/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13700139

482KiB, 831x438, doc.png

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Does smoking really cause lung cancer?

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 08:45:29 2021 No.13700139 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13700191 >>13700529 >>13700643 >>13701036 >>13701180 >>13701226 >>13701336 >>13701428

The german doctor Erhardt Von Grupten Mundt at the Academy of Tobacco Studies has been testing the link between nicotine and lung cancer for thirty years and hasn't found any conclusive results.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FILhDuYWvO0&t=40s

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 08:54:38 No.13700179 Report

Quoted By: >>13700649

everyone who thinks smoking is safe ought to smoke as much as they like for free, simple as.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 08:58:59 No.13700191 Report

Quoted By: >>13700249

>>13700139
>Does smoking really cause lung cancer?
>Does x cause cancer
Proving a causal relationship in something like this is akin to proving a negative. It is known to increase your risk of developing lung cancer.

If you smoke will you get lung cancer? About 10 to 15 percent of smokers develop lung cancer*, so probably not. But many will also develop other smoking related diseases that can also kill you or seriously diminish your quality of life.

*for comparison less than 1% of never smokers will develop lung cancer

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 09:13:28 No.13700249 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700191
What about second hand smoke? When they did most of the studies you could smoke anywhere, so everyone was exposed to it constantly. So it might actually be more dangerous to smoke vs not smoking than thought. Unless there's a newer study with some control that has people that live pristine lives away from car exhaust and second hand smoke and pollution.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1619706444803.jpg, 12KiB, 480x640

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 10:29:08 No.13700529 Report

Quoted By: >>13700655 >>13701157

>>13700139
People focus too much on lung cancer. COPD is a certainty in heavy smokers, the only variable is when and how severe. Worth keeping in mind that unlike lung cancer COPD is not a roll of the dice. Every cigarette will just worsen and prolong your suffering. SUre, lung cancer sucks and chemo is a bitch, but COPD? Imagine drowning non-stop for the last 10 years of your life. 5 year life expectancy in COPD victims are 40%-70%, lung cancer is 18.6%. The risk of developing lung cancer as a smoker lies between 5%-20% depending on study and criteria. Lung cancer has an avg 56% treatment success. generally COPD is lifelong, the symptoms are usually due to accumulative damage.
Long story short, smoking fucks you over. But people focus on cancer cause' its scary and ignore that COPD is the bigger consequence.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5598418/
https://thorax.bmj.com/content/61/11/935
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7895211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2672326/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:02:36 No.13700643 Report

Quoted By: >>13700659

>>13700139
>Does smoking really cause lung cancer?
no it mostly causes throat and esophagus cancer
>the link between nicotine and lung cancer
no one ever claimed nicotine is the carcinogenic component

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:05:04 No.13700649 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700179
>for free
you have my vote mr president

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:05:55 No.13700655 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700529
>But people focus on cancer cause' its scary and ignore that COPD is the bigger consequence.
serious COPD is far scarier than cancer
you can just remove cancer and kill the remains chemically/radiologically; remove one lung with pleura entirely if you're a retard and let it get that far
if you've got stage iii-iv COPD that's it, there's nothing you can do, your lungs are fucked and your only option is a transplant

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:06:03 No.13700659 Report

Quoted By: >>13700671

>>13700643
>nicotine
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553893/

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:09:23 No.13700671 Report

Quoted By: >>13701221

>>13700659
did you read your own link? the only conclusive in vivo effect they've found is that nicotine stimulates cell proliferation, which speeds up progression of already-present tumours

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:13:40 No.13700681 Report

Quoted By:

Well, more proliferation, more chances for it to go wrong and end up cancerous.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 11:45:05 No.13700771 Report

Quoted By: >>13701052

No smoking doesn't cause lung cancer. Your brain creates cancer cells to improve the function of the lungs to help you through death fright conflict.

https://learninggnm.com/SBS/documents/lungs.html#Lung_Alveoli_CA

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 13:34:13 No.13701027 Report

Quoted By:

they failed to create lung cancer from cigarette smoke in animal trials
lung cancer basically didn't exist pre 20th century despite increasing per capita usage of cigars and pipes in the 19th century and thousands of years of humans smoking tobacco prior to that
use of leaded petrol is correlated with lung cancer prevalence
the man that invented the randomized control trial never conceded smoking causes lung cancer
nazis invented anti smoking propaganda
cigarette filters are glass wool

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 13:36:13 No.13701036 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700139
No it's a lie so you aren't allowed to be happy ever.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 13:40:01 No.13701052 Report

Quoted By: >>13701167

>>13700771
I went looking down the Hamer route for a while, I don't think it holds much water.
some parts are interesting but I disagree with his conclusions.
Feels too much like a scam of some kind.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 14:11:59 No.13701157 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700529
Don't forget about pulmonary fibrosis as well. I hear many cases of patients needing to have lungs removed, and/or carry an oxygen tank around until they die.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 14:16:58 No.13701167 Report

Quoted By: >>13701372

>>13701052
What part do you disagree with.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 14:20:33 No.13701180 Report

Quoted By: >>13701317

>>13700139
I understand the old adage of "correlation does not equal causation" but isn't it very revealing that lung cancer cases are represented by heavy cigarette smokers? If smoking was not causative with LC then surely you would expect to find an even distribution of cases amongst smokers and non smokers.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 14:31:16 No.13701221 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700671
and that's the link you were talking about

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 14:34:24 No.13701226 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700139
>has been testing the link between nicotine and lung cancer
this is not equivalent to testing the link between smoking tobacco and lung cancer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 15:04:34 No.13701317 Report

Quoted By:

>>13701180
that saying is best phrased as "correlation does not imply causation", which is true for the strict logical definition of imply, where something must be true.

with a colloquial usage of imply, meaning "suggests", correlation absolutely can be indicative of causation. we have whole frameworks of inference we can use to conclude causality based on correlative data. Look up the Hill Causation Criteria.

and at the end of the day, all scientific evidence is at least slightly correlative. the job of the scientist is to design an experiment such that causation is the only reasonable explanation for observed correlation.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 15:11:56 No.13701336 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700139
Your face causes eye cancer

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 15:19:33 No.13701372 Report

Quoted By: >>13701387

>>13701167
His background and marketing, there are a couple of knock offs he got into a dispute over.
And I don't see the cure rates to back up his claims.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 15:24:16 No.13701387 Report

Quoted By:

>>13701372
Thats pretty bad reasons. He could be a huge asshole but that doesnt take anything away from his research.
What about his research are wrong and dont hold water.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 30 Sep 2021 15:42:02 No.13701428 Report

Quoted By:

>>13700139
no
my grand mammy smoked since she was 16 until she was 80 and never had a problem
they finally convinced her to quit at 80 and it's bullshit
it's all a scam to stop people from increasing their test

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches