I am no advocate of smoking. I have witnessed two friends, both smokers, die from lung cancer. I also believe secondary smoke contributes to lung cancer. Dana Reeves, Christopher Reeves' widow, was not a smoker, but she did work as a singer in clubs where there was smoking, probably lots of it. Perhaps that is why she got lung cancer, though non-smoker females are more susceptible than non-smoker males. I waitressed during my college years (and the some) in a smoke-filled French cafe that stayed open until two on the weekends. I fear I am vulnerable. At the same time, I wonder why so few smokers get lung cancer. The statistics hover at this threshold where we know the majority of lung cancer patients are smokers, but only a minority of smokers develop lung cancer. I wonder about that every time I see some chain-smoking 80-something. This photo is a amusing. But it reminded me that the statistical threshold practically feels contrived by cigarette manufacturers. If more smokers got lung cancer, more people would witness the ravages of this insidious and rarely survivable form of cancer, and more people would quit, or, if they're younger, not start at all. Not that I would want that to take what it took to get people to stop.
FURTHER READING | 8.27.07
· 100-Year-Old Celebrates Her Birthday by Smoking 170,000th Cigarette [The Daily Mail]