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.
Then ask your friend what the RR is that epidemiologists require to form a casual relationship between factors and results.
Then ask him what percentage of studies on ETS match that RR.
Most epedemiologists require a 2.00 and would prefer a 3.00 before associating any factors with a result.
I'm not trying to demean your friend but there is a lot of difference betwen studies on first hand smoke and ETS.
And I didn't think you would want to see what three of the largest studies done to date actually say, but I thought I'd see how open your mind was.