The Ignorance to Cancer

'Ignorance is not innocence but sin.'
-Robert Browning.

On Sunday 26th March 2006, Scotland’s First Minister Jack McConnell became probably the first politician who has ever done something that earned my complete agreement, support and admiration.

The ban on smoking in public places in Scotland was a significant step towards ridding us of this horrible, disgusting, repulsive affliction. Normally I am of the opinion that people should be permitted to do what they want, as long as they are not directly harming or inconveniencing anyone else.

But smoking does harm and inconvenience other people. Everyone knows it does. Everyone knows that smoking causes cancer and other diseases, not only in the smokers themselves but also in other people who are exposed to their second-hand smoke.

It amazes me that people still smoke. I find it really truly astoundingly confusing that people ignore the weight of scientific and empirical evidence, and continue to suck these poisons into their own bodies. More than my amazement that they do this to themselves is my disbelief at the overwhelmingly ignorant, selfish and uncaring manner in which they inflict it on others.

I can’t believe that people don’t understand or believe that cigarette smoke is harmful. There is simply too much evidence and recorded fact. If you don’t believe me, do some research of your own; there’s an abundance of information out there.

There has been decades of research - since 1900 – which has proven a link with tobacco smoking and cancer in the lung, larynx, head, neck, stomach, bladder, kidney, oesophagus and pancreas, and there is a proven, definite correlation between the numbers of adult men who smoke, and the numbers of adult men diagnosed with lung cancer.

About 114,000 people die in the UK every year as a direct result of tobacco smoking.

Tobacco smoking causes 90% of lung cancer cases, and is responsible for one in three of all cancer related deaths in the developed world.

Cigarettes contain over 4,000 toxic chemicals, about 50 of which are known to cause cancer. Apart from the obvious nicotine, carbon monoxide and tar, cigarettes are known to contain acetone (which is nail polish remover), ammonia (which is toilet cleaner), arsenic (which is rat poison), dieldrin (which is an insecticide), formaldehyde (which is used to preserve dead bodies), hydrogen cyanide (which is the poison used in gas chambers), methanol (which is rocket fuel) and titanium (which is a metal used to make aeroplanes). I could go on, but I think the point has been made. The list is extensive, and everything on it is as worrying as those mentioned.

Second-hand smoke is dangerous to passive inhalers, and is especially harmful to children, as their bodies are still developing. Children who grow up in smoking households are known to be far more likely to suffer from asthma, middle ear infections, chest infections, coughs and colds. Medical research also suggests that they are more susceptible to meningitis.

Cot death is twice as likely for babies whose mothers smoke.

It’s bad enough - ignorantly, immorally repugnant enough - that people smoke in the company of other adults; they at least have the chance to voice an objection or leave the area. To do so in the presence of children, to pass on your exhaled poison onto helpless children, takes selfishness and ignorance to levels unapproached by any other social act that a person could perform.

Recent times have seen people start to see sense where smoking is concerned. There are fewer smokers now than there used to be. The number of adults in the UK smoking has dropped drastically, from over 60% of men and over 40% for women in 1948, to less than 25% for both men and women in 2007. That can only be a good thing. It is a step in the right direction. But only a small step. There’s still far, far too much of it.

The smoking ban in Scotland has, strangely, been faced with criticism. Some people proclaim the economic doom that will inevitably ensue. Apart from the fact that the evidence of New York and Ireland show that the economic effects are minimal and temporary, I can’t help but thinking ‘so what?’ So what if there is a bit of economic hardship and pubs don’t sell as much alcohol? The health benefits for the nation far outweigh that inconvenience, and the health of our children is of paramount importance and should take precedence over any other factor. If you disagree with that, then I believe your morals and your very humanity should be questioned.

There exists an organisation known as Forest. They are the smokers’ lobby group. They actively campaign for the rights of smokers. Even they aren’t silly enough to try and deny the harmful effects of smoking. But still they insist that people have a right to do it. Still they campaign for the rights of people to willingly and knowingly damage not only their own bodies but also those of others. In my mind, such an organisation dwells in the same category as politically abhorrent parties like the BNP.

Obviously, I am utterly anti-smoking. But not all cancer is caused by smoking. Apart from smoking, it has been thoroughly demonstrated that excessive alcohol consumption, physical inactivity and obesity are contributing factors to cancer. These are all lifestyle issues. No-one has to smoke, drink lots of alcohol, shirk from physical activity, or allow themselves to become obese. They can all be avoided. Everyone knows that excessive alcohol, lack of exercise and obesity are unhealthy. But a lot of people simply choose to ignore such facts.

As well as the lifestyle factors mentioned above, a lot of cancer causes are largely a product of environmental factors, and are therefore avoidable or rectifiable. Every year there are at least 200,000 known cases of cancer caused by environmental contamination in the workplace. Why is this accepted?

Taking into account all causes, an awful lot of people suffer and die from cancer every year. The most recent fully detailed information available in the UK is from 2007, showing that 80,907 men and 74,557 women died of cancer in the UK that year. That’s 29% of total male mortality and 25% of total female mortality.

Why is this permitted to continue?

We support cancer care and cancer research. And quite rightly too. In my own life, I have seen four people who I cared for very much succumb to this disease and die far younger than they should have. There have been other members of my family, and the families of friends, diagnosed with cancer and been given treatment with varying degrees of success. Out of the love we felt for these victims, and the desire to see others saved the trauma of facing it, we support research into cancer.

But it isn’t enough.

It’s not nearly enough to merely trust in the scientists to develop better treatments, to hope that maybe one day they will discover a cure. Treatment and cures wouldn’t be required if the disease didn’t exist. Obviously, we will never be rid of it, but as the vast majority of cancer cases are related to lifestyle or environment, it is largely avoidable if people cared enough.

If people cared enough for their own health, took some responsibility for their own well-being. If the government and large businesses cared enough to take control of the situation and actually do something about it. If we didn’t have tobacco companies who were driven by the greed for money.

If people cared, and did something about it, we could fight back against this horrible, insidious, life destroying disease.

Instead, we do what we do with everything else. We put on the blinkers. We suffer from apathy. We ignore it until it affects us personally.

They say that everyone will know three people who suffer from cancer. I have already passed my quota. I don’t want to see it again. But I probably will, because the society in which we live is still blind, stupid, greedy, selfish and uncaring enough to largely ignore the problem.

The smoking ban was a significant first step. But it was only the first. We need a lot more.