This study is exposing interesting discrepancies on deaths "caused" by Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS).

The alarmistic results about mortality "caused" by ETS are estimated from methods based on the average lung cancer risk observed in epidemiological studies of exposure to ETS.

Different methods based on empirical data extrapolation can be used. Empirical data implies more use of direct measurement, and less computer-generated estimates based on epidemiological data charts which -- as we well know by now -- can be very easily affected by unintentional or intentional bias.

Therefore, the observations of this older study highlight certain constants that don't change with time, or political winds.

EXCERPT FROM ABSTRACT

"The average particulate environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) exposure of never and current smokers and the average lung cancer mortality rate for current smokers is estimated from empirical data. These estimates are used in a linear downward extrapolation of the lung cancer risk/milligram of particulate ETS exposure for current smokers to calculate the average lung cancer risk for never smokers and the number of never smoker lung cancer deaths (LCD) in the U.S. in 1980 from exposure to particulate ETS."

"The estimated average daily inhaled particulate ETS exposure for never smokers is 0.62 milligrams/day for men, and 0,28 milligrams/day for women. The average never smoker is estimated to retain 11% of the inhaled exposure, for a daily retained exposure of 0.07 milligrams for men and 0.03 milligrams for women."

"Other estimates are: a daily retained exposure for current smokers of 310 milligrams for men and 249 milligrams for women, a smoking-attributable lung cancer risk for current smokers in 1980 of 284 LCD/100,000 men and 121 LCD/100,000 women, and an annual retained-exposure lung cancer risk for never-smokers of 0.64 LCD/100,000 men and 0.015 LDC/100,000 women."

"These risks and exposures estimate 12 lung cancer deaths among never smokers for exposure to particulate ETS: 8 among the 11,960,000 male never smokers and 4 among the 28,850,000 female never smokers in the U.S."

[...]

The study continues on describing the methodology used, the direct measurements for mainstream and sidestream smoke, as well as the mathematical equations used for the calculations.

Direct measurement of emissions is a true representative of pollution values -- thus exposure to risk -- outperforming any interpolation and extrapolation of statistical data.

Mathematical calculation can then be performed on solid data, as opposed to assumptions and biased surveys.

If there are 8 lung cancer deaths among 11,960,000 males, it means that the odds for a male non-smoker to die of lung cancer from ETS exposure are 1 in 1.5 millions. If there are 4 lung cancer death among 28,850,000 females, it means that the odds for a female non-smoker to die of lung cancer from ETS exposure are 1 in over 7.2 millions.

It is our understanding that the odds of being struck by lightening are the classic 1 in a million.

So, this is yet another demonstration of the gratuitous fear tactics that the antismoking industry uses to justify the acquisition of power and tax funds.

In light of the latest computer-generated factual distortions of the latest California EPA "study" that the Bill Clintons of this world use to justify subjugation of dissenting population to political agendas, this empirical "old" data should give us quite a lot to think about.

And the White House and FDA should consider legislation on lightening rods.