Tobacco Use: Relative Danger

[Stone Island]

I smoke a pipe (http://www.zemanpipes.com/pipe.php?pipe_id=16) two or three times a week. I use snus (http://www.swedish-snus.com/index.php) no more than once or twice a week (usually while attending a sporting event). Statistics isn't really my thing. I know that my chances of getting a tobacco related cancer, or suffering some tobacco related ill health effect like heart disease, are better than zero. I've also read articles like this (http://www.swedish-snus.com/articles/In%20English-289/Swedish%20Snus%20Health%20Issues-2287/SHOP-0/) (please note the source). I can't necessarily distinguish between who is Chicken Little (over-emphasizing the harm) and who is Pollyanna (under-emphasizing the harm). The question is, are the harms I suffer from my activities significant enough that I should give up those activities given that we're all going to die of something?

Is that even really the right question to ask?

I mean, I derive a small pleasure from smoking my pipe and taking snus. Relative to everything else what harm can I reasonably expect and is that level or risk objectively high enough to demand a change in behavior?

[Z]

I smoke a pipe a time or two a week as well. Although my doctor would, of course, love to see me stop smoking, she says that my weekly or biweekly ritual of enjoying a pipe may actually have quite a bit of benefit regarding stress management and lowering of blood pressure. Since I rarely if ever drink, don't socialize regularly, etc. she says that my pipe habit is a stress reliever and is probably responsible for keeping my blood pressure in check - that, and my separation from the wife.

IMHO, my risk of developing complications (mouth or throat cancer more likely for pipe smokers) is significantly low enough that it's counteracted by the beneficial stress relief involved.

Don't know WHAT science says about it.

Snus looks nasty, btw. All chewable/suckable tobacco seems nasty. Yuck.

[Stone Island]

Snus looks nasty, btw. All chewable/suckable tobacco seems nasty. Yuck.
Well, I use the portions, not the loose. In any case, it's actually quite nice. You get the buzz but it doesn't cause any excess saliva to build up, so there is no need to spit. There's no need to "chew" either. The snus is inserted between the top lip and the gum.

Depending on which state you're in you can try Camel Snus without having to order from abroad.

[PbFoot]

I also like to have a cigar once in a while. (Maybe 1-2 per month.) I wonder the same thing. I like my cigar, but I always wonder what kind of damage I'm doing with this occasional use.

Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I think perhaps this small exposure to the bad stuff is not a significant risk.

-PbFoot

[Vic Vega]

I also like to have a cigar once in a while. (Maybe 1-2 per month.) I wonder the same thing. I like my cigar, but I always wonder what kind of damage I'm doing with this occasional use.

Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I think perhaps this small exposure to the bad stuff is not a significant risk.

-PbFoot

If you aren't inhaling, I can't imagine you're really doing yourself any harm.

[Z]

That's what my doctor seems to think, anyway.

[MarekM]

I buy a pack of cigarettes maybe once a month. I know it has a negative impact on my health, because I notice a difference in my lung performance while I'm exercising.

I don't think it's going to have a serious impact on my life span though. And I justify it by telling myself that I'd rather live 5 less years of my life than go 70 years without ever smoking the occasional cigarette.

[Ziggurat]

If you aren't inhaling, I can't imagine you're really doing yourself any harm.

Not so. You're just doing harm to something other than your lungs.

[PbFoot]

Not so. You're just doing harm to something other than your lungs.

True. Mouth cancer probably. I wonder what it is in tobacco specifically that is the causative agent. I put the cigar on my lips or a tobacco chewer puts tobacco in his mouth. I wonder which other plants have compounds that would cause problems. (Posion Ivy chew anyone?)

-PbFoot

[quarky]

In Swaziland, tobacco use may be less detrimental to one's longevity.
Its this damn long life-span that causes the trouble.

[Dr. Imago]

Don't kid yourselves. Nicotine is effectively absorbed through the oral mucosa. Pipe and cigar smokers suffer the detrimental effects of nicotine on blood pressure as well as its tumorgenic properties. Pipe and cigar smokers have an increased risk of not only oral cancers, but also bladder and colorectal cancer. Likewise, there are the (potentially controversial) effects of environmental "second-hand" smoke. Most of these are probably dose-related effects.

Having said all that, I've been known to enjoy a cigar myself on occasion. I know; doctor heal thyself.

~Dr. Imago

[Holler Hoojer]

It's just a matter of choices. Some of us might prefer to die of a heart attack. Others, like you, might prefer head and neck cancer. Pick your poison and accept the consequences.

[Z]

You could not smoke, not drink, work out every day, eat healthy, and so forth and so on... and get hit by a truck or have a meteor smash you.

Besides, look at George Burns!

:D

I figure I'm going to die of something anyway - I might as well enjoy as much of life as I can.

[Ivor the Engineer]

You could not smoke, not drink, work out every day, eat healthy, and so forth and so on... and get hit by a truck or have a meteor smash you.

Besides, look at George Burns!

:D

I figure I'm going to die of something anyway - I might as well enjoy as much of life as I can.

Isn't that a reason not to smoke?

[Myriad]

I only smoke while driving under the influence without a seat belt at excessive speeds through bad neighborhoods while talking on a cell phone and eating undercooked hamburgers made from cows that were acting strangely.

That way, the additional risk associated with the smoking is surprisingly small.

But that's nothing compared to the precautions I take when running with scissors.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Stone Island]

If I buy one lottery ticket I have x chance of winning millions of dollars. If I buy two lottery tickets I double my chances. Buying lottery tickets is a tax on the stupid.

If I don't smoke or use tobacco products I have x chance of getting a variety of cancers. If I smoke or use tobacco products how much do I increase my chances of getting a variety of cancers or suffering ill health effects?

No everyone who gets mouth cancer smokes a pipe. Not every who smokes a pipe gets mouth cancer.

In addition, some of the papers I've read looking at the health effects of pipe smoking (in particular) assume a usage rate of three bowls a day. I'm much, much below that.

So, again, what's the relative risk?

[fromdownunder]

Is it a bit of a raffle?

My Grandfather smoked a pipe and cigars regularly and lived to be 99.

My father smoked since he was (probably) about 15, and died of lung cancer 24 years ago at 66 years of age.

My mother ("passive smoking" anyone?) is now 89 and still fine, despite living with a heavy smoker for 45 years (she never smoked).

I have been a heavy smoker for over 40 years, and just before Christmas last year, got what was eventually described as a viral lung infection which landed me in hospital. After heaps of "lungy" tests, the report was nothing in particular wrong, no sign of lung cancer, no sign of emphysema, and nothing else terribly exciting.

So, is it just a raffle?

Norm

[tnt666]

Some people of stronger constitution (genetic fortitude?) will simply live longer no matter the crappy food they ingest and no matter the toxins of their pleasures, we've all met these walking/talking anecdotes. I certainly wish I was one of them.

Trouble is, are you willing to gamble on being one of the lucky? Statistically speaking, the more you smoke, the more your probability of being negatively affected. Simple as that. Probabilities aren't really palpable or relevant to an individual, they're really only useful on a population scale.

The risk you are willing to accept is of course your own business (if you live in a country where you'll specifically pay for your own medical providers) as long as you don't impose your risk taking preference onto others... Myself, if I could choose my death, would rather die in a plane crash or a sinking vessel.

[Cuddles]

If I smoke or use tobacco products how much do I increase my chances of getting a variety of cancers or suffering ill health effects?

No everyone who gets mouth cancer smokes a pipe. Not every who smokes a pipe gets mouth cancer.

75% of oral cancers are associated with tobacco use. Around 90% of lung cancers are associated with smoking. The risk of getting lung cancer as a smoker is 17% for men and 12% for women, compared to just over 1% for non-smokers. See Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lung_cancer#Causes) and sources.

So smoking gives you on average a 10* higher chance of getting lung cancer and a 3* higher chance of getting oral cancer, and that represents a significantly higher risk.

[Modified]

75% of oral cancers are associated with tobacco use. Around 90% of lung cancers are associated with smoking. The risk of getting lung cancer as a smoker is 17% for men and 12% for women, compared to just over 1% for non-smokers. See Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lung_cancer#Causes) and sources.

So smoking gives you on average a 10* higher chance of getting lung cancer and a 3* higher chance of getting oral cancer, and that represents a significantly higher risk.

In most of those 1% of non-smokers who get lung cancer there are probably other causes. The estimates I'm seeing are that 1/3 of that 1% are caused by radon (in non-smokers) and secondhand smoke. Then there are chemical fumes (working in a salon, for example), pollution, asbestos, etc. If you have very little exposure to all of that stuff, your chance of getting lung cancer is probably quite tiny.

[Ashles]

So, is it just a raffle?

Not a pure raffle, no.

A raffle implies everyone has an equal chance of 'winning'.

But there is little doubt that any form of smoking will increase, no matter how little, the odds of an unpleasant disease.

Of course it's up to people to weigh up their enjoyment versus the small extra risk that light smoking might add.

The fact that non-smokers can also get the diseases isn't really relevant - it's about relative increase.

If lung cancer affects, for example, 10/10,000 non-smokers and affects 12/10,000 light smokers, the risk is not particularly appreciable.
Unless you are one of those 2 unlucky people who got a disease they would not otherwise have had.

This is very simplistic, but the bottom line is any level of smoking/tobacco use is likely to increase the risk of a related disease. It might just be a small enough increase that people are personally happy to risk it.

(I just think the "You've got to die of something" argument is a bit weak.
Why not take up heroin then? Apparently that feels really nice indeed.)

[Personal Grudge]

I'll freely admit that the "cancer" and "death" arguments don't particularly work for me as motivation for quitting. I smoke a pack of cigarettes a day, and I have done so for a number of years. And so far, I'm overall healthy. Sure, I recognize that I'm increasing my chances of smoking-related diseases. But the threat of future possible illness just doesn't strike me as a great motivator.

Now... illness aside... morning cough seems a much greater motivation. Waking up in the morning, gagging until you hack up that nice wad of phlegm, inhaling that first drag just to feel like you can start the day normally. Those are greater motivations for me. I'm certain that, over a long time spent smoking, you can easily forget how much better you feel when these symptoms are absent. The symptoms may not be indicators of a specific disease, but they are certainly symptoms of your body's reaction to the product you are consuming. At these early moments of the day, smoking certainly seems like a means to stave off the negative effects of the addiction, rather than an enjoyable vice.

I would doubt that pipe and cigar smokers regularly experience these same issues, however. I can't imagine running through 5 - 10 cigars a day, even if you don't inhale. However, for a cigarette smoker, the certainty of just feeling better physically seems to be a real motivation for me to drop the habit.

[Ivor the Engineer]

Relative risk is pretty meaningless. A more useful and easy to understand metric is the average number of years smoking will take off your life.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/328/7455/1519

Objective To compare the hazards of cigarette smoking in men who formed their habits at different periods, and the extent of the reduction in risk when cigarette smoking is stopped at different ages.

Design Prospective study that has continued from 1951 to 2001.

Setting United Kingdom.

Participants 34 439 male British doctors. Information about their smoking habits was obtained in 1951, and periodically thereafter; cause specific mortality was monitored for 50 years.

Main outcome measures Overall mortality by smoking habit, considering separately men born in different periods.

Results The excess mortality associated with smoking chiefly involved vascular, neoplastic, and respiratory diseases that can be caused by smoking. Men born in 1900-1930 who smoked only cigarettes and continued smoking died on average about 10 years younger than lifelong non-smokers. Cessation at age 60, 50, 40, or 30 years gained, respectively, about 3, 6, 9, or 10 years of life expectancy. The excess mortality associated with cigarette smoking was less for men born in the 19th century and was greatest for men born in the 1920s. The cigarette smoker versus non-smoker probabilities of dying in middle age (35-69) were 42% vs 24% (a twofold death rate ratio) for those born in 1900-1909, but were 43% vs 15% (a threefold death rate ratio) for those born in the 1920s. At older ages, the cigarette smoker versus non-smoker probabilities of surviving from age 70 to 90 were 10% vs 12% at the death rates of the 1950s (that is, among men born around the 1870s) but were 7% vs 33% (again a threefold death rate ratio) at the death rates of the 1990s (that is, among men born around the 1910s).

Conclusion A substantial progressive decrease in the mortality rates among non-smokers over the past half century (due to prevention and improved treatment of disease) has been wholly outweighed, among cigarette smokers, by a progressive increase in the smoker vs non-smoker death rate ratio due to earlier and more intensive use of cigarettes. Among the men born around 1920, prolonged cigarette smoking from early adult life tripled age specific mortality rates, but cessation at age 50 halved the hazard, and cessation at age 30 avoided almost all of it.

But of course, no one wants to believe (s)he is average.:)

[ponderingturtle]

75% of oral cancers are associated with tobacco use. Around 90% of lung cancers are associated with smoking. The risk of getting lung cancer as a smoker is 17% for men and 12% for women, compared to just over 1% for non-smokers. See Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lung_cancer#Causes) and sources.

So smoking gives you on average a 10* higher chance of getting lung cancer and a 3* higher chance of getting oral cancer, and that represents a significantly higher risk.

The problem is how to the risk is distributed across use. Light users likely have lower risks than heavy users. How much that changes who knows?

[shadron]

You can do the research and pull out the mortality figures, add in all the adjustments and come up with a valid comparison. Then cut a finger on the edge of the front page of your report, and die of a staph infection in less time than the report took to write.

C`est la vie.

[Ashles]

I'll freely admit that the "cancer" and "death" arguments don't particularly work for me as motivation for quitting. I smoke a pack of cigarettes a day, and I have done so for a number of years. And so far, I'm overall healthy. Sure, I recognize that I'm increasing my chances of smoking-related diseases. But the threat of future possible illness just doesn't strike me as a great motivator.

Now... illness aside... morning cough seems a much greater motivation.
That is not a sensible way of looking at it. However it was a very similar thought process that led me to give up 5 years ago. :)
I guess sensible is also relative.

Probably the one single thing that gave me the motivation to give up was a comment I overheard.

A work colleague who was 36 was speaking to another work colleague who was 31. Both smoked.
They were talking about giving up. The older guy said
"Just think, if you gave up now, by the time you are my age you won't have smoked for 5 years".

For some reason that stuck with me.

[Cuddles]

C`est la vie.

Technically, c'est le mort.:)

[Z]

The only 'symptom' I seem to get with pipe smoking is, if for some STUPID reason, I smoke three or four pipes in one day (which I've done now and then), I spend two or three days unable to eat anything I normally like, because I've basically scorched my tongue, gums, etc. So, ideally, when I'm regularly smoking, it's one pipe every three or four days. Ideals are just that - ideals - so I actually tend to smoke two pipes every two to four days, depending on weather (as I smoke outside).

[Stone Island]

The only 'symptom' I seem to get with pipe smoking is, if for some STUPID reason, I smoke three or four pipes in one day (which I've done now and then), I spend two or three days unable to eat anything I normally like, because I've basically scorched my tongue, gums, etc. So, ideally, when I'm regularly smoking, it's one pipe every three or four days. Ideals are just that - ideals - so I actually tend to smoke two pipes every two to four days, depending on weather (as I smoke outside).

You should be careful. I read a news article recently that quoted a study that showed that Turks who drank very hot tea, which is their custom, had a higher than expected incidence of some oral cancers given that tea is in no way a carcinogen. The researchers were fairly certain that it's the heat that is to blame for the ill effects. If you're smoking hot I would suggest, in addition to changing how much you smoke, you change your technique to minimize this risk.

Also, I noticed this neat article with an excellent response: The difference between Swedish snus and snus sold in the United States (http://www.examiner.com/x-4742-LA-Smoking-Examiner~y2009m3d23-The-difference-between-Swedish-snus-and-snus-sold-in-the-United-States)

But, back to my OP, it's statements like this which bother me: • Snus users are twice as likely to get pancreatic cancer as non-tobacco users. I don't doubt that this is true, but is it meaningful, or is it like saying that people who buy two lottery tickets are twice as likely to win the lottery than people who only buy one?

[Stone Island]

A high-tech approach to getting a nicotine fix (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-china-cigarettes25-2009apr25,0,7059574.story)

[shadron]

Technically, c'est le mort.:)

Touchee....ahhh, touché. I think.

[tnt666]

Technically, c'est le mort.:)

Technically, c'est la mort ;)

[Cuddles]

Technically, c'est la mort ;)

Really? Bollocks. I spent a while trying to remember which was correct, but I couldn't quite be arsed to look it up. Ah well, I'll just pretend that it was a deliberate mistake to provide some humour in my pickiness. I'm sure everyone will believe me.

[ziztur]

I was totally reading this thread while my boyfriend was out on the porch smoking. Now I am depressed!

He says he wants to quit "before he is 30", (he is 27) and I told him that the day after he turns 28, I will start smoking along with him.

He's of the sort that this kind of blackmail will actually work. He has never worn a seatbelt for as long as he has owned a car - I told him if he wasn't going to wear his, I wouldn't wear mine either.

That got him to wear his seatbelt real quick.

He is afraid that if he quits smoking, the nonsmoking version of himself will be an angry jackass. As far as I know, there isn't much evidence that personality changes like that are anything more than temporary.

[Ashles]

I was totally reading this thread while my boyfriend was out on the porch smoking. Now I am depressed!

He says he wants to quit "before he is 30", (he is 27) and I told him that the day after he turns 28, I will start smoking along with him.
What will you do if he doesn't?

For some people it isn't that easy to give up, even if they want to.

And if you don't really want to it's much harder.

[ziztur]

Eh, I won't inhale. :)

On a serious note, we have discussed this, and he is pretty convinced seeing me smoke will get him to quit. I suppose if it doesn't get him to quit completely, he will at least smoke less. He is worried that if something important is going on in his life, he might screw it up by trying to quit smoking at the same time. It seems like there is a good amount of fear keeping him from quitting.

[Stone Island]

What will you do if he doesn't?

For some people it isn't that easy to give up, even if they want to.

And if you don't really want to it's much harder.

Some say that quitting the use of tobacco is harder than quitting the use of heroin.

[ziztur]

Can you die from tobacco withdrawl? :)


I was trying to find information on the daily effects of smoking. For example my guy often wakes up with a stuffy nose, and sometimes he says he has trouble breathing. Obviously he gets out of breath if we try to do things like ride bikes or jog.

We first thought that the snot/breathing issues might allergies to my dog, but there isn't a strong correlation as he also has these issues in the absence of dogs. It seems like smoking is more likely.

I'm interested in the stuff Personal Grudge had to say here:


morning cough seems a much greater motivation. Waking up in the morning, gagging until you hack up that nice wad of phlegm, inhaling that first drag just to feel like you can start the day normally.


My guy is totally like this - wakes up, blows his nose like he is trying to squeeze his brain out through his nostrils, then pops outside for a smoke, or else he gets a headache.

...

I should also mention that we're both addicted to Mountain Dew, and if I had to strop drinking that I would be PISSED. But that's another thread.

[Robster, FCD]

Appealing to my own authority as a toxicologist, a puff or two a week is not a big risk. That said, it isn't the best choice one could make. Here is the deal.

Nicotine can pass through your gums, lungs, mouth, lips and skin. I grew up on a tobacco farm, and have had nicotine poisoning a few times, from walking through field for 8 hours a day, under just the right conditions. No fun at all. But nicotine isn't the only carcinogen in tobacco. If it is burned, you make a polycyclic compound that makes up a fair amount of tar. That stuff doesn't enter the bloodstream, but it does act as an irritant. Some of these chemicals, including nicotine (which if it has a nitrate group attached, becomes a carcinogen too (if I remember my tox classes from a decade ago correctly) do go into the bloodstream and affect many organs. Hence, the source that Stone Island found that says that the risk of pancreatic cancer is increased is spot on. Luckily, pancreatic cancer is very rare, so an increase there isn't too bad for the population. Unless you get it, when it ceases to be rare at all. If I could pick a cancer to get in my lifetime, Pancreatic would be at the bottom of the list. It is rarely found early enough to treat, and only about 1.5% of patients live for 5 years post diagnosis.

We excrete some of the toxins in tobacco through our urine, so we also affect the bladder, where all those loverly chemicals can sit and affect cells until you empty the bladder.

For a pipe, cigar, snus, snuff or chew user, I would consider quitting to be a good move, as a form of prevention. Your next best move would be to make sure that you have regular checkups on sites of exposure (mouth, lips, nose, whatever) for precancerous changes. You see those, quit.

So, why would repeated heat damage increase risk of cancer? Every time you damage tissue, new tissue grows to replace it. Your chances of having a cell picking up a mutation adds up with every division. So burning your mouth induces repair, increased chance of a mutation, and if you get enough mutations in a single cell, it takes off. Same thing happens to the liver of a severe alcoholic. Years of damage and repair cycles end up giving one cell the mutations it needs to grow out of control.

If you add tobacco and its assorted carcinogens to heat damage, it could be a double whammy.

Hope this helps.

[Stone Island]

Appealing to my own authority as a toxicologist, a puff or two a week is not a big risk. That said, it isn't the best choice one could make. Here is the deal.

Nicotine can pass through your gums, lungs, mouth, lips and skin. I grew up on a tobacco farm, and have had nicotine poisoning a few times, from walking through field for 8 hours a day, under just the right conditions. No fun at all. But nicotine isn't the only carcinogen in tobacco. If it is burned, you make a polycyclic compound that makes up a fair amount of tar. That stuff doesn't enter the bloodstream, but it does act as an irritant. Some of these chemicals, including nicotine (which if it has a nitrate group attached, becomes a carcinogen too (if I remember my tox classes from a decade ago correctly) do go into the bloodstream and affect many organs. Hence, the source that Stone Island found that says that the risk of pancreatic cancer is increased is spot on. Luckily, pancreatic cancer is very rare, so an increase there isn't too bad for the population. Unless you get it, when it ceases to be rare at all. If I could pick a cancer to get in my lifetime, Pancreatic would be at the bottom of the list. It is rarely found early enough to treat, and only about 1.5% of patients live for 5 years post diagnosis.

We excrete some of the toxins in tobacco through our urine, so we also affect the bladder, where all those loverly chemicals can sit and affect cells until you empty the bladder.

For a pipe, cigar, snus, snuff or chew user, I would consider quitting to be a good move, as a form of prevention. Your next best move would be to make sure that you have regular checkups on sites of exposure (mouth, lips, nose, whatever) for precancerous changes. You see those, quit.

So, why would repeated heat damage increase risk of cancer? Every time you damage tissue, new tissue grows to replace it. Your chances of having a cell picking up a mutation adds up with every division. So burning your mouth induces repair, increased chance of a mutation, and if you get enough mutations in a single cell, it takes off. Same thing happens to the liver of a severe alcoholic. Years of damage and repair cycles end up giving one cell the mutations it needs to grow out of control.

If you add tobacco and its assorted carcinogens to heat damage, it could be a double whammy.

Hope this helps.
Very well written and persuasive. Thank you!

[Stone Island]

From Bill Valencia, The Maverick Philosopher (http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2009/04/the-superiority-of-the-pipe.html):
If the cigarette is a one-night stand, the cigar is a brief affair. The typical cigarette smoker is out for a quick fix, not for love. The cigar aficionado is out for love, but without long-term commitment. The pipe, however, is a long and satisfying marriage. But rare is the pipester who is not a polygamist. The practice of the pipe, then, is a long and satisfying marriage to many partners among whom no jealousy reigns.

This completes the first proof of the superiority of the pipe.

[Typicallucas]

I'm not sure how to measure your risk of smoking, snus related cancers.

My advice is to be concerned with the decreased lung capacity you have as a result of smoking a pipe (do you inhale pipe smoke???) I found that my stamina for cardiovascular exercise dropped dramatically as a result of smoking cigarettes. I would bet low physical activity is a greater risk than smoking occasionally.

If you are concerned about snus giving you cancer in the mouth you can try using a nicotine patch. Though it may not give you as intense of a buzz.

[Stone Island]

(do you inhale pipe smoke???)

NO!

Well, actually, a little. The air around your head tends to get filled with smoke, and you end up breathing some of that in. It's unavoidable. However, when you draw on the pipe, you're supposed to just bring the smoke into your mouth, not into your lungs.

I think there are people who do inhale pipe smoke, but they're crazy.

[soylent]

It's not just the PAHs and other nasty carcinogens that form from incomplete combustion.

It's also the fine particulates. They can block or rupture alveoli and they can enter into the blood stream where they can accelerate atherosclerosis and possibly cause alzheimer's.

Tobacco tends to concentrate polonium-210(a strong alpha emitter) from the uranium-238 decay chain. The exposure to a smoker's lungs can easily be on the same order of magnitude as that from radon(also from the U-238 decay chain). If you believe the LNT hypothesis is valid at such low doses this is not entirely insignificant(it's only known with a high degree of certainty to be valid at large doses such as the >100 mSv doses experienced by Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors).

[Stone Island]

It's also the fine particulates. They can block or rupture alveoli and they can enter into the blood stream where they can accelerate atherosclerosis and possibly cause alzheimer's.

Odd, I thought that smoking was associated with a lower incidence of Alzheimer's.

So I did a Google search (yeah, yeah GIGO).

Not at all clear. Actually, the main debate was between the "No, smoking is unrelated" and the "Smoking doubles your chances" crowd. In fact, the only "protective" effect of smoking I could find what seemed to be some reliable data was with regards to Parkinson's. And since Parkinson's is rare, and the damage smoking does is great, not too encouraging.