 aka_teabag says: OK thats interesting. so lets all legislate against somebody else shall we. How about all those joggers who demand hip replacements, because they`ve worn theirs out. Maybe dog walkers who allow their pets to foul our parks and pavements. Hey, for what its worth, lets legislate against the legislators, ie the poloticians, they start wars and kill millions, My grandmother never touched tobacco and died of lung cancer, she was married to a polotician who smoked and lived till he was 89, un-canny but true, get the point !!!. Here's the point: 90 percent of lung cancer victims are smokers. [1] 20 percent of American adults are smokers [2]. Get the point? If you start a smoking habit, your chances of getting lung cancer increase dramatically. To point to the 10 percent of lung cancer victims who don't smoke, or to point to smokers who don't get lung cancer, as evidence that there's no smoking-lung cancer link is disingenuous Hey, aka_teabag, I didn't mean to sound harsh to a first-time clipper. I hope you don't take this to mean you're not welcome to the community--I do hope you continue to participate and share your clips. I just felt I had to make my point in the strongest terms as possible. hey jklugman, sound as harsh as you wish, I voice my opinion and you are free to express yours, as is the entire community. My intention was to point out that non smokers DO get lung cancer, whilst some smokers do not, a fact that is ALLWAYS overlooked by anti-smokers. Smokers, smoke by choice initially, Know the risks and choose to accept them or quit. If smoke is bothering a non smoker directly, it can, why dont they ask the smoker to put it out. they may be suprised. Smoking is responsible for all but a few cases of lung cancer, I agree, but anti-smokers are not doing themelves any favours by shrounding some of the facts deliberately, just to strenghten their case. Thanks for your opinion... Non-smokers get lung cancer.. men get breast cancer.. someone who has lived their entire life never smoking, drinking, eating red meat, has exercised regularly, etc can still get any form of cancer, and or have a heart attack... IE: just because someone who does not smoke can get lung cancer does not mean that smoking is not the major cause of most lung cancers.. IE: just because someone who does not smoke can get lung cancer does not mean that smoking is not the major cause of most lung cancers. Did you read the whole post?..... Im sure I said Smoking is responsible for all but a few cases of lung cancer, I.E The major cause |
View the Top Clips from November 21, 2006
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|||||||||||
