trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Second-hand smoke causes cancer

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
6 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Extensive epidemiological research, systematic reviews, and global burden studies consistently demonstrate that exposure to secondhand smoke significantly increases the risk of developing lung cancer, particularly among non-smokers.

The analysis

The retrieved papers consistently and robustly support the claim that second-hand smoke causes cancer, providing meta-analyses, systematic reviews, cohort studies, and global health data all pointing to a significantly elevated risk of lung cancer among individuals exposed to passive smoking.

Evidence for · 6
Recorded source metadata

M. Hori, Hirokazu Tanaka, K. Wakai, S. Sasazuki, K. Katanoda. Secondhand smoke exposure and risk of lung cancer in Japan: a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjco/hyw091

A meta-analysis of Japanese populations demonstrates a statistically significant increase in lung cancer risk from secondhand smoke exposure.

See more details
More for · 5
Recorded source metadata

Yudong Zhang, Wenxi Wang, Keyao Dai, Ying Huang, Runchen Wang, Danjie He, Jianxing He, Hengrui Liang. Global lung cancer burden attributable to air fine particulate matter and tobacco smoke exposure: spatiotemporal patterns, sociodemographic characteristics, and transnational inequalities from 1990 to 2021. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-22450-8

Global Burden of Disease data attributes nearly 100,000 lung cancer deaths globally to secondhand smoke exposure.

Recorded source metadata

Hana Qasim, Krish S. Sardesai, M. Alghizzawi, B. Ponvilawan, Kailee Bunte B.S, Vedvignesh Gorjala, Simrin Phatak, Lasya P. Daggumati, Ayra Ali, Muhammad Shah Miran. Lung cancer among patients with secondhand smoke exposure: A systematic review.. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e22506

A systematic review highlights secondhand smoke as a distinct etiology of lung cancer, noting high exposure among non-smoking patients.

Recorded source metadata

A. Choker. Household secondhand smoke exposure and lung cancer risk among never-smoking women: a literature review.. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1080/09603123.2026.2701060

A literature review indicates that household secondhand smoke is consistently associated with a 20-30% increase in lung cancer risk among never-smokers.

Recorded source metadata

Guanlian Pang, Mingxuan Zhu, Suli Yue, Runzhe Yuan, Binyan He, Chen Zhu, Qiao Li, C. Ji, Chenying Jin, Yuanlin Mou, Jiaying Cai, Caochen Zhang, Yating Fu, Hongxia Ma, Lingbin Du, Meng Zhu. Secondhand smoke and lung cancer risk in never-smoking women: A cohort and meta-analysis study.. 2026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2026.103051

A cohort and meta-analysis study finds that secondhand smoke exposure significantly increases lung cancer risk in never-smoking women.

Recorded source metadata

James L. Repace. Forensic Analysis of Lung Cancer from Secondhand Smoke Exposure of a Motel Worker. 2024. https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v12i3.5120

A forensic analysis quantifies toxic secondhand smoke exposure in a motel worker, linking her fatal lung cancer directly to occupational passive smoking.

The paper trail · every fact has a biography
first checked01 Aug 2026
judged → SUPPORTED · 8701 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt