[bajabaja]

Each of your studies referes to NON-SMOKERS according to the headings. That was not what I am talking about. I am talking about the lifetime risk to SMOKERS from smoking tobacco. Where did you think I was talking about non-smokers’ risks (i.e., second hand smoke)?

You seem to be challenging me on the issue of second hand smoke. I never mentioned that, dealing only with actual smokers.

I do not believe there is significant support in the morbidity tables for NON-SMOKER/lung cancer link.

But then, I never even mentioned it.

Please read my posts again to assure yourself that you are talking about the same thing.

[Just another Joe]

You're correct, I am using these studies as an example of the type of information that I look for when looking into a study.
If you do searches for these studies you will find abstracts, at least, that give things such as study size, study length, different groupings of participants, what confounders were checked for, results, etc.

All you have linked me to so far are press releases or hypthetical estimates done on hypothetical groupings.

I agree that smoking can be a risk factor for many types of illnesses, including lung cancer.
I haven't seen studies that reliably tell me, with results, that, on average, 10% of all smokers get lung cancer.