Some information for anti smoking zealots

[Ray Scully]

The article below sets out quite clearly another, and IMHO a far more dangerous cause of lung cancer.
One would hope that those with such strong opinions on the effect of other peoples smoke will be rapidly converting to electrical or at least hybrid vehicles, otherwise they can only be thought of as at best hypocritical and it does put some of the silliness surrounding vapour cigarettes into perspective

Living near a busy road can increase the risk of lung cancer, according to a large study that will increase the pressure on governments to reduce air pollution.

Even low levels of traffic fumes have risks comparable with passive smoking, according to researchers, who say that pollution should be added to a World Health Organisation list of recognised causes of lung cancer. The risk increases by roughly 20 per cent when moving from clean areas to moderately polluted ones, and by the same again when moving to the most polluted zones, the international survey found.

Researchers say that, while the risks to an individual are low, air pollution must be considered a serious public health problem. They looked at 17 previous studies that had collected data on 313,000 people around Europe, and recorded pollution levels where they lived. Of those, 2,095 developed lung cancer, or 0.67 per cent.

Airborne particles smaller than 2.5 micrometres in diameter, known as PM2.5, and those smaller than 10 micrometres in diameter, known as PM10, were both linked to lung cancer.

“The more traffic nearby, the more particles; and the more densely populated the area, the more particles,” said Ole Raaschou-Nielsen, of the Danish Cancer Research Centre in Copenhagen, who led the study. “Both traffic and the degree of urban development matters.”

For every extra 5 micrograms of PM2.5 in a cubic metre of air, lung cancer risk increases by 18 per cent, his team reports in The Lancet Oncology. For every extra 5 micrograms of PM10 in a cubic metre, the risk increases by 22 per cent, even after adjusting for class, wealth and other factors linked to lung cancer.

This rule held even at levels considered safe by the EU, Dr Raaschou-Nielsen said. “We found no threshold below which there was no risk.”

Data from London and Oxford used in the study found that PM2.5 levels varied from 8-18 micrograms per cubic metre and PM10 levels from 10-30, giving two distinct increases in risk from least to most polluted areas.

Every year 42,000 people in Britain are given a diagnosis of lung cancer, with smoking the main cause. “If you compare air pollution with smoking, it’s very low risk — you can have a 3,000 per cent increase,” Dr Raaschou-Nielsen said. “So it’s not of that magnitude at all. At an individual level it’s comparable to passive smoking.”

He said it made sense for people to avoid clogged roads if possible, but that drastic measures such as moving house were not necessary. “If you can change your bicycle route so you don’t cycle along busy roads, or avoid rush hour, then I would do it.”

Scource

[Silver_Shiney]

Even so, most driving is essential. Burning tobacco NEVER is.

[The Monocled Mutineer]

Silver Shiney:

Agreed.

On a related topic, the concentration of lethal tobacco smoke within a car is of very serious consequence for passengers and even more so children and that great British obsession, pet dogs.

Derek Kane

The Monocled Mutineer

||||
o Q
<
__

|>o<|

[Ray Scully]

Yes but people have got to take responsibility for the cancer causing agents they are producing whether it be cigarette smoke or vehicle exhausts. The smokers can and do cease the habit or convert to nicotine only products. The motorist must also accept responsibility for the pollution they cause.

With regard to the concentration of lethal tobacco smoke within a car, very few of the ********** can afford a motor these days, accordingly the situation is now unlikely to arise.

Content edited

Ray

[Mervyn and Trish]

Interesting points Ray. Only one thing I'd take issue with and that is that electric or hybrid cars are any greener than the rest. They may not pollute as they drive along, but they cause pollution remotely as they charge up - unless of course their owner has their own wind turbine or solar panels specifically for the purpose.

I think we do need to find a better way of powering cars than burning fossil fuels (not for global warming reasons because I think a lot of that "science" is flawed and open to debate) but for the rather more political and economic reason that the majority of fossil fuels in the world appear to be in the possession of unstable or doubtful regimes (Middle East, Russia, Scotland ) and I'm not keen on being dependent on them, but I'm not convinced the current technologies have yet cracked it.

[B52-2002]

Even electric cars are not particularly "green" or " planet saving ". The chemicals / minerals that are used for the batteries are mined in places like China, causing devastation of the environment , pollution and poisoning of the local population.
The same applies to wind turbines which also use rare minerals in their generators.
It seems a little pointless to annihilate one part of the globe just to make another part feel they are " world leaders" in planet saving It is a bit of an " I'm alright Jack " situation.

[Dark Knight]

is there a correlation between the recent upsurge in smoking threads and the appearance of a certain anti smoker?

[Admiral of the Humber]

A very astute observation DK.

I notice that a lot of dead dress code threads have been resurrected as well.

Good evening to east Hull by the way.

Regards from the west of the fair city of Hull,
Rob aka AOTH

[Ray Scully]

is there a correlation between the recent upsurge in smoking threads and the appearance of a certain anti smoker?

No! a lot of it is just down to an experienced Scouse fisherman and some thinly disguised bait

Ray

[Dark Knight]

Good evening West Hull type

It appears to me that a crude form of Bull baiting is taking place and as funny as it is, it does lack subtlety

[Not so ancient mariner]

What?? - Subtlety on this group?? Whatever next??

[Silver_Shiney]

are standards slipping that much?

[Admiral of the Humber]

some newbies on don't ya know.....lowering the tone and all that...

[Dark Knight]

I am sure they will learn how to interact in a civilised manner soon enough