Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 12:02:51 UTC No. 16275895
There are so many carcinogens in the air due to late stage capitalism already that passive smoking has no variance left to explain.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 13:16:57 UTC No. 16275978
>>16275895
>late stage capitalism
Think you mean early stage Zionism.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 13:19:46 UTC No. 16275981
>>16275978
>Think you mean early stage Zionism.
Literally the same thing.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 14:06:45 UTC No. 16276018
remember when it used to be called secondhand smoking? passive smoking seems more benign
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 14:12:04 UTC No. 16276026
Smokers spend literally 5-10 grand a year on their smoking
why don't we just kill them
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 15:35:04 UTC No. 16276096
>>16275830
Probably not enough volume inhaled via second hand smoke to get any adverse outcomes. You get like 1-3 breaths of second hand smoke before you away from the smokenigger
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:49:52 UTC No. 16276505
>>16275830
Even for heavy smokers the odds of getting lung cancer are only about 10%.
HOWEVER, there are other unpleasantries like COPD that are near certainties. So don't get cocky.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 20:54:22 UTC No. 16276512
>>16275830
>Passive Smoking
AKA second hand smoke
>published 2013
How did they research second hand smoke when all indoor smoking has been banned for nearly a decade?
Where are they getting their research data? HOW are they getting their research data?
This is bait, and OP along with everyone else ITT took it.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:09:29 UTC No. 16276530
>>16276512
>he doesn't inhale PollutedTM air on purpose so that his immune system gets stronger
paid off by the anti pollution lobby
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:37:18 UTC No. 16276579
>>16275830
theres still no known mechanism on how smoking causes cancer.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:40:21 UTC No. 16276585
the Anti smoking lobby has grown out of control.
the based smoker holdouts are way healthier than the general population and will live to 100+
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:43:54 UTC No. 16276593
>>16275830
probably because the concentration of carcinogens is too low to overcome the body's antioxidant defenses
>>16276579
it's literally as simple as
>smoke has reactice chemicals
>those fuck up DNA
>cell usually repairs itself or dies, but eventually one will express too many growth factors without dying and omg cancer
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 21:46:38 UTC No. 16276600
>>16276593
that's horse shit you soience tard
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 22:26:29 UTC No. 16276641
>>16276579
>still no known mechanism
>>16276585
>the based smoker holdouts are way healthier than the general population and will live to 100+
literally survivor bias
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Jul 2024 23:39:52 UTC No. 16276721
>>16276505
Look at it this way, though: lung cancer is only one of the most common types of cancer if you include the smokers population in the statistics
I'd say it's not worth the risk
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Jul 2024 01:28:04 UTC No. 16276786
Smoke smells funky
I support an end to all smokers by any means possible, because I do not wish to smell their funky smell
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 14:26:42 UTC No. 16278799
>>16275830
Passive smoking is taken as second hand smoking, but that is not the link to the article but a press release. I think this might be the original study but it seems to have come out after the article.
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Jul 2024 18:06:24 UTC No. 16279051
>>16276641
>cancer research uk
bro...don't fall for propagandea