A Lack of Credibility

Addressing Sasha Latypova's Absurd Claims

Below are recent Substack posts I recently seen that were written by Sasha Latypova. These posts are alarming to me as they contain incredibly dangerous misinformation. Below I will thoroughly analyze and explain why individuals like Latypova contribute to the spread of anti-scientific misinformation. Their arguments often lack logical coherence, misrepresent evidence, and rely on misleading rhetoric rather than well-reasoned analysis. Worse, they appear to actively conceal the dangers of toxic, cancer-causing products, misleading the public while pretending to challenge the establishment. I will dissect a few of these claims in detail to demonstrate how they fail to hold up under scrutiny.

On Alcohol

Let’s address this from a biological perspective. The argument that alcohol cannot be carcinogenic because it was consumed historically as a safer alternative to contaminated water oversimplifies complex realities. While beer and wine were indeed staples in societies with unsafe water, this does not negate alcohol’s modern classification as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Chronic alcohol use is linked to cancers of the liver, breast, and esophagus, among others. Earlier populations had shorter lifespans due to infectious diseases, trauma, and malnutrition, meaning many did not live long enough to develop slower-onset diseases like cancer. Comparing medieval mortality to modern longevity is a false equivalence. I have seen and lived through the negative effects of alcohol poisoning and cancer from smoking on multiple family members.
People like Latypova speak from a place of complete ignorance on the matter and are woefully ignorant of the biological nature of the human body.

When alcohol is consumed, the body metabolizes ethanol primarily in the liver, where it is broken down into acetaldehyde, a toxic and carcinogenic compound. Acetaldehyde damages DNA and prevents cells from repairing this damage, creating mutations that can lead to uncontrolled cell growth—a hallmark of cancer. This process occurs regardless of the type of alcoholic beverage, including wine.

Alcohol also generates reactive oxygen species (ROS) during its metabolism, which cause oxidative stress. This stress further damages DNA, proteins, and lipids, exacerbating cancer risk. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies alcohol as a Group 1 carcinogen, directly linking it to cancers of the mouth, throat, esophagus, liver, colon, and breast. For breast cancer, even moderate alcohol consumption increases risk due to alcohol’s ability to elevate estrogen levels, a hormone that can fuel tumor growth.

Beyond its well-documented role in cancer, alcohol contributes to a wide range of diseases and systemic toxicity. Its effects are not limited to the liver; alcohol permeates nearly every organ system, disrupting cellular function, impairing metabolism, and increasing susceptibility to chronic illnesses. Alcohol’s toxicity is far-reaching, affecting every organ system and contributing to a wide range of diseases. From liver damage and cardiovascular disease to cancer and neurological disorders, the evidence is clear: alcohol is a potent toxin with profound health consequences.

For Latypova to claim such things shows a vast ignorance of science and the study of toxicology.

---

Cancer Predates Modern Vaccines

Vaccines and their overuse may contribute to cancer, but they are far from the primary cause. The real drivers are the staggering levels of industrial toxicity saturating our environment. From heavily polluted food, water, and air to the relentless exposure to pesticides, plastics, and an ever-growing list of hazardous chemicals and their byproducts, our bodies are constantly bombarded with carcinogens. These factors, compounded over time, create the perfect conditions for cancer to develop, yet many continue to downplay or ignore their impact while fixating on far less significant contributors.

Further, the notion that cancer emerged only after mass vaccination campaigns in the late 18th century is easily disproven by historical and medical evidence. Ancient Egyptian mummies show signs of bone cancer, and Hippocrates coined the term karkinos (Greek for "crab") around 400 BCE to describe tumors. While diagnostic limitations in pre-modern eras led to underreporting, cancer was documented in medieval medical texts and even in fossilized remains. The rise in cancer rates over centuries correlates with increased lifespans, industrialization, environmental pollutants, and improved diagnostic tools—not solely vaccines, as claimed by Latypova.

---

On Smoking

The claim that smoking bans have forced regulators to "pin cancer on other things" is misleading. Smoking bans were implemented because tobacco is a well-established cause of cancer, responsible for about 85% of lung cancer cases and linked to numerous other cancers. These bans have significantly reduced smoking rates and cancer incidence, demonstrating their effectiveness.

Smoking is one of the most well-documented causes of cancer, responsible for nearly 85% of lung cancer cases and linked to a host of other cancers, including those of the mouth, throat, esophagus, pancreas, bladder, and kidneys. Even if tobacco were "pure"—free of additives or pesticides—the act of burning it creates a toxic cocktail of chemicals that poison cells, damage DNA, and lead to cancer. The harm caused by smoking is not solely due to impurities or additives but rather the chemical byproducts produced when tobacco is burned. Understanding the science behind this process reveals why smoking is so devastating to health.

When tobacco burns, it undergoes a process called pyrolysis, which breaks down organic matter into smaller, often highly reactive molecules. This process generates thousands of chemicals, at least 70 of which are known carcinogens. Among the most dangerous are polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), such as benzo[a]pyrene, which directly damage DNA. Nitrosamines, particularly tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs), are another group of potent carcinogens formed during the curing and burning of tobacco. Additionally, burning tobacco releases formaldehyde, a toxic gas that damages DNA and proteins, and benzene, a known cause of leukemia. Other harmful chemicals, such as acrolein and acetaldehyde, interfere with the body’s ability to repair DNA, making cells more vulnerable to mutations. Even heavy metals like cadmium and lead, which accumulate in tissues and disrupt cellular function, are present in tobacco smoke. These chemicals are not the result of additives; they are inherent to the combustion process itself.

The toxic chemicals in tobacco smoke enter the lungs and bloodstream, where they wreak havoc on cells and tissues. One of the primary ways smoking causes cancer is through DNA damage. Carcinogens like PAHs and nitrosamines bind to DNA, forming abnormal structures called DNA adducts. These adducts interfere with DNA replication and repair, leading to mutations that can trigger uncontrolled cell growth. Smoking also generates reactive oxygen species (ROS), which overwhelm the body’s antioxidant defenses and cause oxidative stress. This stress damages not only DNA but also proteins and lipids, contributing to cellular dysfunction and cancer development. Furthermore, smoking triggers chronic inflammation, which promotes tumor growth by releasing cytokines and enzymes that further damage DNA. Chemicals like acrolein and acetaldehyde impair the body’s ability to repair DNA, allowing mutations to persist and accumulate. Over time, these changes can lead to the development of cancer.

In addition to causing direct damage, many of the chemicals in tobacco smoke accumulate in the body, leading to long-term harm. For example, cadmium, a heavy metal found in tobacco smoke, builds up in the kidneys and liver, disrupting cellular function and increasing cancer risk. Benzene, another component of tobacco smoke, is stored in fat tissue and can cause bone marrow damage, leading to leukemia. PAHs, which are fat-soluble, persist in the body and continuously damage DNA and other cellular components. This accumulation means that the toxic effects of smoking can persist long after a person quits, though quitting significantly reduces the risk of further damage. The body has a remarkable ability to heal, but the longer a person smokes, the greater the accumulation of toxins and the higher the risk of irreversible harm.

Harmful effects of smoking are not unique to tobacco. Burning any organic material—whether it’s wood, coal, or even food—produces similar toxic byproducts. For instance, wood smoke contains PAHs, benzene, and formaldehyde, much like tobacco smoke. Charred meat produces heterocyclic amines (HCAs) and PAHs, which are linked to stomach and colorectal cancer. Coal burning releases arsenic, mercury, and other heavy metals, contributing to lung cancer and other diseases, including viral illness. The common factor in all these cases is combustion, which transforms relatively harmless organic materials into a complex mixture of carcinogens and toxins. This underscores the fact that the act of burning itself, not just the material being burned, is the source of harm.

Some argue that "pure" or additive-free tobacco is safer, but this is a misconception. While additives may enhance the addictive properties of cigarettes or alter the flavor, the primary source of harm is the burning process itself. Even organic or "natural" tobacco, when burned, produces many of the same toxic chemicals that cause cancer and other diseases. The idea that "pure" tobacco is harmless ignores the fundamental chemistry of combustion and the inherent dangers of inhaling smoke. Whether it’s tobacco, wood, or any other organic material, burning creates carcinogens that poison the body and increase cancer risk.

---

Closing thoughts

Claiming that smoking doesn’t cause cancer is outright foolish—and the same applies to downplaying the risks of excessive alcohol consumption. Both smoking and alcohol are well-established contributors to cancer and a host of other diseases, supported by decades of rigorous scientific research. With the audience Latypova has, she should think twice before spreading such blatant misinformation. Misleading claims about health risks of these dangerous substances not only undermine public trust in science in their audiences but also endanger lives by discouraging people from making informed decisions about their well-being.

Unfortunately, Latypova is not alone in promoting such dangerous narratives. Others in the same circle, like Denis Rancourt—who insists climate change is a hoax and denies increased death rates during viral outbreaks—are equally guilty of pushing anti-scientific nonsense. These individuals often cherry-pick data, misinterpret studies, or outright reject easily verifiable science to support their contrarian views. I’m all for questioning the status quo, but what these individuals are doing is not that, as they appear to prop up Big Oil, and other harmful corporations. What’s particularly striking is their tendency to promote absurd, unlikely conspiracies while downplaying real-world dangers, such as the well-documented harms of smoking, alcohol, and environmental toxins and their clear and present danger to our environment.

This pattern of denialism is not just misguided—it’s harmful. By diverting attention away from genuine threats, it is my view that these voices create confusion and complacency, making it harder for society (at least in their respective small communities) to be aware and to address pressing health and environmental challenges. Smoking, for example, remains one of the leading preventable causes of death worldwide, and alcohol consumption is a major risk factor for chronic diseases. Denying these facts doesn’t make them any less true; it only puts more people at risk.

In a world increasingly shaped by misinformation, it’s more important than ever to rely on true critical thinking, and scientific evidence, both directly observable and otherwise. Dismissing the dangers of smoking, alcohol, or other toxins isn’t just wrong—it’s a disservice to those you speak to, including yourself.

Jeff Green