Second hand smoke is BS

The ban of smoking in public areas is not just to do with the smell - otherwise, people who have bad breath or who don't wear deodorant wouldn't be permitted as well. There is a direct link between smoking and numerous types of caner, and the risks are still prevalent for second-hand smokers. "Thanks to years of research, the links between smoking and cancer are now very clear. Smoking is by far the most important preventable cause of cancer in the world.Smoking accounts for one in four UK cancer deaths, and nearly a fifth of all cancer cases. In the UK, smoking kills five times more people than road accidents, overdoses, murder, suicide and HIV all put together."This was pulled from a British cancer research website: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org.... "A 2011 study found that more than four in five lung cancers are caused by smoking. 5 In 2002, lung cancer killed around 33,600 people - about one person every 15 minutes. Tobacco smoke was first shown to cause lung cancer in 1950. 10 This study found that people who smoked 15-24 cigarettes a day had 26 times the lung cancer risk of non-smokers. And people who smoked less than 15 cigarettes a day still had 8 times the lung cancer risk of non-smokers."There is a direct link between smoking and cancer. The scientific community does agree with this; the CDC, for example.But I realize that we are discussing second-hand smoking. Here is a section of that UK article on the topic of second-hand smoking. "Several studies have shown that breathing in other people’s smoke causes cancer in non-smokers. 2, 72 Second-hand smoke contains several cancer causing chemicals. Many of these chemicals are present in higher concentrations than in the smoke inhaled by the smoker themselves. 2 One study analysed 55 studies from around the world found that non-smoking spouses of people who smoke at home have 27% higher risks of lung cancer. 73 And a review of 22 studies found that people exposed to second-hand smoke in the workplace have 24% higher risks of lung cancer. Those who were exposed to the highest levels of second-hand smoke at work had twice the risks of lung cancer. 74 One study estimates that passive smoking may kill over 11,000 people every year in the UK from cancer, heart disease, strokes and other diseases. 75 Second-hand smoking also causes other health problems in non-smokers including asthma and heart disease. One study showed that even 30 minutes of exposure to second-hand smoke can reduce blood flow in a non-smoker’s heart." The CDC also supports this claim as well. "There is no risk-free level of contact with second hand smoke; even brief exposure can be harmful to health."Pulled from the CDC website: http://www.cdc.gov..."The entire scientific world says that there is no solid evidence that this phenomenon takes place."I have provided some of the top names in medicine to prove this - the CDC, for example. There is a direct link between smoking and cancer."The campaign that has started globally on banning smoking from cafeterias and bars is wrong and if you are an American, unconstitutional." First, we have not banned it entirely - but have rather limited it to certain areas. And second, how is it constitutional that you can damage the health of another person in a place that they have just as much right as you have to be in? A restaurant, for example. "I know smoking sucks for the smoker, and the smoke is a B word to smell, but that doesn't mean that you will force someone to stop it because you don't like it."You say that is sucks for the smoker - how is it fair that the person nearby has to suffer? How is it fair that one can harm the health of another person without their consent?And, although many see it as a ban on the smell, it truly is a ban on the health effects that go along with it. "As i mentioned, the next day you might not want to sit next to me in a cafe because i wear a blue shirt, or i have tattoos of dragons, or whatever." That is not harming any body's health. It is okay. Smoking harms others' health without their consent. It is not okay. Quite simply, nobody has the right to harm the health of another person, plain and simple, in both public and private areas. If it were really about the smell, we would eliminate those with bad breath and no deodorant as well. Vote based on who made the better argument, and who backed up their claims with fact and cited resources.