Suzanne Humphries on tobacco: what the evidence says · JRE #2294
SUBJECT: TOBACCO
Not a true/false call. Every claim is logged with its sources; read the exhibits below.
people were smoking natural cigarettes, it was almost unheard of for them to develop lung cancer with a natural tobacco.
What the evidence says 01 / RECORD
The claim that natural, additive-free tobacco is almost never linked to lung cancer is not supported by the evidence. The main lung carcinogens in tobacco, tobacco-specific nitrosamines such as NNK and NNN plus polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, form from tobacco's own alkaloids during curing and from combustion itself, not from added chemicals, so removing additives does not remove the carcinogens (PMC review: cigarette smoke contains 73 compounds carcinogenic to animals or humans, with NNK and PAHs reproducibly inducing lung tumors). A peer-reviewed biomarker study of Natural American Spirit smokers, who use additive-free tobacco, found their urinary NNAL and NNN, although lower than other brands, were still at levels associated with increased lung and esophageal cancer risk. There is no epidemiological evidence that smoking additive-free or historical natural tobacco carries negligible lung cancer risk; the carcinogenic hazard comes from burning tobacco, regardless of whether it is natural.