% chance of losing a family member

July 5, 2007 2:36 PM

My mom 50, and two sisters 23 and 17, started smoking cigarettes all together a few years ago. If none of them ever quit, what are the statistical chances of one of them dying from the habit? I'm assuming it gets closer and closer to 100% the longer it continues, any idea on how to calculate this?
posted by parallax7d to health (24 comments total)

Your mother got her 14 or 15 year old daughter smoking??? If you're looking for evidence to convince them to quit, you could always threatening your mom with a child endangerment charge. (I'm only sort of kidding.)
posted by Kololo at 2:49 PM on July 5, 2007

IIRC, one in two -- for each of them.
posted by mcwetboy at 2:53 PM on July 5, 2007

Define "dying from the habit". Smoking influences more health problems than just lung cancer.

Also, seconding Kololo's "wtf" moment there.
posted by Mikey-San at 3:16 PM on July 5, 2007

Lotsa data here.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 3:18 PM on July 5, 2007

jesus, those figures are staggering. 14 year lower life expectancy? one in five deaths are due to cigarette smoking? I mean I knew it was bad but... wow.
posted by PercussivePaul at 3:26 PM on July 5, 2007

If she keeps up that charming habit for the rest of her life, I'd say the chances are far higher that the 17-year-old will die from some smoking related illness at some point than your 50-year-old mother.

Frankly, your mother likely doesn't have enough time left in her life for the really nasty smoking-related diseases to take effect before something else gets her.
posted by M.C. Lo-Carb! at 3:26 PM on July 5, 2007

One in three people (in the UK...) get cancer at some point in their lives. Which one out of your mother, and two sisters, wants to be that one?
posted by cardamine at 3:27 PM on July 5, 2007

What do consumers know about the risks of tobacco smoking?

Everyone is exaggerating like mad. 15% of smokers get lung cancer, which is a lot, but not 50% like people are claiming here. There is a (1- (0.85 x 0.85 x 0.85)) = 38.6% chance that at least one of the three will get lung cancer; and thus a 61.4% that none of the three will get lung cancer.

That said, smoking is bad for you. Cut it out.
posted by commander_cool at 3:38 PM on July 5, 2007

To clarify, my mother did not get my sisters smoking. They all roughly started at the same time though on their own accord. I appreciate the answers so far, but I'm still not certain how I can put this in a "one of you WILL die 100% chance" or something similarly shocking to get them to hopefully stop together. 1 in 5 just isn't shocking for them, they aren't informed or that smart frankly.
posted by parallax7d at 3:39 PM on July 5, 2007

Everyone is exaggerating like mad. 15% of smokers get lung cancer, which is a lot, but not 50% like people are claiming here. There is a (1- (0.85 x 0.85 x 0.85)) = 38.6% chance that at least one of the three will get lung cancer; and thus a 61.4% that none of the three will get lung cancer.

That said, smoking is bad for you. Cut it out.

As already pointed out lung cancer is not the only way to die from smoking
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/Factsheets/cig_smoking_mort.htm
posted by missmagenta at 3:43 PM on July 5, 2007

Using the data from the CDC site, 45.1 million "adults" smoke in the US each year (20.9% of all adults in the US), and 438,000 people in the US die from smoking-related causes each year (including second-hand smoke). That's a little over 1% of the smoking popluation dying from smoking-related causes each year.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:59 PM on July 5, 2007 [1 favorite]

Maybe giving them facts and figures won't be the best idea (as you said, they aren't that informed or smart).

Perhaps get in touch with an oncologist at a local hospital and arrange to have them vist and understand just how terrible life with cancer can be. Chemotherapy can be tougher on a person than the cancer, itself. Perhaps understanding what chemo does to a person might make them think twice.

You could surprise them, like when my mom told me that we were going for ice cream and then I ended up getting a flu shot. :)

ahh..deception....
posted by ThFullEffect at 4:01 PM on July 5, 2007

You can't abuse statistics that way. It is like walking into a casino and playing a slot machine that pays out, say at a rate of 99.8% per dollar spent. If I walk up there with $1, would you say that my I should expect a return of 99.8 cents (assuming that such a return was available)? Of course not, statistics does not deal with predicting the course of singular events, but describes the distribution of a given set.

Statistics cannot be used in the predictive function you wish it to be used. If you wish to dissuade them from their choice, I suggest an emotional narrative.
posted by geoff. at 4:30 PM on July 5, 2007 [2 favorites]

but I'm still not certain how I can put this in a "one of you WILL die 100% chance" or something similarly shocking to get them to hopefully stop together.

That's because there simply isn't a 100% chance that one of them will die from it. Smoking is terrible but it's not automatically lethal. The chances of one or all of them having smoking related illness is pretty high and the chances that that illness will be really horrible is even higher (e.g. non small cell lung cancer has an average survival rate of about 6 months), but they all might smoke forever and do just fine.

Instead of going for a single shock statistic read up on the info and be informed. Focus on all the things that can go wrong rather than just one and let them know how much their quality of life is going to be reduced. Reasoned, thought out information is going to do them more favours in the long run, it's harder to dismiss.
posted by shelleycat at 4:41 PM on July 5, 2007

20 to 30 pack years is the average for the onset of lung problems (meaning a pack a day for 20 years), IANAD so YMMV
posted by kanemano at 4:43 PM on July 5, 2007

If you're looking to shock them, perhaps these Australian ads/site will help. However, I'm sorry to tell you that most smokers will not quit based on family pressure. It just makes them cranky and want to avoid you. If they do show any interest in quitting, there are a bunch of support forums out there (including one in my profile) like this biggie which might be particularly helpful for your sisters, because it has (I believe) a forum dedicated to quitters under 25.

Good luck.
posted by b33j at 5:33 PM on July 5, 2007

If you're looking to shock them into wanting to quit, your chances of succeeding are pretty much zero. Most people, even the ones who "aren't informed or that smart frankly" (your words), know that smoking is not healthy... But, the more you try to convince them to quit, the more they'll resist it. They have to want to quit, and they have to decide to do it, on their own terms.

My own personal rebuttal whenever someone tells me that smoking will kill me is to quote Denis Leary: "Sure, smoking takes ten years off your life, but it's ten years off the end of your life, and those are the bad years anyway"...

And yes, I would like to quit (I've successfully quit several times ~ at most for a year at a time ~ but I always go back to it). Scare tactics have never worked.
posted by amyms at 7:26 PM on July 5, 2007

If they aren't that smart, as you said, show them like diseased lung pictures, that'll mean more than anything to them. I mean, it's ugly, it's gotta be terrible, right?
posted by dagnyscott at 8:33 PM on July 5, 2007

Like others have said, lung cancer is not the only deadly result of smoking. My grandpa who smoked himself to death died of emphysema, not lung cancer. My grandma, who died following a stroke, significantly increased her stroke risk because of her smoking habit.
posted by croutonsupafreak at 10:06 PM on July 5, 2007

Odds are they won't be killed in a way they'll find humane. Most smokers are kept alive by modern medicine for a good long time while they watch they're breath and livelihood shat down the toilet and they're savings pissed away on medicine to let them take in enough air to get to the toilet in the morning.
posted by docpops at 10:13 PM on July 5, 2007

For the daughters at least, it may be more effective to appeal to their vanity: smoking ages the skin. Not to mention the yellow teeth and delightful odour of cigarette smoke. Not nice.
posted by crocomancer at 1:00 AM on July 6, 2007

Smoking makes you ugly.
posted by thebrokenmuse at 8:35 PM on July 7, 2007

Smoking does make you ugly over time. And, depending on their peer group, unattractive immediately.

It's also expensive. Figure out exactly how much they're spending and how much interest that would accrue over 40 years.

Also look into the effect that smoking has on fetuses. Tell them to quit now before they find out that they're three months pregnant and have already put their future child at risk. I'm not familiar with the specific dangers or likelihoods but they put that warning on the packages for a reason, don't they?
posted by stuart_s at 10:05 PM on July 8, 2007

I hate to say it, but like some have posted above, scare tactics will not work. Medical information or scary pictures will end only in arguments. I have tried to convince many close loved ones to stop smoking and I just end up getting more mad at them for not listening. Some are trying and have decreased their volume of smoking, but I have never been able to get anyone to quit completely.

It is hard to not take their stubbornness personal. You want them to listen to you so that they are alive longer, so that they are healthier. Trust me, they won't. It has to be their personal choice. Similar to getting a family member to lose weight. You can be mean and make as many fat jokes as you like, but you are only driving a wedge between family members instead of being supportive.

My best advice is to be supportive, no nagging, but let them know when it is bugging you. I have bronchitis and when family members smoke, I tell them flat out to go outside. I also have a little girl and there is absolutely no smoking around her. I would suggest start controlling your environment around you, not them. It has worked for family members for me.
posted by dnthomps at 3:12 AM on July 27, 2007 [1 favorite]