McDonalds maaltijd net zo ‘gevaarlijk’ als 30 minuten meeroken

Kritische anti-roken onderzoeker Dr. Michael Siegel zet op zijn weblog de anti-rokenorganisaties weer eens een keer voor schut door hun te confronteren met een nieuw onderzoek naar de ‘gevaren’ van eten bij McDonalds.


De anti-rokenorganisaties (daarin gevolgd door naieve figuren als minister Ab Klink en zijn ambtenaren) claimen al tijden dat 30 minuten meeroken grote gevolgen voor de gezondheid heeft:



  • Verharding van de slagaders
  • Artherosclerose
  • Hart- en vaatziekten
  • Hartaanvallen
  • Acuut doodvallen

Siegel, die deze claims al lange tijd bestrijdt (“het zijn normale, kortstondige en onschuldige reacties van het lichaam”), verwijst in zijn laatste weblog naar een nieuw onderzoek dat is gedaan naar eten bij McDonalds. Daarin werden zelfs de ‘gezonde’ maaltijden meegenomen, die geen uitzondering op de conclusie vormden: er is na het eten van zo’n maaltijd eenzelfde effect aan de bloedbanen te meten als dat gebruikt wordt om deze meerokenclaims te rechtvaardigen.


Begging the question of why someone would go to McDonalds to order a salad, fruit, yogurt, and orange juice in the first place, this study has very important implications for the widespread claims that anti-smoking groups are making about the acute cardiovascular effects of secondhand smoke.

The study casts into serious doubt the widespread claims of anti-smoking groups that 30 minutes of secondhand smoke exposure causes hardening of the arteries, atherosclerosis, heart disease, decreased coronary artery blood flow, strokes, heart attacks, and death. These claims are based largely on the Otsuka et al. study, which showed that brief secondhand smoke exposure causes endothelial dysfunction – as measured by a reduction in coronary endothelial-dependent flow-mediated dilatation – in healthy nonsmokers.

Here, however, we see that simply eating a single high-fat meal – even a seemingly healthy one – also causes endothelial dysfunction and to same extent as a brief exposure to secondhand smoke. Since it would be absurd to claim that eating a single high-fat meal causes hardening of the arteries, atherosclerosis, heart disease, decreased coronary artery blood flow, strokes, heart attacks, and death, it is equally absurd to make the same claims for a single, brief secondhand smoke exposure.

What these studies – both of them – demonstrate is that there is a plausible mechanism by which chronic exposure to high fat meals and secondhand smoke can lead to the development of atherosclerosis and eventually – to heart disease. But clearly, the process does not occur immediately.

Moreover, while it may be technically true that a brief exposure to secondhand smoke could hypothetically trigger a heart attack in someone with severe existing coronary artery disease due to its acute effects on endothelial dysfunction, the same can be said with respect to eating a high-fat meal. But you don’t hear health groups going around warning people that eating a high-fat meal can trigger a fatal heart attack.

The point is this: if someone has such severe coronary artery disease that a heart attack can be triggered by an acute impairment of endothelial dysfunction due to a brief secondhand smoke exposure, then such a cardiac event can also be triggered by eating a high-fat meal. We are talking about a very specific situation, so the generalized claims being made by anti-smoking groups that 30 minutes of secondhand smoke triggers heart attacks are simply not supported by the science.

The rest of the story is that the “30 minute claims” being made by anti-smoking groups represent the most shoddy science and they have no place in the tobacco control movement if the movement wishes to maintain any sense of scientific integrity.

Of course, if the movement doesn’t care about scientific integrity any more, then retaining these 30-minute claims is a great idea, because it makes for a more sensational communication and will falsely appeal to the public’s emotions.

In other words, in making these 30-minute claims, anti-smoking groups are essentially borrowing a classic tobacco industry technique.



  1. New Study Shows McDonalds Meal Causes Same Degree of Endothelial Dysfunction as Brief Tobacco Smoke Exposure; Anti-Smoking Groups’ Claims are Flawed
  2. Jacob Sullum over dit onderzoek

Geef een antwoord

Het e-mailadres wordt niet gepubliceerd. Vereiste velden zijn gemarkeerd met *

Download poster

Citaten

  • "Es ist schwieriger, eine vorgefaßte Meinung zu zertrümmern als ein Atom."
    (Het is moeilijker een vooroordeel aan flarden te schieten dan een atoom.)
    Albert Einstein

  • "Als je alles zou laten dat slecht is voor je gezondheid, dan ging je kapot"
    Anonieme arts

  • "The effects of other people smoking in my presence is so small it doesn't worry me."
    Sir Richard Doll, 2001

  • "Een leugen wordt de waarheid als hij maar vaak genoeg wordt herhaald"
    Joseph Goebbels, Minister van Propaganda, Nazi Duitsland


  • "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."
    Mahatma Gandhi

  • "There''s no such thing as perfect air. If there was, God wouldn''t have put bristles in our noses"
    Coun. Bill Clement

  • "Better a smoking freedom than a non-smoking tyranny"
    Antonio Martino, Italiaanse Minister van Defensie

  • "If smoking cigars is not permitted in heaven, I won't go."
    Mark Twain

  • I've alllllllways said that asking smokers "do you want to quit?" and reporting the results of that question, as is, is horribly misleading. It's a TWO part question. After asking if one wants to quit it must be followed up with "Why?" Ask why and the majority of the answers will be "because I'm supposed to" (victims of guilt and propaganda), not "because I want to."
    Audrey Silk, NYCCLASH