[arielb]

Proof? Perhaps paid by the tobacco companies who have for years denied any link between smoking and cancer? Maybe you can find proof that the world is flat too but pretty much every real scientist agrees that smoking is bad for you.

[Max McGarrity]

Proof? Perhaps paid by the tobacco companies who have for years denied any link between smoking and cancer?

Like every single anti-smoker authoritarian zealot, you consistently mix up direct smoking with environmental tobacco smoke. They are not the same, and the "proof" I mention is not from the "tobacco companies." Neither is it from "Big Anti-Tobacco" or "Big Government," but from honest, reputable researchers without a dog in this fight. Guess you're just not interested in the truth, huh? Your mind is made up and you don't want to be confused by the facts?

Maybe you can find proof that the world is flat too but pretty much every real scientist agrees that smoking is bad for you.

Mighty sweeping statement you made there..."every real scientist"...but again you've made the fallacious leap from direct smoking (YES, SMOKING IS A RISK and CAN BE BAD FOR YOU!!Okay?) and environmental tobacco smoke, which is what this thread addresses. Actually, it's where ALL the debate is, and where MANY "real scientists" disagree.

If ignorance is bliss, far be it from me to intrude on your happiness.

[Just another Joe]

Proof? Perhaps paid by the tobacco companies who have for years denied any link between smoking and cancer?

Really? You mean the World Health Organization was paid by the TOBACCO companies to do their study?
Will wonders never cease.