Science Lies?

Discussion in 'Science and Technology' started by Madeline, May 30, 2010.

  1. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    Anyone read "Hyping Health Risks" by Geoffrey Kabar?

    [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Hyping-Health-Risks-Environmental-Epidemiology/dp/0231141483/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275208074&sr=1-1]Amazon.com: Hyping Health Risks: Environmental Hazards in Daily Life and the Science of…[/ame]


    What caught my eye when I read the book review in "Skeptical Inquirer" magazine was that the "proof" that second hand smoke kills does not exist, according to the author. Not only do I smoke, but I have watched several businesses in my neighborhood go under as a result of the recent smoking ban here. All this nagging and misery for naught?

    Makes me mad enough to hit someone.
     
  2. LuckyDan
    Offline

    LuckyDan Sublime

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    2,327
    Thanks Received:
    607
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    The mountains of North Central Texas
    Ratings:
    +609
    No shit. Second-hand smoke was all a load.

    Who'd a fuckin' thunk it? And do you know 94% of the fartsniffs who were trying to sell this shit were dems?
     
  3. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,516
    Thanks Received:
    5,898
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,925
    Born in 1957 and having lived through the 60's and 70's I have NO sympathy for smokers being banned. You see in the 60's and 70's there were no NONE smoking areas. Smokers would light up anywhere they pleased.

    I happen to dislike cigarette smoke, having had to live through it as a child both parents smoked.

    The pendulum as swung live with it till it swings back again.
     
  4. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    RetiredGySgt, believe it or not I am a VERY polite smoker. I did not smoke if it bothered people and if I was near someone I did not know, I asked. I think 95% of people who smoke are like that, but yes, I do recall when there just were no bars or restaurants that accommodated people who dislike smoking.

    The book deals with other science lies, such as the allegation that power lines cause cancer. Millions and millions of dollars have been spent researching this claim and despite all failure of proof, many still believe this -- to such a degree, some unfortunate property owners have seen their land lose value.

    I just wondered if any science geeks here have read the book and what they thought of it. I did not mean to spank nonsmokers.

     
  5. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +915
    I remember being examined by a doc
    , in the sixties, while he had a Salem hanging out of his mouth.
     
  6. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    Oh Lord. This is doomed to be a smoking thread.

    LOL.
     
  7. standunited
    Offline

    standunited Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2009
    Messages:
    23
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2
    Yes, science lies. Thats been proven!
     
  8. Madeline
    Offline

    Madeline BANNED

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Messages:
    18,505
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Cleveland. Feel mah pain.
    Ratings:
    +1,624
    There is a difference between a scientific breakthrough that shows an error in thinking in the past and an outright LIE.

    What science lies do you know of, standunited?
     
  9. SmarterThanHick
    Offline

    SmarterThanHick Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,084
    Thanks Received:
    240
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +240
    Let me make sure I just understand this correctly. You are trusting the word of a single epidemiologist who doesn't have the source or subject of his doctorate disclosed anywhere online and who is trying to make money selling his book over the mountain of unbiased peer-reviewed scientific literature that directly proves him wrong? This is exactly why the average layperson should not have voting privileges for health issues. There is so much research on this topic, we can examine the effects of second hand smoke through meta analysis:

    Environmental tobacco smoke exposure and perinatal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses.
    "CONCLUSIONS: [Environmental tobacco smoke]-exposed women have increased risks of infants with lower birthweight, congenital anomalies"

    Cardiovascular effect of bans on smoking in public places: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    "CONCLUSIONS: Smoking bans in public places and workplaces are significantly associated with a reduction in [heart attack] incidence, particularly if enforced over several years."

    Meta-analysis of studies of passive smoking and lung cancer: effects of study type and continent.
    "CONCLUSIONS: The abundance of evidence, consistency of finding across continent and study type, dose-response relationship and biological plausibility, overwhelmingly support the existence of a causal relationship between passive smoking and lung cancer."

    Passive environmental smoking has been definitively linked to increased heart and lung disease in adults, as well as increased risk of asthma and ear infections in children. The topic made you buy his book though, didn't it? $$$
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. eagleseven
    Offline

    eagleseven Quod Erat Demonstrandum

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    6,518
    Thanks Received:
    1,254
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    OH
    Ratings:
    +1,255
    One does not become a Senior Epidemiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine through fraud. If you took the time to do your homework, you would learn that he has personally researched this topic for decades, with multiple peer-reviewed journal publications:

    Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98

    The Long Island Breast Cancer Study Project: Description of a Multi-Institutional Collaboration to Identify Environmental Risk Factors for Breast Cancer

    Tobacco, alcohol intake, and diet in relation to adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastric cardia

    Lung cancer in nonsmokers

    Environmental Toxins and Breast Cancer on Long Island. II. Organochlorine Compound Levels in Blood

    The Role of Tobacco, Alcohol Use, and Body Mass Index in Oral and Pharyngeal Cancer

    Relation between Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer in Lifetime Nonsmokers

    Body Mass Index and Lung Cancer Risk

    -----------------

    Regarding your meta-analyses, these are precisely what Kabat's published articles dispute:

    Environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease mortality in the United States - A meta-analysis and critique (2006)

     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2010

Share This Page