Slashdot Mirror

I already have, have you?

There isn't a single piece of hard evidence that the two are linked. Again, very qualified opinions by doctors who have studied the issue lead to the belief, and it's probably true.

However, second hand smoke is a different story altogether.

This article from Medical News Today says it's a widely accepted notion and goes on to say more research is needed.

This article from Cancer.org says there is strong evidence that the two are linked, and that more research is needed.
In 2006 the UK Scientific Community on Tobacco and Health issued a report describing "a tentative link between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and lung cancer."

Of course there are no real scientific studies to show why people who have never been exposed sometimes die of lung cancer, but George Burns lived to 100 and died from fluid buildup in his skull from a fall in the bathtub.

So to sum up, invitation preemptively accepted, although it appears I'm the only one in this conversation who actually has done any research.

Why don't you see the doctor about that knee-jerk and read the original document here with more thoughts here (pp.64-66)?

On a plus note, at least the Boundaries Commission can continue delivering ;-).

I was reading this report on the BBC website earlier today, and I thought then that there is always the possibility that there is a flaw in the study method itself. As the study looks at self-reported health issues, you could also draw the conclusion that people in the US are more aware of health problems than the British.

By "aware" you could also mean "alive".

Many of the diseases listed can cause death in a short period of time. Those that don't live long tend not to be around to report. That biases the study.

One possible conclusion, then, is that Americans tend to survive longer with these diseases than those in the UK.

If twice as many people in the US report living with cancer than in the UK, for example, that might mean that twice as many people with cancer in the UK die. That's not far from the truth, actually.

Here in the UK, the Police are not allowed to enter your property with out your permission or a warrant.

Actually, that isn't true. The Police are allowed to enter your property without a warrant or your consent under certain conditions

Seems so.:

"Section 16B of the PTA makes it an offence in England and Wales and in Scotland to collect, record or possess any information which might be useful to terrorists. This provision too applies to both Irish and international terrorism. Equivalent provision is made for Northern Ireland in section 33 of the EPA. This offence is designed principally to catch those compiling or possessing targeting information. Lord Lloyd notes that the police have found the offence particularly useful in Northern Ireland and he recommends that a similar offence be included in any new legislation against terrorism. Again the Government agrees. As terrorist groups try to obtain information on the movements of their potential and actual targets and to gather any other information which might assist them in mounting an attack, the existence of this offence can help the police and the security forces to disrupt such terrorist attacks. "

Is it me or does this seem like a license to arrest anyone anywhere for any reason? "A recipe for a cake? That could be useful to terrorists!"

What about Dunblane? Not quite the same scenario, I know, but fairly similar.

You are mixing 2 cases here:

1. was the sad case of Daminola Taylor, a 10 year old schoolboy, murdered. It was expcted a gang of only slightly older kids killed him, but this suspected group 'got off' because their mobile phones were traced to a distance too far away from the murder scene to be credible. The ganag was mainly Afro-Carribean (Daminola Taylor was Nigerian, the racial aspect centered around Afro-Carribean vs. African violence, a serious friction point in London's black community).

2. The infamous racist killing in SOuth London was that of Stephen Lawrence (late teens IIRC) whose alleged attackers (racist white gang) 'got off' on technical details.

Both were killings and in both cases the attacters were not convicted.

Actually, Smoking does kill

I Just got hit by the "lameness filter". (Is it supposed to refer to the lameness of the filter, or what it's supposed to be filtering for?). I don't mind something that stops lame posts, but this filter seems to hit with a randomness that eludes my logic.

What is this filter supposed to do?

Do filter hits get logged, so that /. admins can verify that it's actually getting true lame posts? Is it DESIGNED to discourage putting URLs in your post? Does it actually help? Will the answer to these questions be posted by someone in the know?

In the hopes that this rant has mollified the lameness filter, I now return you to the regularly scheduled feature.

Ignore everything above this line

You're mostly complaining about our electoral system, not our voting system.

I have two pointers here. The first and The second. Excuse the brevity. I'm trying to avoid the lameness filter.

Remainder of post deleted to mollify the lameness filter
`ø,,ø!