Trying to prove to my Wife, need help
dennisking
Everyone, Registered Users Posts: 3,681
My Wife has started to really have a problem with my cigar hobby. She's using the whole "cancer" thing as her excuse. I've done a little research and all I can really find is that if I smoke every day, I have a risk.
I only want to smoke once a week though and the only info I can find says "there is no proof that one cigar a week causes cancer".
If anyone has any better info, I would appreciate it. Just trying to be fair. She gets her bath at the end of the day and that's her reading time. I would like some time by myself once a week to relax also.
Thanks
I only want to smoke once a week though and the only info I can find says "there is no proof that one cigar a week causes cancer".
If anyone has any better info, I would appreciate it. Just trying to be fair. She gets her bath at the end of the day and that's her reading time. I would like some time by myself once a week to relax also.
Thanks
Comments
CLICK
EDIT - seems Kuzi proved me
if i can find it there was one study where "a lot" was defined as "6 churchill sized cigars a day"
even then it was better than cigarettes.
The only studies that are actually worth a damn are all about cigarettes and first hand exposure. Beyond that and there's just not enough data to prove anything (if you see someone declare something they're likely torturing some poor statistic or just inferring causation = correlation to further their own agenda). Now, I haven't read EVERYTHING (in fact, to be honest I have read very little other than the base conclusions of the study) so I'm not an expert on the studies.
What I *am* good at is statistics so I can tell you something that happens alot to watch out for. They did this with the second hand smoke study. Basically: don't trust percentages. There was a study that said exposure to second hand smoke increased the liklihood you would get cancer by 25%. Scary right? I mean 25% is alot.
In reality what happend is that people in the study not exposed to SHS had a 10:1,000,000 chance to get cancer. Folks that were exposed had a 12.5:1,000,000 chance. Technically that's a 25% increase in your liklihood, but in reality your "cancer chance" only went from 0.001% to 0.00125%. Not nearly as sensational when you put it that way.
I would be interrested if you find anything that looks like a good study and would be more than willing to give it the old scientific/statistic once-over to tell you how sound/spun the data is.
Edit: Kuzi posted while I was typing this. Going to read the links he has provided.
Sucks to hear that your wife is trying to stop you (with good intentions) from enjoying this hobby. Hopefully, the articles Kuzi posted will give you some useful information. There are way worse "habits" you could be doing in my opinion.
I will share this info with her.
Sorry I didn't do a snazzy 'click' thing but I can't figure out how to include a link. I guess you'll just have to copy & paste it.
Marty
Edit: You have to scroll down the page to get to the statistical charts.
Causation and correlation are NOT the same thing.
If I tried coming back with statistics, she'd be on WebMD or some other site pulling up stats quicker than you can say "double ligero".
This is basically a rehash of the info on the charts at the website whose URL I posted above...
Good information, though, and thanks....
Marty