Skip to main content

So many smoking....to death

World Cancer Day led World Focus to look at the insidious effects of smoking.

"According to the World Health Organization, while cigarette consumption is declining in some countries, the number of smokers worldwide is on the upswing. Those smokers also consume more cigarettes than ever.

Tobacco is considered the single most important risk factor for cancer, which the WHO says accounted for 7.4 million deaths (around 13% of all deaths) in 2004. More than 70% of all cancer deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries.

On average, smokers increase their risk of lung cancer between 5 and 10-fold and in developed countries, smoking is responsible for upwards of 80% of all lung cancers. Using American data, 24% of men who smoke can expect to developing cancer during their expected life time. Recently, the spread of tobacco use to developing countries has led to papers describing similar patterns there."

And:

"MedIndia, an Asian health portal, focused on smoking prevention in the developing world.

"The WHO makes no qualms about the fact that in the absence of timely intervention, cancer can claim the lives of 84 million people worldwide between 2005 and 2015, with the low and middle-income countries bearing the brunt as compared to the industrialized ones… According to the forecasted figures for 2030, there are likely to be 20-26 million fresh cancer diagnoses and 13-17 million cancer related deaths. China, Russia, and India need to watch out and tackle the growing burden of cancer, attributed mainly to increase in use of tobacco, fatty diets, adoption of western habits, and demographic changes."

Comments

Quitting smoking really makes a different, you can taste the food better and your breath smell fresh. Your cough goes away this happens to men or women who already give up the smoking habit and exchange it for healthy life.

http://www.stopsmokinghabits.com

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...