Smoking: The PRIME Cause!

Most of us today will know or at least heard of lung cancer. Just in case you don't, check out the link below then you'll get what I mean: (WARNING: The pics may be a little disgusting.)

Lung Cancer Pics

What you saw occurs when the tissues in the lung experienced uncontrolled cell growth. Failure to provide timely treatment will result in metastasis, the process where malignant cells spread into nearby tissues. If you had a time machine and could travel back to the 1900s, try asking the people then about lung cancer. Don’t be surprised if you get confused expressions, as lung cancer was nearly non-existent then. In fact, only 374 cases were reported until 1912.

These days, however, lung cancer kills more women than breast cancer, uterine cancer and ovarian cancer combined. In 2007, the National Cancer Council of Malaysia diagnosed a total of 1865 cases of lung cancer, making it the third commonest cancer for that year. How did something that nearly didn’t exist in the past become one of the most notorious killers in today’s world? Let’s take a look back in time.

World War I and smoking

James Bonsack's cigarette-rolling machine.
Source: Wikipedia

As you may expect, the rise in lung cancer cases is related to the widespread prevalence of cigarette smoking. Cigarettes were not popular prior to WWI because they were expensive as they were hand-rolled. That changed when machines were involved in the mass production of cigarettes. Tobacco cigarettes became commercially popular following James Albert Bonsack’s invention in 1881, a machine capable of producing 70,000 cigarettes every 10 hours. It was invented as a response to the request of cigarette manufacturer Allen & Ginter which offered a reward for the development of such a machine.

Cigarettes became more common, but the time when their popularity started building up was in WWI (1914-1918). Millions of soldiers received cigarettes free of charge from tobacco companies and the soldiers would smoke to relieve stress. The popularity in smoking amongst civilians rose considerably, even including women. Although lung cancer was very rare earlier, the number of cases related to it leaped rather significantly. Based on an autopsy, the percentage of lung cancer in all cancer-related cases had risen to nearly 10% by 1918, and to more than 14% by 1927.

At first, they said smoking was unrelated

Smoking was not immediately blamed to be the main culprit of the escalation of the increasing number of lung cancer cases. The 1930 edition of the Springer Handbook for Special Pathology listed a few possible causes, namely the drop in air quality due to developing industries notably the automobile industry, the asphalting of roads, exposure to benzene and gasoline amongst workers, as well as the 1918 flu pandemic. However, the rise in the number of cases was virtually no different in most countries, despite some having a lower rate of development in the mentioned industries, as well as a lack of exposure towards said gases amongst workers. The number of cases also did not observe any jump after earlier flu pandemics, so we can easily say that these AREN'T related to lung cancer.

Some did suspect smoking had something to do with this, but there was insufficient scientific evidence, so the relationship between smoking and lung cancer was dismissed. Interestingly though, there was once when anti-tobacco activism became widespread in Germany. In 1929, a German physician, Fritz Lickint published a paper with statistical evidence of the likeliness of smokers to be diagnosed with lung cancer. Another catalyst for this campaign was Nazi leader, Adolf Hilter’s decision to quit smoking, saying that it was

“a waste of money.”

The campaign involved banning smoking in public transports, promoting health education and restriction towards advertisements. In the early stages, the campaign seemed to be a failure, as tobacco use increased from 1933 to 1939, but smoking eventually declined soon after.

An anti-smoking advertisement from that time, saying: "He does not devour the cigarette, it devours him." Source: Wikipedia

But they changed their mind

Clinicians began to suspect the link between cigarette-smoking and lung cancer due to a sudden epidemic of lung cancer in this period. Although smoking started becoming popular in the 1910s, the lung cancer cases began to pop up only about two decades after. In other words, there was a time lag of approximately 20 to 30 years between smoking and the development of lung cancer, because well, you can’t expect the damage inflicted to be instant.

Smoking was associated with the disease, conclusively established in the 1950s. The fact that smoking is bad was a bitter pill to swallow for those who had “enjoyed” smoking until it had developed into an “addiction”.

"But now, you and I should know better."

What’s wrong with smoking anyway?

Cigarette smoke contains carcinogens, meaning substances which can cause cancer. There are over 60 known carcinogens in cigarette smoke (Clicky!). The main carcinogenic agent is known to be ‘tar’, an acronym for “total aerosol residue”, NOT the tar on this:

I wouldn't blame you if you had that misconception, coz I did too. =P

In the lungs, tar coats the cilia which serve to filter inhaled air, rendering them useless and opening entry for dangerous toxic particles in tobacco. These carcinogens cause changes in DNA material of the body cells, including those which control cell division, thus leading to the uncontrolled cell division known as cancer.

Another well-known component of cigarette smoke is nicotine, the underlying cause of addiction to the habit. This is what that makes smokers “love” smoking and not want to kick the habit. In 2011, research has shown that nicotine acts as an inhibitor to chromatin-modifying enzymes, which amplifies the ability of cocaine to cause addiction.

Smoking in public harms others too!
Source: Cigarette Flavours

Passive smoking, more commonly known as second-hand smoking, also brings a risk of lung cancer. Worse, a higher risk is inflicted, as revealed by an international series of studies in 2004. Recent studies of sidestream smoke, smoke coming from a burning cigarette, showed that sidestream smoke contain 2-6 times more condensate per gram than mainstream smoke, so the exposure to carcinogens in second-hand smokers is far more dangerous.

Final Words

Lung cancer came after smoking, you can’t deny that. 

It's NOT like the chicken and the egg.

So, if you love your life, do yourself a favour, stay away from these!

Just don't smoke, okay?

To continue, click here.

To go back, click here.