I heard a clip from him announcing that he had lung cancer. He said that he quit smoking 20 years ago but had taken it up again after 9/11 because he was "weak." As of yet I don't believe that he is sermonizing about this.
Posts: 115 | Location: San Francisco, CA, USA | Registered: Tue October 24 2000
Don't worry, he doesn't have to. That'll be taken care of by the rest of the media & the Taliban-he's the new poster boy, and Gerald Macreany (sp?-played "Major Dad")is the back-up man. Larry "pencil-neck geek" King (hate that no-talent hunchback) even had Tammy Faye Baker on as more backup. Glad to see they both survived, though. The ONLY reason you're not catching more of it yet is the fact that we now have 24-hr. Pope TV (just as we had 24-hr. Teri Schiavo TV before that, and 24-hr. Peterson trial TV before...well, you get the idea). But just wait until that starts to slowly fade....
The ONLY reason you're not catching more of it yet is the fact that we now have 24-hr. Pope TV (just as we had 24-hr. Teri Schiavo TV before that, and 24-hr. Peterson trial TV before...well, you get the idea). But just wait until that starts to slowly fade....
You forgot that we'll probably still have 24hr Michael Jackson TV after that to pre-empt the antis sermonizing. Who knows, maybe Jennings will pull through and live on for enough time that they won't say his death is premature - which we know is impossible, he smoked therefore it wouldn't matter if he dies at 100.
Posts: 598 | Location: VA | Registered: Sun September 26 2004
I won't be surprised if he's taken off the air soon(if it hasn't already happened, I dunno). When he made that announcement about his own lung cancer, he voice sounded in bad shape and he was kinda pale. They say he has Stage 3 Lung Cancer, so he'll have to go through Chemo, and Stage 3 and 4 Lung Cancer's have a VERY low survival rate, and those who do survive it are usually expected to die soon anyway.
what ever happened to that spiel about 8 years after quitting smoking your lungs regenerate themselves to healthy and pink again? just anti's lying propoganda to get smokers to quit? perhaps if the truth were out"once you smoke your lungs are screwed no matter what" no one would quit!
I walked a mile with pleasure, she chattered all the way, But left me none the wiser For all she had to say.
I walked a mile with Sorrow And ne'er a word said she; But oh, the things I learned from her When sorrow walked with me!
You may be right. The fact is that roughly 50% of diagnosed lung cancer cases are in EX-smokers, some of whom had quit longer than Peter Jennings. Then there are about 15% in never-smokers.
Part of the problem is the way the words "smoker" and "ex-smoker" are defined by the CDC. A "smoker" is anyone who has smoked more than 100 cigarettes in his/her life and is currently smoking; and "ex-smoker" is anyone who has smoked at least 100 cigarettes in his/her life and has not smoked for at least a year. With such a broad definition of ex-smoker, this would include people who during their college years had roughly 5 packs of cigarettes in four years and then never smoked again as well as people who had chain-smoked for forty years and then quit for 10.
1. If you quit smoking 20 years ago but died if lung cancer, smoking killed you. 2. If you quit smoking 5 years ago but died of causes other than lung cancer, then, quitting smoking saved you from dying of lung cancer. 3. If you die of lung cancer at age 85 after smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day, you are a tragic victim of smoking. 4. If you die of lung cancer at age 85 after smoking 5 cigarettes a day, but quit smoking 30 years ago, you are a tragic victim of smoking. 5. If you die of lung cancer at age 85 but have never smoked in your life, you are a tragic victim of secondhand smoke.
Posts: 31 | Location: Parker, CO | Registered: Fri March 25 2005
John Wayne and Yul Brenner_ What other risk factors did they have? Lets see- They were both over 70 when they died? I think John Wayne was 72- not so sure about Brenner. If we were to implicate smoking, its worth noting that they both smoked 4-5 packs a day of non-filtered. I wonder how far downwind of Los Alomos that Wayne was when he was doing all those westerns. I remember reading that Yul Brenner was of Gypsy origins (inbreeding). What about asbestos? Ah heck- never mind doing anything that complicates matters. It was smoking period. Discussion over. Health Nazis suck- period. Scott
John Wayne spent a lot of time in southwest Utah in an area that was used extensively for western movies. A hundred miles southwest of the movie locations was the testing grounds for the atomic and hydrogen bombs. Those were the days when the tests were above ground. The city of St. George Utah was directly in the path of prevailing winds and it is documented that there are a very large number of residents who came down with cancers that have been attributed to the bomb testing. I read somewhere that John Wayne blamed the tests for his cancer but I don't know whether that's true or not.
Posts: 115 | Location: San Francisco, CA, USA | Registered: Tue October 24 2000
Peter Jennings covered the oil fires during the 1st Gulf War. These burned with heavy smoke for several days, who knows what other chemicals he may have been exposed to in a war zone? Also, he lived in NYC for many years and there is a correlation between living in urban areas (more air pollution) and an increaed risk for lung cancer. Yet nobody has mentioned these as contributing factors, just his smoking.
Posts: 598 | Location: VA | Registered: Sun September 26 2004
Don't you love corporate news' hardline dedication to bringing their viewers the truth?
(I read some discussions you all had with niconazi about his being suboptimal as a conversationist, and it was brought up that he was the new kid. I assume I'm the new new kid so I would just like to clarify: I'm half poking fun at myself with the question above so please don't give in to the impulse to tell me I'm an anti-business fool. I'm not that much of a babe. (wonderful word, if I may say so). )
The short answer is "yes." No one knows what causes cancer of any kind. Since anywhere from 15 to 20% of lung cancer cases occur in never-smokers, and something like 50% occur in ex-smokers, some of whom have not smoked in many, many years, clearly other things are involved.
I have a collection of articles about lung cancer sufferers who have never smoked and whose families didn't smoke. Some are young--in their 20s and 30s. One was even a professional female basketball player, who was in top physical condition.
The only person I've known personally who got lung cancer was a nun, who not only never in her life smoked, but who was never around tobacco smoke most of her life (wasn't exactly hangin' out in bars).
