Diesel causes lung cancer not tobacco

[gayhalo]

[h=2]

Diesel causes lung cancer not tobacco.[/h]

I think we all ought to read this, if true then it shows what can be achieved if the ANTZ and government want it. I have long blamed petrol fumes but it looks like a may have been only slightly off target.

Are Diesels More Dangerous than Cigarettes as a Cause of Lung Cancer?


I have posted this here as it was not getting much attention down in medical research!!!​

 

[footbag]

I don't know if it's the poorly designed website, or the fact that it cites studies from 50 years ago or this statement... "tobacco smoke contains no carcinogens"; but I'm not sure I'd consider it credible. Yes diesel causes cancer, but that doesn't mean tobacco smoke doesn't. Tobacco absolutely causes cancer.

 

[SissySpike]

It stands to reason something formed from dead things deep underground then pumped up and burned millions of gallons at a time might not be good to breath in. I think any sane thinking person can reach this conclusion. But we can do with cigarettes and if everone started thinking fossil fuel use is killing them things would have to change! Just look around you most people prefer to hide their head in the sand about most serious issues.

Just keep walmart open let us keep 40% of our earnings make it our duty to invade other society's in the name of freedom and all is good O yea dont smoke!

 

[sonicdsl]

Moved to Media & General News

 

[Uma]

WHO did a release the other day. A big doh' from those of us in the real world. But now that they're terrified of lack of court ordered funding from tobacco, cigarette tax money, even diet money (there are even zero nic restaurant lounges opening up, to vape your favorite desserts), they are running around wild eyed with $$$ panic.
It looks like higher taxes are coming for Diesel trucks. I do hope everyone has a solid supply of truck dependent supplies. Got Charmin? The truckers already can't make a living as it is and have been "whining" for years...

 

[gayhalo]

Did you read the bit

Urban smoke and cigarette and tobacco smoke contain a chemical, 3:4 benzpyrine, that is weakly carcinogenic. However, it oxidises very easily, and has never been shown to cause lung cancer.

 

[Uma]

I believe it. A few journals have said that 2nd smoke was 95% okay, so Glantz blew the 5% remaining way out of whack and actively promoted the results. He even went so far as to claim that people die within 30minutes of being around smoke lol.

Read
http://www.velvetgloveironfist.com/index.php?page_id=64

And Joe Jackson essay
http://www.joejackson.com/smoke-lies.pdf

And anti THR lies blog
Anti-THR Lies and related topics | because cultivating the truth requires both seeding and weeding

Dr. Michael Seigel blog
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com

Reading the blogs from beginning to now is very informative.

 

[Uma]

From the article
""Since the effect of the anti-smoking campaign has been to prevent the genuine cause from being publicly acknowledged, there is a very real sense in which we could say that the main reason for those 30,000 deaths a year from lung cancer is the anti-smoking campaign itself".

Something many of us have felt all along. They were cherry picking smokers and ignoring the real causes, in order to take advantage by excessively taxing the addicted.

Take a peek at this sweet thread.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...r-charities-cause-cancer-who-responsible.html

 

[Ranic85]

I love the smell of diesel in the morning.

 

[gayhalo]

I love the smell of diesel in the morning.

I was an HGV driver for 5 years and I loved the yard when starting work and all the trucks starting.

 

[footbag]

2nd hand smoke is harder to judge, because you have to compare it to a control group. If your control is a completely smoke free environment, a study will likely show that it causes cancer. But if your control group is a BBQ pit, it may turn out to be insignificant. It's all about the combustion.

But with 1st hand smoke, the correlation and causation is so significant when it comes to tobacco and cancer that no reasonable person could look at the data and say otherwise. This isn't just smoked either. It's chewing tobacco as well.

The article seems to make the mistake that one must decide between "diesel causes cancer" or "tobacco causes cancer". Isn't it likely that both tobacco and diesel cause cancer?

Just based of the terminology and the years of the studies; I believe they were likely favorable to the tobacco industry. And you really do have to go that far back to find anyone questioning that tobacco causes cancer.

I'm not a tobacco nut. I currently smoke cigars and until recently cigarettes. I think it's everyone's right to smoke and I'll defend that right. But, I know they are bad for me.

 

[gayhalo]

I am not trying to make any case but the evidence in the article is fairly clear. The point is not if smoking causes cancer...... Let's just assume it does. The point is on second hand smoke. Something made the lung cancer occurrence increase in the 1930s. Question what changed. Was there a change in smoking habits.... No. Other things may have happened and one was the rise of diesel engines. It is just as hard to prove or disprove that diesel is the culprit as SHS but the evidence it heavy. SHS is only mildly carcinogenic, diesel is very c. No other highly c smoke occurred in the 1930s. The cancer rate is high in towns and near motorways, low in the country. Californian men who spent a lot of time outside more than the stay at homes. These are far more powerful indicators than research carried out on animals and extrapolated to what MIGHT happen in humans.
I posted this in the first place not to blame anyone but to warm vapers that it does not matter how good your product is......THEY will blame you if THEY want to.

 

[Bill Godshall]

While there is no evidence that consuming smokefree tobacco products increases risks for lung cancer, its long been a scientific consensus that daily smoking of cigarettes and cigars can cause lung cancer.

In fact, an estimated 85% of lung cancer deaths in the US, EU and other developed countries are caused by cigarette smoking.

Inhaling diesel smoke poses far fewer lung cancer risks than does cigarette smoking. But if hundreds of millions of people inhaled diesel smoke directly from exhaust pipes multiple times daily for many decades (as smokers they do with cigarettes), diesel smoke might cause as many lung cancer deaths as cigarettes.

 

[gayhalo]

Ok Bill I stand corrected by someone I respect as knowing 1000 times more than I do. Do you have any comment on the subject of the post?

 

[Uma]

While there is no evidence that consuming smokefree tobacco products increases risks for lung cancer, its long been a scientific consensus that daily smoking of cigarettes and cigars can cause lung cancer.

In fact, an estimated 85% of lung cancer deaths in the US, EU and other developed countries are caused by cigarette smoking.

Inhaling diesel smoke poses far fewer lung cancer risks than does cigarette smoking. But if hundreds of millions of people inhaled diesel smoke directly from exhaust pipes multiple times daily for many decades (as smokers they do with cigarettes), diesel smoke might cause as many lung cancer deaths as cigarettes..

Which is exactly what happened to children every day, on long bus rides to and from school, waiting for the busses to load, stuck in traffic, driving through freshly sprayed agricultural fields, staying warm in asbestos filled classrooms and homes ...

 

[ut1205]

Thanks for the links. Very interesting reading.

 

[CCC1]

Apparently, breathing causes cancer. Air pollution causes lung cancer, WHO agency decides - Health - CBC News

(Nice chin )

 

[JayTater]

Take away my diesel, and I will crack your skull with my mod.

 

[gayhalo]

(Nice chin )

Thanks CCC1

 

[TomCatt]

Did you read the bit

Urban smoke and cigarette and tobacco smoke contain a chemical, 3:4 benzpyrine, that is weakly carcinogenic. However, it oxidises very easily, and has never been shown to cause lung cancer.

"Sources of Benzo[a]pyrene[edit]

The main source of atmospheric Benzo[a]pyrene is residential wood burning.[1] Benzo[a]pyrene is also found in coal tar, in automobile exhaust fumes (especially from diesel engines), in all smoke resulting from the combustion of organic material (including cigarette smoke), and in charbroiled food. Cooked meat products, regular consumption of which has been epidemiologically associated with increased levels of colon cancer[2] (although this in itself does not prove carcinogenicity),[3] have been shown to contain up to 4 ng/g of benzo[a]pyrene,[4] and up to 5.5 ng/g in fried chicken[5] and 62.6 ng/g in overcooked charcoal barbecued beef.[6]"


Sorry, I can't take any article seriously that posts "3:4 benzpyrine" ; it should be 3,4-benzpyrene, at the very least .