If we had a cure for lung cancer, would you smoke?

Absolutely not. If we had a cure for lung cancer, I would absolutely never put my health and life at risk by smoking cigarettes. Smoking is one of the leading causes of lung cancer, and having access to a cure would not change that fact; it would simply give patients greater hope of surviving if they should ever contract the disease.

Aside from the clear link between smoking and lung cancer, there are also numerous other long-term health effects associated with tobacco use. Studies have shown that smokers are up to 30 times more likely to develop or die from lung cancer than non-smokers—a risk factor that no one should be willing to accept given how treatable and manageable it could potentially be with an effective cure in hand. Other common adverse effects include stroke, heart attack, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD), emphysema, coronary heart disease (CHD), type 2 diabetes, premature aging and wrinkling of skin due to reduced blood flow caused by nicotine blocking oxygenation of cells in the body, fertility complications in both men and women during pregnancy such as low birthweight babies or ectopic pregnancies—the list goes on!

Smoking poses an immense threat not only to our own physical wellbeing but also the wellbeing of those around us who may be exposed to secondhand smoke without their consent or knowledge. The dangers posed are so great that even with a readily available treatment for any potential consequences related directly or indirectly to smoking, I still wouldn't take this foolish gamble on my health.