A bitter epidemiological dispute developed when Enstrom and Kabat (2003), funded bythe tobacco industry

A bitter epidemiological dispute developed when Enstrom and Kabat (2003), funded bythe tobacco industry, published a re-analysis and 40-year follow-up of the American Cancer Society’s (ACS) Cancer Prevention Study I cohort that concluded that “the results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and tobacco-related mortality.” Thun (2003) of ACS responded that Enstrom and Kabat’s (2003) analysis was “misleading science” and was fundamentally flawed in major part because of exposure misclassification of CPS I subjects. Enstrom and Kabat replied that in this cohort, in 1959, “the majority of female never smokers married to never smokers were not exposed to ETS.” The U.S. adult smoking prevalence in 1965 was 42.4%, 37% in 1974, and by 1990 had declined to 25.5%. If Figure 9.3 represents the exposure distribution of the nonsmoking U.S. population in 1990, who is more likely to be correct? Why?