|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by infinitethoughts
on Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:38 pm |
|
Curezone.com is a massive (I mean MASSIVE) website that labels itself as "Educating not medicating". In the past I've posted about Tobacco and how it cures Bronchitis and it got Recommended by the Mods. Much to the surprise of the poor Antis. 
Let's see what happens this time.
Here's the post.
http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1537579#i |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by violetfae
on Thu Dec 10, 2009 10:05 pm |
|
| Well done. According to quantcast.com, that site gets 24K hits a day. |
|
|
violetfae
Newbie
Joined: Mar 22, 2009
Posts: 33
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Fri Dec 11, 2009 11:46 am |
|
| Thanks. I knew it was a lot but not that much. |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by AndyB
on Fri Dec 11, 2009 6:40 pm |
|
Non smoking sites discuss lung cancer. It's not actually lung cancer that kills most smokers. It's circulation failures and arteries stuff for number one, and number two is cancers of the pancreas and other places like that. Lung cancer (small-cell cancer) rates, while more pronounced in smokers, mightn't appear to be hugely differing, as we expect.
As for the rats study itself, well, I would like to read the complete analysis to be able to judge. For, as you know, 65% of all statistics are made-up. |
|
|
AndyB
Newbie
Joined: Dec 11, 2009
Posts: 10
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by libertarian99
on Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:45 pm |
|
AndyB wrote: As for the rats study itself, well, I would like to read the complete analysis to be able to judge. For, as you know, 65% of all statistics are made-up. |
|
|
libertarian99
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: May 01, 2009
Posts: 453
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Sat Dec 12, 2009 6:52 pm |
|
AndyB wrote: It's circulation failures and arteries stuff for number one, and number two is cancers of the pancreas and other places like that.
Post the research and then we'll talk,
If you don't have the research then why you bringin it up ? |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by AndyB
on Sat Dec 12, 2009 7:03 pm |
|
Quote: Really? Where did you get that number? How can you be certain the 65% figure wasn't made up, as well?
Oh, come on. I am being tongue in cheek. Surely you can see I was doing a lol.
Here is an excerp from a medical site:
"Cardiovascular disease is the main cause of death due to smoking. "
And from another site:
"While most people equate smoking deaths to cancer and lung disease, in fact many more people will die from circulatory conditions from smoking than die from cancer or other lung diseases."
PS: ".. only .05 per cent of people who've never touched a cigarette develop lung cancer."
The truth is vastly different from your rats study. |
|
|
AndyB
Newbie
Joined: Dec 11, 2009
Posts: 10
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:03 pm |
|
AndyB wrote:
PS: ".. only .05 per cent of people who've never touched a cigarette develop lung cancer."
The truth is vastly different from your rats study.
Lol.....
"Andy", sounds a lot like "Anti", but anyway I digress. 
You post a statement, with no reference to any study and then grandly call that "The Truth" ??....and you expect us to believe this ??
Go back to your little world of fiction and quit wasting our time. |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Mon Dec 14, 2009 2:29 pm |
|
AndyB wrote:
Here is an excerp from a medical site:
"Cardiovascular disease is the main cause of death due to smoking. "
And from another site:
"While most people equate smoking deaths to cancer and lung disease, in fact many more people will die from circulatory conditions from smoking than die from cancer or other lung diseases."
I got rid of your attempt to color the text. (To make it stand out more?) Black and white works just as well.
Here's an actual study that says the opposite of what you posted.
(Circulation. 2001;104:773.)
American Heart Association, Inc.
Clinical Investigation and Reports
From the Harvard Clinical Research Institute, Harvard Medical School (D.J.C., M.D., D.E.C., K.K.L.H., R.E.K.); Cardiovascular Division, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (D.J.C., M.D., D.E.C., K.K.L.H.); and Divisions of Cardiology (J.J.P., R.E.K.) and Clinical Biometry (R.E.K.), Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Mass.
Background— Recent studies have suggested that smokers may require less frequent repeated revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with nonsmokers.
http://85.18.251.150/34/circulation_2001_104_773.htm |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by AndyB
on Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:40 pm |
|
Quote:
"Andy", sounds a lot like "Anti" ...
Wtf? Is this part of your discussion, personal attacks?
Quote: You post a statement, with no reference to any study and then grandly call that "The Truth" ??....and you expect us to believe this ??
Quote: Recent studies have suggested that smokers may require less frequent repeated revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with nonsmokers.
Because many of those patients die before they ever have a chance of repeating the procedure.
Have you thought of that?
Quote: Go back to your little world of fiction and quit wasting our time.
I do realize that you should conserve your time. |
|
|
AndyB
Newbie
Joined: Dec 11, 2009
Posts: 10
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|
