/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8231948

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/causes-of-cancer/smoking-and-cancer/smoking-facts-and-evidence#smoking_facts0

It's not fragile at all. 97% of scientists agree that climate change is happening and is a real issue. The idea that smoking is bad for health is unanimously accepted so much that cigarette companies have to plaster it all over packages. Why should we trust some random guy linking the few cherrypicked studies he found when the entire scientific community, the government, corporations that sell this shit, and any evidence you can find in the real world acknowledge that it's a problem? My grandfather smoked all his life and died 2 years ago because of lung cancer. It's not a meme, it's been documented and proven time and time again.

Who would benefit from targeted "smear campaign" against smoking? Certainly not the government or corporations since they get less revenue and tax income with more regulation and less sales of tobacco.

>It was a popular idea that smoking was harmless and a nice focus boost
Good thing science evolves. At one point, people thought the Earth was flat and/or the center of the Universe, that eating junk isn't bad for your health, etc.

>constantly coming up with information to suit their narrative
You mean adding more scientific evidence when it comes up, just like you try to do with all your links?

>just the U.S., Nazi Germany, the U.K.
I live in Canada, and it's a well-known fact. It also is in Europe, Australia, and most likely other countries.

>Nazi Germany
>DDAAAAA NAZIIIIS
Cuckservatives are pathetic. Then you talk about "appeals to emotion".

Please tell me this is a troll. If it's not libtards denying that there are differences between the sexes and races, it's cuckservatives denying common knowledge like smoking being bad. This shit is like the flat-earthers on /x/.