Tobacco and Cancer
It seems hardly a debate in the 21st century that tobacco causes lung cancer in those that smoke it. Debate on the existence of a link to disease and tobacco has been around since Columbus brought the cultural use of it from the natives of North America to Europe (Glantz, 1998). People that are inclined to believe the advice of physicians are coaxed by those that are not inclined to believe medical research to smoke, even though horrible pictures and labels are on the packs that they smoke (Canada, 2004). The people trying to get the population to smoke vary, from the tobacco companies down to peer pressure from a friend who just wants a smoke buddy. The end result is the same sobering statistic: one in two will die from complications related to tobacco use (Samet, 1994).
Tobacco is reported to cause not just cancer of the lungs, but also that of many other organs in the human body. There are reports that higher incidences of cancer is found in the mouth, throat and the digestive organs that are subjected to chemicals that accumulate in saliva (Samet, 1994).
How then are there still smokers that despite warnings continue to smoke? The easiest answer to this question is that deception by the tobacco industry such as Brown and Williamson to the public insisting they were safe in ads has continued (Glantz, 1998). In a sample of mortality in men aged 50-69 taken in the years of 1952 through 1955, a nonsmoker mortality rate was 12.8. A smoker was reported as having a mortality rate of 127.2 (Samet, 1994). This does not seem to be a safe hobby to have with such a high mortality rate.
Why then do people continue to smoke? It could be that by seeing a grandmother not die of lung cancer assumptions are brought to life that somehow their own genetic code is not afflicted with the curse of cancer. It is a fact that there are some inheritable markers that will help lung cancers grow. It is not quite so simple to assume that since a grandmother smoked for 50 years and didn’t get cancer, it is safe to smoke tobacco as a niece or son. There is no DNA test for the markers that will provide concrete evidence to the susceptibility of lung cancer when smoking tobacco (Samet, 1994).
How did smoking continue even if there was death even in the 1950’s? It is not easy to prove tobacco being a cause of lung cancer in the year 2008; it was much more difficult to do so in the booming years of smoking that was the 1950’s. It was not until the early 1960’s that the health system as a whole began to see through the deceptions that were being produced by the tobacco companies. Research by scientists could not show the deaths attributed to the use of tobacco early in the history of smoking due to the lack of modern equipment such as X-ray machines, or even the bronchoscope (Samet, 1994).
In the late 1970’s and middle 1980 there was no longer a way to deny the existence of a link to cancer and smoking by the use of medical instruments and studies with rodents. Tar from cigarettes painted on the backs of rodents and lung cancer from smokers were being correlated. With the link of cancer being strong, tobacco companies put forth an effort to build a “safe” cigarette through the use of filters. The filters largely succeeded in reducing the danger of smoking to the smoker, but it was not a perfect filter. The use of the filters that removed some of the worst chemical byproducts was abandoned by the tobacco industry, as the list of chemicals grew too high to contain in a filter. The result was that the tobacco industry would turn to litigation and lawyers in order to continue selling a product that was not labeled as being dangerous to your health (Glantz, 1998).
What about then the diseases that are silent killers of smokers? Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, which can be caused by smoking, is a class of diseases that kill the patient slowly enough that by the time some people seek treatment; there is too high of a decline of function in the lungs (Glantz, 1998). These diseases like chronic bronchitis and emphysema cannot be cured, but merely slowed down so that some normal life can continue until the patient suffocates while alive in the case of emphysema (COPD Update, 2007). Heart disease and stroke is added to this list (Glantz, 1998), but they are even harder to control once the damage has been done. It can take nearly 10 years for stroke or heart attack risk to slowly fall to normal levels, but COPD will remain since all people die with reduced lung function that is the mark of COPD (COPD Update, 2007).
Smoking has been shown bad for health for decades, but the debate is far from over for the people that die every year. There seems be the right of freedom to die slowly with smoking, but not if you wish to end a terminal illness. There is a saying that tobacco is the only consumer product that when used as directed, results in the death of the user. Medical literature is clear on the diseases that are seen in smokers, especially COPD. It is unfortunate that smoking tobacco is difficult to stop despite warnings and clear evidence of danger if it is continued. The link of COPD to smoking combined with the cancer link in genetics should provide enough incentive for a smoker to stop. Shortness of breath is the first warning sign that should not be ignored.
References
Canada, H. (2004, October). Health Canada tobacco control programme. Retrieved October 13, 2004, from http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/tobacco/index.html
COPD Update. (2007). Respiratory Medicine , 148-152.
Glantz, S. A. (1998). The Cigarette Papers. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Samet, J. M. (1994). Lung Biology in Health and Disease. Lung Biology in Health and Disease ; V. 74 . New York : Marcel Dekker, Inc.