I know someone who said that they had lung cancer because her mom was exposed to second hand smoke while she was pregnant with her. I believe her but is it possible?
Cancer - 11 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
It's possible, but it's very rare. When you're pregnant stay away from smoke at all costs, but it won't cause your baby to have lung cancer.
2 :
Yes anyone is capable of getting second hand cancer, even babies=(
3 :
Not in the womb. I mean they arent even breathing so how could it get in there? It's still kinda possible though. I guess you could get cancer anywhere from second hand smoke, even in the womb?
4 :
Yes, it is very possible. Second hand smoke is worse than first hand smoke.
5 :
I for you to get cancer, I think you need to be exposed to it for a very long time non-stop/years. It's rare but it can happen.
6 :
Well a baby still in the womb can become addicted to cigarettes and thus has more probabilities of smoking later on in life thus more probabilities of develloping lung cancer. Lung cancer during pregnancy is rare all though the number have increased in recent years. Please get checked for lung cancer because having lung cancer when carying a child is considered a high risk pregnancy. Yes in extreme cases the baby could devellop cancer often found in infant but cancer is much rarer among the young ! Toxins from a mother can be given top the feotus/child/baby.
7 :
I wouldn't say impossible but, this person would have a time trying to prove it. The possibility is there the probability is not, it's a catch 22 situation.
8 :
She's full of it! There are many things beside smoking that cause lung cancer ... nobody seems to want to admit that . It would take years and years of constant exposure to second hand smoke to get cancer . Most smokers who die from smoking related illnesses don't ever get lung cancer. Tobacco smoke is not good for anyone but this ignorant paranoia about it is ridiculous.
9 :
Yes it is more than possible. Actually the smoke emitted from the cigars or cigarettes possesses many more activated chemicals, most of which are carcinogens (around 160 more - I can't recall the exact figure), than the actual smoker lets in, thus leading to lung cancer. This works because the smoker is inhaling smoke directly from the source, where as the smoke is let into the air many more chemicals are activated. For that reason, second-hand smoking ranks as one of the leading causes of lung cancer. Now in the case you presented where the mum was exposed to second-hand smoke while pregnant, the mum would have to have been constantly exposed to the smoke. However, being exposed a few random times to the smoke causes no effective harm. In terms of pregnancy, what the mum is exposed to the baby is as well. If the mum is constantly inhaling these chemicals and carcinogens it definitely isn't good for the baby. The baby she is carrying actually has a higher chance of getting harmed by the smoke than the mum since his/her lungs are much younger and much less developed. The development of the lungs is crucial and the smoke can definitely cause the baby to carry lung cancer since s/he was constantly exposed to a heavy amount of carcinogens. Inhaling the smoke can not only cause cancer but do much everlasting harm. The very, very harmful chemicals interferes in the development of the baby at a crucial stage and that can result in the baby being a midget, can result in retardation, asthma, constant wheezing and other everlasting effects.
10 :
I think your friend is laying blame to something that is very convenient to blame for cancer. That doesn't discount the disburbing account of having cancer, but sometimes it's more comfortable when you can blame something for it. It sounds kinda far-fetched to me. Many lung cancers had required years and even decades of smoking by the primary people to get infected. So she says her mom was exposed to second hand smoke, and it transferred to the genetic DNA of the fetus. I think it's quite a huge stretch. There's all kinds of chemicals we use daily, bathroom and kitchen cleansers that seemingly would cause genetic manipulation much easier than when a fetus is infected when mom smells some 2nd hand smoke. Even 2nd had smoke will take some time to cause any dangerous effects. It's not impossible, but it's not probably, which means the odds are against it. However, there is a case of asbestos poisoning of an older middle aged woman, but her only ONLY point of contact was when as a child, she washed her father's shirt from a single day's work in a nearby asbestos mine. So from a single day's exposure, it took 40 years to make a change in the woman's physical body to make her sick. It took long time, but it also only required a single contact. How long was the mother exposed to the smoke? Are we talking about working in an office where people smoked and she was employed for months and months? Then it's more possible that there might have been an effect carried over. Usually the results to babies are asthma, but i"ve never heard of receiving lung cancer because your mother breathed 2nd hand smoke.
11 :
Half of us wouldn't even be here if smoking killed babies like the no smoking campaigns would have you believe.
Read more discussions :
- What are the effects of large quantitys of morphin...
- What is the right kind of food for an advanced lun...
- Can you get lung cancer from one of your famliy me...
- My mother has lung cancer and her tumor marker cam...
- Why are some people so insensitive to people with ...
- What is the correct definition of lung cancer
- When you start smoking, how long will it take for ...
- Which would be a good topic to research on Lung Ca...
