Posted on 06/02/2004 4:43:14 AM PDT by Colosis
LONDON (Reuters) - Smoking destroys protective molecules in saliva and transforms it into a dangerous cocktail of chemicals that increases the risk of mouth cancer, scientists say.
"Cigarette smoke is not only damaging on its own, it can turn the body against itself," said Dr Rafi Nagler, of the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa, Israel.
Saliva contains antioxidants, molecules that normally protect the body against cancer, but Nagler and his colleagues have discovered that cigarette smoke destroys the molecules and turns saliva into a dangerous compound.
"Our study shows that once exposed to cigarette smoke, our normally healthy saliva not only loses its beneficial qualities but it turns traitor and actually aids in destroying the cells of the mouth and oral cavity," he added.
In research reported in the British Journal of Cancer on Wednesday, Nagler and his team studied the impact of cigarette smoke on cancerous cells in the laboratory.
Half of the cells were exposed to saliva exposed to cigarette smoke and the other half just to the smoke. Cells exposed to the saliva mixture had more damage and it increased along with the time of exposure.
"Most people will find it very shocking that the mixture of saliva and smoke is actually more lethal to cells in the mouth than cigarette smoke alone," Nagler added in a statement.
Smoking and drinking are the leading causes of head and neck or oral cancers, which includes cancer of the lip, mouth, tongue, gums, larynx and pharynx. Nearly 400,000 new cases of the illness are diagnosed worldwide each year with the majority in developing countries. The five-year survival rates are less than 50 percent.
Nagler and his colleagues believe the research could open up new avenues to develop better treatments to prevent oral cancer.
"This insight into how mouth cancer can develop offers more reasons for smokers to try and quit," said Jean King, of Cancer Research UK, which publishes the journal. "People know the link with lung cancer and this research adds compelling evidence about the damage smoking can do to the mouth."
I have yet to see a "cheap shot" in that post. If you are offended by this statement, you need to get thicker skin.
"Do you think God wants you to continually fill the lungs he gave with smoke ? Do you think God wants you to continually have oxygen starved red blood cells ? Do you think God wants you to be so addicted to substances your mind is constantly thinking about the next cigarette ?
Or do you think God wants you to be able to enjoy clear lungs, clear air and be able to enjoy fully all the beautiful scents in his creation ? That God maybe wants you to fill your mind with thoughts of what his will is rather than with having the next cigarette ?"
"Saying that smoking is bad for your health is now fascism?"
Using government force to make other's bend to your preferences so your nose isn't offended is Fascism. If you can't be honest about it, you should re-examine your position.
"I'm currently in the middle of writing a piece about the Michigan Governor.......It's titled "Booze and Butts for the Kids."
"What's wrong with the Rand report?"
It's an organization that fights to protect property rights, individual liberty and capitalism. It is in complete opposition to the gnatzie agenda, therefore it must be considered not legitimate. If it doesn't support their agenda they must discount it. Typical Lieberal tactic.
If you received free cigs just like your buds, why don't you have lung cancer? Could it be that exposure to some other element or combination of elements, plus genetics caused their lung cancer?
"What's wrong with the Rand report?"
It's an organization that fights to protect property rights, individual liberty and capitalism. It is in complete opposition to the gnatzie agenda, therefore it must be considered not legitimate. If it doesn't support their agenda they must discount it. Typical Lieberal tactic.
CSM, I know it is funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, but I just posted it because it was saying that obesity is overtaking smoking as the number one killer.
"For years I had to endure smoke in public places and suffer in silence. I have a season ticket for hockey. Before the restrictions on smoking there, by the third period the arena was filled with a smoke filled haze that caused me to sneeze uncontrollably for 45 minutes. It couldn't have been good for me."
Who held the gun that forced you to attend these games?
Then they fooled me with their name. I was associating them with Ayn Rand Institute. Pretty clever of them to come up with a name that gives them credibility based on someone else's reputation. I rescind any positives in my past post, any RWJF associated organization is not interested in protecting property rights, individual liberty or capitalism. Thank's for the heads up.
You keep lying about my position and then yelling at me for this imaginary position. Congratulations.
No one. I guess I thought you'd be able to figure it out for yourself.
Since the majority of people are happier without the smoke in the arena now it's your choice whether to attend or not and no one is holding a gun to your head.
On a side note, you'll note no drop in attendance due to the new laws or in bar business in New York as had been predicted by some of the zealots. Now if smokers want to smoke they can do so outside. It's their choice, not ours anymore.
Are seat belt laws fascist? Laws against speeding? Driving drunk laws?
You really need to go back and read what you posted regarding Fascism.
First you said: "You keep lying about my position and then yelling at me for this imaginary position. Congratulations."
In response to my statement of: "Using government force to make other's bend to your preferences so your nose isn't offended is Fascism."
Then in the very next post you state: "On a side note, you'll note no drop in attendance due to the new laws or in bar business in New York as had been predicted by some of the zealots. Now if smokers want to smoke they can do so outside. It's their choice, not ours anymore."
You claim to not be Fascist, but then turn around and celebrate the use of government force to bend the use of private property to your preferences. Do you see your problem in this argument?
Stepford Freepers?
Lots of anecdotal statements from you but no indication of what you would propose to do about the issue. Legislate away individuals' ability to engage in behaviors that can harm themselves? Or acknowledge the right to liberty?
And the government has no business regulating their use on private property by adults either.
Then your recourse is to petition the owner to ban smoking. Or exercise your liberty and not attend.
To me, you have it exactly backwards. The public has every right to set the rules for behavior on the sidewalk (presuming it is a public sidewalk) and no right ot set the rules inside the private arena.
If applied to public roadways, no. If applied to private ones, yes.
When I die I'm going to have "Smoking Section" carved into my headstone.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.