Still want to be part of the statistics?

Smoking, particularly of cigarettes, is by far the main contributor to lung cancer. In the US, smoking is estimated to account for 87% of lung cancer cases (90% in men and 85% in women). Among male smokers, the lifetime risk of developing lung cancer is 17.2%. Among female smokers, the risk is 11.6%. This risk is significantly lower in non-smokers: 1.3% in men and 1.4% in women. In other words, if you smoke, guys are at least 13 times more likely to develop lung cancer than those who don't, and girls 8 times more likely. Probably hardcore smokers will point at the 82.8% of smokers who never developed lung cancer, but still, ARE YOU TRYING TO RISK IT? Sure, life is a gamble, but WHY gamble it away? Besides, I believe that the statistics do not reflect many of those smokers who developed lung cancer but never sought treatment or reported it, hence, never became part of the statistics. Probably they were too sick to seek treatment too, anyway... or they probably can't afford lung cancer treatment, due to a lifetime of spending their money away on cigarettes. And surveys are not perfect. They don't include EVERYONE in the community. At best, they are just rough estimates of the REAL statistics.

Cigarette smoke contains over 60 known carcinogens (cancer-causing agents) including radioisotopes from the radon decay sequence, nitrosamine, and benzopyrene. Additionally, nicotine appears to depress the immune response to malignant growths in exposed tissue. The length of time a person continues to smoke as well as the amount smoked increases the person's chances of developing lung cancer. If a person stops smoking, these chances steadily decrease as damage to the lungs is repaired and contaminant particles are gradually vacated. More recent work has shown that, across the developed world, almost 90% of lung cancer deaths are caused by smoking. In addition, there is evidence that lung cancer in never-smokers has a better prognosis than in smokers, and that patients who smoke at the time of diagnosis have shorter survival than those who have quit.

Passive smoking — the inhalation of smoke from another's smoking — is a cause of lung cancer in non-smokers. Studies from the US (1986, 1992, 1997, 2001, 2003), Europe (1998), the UK (1998), and Australia (1994) have consistently shown a significant increase in relative risk among those exposed to passive smoke. Recent investigation of sidestream smoke suggests it is more dangerous than direct smoke inhalation.

This post is not intended to create fear or instigate anyone but just my personal opinion of what's best for you, your health and your body. Our lungs are already taking in more than enough pollution from the ever-increasingly polluted air, so why pollute it even more with direct cigarette smoke?

It's your choice — Lung cancer or a Healthy pair of lungs?