Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 161 posts

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#31

Post by darth_avocado »

enhancer wrote: post #18
lambdaba wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seed oils mainly, a factor of the lower smoke point. The only suitable plant oils in this regard are olive and coconut oil - which are fruit oils. [edit] seed oils r bad skeptics can just double check - the top 3 highest smoke point oils are all fruit oils, with seed oils at a distance - with the exception of peanut oil, which is closer. The smoke point is also not the only relevant factor, the fatty acid makeup is a…

Damn so sesame oil or soybean oil? Those are essential is asian cuisine

Soybean oil is very common in most American deep fried food.

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#32

Post by lambdaba »

enhancer wrote: post #18
lambdaba wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seed oils mainly, a factor of the lower smoke point. The only suitable plant oils in this regard are olive and coconut oil - which are fruit oils. [edit] seed oils r bad skeptics can just double check - the top 3 highest smoke point oils are all fruit oils, with seed oils at a distance - with the exception of peanut oil, which is closer. The smoke point is also not the only relevant factor, the fatty acid makeup is a…

Damn so sesame oil or soybean oil? Those are essential is asian cuisine

Soybean oil is mentioned in the study. A lot of people get very angry when seed oil dangers are mentioned, it's hilariously politicized, the fact is these are not lindy at all, there is no tradition that would validate their safety, these are 20th century inventions.

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#33

Post by jncfhnb »

ahepp wrote: post #16

A graph in the article is captioned: > A study of nearly 4,000 non-smoking women found that the share of Asian American women who developed lung cancer was more than twice that of white women. And then proceeds to list "53.4%" for Asian. Are we to believe that in a sample of "nearly 4,000 non-smoking women", over half of the Asian American women developed lung cancer? Elsewhere in the article it is said that > Among…

It is saying that 53.4% of the non smoking women that developed cancer in the study were Asian.

It is a dumb stat to chart without contextualizing that Asians were 15.92% of the entire study population.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8530225/table/T...

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#34

Post by lambdaba »

darth_avocado wrote: post #31
enhancer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damn so sesame oil or soybean oil? Those are essential is asian cuisine

Soybean oil is very common in most American deep fried food.

I know it's not very HN of me but I want to point out your username is highly relevant to the discussion.

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#35

Post by jjgreen »

d1sxeyes wrote: post #30
rafram wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you smoke, your chances of getting cancer are only 3 in 10!" is not actually very comforting.

Also worth remembering that cancer isn’t the only bad thing smoking does to you. 7/10 smokers (2/3) die of a smoking related illness.

Any idea of what percentage of non-smokers die of a smoking related illness?

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#36

Post by max_ »

nneonneo wrote: post #13
max_ wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are Many things that cause lung cancer other than smoking. Infact majority of people that smoke don't get Cancer (only about 30% in a group of smokers get lung cancer) Edit: I don't mean it's comforting I prefer to have it at 0/10 I am just trying to say that things that cause cancer are not as deterministic as we think.

I mean, it’s not going to be 0/10 because smoking causes cancer. Cancer itself isn’t deterministic. This isn’t news. There is virtually nothing that is 100% guaranteed to produce cancer, but there are things that massively increase risk. Tobacco is one of them. An estimated 72% of lung cancers in Canada are caused by tobacco ( https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-conce... ) Smokers are 25x more like…

It is true that Tobacco increases cancer risk.

But what about stuff like the use of Teflon and other "forever" chemicals? These things may also be making a contribution.

It could also be a genetic defect. A liver cell growing in the lung.

Or maybe a staple food familiar to Asian women that is being contaminated with carcinogens.

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#37

Post by [deleted] »

x0x0 wrote: post #29
ahepp wrote: post #16

A graph in the article is captioned: > A study of nearly 4,000 non-smoking women found that the share of Asian American women who developed lung cancer was more than twice that of white women. And then proceeds to list "53.4%" for Asian. Are we to believe that in a sample of "nearly 4,000 non-smoking women", over half of the Asian American women developed lung cancer? Elsewhere in the article it is said that > Among…

I think what it means, and the graph is unclear, is that of the A-A women who developed lung cancer, 53% don't smoke. It's P(non-smoking | lung cancer, ethnicity)

[deleted]

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#38

Post by DonsDiscountGas »

max_ wrote: post #4
helsinkiandrew wrote: post #3

12% of Asian American men smoke compared with 2.6% of women. So non smoking Asian women are more likely to live with a smoking man. Could second hand smoking exposure be a factor in this? https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/impact-of-to...

There are Many things that cause lung cancer other than smoking. Infact majority of people that smoke don't get Cancer (only about 30% in a group of smokers get lung cancer) Edit: I don't mean it's comforting I prefer to have it at 0/10 I am just trying to say that things that cause cancer are not as deterministic as we think.

IIRC the lifetime risk of lung cancer for smokers is more like 20%. For reference, among non-smokers the risk of lung cancer[0] is about 1%. So smoking is represents a 20x increase in risk.

Around 80% of lung cancers are found in smokers and another 10% with heavy exposure to second-hand smoke. Smoking is the single largest risk factor for lung cancer.

[0] All numbers are based on general population of US, so heavily white-skewed, I dunno about asian americans specifically.

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#39

Post by woodruffw »

helsinkiandrew wrote: post #3

12% of Asian American men smoke compared with 2.6% of women. So non smoking Asian women are more likely to live with a smoking man. Could second hand smoking exposure be a factor in this? https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/impact-of-to...

This is what I first thought of as well, but other sources indicate that Asian Americans are actually the demographic with the least overall cigarette use[1]. Given that White and Black Americans use cigarettes at almost twice the rate Asian Americans do, we'd expect strong second-hand correlations for those groups as well.

(This source doesn't quantify "use," so there are confounding factors: prevalence of smoking at home, chain smoking vs. social smoking, etc.)

[1]: https://smokingcessationleadership.ucsf.edu/racialethnic-min...

Re: Asian American women are getting lung cancer despite never smoking

#40

Post by gruez »

lambdaba wrote: post #32
enhancer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damn so sesame oil or soybean oil? Those are essential is asian cuisine

Soybean oil is mentioned in the study. A lot of people get very angry when seed oil dangers are mentioned, it's hilariously politicized, the fact is these are not lindy at all, there is no tradition that would validate their safety, these are 20th century inventions.

>when seed oil dangers are mentioned, it's hilariously politicized

???

Where are you seeing this? It's definitely controversial, but calling it "politicized" seems like a stretch.

Post reply on HN