Feed on

Let’s all remember that only Neanderthal skeptics refuse to accept sound science. Here is the latest in the sham scientific community and practice that is known as “Climate Science.” Here is a better illustration. This whole thing reminds me of how the “E”nvironmental community dealt with the issue of Lung Cancer back in the 1950s and 60s. I’ll let Matt Ridley tell the story:

Here he is writing a paper called Lung Cancers and their Causes in 1955 in CA, a cancer journal for clinicians http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/content/abstract/5/3/95:

1. The total epidemiological, clinical, pathological, and experimental evidence on hand clearly indicates that not a single but several if not numerous industrial or industry-related atmospheric pollutants are to a great part responsible for the causation of lung cancer.

2.While the available data do not permit any definite statement as to the relative importance of the various recognized respiratorycarcinogens in the production of lung cancers in the generalpopulation, they nevertheless unmistakingly suggest that cigarettesmoking is not a major factor in the causation of lung cancernor had it a predominant role in the remarkable increase ofthese tumors during recent decades.

3. In view of the fact that not only a great deal of the existing circumstantial epidemiological evidence but also practically the entire factual and conclusive evidence available on exogenous respiratory carcinogens are either of occupational origin or point to industry-related factors,it would be most unwise at this time to base future preventive measures of lung-cancer hazards mainly on the cigarette theory and to concentrate the immediate epidemiological and experimentalefforts on this evidently overpropagandized and insufficiently documented concept. When environmentalists want to attack a skeptic these days, they quite frequently accuse him or her of being the kind of person who would have defended the tobacco lobby – in some cases with justification. So it is ironic to find that possibly the most iconic and original text of the entire environmental movement, Silent Spring, was built on the work of a fervent tobacco defender. Hueper is quoted frequently throughout Carson’s book.

In other words, the “E”nvironmentalists were so adamant that chemicals were  going to kill us off that they refused to accept that lung cancers were caused by cigarette smoking.

One Response to “Newsflash: Smoking is Not the Major Cause of Lung Cancer!”

  1. […] Newsflash: Smoking is Not the Major Cause of Lung Cancer! […]

Leave a Reply