Re: Radon 'Causes 9% of Lung Cancer Deaths'

[dckosloff@firstenergycorp.com]

The "science" of "never-smokers" is exposed here as absolutely non-science.

Using non-science as part of science results in nonsense.



The 100 cigarette concept is clearly arbitrary with no scientific or any

other basis.  I am 57 years old and I smoked a bit from when I was about 14

until I was about 18.  That was mostly filtered cigarettes, but also a few

non-filtered cigarettes and many cigars.   I have also smoked about 5

cigarettes in the last ten years.  I am not unique.  Did I smoke 99

cigarettes (equivalent) or 101 cigarettes (equivalent)?  I certainly don't

know.  Yet, when I get lung cancer, some "scientist" will classify me as a

"smoker" or a "never smoker".  Besides what if I smoked 99 cigarettes three

months ago instead or 100 cigarettes twenty years ago instead of 100

cigarettes between the ages of 14 and 18?  Also, what if a person never

smoked cigarettes but smoked 60 joints when they were between 17 and 23?

That person would be classified as a "never-smoker".  Clearly absurd,

especially since I used to clean parts regularly with gasoline and was

exposed to asbestos and worked in a coal liquefaction facilty with a potent

solvent.



The information from BBC is valuable, but as long as it is linked with the

"never-smoker" concept, it is horribly degraded.



Don Kosloff

Perry OH









                      LancerGT@AOL.COM

                      Sent by:                      To:       radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

                      owner-radsafe@list.van        cc:

                      derbilt.edu                   Subject:  Re: Radon 'Causes 9% of Lung Cancer Deaths'





                      12/22/2004 09:40 AM

                      Please respond to

                      LancerGT













    Perhaps this is a little off thread here, but I have read recently,

several reports detailing the impressive positve theraputic results for

small molecule inhibitors, (like Iressa and Erbitux), against non-small

cell lung cancers (NSCLC) in never-smokers, who have a mutation of the gene

epidermial growth factor receptor (EGFR) - causing its' overexpression.

This is about 10% of NSCLC patients whose tumors carry a set of

heterozygous mutations in the EGFR tyrosine kinase domain which correlates

with clinical responsiveness.



Is there any data available on patients with NSCLC possessing overexpressed

EGFR and those whose cancers can be Rn exposure related amongst

never-smokers? Is it possible  that there is more than a casual link -

either positively or negatively correlated between EGFR overexpression in

never-smokers and Rn exposure?



Just hoping to throw in something new into the discussion and to troll for

some insights. Maybe its a little slow around here the week before

Christmas





Best Regards,

David Lawrence



Lifted from the BBC



TUESDAY, Aug. 24 (HealthDayNews) - A genetic mutation can leave some people

vulnerable to lung cancer even if they never smoked, a new study finds.





<SNIP>





"We think that never-smokers may have a distinct form of lung cancer

compared with 90 percent of lung cancers associated with smoking," said

lead author Dr. William Pao, a research fellow at the center.





<SNIP>





Never-smokers are described in this study as people who have smoked fewer

than 100 cigarettes in their life.





<SNIP>





Copyright © 2004 ScoutNews LLC. All rights reserved





















-----------------------------------------

The information contained in this message is intended only for the personal

and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this

message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for

delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you

have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination,

distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you

have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately,

and delete the original message.