hello, as per my knowledge,smoking is one of thousands reasons of cancer.smoking only increase the risk of getting one kind of or a few kinds of cancer.smoking is not a major ground of cancer attack.this is my personal opinion based on my personal knowledge.thanks.
This is interesting. You say this is your 'personal opinion' but it is presumably predicated on some sort of evidence. Would you be kind enough to share this, as I'd like to look into it.
thanks,my wife died 4 months ago due to lung cancer only at the age of 34. not only she was nonsmoker, she was not havitueted any kind of life risking things. she had no diseces. i never smoked in her presense. when the cancer founded,she died only after about 90 days.this is the reason of my this kind of comment,nothing more.sorry to everyone who disliked the opinion,bad is always bad,it is only true thing.
I does seem that there are many non-genetic factors other than smoking that causes cancer. Genes cannot account for the massive and gradual rise in incidents of cancer over the last hundred years or more, because the gene pool remains more or less the same. Contenders, I think, are: pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and some food additives, electromagnetic pollution and air pollution, in other words just living in the modern world. You've just got to minimise the risks where you can.
it's one of those thousand dumb opinions where weak people like you who smoke a pack every day and cant quit say that " smoking only increases the chance of cancer". Lemme ask you this: If it increases the chance, then why not quitting it. why not keeping the chance the same or even decreasing it.
You're absolutely right! Pesticides, herbicides, fungicides...and that's before they put in the chemical flavouring, colouring, preservative (and other additives) growth hormones in meat and dairy produce and so on. It's not really puzzling, is it. At last I've got an intelligent reply. Thx. Our government puppet (strings pulled by big business) says it's all genetic plus lifestyle. Bullshit!
This has been flagged as spam show
This must be watch by primary and secondary hand smoker! This conclusion is highly associated with the lung cancer patient.
happinesson 1 month ago
Alcoholics and smokers, you better stop your vices before it is too late.
agapitoflores001 2 months ago
Imagen in 15 years time, you will have genetic analysis to find out how much your health insurance premiums will cost you...
Mopperty 2 years ago 2
I don't think I care for that thought...
monkeytwineball 2 years ago
PEOPLE ARE still going to get cancer because are world is so poluted ecpesaly smog if people dont know smog is very cariginetic
hypnosis07 2 years ago
It could be the time lag between the population reducing smoking and the cancer rate lessening.
Gorteenminogue 2 years ago
Can anyone explain why incidence of cancer in the UK is on the increase when fewer and fewer people are smoking? Isn't it puzzling?
archdeaconj 2 years ago
hello, as per my knowledge,smoking is one of thousands reasons of cancer.smoking only increase the risk of getting one kind of or a few kinds of cancer.smoking is not a major ground of cancer attack.this is my personal opinion based on my personal knowledge.thanks.
akr333333 2 years ago
This is interesting. You say this is your 'personal opinion' but it is presumably predicated on some sort of evidence. Would you be kind enough to share this, as I'd like to look into it.
archdeaconj 2 years ago
thanks,my wife died 4 months ago due to lung cancer only at the age of 34. not only she was nonsmoker, she was not havitueted any kind of life risking things. she had no diseces. i never smoked in her presense. when the cancer founded,she died only after about 90 days.this is the reason of my this kind of comment,nothing more.sorry to everyone who disliked the opinion,bad is always bad,it is only true thing.
akr333333 2 years ago
I does seem that there are many non-genetic factors other than smoking that causes cancer. Genes cannot account for the massive and gradual rise in incidents of cancer over the last hundred years or more, because the gene pool remains more or less the same. Contenders, I think, are: pesticides, fungicides, herbicides and some food additives, electromagnetic pollution and air pollution, in other words just living in the modern world. You've just got to minimise the risks where you can.
archdeaconj 2 years ago
it's one of those thousand dumb opinions where weak people like you who smoke a pack every day and cant quit say that " smoking only increases the chance of cancer". Lemme ask you this: If it increases the chance, then why not quitting it. why not keeping the chance the same or even decreasing it.
ani2k 2 years ago
This is incorrect deduction drawn from incomplete knowledge.
I'm happy to educate you.
Statistically smoking increases your rate in all types of cancer.
Speculatively, it's from the extra load on your immune system. Smokers also tend to catch a cold more often.
monkeytwineball 2 years ago
It's not puzzling, we eat absolute shit.
The vegetation has all the nutrients sucked out of it
All the meat is fed chemical 'enhancement' and divorced from its natural environment
Everything else is corn syrup...
monkeytwineball 2 years ago
You're absolutely right! Pesticides, herbicides, fungicides...and that's before they put in the chemical flavouring, colouring, preservative (and other additives) growth hormones in meat and dairy produce and so on. It's not really puzzling, is it. At last I've got an intelligent reply. Thx. Our government puppet (strings pulled by big business) says it's all genetic plus lifestyle. Bullshit!
archdeaconj 2 years ago