U_I: " We all know what the effects of passive smoking are"
Do we (you)?
There is NO clear link between passive smoking and lung cancer, scientists claim
Scientists from Stanford University claim only people living with a smoker for over 30 years might be more likely to develop lung cancer. The research, which studied 76,000 women, adds to a body of evidence that argues there is no link between second-hand smoke and lung cancer.
"Between 1959 and 1989 two American researchers named James Enstrom and Geoffrey Kabat surveyed no few than 118,094 Californians. Fierce anti-smoking campaigners themselves, they began the research because they wanted to prove once and for all what a pernicious, socially damaging habit smoking was. Their research was initiated by the American Cancer Society and supported by the anti-smoking Tobacco Related Disease Research Program.
At least it was at first. But then something rather embarrassing happened. Much to their surprise, Kabat and Enstrom discovered that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ie passive smoking), no matter how intense or prolonged, creates no significantly increased risk of heart disease or lung cancer.
Thw WHO concluded in 1998 after a seven-year study that the correlation between "passive smoking" and lung cancer was not "statistically significant." A 2002 report by the Greater London Assembly agreed. So too did an investigation by the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee."
U_I, the vehicles passing over "your" zebra crossing, and next to the school, will be causing more harm from their exhaust pollution than that from smokers in the open.
nɥºɾ
