In spite of the advancing prohibition and antismoking hysteria, another nail has been driven into the coffin of the “scientific” proof that “smoking causes cancer” by a recently published American study. “A newly published study links the sexually transmitted human papillomavirus, or HPV, to lung cancer, adding lungs to the list of organs scientists say are susceptible to cancer as a result of contracting the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United States … HPV has long been known to result in cancers of the sex organs, particularly the cervix, and a vaccine targeting young women and girls was introduced in the United States in 2006 … parents and groups say the news showing a link between the virus and lung cancer, which means it could affect not only their daughters but also their sons, does not change their opposition to the drug … At a conference this week in Geneva, Dr. Arash Rezazadeh from the University of Louisville presented the findings of the study, which found HPV in six out of 23 lung cancer samples. “
This is an important finding – but careful, now we slide into the political once again.
“All the samples came from smokers, and authors of the study said smoking remains the most important factor in the development of lung cancer. But ‘the fact that five out of 22 non-small-cell lung cancer samples were HPV-positive supports the assumption that HPV contributes to the development of non-small-cell lung cancer,’ they said. ‘We think HPV has a role as a co-carcinogen which increases the risk of cancer in a smoking population,’ Rezazadeh said in a statement.“
It is important to remember that this is lifestyle epidemiology, not science, and lifestyle epidemiology never can establish causation.
Having said that, an implication seems to be that small-cell lung cancer is a cancer “caused” exclusively by smoking. That implication is false and dishonest. Small-cell lung cancer also develops in non-smokers.
This news also goes with what we recently published (https://www.forces.org/News_Portal/news_viewer.php?id=1251) about the AATD and the so-called Russian “paradox,” which goes with the Japanese “paradox,” the Greek “paradox”… (Japan and Greece are the first and second heaviest smoking countries, respectively, and those with the lowest and second-lowest frequency of lung cancer, respectively).
In short, everything that goes against the ideology/epidemiological fraud that “smoking causes cancer” becomes a “paradox” – and if researchers discover some new important concomitant factors for lung cancer, they better state right off the bat that “smoking remains the most important factor in the development of lung cancer”, as we have seen above — or else they can kiss both their research grants and their careers goodbye. The faith that smoking causes lung cancer must be preserved at any cost.
Another important point of contemporary neo-Puritanism comes later on in the article: the self-punishing concept of abstention.
"’HPV is completely 100 percent preventable. I don’t see the point of putting her through the risk of the vaccine," she said. "In the same way I protect my kids from lung cancer by teaching them not to smoke or do drugs, I can protect them from HPV by teaching them not to have sex. … Stopping the behavior is the best way to stop the disease’".
That is the cancerous assumption, for if people don’t smoke, drink, eat, have sex; no Wi-Fi, no cars, no anything; if they stand perfectly still and if there is no progress, perhaps death won’t come — in a pig’s eye. Abstention from life is not the preservation of life, which is made of risk, joys, and eventual death, no matter what.
Abstention from what is natural — whether it is smoking, drinking, eating tasty food, or having sex — is not a virtue, it’s an anomaly. That logical non-sequitur — don’t live and you’ll live forever — is as stupid as it is dangerous. Millenia of sexual repression have never stopped — or even contained — sexually-related diseases, for example; all it takes is a look at history books.
Yet this neo-Puritan mentality was — and is — at the very foundation of the “anti” philosophy in general, which is the totally nihilistic negation of joy, to reduce life to mere existence and humanity to a well-trimmed plant; to turn life into death before its time.
No, thanks.
0 Comments