What I was saying is that while the studies done are neutral, the way the results are reported are biased toward not smoking. True, smoking is unhealthy. That is why I quit. That does not mean that the way studies are reported should be biased toward whatever makes smoking sound so deadly. The result of that is some of the extreme opinions we’ve seen here. If no one regularly smokes indoors near you, your exposure to secondhand smoke is so minimal, that describing their actions as “depraved indifference” is as silly as it is extreme.
Someone here wrote that a smoker is more than 50% likely to die from smoking. Really? Prove it. What study are you citing? Does this include a 96 yo smoker who has a heart attack?
My point with the lung cancer numbers is just to show a) there’s a significant risk w/o smoking, and b) if you and 178 other people smoke, odds are none of you will get lung cancer.