Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

NO such thing as Climate Change?, page-51

First 51 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
MasterStrategist

13,231 Posts.

2329

15/09/24

16:40

Post #: 75682184
Share

Originally posted by pintohoo: ↑

but tobacco science DID know that tobacco was dangerous and caused cancer from the 'early' twentiety century

by the time of ''Climate science is no better than Tobacco Science of the mid to late twentieth century''

the evidence was rock solid ------------ yet industry continued to lie, and people continued to smoke

AND DIE - in MILLIONS

The recognition of the dangers of tobacco smoking evolved over several decades, with significant milestones marking the scientific consensus on its health risks.
### Early Observations
- **Late 1800s to Early 1900s**: Initial observations linking tobacco to health issues began in the late 19th century. Some physicians noted associations between tobacco use and various cancers, particularly mouth cancer from pipe smoking. Dr. Isaac Adler was one of the first to suggest a link between lung cancer and smoking in 1912, but this view was not widely accepted at the time[1][2].
### Growing Evidence
- **1930s to 1950s**: Research into the carcinogenic effects of tobacco intensified. By the 1930s, studies indicated that tobacco smoke could induce cancer in laboratory animals. Notably, Angel Roffo's experiments demonstrated that tobacco tars could cause tumors in animals[4]. Despite this, the tobacco industry actively sought to downplay these findings, often using misleading advertisements featuring physicians to promote cigarettes as safe[7].
- **1950**: Landmark studies by Richard Doll and Austin Bradford Hill in the UK established a clear link between smoking and lung cancer, based on a case-control study of British physicians. This was a pivotal moment in the scientific community's understanding of smoking's dangers[2][6].
### Official Recognition
- **1964**: The turning point came with the publication of the **U.S. Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health** on January 11, 1964. This report concluded that smoking was a significant cause of lung cancer and chronic bronchitis, leading to widespread public awareness and subsequent policy changes, including warning labels on cigarette packages[5][8].
- **Post-1964**: Following the report, public health campaigns intensified, and smoking rates began to decline as more people became aware of the associated health risks. The medical community largely accepted the findings, although some resistance persisted due to the influence of the tobacco industry and nicotine dependence among healthcare professionals[1][3].
In summary, while concerns about tobacco's health effects date back to the late 1800s, it was not until the mid-20th century, particularly following the 1964 Surgeon General's report, that the dangers of smoking were firmly established in the public consciousness and scientific literature.
Citations:
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_tobacco
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5342645/
[3] https://aacrjournals.org/cebp/article/16/6/1070/260310/The-Cigarette-Controversy
[4] https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/21/2/87
[5] https://blogs.cdc.gov/niosh-science-blog/2010/12/10/smoking/
[6] https://www.rgare.com/knowledge-center/article/smoking-a-100-year-story-that-doesn-t-end-here
[7] https://www.healio.com/news/hematol...igarettes-were-once-physician-tested-approved
[8] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/jun/02/thisweekssciencequestions.cancer

Expand

And what a great tax gig for the government. Get folks hooked on one of the most addictive substances on earth, then raise the tax on those that can't kick the habit to a level where the afflicted are forced to spend circa $300 a week (mostly tax) while fostering a new criminal enterprise of illegal imports and stand over tactics for a share of criminal proceeds. Not to mention forcing otherwise law-abiding citizen smokers to purchase illegal imported products.
Something very wrong with this broken (greedy) dynamic created by government. Dangerous too, given the gift of financial incentive to criminal cartels and the almost weekly tobacco shop fires. Has to be a better way than prohibition by excessive tax.
3 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

AL3

AML3D opens new facility in Ohio as US Defence strategy bears fruit

PV1

Hydrogen tanker stock Provaris inks MOU with "K" LINE to provide advice

NVO

Novo flags antimony and gold in the Pilbara – but does it need to step back?

ASX Market Open: Stocks slide as Trump tosses up attacking Iran directly | June 20

Listen: HotCopper Wire Podcast 014 – Abu Dhabi wants to buy our 'true' oil and gas gem

Friday’s HotCopper trends: Dreadnoughts's drill delight, Galan's beaut raise | June 19

PIQ

Proteomics notches up as company launches PromarkerD into the US

Thursday's HotCopper trends: Second Amplia response, Race combo dosing | June 19

HotCopper Highlights for Week 25: 4DS Memory, Meeka & Sprott-citement

Week 25 Wrap: Fed & BoE pause rates ahead of RBA; Santos-ADNOC, Oz tax reforms

There are more pages in this discussion • 12,484 more messages in this thread...

First 51 Last