1992 E.P.A.
Report By the Numbers

Yes, Let's
Look at Those Inhalation Anthrax Victims

3,000 lung cancer deaths annually in the U.S. nonsmokers."

The relative risk that they use is 1.19

The report was published in 1992. Most of the work was done in
1991, and

the latest figures that they would have had to work from were from
1990.

Checking the figures:

Smoking status rates (from NHSDA, 1990)

Male Female

Current smokers
28.4% 22.8%

Former smokers
30.3% 19.5%

Never smokers
41.3% 57.7%

Population (from U.S. Census, 1990)

94,755,000 102,292,000

Calculate numbers

Current smokers 26,910,420 23,322,576

Former smokers 28,710,765 19,946,940

Never smokers 39,133,815
59,022,484

Lung cancer deaths (Age >= 35, 1990, from CDC)

91,685 52,064

Relative risks for lung cancer (From CDC SAMMEC II)

Current Smokers
22.4 11.9

Former Smokers
9.4 4.7

Never Smokers
1.0 1.0

The fundamental equation for calculating lung cancer deaths from risks is:

NumDeaths = BaseRate * NumNeverSmokers +

BaseRate * RelativeRisk(Former) * NumFormerSmokers +

BaseRate * RelativeRisk(Current) * NumCurrentSmokers

We have everything for the above equation except the base rate.

Manipulating the equation algebraically results in:

BaseRate = NumDeaths /

(NumNeverSmokers
+

RelativeRisk(Former) * NumFormerSmokers +

RelativeRisk(Current) * NumCurrentSmokers)

Filling in the figures and calculating results in:

Base Rate 0.000100553 0.000120991

We can now calculate the expected number of lung cancer deaths by gender
and

smoking status

Male Female

Current smokers
60,613 33,580

Former smokers
27,137 11,343

Never smokers
3,935 7,141

In the EPA's claim, does "non-smoker" mean "never-smoker" or "never-smoker

AND former smoker".

First, we can calculate the "new" lung cancer death base rate by the

equation:

EPABaseRate = (Lung Cancer Deaths - 3000) / Total population.

If "non-smoker" means "never-smoker", then that rate becomes:

EPABaseRate = ((3,935+7,141)-3000) / (39,133,815+59,022,484)

= 8,076 / 98,156,299

= 0.00008227694

Since:

Lung Cancer Deaths = EPABaseRate * Unexposed Population +

EPABaseRate * Relative Risk * (Total Population -

Unexposed Population)

we can manipulate the equation to give us the Unexposed Population:

Unexposed population = (Lung Cancer Deaths - EPABaseRate * Relative
Risk *

Total Population)/

(EPABaseRate - EPABaseRate * Relative Risk)

for "non-smoker" meaning "never smoker", the unexposed population can
be

calculated to be:

Unexposed Population = ((3,935 + 7,141) - 0.000082276794 * 1.19 *

98,156,299)/

(0.000082276794 - 0.000082276794 * 1.19)

= (11,076 - 9610.44) / -0.000015632

= -93,753,838

Unfortunately for the EPA, a negative figure for the unexposed population
is

not physically possible. Therefore, "non-smoker" does NOT mean

"never-smoker" alone. It can only mean, therefore, "never-smoker"
+

"former-smoker". Doing the same calculations again, using "never-smoker"
+

"former-smoker" as "non-smoker" results in:

EPABaseRate = ((27,137 + 11,343 + 3,935 + 7,141) - 3000) /

(28,710,765 + 19,946,940 + 39,133,815 + 59,022,484)

= 46,556 / 146,814,004

= 0.0003171087

Unexposed population = ((27,137 + 11,343 + 3,935 + 7,141) - 0.0003171087*

1.19 * 146,814,004)/

(0.0003171087 - 0.0003171087 * 1.19)

= (49,556 - 55,401.64)/

(-0.000060250)

= -5845.64 / -0.000060250

= 97,023,071

meaning, of course, that 97,023,071 / 146,814,004 = 66.1% of the non-smoking

population is unexposed, leaving 33.9% of the non-smoking population
(or

49,790,933) exposed to ETS sufficiently to produce "measurable" results.

But now that we have the proportion exposed, we can calculate the base
rates

for each of those groups (never-smokers and former-smokers) by way
of the

formula:

Base Rate = Lung Cancer Deaths /

(Unexposed population +

Relative Risk * Exposed population)

For never-smokers, this works out to be:

Base Rate = (3,935 + 7,141) /

(66.1% * (39,133,815 + 59,022,484) +

1.19 * 33.9% * (39,133,815 + 59,022,484))

= 11,076 /

0.661 * 98,156,299 * 0.40341 * 98,156,299)

= 11,076 / 98,156,299
* (0.661 + 0.40341)

= 11,076 / (98,156,299
* 1.06441)

= 11,076 / 104,478,546.21859

= 0.00010601219

The expected number of lung cancer deaths for never-smokers, in an "ideal"

world (assuming that the model used is correct), where no never-smoker
was

exposed to ETS, would be:

0.00010601219 * 98,156,299 = 10,406

However, in that group, there were 11,076 lung cancer deaths, so we
can

assume (if the model is correct) that

11,076 - 10,406 = 670

lung cancer deaths of never-smokers due to the exposure to ETS annually.

The number of lung cancer deaths of former-smokers due to SHS would

therefore be

3000 - 670 = 2,330.

But hold on just one minute, here. The relative risk ratios used
by SAMMEC

II were derived from studies which accounted for ALL the lung cancer
deaths

in each of the three groupings - never-smoker, former-smoker and

current-smoker. Therefore, those 2,330 "additional" deaths of
former

smokers have already been counted.

So, what the EPA is really saying is that each year, 2,330 ex-smokers
die of

lung cancer, then are miraculously resurrected, only to die *again*
from

lung cancer.

The numbers have been reduced to the extent that basic

algebra is all that is required to understand them.

We welcome any critique pointing out where, mathematically, this has
gone wrong.

But what the EPA is really saying is that each year, 2,330 ex-smokers
die of

lung cancer, then are miraculously resurrected, only to die *again*
from

lung cancer. Hell, Christianity is based on the resurrection
of ONE man,

2000 years ago, yet here we have 2,330 resurrecting each and every
year.

**YES, LET'S LOOK
AT THOSE INHALATION ANTHRAX VICTIMS**

Excerpted from the NY Post, Sunday, November 11, 2001:

**CDC REPORT TELLS OF HER LAST DAYS**

*Kathy Nguyen's *[NYC victim]* final days were marked by fatigue
and massive bleeding in her chest as she heaved coughs and gasped through
an oxygen mask....*

*... Nguyen's death and all 10 inhalation cases are described in clinical
detail in a report hastily posted on the Internet on Friday by the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention...*

*The study revealed little conclusive evidence that succumbing to
inhalation anthrax can be tied to prior health conditions.*

*Age might play a role -- the median age was 56 for the 10 victims
-- while "none of the patients was a current or recent smoker," the report
said.*

Why on earth would there be any reason to consider smoking as a factor when what is being investigated is a bacteria? The health organizations will stop at no lengths to try to demonize smoking and insinuate it is at the root of all ills any chance they get whether it fits or not.

But since they brought it up, a member of the newsgroup alt.smokers decided to take a look at the ten (10) inhalation anthrax victims who have died and the role smoking might actually play:

Assuming that the sample is from the yuppie class (vector was business

mail), we can hypothesize an 18% proportion of smokers. This
can be seen as

a binomial experiment and the odds would be calculated as follows:

# smokers with

Anthrax out of

the 10 victims Probability

0 0.1374480313

1 0.3017151907

2 0.2980357372

3 0.1744599437

4 0.0670181491

5 0.0176535612

6 0.0032293100

7 0.0004050702

8 0.0000333442

9 0.0000016265

10 0.0000000357

Note that the probability of there being at least one current smoker
out of

that group is 1.0 minus the probability of their being no current smokers
in

the group, so the probability of there being at least one current smoker
in

that group is 0.8625519687.

However that is NOT what the report said. It did not say "no current

smokers" but "none of the patients was a current or recent smoker".

Generally speaking, ex-smokers exceed the number of current smokers,
but the

term "ex-smoker" includes even those who have quit for decades, and
these

would certainly not be classified as "recent" smokers.

So let's set the proportion of ex-smokers at the 18% to equal the proportion

of current smokers. Then let's classify half of those ex-smokers
as

"recent" smokers. That means that instead of 18%, the proportion
is 18% +

1/2 * 18% = 27%.

Using that proportion in the binomial formula, we get the following:

# "smokers" with

Anthrax out of

the 10 victims Probability

0 0.0429762583

1 0.1589532841

2 0.2645592331

3 0.2609351341

4 0.1688929464

5 0.0749607050

6 0.0231043269

7 0.0048831063

8 0.0006772801

9 0.0000556669

10 0.0000020589

Please note that the probability of having at least one "current or
recent

smoker" in this group of 10 jumps to 0.9570237417.

95.7%!!!! In other words, we are 95.7% confident that the results
seen were

NOT brought about by random chance alone. What do you know.
The

theory of cigarette tars capturing contagion before it has a chance
to work

on the body were correct, at least for anthrax.

In layman's terms, do you suppose there's a protective effect from smoking against inhalation anthrax?

***Analysis courtesy of David MacLean, member of alt.smokers newsgroup***