How does smoking affect the lungs and cause cancer?

Answer 1

No! It may add risk but no directly and alone it does not!

Judge doesnt accept statistical studies as proof of LC causation!

It was McTear V Imperial Tobacco. Here is the URL for both my summary and the Judge's 'opinion' (aka 'decision'):

boltonsmokersclubDOTwordpressDOTcom/the-mctear-case-the-analysis/

(2.14) Prof Sir Richard Doll, Mr Gareth Davies (CEO of ITL). Prof James Friend and

Prof Gerad Hastings gave oral evidence at a meeting of the Health Committee in

2000. This event was brought up during the present action as putative evidence that

ITL had admitted that smoking caused various diseases. Although this section is quite

long and detailed, I think that we can miss it out. Essentially, for various reasons, Doll

said that ITL admitted it, but Davies said that ITL had only agreed that smoking might

cause diseases, but ITL did not know. ITL did not contest the public health messages.

(2.62) ITL then had the chance to tell the Judge about what it did when the suspicion

arose of a connection between lung cancer and smoking. Researchers had attempted

to cause lung cancer in animals from tobacco smoke, without success. It was right,

therefore, for ITL to 'withhold judgement' as to whether or not tobacco smoke caused

lung cancer.

[9.10] In any event, the pursuer has failed to prove individual causation.

Epidemiology cannot be used to establish causation in any individual case, and the

use of statistics applicable to the general population to determine the likelihood of

causation in an individual is fallacious. Given that there are possible causes of lung

cancer other than cigarette smoking, and given that lung cancer can occur in a nonsmoker,

it is not possible to determine in any individual case whether but for an

individual's cigarette smoking he probably would not have contracted lung cancer

(paras.[6.172] to [6.185]).

[9.11] In any event there was no lack of reasonable care on the part of ITL at any

point at which Mr McTear consumed their products, and the pursuer's negligence

case fails. There is no breach of a duty of care on the part of a manufacturer, if a

consumer of the manufacturer's product is harmed by the product, but the consumer

knew of the product's potential for causing harm prior to consumption of it. The

individual is well enough served if he is given such information as a normally

intelligent person would include in his assessment of how he wishes to conduct his

life, thus putting him in the position of making an informed choice (paras.[7.167] to

[7.181]).

The ranking goes for all cancer deaths/mortality:

Per 100,000 population CDC NUMBERS/ smoking rates from tobacco free kids

Kentucky at 207 Adults in Kentucky who smoke* 29.0% (971,000)

Miss. 200 Adults in Mississippi who smoke* 26.0% (579,300)

West Virginia 196 Adults in West Virginia who smoke* 28.6% (420,500)

Louisianna 196 Adults in Louisiana who smoke* 25.7% (888,300)

Arkansas 193 Adults in Arkansas who smoke* 27.0% (601,400)

Alabama 190 Adults in Alabama who smoke* 24.3% (893,100)

Indiana 187 Adults in Indiana who smoke* 25.6% (1,259,300)

Maine 186 Adults in Maine who smoke* 22.8% (241,400)

Missouri 184 Adults in Missouri who smoke* 25.0% (1,149,600)

Delaware 184 Adults in Delaware who smoke* 21.8% (153,100)

South Carolina 182 Adults in South Carolina who smoke* 23.1% (831,200)

As we can see kentucky has the Highest rate but when we look at the map of kentucky cancer it shows us that its the Coal Mining Mountain region that sets Kentuckys state level Higher than all the rest. When we look at the local county levels they are pretty much in line with the rest of the country. Louisville reports roughly 750 cancer cases in 2010 by the chart yet no mention of out of state cases diagnosed there by the local 5 hospitals and cancer treatment done there by far attracting a higher base rate. Possibly inflating the kentucky numbers for louisville itself.

But even without removing the coal mining regions the rate trends precisely with other states..........

..................................................

Lung and Bronchus. Invasive Cancer Incidence Rates and 95% Confidence Intervals by Age and Race and Ethnicity, United States (Table 3.15.1.1M) *†‡

Rates are per 100,000 persons. Rates are per 100,000 persons.

Note the age where LC is found…………..OLD AGE group incidence hits the 500/100,000 at age 75-85

AGE it seems is the deciding factor……….

Answer 2

Smoking has lots of disadvantages on the lungs, and more over if the person already has lung cancer.

Smoking can destroy your alveoli, bronchioles even more rapidly, thus reducing your life span even more quickly.

Answer 3

I think if a person has common sense, they know the answer to this. Many studies have been done on the carcinogenic effects of smoke in the lungs and smoking marijuana would have to be toxic to the lungs. Think about it....

Answer 4

Doctors believe smoking causes lung cancer by damaging the cells that line the lungs. When you inhale cigarette smoke, which is full of cancer-causing substances (carcinogens), changes in the lung tissue begin almost immediately.At first your body may be able to repair this damage. But with each repeated exposure, normal cells that line your lungs are increasingly damaged. Over time, the damage causes cells to act abnormally and eventually cancer may develop.

Answer 5

It turns your lungs black.