Secondhand smoke debate?

Has modern day science been corrupted with politics and biases? How come there are so many ads and claims about health risk associated with second hand smoke when the risk is still just a debate in the scientific world. Seems to me if there was a SIGNIFICANT risk it when have been a closed book case centuries ago when the studies started. Why do they keep trying to study something over and over again, when they keep getting the same results?





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…|||Well 'tgit23' this is a very similar question to your other one. OK here goes. Smokers are now in a distinct minority compared to the '40s and 50s so Madison Avenue is naturally going to cater to the non-smokers. The evening news won't print or say anything negative about the issue. (See my answer to your other question. Now to be the devil's advocate, you ever blow smoke (second hand smoke) into a jar full of Japanese beetles when you were a kid? Makes them go bonkers, right. Come on every kid probably did that. Anyway the beetles don't need a bunch of 'studies' to tell them it isn't good for them. Now come on, while the debate goes on, I'm going to err on the side of caution and stay out of high concentrations of secondhand smoke. It's just the smart thing to do. I think the Japanese beetle 'study' will probably be right in the end. Good question.