Smoking is the major cause of lung cancer, second hand smoke kills many innocent people and meanwhile pollution ain't that bad.
As the agenda pushers have continually pushed the anti-smoking campaign over the past twenty years, it has to make you take a step back and think. Let's agree smoking is bad and is a big contributor to lung cancer. Let's concede that point for the sake of this post. Second hand smoke, so we've been told over the past twenty years is atrocious. There's even been talk of third hand smoke as being a risk to society.
Let's take a step back. What's in cigarettes. What makes them worse than what is burned in petrol or diesel. And how much more exposure does the average person get to cigarettes than fumes from cars.
Erm, wait a minute I hear you say. It's the other way round. Indeed, it is. What do you think the chances are, that the increase in lung cancer ( of non smokers) over the past 50 years is related to the increase in motorised vehicles? Seems reasonable doesn't it. Never heard the government make such a link before though. Just think of the consequences if they ever did and that might give you some understanding of why second, third, fourth and fifth hand smoke are to blame. I wonder what would happen if everyone stopped smoking. Might explain why cigarettes are still affordable. Price them at fifty pounds a packet and the government might just have to explain away the deaths of non-smokers from lung cancer ie the majority
US taxpayer funded health spending vs NHS
11 hours ago