Racing junkies will be pleased to know that there is no evidence that nhra drivers, despite their high-powered engines, are at any risk of developing lung cancer.
The findings are based on the latest data on the race track’s health and safety, which is released every two years.
The study looked at data collected from more than 10,000 nhra racers, who are registered in the national track registry.
The team found that nra drivers had no increased risk of any disease over the past 10 years.
“There is no direct evidence that the race driver has a higher risk of lung cancer,” said Dr Kavita Srinivasan, a research fellow at the National Institute of Public Health and Tropical Medicine in Bangalore.
Dr Srinivaan said the data collected for the study did not show any increase in the incidence of cancer in racers who were registered as a race driver.
The report found that race drivers had a lower risk of having lung cancer than other drivers, but it was not clear why. “
It seems like there is less cancer cases in those who are race drivers, which might be due to better care.”
The report found that race drivers had a lower risk of having lung cancer than other drivers, but it was not clear why.
It said there was no association between race driver and race car number of previous air pollution exposure and risk of cancer.
In fact, there was a negative association.
Dr Nirmala Srikanth, an assistant professor at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, said there were no known risk factors for lung cancer that would explain the increased risk.
“The only possible factor is that race driver is more exposed to the air pollution, or is more active in the race car,” she said.
She said it would be important to examine the data in more detail.
“One of the problems with the current study is that it doesn’t account for race car type, which in turn could be influenced by other factors,” she added.
“For example, some of the cars used for nhra races are also used in the world’s largest motor race, the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.”
Race car number has been linked to an increased risk in the past for several cancers, including melanoma.
A study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, however, found no direct link between race car and cancer risk.
Dr Vijay Kumar, a professor at Imperial College London, said that the data on race cars was incomplete.
“Race car number is a good proxy for driver skill, and it’s probably an indicator of how well you understand the race conditions,” he said.
“But there are plenty of other factors that we haven’t looked at that could influence race car safety.”
A study published in the Lancet last year found that a car’s number of laps had no effect on its overall safety, but increased the risk of being involved in a crash.
A recent study in the British Medical Journal found that the number on a racing car was a better predictor of the likelihood of a crash than a driver’s performance, although both were still important.
In a recent study, researchers at the University of California, San Diego, analysed the records of 1,844 nhra and other Indian racers.
They found that drivers who were classified as nra were about two times more likely to have been involved in an accident than those who were not.
The researchers found that about 10 per cent of nhra accidents involved people who were in the top five per cent for road safety.
The data suggests that a driver with an average of 25 kilometres per race per year may be more likely than someone who drives just two or three kilometres per session to get involved in crashes.
“As we know from other countries, drivers who use high-performance vehicles such as turbodiesels and hybrid cars are less likely to crash than those that use relatively standard vehicles such.
electric cars,” said Professor Kumar.
“Therefore, the more the driver competes, the higher the risk.”
Dr Srikanath said the findings were “surprising”.
“Race cars are a form of sport.
They are not necessarily the safest cars to drive, so the more they are tested, the better they are,” she concluded.
Race drivers are more likely the ones who have been exposed to higher levels of air pollution than other members of the public, she added, but that wasn’t a cause for alarm.
“We are not worried about cancer,” she argued.