3 ms·

Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking. Stunned might be hyperbole, but it is at least a little bit surprisin

Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking. Stunned might be hyperbole, but it is at least a little bit surprising.

zdragnar 2mo ago
"Stunned" isn't really a scientific term. It's the sort of editorializing you should expect to come from people who aren't the scientists themselves. More than hyperbole, it is classic click bait. Also, quitting smoking definitely eases a number of symptoms, especially if you're not at the point of chronic emphysema. The reduction of inflammation triggers alone after a bit of time is fairly significant. Less coughing, less mucus buildup, etc.
- Nition 2mo ago
  But this isn't that at all. "Stunned" is used here because it's the word one of the study's authors actually used. '"I was absolutely stunned when I first saw the results," Prof Chris Griffiths, a senior author on the study, at Queen Mary University of London, told the BBC.'
anon48293 2mo ago
> “ Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking” Except that they do undo the damage. “ After 15 years, your chances of getting lung cancer are almost the same as someone who has never smoked.” https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/prevention/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/prevention/
- bryanlarsen 2mo ago
  4x the rate is "almost the same"??? https://www.verywellhealth.com/risk-of-lung-cancer-in-former-smokers-3971884 https://www.verywellhealth.com/risk-of-lung-cancer-in-former...
  - denismenace 2mo ago
    The lifetime risk is approximately 1.3% for women and 1.8% for men. For regular smokers: 11.2% for women and 14.8% for men. So about 15 to 30 more likely to get lung cancer. Bringing that down to 4x is close to "almost the same".
    - throw310822 2mo ago
      Might be that I am not reading probabilities correctly, but how do 1.3% -> 11.2% and 1.8% -> 15% become "15 to 30 times more likely"? Sounds like less then ten times?
      - denismenace 2mo ago
        Good catch, wrote this on the go. The first stat is a study on Canadians, the second is from another source which is global.
  - anon48293 2mo ago
    No. But that only looks at heavy smokers and duration they stopped, so overselects for old age with higher cancer incidence. This study looks more broadly, notably also at onset of smoking: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2784990 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/27... And this is the TL;DR: “ Thus, those who quit smoking at ages 15 to 34, 35 to 44, 45 to 54, and 55 to 64 years avoided an estimated 100%, 89%, 78%, and 56% of the excess cancer mortality risk associated with continued smoking, respectively”
dave7 2mo ago
They absolutely do! Not all the way, but if you'd have smoked a pack a day for 15 years and then have given up for the last 15, there's absolutely no way you'd be saying this!
- bryanlarsen 2mo ago
  My Dad stopped smoking for 20 years and then died from long cancer.
qsera 2mo ago
Hey here is something for you to stun on: https://old.reddit.com/r/OldSchoolCool/comments/1v73w9s/hydration_break_for_a_german_footballer_in_1994/ https://old.reddit.com/r/OldSchoolCool/comments/1v73w9s/hydr...

Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking. Stunned might be hyperbole, but it is at least a little bit surprising.

zdragnar 2mo ago

"Stunned" isn't really a scientific term. It's the sort of editorializing you should expect to come from people who aren't the scientists themselves. More than hyperbole, it is classic click bait. Also, quitting smoking definitely eases a number of symptoms, especially if you're not at the point of chronic emphysema. The reduction of inflammation triggers alone after a bit of time is fairly significant. Less coughing, less mucus buildup, etc.

Nition 2mo ago
But this isn't that at all. "Stunned" is used here because it's the word one of the study's authors actually used. '"I was absolutely stunned when I first saw the results," Prof Chris Griffiths, a senior author on the study, at Queen Mary University of London, told the BBC.'

anon48293 2mo ago

> “ Smokers don't magically undo the damage they did to their lungs after they stop smoking” Except that they do undo the damage. “ After 15 years, your chances of getting lung cancer are almost the same as someone who has never smoked.” https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/prevention/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/prevention/

bryanlarsen 2mo ago
4x the rate is "almost the same"??? https://www.verywellhealth.com/risk-of-lung-cancer-in-former-smokers-3971884 https://www.verywellhealth.com/risk-of-lung-cancer-in-former...
- denismenace 2mo ago
  The lifetime risk is approximately 1.3% for women and 1.8% for men. For regular smokers: 11.2% for women and 14.8% for men. So about 15 to 30 more likely to get lung cancer. Bringing that down to 4x is close to "almost the same".
  - throw310822 2mo ago
    Might be that I am not reading probabilities correctly, but how do 1.3% -> 11.2% and 1.8% -> 15% become "15 to 30 times more likely"? Sounds like less then ten times?
    - denismenace 2mo ago
      Good catch, wrote this on the go. The first stat is a study on Canadians, the second is from another source which is global.
- anon48293 2mo ago
  No. But that only looks at heavy smokers and duration they stopped, so overselects for old age with higher cancer incidence. This study looks more broadly, notably also at onset of smoking: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2784990 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/27... And this is the TL;DR: “ Thus, those who quit smoking at ages 15 to 34, 35 to 44, 45 to 54, and 55 to 64 years avoided an estimated 100%, 89%, 78%, and 56% of the excess cancer mortality risk associated with continued smoking, respectively”

dave7 2mo ago

They absolutely do! Not all the way, but if you'd have smoked a pack a day for 15 years and then have given up for the last 15, there's absolutely no way you'd be saying this!

bryanlarsen 2mo ago
My Dad stopped smoking for 20 years and then died from long cancer.

qsera 2mo ago

Hey here is something for you to stun on: https://old.reddit.com/r/OldSchoolCool/comments/1v73w9s/hydration_break_for_a_german_footballer_in_1994/ https://old.reddit.com/r/OldSchoolCool/comments/1v73w9s/hydr...