God, I love humans.

On the subject of second-hand smoke:

“Sure it’s crappy science, but look at the outcome–a smoke-free America.”

Anti-smoking activists were quick to pronounce that “Second Hand Smoke Kills.” Well, no, it doesn’t, actually. A recent article in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute described the details of a study involving 76,000 women over a period of more than 10 years. The bottom-line conclusion: the study found no statistically significant causal relationship between lung cancer and exposure to passive smoke.

…

… I have to ask why anti-smoking activists don’t simply stick to the facts instead of alarming everybody with the assertion that passive smoke causes lung cancer when it clearly doesn’t.

The answer lies not in science but in culture. … “The strongest reason to avoid passive cigarette smoke is to change societal behaviour; to not live in a society where smoking is the norm.”

Well, bravo. An admirable objective. But that is social engineering [my emphasis], not medicine.

http://www.cbc.ca/thesundayedition/essays/2014/01/15/the-myth-about-second-hand-smoke/

Of course, a lot of details are missing in this article, and no one can really believe inhaling toxic substances is good for you. Neither is pumping gas, eating sand in a public playground or eating food that has sat on the ground for more than three seconds. But that is what immune systems are for, isn’t it? I just like the fact that for all the science involved, stuff like this is always so much about ‘social engineering.’ Baaaaah, baaaaah!

Anyway, read the comments; they are a hoot.