The Benefits of Smoking Actually Outweigh the Risks

I will be debating pro; there will be four rounds. This debate will assume that "smoking" means "smoking tobacco", as the practice of smoking cannabis is also gaining some momentum. The debate will begin with each side providing a statement of their stance in the first round. In the second round, both sides will present their arguments, and the rounds after the second round will include the negative cross examinations of both sides, and the rebuttals.Pro Statement:Considering the fact that tobacco has been smoked and used medicinally for hundreds of years, it should come across as questionable as to why there has been a sudden outburst as to it's risks - especially during the mid-1900's, where many other recreational drugs (alcohol, cannabis) were being demonized at the time by various other prohibitionist movements, not to mention the drug hysteria and the "Just Say No" campaign put forward by the Reagan administration. A timeline of the history of tobacco can be seen here: (http://www.erowid.org...). In fact, contrary to anti-smoking propaganda, the benefits of smoking actually do outweigh the risks. **Smoking tobacco lowers the smoker's risk of alzheimer's disease, parkinson's disease, and breast cancer, while also improving the smoker's **"human information processing". Yes, the practice of smoking may increase the smoker's risk for cancer and emphesema, but the risk factors of these diseases are **"multifactorial" and could have been caused by anything. Doctors in one voice will declare that smoking "causes" cancer - and doctors are very authoritative figures in the world of health and medicine - however, doctors have been wrong before, as in 1890, it was generally believed that "masturbation caused blindness." *(Colby).Furthermore, anti-smoking campaigns and the surgeon general have stated that smoking "causes" cancer, when this is not true at all according to the evidence. In fact, nobody really knows exactly what causes cancer, but what we do know is what lessens our risk of cancer. In the case of smokers developing lung cancer, ****"Would you believe that the real number [of smokers contracting lung cancer] is <10%?"(Siepmann, M.D.). I propose that the medical findings of the risks of tobacco are blown out of proportion and fear mongered into the mass media by anti-tobacco firms - many of which having their origins and religious (***"Like many forms of state coercion, the anti-tobacco movement gained real political momentum only after the Civil War. Lucy Page Gaston began her anti-smoking career as a member of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union and later created the Chicago Anti-Cigarette Group and the National Anti-Cigarette League." ) or arguably racist (http://www.lcolby.com...) backgrounds. Tobacco products do carry risks, but so do every pharmeceutical drug which doctors choose to perscribe to their patients on a day to day basis. An infamous example of these is Adderall and Ritalin, which has been said to be comparible to cocaine (http://healthimpactnews.com...)I have provided a link to a list of other scientific findings (from, admittedly, a pro-smoking webpage) below, for the consideration of my opponent.**http://www.forces-nl.org...---------------------------------------------------------------------------------***the source of this statement: http://www.independent.org...---------------------------------------------------------------------------------****http://www.journaloftheoretics.com...---------------------------------------------------------------------------------*The eBook by Lauren Colby, attorney. "In Defense of Smokers". http://www.lcolby.com...