Frankspencer mentioned this…

In his own inimitable way, of course, but could somebody please explain to me the logic of why or how some people can smoke like troopers yet live to be a ripe old age; whilst at the same time perfectly healthy, regular exercising non-smokers develop lung cancer and die young?

What’s the deal with that?

(Please send replies to ‘It’s all God’s will’ competition, PO Box 69, Cleethorpes)
( Pooflake braces for an onslaught..., Wed 26 Mar 2008, 10:47, 16 replies)

Because everyone is different.
My great-grandmother has smoked since she was 13.
She's now 84. Figure that out if you can?
( TY&GN, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 10:49, closed)

Genetics....
It's whether your genetically disposed to live to a ripe old age with a bit of lady luck thrown in.
( girlinthehole, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 10:51, closed)

Genetics play a part
Or just plain bad luck. My ex father in law died in his late 50s of an alcohol-fuelled heart attack. He was a chain smoker. My ex mother-in-law died of breast cancer in her mid 50's. She was an ex smoker, and clinically overweight. My ex wife, now 38, has about 2 years to live thanks to an agressive brain tumour. She doesn't smoke, is vegetarian, exercises regularly, isn't overweight, and drinks moderately.

Go figure that one out.
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 26 Mar 2008, 10:55, closed)

Is it something to do with...
... NHS postcodes?
(happylittletulip helpless and delicious, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 10:56, closed)

Immigrants!
It's all the immigrants fault!

*puts down Daily Mail*
( uberdeity Wondered why Owen Lars knew of the term "hell" on, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 10:58, closed)

It's God
Nothing happens without God knowing about it. So next time you're wondering whether you should pray for help, remember that it was God who gave you cancer in the first place. He's not likely to give a fuck about taking it back, is He?
(frankspencer, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:01, closed)

^
worryingly, this is what the priest was saying at the funeral yesterday: "God gives us pain, but then he takes away our suffering" and I was thinking a) what bollix, and b) that's not even an optimal administrative strategy.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:04, closed)

Actually
I blame George W Bush.
(happylittletulip helpless and delicious, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:07, closed)

don't they
call it the "churchill gene"? he was grossly overweight, ate his own gross weight in sausages and other fried stuff, drank like a fish, smoked like a chimney, had the most stressful job in the country - and lived into his 90s.

witness: "i was as drunk as a judge"

judge: "you mean drunk as a lord"

witness: "yes my lord"

i know this has nothing to do with anything but it always makes me smirk.
( rachelswipe with a fork, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:11, closed)

Here comes the science bit...
Well speaking as a doctor who has spent the last 10 years specialising in smoking related diseases this may be a good place for me to step in. Basically no-one knows, millions of pounds has been spent on research trying to find out why only 10-15% of smokers will ever develop emphysema but as yet the reason has remained elusive. A number of studies have been carried out to trying to find links to genetic pre-disposition but as yet nothing concrete has been found. With regards to cancer though there are a number of factors to take in to consideration alongside actual smoking that may determine whether you develop a tumour or not. *goes back to lurking*
(superfly78, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:40, closed)

^...

So you're saying it's not God then?
( Pooflake braces for an onslaught..., Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:42, closed)

The lord on high,,
has nothing to do with it as far as I'm aware. We are yet to devise an experiment that measures divine intervention, should we succeed you'll be the first to know!!
(superfly78, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:47, closed)

^
Actually, I have rigourous empirical evidence about divine intervention but it involves a bag of kittens and a class 4 laser. It doesn't get through ethics committees and hasn't been accepted for publication due to the non-rejection of the null hypothesis.
( crackhouseceilidhband Fuck off back to Mumsnet, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 11:54, closed)

^
Publish your findings in some dodgy journal and I'll offer to review it for you.

Shame it doesn't work like that. All the papers I get for review are pretty shit.
( K2k6 has a proper job these days, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 12:00, closed)

/\
There was a prayer experiment, here they took three groups of people undergoing some kind of dangerous surgery.
Group 1 where prayed for, and knew about it.
Group 2 where prayed for , and didn't know.
Group 3 wheren't prayed for and knew it.

Group 1 had the most deaths, followed by group 2.
True story, Richard Dawkins told me
(via his book )
(L.T. Smash Humungous fail since, Wed 26 Mar 2008, 15:45, closed)

superfly78...
'Well speaking as a doctor who'...

Which one - Tom Baker, Chris Eccleston, or David Tennant? (Or, indeed, any of the others)?

/Coat

/Twitch. 48 Hours of no nicotene and counting...
( Davros' Granddad a voice of calm reason in a world of spastics., Wed 26 Mar 2008, 22:16, closed)