nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index nglreturns.myfreeforum.org
Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


No link between passive smoking and cancer
Page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Health
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.






Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
Lexilogio
Well Known Chatterbox...


Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 7585


Location: North of the Watford Gap

PostPosted: Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:21 pm    Post subject:  Reply with quote

Interesting.

Couple of points:
- the study looked at only women. Disease pathways can vary between genders, so it would be interesting to see a corresponding male only study. (I haven't looked into this, so there may have already been such studies).

- as Genghis pointed out, the study concentrated only on lung cancer. The biggest danger from smoking is more the cardiovascular disease and COPD.

- I would, ideally, like to examine the methodology before drawing conclusions (inclusions / exclusions, sample locations, smoking habits of partners, length of smoking time etc)

But, it does imply that the risk is not as great as previously thought.

It seems a shame no one has done a study on long term bar workers?
_________________
Lexi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shaker
Site Admin


Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 8694



PostPosted: Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lexilogio wrote:
It seems a shame no one has done a study on long term bar workers?

it would be interesting, but I suspect (on grounds based on personal experience) that the sample size would be pretty small as generally I think there are very few bar workers who stay in that line of work for a very significant length of time - year after year after year, I mean: it tends to be far more of a short-term occupation.

I suppose what you could look at is those pub landlords/ladies who have been in the business for a very long time, i.e. well before the ban came in and therefore well used to the days of smoky old pubs (which I certainly remember). It might suffer from the same methodological flaw though - how many people keep a pub for decades?
_________________
Thereís no reason to be agnostic about ideas that are dramatically incompatible with everything we know about modern science. - Sean M. Carroll
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rose
Community Member


Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Posts: 927


Location: Now Ramblin free

PostPosted: Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Years ago    pubs used to come with a lounge ( if you wanted to be posh) a workers bar ( if you were wearing very casual or work clothes) and a jug( where all the old boys and their sheep dogs used to sit).

I always think it is a shame they have all gone down the route of having one big bar.

Smokers could have always gone in their own room instead of trying to shelter in the doorway out of the rain!

Julie
_________________
Ramblin' rose, ramblin' rose
Why you ramble, no one knows
Wild and wind-blown, that's how you've grown
Who can cling to a ramblin' rose?

Ramble on, ramble on
When your ramblin' days are gone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ketty
Moderator


Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Posts: 7376


Location: Walking the narrow path, singing merrily and living Victoriously

PostPosted: Sun Feb 23, 2014 10:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lexilogio wrote:
It seems a shame no one has done a study on long term bar workers?


It's only one chap, but Roy Castle put his own lung cancer down to year's of inhaling second hand smoke.  The fact he was a trumpet player meant he was taking perhaps deeper breaths than the general population.
_________________
<><Although Christians and Mormons use the same words such as grace, faith, God and sin, they mean very different things by them. Beware the poison!><>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rose
Community Member


Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Posts: 927


Location: Now Ramblin free

PostPosted: Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This one seems to be on the improvements felt since bar staff don't have to work in smoky conditions.

http://www.cieh.org/uploadedFiles...aces/impact_of_NI_smoking_ban.pdf

Julie
_________________
Ramblin' rose, ramblin' rose
Why you ramble, no one knows
Wild and wind-blown, that's how you've grown
Who can cling to a ramblin' rose?

Ramble on, ramble on
When your ramblin' days are gone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rose
Community Member


Joined: 09 Jul 2013
Posts: 927


Location: Now Ramblin free

PostPosted: Sun Feb 23, 2014 11:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
SCOTH concluded that the increased risk of contracting lung cancer for those exposed to SHS was 24% and for heart disease was 25%.

Even if these numbers are accepted, they are utterly trivial compared to the risks we are willing to accept Ė or expose others to - in many other areas of our lives.

For example, according to Cancer Research UK, the increased risk of contracting lung cancer if you work in a profession that regularly exposes you to diesel fumes is 47% - twice that of exposure to SHS assumed in SCOTH.

Those living in areas with high levels of nitrogen oxide (usually caused by vehicle emissions) have an increased chance of about 33% of contracting lung cancer.

Workers in the ship-building or construction industry have been estimated to have an increased chance of contracting lung cancer of up to 50% - twice that assumed for workers exposed to SHS by SCOTH.

One study even suggests that women who donít smoke, but have a wood-burning fire at home, may have an increased risk of lung disease in excess of 300%.

A French study in 2003 suggested a typical barbecue in oneís garden releases the same number of dioxins that would be emitted from 220,000 cigarettes.

So, even if one accepts the SCOTH reportís numbers on the increased risk suffered by those working in smoke-filled pubs and clubs, these risks pale into utter insignificance compared to risks we readily and unquestionably accept elsewhere.

Furthermore, any presumed risk - to those working in environments with SHS - needs to be compared to the alternative. In a deteriorating economy, the alternative for many of those who no longer work in pubs and clubs is measurably less income as a result of unemployment.

http://www.amendthesmokingban.com/our_case/



I'm doomed then!

I don't smoke, but I do like a good barbecue!

From now on I shall have this picture of me covered in 220,000 cigarettes ..... Like one of those jokes about post it notelets........



Julie
_________________
Ramblin' rose, ramblin' rose
Why you ramble, no one knows
Wild and wind-blown, that's how you've grown
Who can cling to a ramblin' rose?

Ramble on, ramble on
When your ramblin' days are gone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bnabernard
Senior Community Member


Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 2726



PostPosted: Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

 I've been using one of them electronic nicotine delivery devices for about a year now, yes an e-cigarette, the ward sister (or the one in charge whatever that is since they done away with matrons) unplugged me battery and said 'their' use was not allowed on the ward, despite me cardiologist and others telling me it was ok.
There's a brainwashing gone on that exceeds the reality/realities.

Fair anough using hospital lecy to charge up is a point but same goes for mobiles and when it comes to donating for leccy then I is up for it.

bernie (hug)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ketty
Moderator


Joined: 26 Aug 2008
Posts: 7376


Location: Walking the narrow path, singing merrily and living Victoriously

PostPosted: Wed Oct 08, 2014 5:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think your consultant and 'er in charge need to have a discussion.

Hope you're okay Bernie.  
_________________
<><Although Christians and Mormons use the same words such as grace, faith, God and sin, they mean very different things by them. Beware the poison!><>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MikeRan
Junior Community Member


Joined: 02 Jun 2014
Posts: 37


Location: nearby

PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It has never been established that Roy Castle's lung cancer was related to passive smoking although that is generally believed to be the cause.There is more than one type of lung cancer and we don't know which type Mr. Castle had.
_________________
Mikey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shaker
Site Admin


Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 8694



PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 6:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MikeRan wrote:
It has never been established that Roy Castle's lung cancer was related to passive smoking although that is generally believed to be the cause.


It's certainly the case that that's what Roy Castle himself believed, but I'm afraid I don't entirely trust the late Mr Castle's ability to draw accurate conclusions from dubious premisses. I am sorry he died prematurely. He was a superb musician and entertained many of my young hours on Record Breakers. But an oncologist and/or statistician and/or epidemiologist he was not.

Quote:
There is more than one type of lung cancer and we don't know which type Mr. Castle had.


First part absolutely true. Second part I've no idea - I don't know if Roy Castle's specific type of cancer was unknown.

The Lynda Bellingham thread, to which I last contributed earlier today, essentially states that cancer is a migraine-inducingly complicated family of various conditions which almost never admits of the simple, straightforward, easy answers that people want.

Sorry, it's not like that. People who've never smoked in their lives get lung cancer. People who've never touched a drop of alcohol get liver cirrhosis. People who smoke like a chimney live to extremely advanced ages and so do people who drink enormous quantities on a daily basis.

This ought to be telling you two things. One is that there is absolutely and certainly a statistically significant basis between smoking tobacco/heavy drinking/overeating/lack of exercise and premature death. The second is that there are a whole range of complicated lifestyle and genetic factors which override these factors.

What the Americans call the take-home message from all this is that the universe operates on certain laws which admit of random variations.


_________________
Thereís no reason to be agnostic about ideas that are dramatically incompatible with everything we know about modern science. - Sean M. Carroll
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Health All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum