The backing for the second value goes into diseases that can be supposedly cut if someone smoked. Smoking can cut Parkinson’s disease by half the rate as a non-smoker. Alzheimer’s disease can also be cut by 50% if a person smoked. In reality doctors do not know what causes Alzheimer’s. Endometrial cancer can also be cut as much as 50% with smokers than non-smokers. Prostate cancer with smokers is cut in half compared to non-smokers. He adds this needs corroboration though. Osteoarthritis is five times as less likely to develop with smokers. Colon cancer and ulcerative colitis is 30% to 50% less with smokers than with people who do not smoke. (Brimelow). All this sounds good and even beneficial, but all of these numbers are at 50% which is half the population. Brimelow is taking advantage of numbers that are statistics. All of these diseases have another thing in common; doctors are not sure what exactly causes them.[Add a document citation here, including the page number if there is one.] Three-fourths of these statistics are also based on surveys, which are not always accurate. All of this backing is not logical or by any means true. He is using diseases not fully understood to his advantage giving smoking a better image.