Frank Davis has an interesting piece over on his site today.
Now I have been slightly [*cough*] critical in the past about "studies" and especially epidemiological ones, so how am I going to react to this one?
The answer to that conundrum is simple – I think it is a valid study.
But people will shout that I am only agreeing with it as it fits in with my point of view? No, for the very simple reason that it is stating the bleeding obvious.
I have fond memories of going to the cinema [or The Pictures, as we called it] back in the fifties and sixties, and one of my more vivid memories is of the light from the projector barely making it to the screen through the dense fog of cigarette smoke. It was a sort of precursor to modern laser displays, as the beam flickered and shimmied its way through the fog. But the point is that I don't remember anyone complaining or coughing, and I certainly don't recall anyone dropping dead of a heart attack.
Smoking was everywhere, from shops to schools [a couple of my teachers were avid pipe smokers!], from transport to most houses in the land, yet non-smokers were perfectly healthy. In fact asthma and other respiratory ailments were less common then than now. So from the point of view of someone who lived through that era, the whole concept of "second hand smoke" was a blatant lie from the outset.
Of course if this study had shown the opposite – the definitive proof that second hand smoke causes cancer – it would be headline news in virtually every newspaper and on every radio and television channel in the land, and beyond, but I very much doubt there will be a single mention anywhere except on sites like this. The lie has spread too widely and the laws have gone too far. There are too many people making a comfortable living out of Tobacco Control and they aren't going to kill that little golden goose.
The study will probably never see the light of day. You see, tobacco companies are thanked for their help in compiling the study so it will be dismissed out of hand as being more lies from Big Tobacco. We won't hear that the researchers have also done work for Big Pharma?
But Big Tobacco didn't twist and contort the figures, so anyone with enough time and expertise can work out the conclusion for themselves.