Studies in 1978/79

[mikeklumpp]

In 1978 I remember two independent studies of pipe smokers which both concluded that the average pipe smoker lived a year longer than the average non-smoker. One was University of Michigan and I believe the other was University of Wisconsin. Neither study was ratified by the USDA as they said it could be due to the disposition of the person drawn to the pipe not the pipe habit itself. I would love to lay my hands on those studies. Does anyone else remember them?

 

[ssjones]

The 1964 Surgeon Generals Report is where pipe smokers show a lower mortality than non-smokers, Chapter 8 has the mortality charts. You can download it from my Drop-Box

https://www.dropbox.com/s/stplibm9ovzu6ay/Surgeon_Gen_Report.pdf?dl=0
These two are summaries/updates and contain info about later tests.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/38o3mwrf10h4ter/Pipes_Smoking_Test_Results1964%20%26%201982.pdf?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vqz7y6tddecjznw/Pipe_Smoking_Health.pdf?dl=0

 

[jitterbugdude]

And the 1997 "Monograph No. 9" published by the U.S. Gov't clearly shows that people that smoke 2 cigars a day live longer than non-smokers.
The 1964 SG's Report on smoking is interesting. IIRC the data showed that English pipe smokers lived longer than non-smokers, Americans lived the same and Canadians lived slightly less longer. This got me to thinking... did the English smokers live longer because England still had their purity laws in effect? In other words.. is pure tobacco (with some herbs and scents added) better for you than tobacco with casings/sauces and toppings?

 

[mawnansmiff]

Perhaps the reason the purity laws were dropped was to level the playing field so we all died at the same age :rofl:
Regards,
Jay.

 

[mso489]

I bet the research funding for that topic was dropped like a lead balloon. One study does not a conclusion make. Of course it could be studied again. But no one sees a career boost in that. Good science is real science, that doesn't anticipate the result, in design nor analysis of data. But getting funding for specific subjects, ah there's the rub. It's an interesting result objectively.

 

[mikeklumpp]

there were two independent studies but I agree mso funding is the key - the purse controls the evidence in too many studies - ssjones - thanks - I will follow the trail -