>>14173148like the other guy said, there's no nuance to anything at all ever.
what you're dealing with is a bunch of brainwashed zealots who want to insist that tobacco be banned because the people who make money growing and selling tobacco are mostly white and support the wrong political party.
all of the medical reasons are just excuses for politically motivated financial assaults on the tobacco industry. the same people who make posts saying tobacco causes all lung cancer will come back an anti-coal thread to tell you that mining and burning coal cause incredible amounts of dangerous lung cancers.
the zealots willfully ignore real evidence that contradicts their political narrative, such as the findings of the british doctor's study, which is the most thorough research that has yet been done on the topic, and instead they favor infinite reproducibility crisis studies that draw statistical conclusions from highly curated small samples by ignoring error margins. the british doctor's study is the only one of it's type that has ever produced statistically reliable information, it accomplished that with extremely large sample sizes, took 70 years to complete. it was a large project that produced good data, no other has been willing to commit to the effort needed to produce such a large study, thats why their data and information is shit quality. instead of getting better data, all of the "scientists" studying this issue just routinely ignore the british doctor's study as a matter of intellectual convince.
>if we just ignore the precession of mercury then newton is still perfectly accurate and enough spammed intentionally dishonest, misleading and unscientific studies on the dangers of smoking will eventually prove that smoking tobacco is more dangerous than plutonium buttplugs as long as they are able to successfully ignore the results of the british doctor's study.
