Report: Reynolds eyes company that helps smokers quit

discusseded wrote:

<quoted text>
Maybe not, but it is the only approach that would satisfy your demands for "proof" of harm. And even then, you and yours would probably continue screaming that it was all a coincidence or that the tests were being done by people who WANTED to show that SHS was potentially lethal.
If Master Settlement money were used to fund autopsies for nonsmokers dead of lung cancer, and those autopsies included testing at the DNA level to identify damage known to result from tobacco-specific carcinogens, it just might evolve a level of proof that would shut down ALL efforts to pretend there is reasonable doubt.
The utility of such a program in terms of rock-solid political/social support for smoke-free efforts is not easy to communicate, though, to the mainstream scientific community when THOSE people have no doubt whatsoever about the connection. They would likely see it as wasting time, money and facilities in pandering to and legitimizing tobacco apologists.
The industry has a vested interest in creating public antipathy for using the money for effective anti-tobacco efforts, and there is no shortage of other interests who are more than happy to have the money pushed their way.

If simple autopsies could discover the direct cause of any kind of cancer and isolate it, then scientists would be well on their way to curing rather than simply treating cancer.

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
If simple autopsies could discover the direct cause of any kind of cancer and isolate it, then scientists would be well on their way to curing rather than simply treating cancer.

Not by simple autopsies alone, but scientists are close to and in some cases have discovered a direct cause for certain types of cancer. They are will on their way to curing certain types of cancer, or at least putting it into long term remission.

u cannot own me wrote:

<quoted text>Oh you nazi prick, big pharma will see that nicotine is not illegal..you live in fantasy land

'linda addict', How low class can you go?----FLUSH---

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Not by simple autopsies alone, but scientists are close to and in some cases have discovered a direct cause for certain types of cancer. They are will on their way to curing certain types of cancer, or at least putting it into long term remission.

Let's hope so. As it stands now, the treatment is often as bad as the disease. My father-in-law's latest chemo for colon cancer makes touching anything cold feel like a knife stabbing him. That is only one of the myriad of debilitating side effects that is making him ready to give up. His treatment will be lifelong since it is a recurrence of the first colon cancer diagnosis ten years ago.

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Not by simple autopsies alone, but scientists are close to and in some cases have discovered a direct cause for certain types of cancer. They are will on their way to curing certain types of cancer, or at least putting it into long term remission.

If discovering the cause can lead to discovering a cure, then that would indeed be good news.

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
If discovering the cause can lead to discovering a cure, then that would indeed be good news.

In laymans terms think, certain types of LUNG, skin cancer, blood cancer, ect. It's a start. Sad to say while they know certain things cause Lung cancer, there are few if any effective ways to put it in remission.

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
If simple autopsies could discover the direct cause of any kind of cancer and isolate it, then scientists would be well on their way to curing rather than simply treating cancer.

And then,

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
If discovering the cause can lead to discovering a cure, then that would indeed be good news.

In one quote you state as a fact, then in the other you act as if it is questionable/dubious. Make up your mind.

I believe that there are specific effects caused by a number of specific causes that are linked to specific types of cancer. There's a thread in the forum on the observable differences between lung cancer in smokers and lung cancer in nonsmokers.

It's been a couple years since I read of it, but I believe there is tobacco-specific cell damage that leads to cancer. I don't think identifying it would involve a "simple" autopsy, and I don't think it would account for a high enough percentage of even tobacco-related cancers to be useful as more than proof that SHS can cause cancer, and then only after a prohibitively large number of cases involving other vectors--tobacco-related or not.

The portion of the medical community that NEEDS such proof is no longer large enough to warrant much in the way of effort for that purpose.

It is a shame there isn't an oncologist or two on the forum. What I read that suggested this was probably only the abstract of a study, and that while I was looking for something else entirely.

I guess I need to get back to school, so I can justify being a nonsmoker.

discusseded wrote:

Let's see, apart from the fact that an anti-Nazi German scientist was advocating proscription of tobacco in the 1920s because his research showed a clear causal link to lung cancer in smokers AND IN THEIR SPOUSES, we can look at this name-calling another way.

You are still spewing your lies and nonsense?

How many times must you make a complete fool of yourself?

It was a bunch of Nazis that forced smoking bans on the German people...no matter how much ridiculous propaganda you choose to spew to cover up historical facts.

http://www.bmj.com/archive/7070nd2.htm

After the war Germany lost its position as home to the world's most aggressive anti-tobacco science. Hitler was dead but also many of his anti-tobacco underlings either had lost their jobs or were otherwise silenced.

Karl Aster, head of Jena's Institute for Tobacco Hazards Research (and rector of the University of Jena and an officer in the SS), committed suicide in his office on the night of 3-4 April 1945.

Reich Health Fuhrer Leonardo Conti, another anti-tobacco activist,committed suicide on 6 October 1945 in an allied prison while awaiting prosecution for his role in the euthanasia programme.

Hans Reiter, the Reich Health Office president who once characterised nicotine as "the greatest enemy of the people's health" and "the number one drag on the German economy"(27) was interned in an American prison camp for two years, after which he worked as a physician in a clinic in Kassel, never again returning to public service.

Gauleiter Fritz Sauckel, the guiding light behind Thuringia's antismoking campaign and the man who drafted the grant application for Astel's anti-tobacco institute, was executed on 1 October 1946 for crimes against humanity.
----------

Now tell us...why did the German people reject Hitler's beloved smoking bans after his death in 1945?

Those who forget the past will repeat it. Those who deny the past should be feared.

When US troops went in-to areas they had freed, one of the first things they did was pass out free packs of cigarettes. Tobacco cos made sure there were pleanty of free cigarettes, and even had the Red Cross passing them out. Back then most people didn't know any better, and even some MDs smoked. We can be glad most of us now know the truth about toxic cigarettes. We also now know know the danger from second hand, side stream & third hand smoke.

Hitler also gave the world it's first super highways. He was indeed a crazy demented demon who should have been stuck on some LA freeway during rush hour. lol

just candid wrote:

When US troops went in-to areas they had freed, one of the first things they did was pass out free packs of cigarettes. Tobacco cos made sure there were pleanty of free cigarettes, and even had the Red Cross passing them out. Back then most people didn't know any better, and even some MDs smoked. We can be glad most of us now know the truth about toxic cigarettes. We also now know know the danger from second hand, side stream & third hand smoke.

Do we now? What IS the danger of 3rd hand smoke? Please link to THAT study.

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
Do we now? What IS the danger of 3rd hand smoke? Please link to THAT study.

Shake out any dry jacket that has been in a smoky bar or hanging in a smoky area. Make sure you have a bright light between yourself and the jacket. When you see dried tobacco "dust" in the bright light, inhale.(NOT) Like some pathetic smokers say, "to inhale is to enjoy." ( NOTE; Please don't inhale that dust. It might lead to cancer.)

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Shake out any dry jacket that has been in a smoky bar or hanging in a smoky area. Make sure you have a bright light between yourself and the jacket. When you see dried tobacco "dust" in the bright light, inhale.(NOT) Like some pathetic smokers say, "to inhale is to enjoy." ( NOTE; Please don't inhale that dust. It might lead to cancer.)

Spring cleaning is not any proof, nor is it a study. Where are those studies you people love so much?

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> Shake out any dry jacket that has been in a smoky bar or hanging in a smoky area. Make sure you have a bright light between yourself and the jacket. When you see dried tobacco "dust" in the bright light, inhale.(NOT) Like some pathetic smokers say, "to inhale is to enjoy." ( NOTE; Please don't inhale that dust. It might lead to cancer.)

if I hake a jacket and dust flies I will smack my behind for not laundering or having the jacket cleaned when it got dirty/dusty..hope you don't wait until dust flies from your sheets before washing them :D

hake = shake

just candid wrote:

When US troops went in-to areas they had freed, one of the first things they did was pass out free packs of cigarettes. Tobacco cos made sure there were pleanty of free cigarettes, and even had the Red Cross passing them out. Back then most people didn't know any better, and even some MDs smoked. We can be glad most of us now know the truth about toxic cigarettes. We also now know know the danger from second hand, side stream & third hand smoke.

You are such a blind self righteous fool.

http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/drilling-...

On the evening of the 24th I spoke with a local Iraqi official, Colonel Faik, who said the Muftis would order the severance of the two fingers used to hold a cigarette for any Iraqis caught smoking.

Other reports, from here in Diyala and also in Anbar, allege that smokers are murdered by AQI.

Most Iraqis smoke and this particular prohibition appeared to have earned the ire of many locals.

After an American unit cleared an apartment complex on the 23rd, LTC Smiley, the battalion commander, reported that residents didn’t ask for food and water, but cigarettes.

In other parts of Baqubah, people have been celebrating the routing of AQI by lighting up and smoking cigarettes.

Freedom wrote:

<quoted text>
You are such a blind self righteous fool.
http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/drilling-...
On the evening of the 24th I spoke with a local Iraqi official, Colonel Faik, who said the Muftis would order the severance of the two fingers used to hold a cigarette for any Iraqis caught smoking.
Other reports, from here in Diyala and also in Anbar, allege that smokers are murdered by AQI.
Most Iraqis smoke and this particular prohibition appeared to have earned the ire of many locals.
After an American unit cleared an apartment complex on the 23rd, LTC Smiley, the battalion commander, reported that residents didn’t ask for food and water, but cigarettes.
In other parts of Baqubah, people have been celebrating the routing of AQI by lighting up and smoking cigarettes.

"Dimbo", a.k.a. "free dum"; For gosh sake man, get with the program. We were talking about Germany /hitlers smoking bans ect. not Iraqi. Some of you smokers never cease to amaze me. "You be" dum, dum and dummer.

Sheri wrote:

<quoted text>
Spring cleaning is not any proof, nor is it a study. Where are those studies you people love so much?

You claim you don't believe in studies made by others (unless it's from Big Tobacco) and I'm not talking about spring cleaning. Now lets start over. I'll add one more step. You can make a choice on how you wish to do. Either wash, or dry clean a windbreaker type jacket. Make sure it gets totaly dry. Wear it to a dive type smoke filled bar.(you should love doing that >;~)me to maybe, lol ) next day shake it out in a sunbeam and you should see what we refer to, as third hand smoke. Enjoy

u cannot own me wrote:

<quoted text> if I hake a jacket and dust flies I will smack my behind for not laundering or having the jacket cleaned when it got dirty/dusty..hope you don't wait until dust flies from your sheets before washing them :D

Like my other linions(silks), sheets get changed every day.

just candid wrote:

<quoted text> You claim you don't believe in studies made by others (unless it's from Big Tobacco) and I'm not talking about spring cleaning. Now lets start over. I'll add one more step. You can make a choice on how you wish to do. Either wash, or dry clean a windbreaker type jacket. Make sure it gets totaly dry. Wear it to a dive type smoke filled bar.(you should love doing that >;~)me to maybe, lol ) next day shake it out in a sunbeam and you should see what we refer to, as third hand smoke. Enjoy

I do enjoy those dive bars and the 3rd hand smoke that I take home.