The risk of developing any of the smoking-related cancers is dose-related; that is, the more cigarettes consumed daily, the younger the age at which one initiates smoking, and the more years one smokes, the greater the risk. --from an NIH publication
So if I want to start smoking now, occasionally, what's the risk? Turns out this is frustratingly difficult to find out. Despite the above conclusion, smoking researchers, when pressed, revert to the mantra "there is no safe level of smoking". Which, given the evidence that risk is dose-related, seems to be beside the point or trivially true at best. That's like saying there is no safe level of driving. One cigarette a year? ("There is no safe level of ...." I think it's a pavlovian response in medical professionals involved in smoking cessation efforts. It might be impossible for them not to say this when provided a trigger phrase.) Fine, let's agree it's unsafe. I'll allow that, yes, a 1.01x risk increase (for example) is less safe than no risk increase. What's the actual risk of, say, a nonsmoker for 40+ years smoking 3 cigarettes/week? How old do I need to get before my life expectancy will be roughly the same no matter what I start doing?
2 comments:
"I think it's a pavlovian response in medical professionals" - those are SO COMMON, not just for smoking cessation, but for most anything that they can finitely measure. Cholesterol, Omega-3 fatty acids, nicotine and tar intake, if it can be measured, medical professionals say "do not intake any" when they have no idea what reduced levels really do. So many confounding and contradicting studies. yes, a 5 pack a day chain smoker, or a 100% daily bacon diet, will accelerate serious maladies. I suspect the algorithm is highly individualized, dictated by genetics, environment, stress, and too many other factors to be accurate.
Exactly, if we want to start puffing now, does it really hurt us?
Post a Comment