Lung Cancer In Never Smokers
The Lung Cancer Alliance is a newcomer in the Healthist crowd. It declares that it will take 'no more lung cancer'. It promises new approaches to combat this disease. Whether this promise will materialize is yet to be seen. There are no visible signs that the Lung Cancer Alliance desires to end the persecution of smokers. But little signs of compassion are visible. Nobody, not even smokers, 'deserve' lung cancer. That is where the compassion ends for now.
One welcome approach by the Lung Cancer Alliance to the issue, is a junk science study on lung cancer in never smokers. This has the interest of smokers. We too are interested in knowing how to reduce the risks of lung cancer - without giving up our smoking, obviously. After all, for the smoker, foregoing smoking for the benefit of living longer is to no avail. For the smoker, a longer life contains the prospect of enjoying more years smoking!
The study is by one Assistant Professor Heather Wakelee of Stanford University. Let us see what we can garner from the study.
First there is the usual passive smoke garble. The study parrots ACS claims about ETS and lung cancer. Proclamations follow about lung cancer rates dropping in response to lower smoking rates. The good researcher licks the jackboots of the antismoking troopers, in order to appease them.
Professor Heather has found out that donning knee pads and servicing Big Cancer is part of the research game, unless you want your funding to dry out mysteriously. Just ask James E. Enstrom or Brad Rodu what happens if you stand up against the cancer barons. Even Michael Siegel is feeling the flail, and he is just speaking up against outdoor smoking bans. Pavlovian conditioning at work.
One particular form of lung cancer stands out. Adenocarcinoma makes up a larger proportion of cancers among never smokers and former smokers than current smokers. It might be fair to establish that adenocarcinoma seems to be a 'non smokers' cancer. Perhaps the smokers are infested by this form of lung cancer, by socializing too much with never smokers. Passive never smoking. Let's ban never smokers from the workplaces of smokers, to protect the smokers from the lung cancers of never smokers.....
Another interesting observation is that Swedish cigarette smokers have lower lung cancer rates than smokers of other countries. It seems like Swedish pesky smokers do not die at the rates prescribed by the health fascists. Shame be unto those dastardly Swedish cigarette smokers!
On a different note, female never smokers are about twice as likely as men to have 'non smoking related (sic!) lung cancers' than males. Take that, never smoking females!
The study does not establish whether there is an actual increase in the number of non smoking related cancers. Thank you for providing us with this information. What it means is that there is no decrease in this form of lung cancer, despite lower smoking rates, and less passive smoking going on. So much for the cancer czars claims that passive smoke is a cause of lung cancer in non smokers.
The final words of the study are worthy of quotiation:
"With lung cancer persisting as the leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States, research into the epidemiology of lung cancer in never smokers should be an importantpublic health priority."
So much for the anti smoking cartel promise of the lung cancer free utopia of tobaccophobia. Lung cancer is not disappearing at all.
Events will show whether the Lung Cancer Alliance will make a difference to lung cancer. How long will it be before the ACS empire strikes at this attempt at pillaging territory from its cancer fiefdom?
We will see. Time to suck a cancer stick.