Comments on: Smoking Duration vs. Intensity and the Impact on Lung Cancer Risk

By: Angel

Angel — Thu, 08 May 2008 20:02:31 +0000

Now there is a rather pointless study. It assumes cancer is your biggest worry. In fact heart attack, stroke, emphysema, and chemical imbalances will do it’s toll as you accumulate the solid poisons, no matter how slow or fast you do it. The emphasis should be on 1)techniques for quitting 2) educational material that prevents starting in the first place.

By: Joe Mangrove

Joe Mangrove — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 01:21:30 +0000

Very Interesting. This, I guess, is also some good news for my ears, since I have recently quit smoking. To all of you who read this article, just quit smoking. The information above should be motivation in and of itself. The first three days being smoke free are the worst and once you get past the first three months smoke free you are free and clear.

By: Gary

Gary — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:22:44 +0000

I love to hear the stories of people quitting. It was too late for my father he smoked from 13 till he was 45. He passed away because of smoking. I can’t believe its not against the law.

By: Walter

Walter — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 02:56:06 +0000

Hi Morgan - congratulations on being smoke free! It sounds like you had your addiction somewhat under control even before you quit. I'm glad to hear the damage to your arteries and lungs is minimal. Isn't it interesting how smoking injury differs from person to person? A number of genes are thought to contribute to the susceptibility to tobacco smoke toxicity, including enzymes involved in the metabolism of xenobiotics. Palma et al. Influence of glutathione S-transferase polymorphisms on genotoxic effects induced by tobacco smoke. Mutat Res. 2007 Sep 1;633(1):1-12. Epub 2007 Jun 2. View abstract

By: Who’s using the Research Blogging icon? | BPR3

Who’s using the Research Blogging icon? | BPR3 — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 12:53:55 +0000

[...] Highlight Health: Smoking Duration vs. Intensity and the Impact on Lung Cancer Risk [...]

By: MorganLighter

MorganLighter — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:26:16 +0000

Interesting study.
Having been a smoker for more years than I would care to admit, I decided that enough is enough and have been smoke free for the last 6 months with no withdrawal symptoms – fortunately.
The reason for this might have been that I never smoked in our house, car or anybody else’s house or car nor did I choose to sit in the smoking section of restaurants, etc.
I recently went in and had an ultrasound scan of all major arteries, and organs and, to the tech’s amazement, there was not plaque or other obstructions to any part of my body. I also underwent a breathing examination and was quite surprised to find that my lungs are 80% clear – and was told with more exercise my lungs would attain 90%+ within a year.
Thanks for the article. Most interesting and congratulations to all of you who have chosen to live longer by their deciding to be smoke free.

By: Walter

Walter — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:10:57 +0000

I wouldn't say you're doing the maximum amount of damage smoking 30 cigarettes per day - clearly someone smoking more than that would be doing further damage to their lungs. However, from a relative risk standpoint, the risk of being diagnosed with lung cancer increases at a higher rate from 1 to 30 cigarettes than from 30 up. Don't forget that smoking is associated with a higher risk for the development of other diseases, including other types of cancer and cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. I think Chrysalis summed it up nicely - quit and quit fast.

By: Ian B Gibson

Ian B Gibson — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:17:12 +0000

Thanks for answering my question.

So, basically, once you smoke around 30 cigarettes per day, you’re already doing more or less the maximum amount of damage and so smoking more than this makes little difference?

This is good news for me, since I smoked extremely heavily throughout my college years, very lightly (i.e. one pack every few weeks) for about 5 years after that and not at all for over a year now (since age 30).

I think I am quite lucky in that I haven’t experienced any of the adverse effects associated with stopping smoking (other people I know aren’t so fortunate), and I can certainly use the extra money.

I have no plans to resume!

By: Chrysalis Angel

Chrysalis Angel — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 10:39:10 +0000

Interesting. No one talks about the intensity of smoking vs long term use. The message is clear, quit and quit fast.