Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Misconceptions and ill-founded theories can arise in all areas of science. However, the apparent accessibility of many epidemiology findings and popular interest in the subject can lead to additional misunderstandings. The article below is the fourth in an occasional series of short editorials highlighting some current misinterpretations of epidemiological findings. Invited authors will be given wide scope in judging the prevalence of the misconception under discussion. We hope that this series will prove instructive to cancer researchers in other disciplines, as well as to students of epidemiology. Adrian L Harris and Leo Kinlen Lung cancer incidence in smokers is roughly proportional to dose rate (cigarettes per day) but increases much more rapidly with duration of smoking. The assumption that the incidence rate is proportional to total lifetime dose (the product of dose rate and duration) has been known to be wrong for many years, but total dose in pack-years is still often included, either alone or together, with more fundamental parameters such as dose rate, in regression analysis of epidemiological data. This is mathematically unnecessary and scientifically unhelpful.
Julian Peto (Sun,) studied this question.