Christopher Reeve's wife just announced she has lung cancer. She's 42. News says she's a nonsmoker.

I guess it's time for SHS to rear its ugly head again.

John Wayne did not die of lung cancer. He did have lung cancer back in 1964, and beat it. They removed part of one lung. He died of stomach cancer in 1979.

Oops. Dana Reeve is 44, not 42.

ABC News tonight kept bringing up SHS. SHS SHS SHS as to causes of lung cancer in nonsmokers.

Not one mention of radon which ALA says causes 15,000-22,000 deaths from lung cancer every year.

ABC also used the SHS increases risk 30% figure in nonsmoking spouses.

They did mention (barely) air pollution.

Interestingly, the local news I watched, which was on a Fox affiliate channel, didn't mention smoking at all except to say that while Jennings had been a smoker, Reeve had never smoked. There was a brief taped comment from a lung cancer specialist who said that certainly lung cancer occurs in non-smokers, especially women.

I was pleasantly surprised.

The antis would be better off, looking for another poster boy, because it draws attention to the fact, money that otherwise might be going toward research with a benefit for nonsmokers, is instead ... going into their pocket.

FUNDING PER DEATH

Breast Cancer: $23,477

Prostate Cancer: $14,369

Lung Cancer: $1,829

MSNBC VIDEO

Dana Reeve(the Camel guy I think)said on TV(Larry King) 75,000 people die every year from second-hand smoke in the States.

One person out of five,who never smoked will get lung cancer.

Does that mean 4 out of 5 people who smoke will die from lung cancer?

Sounds like a 'trick' question

quote:

Originally posted by snowbird:
...75,000 people die every year from second-hand smoke in the States.

One person out of five,who never smoked will get lung cancer.

Those numbers are idiotic. Didn't anybody call him on it?

We now go from 3,000 lung cancer deaths in nonsmokers from SHS to roughly 290,000?

2.4 million deaths annually. Using their numbers, smoking kills 400,000 smokers a year. Half die from their addiction. That means 800,000 smokers die each year. That leaves 1.6 million nonsmokers. 20% of them = 320,000. Let's say 90% die from their lung cancer. So that's about 290,000.

Throw in 50,000 from heart disease and we're up to 340,000. Where does that retard come up with 75,000? Or that 1 in 5 get lung cancer? LOL

quote:

Originally posted by Wanda Hamilton:
Interestingly, the local news I watched, which was on a Fox affiliate channel, didn't mention smoking at all except...

One of my local stations (ABC) interviewed a woman smoker who didn't want to be identified because she was "embarrassed" to be a smoker. (HOW THE HELL DID THEY EVER FIND HER???)

She was pathetic, but what was interesting was they got shots of her hand while smoking and you could see her mouth when she was dragging on a cigarette and you could tell she wasn't young. I'm not real good at guessing ages, but I'd put her at 60 years old.

One of her comments was that her mother had recently been diagnosed with lung cancer and I thought, geez, your mom's what, 80 or 90, you're no spring chicken, what the hell are you whining about? Just shut up and go back to being embarrassed you smoke. Go hide in your house.

One thing I really like about my idiotic local news channels is how anti-tobacco they appear to be. Many stories on smoking and the heralding of the latest studies, including those dealing with Smoking In Movies Makes Kids Smoke.

But then whenever they do a story on smoking they're always zooming in on smokers taking drags.

How many kids have they gotten hooked on smoking? LOL

The right attitude when it comes to death

August 8 | 6:50 p.m.
Pondering implications of smoking, lung cancer (Mike Taibbi, Correspondent, NBC News)

At 7:30 this morning, knowing of Peter Jennings' death, I told John Reiss (the Nightly News Executive Producer) that I'd help in our coverage in any way possible.

Ultimately, it was decided that in addition to the obituary, and personal reports by Brian Williams and Tom Brokaw, I would do a separate piece on lung cancer, Peter's killer.

It was the x-factor in the lung cancer story: the stigma suggesting lung cancer victims bring it on themselves. It's one reason funding for lung cancer research lags so far behind the research dollars for other forms of cancer (one-tenth of the money for breast cancer research, for example). But smokers are not "bad" or "weak" by definition: Peter Jennings was one of the great figures in journalism, and on the American scene. He smoked. A lot of reporters did in his heyday as a foreign reporter. I smoked.

I still do.

And the piece remained about Peter, and his killer, and the need for that killer to be fought with as much vigor and as many dollars as any other form of cancer. Because Peter wasn't weak; he just got sick, and died too soon and too quickly.

story

BTW, i think it was Glantz who was just quoted as saying that Jennings died a horrible (or painful) death. In the reports I read it said Jennings was in no pain and died at home.

Thanks Pat. I couldn't remember exactly.

Interesting data on $$$ spent on cancer research.

Hmmm isn't AIDS a lifestyle disease??? Was it really funded until it hit THE CHILDREN?

Oh wait everyone has sex. So anyone could get it. Nevermind.

Dana Reeve probably spent time in smoke filled bars in her youth. No wonder she got lung cancer.

There is no proof that ANYONE has died from secondhand smoke, let alone the idiotic claim of 75,000 per year. Also, approximately 1 out of 11 smokers will develop lung cancer, which leaves 10 out of 11 who won't. The 400,000 "smoking-related" deaths per year is a joke as well. The actual figiure is probably less than half that number, but the CDC and/or the AMA considers a death to be "smoking-related" if the deceased was evr a smoker during his or her lifetime. A perfect example of this misleading BS is the case of John Candy, the comedic actor who dropped dead of a heart attack at 43 in 1994. He weighed 350 pounds. His father died of a heart attack at age 35. Candy 's diet consisted of chili dogs, hamburgers, and french fries most of the time. He smoked one pack of cigarettes a day. Yep, smoking is what killed him!

Originally posted by Pat:
"There is no proof that ANYONE has died from secondhand smoke, let alone the idiotic claim of 75,000 per year."

Several years ago someone was trying to get 100,000 to be the new number. LOL

"A perfect example of this misleading BS is the case of John Candy...Yep, smoking is what killed him!"

I thought everybody focused on his weight when talking about his death?