Can it kill?

[orangeman]

Uhhh I got a serious question....my mom smokes marijuana and she's been doin it for about 3 yrs so I'm thinking about starting but before I start I just wanna know....can weed kill me?

[del...]

only if you've got 100's of pounds and they happen to fall on you...

no, cannabis will not kill you. but those enforcing the insane cannabis laws just might have to shoot you for being a menace to society.

[The Piper]

nahh man weed cant kill u theres never been a death recorded due 2 marijuana...so smoke up an enjoy man

[robert42]

yea man smoke up youd have to smoke like 1million dolars worth to die!

[Beeblebrox.420]

Well, I wouldn't say it's absolutely impossible for weed to kill you. It does cause a spike in blood pressure and heart rate, so if you have a latent heart condition, it could conceivably kill you. That said, I've only ever heard of a very, very few deaths being attributed to marijuana usage and none have even been definitely confirmed, to my knowledge. It's about as safe a drug as there is, right up there with caffeine and aspirin. I really wouldn't worry about it. You have a higher risk of dying from being hit by a bus.

[del...]

and with many people, cannabis lowers BP...like me for instance. my doc even documented it for his paper on med use and users.

[CanaBliss]

You have a better chance of dying from caffeine, riddlin, alcohol, and aspirin.

Never weed.

[CanaBliss]

Btw, correct me if I'm wrong but depending on your weight (95-200), you have to smoke 1200-1800 pounds of marijuana within a 15 minute period to overdose. And before you could acheive that, you would passout/ fall asleep.

[Oli]

It's something incredibly high like that. That's a fuck load of weed...

[Beeblebrox.420]

That's a dose for an LD-50, given what data we have for rats and mice. It does not include potential side effects due to existing medical conditions or other unexpected reactions. You can never say X amount of Y substance will not kill you, because everyone's body chemistry is slightly different, and people react differently to various substances. But again, weed is about as safe as anything. More people die each year from peanut allergies.

[Beeblebrox.420]

Incidentally, just for those who are curious, we can derive a more reasonable amount weed needed for an LD-50 dose. According to this MSDS for tetrahydrocannabinol (http://nepenthes.lycaeum.org/Drugs/THC/msds.html), the LD-50 for rats is 666 mg/kg of body weight. If we extrapolate that to humans (probably not terribly accurate, but good enough for a first-order approximation), it would require a 200-pound man (91 kg) to ingest 60,606 mg of THC. The very best weed out there is about 27% THC b.w., which means he'd have to eat 224 grams or nearly a half pound of the stuff. While this may seem low, remember we're extrapolating from rat data, so the actual number for humans may be much higher, and this is also assuming 100% efficiency at extracting the THC during digestion, which would not be the case in reality. I suspect that much roughage would cause considerable gastric upset which would drastically lower the extraction efficiency, as well. I've never heard of anyone eating that much weed at once, in any case. LD-50 data for smoking is not available and would likely be very different from oral ingestion.

[BUZz UK]

More people die each year from peanut allergies.
damn you peanuts!

why don't the government do anything to stop this terrible peanut death epidemic?!

if you want peanuts made illegal, go to www.stonersagainstpeanuts.com and bring the fight to the nuts!

[koshea]

rofl eat a half pound of 27% THC bud? r u jokin lol that would be about $2500 worth of bud

[Beeblebrox.420]

Well, I never said anyone would! :D

[ezjim]

Uhhh I got a serious question....my mom smokes marijuana and she's been doin it for about 3 yrs so I'm thinking about starting but before I start I just wanna know....can weed kill me?
in over 5000 yrs of marijuana history NO ONE has ever died from OVER DOSE OF MARIJUANA . now thats not to say no one ever got to stoned and walked in front of a car or had some other stupidity related accident but there is no way humanly possable to overdose from weed just remember the first few times you smoke it to just take 1 or2 hits then wait about 10 minutes to see how you react to it good luck and enjoy.... our minions are growing

[Beeblebrox.420]

in over 5000 yrs of marijuana history NO ONE has ever died from OVER DOSE OF MARIJUANA. He isn't asking about just overdosing, and there are other ways to die by ingestion of a substance, other than ODing. See my other posts. I agree the risk is extremely minimal, but saying weed never killed anyone, ever, and never will is just as bad as the government saying weed makes everyone crazy and kill people.

[ezjim]

He isn't asking about just overdosing, and there are other ways to die by ingestion of a substance, other than ODing. See my other posts. I agree the risk is extremely minimal, but saying weed never killed anyone, ever, and never will is just as bad as the government saying weed makes everyone crazy and kill people.
sorry dude i missed the post you had put up but it is true that cannibis has never caused an OD death but as i said in my post it has caused accidental deaths from walking in front of cars ect. i actually saw this happen in sanfrancisca at the warfield theater after the show this guy who was a lil bit to stoned walked right in front of a tractor trailer on market street and was killed instantly any way im sorry if my response to his ? was not clear or was misunderstood it was hot as hell at work today and that combined with the post 420 activity my brain isnt firing on all cylinders

[Fengzi]

sorry dude i missed the post you had put up but it is true that cannibis has never caused an OD death but as i said in my post it has caused accidental deaths from walking in front of cars ect. i actually saw this happen in sanfrancisca at the warfield theater after the show this guy who was a lil bit to stoned walked right in front of a tractor trailer on market street and was killed instantly any way im sorry if my response to his ? was not clear or was misunderstood it was hot as hell at work today and that combined with the post 420 activity my brain isnt firing on all cylinders

Wow, the Warfield. I haven't been there in years. Not since seeing JGB back in '95. Seeing shows there was always so bizzare. It was totally cool inside but once you stepped out the door you go from Dead Head peace love and happiness to urban blight . That section of market street is always a bit of a downer. Nothing but shady strip joints, pawn shops, and frequently schitzophrenic homeless people. I never tripped or shroomed at a Warfield show simply because I didn't want to deal with the post show bummer once we got out of the venue.

Sorry to get of topic. This just brought back some memories.

[orangeman]

Thx so...my mom wont die from it and I wont :D. And a couple of people were right I wasnt talking about over dosage I read in a book and every drug had death listed in the over dosage section besides marijuana so I was really talking about long term effect. And sorry for those that didnt feel like answering me but did it any ways I googled my question first and didnt come up with accurate results so I came here :D thanks everyone!

[Beeblebrox.420]

Cool, man. There may be some long-term health effects, particularly in the lungs, but hell, life will kill you eventually. :D

[Hydrizzle]

you have a better chance of dying from a polio puppy attack.

[orangeman]

Ok well I dont care about dying later on I dont mind dying when I'm about 50 anyways :P.

[sToNeDpEnGuIn420]

you have a better chance of dying from a polio puppy attack.
RAWR puppys! lol
I always thought it was like you have to smoke double your weight in weed to die....hmm?

[Porkchop913]

Btw, correct me if I'm wrong but depending on your weight (95-200), you have to smoke 1200-1800 pounds of marijuana within a 15 minute period to overdose. And before you could acheive that, you would passout/ fall asleep.
now thats bullshit impossible lol

[ezjim]

Wow, the Warfield. I haven't been there in years. Not since seeing JGB back in '95. Seeing shows there was always so bizzare. It was totally cool inside but once you stepped out the door you go from Dead Head peace love and happiness to urban blight . That section of market street is always a bit of a downer. Nothing but shady strip joints, pawn shops, and frequently schitzophrenic homeless people. I never tripped or shroomed at a Warfield show simply because I didn't want to deal with the post show bummer once we got out of the venue.

Sorry to get of topic. This just brought back some memories.
yea i loved the shows there but once you got a block or 2 away like over to golden gate and jones street it was deff. junkie hell all the way i have a few of the 90-95 jgb shows from the warfield if you would like copys i can do a B&P or i also have a ftp server you can DL direct from me take care it was good hearing from another jerry fan peace jim

[duppy man]

usage and none have even been definitely confirmed, to my knowledge. It's about as safe a drug as there is, right up there with caffeine and aspirin. I really wouldn't worry about it. You have a higher risk of dying from being hit by a bus.[/QUOTE]

Cannabis up there With Caffeine have you ever read up on the misuse of caffeine and the effects on the central nervous system cannabis is at the bottom end of the scale with salvia...and air :D

[NextGen]

"He/she died from marijuana" here's one of those phrases you never here or ever will.

What are the chances, one of my jury selectees ended up blurting out "my sister died from marijuana". We already picked his dumb ass too. what a lying pos.

[orangeman]

Hahah Nextgen well thx guys you are really helpful. :D:D:D.

[haha]

You can develop lung cancer from smoking weed for several years.

[del...]

haha...bullshit. where are your facts that causes you to be so ignorant?

[KronicKing]

acctualy marijuana smoke is better for you over time with breaks.there has never been a case of lung cancer that the person got the condition from smokeing only marijuana,there have been plenty of cases were the person smoked both marijuana and ciggaretts

[ezjim]

You can develop lung cancer from smoking weed for several years.
that is not entirely true please read the following article on a cannibis and cancer http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner07022005.html

[duppy man]

I thought that Mods were suppose to be knowledgeable and fair come on guys at the very least research before you reply cannabis is known to cause cancer as well tobacco and beeble saying cannabis is up there with caffeine, come on guys, this is not a I thing,,,,, RON where are you at man

[Beeblebrox.420]

...and beeble saying cannabis is up there with caffeine... Read my post again. I'm saying weed is at least as safe as caffeine. I'm not saying it's dangerous. Get a grip already.

[summer]

anyone who is wondering about the effect of smoking pot are should go to the DEP drug education project.......pot doesn't even kill brain cells so it will not kil you....we have THC receptors in our brains we are born with them and when we we smoke our alpha waves actually increase which in turn causes the body to relax.......there is NO neurochemical changes in the brain....i am not saying that pot has no down side because you can get lung cancer....unless ofcourse you vaporize....but then again if you do the research most of us will die of one form of cancer or another....for more info go to the Schafer Libary of Drug Policy.......they have all the info, tests, studies, and facts:p :D

[Beeblebrox.420]

...there is NO neurochemical changes in the brain... Of course there are. If there weren't, you wouldn't get high. What you probably meant to say is there are no permanent neurochemical changes.

[summer]

with all due respect beeblebrox president of the universe...lol...go to the library web page and read......Schaffer Library of Drug Policy

[summer]

if i knew how to put up a link ii would

[NextGen]

You can develop lung cancer from smoking weed for several years.

BAN HIM!! :p

[del...]

>>>cannabis is known to cause cancer as well tobacco <<<

where are your facts, duppy? i gave my links to dr's reports saying the opposite of what your doc's are saying...oh wait, you don't have anything to back up your statement...

duppy, we patiently await some proof to your claims...and if it comes from freevibe, forget it. if they said the water is wet i wouldn't believe them...they have no credibility whatsoever.

[del...]

summer, all ya do to post a link is post it!


like www.cann.com


see?

[ezjim]

anyone who is wondering about the effect of smoking pot are should go to the DEP drug education project.......pot doesn't even kill brain cells so it will not kil you....we have THC receptors in our brains we are born with them and when we we smoke our alpha waves actually increase which in turn causes the body to relax.......there is NO neurochemical changes in the brain....i am not saying that pot has no down side because you can get lung cancer....unless ofcourse you vaporize....but then again if you do the research most of us will die of one form of cancer or another....for more info go to the Schafer Libary of Drug Policy.......they have all the info, tests, studies, and facts:p :D
Study: Smoking Marijuana Does Not Cause Lung Cancer
By FRED GARDNER


Marijuana smoking -"even heavy longterm use"- does not cause cancer of the lung, upper airwaves, or esophagus, Donald Tashkin reported at this year's meeting of the International Cannabinoid Research Society. Coming from Tashkin, this conclusion had extra significance for the assembled drug-company and university-based scientists (most of whom get funding from the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse). Over the years, Tashkin's lab at UCLA has produced irrefutable evidence of the damage that marijuana smoke wreaks on bronchial tissue. With NIDA's support, Tashkin and colleagues have identified the potent carcinogens in marijuana smoke, biopsied and made photomicrographs of pre-malignant cells, and studied the molecular changes occurring within them. It is Tashkin's research that the Drug Czar's office cites in ads linking marijuana to lung cancer. Tashkin himself has long believed in a causal relationship, despite a study in which Stephen Sidney examined the files of 64,000 Kaiser patients and found that marijuana users didn't develop lung cancer at a higher rate or die earlier than non-users. Of five smaller studies on the question, only two -involving a total of about 300 patients- concluded that marijuana smoking causes lung cancer. Tashkin decided to settle the question by conducting a large, prospectively designed, population-based, case-controlled study. "Our major hypothesis," he told the ICRS, "was that heavy, longterm use of marijuana will increase the risk of lung and upper-airwaves cancers."

The Los Angeles County Cancer Surveillance program provided Tashkin's team with the names of 1,209 L.A. residents aged 59 or younger with cancer (611 lung, 403 oral/pharyngeal, 90 laryngeal, 108 esophageal). Interviewers collected extensive lifetime histories of marijuana, tobacco, alcohol and other drug use, and data on diet, occupational exposures, family history of cancer, and various "socio-demographic factors." Exposure to marijuana was measured in joint years (joints per day x 365). Controls were found based on age, gender and neighborhood. Among them, 46% had never used marijuana, 31% had used less than one joint year, 12% had used 10-30 j-yrs, 2% had used 30-60 j-yrs, and 3% had used for more than 60 j-yrs. Tashkin controlled for tobacco use and calculated the relative risk of marijuana use resulting in lung and upper airwaves cancers. All the odds ratios turned out to be less than one (one being equal to the control group's chances)! Compared with subjects who had used less than one joint year, the estimated odds ratios for lung cancer were .78; for 1-10 j-yrs, .74; for 10-30 j-yrs, .85 for 30-60 j-yrs; and 0.81 for more than 60 j-yrs. The estimated odds ratios for oral/pharyngeal cancers were 0.92 for 1-10 j-yrs; 0.89 for 10-30 j-yrs; 0.81 for 30-60 j-yrs; and 1.0 for more than 60 j-yrs. "Similar, though less precise results were obtained for the other cancer sites," Tashkin reported. "We found absolutely no suggestion of a dose response." The data on tobacco use, as expected, revealed "a very potent effect and a clear dose-response relationship -a 21-fold greater risk of developing lung cancer if you smoke more than two packs a day." Similarly high odds obtained for oral/pharyngeal cancer, laryngeal cancer and esophageal cancer. "So, in summary" Tashkin concluded, "we failed to observe a positive association of marijuana use and other potential confounders."

There was time for only one question, said the moderator, and San Francisco oncologist Donald Abrams, M.D., was already at the microphone: "You don't see any positive correlation, but in at least one category [marijuana-only smokers and lung cancer], it almost looked like there was a negative correlation, i.e., a protective effect. Could you comment on that?"

"Yes," said Tashkin. "The odds ratios are less than one almost consistently, and in one category that relationship was significant, but I think that it would be difficult to extract from these data the conclusion that marijuana is protective against lung cancer. But that is not an unreasonable hypothesis."

Abrams had results of his own to report at the ICRS meeting. He and his colleagues at San Francisco General Hospital had conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled study involving 50 patients with HIV-related peripheral neuropathy. Over the course of five days, patients recorded their pain levels in a diary after smoking either NIDA-supplied marijuana cigarettes or cigarettes from which the THC had been extracted. About 25% didn't know or guessed wrong as to whether they were smoking the placebos, which suggests that the blinding worked. Abrams requested that his results not be described in detail prior to publication in a peer-reviewed medical journal, but we can generalize: they exceeded expectations, and show marijuana providing pain relief comparable to Gabapentin, the most widely used treatment for a condition that afflicts some 30% of patients with HIV.

To a questioner who bemoaned the difficulty of "separating the high from the clinical benefits," Abrams replied: "I'm an oncologist as well as an AIDS doctor and I don't think that a drug that creates euphoria in patients with terminal diseases is having an adverse effect." His study was funded by the University of California's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research.


* * *

[Dick Justice]

Case closed?

[del...]

thanks, jim.

and for those interested in learning more about the plant, laws (local and fed) and the politics of it all should make www.mpp.org a 2nd home...

[ezjim]

thanks, jim.

and for those interested in learning more about the plant, laws (local and fed) and the politics of it all should make www.mpp.org a 2nd home...
sorry bout the long post but no one was following the link to the story it's hard to get people to believe they are being lied to by the feds but its a task worth taking on

[summer]

www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/

[summer]

dell you were right i just had to post it.....lol

[NowhereMan]

I thought that Mods were suppose to be knowledgeable and fair come on guys at the very least research before you reply cannabis is known to cause cancer as well tobacco and beeble saying cannabis is up there with caffeine, come on guys, this is not a I thing,,,,, RON where are you at man

i dont understand a word of that
maybe its the weed im smoking


i can say
im more addicted to cigs,and pop,than anything

[duppy man]

Read my post again. I'm saying weed is at least as safe as caffeine. I'm not saying it's dangerous. Get a grip already.

weed is allot safer lb for lb than coffee any day our charge nurse did a project on chemicals and their effect on the human body and coffee came top with tobacco for having the most negative and most corrosive effects on the human body cannabis did not reach the top 5 if you want i will try and retrieve the info it will at least keep you up to-date on statistics, can I ask where do you glean your facts

[duppy man]

>>>cannabis is known to cause cancer as well tobacco <<<

where are your facts, duppy? i gave my links to dr's reports saying the opposite of what your doc's are saying...oh wait, you don't have anything to back up your statement...

duppy, we patiently await some proof to your claims...and if it comes from freevibe, forget it. if they said the water is wet i wouldn't believe them...they have no credibility whatsoever.
Cancer concerns

Tar in cannabis cigarettes can contain as much as 50% more cancer-causing carcinogens than tobacco.

What's more, cannabis smokers tend to draw more heavily on joints than cigarette smokers - increasing their risk of cancer further.

The government scientists who recommended the reclassification of cannabis described the risk as "real".

In their report, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs said smoking cannabis can increase the risk of "bronchitis, asthma and lung cancer as well as disorders of the heart and circulation".

This is one of the reasons why if the UK government allows the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes, it will come in pill form and will only contain the active ingredients of the drug.