Ol' Smokey

For the elimination of doubt, when I use the word 'evidence', I mean it in the literal sense, as in its legal usage.

The problem is that, because smoking has been around for hundreds of years, the burden of proof falls on those who see it as a killer. Were it a modern introduction, it would never make it into the shop.

None of us, not even the scientists, can rightfully presume to know one way or the other for certain.

Ultimately, all science is a correlation of observed data and theory. One day all the beer in your glass may spontaneously leap upwards but don't bet your life on it. You are betting your life on your statement that there is no evidence whatsoever that lung cancer is caused by smoking. You are betting other people's lives on the idea that no-one has ever produced actual evidence of passive smoking being fatal.

Have a read of this -
http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/healthyliving/smokingandtobacco/howdoweknow/#Deaths