On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 04:35:12 +0100, Janet > wrote:

>In article >, says...
>>
>> "Bruce" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Fri, 22 Sep 2017 06:18:54 -0700, "Cheri" >
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > wrote in message
>> . ..
>> >>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 21:48:05 -0400, jmcquown >
>> >>
>> >>>>Then again, there are plenty of people who never smoked who died of lung
>> >>>>cancer. Living is a dangerous business.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Jill
>> >>>
>> >>> I know three or four people, who smoked, and died of lung cancer. Are
>> >>> you busy trying to justify smoking?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>I know two who died of lung cancer who never smoked, but did work in the
>> >>shipyards during the war. I see nothing in Jill's post that is *trying to
>> >>justify smoking* she's just stating a fact.
>> >
>> > There aren't "plenty" of non smokers who die of lung cancer. There is
>> > a small number of them. And there is a much bigger number of smokers
>> > that die of it.
>>
>>
>> That is absolutely not true, there are many who die of lung cancer from
>> other causes, not as many as smokers, but still many/plenty.
>>
>> Cheri
>
>
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3170525/
>
> " Approximately 10 ? 15% of all lung cancers arise in never smokers,
>making lung cancer in never smokers one of the leading causes of cancer-
>related mortality."

15% versus 85%. Thanks for proving my point.