51–60 of 259 posts
This has some legal implications. You can now prove fairly conclusively that your lung cancer came from smoking. I wonder if it will lead to a new wave of tobacco litigation. I think even Fisher would be convinced [1]. [1] https://priceonomics.com/why-the-father-of-modern-statistics...
https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/are-former-smokers-safe-after-1...
This has some legal implications. You can now prove fairly conclusively that your lung cancer came from smoking. I wonder if it will lead to a new wave of tobacco litigation. I think even Fisher would be convinced [1]. [1] https://priceonomics.com/why-the-father-of-modern-statistics...
Anal point - why the apostrophe? Should it be "Smoking becauses hundreds..."?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can always go for vaporizers. Are vaporizers actually ever used on tobaco? (i think they're sold "for tobaco use only" like bongs?)
As a pipe smoker, I can tell that vaporisers work with synthetic liquids containing synthetical nicotine, nothing to do with harms and benefits of tobacco. You could use nicotine plasters with the same effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure that this could prove that. I believe that the mutation rate for non-smokers that develop lung cancer should be elevated as well. Perhaps there is a statistical difference, but it might not be easy to prove with certainty.
The tobacco signature goes beyond elevated rate, it has a sequence specific pattern (see http://cancer.sanger.ac.uk/cosmic/signatures ).
From your source:
> With more cancer genome sequences and the additional statistical power this will bring, new signatures may be found, the profiles of current signatures may be further refined, signatures may split into component signatures and signatures may be found in cancer types in which they are currently not detected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a pipe smoker, I can tell that vaporisers work with synthetic liquids containing synthetical nicotine, nothing to do with harms and benefits of tobacco. You could use nicotine plasters with the same effect.
I was talking about vaporizers where you put the thing that you usually burn in there, not some kind of liquid. Example: http://sales.magic-flight.com/original-maple-launch-box-kit/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's definitely not obvious. I would agree that mutations due to smoking could be in majority harmful due to the chemical components and the high temperatures involved. Other than that, a mutation is a mutation, whether due to smoke, nuclear irradiation, high altitude, or chance. In all cases, they can be beneficial or harmful. The evolution process will then cause only the beneficial ones to perdure.
> The evolution process will then cause only the beneficial ones to perdure. This isn't correct and is a common misconception about evolution. The process which does this is natural selection, and it only occurs through the organism being unable to reproduce as well as an organism with beneficial evolutionary changes. With humans in the modern world, there is no natural selection because of state benefits that keep p…
This has some legal implications. You can now prove fairly conclusively that your lung cancer came from smoking. I wonder if it will lead to a new wave of tobacco litigation. I think even Fisher would be convinced [1]. [1] https://priceonomics.com/why-the-father-of-modern-statistics...
Hitting yourself repeatedly over the head with a hammer can give you a headache. Not sure DeWalt are worried from a litigious point of view. I doubt there is a smoker alive today who can reasonably claim to have been unaware of the risks when they started. Anal point - why the apostrophe? Should it be "Smoking becauses hundreds..."?
> "Had I known as a teenager that smoking caused mutations which would stay with me for life then I would never had started"
It agree with you that it's a little silly, especially for young people, but it wasn't that long ago they started forcing cancer warnings on tobacco.