I'm sure Smoking tobacco is real bad for you, if you pay $1.00 a pack with $9.00 tax..

That's $100.00 a carton, Now if you quit Smoking wheres the money go?

Higher priced foods at the MALL 15 miles away oh ya gasoline too, you got to get there.

Or maybe 10 $10.00 lotto tickets. A quick stop at the casino. Its going to make you go everywhere.

you can't stay put ever.

That's what its all about. You See Smoking satisfies you at home.

And that's real bad for them. That's the scam... Dozervice@msn.com

Where can someone find all of the statistics and studies? I don't mean a link to a website that says "90% of this cancer is caused by ...".. I mean the actual studies so I can read what was done, how the data was taken, who was involved, what the raw numbers were, etc.. so I can actually see the data.
Are these statistics available on the internet? It seems if I Google it I always end up at some site that puts out some general numbers and summaries.

I do find a correlation between anti-smokers and foul, insulting language. Therefore, the "majority" of the people in society are hyperbolic, neurotic, ill-tempered, ill-mannered weaklings, who charge the government with the task of catering to their self-centered needs. It's no wonder the children are growing up to point fingers, rather than taking responsibility and ownership of THEIR disordered lives.

I find the arguments in this blog to be faulty. I can answer questions easily.

“Can you scientifically prove a single death from smoking?” Yes. First, find out the factors that cause cancer. We know that there are several cancer-causing chemicals in cigarette smoke, (like arsenic) and the smoke is basically just coating lung tissue with the chemical, repeatedly. There are of course the statistics, too.

* “Has it scientifically – not statistically – been demonstrated that smoking causes cancer, when the origin of cancer is still unknown? Yes, or no?” This is the question that seems the most ridiculous. Statistics is math. It's almost ridiculous to argue against math. Thus, it's probably the most obvious scientific evidence there is. If 90 percent of lung cancer patients say that they smoke or someone smokes around them, that's evidence. Ask a control group of people who don't have cancer if they smoke. Run the numbers. It's simple, it's math, and it's science.

* “In any cancer case of your choice, are you able to reliably separate the co-factors, identify them, quantify them, and/or establish with reasonable certainty their percentage of contribution to that cancer, so that its causality is scientifically credible?” Yes. If smoking shows up at a consistent rate among people with cancer, then its "percentage of contribution to that cancer". Even on an individual basis, if the statistics show a 90 percent correlation amongst a population, and if the person who has cancer smokes, you can confidently say that their smoking was a major cause of the cancer.

* “In the active/passive smoke studies, are you able to specify their margin of error? If it was done using statistics, then yes. The margin of error is posted along with the study.

Before I start I would like to point out that I am not one of those conspiracy theorist nutcases - I just believe that people should not be manipulated and controlled by politics - our definition of freedom and liberty has lost its value these days.

Western countries rely massively on taxes from cigarettes. Printing the warnings on packs is an attempt to rid our economy’s dependence on it. It serves to place fear and doubt in the minds of smokers and non-smokers, it conveniently provides a 'reason' to regularly raise prices in a fake attempt at 'duty of care' from a so-called 'deadly' product which is allowed on the market, and to a lesser extent, it contains and element of the age-old 'forbidden fruit' (general human curiosity) angle. 90% of people who smoke get cancer - what a load of crap. More like 90% of people have either once smoked or passively smoked. Cigarettes are easy to blame due to the fact that almost everyone has been exposed to them.

A negative image of cigarettes has been built-up over time - non-smokers look down on smokers simply because they have fallen victim to government fear mongering. Why should anybody care that anybody else smokes? The government justifies fear mongering as 'politics'. How could it be a well known fact that smoking causes cancer if the origin of cancer is unknown? All that can be relied upon are statistics, and statistics can be manipulated to make morons believe anything. All you have to do is ask the right questions during statistical gathering and present the findings in a biased light. That too is justified as 'politics'.

To put it simply - being alive causes cancer. There is a greater trend of genetic predispositions toward cancer than anything else. Cancer is an unknown phenomenon.

For the typical person smoking wastes money, can cause disruptions to your appetite, it lowers your fitness and ruins motivation through bursts of immediate relaxation. The fact that it is addictive leaves more room for concern. In controlling its 'subjects', the government can rid the economy and our lives of this variable so they can obtain more of a strangle-hold on our lifestyle and make the economy more manageable (or so it is assumed). We are very susceptible to control and influence. We are merely easily-influential subjects in political eyes.

And Tracy - I'll have my few cigarettes per day, blowing a huge cloud of relaxation above my head after a hard day's work knowing I am a productive citizen contributing to the economy. Gamble with your life you say? Well, we all gamble with our lives every day. Driving, crossing the street, going to the bank - going out in public full stop is a life gamble. So you might say 'why add another risk into the mix?' - I guess I live life on the edge. You get nowhere blindly conforming to what the government would like us to be. All you do is limit the freedom and liberty of generations to follow. We are complacent, easily suggestible beings who can be controlled like any other animal. Commandeer as much of your own brain as possible champ - mindlessly conforming to whatever anyone 'says' will not leave you better off.

This is bollocks!! Its a known fact that smoking causes lung cancer. The tobacco companies even print health warnings on their evil product. Why do you think they do that? Because its a get out clause to roll out should some poor unfortunate addicts family complain at the death of a loved one.
Ditto every word Jack says. Prove it you twat!! Gamble your own life!!

Actually Jack, after thinking more about it (which you obviously have not) don't bother finding that citation. If science used your logic:
'they ask people who have cancer, 'do you smoke?', they then record this, and how severe the cancer is, along with how long they live. This gives them data and facts. This gives correlation'.
we could also ask cancer victims whether they wait at red traffic lights whilst driving to give a 99% correlation between that and cancer. Not everyone smokes, not everyone drives.
I can't believe you call that science.

I will believe Jack (below) if he can provide a fair, unbiased, reliable and credible citation for the statement that 90% of lung cancer victims are smokers. Sorry, I just can't take your word for it dude. I like your argument but there is no need for name calling...

Just found this page - 5 years later! - Its a great piece of research. Interesting that I've never heard of the case, but at least its another pointer at the myth of cancer causing smoking.

I belive that everyone is born with cancer cells. The only way to avoid cancer is to build you imune system and keep it very strong so your white blood cells can attack these cells on a daily basis. Cancer is not cause d by smoking alone. It is caused by a weakend imune system. We destroy our imunes system by taking part in the (S.A.D.) Standard American Diet, and do not replenish our bodies with cancer cell fighting foods. Veggies, Fruits, and Toxic cleansing foods. These cancer cells come alive when we pollute our bodies with man made toxins both in our food and in the air around us. Good in produces Good out. Bad in produces Bad out. We are what we eat. This comes from experiance. I was diagnosed with cancer 3 weeks ago and declined conventional treatment when give a death sentence of 10 months regardless of treatment or not. I decided to boost my imune system by Juicing veggies 8 times a day, and getting Vit.C and B12 IV's twice a week. I feel wonderful and look foward to checking back with the cancer center for a check up and them finding the cancer is gone. I have never felt better in my life and know that cancer is leaving my body.

I hope no one believes a word you say, you insolent twat. I really do hope you die from the tumour that is soon to develop in your idiotic throat. How much am I betting that you are paid by tobacco companies to publish this shit. How can you deny scientific fact, you absolute imbecile, we'll prove 'ONE death' when you're forced to smoke cigarettes until you're gagging on the blood caused by the tumour growing inside your lungs.
I do agree that the case was justified, people shouldn't be able to smoke and then go on to sue the companies, but to DENY that smoking causes cancer. You know how they work out these statistics...or what you call 'faith disguised as scientific fact'...they ask people who have cancer, 'do you smoke?', they then record this, and how severe the cancer is, along with how long they live. This gives them data and facts. This gives correlation. And to Douglas Gross, yes, non-smokers do contract the same conditions, only with less severity and far less frequently..what you'd find if everyone stopped smoking would be the same conditions, only in far less people, such as lung cancer, 90% of which occur in smokers..

Had to bookmark this one for sure. It is hard to find real arguments like the one so well-defined here. I have been a smoker since age eighteen for the most part. I did wait until I was eighteen before I ever smoked my first cigarette. No one influenced my decision at all. I started out of pure interest. I have quit for two years once. I have gone through other smaller periods of times when I didn't feel like smoking. There were also periods in my life where I only felt like smoking when I was drinking beer. I have even held opinions against smoking at times in my life, but I have never believed this propaganda about smoking or chewing tobacco causing cancer. It is the old cause and effect fallacy. Through the media and word-of-mouth these progandist tell you the old lung in a jar bit, or the guy who had no mouth on his face because he had contracted skin cancer from chewing tobacco. However, you cannot find photos of this anywhere, not even on the Internet. You never actually see people like this, you only hear about it. A person gets cancer of in their larnyx and they smoke. So, the so-called experts start making the fallacy of associating tobacco users with medical conditions. To put it very bluntly, the only way to prove to these incompetent boobs with doctorate degrees in medicine that tobacco cannot be associated with these cancer cases is for everyone to quit smoking and demonstrate people still contract these exact conditions. For every case of a smoker having cancer, there is a higher ratio of nonsmokers who also have cancer. Statistically speaking, smokers could be just as absurd as anti-smokers and say that since there are more nonsmokers with cancer, it is safer to smoke! LOL! I will be blogging this one, you can count on that!!