Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
Well hey, if you're so educated on the subject lets see the studies that support your position. Seems like that should be an easy task. Actually, there should be some written by you. Let's see them.
Typical internet nitwit. Pump up your credentials while never showing anything that should make anyone take you seriously.
Your position is that cigarettes are nothing more than tobacco. That is patently false.
|
You have yet to point to one chemical that is purposely added to nicotine that is carcinogenic. If anyone here's the "nitwit" it's you. Talk tough until someone who knows what they are talking about comes along and then call them names when you lose.
Please show me one study that shows the occasional wif of cigarette smoke is harmful. I agree second hand smoke is harmful, but every study I've ever seen uses prolonged exposure in contained areas as a model.
You know full well that a scientific study where someone is exposed to smoke in small amounts once in a while and doesn't get cancer is impossible. The controls for such an experiment would be impossible.
The studies that do show second hand smoke is dangerous all point to the fact you need at least moderate exposure over a prolgonged period to have a health risk.
Most studies that show the harms of second hand smoke are limited to the spouses or family members of regular smokers.
You're the one that is making the proposition. It's you who has to prove that occassional wiffs of cigarette smoke outdoors will cause cancer.