[Bumpman]

I do agree with you in that you do have the right to live your own life as you please, because realistically people do need to be free enough to choose what they'd like to believe. On that note though I would make one very important point. I'm not talking about theory. I'm talking about fact. Carcinogens are fact. Their principal effects aren't challenged by any reputable scientific institution.

Despite that, I'm not actually bothered by smoking in practice, and I'm definitely not one of those people who brings this crap up whenever someone whips out a pack of matches. The reason I take issue with it is because ZachC claimed that smoking marijuana every day fitted in the context of a responsible lifestyle. I dispute that on the grounds of genetic evidence. Nothing else.

And lastly, I think everyone knows at least one person who's either smoked 60 a day and lived to be 100, or dropped dead for no reason at 20. No-one disputes that the presence of cancer in humans seems totally random and often strikes at people who have spent their lives trying to avoid it. However, there's more then enough evidence to persuade people at this stage that many (if not most) cancers are avoidable. Which, for the record, is not "one person's research". But rather has been (along with HIV), the most pressing issue facing the worldwide medical community in the last 35 years.

I'm not just focusing on this one issue because it's convenient to me. The real question is whether you prefer to leave the issue of smoking aside because it doesn't play well against your discomfort with pollution. I don't take issue with your personal choices. Only with your definition of responsibility as it relates to this.