Google analytics

Saturday, 19 October 2013

Is this the real cause of the rise in Lung Cancer?

If so this should frighten the living daylights out of the Antismoking fake charities such as ASH.

The question to be asked is this:

Are Diesels More Dangerous than Cigarettes as a Cause of Lung Cancer?

I’ve written this post as the WHO have just come out of the closet and admitted that outdoor air pollution is maybe the main cause of lung cancer.

A major environmental health problem

Air pollution is already known to increase risks for a wide range of diseases, such as respiratory and heart diseases. Studies indicate that in recent years exposure levels have increased significantly in some parts of the world, particularly in rapidly industrializing countries with large populations. The most recent data indicate that in 2010, 223 000 deaths from lung cancer worldwide resulted from air pollution.

The most widespread environmental carcinogen

“The air we breathe has become polluted with a mixture of cancer-causing substances,” says Dr Kurt Straif, Head of the IARC Monographs Section. “We now know that outdoor air pollution is not only a major risk to health in general, but also a leading environmental cause of cancer deaths.”

 However a research scientist  came up with a study in 1998 which if was true should have turned the prevailing orthodoxy on it’s head about cigarette smoking.

Here is a few facts from her work:

  • tobacco smoke contains no carcinogens, while diesel fumes contain four known carcinogens;
  • that lung cancer is rare in rural areas, but common in towns;
  • that cancers are more prevalent along the routes of motorways;
  • that the incidence of lung cancer has doubled in non-smokers over past decades;
  • and that there was less lung cancer when we, as a nation, smoked more.

And even more damning is her summary.

"Since the effect of the anti-smoking campaign has been to prevent the genuine cause from being publicly acknowledged, there is a very real sense in which we could say that the main reason for those 30,000 deaths a year from lung cancer is the anti-smoking campaign itself".

Over to you ASH.


  1. Without all the scare tactics, the tax on tobacco would be so much less, and the politicians would have less of our money to spend.

  2. This is not news, my mum when she was training to be comes a lecturer in Geriatric nursing over 30 years ago was told this by her lecturers. It is a well known fact in the higher echelons of Nursing and Government that Diesel engines exhaust fumes are full of Carcinogines.

  3. Not only carcinogenic chemicals but tiny particulates that can penetrate to the lung alveoli. Any irritation long term will also induce a cancer of a type depending on the tissue. So for example osteomyelitis and the suppurating sore will, if not treated often lead to skin cancer at the site of the ulcer. Likewise with these particulates in the lung, with lung function as in self cleansing reduced because of the chemical contamination and irritation causing inflammation. This is well known to medics and scientists of a certain persuasion but not generally. It doesn't exonerate smoking as there are carginogenic chemicals in tobacco smoke. And wood smoke. And bonfire smoke.

  4. For quite some time it has been known that the incidence of lung cancers and other respiratory complaints is highest near to airports or under the landing or take- off flightpaths. The only known preventions would be either moving everyone away from airports or stopping all air traffic. The solution was to disregard the number of 'acceptable casualties'.

  5. 30,000 deaths per year as a result of ASH's propaganda is a most spectacular own-goal! If we had a sensible and caring government instead of the self-serving and corrupt band of idiots presently occupying Westminster, ASH's funding would be withdrawn immediately. ASH=All Shit Heads


Say what you like. I try to reply. Comments are not moderated. The author of this blog is not liable for any defamatory or illegal comments.