Is there really a correlation between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer? For those people who doubt the Surgeon General’s warning, consider the late news anchor Peter Jennings. Subsequent to 9/11, the highly reputed journalist took up smoking again. In 2005, Jennings met his demise with lung cancer. Although, it is one isolated case, lung cancer is tantamount to sudden death.

On the other side of the coin, actress Dana Reeves, the widow of Christopher Reeves announced that she was afflicted with lung cancer; however she never smoked. The life robbing disease has raised many new questions on the prevention.

Here are a few factual incentives to quit smoking or even encourage a love one to give up cigarettes:

There is only a 15 percent survival rate of lung cancer

In the United States, annually, approximately new 174,000 diagnoses of lung cancer are made

Tobacco is definitively the leading cause of lung cancer

When individual quit smoking prior to the age of 50; the risk level can be reduced to the equivalency of an individual who never smoked.

Smoking cigarettes accounts for 87 percent of lung cancer mortalities
After ten years of smoking cessation, the risk of lung cancer death is reduced between 30 to 50 percent

The technical jargon named by the Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) for someone who does not smoke is referred to as ‘passive smoking’

Each year, passive smoking accounts for 3,000 deaths

Nutritional eating habits may offer a few health incentives to protect smokers, former smokers as well as non-smokers from lung cancer.

Based on the recommendations in a report released by the World Health Organization (WHO), eating a minimum of four cups of both vegetables and fruits a day may potentially lower lung cancer by 12 percent, worldwide