Second hand smoke and health concerns?

Why is it that NONE of your second hand smoke concerns has any SCIENTIFIC CASE STUDY report that you can read to back up their scare tactics? I seem to be able to find one's that disagree.





http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/…


“Conclusions The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed.”





http://www.cigarmony.com/downloads/smoki…


“Conclusions: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk. We did find weak evidence of a dose–response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS. There was no detectable risk after cessation


of exposure.[JNatlCancerInst1998;90:1440–50…





http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/…


“No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke before or after adjusting for seven confounders and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease. No significant associations were found during the shorter follow up periods of 1960-5, 1966-72, 1973-85, and 1973-98.”





Showtime television, "How the EPA, CDC, Lung Association, and etc." support their claims.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGApkbcaZ…





A CDC S.H.S. research employee offers $100 to any campaign willing to tell the truth.


http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2006…





Yet most continue to believe the lies right in the face of scientific reports. Why is that? Are they just prejudice and refuse to believe something proven to them?|||You know 'tgit23' it's people like you who get other people thinking. I'm surprised there are no other responses to your question. In the first place the 'public' gets most of it's 'information' from the nightly news. OK? So the public generally believes what they hear on the 'news'. Since it is no longer 'politically correct' to promote any negative information to the 'second hand smoke kills' bandwagon you won't hear it. And if you don't hear it how are you (the public in general) going to be able to consider it? Remember these aren't people like you who go out and do their own research before making forming an opinion. These are 'Dancing with the Stars' kind of people. You get the picture? I guarantee that if some study said that by just looking at a highway billboard advertising cigarettes you would double your risk of lung cancer it would hit the evening news and the 'public' would believe it. That's the way human nature is. Don't let it get to you. Great question.