Thirdhand Smoke Causes DNA Damage
Source: Science Daily
Furthermore, the study also found that chronic exposure is worse than acute exposure, with the chemical compounds in samples exposed to chronic thirdhand smoke existing in higher concentrations and causing more DNA damage than samples exposed to acute thirdhand smoke, suggesting that the residue becomes more harmful over time.
"This is the very first study to find that thirdhand smoke is mutagenic," said Lara Gundel, a Berkeley Lab scientist and co-author of the study. "Tobacco-specific nitrosamines, some of the chemical compounds in thirdhand smoke, are among the most potent carcinogens there are. They stay on surfaces, and when those surfaces are clothing or carpets, the danger to children is especially serious."
Their paper, "Thirdhand smoke causes DNA damage in human cells," was published in the journal Mutagenesis. The lead investigator was Bo Hang, a biochemist in the Life Sciences Division of Berkeley Lab; he worked with an interdisciplinary group, including chemists from Berkeley Lab's Environmental Energy Technologies Division -- Gundel, Hugo Destaillats and Mohamad Sleiman -- as well as scientists from UC San Francisco, UCLA Medical Center and the University of Texas.
"Until this study, the toxicity of thirdhand smoke has not been well understood," Hang said. "Thirdhand smoke has a smaller quantity of chemicals than secondhand smoke, so it's good to have experimental evidence to confirm its genotoxicity." It is the first major study of disease-related mechanisms to come out of the California Consortium on the Health Effects of Thirdhand Smoke, which was established two years ago largely as a result of work published in 2010 by Gundel, Destaillats, Sleiman and others. The Consortium is funded by the Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program, which is managed by the University of California and funded by state cigarette taxes.
Read more: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130620132459.htm
Cigarette butts are the most littered item in the world.
= new reply since forum marked as read
1) There's people, called 'smokers', who sit there and directly (and deeply) inhale every possible drag from, say 20-30 cigarettes, directly into their lungs, every single day, for decade after decade ...
2) On top of that, such people undoubtedly also absorb MANY TIMES more 2nd hand smoke than any non-smoker could possibly ever absorb, and
3) On top of that, such people undoubtedly also absorb MANY TIMES more '3rd hand' smoke than any non-smoker could possibly ever absorb.
And yet, such people (actual smokers) will only have their lifespan reduced by, on average, approximately 10 years.
And given the above reality, I'm supposed to believe that the amount of 'carcinogens' emanating from friggin cigarette butts is actually a 'concern' to human beings?
I don't personally even subscribe to the idea that 2nd hand smoke (in anything less than ABSURDLY higher concentrations than any human would ever willingly subject themselves to, over many, many years) is in any way life-threatening to anyone who's not like already sick, so I'm damn sure not going to buy into the idea that 'cigarette butts' are killing people, it that's indeed the implication here.
But by all means, let the anti-smoking paranoia rage on. I don't smoke cigs anymore anyway 
I firmly believe that things like car exhaust, industrial pollution, indoor pollution (radon and the like), and the residual lead in our environment are all far, far more dangerous than anything related to cigarettes, for everyone but *actual smokers*.
The idea is to scare people. You are way too practical...
Not to mention, wait tables where people smoke 
Keep those pinkie fingers away from those butts and you're safe! 
You'll get DNA mutations retroactively. We all need to be on the lookout now for the X-Y Men
mais oui
So they only put prime numbers in their packs? 
Or cake.
