You mean susceptible, don't you?   And yes, some people are more  
likely to get lung cancers than others, but remember that it's not  
all genetics or all environmental causes.  It's a combination of the  
two and very hard to predict.

My mother died of a fast-killing lung disease - not cancer - that was  
likely related to her working with toxious chemicals when working for  
the film industry in Hollywood in the 1940s and 1950s.  She did  
smoke, but doctors didn't think her disease was triggered by the  
smoking.  My opinion is, it might not have been the direct cause but  
it certainly didn't help her any.

I myself smoked for seven years but I never smoked more than a half a  
pack a day and found it very easy to quit and it's been almost 30  
years since I quit.  I don't like eating in restaurants that still  
have smoking sections, and I think it's fine to outlaw smoking in  
public places, but I don't think anyone has any right to tell smokers  
they can't smoke in the privacy of their own homes.

Kat



On 12 Mar 2006, at 15:23, Anthony Arnold wrote:

> This is a real good question that Kathy Jo brought up, are some  
> people more
> acceptable for developing lung cancer than others are?  For  
> example, my
> Grandpa smoked for over 60 years, and never really had any major  
> health
> problems according to my knowledge.
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony
> Visit my website at www.anthonyarnold.net