A while ago, I came across a question posed on a website.
How long do you have to ‘second hand’ smoke before you develop lung cancer? I heard it can happen if you’re around a smoker at least one time. And what if you’re also twenty years old? When will the lung cancer be developed then? Is there still a chance of getting lung cancer if you’re riding in the car with all the windows open? Or if you’re in an open space?
What struck me about this was the appalling ignorance out there on the subject of cancer and smoking. This is a lack of knowledge that is fostered and nurtured by the anti-smoker brigade, despite the fact that it terrifies people into believing the most absurd ideas.
In the case above, the questioner seems to give credence to the idea that a person can die from cancer after being in the presence of a smoker just once.` I decided to sniff around a little more, and found such definitive claims that “smoking just one cigarette can cause cancer” and one real classic – “If you want to kill yourself, you don’t even have to smoke. Just stand next to someone who does, each time they go outside for a cigarette. In about a year or so you will be unable to breathe without a respirator and without intensive medical treatment every day, you will die pretty early in life.” These idiotic statements are grist to the mill for the Anti Brigade as, despite the fact that people are being terrified for no reason whatsoever, they promote the vilification of the smoker.
To return to the original question, the questioner wanted to know the risks of riding in a car with all the windows open. It is laughable to suggest that there is any concentration whatsoever of smoke under that circumstance, yet I recently read somewhere [maybe someone out there can tell me where?] that ASH have stated categorically that opening car windows does not clear the air in a car, as the smoke immediately blows back in again. That statement is so patently absurd that a five year old would laugh at it, yet it is put out into the public domain to foster further fears.
Let us assume for one brief moment that cigarettes are as deadly as they claim, and that sitting in a car with the windows wide open can cause cancer, then can someone please explain to me how the primary smoker is still alive after his or her first twenty cigarettes?
The reason of course that the Antis love such misinformation is that it fosters a fear, not of cigarettes but of the smoker.
I baffles me how the Antis can gat away with such fear mongering, when the truth is out there.
Would you accept the conclusions of the BMJ? A study of over 100,000 people over a period of 39 years? That would seem to be fairly comprehensive, and their findings? “The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality”
Would you accept the findings of the World Health Organisation?
Or would you rather believe that spending a day in the open air with a smoker is going to lead to a horrible, painful death?