If lung cancer is caused by smoking, are deaths caused by lung cancer lesser than 20 years ago?

Until the 70's 80% of all adult people were smokers, now they are a marginal minority (maybe 10%), deaths for cancer of lung should have dropped down in the same ratio.

Adult people born after 1970 are mostly non smokers, and the few strive for quitting. Will this generation be lung- cancer- free?If lung cancer is caused by smoking, are deaths caused by lung cancer lesser than 20 years ago?
In ratio to the population yes. But you don't need to be a smoker to get lung cancer. There will always be lung cancer until researchers find a cure.
No, smoking history is a major risk factor that can lead to lung cancer, but it is not the only cause of the cellular abnormalities that form cancer cells. Then there are the second hand smoke risks. Those born after 1970 have still been exposed to that. Many people develop lung cancer with no history of smoking or major exposure. I find it hard to believe that only 10% of current adults smoke, could be true but I think that number is much higher still.