Thursday, March 22, 2012

Radiation Found To Be The #1 Cause of Tobacco-Related Cancers

Sayer Ji, Contributor
Activist Post

It is well-established that 25-30% of all cancer are caused solely by tobacco consumption – a completely avoidable cause.

But what if the tobacco itself were not actually the primary cause of the cancer, but something else contaminating it? And what if it the tobacco industry knew this lethal contaminant was in their product, and even knew how to remove it, but did and said nothing for over 30 years in order to conceal this deadly secret from the public?

In 1998, the major tobacco industry's internal secret documents were made available online by the Master Settlement Agreement, revealing that the industry was aware of the presence of a radioactive substance in tobacco as early as 1959.

It was discovered in 1964 that the cancer-causing radioactive substance was Polonium 210, which millions still inhale in their cigarette smoke, unwittingly.

Polonium 210 is a byproduct of the decay of uranium daughter isotopes, which, while occurring naturally in the environment, are primarily found within our soil as a result of pollution from various industries.

Uranium mining is one source, as are the nuclear and coal-fired power industries. In fact, “fly ash” produced from coal-fired power carries 100 times more radiation into the surrounding environment than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy. (1)


This is, of course, when nuclear power plants properly contain their radioactive fuel and waste and don't release massive, irretrievable quantities of radioisotopes into the environment, as occurred in Chernobyl and Fukushima. Nuclear weapons and munitions (depleted uranium), are another well-known source of global contamination.  No matter where the uranium comes from, tobacco plants selectively absorb and concentrate the byproduct of its decay, Polonium 210, to dangerous -- if not lethal -- levels.

A recent review published in the journal Nicotine & Tobacco Research summarized this disturbing fact of history as follows:
  ...[T]he industry was not only cognizant of the potential 'cancerous growth' in the lungs of regular smokers but also did quantitative radiobiological calculations to estimate the long-term (25 years) lung radiation absorption dose (rad) of ionizing alpha particles emitted from the cigarette smoke. Our own calculations of lung rad of alpha particles match closely the rad estimated by the industry. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, the industry's and our estimate of long-term lung rad of alpha particles causes 120-138 lung cancer deaths per year per 1,000 regular smokers.
These findings indicate that the tobacco industry’s relationship to their consumer base was (and still is) homicidal, in the worst, premeditated sense of the word. Moreover, the industry actually knew how to mitigate the problem, but realized it would interfere with the addictive power of their product (and therefore profitability) to do so:
 Acid wash was discovered in 1980 to be highly effectively in removing (210)Po from the tobacco leaves; however, the industry avoided its use for concerns that acid media would ionize nicotine converting it into a poorly absorbable form into the brain of smokers thus depriving them of the much sought after instant 'nicotine kick' sensation.
Polonium 210 is extraordinarily toxic when ingested or inhaled. In fact, it is 4,500 times more toxic than radium 226  -- a startling fact considering that during the Manhattan Project (1944), the "tolerance dose" for workers was set at 0.1 microgram of ingested radium.

When incorporated into the body, radioisotopes like Polonium 210 emit alpha particles, which are the radiobiological equivalent of howitzers on a cellular level, profoundly damaging, mutating and destroying DNA, as well as causing other forms of irreparable damage to the cell. Because of the fact that the dominant radiation risk model does not acknowledge the profoundly detrimental effects of low-dose, internalized radioisotope exposure (largely because it was developed before the discovery of DNA in the early '50s, and was based on external exposures to the type of gamma-radiation associated with atomic bomb blast), the true dangers associated with Polonium 210 have been largely concealed or discounted.

According to a review published in the journal Health Physics in 2010, smoking tobacco has resulted in “443,000 deaths and 5.1 million years of potential life lost among the U.S. population each year from 2000 through 2004.” Furthermore, the review estimated that the associated collective radiation dose from smoking is “more than 36 times that to the workers at all the U.S. nuclear power plants, U.S. Department of Energy nuclear weapons facilities, and crews of all the vessels in the U.S. Nuclear Navy.”

If we calculate the death toll associated with tobacco use from 1997 to present (2012) at an estimated 443K fatalities a year, we arrive at a figure of over six million dead -- the same estimate of how many Jews died in the Holocaust during World War II.  How many millions more will die from radiation-induced cancer, and related diseases, as a consequence of their uninformed tobacco use?

(1) Hvistendahl M. Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Waste. Scientific American. 2007. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

This article first appeared at GreenMedInfo.  Please visit to access their vast database of articles and the latest information in natural health.



BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW

13 comments:

Anonymous said...

"In fact, “fly ash” produced from coal-fired power carries 100 times more radiation into the surrounding environment than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy. (1)"


http://www.concernedgilescitizens.org/?page_id=11
"Coal ash has been studied extensively for decades by universities and government regulatory agencies. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other government bodies have determined that it is non-hazardous… Designating coal ash as hazardous or toxic is counter to scientific evidence and would seriously limit the current widespread uses of these materials today. (says the)American Coal Ash Association Educational Foundation"

"... in Giles county these facts hit home. The 2006 health statistics profile for our community indicates we are already exhibit a much higher level of health problems than the rest of the state or the country. In addition, pollutants in the New River have prompted the Virginia Department of Health to advise limited consumption of fish caught in the New River’s waters. If someone had tried to put a nuclear power plant in our county we would have been up in arms, but because fly ash “looks like talcum powder” we are less apt to worry about its effects. In fact, a 2007 Scientific American article reports that coal ash is more radioactive than nuclear waste-but that is far from the worst threat"

looks like some things never change....and they wonder why we don't trust them...shesh

Anonymous said...

Radioactive polonuim. Yep. Old news, but thanks for bringing it to the forefront. People need to be aware of this.

Bill said...

From Wikepedia under Apatite

... some apatite in Florida used to produce phosphate [as fertilizer] for U.S. tobacco crops contains uranium, radium, lead 210 and polonium 210 and radon.

Anonymous said...

One reason I stopped smoking tobacco cigarettes and started vaping instead.

Anonymous said...

"From Wikepedia under Apatite

... some apatite in Florida used to produce phosphate [as fertilizer] for U.S. tobacco crops contains uranium, radium, lead 210 and polonium 210 and radon."

Its not in wikipedia any more.

Anonymous said...

I wonder why they are so keen for people to stop smoking just now, while at the same time they are supposedly killing us softly by other means?

nutritase said...

I first read about this back in the early 90s in Jack Herer's "The Emperor Wears No Clothes". The description of how tar from tobacco accumulates at the branching of lung bronchioles much like silt deposits at forks of rivers made a lot of sense to me, and since that tar is radioactive due to tobacco plants readily absorbing (at the time he described it as radon? I forget) it just sits at those splits irradiating the area and a few decades later, that's where the lung cancer tumors are. He also explained how ingesting marijuana was good for tobacco smokers because it expands the bronchioles, making it easier to cough up the tar, as well as lowering blood pressure - nicotine constricts both blood vessels and bronchioles.

"I wonder why they are so keen for people to stop smoking just now, while at the same time they are supposedly killing us softly by other means?" I'm guessing second-hand smoke and pollution (butts).

"One reason I stopped smoking tobacco cigarettes and started vaping instead. " Read up on the ingredients. Propylene glycol doesn't sound much better. I finally just decided to quit cold turkey since American Spirits were costing too much and I was *really* starting to feel the effects on my circulatory system.

Anonymous said...

Health Benefits of Tobacco according to the Scientific Method:

Tobacco tar is known to protect against the damaging effects of Asbestos [12], cure Asthma and prevent Breast Cancer [13]. Nicotine has been shown to stop Tuberculosis in its tracks. [14] Carbon Monoxide may prevent Heart attacks and Stroke. [15] Parkinson’s Disease is associated with non-smoking [16] Alzheimer’s disease is associated with non-smoking. [17] Less than 3% of smokers die of lung cancer, even if they smoked chemical ridden generic cigarettes. [18] According to the Journal of Theoretic, Smoking simply does not cause Lung Cancer. [19a] Researchers attempted to induce lung-cancer in thousands of mice through exposure to chronic levels of tobacco smoke (equivalent to 200 cigarettes a day in some cases) every study failed. One study even proved that chronic exposure to tobacco smoke protected mice from cancer induced by nuclear radiation. [19b][c]

Anonymous said...

Many other studies show protective effects of smoking for asbestos workers. Similar effects are found for other lung cancer risk factors, including radiation and chemical cancerogen exposures. For example:

From "Lung Cancer Dueto Chloromethyl Ethers" (Hahnemann Medical College and Hospital, Philadelphia) by Weiss, W., "Over the 22 years of follow-up, exposed workers have had a very high risk of respiratory cancer, mostly of the lung. The risk has been dose related and has been much higher in nonsmokers and ex-smokers than in current smokers. The epidemic began to subside shortly after exposure to chloromethyl ethers ceased. The mean induction-latency period was 17 years. Most of the lung cancers in the moderate and high dose groups have been small cell carcinoma,"
From "Respiratory Effects of Exposure to Diesel Emissions in Underground Coal Miners" by Ames, R.G. (DHHS, PHS, CDC, NIOSH. Funding: NIOSH), "Presence of chronic respiratory symptoms at baseline was inversely related to cessation of smoking. Respiratory impairment was positively associated with smoking cessation, but failed to reach statistical significance,"

Lysander Spooner said...

From the article,

"...over six million dead -- the same estimate of how many Jews died in the Holocaust during World War II."

Uhhhh, yeah. That may be the "estimate" but it isn't based on anything factual or empirical. In fact, it is entirely made up and utterly false. Sort of like the whole "gas chambers" myth, which has been thoroughly debunked, scientifically.

Ivan the Reasonable said...

Anonymous said...

"I wonder why they are so keen for people to stop smoking just now, while at the same time they are supposedly killing us softly by other means?"

Because nicotine is a beneficial stimulant, which, when smoked, can help overcome the other forms of attack we are under, such as aerosol spraying and microwave radiation from cell phone towers.

Anonymous said...

Ivan, that is amazing. I always wondered the same thing.

We know they dont care about any of us. What with depopulation genocide, etc, so why all the concern about smoking?

It must be good for you if they want to take it away. I suspect this whole no smoking thing is some kind of scam.

They sure have brainwashed a whole society with their unproven opinion.

The do not have proof still. They have what is called statistical proof. That is one kind of proof. They don't have scientific absolute proof. They cannot prove cigarettes are bad no matter whatg they say.

Anonymous said...

Tobacco is called a sacred herb by native Americans to the two people above me in this blog.

Remember the peace pipe used in the old cowboy and Indian movies?

If they are adding radiation, get yourself some iodine from an herb website.

And don't feel guilty and let them make make you feel like a second class citizen for smoking.
It's their vaccines which cause cancer. Those things are time released.

They attack their victims, these gov't people, and they do this because they have made billions on the anti-smoking campaign.

It actually pays for them to attack themselves and you because there is a lot of money and control they get from it. They play both sides on any issue to confuse us.

It's a bit like marijuiana which is the cure for all the diseases they create on purpose for their depopulation and selfishness programs.

What can save us with, from their vaccines and eugenics programs, the flouridated water, the chemtrails etc., they outlaw.

Don't fall for it. Did you know the weed dandelion which we try to get rid of if you boil in a tea and strain will cure cancer.

We now live in the twilight zone where white is black and and black is white.

To survive, do the opposite of what they say.

Love ya

Post a Comment