Skip to main content

See also:

Surgeon General's Report says one cigarette can cause immediate damage

In 1964, the first Surgeon Generals report on the effects of smoking was issued. Today, U.S. Surgeon General Regina M. Benjamin issued the 30th tobacco related report, "How Tobacco Smoke Causes Disease: The Biology and Behavioral Basis for Smoking-Attributable Disease". The report describes how the tobacco smoke in one cigarette can damage the body.

"Inhaling even the smallest amount of tobacco smoke can also damage your DNA, which can lead to cancer, " Benjamin said in the report.

Highlights from the report include:

  • There is no safe level of exposure to tobacco smoke
  • Even low levels of exposure such as an occasional cigarette or secondhand smoke can lead to a heart attack or stroke
  • Damage from tobacco smoke can be immediate
  • There are 7,000 chemicals in tobacco smoke, 70 cause cancer
  • Cigarettes are designed for addiction
  • There is no safe cigarette

The report details how inhaling smoke damages the delicate tissues of the lungs and then enters the blood stream, carrying 7,000 chemicals to every organ of the body. The length of time and the number of cigarettes smoked is related to the risk and the severity of many diseases. The immune system is weakened from the inflammation and cell damage from smoke exposure.

Exposure to tobacco smoke is linked with:

  • Inflammation and damage of the lining of the blood vessels, which can lead to a heart attack or stroke
  • Damage to the DNA, leading to cancer, 30% of all cancers are related to smoking
  • Emphysema, chronic bronchitis and COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) fromt he damage to lung tissues
  • Interferes with the regulation of blood sugars, increasing health risks of diabetics.

Comments

  • Michael J. McFadden 4 years ago

    So SG Regina Benjamin says, "“Inhaling even the smallest amount of tobacco smoke can also damage your DNA, which can lead to cancer.” . . . . . . .
    '
    Odd how she neglects to mention that 1 second outside in the sunshine can do the same thing. Or that one second in a restaurant where people are drinking wine and martinis (both filled with the highly volatile Class A Carcinogen, Ethyl Alcohol) may also put you at risk. Of course there's no huge multimillion-dollar AntiSunshine or AntiAlcohol lobbies going at the moment (According to the AMA, "Tobacco Control" gets up to 880 *million* dollars a year for its games!) . . . . . . .

    Antismoking nonsense needs to be seen for what it is: propagandistic fear statements designed to achieve the social engineering goal of banning smoking virtually everywhere. I'm not in any sense arguing that smoking isn't bad for a smoker's health, but the secondhand smoke craziness is simply, in all practical terms, a lie. Google "V.Gen5h" in quotes just like that and click on "The Health Arguments" to read "The Lies Behind The Smoking Bans." You may be surprised to see what the studies actually show -- as opposed to what the press-releases SAY they show. . . . . . .

    Michael J. McFadden,
    Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains'

  • Profile picture of VJ Sleight
    VJ Sleight 4 years ago

    It was less than 20 years ago, in 1994, when the 7 CEO's of the tobacco companies stood in front of congress and proclaimed that nicotine is not addictive. The same lies used by the tobacco companies are now being used against secondhand smoke. But since 1994, the tobacco companies lies about their product have been exposed, and as more sophisticated technologies are created, we are able to detect at the cellular level exactly what tobacco smoke is doing. McFadden's book was published in 2004, I suggest that we have additional information now that was not available in 2004 showing how deadly tobacco smoke is to both smokers and exposed non-smokers. But read the report yourself and then make up your own mind: http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/tobaccosmoke/report/index.html

  • Michael J. McFadden 4 years ago

    VJ Sleight is quite correct when she says, " McFadden's book was published in 2004, I suggest that we have additional information now that was not available in 2004 "

    While I have not written anything as extensive as Brains since then, I have written a great number of shorter pieces showing that "The same lies used by the" Antismokers back then are still being used. Let me provide two examples, and VJ or anyone else is quite welcome to offer specific, substantive criticisms of anything within them.

    First, I'm sure you've all heard about "third hand smoke." Did you know that the big headline-generating study on that, Winickoff 2009, was actually NOT a study at all, but just an analysis of opinions gathered in a random home telephone survey? Read my piece on it at Global Health Law:

    http://globalhealthlaw.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/third-hand-smoke/#commen...

    My second offering is actually a brief collection of criticisms of a number of recent studies that have been used to promote smoking bans. They're gathered together for printing and distribution by activists in local ban fights, and they're not presented in nearly the depth or sophistication that was exemplified in Brains, but I'm still quite willing to stand behind what I say in "The Lies Behind The Smoking Bans" freely available at:

    http://kuneman.smokersclub.com/PASAN/StilettoGenv5h.pdf

    - MJM

  • Profile picture of VJ Sleight
    VJ Sleight 4 years ago

    I think this post on my blog, tells you what I think about your views and why my outlook will never change:
    http://stopsmokingstayquit.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.html
    You can attack tobacco control research all you want but cherry picking your statistics and bashing it, doesn't make your agrument true.

  • Profile picture of genebb
    genebb 3 years ago

    The worldwide spammer McFadden has branded his book title into the Examiner's flesh. It's basic "viral marketing." Google his title for over 14,000 links(!), many if not most posted on innocent message boards by McF himself. The more mentions he can pump out, the more "famous" his book becomes, the more it'll show up on Google searches, the more copies he can sell. He similarly promotes his pals' screwball websites, raising their Google rankings through the links he posts, hijacking the popularity of The Examiner.

    Check out the link he posted; it's to his own diatribe, of course, in which he's posted a quick link straight back to his own site--and presto! His site's now just a hop and a skip from the Examiner. He couldn't make it any easier to get there and buy his book without a flashing billboard on this page's header. And the poor "Global Health Law" site--he's branded his title there no less than 6 times(!)

  • gene 3 years ago

    Ah, classic. McF uses my post as an excuse to post yet another self-serving link(!) Never miss an opportunity!

    And yet for all his 14,000+ links and growing, for all his 25 years of striving to become Big Man on the Internet, he still labors in utter obscurity. No one pays him the slightest attention except as a globe-spamming pest. Naturally; he has no known education or expertise whatsoever, nothing much really except an apparently insatiable need to promote himself everywhere he can on the web, and a book to sell.

    And good luck arguing with him--if all of medical science can't sway him, I doubt you'd have much luck. But it would give him an excuse to post more links.

    Michael J. McFadden, meet Charles K. Johnson, head of the Flat Earth Society, who, if he were alive today, would be out promoting his nonsense in exactly the same way McF does.

  • Mitchell Sexner 1 year ago

    Exposure to tobacco smoke, regardless of what extent it is, is dangerous to one’s health. I have handled a case that is centered on medical malpractice law http://www.sexnermedicalmalpracticelaw.com/practice-areas/ and it was later found out that smoking actually caused the complications and not the medical error of the doctor. Thus, you will never know how smoking can affect you and your life, and even your profession.