Pot does not cause lung cancer

[DeTaiLs]

A new study came out saying they have found no link between smoking pot and lung cancer, also THC kills aging cells which may cause cancer cells to spread. I wonder how long until the goverment realizes how much of a mistake they made and just legalize it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/05/24/pot.lung.cancer.reut/index.html

[Mephisto]

fo sho

[Ishbar]

and then everyone will smoke pot
and be sterile
and a basket case
...yes...its such a mistake
if they really wanted to do some good..they'd find a way to superimpose the THC and use it as a fighting agent against Cancer cells in some form of injection. Otherwise..smoking pot isnt gunna save your life.

[Joe[x86]]

Cool. Anyone got a joint?

[Rule]

A new study came out saying they have found no link between smoking pot and lung cancer, also THC kills aging cells which may cause cancer cells to spread. I wonder how long until the goverment realizes how much of a mistake they made and just legalize it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/05/24/pot.lung.cancer.reut/index.html

If you understood what "cancer" is caused by, you would realize that inhaling smoke of any kind is very bad for you and is sure to stimulate mutations affecting mitosis, which may lead to certain lung deformities, or uncontrolled cell replication causing cancer.

Also note:

The results should not be taken as a blank check to smoke pot, which has been associated with problems including cognitive impairment and chronic bronchitis, said Dr. John Hansen-Flaschen, chief of pulmonary and critical care at the University of Pennsylvania Health System in Philadelphia.

Previous studies showed marijuana tar contained about 50 percent more of the chemicals linked to lung cancer, compared with tobacco tar, Dr. Tashkin said. In addition, smoking a marijuana joint deposits four times more tar in the lungs than smoking an equivalent amount of tobacco.

"Marijuana is packed more loosely than tobacco, so there's less filtration through the rod of the cigarette, so more particles will be inhaled," Tashkin said in a statement. "And marijuana smokers typically smoke differently than tobacco smokers -- they hold their breath about four times longer, allowing more time for extra fine particles to deposit in the lung."

He theorized that tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, a chemical in marijuana smoke that produces its psychotropic effect, may encourage aging, damaged cells to die off before they become cancerous.

LOL, so THC is a cause of cell death, and you're saying that's good?
You are aware that, in general, something that mutates cells is likely to cause cancer, and something that kills/mutates cells is far far worse.  In general, if it is hypothesized that a chemical you're breathing in is killing cells, that's not a good thing. 

Nice way to try and spin the article though.  I think it's pretty obvious that you're an heavy pot smoker; enjoy your drug addiction and your life of denial =).

Now that the government knows that THC is a cause of significant cell death, desposits four times more tar in the lungs than tobacco, and is associated with problems including "cognitive impairment and chronic bronchitis," they must be banging their heads against the wall for ever thinking that it was dangerous.  In fact, it must be good for you.

Is it just me, or are marijuana users particularly defensive of their drug, far more so than alcohol drinkers or cigarette smokers?  I've also noticed that the only people pushing the "pot is harmless," "pot is good for you" nonsense are the users.

[topaz]

topic title

Where'd you come up with that one, idiot? Tabloid magazines? OF COURSE IT DOESN'T CAUSE LUNG CANCER

[warz]

Who cares? If people want to smoke pot, let them. If people don't, then they won't. A beginner cigarette smoker may feel similar affects that pot enduces. If you've never smoked cigarettes, and want a similar buzz, but for a much shorter time period.. smoke a cigarette. If you don't want to smoke at all, drink alcohol. If you don't feel like doing either - buy some cocaine.

Who the fuck cares.

[Mephisto]

Meh, IMO the first cigarette high is anything but fun.

[warz]

Meh, IMO the first cigarette high is anything but fun.

Same.

[Rule]

Who cares? If people want to smoke pot, let them. If people don't, then they won't. A beginner cigarette smoker may feel similar affects that pot enduces. If you've never smoked cigarettes, and want a similar buzz, but for a much shorter time period.. smoke a cigarette. If you don't want to smoke at all, drink alcohol. If you don't feel like doing either - buy some cocaine.

Who the fuck cares.

Uh, a lot of people?  If you didn't notice, this thread started by someone pushing the idea that pot is basically harmless, and hence, the "government" should re-evaluate their position.  Because, you know, a number one priority in the government is unrightfully demonizing marijuana and those who smoke it.

I'm just so sick of people I know who smoke pot and say how bloody harmless it is.  It's just not true!.  Ok, pot probably won't kill you, but it's not freaking good for you, and there isn't some big "conspiracy" on the government's behalf to  make pot out to be worse than it is.  I rarely hear this garbage from people who drink or smoke cigarettes.  Maybe the pot is making you people paranoid .  I've even heard a pot user tell me that the government wants people to think pot is dangerous because it makes you lazy, and if you're lazy, you won't be able to work for the government.

People who smoke pot, in general, seem to be in denial a lot more so than people who do other drugs.  They're always pushing the "so-called" truth about their drug of choice.  Yeah, who cares.  It's bullshit.  If you want to smoke pot go ahead, but don't make yourself look like an idiot by unrealistically defending it.

Edit: Most people who have other drug problems are denial in the sense that they won't admit that they have a problem with the drug.  Because whether marijuana should be legalized or not is a public issue of controversy, marijuana users think they have some great window of opportunity to take this sort of denial to a whole new level and claim that there isn't anything wrong or dangerous about the drug at all: if they can convince themselves and others of this, the passage is clear for them to use without feeling any guilt about it.  I think that's a pretty dangerous attitude in itself, and really hits the nail on the head as far as explaining why I see this  from pot users in particular. 

[Mephisto]

I tend to agree with Rule, specifically the big picture: Do what you want, but don't deny the 'X'.  What X is, is largely arguable, IMO.  But I suppose you could substitute irrefutable facts such as lung danger (tar deposits) & deteriation of state of mind.  Then you can interpret whether that's significant enough or not to warrant a ban & not to use marijuana.  Personally, I think it warrants neither for recreational use, then again, that'd be impossible to force.  So I generally favor illegalization of marijuana since legalization in all probability would lead to more serious social problems (gateway drug & abuse).  But I can also accept arguments for legalization (taxes, marijuana industry -> $$, etc.).

[Arta]

I'm in favour of the legalisation of just about everything. Whether or not it's good for you is completely beside the point.

[Ringo]

also THC kills aging cells

w00t, you mean if i market THC Anti-Aging Wrinkle Cream, i could cash in big time?

[GameSnake]

That's great news! Marijuana should be legalized, it isn't safe but safer than legal drugs, like alcohol nicotine and even caffiene.
You should see my forum for more pot-related discussion .

[Rule]

... and even caffiene.

I don't know how much caffeine you're talking about, but if you think smoking 2 joints a day is safer than drinking two cups of coffee a day, then I beg to differ...