Well, duh! It's like I've been saying for years: When they ban pollution belching buses and trucks, then I will agree with all the public smoking bans. They went after smokers because it was easier. Trying to control/ban or otherwise reduce the pollution in cities is expensive. Targeting smokers costs nothing other than a few signs here and there, if that. *See highlighted part

LONDON -- What many commuters choking on smog have long suspected has finally been scientifically validated: air pollution causes lung cancer.

Air pollution causes cancer, World Health Organization agency declares Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/health-hea ... z2hzf2TjHm

The International Agency for Research on Cancer declared on Thursday that air pollution is a carcinogen, alongside known dangers such as asbestos, tobacco and ultraviolet radiation. The decision came after a consultation by an expert panel organized by IARC, the cancer agency of the World Health Organization, which is based in Lyon, France.

"The air most people breathe has become polluted with a complicated mixture of cancer-causing substances," said Kurt Straif, head of the IARC department that evaluates carcinogens. He said the agency now considers pollution to be "the most important environmental carcinogen," ahead of second-hand cigarette and cigar smoke.

Read more: http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/health-hea ... z2hzeTpWZU

Air pollution causes cancer, World Health Organization agency declares

No it doesn't. That fraudulent claim is based on junk science. They're just trying to hurt the American economy. Cancer is really caused by Chinese acrobats attending bunga bunga parties in Mumbai. I know a guy who's cousin has a chemistry set in his basement and so knows more than scientists says so.