Children regularly exposed to smoking
are three times more likely to contract lung cancer
in later life than those in non-smoking homes, research
suggests.
The Imperial College researchers tracked
the progress of more than 123,000 participants over
seven years.
They told the British Medical Journal
that the link between lung cancer and passive smoking
was "significant".
Health charity Cancer Research UK said
the study raised a "terrifying spectre" for smoking
parents.
The researchers tracked 123,479 volunteers
- some of whom had never smoked, others had stopped
smoking, but all had been exposed to second-hand smoke
in their childhoods.
Over a seven-year period they found
that 97 people developed lung cancer and 20 more had
related cancers such as cancer of the larynx.
In addition, 14 died from chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease.
"Environmental tobacco smoke exposure
during childhood showed an association with lung cancer,
particularly among those who had never smoked," the
researchers said.
The team concluded that the study reinforced
past research about the cancerous effects of passive
smoking.
The researchers also found that ex-smokers
faced up to twice the risk of respiratory diseases from
passive smoke than those who had never smoked.
They believe this is because their
lungs were already damaged - making them more at risk
to the effects of passive smoking.
The British Medical Association (BMA)
said the "important study" confirmed that passive smoking
kills.
"The results show clearly that second-hand
smoke causes cancer of the lung, mouth and throat,"
a BMA spokesman said.
Professor Robert West, Cancer Research
UK's director of tobacco studies, said society's attitude
towards passive smoking "has to change".
"As a society we recognise that non-smokers
need to be protected from carcinogens when at work but
we are not doing enough to protect the most vulnerable
non-smokers of all - children," he said.
Amanda Sandford, research manager for
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), called for a smoking
ban in all public places.
She added: "The best thing parents
can do for the health of themselves and their children
is to stop smoking."
Simon Clark, director of the smokers'
lobby group Forest, said: "The effects of passive smoking
are notoriously difficult to measure.
Most studies are based on imprecise
recall and anecdotal evidence concerning the exact amount
of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Yet this
report, like so many, adopts a preposterous pretence
of precise measurement which immediately arouses suspicion.
"To isolate the effect of environmental
tobacco smoke on lung cancer cases would require an
examination of all possible alternative causes.
"Unfortunately it is just another example
of anti-smoking hysteria, a further attempt to demonise
smokers for their habit."