Second Hand Smoke not a Danger - World Health Organization
By bobmnu
@bobmnu (8157)
United States
June 27, 2009 9:42am CST
In a suppressed study commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO)using United Nations funds it was found that there is no link between exposure to second hand smoke and Lung Cancer. WHO which has been a strong voice against smoking and second hand smoke has yet to release the report and has only released a summary internally. The article can be read at http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_062609/content/01125119.guest.html
It is interesting that when a scientific study is done that disproves a "Widely Held Belief" that it is not believed but people saying it is proof enough for doctors to prescribe treatment. Earlier I was having some breathing problems and went to the Doctor. He questioned me about my habits and asked if I smoked, I said no, he then asked if I was around smokers and again I said no. His response was I don't know what the source of the problem is but this is how we will treat you. Studies like this are very important and should be made public so that people can be helped. The government is funding research to find a link between smoking and lung cancer. Research should be done to find the cause of lung cancer. Every year thousands of people die from lung cancer who do not smoke and who are not around the "governments risk factors" for lung cancer.
It is time the government got out of the research business and let researchers find the cause of Lung Cancer instead of trying to prove a political view point.
1 person likes this
7 responses
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
27 Jun 09
This is what logic has told me for years. I'm a member of the Baby Boomer generation...we're all over 50 and most of us had parents who smoked around us. I know that I did. If the second hand smoke bs were true the Baby Boomers would be dropping like flies since, aside from the second hand smoke we were subjected to by our parents, many of us have and still do smoke.
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
27 Jun 09
OMG, you just brought back a memory! There was a little creek down the street from where I grew up and we used to play in it, catching crawfish and waterbugs. My parents would have a FIT about that creek...telling us that we could catch Polio from it. No one ever did....
1 person likes this
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
27 Jun 09
The anti-smoking campaign is no different then the man made global warming campaign.... it is all based on bad or non existent science in order to push a political agenda.
The reason they don't publish these types opf results is simply because that would be detrimental to their agenda.
@heathcliff (1415)
• United States
28 Jun 09
The two are very different in terms of effect and level of "proof". What they share is that it supports your agenda right now to compare them. It is always about agenda.
The WHO is more likely just embarrassed that they spent so much and didn't prove what they wanted. The study was flawed and ended up inconclusive, big surprise.
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
28 Jun 09
You just made my point.
Global warming is an agenda as is the anti smoking rhetoric... as was the manufactured credit crisis that prompted TARP.
People need to stop listening to the propaganda and start thinking for themselves.
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
27 Jun 09
I've long believed that when studies are done they overlook many other risk factors and take for granted if someone is ever around second hand smoke that has to be the cause of their problems. I wonder if there's any more recent study than the one you linked to which is from 1998. I remember hearing Limbaugh talk about it years ago so this must be the same study he talked about then. I have to admit, when he says something I immediately look for a second opinion! I guess even he could be right on an issue once every two decades or so...lol!
Annie
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
28 Jun 09
He is right on most everything he says. Rush sure has the lying liberals pegged.
Meanwhile, 0bozo is once again changing his tune about GITMO.
He is finding out Bush was right.
@posham (1236)
• Philippines
28 Jun 09
Hmmm, I know you were expecting this but I would have to disagree... Smoke, any smoke for that matter, may it be from a cig or not is composed of particulates, tiny tiny dust. And since our lungs can only accommodate up to a certain percentage, more intake will likely cause damage and entice free radical formation. And if that won't cause cancer, I don't know what will.
I guess the study is saying that there is no significant evidence that correlates the two because there are other factors that influence the result.
Well, just a thought 
@maikarumike (458)
• Malaysia
28 Jun 09
I was shocked to know the fact that secondhand smokers are safe from all the harmful emissions of the smokes and also lung cancer, i stopped smoking for a while already and i freaked out because my friends are all smoking and i am scared i am still prone to cancer even though i stopped.
@busky5 (3164)
• Thailand
28 Jun 09
busyky, I think everyone shouldn't smoke because it 's bad for your life. If you're
anxious,you should find to do something good for your life or think someday it will
have good for your life. Although second smoke not bad for life but it's annoy for another people. If you take it next from other, you may take germs or h1n1 too.
@bird123 (10632)
• United States
27 Jun 09
You might not be smoking or around people who do but you are smoking. Air quality from cars and factories not to mention all the coal being burned is just like smoking when you have to breathe it all. I heard a report that said a million pounds of cyanid is pumped into the air in louisianna every year. That is just one state and one chemical.Who knows what other cancer causing chemicals are in our air, food, water, furniture, carpets, building materials, why they even spray poisons in the air all over town to kill mosquitoes. It's a wonder more aren't sick.
