General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSmoking causes diabetes, colon cancer, new report says ...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/01/17/surgeon-general-report-smoking/4476323/?csp=eMail_DailyBriefing_45323389The report, released today, represents the first time the surgeon general has concluded that smoking is "causally linked" to these diseases. The report finds that smoking causes rheumatoid arthritis, erectile dysfunction and macular degeneration, a major cause of age-related blindness. Smoking causes inflammation, impairs immune function and increases the risk of death from tuberculosis, an infectious disease. Smoking also harms pregnant women and their fetuses by causing birth defects called cleft lips and palates and by causing ectopic pregnancy, which occurs when a fertilized egg implants in the fallopian tubes instead of the uterus.
The new report issued 50 years after the first surgeon general report on smoking finds that exposure to secondhand smoke, previously linked to cancer and heart attacks, also causes strokes.
"Amazingly, smoking is even worse than we knew," says Thomas Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Even after 50 years, we're still finding new ways that smoking maims and kills people."
hughee99
(16,113 posts)The only reference I could find to diabetes were these two sentences.
The first sentence
"A new report from the surgeon general finds that smoking causes even more physical and financial damage than previously estimated, killing 480,000 Americans a year from diseases that include diabetes, colorectal cancer and liver cancer."
8 or 9 Paragraphs in
"Ratner says the science on smoking and diabetes is not clear-cut. Though population-based studies show smokers have an increased risk of diabetes, Ratner says, "I am unaware of any data which directly links smoking to causing diabetes."
With respect to diabetes, don't these two sentences (and the headline) say the opposite thing? One claims causation, the other suggests that they don't have data to show causation.