Doctors who treat lung cancer are facing a puzzling trend: every week about 65 Canadians who have never smoked are being told they have cancer in their lungs. According to the Canadian Cancer Society, an estimated 22,700 Canadians will be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2006 and 19,300 will die of it. About 437 Canadians will be diagnosed with lung cancer every week and an average of 371 lung cancer patients die every week. Smoking has long been understood to be a key risk factor for lung cancer. But according to information CTV's Avis Favaro received from doctors at Princess Margaret Hospital and the Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre in Toronto, 10 to 15 per cent of new lung cancer cases diagnosed are in people who have never smoked. Many have never been exposed to second-hand smoke. In Canada, that adds up to 3,500 nonsmokers diagnosed with the disease each year. NOTE; Notice how they contradict themselves? First they claim that "22,700 Canadians will be diagnosed with lung cancer in 2006", then they say that "In Canada, that adds up to 3,500 nonsmokers who will be diagnosed with the disease each year". So which is it, 22,700 or 3,500 nonsmokers will be diagnosed with lung cancer per year? Lets read on..... Karry Langman is mother who's always tried to live a healthy life. She's never smoked. Yet at age 36, she discovered she had lung cancer. Her only symptom was a cough that wouldn't go away, first thought to be pneumonia, and then asthma. She was X-rayed only after repeated visits to the doctor. The X-ray confirmed it was cancer. "It was just a shock," Langman told CTV Newsnet. "It's just disbelief because it's lung cancer and I'm not a candidate for lung cancer." So how did she get it? No one seems to know. Genetics, hormones, second-hand smoke, diet and air pollution are all possible factors. One other possible cause is Radon gas: An estimated 12 per cent of lung cancer deaths in both smokers and non-smokers are attributed to being exposed to this naturally-forming gas. Asbestos: Widely used in the past as an insulation material, asbestos fibers inhaled into the lungs can persist for a lifetime. Air pollution: All forms of pollution from automobiles, industry, and power plants, increase the risk of developing lung cancer. If you think breast cancer is the cancer killing most women, you'd be wrong. Lung cancer kills more women -- and men -- every year than any other cancer, according to the Canadian Cancer Society. And research shows that women are approximately 1.5 times more likely to develop lung cancer than men. "Many of these people are young," said Dr. Natasha Leighl of the Princess Margaret Hospital. "They're women and this is a population that is increasing. In California, they believe the number of people with lung cancer who have never smoked may now be 30 per cent." Doctors suspect environmental pollution may trigger some cases. In others there may be a genetic link. Many agree the numbers of non-smokers developing lung cancer is growing. The good news is that caught early, lung cancer early is treatable. In Langman's case, her right lung was removed almost a year ago, and she underwent chemotherapy. Her odds of a cure are more than 70 per cent. "I feel blessed that the people looking at the X-ray found it and they were able to diagnose it early," said Langman. Now she wants others to learn that lung cancer doesn't just happen to smokers. Dana Reeve, the widow of actor Christopher Reeve, died earlier this year. She was a non smoker with lung cancer, which brought some attention to the issue. There are a few key things to watch for, said Dr. Sunil Verma at the Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre. "Symptoms like a cough that won't go away, or phlegm that is different in colour," could be a symptom of lung cancer said Verma. "If you notice blood (in phlegm) or it is changing in colour, that is something to be concerned about." Doctors want even those who never picked up a cigarette to watch for the following signs: persistent cough, blood in phlegm, phlegm that has changed colour, pain in the chest, shortness of breath , trouble swallowing, hoarseness, constant tiredness, loss of appetite, weight loss or pneumonia. It pays to be persistent about complaining about such symptoms to your doctor, as Langman was, even if you don't have a risk factor for lung cancer. Because many of the victims are young, nonsmokers who are otherwise healthy, doctors sometimes misdiagnose their ailment as asthma. A delay in diagnosis gives cancer a chance to spread, said Leighl, and once lung cancer has spread it's difficult to treat and often incurable. People who had quit smoking doesn't mean you don't have to worry. Leighl said 70 per cent of diagnosed cases of lung cancer are in former smokers who said they quit 10 or 20 years ago.

Exposure to high levels of radon increases the risk of developing lung cancer. This relationship has prompted concern that radon levels in some Canadian homes may pose a health risk. Radon is a colourless, odorless, radioactive gas that occurs naturally in the environment. It comes from the natural breakdown of uranium in soils and rocks. In the open air, the amount of radon gas is very small and does not pose a health risk. However, in some confined spaces like basements and underground mines, radon can accumulate to relatively high levels and become a health hazard. Exposure to high levels of radon has been associated with an increased risk of lung cancer, depending on the time length of exposure. Because it is radioactive, radon decays. As it decays, it produces decay products, sometimes called “radon daughters” or “radon progeny”. Two of these progeny, polonium-218 and polonium-214 decay rapidly themselves, and emit alpha particles. When alpha particles hit an object, the energy in them is absorbed by the surface of the object. Human skin is thick enough to not be affected, but if you breathe in alpha particles, they can damage bronchial and lung tissue, and can lead to lung cancer. Studies of the incidence of lung cancer among uranium miners showed a correlation between radon exposure and deaths from lung cancer. Until recently, there had been no evidence of a direct link between radon levels in the home and lung cancer. However, two recent independent scientific studies in Europe and North America show that lung cancer risks extend to levels of radon found in some homes. Radon gas can move through small spaces in the soil and rock upon which a house is built. It can seep into a home through dirt floors, cracks in concrete, sumps, joints, basement drains, under the furnace base and jack posts if the base is buried in the floor. Concrete-block walls are particularly porous to radon and radon trapped in water from wells can be released into the air when the water is used. A survey conducted by Health Canada during the 1970s, (I do not know how reliable their information is, considering how they have partisapated in the gross exaggerations and had deliberately lied to people with those Anti-smoking groups, when they claimed that smoking tobacco was the major cause for all developing lung cancer). But their own survey has showed that radon levels in certain Canadian cities were higher than in others. However, these same studies showed that it is impossible to predict whether any one house will have a high level of radon. Factors such as the location of the house and its relation to the prevailing wind may be just as important as the source of the radon. Commercial services are available to homeowners who wish to measure radon levels in their homes. Radon is measured in units called “becquerels per cubic meter”. The most popular radon detectors are the charcoal canister, the electrets and the alpha track detector. These devices are exposed to the air in a home for a specified period of time, and then sent to a laboratory for analysis. There are other techniques for testing radon levels, but they require a trained operator and are more expensive. However, it is difficult to predict the level in any one home. If you are concerned about exposure to radon gas in your home, you might consider testing the level to see if it exceeds Canada’s guideline for exposure to radon in indoor air. The guideline, which was updated in 2007, recommends that:

Remedial measures be taken in a dwelling whenever the average annual radon concentration in the normal occupancy area exceeds 200 becquerels per cubic meter.

The higher the radon concentration, the sooner remedial measures should be taken.

When remedial action is taken, the radon level should be reduced to a value as low as practicable (i.e., reduced as much as possible using methods that are cost-effective).

The construction of new dwellings should employ techniques that will minimize radon entry and will facilitate post-construction radon removal, should this subsequently prove necessary.

Because there is some risk at any level, homeowners may want to reduce their exposure to radon, regardless of levels tested. Some of the steps you can take to reduce radon levels in your home include:

Renovating existing basement floors, particularly earth floors.

Sealing cracks and openings in walls and floors, and around pipes and drains.

Ventilating the sub-floor of basement floors. According to Health Canada, it has taken a number of steps to protect Canadians from the potential dangers of radon gas. These include evaluating measurement techniques, conducting research into effects of radon exposure and developing guidelines. Health Canada’s guideline for exposure to radon are based on the best available scientific evidence of health risk, so they claim. In 1988, a guideline of 800 becquerels per cubic metre was established in Canada. After considering new evidence about radon and the risk of lung cancer, Health Canada worked in partnership with the provinces and territories to develop a proposed new guideline of 200 becquerels per cubic metre, which is four times more stringent than the previous one. (Notice that Health Canada had known since 1988 that people could get lung cancer through exposure to Radon gas, and had attributed these lung cancer cases to tobacco users or second-hand smoke.) Following a series of consultations with interested stakeholders and the general public, the new guideline was finalized in June 2007. Health Canada claims to have worked with the provinces and territories to help raise awareness about Radon among homeowners and assist them in finding solutions to lower the levels of radon in their homes. My question is, why had not Health Canada informed doctors about this? If they were told about Radon gas, then even the doctors were in on this little conspiracy to blame all cases of lung cancer to tobacco users or second-hand smoke. Given what is known now, maby the Tobacco industry should re-open some of those lung cancer cases they had paid out millions upon millions of dollars based upon fraudulent, exaggerated claims by those who had been directly involved in this Anti-smoking conspiracy.

Minimize the radon level in your home! Anti-smokers and doctors have attributed all of the lung cancer deaths in Canada to smoking tobacco which were actually caused by radon, auto exhaust fumes, along with industrial pollution. These are preventable to a large degree if the proper steps are taken when people are aware of the true facts. Reducing radon in your home by 90 percent will reduce the risk to your family getting lung cancer by at least 80 percent. Use products which is a penetrating concrete sealer against Radon which retards the entry of Radon gas from mitigation into the home is simple and affordable for homeowners.

It has long been known that plastic containers such as those found in the large water and soda bottles, plastic food containers, plastic cups and other common products used everyday by people can cause cancer in people. Studies had been found on mice and other animals that were exposed to the chemical bisphenol A which is the main ingredient in polycarbonate plastic, is also found in thousands of consumer products including office water jugs, food and drink packaging. It was found that Bisphenol A, leaches out in those plastic containers containing food and various liquids, such as water bottles, milk and soda pop, and have shown the development of cancer, reproductive problems, type 2 diabetes and learning development disorders. An expert panel of the U.S. National Toxicology Program had concluded that bisphenol A exposure to fetuses and to children could result in behavioural and nervous system impacts. Environmental Defence said it found 39 chemicals contaminating people it tested as part of its national Toxic Nation campaign. Ontario's political leaders, McGuinty, PC Leader John Tory and NDP Leader Howard Hampton was found to have bisphenol A in their bodies when tested by the group. In an interview with Dr. John Myers, CEO of Environmental Health Sciences in Virginia, by the Canadian Press (CP), Myers admitted that there was little scientific evidence to date, on what exactly Bisphenol A, does to humans. Health Canada spokeswoman Joey Rathwell told the CP the ministry plans to have a report on the chemical completed by May 2008.

Now for the latest news against people who smoke. The anti-smoking fight is going global, headed by the UN, (New World Order). Energized advocates are pooling their efforts into an ambitious long-term push to curb smoking in the wealthy nations where it has flourished and to keep it from catching on in the developing nations where it hasn't. There's more to this than pronouncements and demonstrations: There's education, legislation, and a new heap of litigation. Before long, tobacco opponents should even have a World Health Organization-sanctioned global treaty, the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC)--an agreement that promises to influence legislation around the world. The FCTC could make it easier for governments to implement tobacco controls; it could also put in place a system to monitor compliance. Such steps could prevent hundreds of millions of people from picking up the habit. NOTE; Take great heed on that wording.... "they could also put in place a system to monitor compliance". That is "BIG BROTHER" speaking right there! WATCH OUT!

Another push against tobacco users is coming from business firms who want to prohibit cigarette use, even off the job. People have the right to smoke off the job, companies have no right to tell people they will loose their jobs because they smoke at home. Yet these American firms nevertheless who want to prohibit cigarette use, even off the job. Workers are angry, and rightly so, on those firms who are trying to ban smoking from their employees, even at the employees home. Now these firms are dictating to their employees how they should live their lives.

• Pro Advocates against tobacco users say that smokers contribute to higher health care costs. tobacco users, they say, are less productive than nonsmokers. A nonsmoking workplace is a healthier environment for all employees.

• Critics say employers are invading the privacy of their employees by regulating whether they smoke outside the workplace. Conducting random illegal drug tests is one thing, but smoking is legal. These firms are conductingtheir their own test to find out if an employee is smoking cigaretts, even off the job. These employers have a policy to pass over a person who smokes, even when he or she is the best for the job.

• Weyco, Inc. launched a strict no-smoking policy Jan. 1. Employees are subject to random breath tests to determine if they used tobacco during or after work hours. If employees test positive, they can be fired.

• Starting this month, Kalamazoo Valley Community College no longer hires tobacco users full time.

Michagan firms prohibit cigarette use, even off the job, angering privacy advocates. Tobacco users are already hard hit by high taxes on cigarettes and limits on places to smoke. Tobacco users in Michigan now face moves by some employers to either refuse to hire them, or in one case, to fire those who won't quit. The decision by Okemos-based Weyco Inc. to terminate workers drew national attention Wednesday and immediately raised the issues of what other personal behaviors employers may seek to limit, even outside the workplace. "The problem I have is that tobacco users already pay a lot of taxes, so we are already paying enough for this indulgence," said Julie McAllister, 44, of Northville. "A lot of people have quit and have gained weight because of that. So what's next, a policy that says you can't hire overweight people?" The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan has decided not to challenge the move by Weyco, a medical benefits administrator, because there is no state law prohibiting employers from controlling behavior outside the workplace, said ACLU spokeswoman Wendy Wagenheim. "At least two dozen other states prevent lifestyle discrimination, and that's possible in Michigan as well if people are concerned about their privacy, as well they should be," she said. "To think a company is trying to control off-site behavior when it doesn't affect their job will really bring people out in real numbers to address what's happening to privacy in this country." Linda Goldberg, a lawyer with the Miller Canfield law firm in Ann Arbor, said state and federal civil rights laws prevent discrimination based on age, race, color, gender, marital status, national origin, weight, height and religion. "An employer is free to hire on the basis of what it considers is desirable traits, skills, characteristics and so forth, provided they don't violate the law," Goldberg said. The Triangle Foundation, a nonprofit group that works on behalf of gay, bisexual and transgendered individuals, has pushed for 10 years to add sexual orientation to the list of traits that cannot be used against individuals applying for employment. "This simply draws a parallel to the very real reasons that people can lose their job (for issues) that have nothing to do with the merits of their work," said Jeff Montgomery, the group's executive director.

The thousands of people who do smoke, and those who believe this is an unjust policy, can boycott such firms and not buy their products or use their services that they offer. I would strongly suggest that all tobacco users right across Canada do not take this kind of discrimination from these Anti-Smoker groups lightly. Now is the time to stand up and challenge these morons. Do not allow these people to discriminate and infringe upon your choice of lifestyle. For if we do not take a stand now and allow this kind of discrimination and infringements upon us, other people may one day be next on the hit list for some other cause and end up loosing some of their rights and freedoms which they presently enjoy today. Think about it!

I remember Premier McGuinty's first act when he became the Liberal Provincial Government of Ontario, he raised the tax on cigarettes and tobacco products. What an underhanded, cheap shot that was. The Government is already gouging people who smoke with these unfair tax hikes, for that moron to hike the tobacco tax again. And the Government complains that the electric and oil industries are gouging the public? They had better look into their own mirror before they accuse others what they themselves are doing. It was for that reason I stopped voting for that man. I remember when the Government had enacted that "Smoke Free Places Act" during the time I had been volunteering to help people in Old Age Homes. They were forcing elderly people in their 70's and 90 years of age to smoke outside in -20 to -40 degree temperatures during the winter months. Which they are still doing now, by the way. How cruel and inhumane these damn Christian do-gooders are who attack the very dignity of these elderly people with the pretext that they are doing this for their own good! That is the last thing these elderly people need at this stage in their life is to have to deal with any unnecessary kind of anxiety, stress or aggravation. They should let these elderly people alone and let them enjoy their smokes in peace and contentment during their last few years of their lives. Besides elderly people, thousands of people who are tobacco users , are now forced by these Anti-smoking morons to go outside, even in freezing tempatures during the winter months in order to have a cigarette. Business establishments such as a resturants or bars can no longer allow their patrons who are tobacco users to come in and enjoy a smoke in comfort. If you believe this is unjust, then speak out! Do not let these Anti-smoking morons get away with it. Do something about it. Tobacco users are being treated now like they are Lepers! It's not that much different then how ignorant people had at one time had treated people who were lepers way back in ancient history! There is no doubt that some people who smoke, do so excessively. I am talking about the chain-smoker. I have seen chain smokers light up a cigarette, and before they are done with that cigarette, light up another. Common sense alone will tell you, excessive smoking in that fashion, will cause problems to one's health. But smoking in moderation, will not. That is the point I want to stress here. Doing most anything excessively, is not a good thing to do. The same people who are involved in the Anti-Smoking Lobby groups are also behind or directly involved with the Anti-Fat campaigns people are starting to see now on TV and hear on the radio. What is next? We already have Anti-Gay, Anti-Smoking, Anti-Fat Lobby groups. Maby they will next have an Anti-tall or Anti-small people Lobby groups just to keep them busy and employed, Huh? Next time you hear someone from one of those Anti-Gay, (See page 7; Doing Away with Canada's Bill of Rights), Anti-Smoking, Anti-Fat or Anti-Christ lobby groups, tell them where they can stick it!