Dr. Gott: Doctor’s diagnosis up in smoke

Dear Dr. Gott: A 68-year-old man I knew recently died from lung cancer after smoking for most of his life. He had quit smoking and was diagnosed with lung cancer about a year after quitting.

His doctor told him that if he had not quit smoking, the cancer would not have grown as quickly because the smoke would have depleted the lungs of oxygen. The doctor said cancer cells thrive in oxygen and, by quitting cigarettes, he actually hastened the cancer’s growth.

The doctor’s advice seems counter to everything I’ve heard about smoking cessation. What is your take on this theory?

Dear Reader: My take? That advice is not only counter to good medical care, it makes no sense at all.

Some recent studies have shown that the tars in tobacco smoke actually cause cancer by neutralizing anticancer cells in lung tissue.

This has nothing to do with oxygen. Authorities still have not discovered a proven cause for cancer.

But, unquestionably, cigarette smoking is associated with a much higher incidence of lung malignancies than is any other factor.

My conclusion? Don’t smoke.

To give you related information, I am sending you a copy of my health report “Viruses and Cancer.” Other readers who would like a copy should send a long, self-addressed, stamped envelope and $2 to Newsletter, P.O. Box 167, Wickliffe, OH 44092. Be sure to mention the title.

Dear Dr. Gott: I am an 88-year-old man in better condition than many of my contemporaries. I quite smoking in 1966, my blood pressure and other vital signs are within normal range, and I am neither alcoholic, obese, indolent, diabetic nor delusional.

How old do I have to get before I can eat whatever I like, including moderate amounts of bacon and occasional doughnuts, without guilt or fear of surviving adverse consequences? My physician tells me I am almost there.

Dear Reader: You are there. I encourage you to relax your diet, continue to be prudent and look forward to reaching 100.