India knight on smoking in times

[FluffyMummy123]

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

He did - but there are two things to bear in mind:

1. Not all lung cancer is caused by tobacco smoke (though 80-90% of it in the West is)

1. It takes a long time for an ex-smoker's risk of lung cancer to reduce - ex smokers remain at elevated risk for developing lung cancer compared with never smokers (though at lower risk than continuing smokers)

He smoked 80 a day for 30 years, I think. Then continued to passive smoke in counselling sessions with clients for the rest of his life. I think it's safe to say that smoking killed him!

Yes, there are lung cancers that non smokers get, but the cell type of these is different from the tumour normally found in smokers.

Roy castle got the lung cancer that is almost always only found in smokers.

The effect of smoking depends on your age, amount, and how old you are when you stop. Chronic Bronchitis, Emphysema and COPD are very commonly the result of smoking. This damage can be largely reversed if younger smokers stop. they older you are, the less improvement, however just about all smokers do get a reduction in their lifetime risk.

this is particularly true of the effect on the heart and blood vessels

Fair enough, but I always think it's important to acknowledge that we can't know for sure without a post mortem - in the case of AC, I think that the RC issue was clarified as per Martianbishop's post.

Thanks for raising the heart disease/ COPD thing, MB - it's often forgotten that heart disease caused by smoking causes nearly as many deaths in the UK as lung cancer. Then there's COPD and the other types of smoking-related cancers, too.

Globally, tobacco-related disease causes more deaths than HIV-AIDS and malaria combined.

I taught a lesson on this very thing today. In the time it took to teach the lesson, 3 people in the UK will have died of emphysema.

And while everyone dies, dying of COPD wouldn't be my first choice. In some ways it is 'worse' than lung cancer.

There is an undoubted lag between smoking and developing the cancer, but every time you smoke you are increasing the risk of causing the mutation that may trigger the formation of the cancer.

But no smoker should think, 'So what is the point of giving up' since every one you smoke makes the odds that more likely

the garage

that just about sums it up really

ummm so - passive vegetarianism anyone?

Has India Knight actually lost much weight though? I remember her before and after pics on Observre Woman abotu a year ago and I could, honestly, not tell the difference.

Sorry bundle, have no idea what you are on about.

Hve not read the whole thread, but when I read this on Sunday reminded me of why I only read India Kinghts column if am sitting in takeaway and the only alternative is the motoring supplement.
A few years ago she was raging against people who selfishly refused to vacciante their children, the rationale being that it put her daughter at risk, who was vulnerable to infection. However, she then takes this libertarian appproach to smoking, and a cavalier approach to other vulnerable people, whose asthma is exacerbated by her smoke., as well as those of us who go out in clean clothers with clean hair and object to being forced to stink of her smoke.. (Must remember always to have alternative reading matter to avoid having to read any more of her drivel.)

the mother of a good friend of dh's recently died of lung cancer. She had never smoked. But she had worked in an office for 25 years where many people did smoke [overseas] So ultimately she paid the price for other people's dirty habit.

apparently she had the kind that smokers get.

sorry, being vague about way-back posts

the garage - the woman who only* smokes in there.

what a saddo. nuff said

*people twittering on about it's my life i'll eat/do what i like....
being a veggie or whatever doesn't actually cause cancer to other people

i'm not a veggie

my dad had copd it's shit

I can't think of many things worse Bundle, so sorry to read about your dad.

Hate smoking. Both parents smoke, my brother and I don't. Find myself in the strange position of defending Katie (a bit - some of her comments were a bit antagonistic). She doesn't smoke in front of her kids. That is to be commended. That shows that she is thinking about her children and doesn't want them to passively smoke. At this stage (and maybe never) she doesn't want to give up. That is her choice. If my parents got cancer I would be sad, but hey it's their life and they make their own choices. I feel more angry that I was forced to passively smoke as a child than I do about their decision to continue to smoke. They don't smoke around me in enclosed spaces anymore and more importantly, not around my ds.

By the way, I am very sorry to hear about the experiences of some of the posters who have lost relatives to smoking diseases. I am not saying they should feel the same way as me.

My point, Ladylush, is that not all children of cancer patients are adults themselves (my dh is dying and my kids are 11 and 7).

When smokers say that if they die it is only 'their buisness' are missing the point that they may very well be leaving young children to cope with the loss of a parent.

So while people may very well be sensible enough not to force their children to passive smoke (and this is a good thing) they are ignoring the fact that they could be setting up a situation of great loss and upset for their children.

And they really should take this into account when they talk about it being 'only their buisness'. Because it often isn't.

all part of the feeling that they have that 'It will not happen to me', possibly. But between 1/2 and 1/3 of smokers die of a smoking related disease

11 and 8....but his birthday wasn't that long ago!

I am so sorry about your dh.
You are right - it is not their own business. Of course it affects their children/loved ones. But it is still their choice (whether we like it or not) and I don't think anything non-smokers say will change the view of people like Katie (or my mum) who enjoy smoking.

I miss being able to smoke upstairs on the bus

It is their own buisness, but it isn't just their own buisness.

My dh is dying and he did nothing to cause his cancer. We spent part of this evening helping our dd (11) through a sad moment. It was hard. To do that knowing that you smoked and caused your cancer must be near unbearable.

And I have every sympathy for smokers, I really, honestly do, because it is a vile addictive drug.

But sadly they can duck the facts if they are ever going to quit. And facing up to the fact that even if they are the best mannered and politest of smokers they may well still be causing a huge hurt to the people they love most in the world.

and Katie irritated me a little by calmly saying that her children would know that she died happy with a cigarette in her hand. sadly life is seldom that easy, and that she would have'no regrets'. Which I don't believe for a second.

Yes I agree that comment was insensitive.
for you and your family.

and FWIW I think that a large chunk of the huge income that the govenment gets from the taxation on smoking should be fed into properly supported quitting programmes.

It is a dreaful addiction that causes awful diseases.