CIGARETTES AND LUNG CANCER
SIR,—Dr. A. Piney reminds Pharos (Spectator, August 16) that 'the evidence of a causal relationship betv eeri
, is cigarette smoking and cancer of the lung . .
. . . of exactly the same type as that on which every' one accepts radio-activity as a cause of cancer, bent°1 as a cause of aplastic anemia, aniline as a cause of cancer of the bladder, etc. . . . The (statistically) good results of the anti-polio vaccine are very widely accepted, although they are of the same class as the cigarette ones.' Can Dr. Piney enlighten us on the significance °f what, on the assumption of causality, seems 3 puzzling statistical datum—the fact that ceteris paribus no wider incidence of lung cancer has been found among inhalers than among non-inhalers, What, moreover, are the parallel data in Dr. Pine's ,the four examples of 'exactly the same type' and same class' of evidence? If there are none, who( exactly does his 'exactly' mean?—Yours faithfully, HANS KEL.I
50 Willow Road, NW3
Previous page
