Example interesting excavations
Nowhere in the scientific medical literature you will not find evidence that smoking during pregnancy kill the fetus. It is not. All studies show something else: "Smoking during pregnancy can lead to conditions that may lead to the development of other states, which in turn can complicate pregnancy, which sometimes leads to fetal abnormality or death." That such things.
There is nothing good in smoking during pregnancy is not. This is a risk, but almost 100% of disposable itself. I would not advise anyone and I do not advise to smoke, but also the harm of smoking for pregnant women, say the words of Mark Twain, "slightly exaggerated." That is: if you plan pregnancy and do not smoke - and then do not start! If you smoke - do not suffer and throw, if it is not easy for you. This part of you is the same as the character, appearance and so on. And it is unlikely it will be better without it.
Looking through old newspapers, ran into health arithmetic phenomenon that may seem interesting. Smoking, according to the figures - perhaps the most useful thing you can do in life. And I still can not find the error in the calculations.
It is seen from year to year are returned the same topic of conversation, for reasons of fear, admiration for idols. Well and husks. For example - article about the dangers of smoking.Hey! Even airplanes could smoke - now you blame for it and send terrorists at Guantanamo.
And quite maloprimechatelnaya article from provincial newspapers in Milwaukee
Article illustrates perfectly what pours on us year after year:
Blah blah, smoking is harmful, blah blah, next year from lung cancer almost exclusively associated with smoking, 91,000 people die a little eloquent comparisons ...
Stop. Big red stop-cock, cold to the touch.
Something in these figures looks suspicious. Begin to dig. See: in 1975 the U.S. population was 215,465,255 people. Of them, for example, died of lung cancer - 81,000. Let the earth they rest in peace. Open recent data. The last available report CDC - 2007. From lung cancer this year 158.683 people died. U.S. population at that time was 301,621,157
Proportion does not converge. Believe. In 1975:
died of lung cancer - 81,000
lived all - 215,465,255
Mortality in bringing people to 100K - (81.000 / 215,465,255) * 100.000 = 37.9672869543 (about 38 people per one hundred thousand)
In 2007:
died of lung cancer - 158.683
lived all - 301,621,157
Mortality in bringing people to 100K - (158.683 / 301,621,157) * 100.000 = 52.6100362383 (approximately 53 persons per hundred thousand).
Lung cancer mortality increased by 40%. At the same time the percentage of smokers has dropped to 20% instead of 40% in the seventies.
If you get away from everything that we think we know, it turns out that the reduction of some factor X, whose strength was equal to 0.4 (40%) to 0.2 (20%) led to the fact that the factor L (mortality by RL) increased by 1.4 times. I hope you understand?
I love paradoxes and doubt in the obvious and conventional. But the results are somewhat embarassing, agree. Like many others, I am often wrong. We must find and neutralize a possible error. I would be grateful to readers if they find it, because I believe it is in this audience. For my part I will explain what will be able to drop immediately.
Possible errors and denials
Incorrect data. Verified the correctness of input digits according to the CDC and the U.S. national census. America - very bureaucratic country, the country of filling forms and the birds in the boxes. Technique of assigning the cause of death in the section of lung cancer has not changed. That's why I'm taking the U.S. data, they are very accurate and are available for many years. Bottom line - no error.