[Just another Joe]

But it's a VERY UNscientific giant leap of FAITH to therefore ASSUME that ALL smoking studies are useless.

I ASSUME nothing.
Of all the studies I have read, all the abstracts I have read, and all the risk ratios I have seen associated with them, it runs about 80% that there is no statistical significance associated with ETS causing harm to someone that has no preexisting medical condition.
About 20% find a very slight risk or even some type of casual association.
From what I've been able to ascertain a number of that 20% have no control groups, are sloppy in documenting confounding factors, or are metastudies where the studies and/or data has been cherry picked.

I've done my homework on this subject. Have you?

[Quix]

I have a good friend in Hawaii who's head of a group that examines such studies. I trust his homework. He asserts that the smokers' position is off the wall in denial and avoidance of facing up to the myriad of solid, well constructed double-bind studies etc.

But, hey, I don't need to get that deep into it. The hogwash is abundantly evident on these threads in the lack of logic; the selfishness; the arrogance; the rationalizations; etc. based on aereogel or less.