REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

Reply to thread

Message

There is not one shred of true, statistically significant scientific eveidence that passive smoking has ever killed anyone ?

The DOH cant, ASH cant,and neither can Cancer Research. You have to read their words carefully, they are all full of might, possibility, maybe, estimate they cannot provide any evidence whatsoever.

The only report that came up with any risk was the EPA who gave a risk factor of 1.19, even this was discredited in court and thrown out after it was discovered that the EPA had fiddled the figures. Anything under a risk of 3 is not considered a risk at all and whole milk has a risk factor of 2.5.

[QUOTE="The Pro, post: 2111426, member: 65179"] There is not one shred of true, statistically significant scientific eveidence that passive smoking has ever killed anyone ? The DOH cant, ASH cant,and neither can Cancer Research. You have to read their words carefully, they are all full of might, possibility, maybe, estimate they cannot provide any evidence whatsoever. The only report that came up with any risk was the EPA who gave a risk factor of 1.19, even this was discredited in court and thrown out after it was discovered that the EPA had fiddled the figures. Anything under a risk of 3 is not considered a risk at all and whole milk has a risk factor of 2.5. [/QUOTE]

Verification: 5 + 3 = ?