That's just conjecture on your part. Some people are lucky, others are not, it's not always due to behavior. 3 cigarettes a day is also extremely low - the average is apparently 14[1] right now.

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2018/p0118-smoking-rates-...

https://www.bmj.com/content/360/bmj.j5855

I don't believe there is any harmful information but the whole picture is that most folks cannot smoke a few per day. Eventually cigarettes will own most smokers.

Nicotine, CO and radioactive toxicity have a long half-life, where primary radical damage or reactive carcinogen burden is dose dependent stochastics.

Also people forget, you are much, much more likely to die from cardio-vascular damage or COPD as a consequence of smoking, than lung cancer.

The addictive nature of cigarettes makes it very hard to stick to 3 a day.

My mean, spiteful and horrendous grandmother in law was nothing but pure bile and hatred. Every day she lived her life in perpetual outrage and never had a moment's peace.

She lived to 96.

I fear most evil folks sleep well at night.

Karma is something people invented for some temporary solace.

In Europe, coal typically kills more than 20,000 people _every year_: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jun/12/european...

[ And yet Germany and Belgium decided to end nuclear energy because people are afraid of the "risks", but keep coal plants. ]

Belgium doesn't have coal plants.

Belgium's nuclear plants are/were scheduled to close because they've surpassed their initial lifespan. An extension was added but that has almost been surpassed as well. These are plants which have been in operation for 40-50 years.

Replacements aren't being build because they are "unsafe". They aren't being build because it's economically not viable to do so in a country like Belgium. Not at this moment in time, not in the past 20 to 30 years.

Belgium's major energy operators are also largely controlled by French energy conglomerates such as ENGIE.

During the same time, nuclear is down from 17% to 13%. https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy_pie/chart.htm?l=en&...

Still too little too late in my opinion, but one has a hard time arguing that nuclear plays a role here at all.

The nuclear security agency in France is one of the toughest in the world, and is independent. They notably demand "current" state-of-the art security for all nuclear plants (vs. state-of-the-art at the time of building in the US, typically)

French nuclear plants typically never killed anyone (and will never), unlike German coal plants (which are at least partially responsible for the 22,000 coal-related premature deaths every year)

Nuclear energy is a very emotionally polluted debate (no pun intended), but facts tend to shows that this is the cleanest and safest energy.

The future is uncertain, and I hope the German people don't suffer shortages of electricity as a result of these phase-outs.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26348520

Nuclear is remarkably well-regulated by comparison. I understand why people may want to get rid of it eventually, but compared to coal, it's sunshine and rainbows.

https://www.reddit.com/r/outside