Pot not a major cancer risk

[Starchild]

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Although both marijuana and tobacco smoke are packed with cancer-causing chemicals, other qualities of marijuana seem to keep it from promoting lung cancer, according to a new report.


The difference rests in the often opposing actions of the nicotine in tobacco and the active ingredient, THC, in marijuana, says Dr. Robert Melamede of the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs.

He reviewed the scientific evidence supporting this contention in a recent issue of Harm Reduction Journal.

Whereas nicotine has several effects that promote lung and other types of cancer, THC acts in ways that counter the cancer-causing chemicals in marijuana smoke, Melamede explained in an interview with Reuters Health.

"THC turns down the carcinogenic potential," he said.

For example, lab research indicates that nicotine activates a body enzyme that converts certain chemicals in both tobacco and marijuana smoke into cancer-promoting form. In contrast, studies in mice suggest that THC blocks this enzyme activity.

Another key difference, Melamede said, is in the immune system effects of tobacco and marijuana. Smoke sends irritants into the respiratory system that trigger an immune-regulated inflammatory response, which involves the generation of potentially cell-damaging substances called free radicals. These particles are believed to contribute to a range of diseases, including cancer.

But cannabinoids -- both those found in marijuana and the versions found naturally in the body -- have been shown to dial down this inflammatory response, Melamede explained.

Another difference between tobacco and marijuana smoking, he said, has to do with cells that line the respiratory tract. While these cells have receptors that act as docks for nicotine, similar receptors for THC and other cannabinoids have not been found.

Nicotine, Melamede said, appears to keep these cells from committing "suicide" when they are genetically damaged, by smoking, for instance. When such cells do not kill themselves off, they are free to progress into tumors.

THC, however, does not appear to act this way in the respiratory tract -- though, in the brain, where there are cannabinoid receptors, it may have the beneficial effect of protecting cells from death when they are damaged from an injury or stroke, according to Melamede.

All of this, he said, fits in with population studies that have failed to link marijuana smoking with a higher risk of lung cancer -- though there is evidence that pot users have more respiratory problems, such as chronic cough and frequent respiratory infections.

If marijuana does not promote lung cancer, that could factor into the ongoing debate over so-called medical marijuana. Melamede said he believes "marijuana has loads of medicinal value," for everything from multiple sclerosis, to the chronic pain of arthritis, to nausea caused by cancer treatment.

U.S. government officials, however, maintain that the evidence for medical marijuana is not there. Ten states allow people to use marijuana with a doctor's prescription, but the Supreme Court has ruled that federal law trumps state law.

SOURCE: Harm Reduction Journal, October 18, 2005.

[rysk8er420]

Just one more reason why weed is the best drug ever!

[Starchild]

Agreed!

[Ganj]

not a major cancer risk??

marijuana has anti-cancer characteristics, the only way it should be involved with cancer is if it was being used to help cure it. if you smoke cigarettes and marijuana, lung cancer is not a problem you'll face...ever. that's why i'm going to stick with our ganja throughout my whole life and, as we all know, it also assists in movement disorders such as, parkinson's disease, muscle spasms, etc.


marijuana is the most beneficial drug to man-kind.

[Cheesybeast]

I'd love to belive in stuff like this, but i just think its pot heads lookin for hope. At the end of the day smokin weed causes lung cancer, it contains two times more tar and carbon monoxide than regular cigerettes and that a pure geen joint. Its something weve got to deal with if you wanna smoke it..

peace

[lemonboy]

And that's how the US Government would like you to think. It is easy to look at something and draw a conclusion without any scientific evidence. These studies that have popped up recently represent the result of someone's work though. I'll take that over the theory you're willing to blindly pull out of your ass any day.

Cannabis has already CURED cancer in mice. Keep those eyes and ears open, kiddos.

[Starchild]

I do not agree.This study was done by a major university with grant monies..

[beachguy in thongs]

I'd love to belive in stuff like this, but i just think its pot heads lookin for hope. At the end of the day smokin weed causes lung cancer, it contains two times more tar and carbon monoxide than regular cigerettes and that a pure geen joint. Its something weve got to deal with if you wanna smoke it..

peace

Peace back in...

Smoking weed promotes Melatonin production, in the Pineal, in the Brain which fights cancer and heart disease. Marijuana is the best way to do this, your Melatonin levels go up 4,000%, two hours after smoking a joint.

EDIT: Smoking Weed also expands the lungs. And extends cell-longetivity.

When you stop producing Melatonin, it's not long before you die.

http://www.cures-not-wars.org/melajuana.html

http://melatonin.com/

CTB

[MightyFourTwenty]

I'd love to belive in stuff like this, but i just think its pot heads lookin for hope. At the end of the day smokin weed causes lung cancer, it contains two times more tar and carbon monoxide than regular cigerettes and that a pure geen joint. Its something weve got to deal with if you wanna smoke it..

peace

Hey, way to buy into the government's propaganda! :thumbsup:

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

I'd love to belive in stuff like this, but i just think its pot heads lookin for hope. At the end of the day smokin weed causes lung cancer, it contains two times more tar and carbon monoxide than regular cigerettes and that a pure geen joint. Its something weve got to deal with if you wanna smoke it..

peacei'd like you to prove this.


let me point some things out to you...




marijuana has four hundred tewenty different (chemical) compounds in it. many of these compounds have yet to have been "discovered" or understood. in other words, we dont know what they do.


but...

we do.


just not nessecarily what ones, why, or how.


marijuana smokers will vouch: it cleans your lungs.

proof: the phlegm you cough up.


marijuana accelerates the rate at which the body eliminates dead cells.
this is why there has never been a recorded case of cancer in any (at least moderate) marijuana users ever.

also, because of the rate in which the body breaks down dead cells, you also absorb more nutriants from food, as well as digest it faster (the munchies effect).

do you wish to go further?

[MullManiac]

No matter what these studies come up with it's common sence that weed (smoking it anyway) is bad for you. I'm sure there are some medical benifits but for most of us (young healthy ect) the negitives most likly outweigh the possitives.

[UserName AlphaNiner]

No matter what these studies come up with it's common sence that weed (smoking it anyway) is bad for you. I'm sure there are some medical benifits but for most of us (young healthy ect) the negitives most likly outweigh the possitives.

Examples? I usually don't need help with word problems, but this one isn't adding up.

"Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen"

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

No matter what these studies come up with it's common sence that weed (smoking it anyway) is bad for you. I'm sure there are some medical benifits but for most of us (young healthy ect) the negitives most likly outweigh the possitives.i just told you something, you ignored me completely.


marijuana cleans your lungs. it heals damage caused by smoke and other things you've inhaled.

it expells this junk from your lungs (the phlegm you cough up).

and because of the increased cellular death rate, your body can produce more new cells, therefore healing faster.

MARIJUANA is not bad for you in any way of the word, except, perhaps, user stupidity...

[MullManiac]

It does not clean your lungs! thats one of the stupidist things i've heard in a while.
Your lungs have a mucus lining that protects your aviolies from all the crap/dust/smoke that you breath in, but if theres just too much crap in there then it becomes toxic and you have to get rid of it (the phlegm you cough up), when you cough this up it leaves the surface of your lungs exposed to carsonagenics and other such poisens.

And come on it's common sence that breathing in smoke is bad for you.

Ps. where on earth did you get that fact about the coughing up phlegm being a sign that your lungs are clean and healthy!?

And as for the incresed cell death, if a cell in your body is unhealthy it will be replaced, weed kills off healthy cells that will need more energy and more nutrience to be replaced.

I'm not saying it has not possitive heath benifits, i'm saying it has more negitive effects then possitive ones.

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

you're forgetting about the accelerated cellular death and regrowth.

yeah, smoking pot excessively would totally damage your lungs, like tobacco, but if you're not over doing it, you wont cause more damage than your body can quickly repair.

[MullManiac]

Thats like saying cutting yourself with a razor blade is good for you cause it's killing cells so they grow back faster, but with that there is an increased chance of infectionnot to menturn all the nasty chemicals and toxins that would get into your body and the scar it would leave, smoking is a lot like cutting your lungs with a razor blade, it's not gonna kill you (right away) but it's cirtanly not good for you.

And no matter how little you smoke it's stil, bad for you, just the less you smoke the less bad it is for you and the less chance you have of gettig cancer.

I'm not saying if you smoke you will die, but it does increase your chances of dieing (later in life mind you), it's a risk every smoker (yes even me) has to live with.

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

i must've found it somewhere, try NORMAL's website, but somewhere they found out that pot acts almost like a scrub for your lungs, scrubbing crap off, leaving no residue to eat at the lungs.


although, im sure you're right, that scrubbing can cut up the lungs, but with dead cells being eliminated from the body so much faster, new ones have a chance to grow back faster, and you heal faster.


healing = evolution.


if you evolve to adapt to a situation, it doesnt harm you anymore.

[MullManiac]

"healing = evolution. "
Look up your definitions ;), for evolution to occur you need death ;).

As for the other stuff inhailing smoke of any kinda will in a way 'scrub your lungs' but if you didnt smoke in the first place they wouldnt need 'scrubing'.

When you say 'scrub' you are talking about your body attempting to get rid of all the tars, dead cells and other such matirial that are in your lungs as a result of smoking.

A simple explenation on how lungs work:
You breath in, oxygen and nitrogen go into your lungs and oxygen is absorbed into little air sacks and then diffuses into your blood, your blood goes around your body and picks up carbon dioxide and gives off oxygen. Blood goes back to lungs and carbon dioxide diffuses from your blood into your lungs and is expeled.
Any change to this is going to harm your lungs! Even if the air you breath in has more then 20% oxygen in it it will harm your lungs (very very slightly, almost unnotasable) so what do you think tars and other carsonagenics will do. Sure THC may be slightly benifitial but over all it wouldnt make much differance.

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

ok... when you cut yourself, cells die. when they heal, that is evolution on it's smallest scale.


therefore, if you expose yourself to diseases, and your body recovers, you have evolved a tolerance.

the same applies to your lungs.

[MullManiac]

I am praying to god you are not a doctor!!!

First of all evelution cant happen to an indervitual, it's a population of inderviduals that slowly evolves due to mutations in there genctic make up.

And as for your other point, when you get a desease you immune system kicks in and your memory cells grip onto the pathogen and copy the protine sequence on the suface of it and make antibodies to combat it, even when the desease is gone your body still has those antibodies in it so if the desease comes back they attack and destroy it right away and u dont feel a thing.
Now lungs work nothing like that at all, they dont have a memory and so cant develop a tolorance.

[mseerob]

i just told you something, you ignored me completely.


marijuana cleans your lungs. it heals damage caused by smoke and other things you've inhaled.

it expells this junk from your lungs (the phlegm you cough up).

and because of the increased cellular death rate, your body can produce more new cells, therefore healing faster.

MARIJUANA is not bad for you in any way of the word, except, perhaps, user stupidity...

WTF Of course its bad for you? what the hell are you talking about, how old are you exactly? Of course it doesnt kill you or permanently damage your brain but it sure is to hell not good for your health at all in anyway.

[MullManiac]

WTF Of course its bad for you? what the hell are you talking about, how old are you exactly? Of course it doesnt kill you or permanently damage your brain but it sure is to hell not good for your health at all in anyway.
Who said it wont kill you, it could.... hasnt realy been enough research on it to know for sure.

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

Who said it wont kill you, it could.... hasnt realy been enough research on it to know for sure.exactly, so who the hell are you to say you know any more than me?

[MullManiac]

you can tell quite easily by reading this thread, i know enough about that human body and how it works to form the very likely hypothesis that breathing in smoke is not benifitial to your lungs, but most people just call that common sence.

[Stoner Shadow Wolf]

yes, but what do you know about marijuana, and it's smoke, that says for sure it does not, in fact, help your lungs more than it harms them?

[MullManiac]

Well first of all the fact that u cough up phlegm! thats a clear indicater that somethings not right.

We know it's bad for you we just dont know how bad yet, much the same as smoking through an alluminion pipe, theres no real proof that it's bad for you but there is a lot of evidence that it is.

The only way smoking weed could be good for you is if the THC or any other compound found in it were not only good for you but powerful enough to override the bad chemicals so top speak. And this is almost insanly unlikly.

[Monkey4Sale]

marijuana has four hundred tewenty different (chemical) compounds in it. many of these compounds have yet to have been "discovered" or understood. in other words, we dont know what they do.

Marijuana doesn't have 420 chemical compounds. Read the info on it, that's a myth. One that has been proven false.


ok... when you cut yourself, cells die. when they heal, that is evolution on it's smallest scale.


therefore, if you expose yourself to diseases, and your body recovers, you have evolved a tolerance.

the same applies to your lungs.

Where you high during science class? Evolution happens over millions of years, your immune system isn't evolution at it's smallest scale. Your immune system is a byproduct of evolution.

I'm not arguing the idea that Marijuana could be good for you, I'm just sayin Stoner Shadow Wolf needs to read a science text book. You don't know what you are talking about, and are just straight out wrong. Also as an Oregonian, you should know better.

[Goodman3eb]

PLEASE tell me you didn't just compare smoking to slicing your lungs with a razorblade!

Granted, inhaling particulate carbon isn't great for your lungs, but it's nothing your lungs can't handle. Your lungs were designed to filter out airborne particulates-- thus coughing up phlegm. It's a natural response to the smoke, and it's only bad if you smoke so much that you no longer have phlegm to coat your lungs and throat.

That said, heavy smokers DO have an increased chance of lung infection--the article confirmed that. However, lung cancer is a whole different thing, and marijuana has been shown to be protective against lung cancer.

Finally, you're confusing evolution and Darwinian natural selection. Natural selection occurs over many generations through genetic mutation, but evolution can occur on a cellular level within a human. For instance, every time you get a virus, the body develops new antibodies to fight it off, and after that first sickness, you never get sick from that virus again--hence people only getting Chicken Pox once. That's evolution, plain and simple. As to whether your lungs actually get more resistant to smoke over time, I don't know, but don't rule it out as a flaw in evolutionary theory, because it's not.

To summarize, marijuana doesn't scrub your lungs clean, and it doesn't give you cancer. Certain effects are detrimental, and others are beneficial. To get the best of both worlds, don't smoke in excess, and only smoke good weed to avoid inhaling more smoke than necessary. Most of all, just enjoy being high!

[MullManiac]

PLEASE tell me you didn't just compare smoking to slicing your lungs with a razorblade!

Granted, inhaling particulate carbon isn't great for your lungs, but it's nothing your lungs can't handle. Your lungs were designed to filter out airborne particulates-- thus coughing up phlegm. It's a natural response to the smoke, and it's only bad if you smoke so much that you no longer have phlegm to coat your lungs and throat.

That said, heavy smokers DO have an increased chance of lung infection--the article confirmed that. However, lung cancer is a whole different thing, and marijuana has been shown to be protective against lung cancer.

Finally, you're confusing evolution and Darwinian natural selection. Natural selection occurs over many generations through genetic mutation, but evolution can occur on a cellular level within a human. For instance, every time you get a virus, the body develops new antibodies to fight it off, and after that first sickness, you never get sick from that virus again--hence people only getting Chicken Pox once. That's evolution, plain and simple. As to whether your lungs actually get more resistant to smoke over time, I don't know, but don't rule it out as a flaw in evolutionary theory, because it's not.

To summarize, marijuana doesn't scrub your lungs clean, and it doesn't give you cancer. Certain effects are detrimental, and others are beneficial. To get the best of both worlds, don't smoke in excess, and only smoke good weed to avoid inhaling more smoke than necessary. Most of all, just enjoy being high!

Ok first of all natural selection results in evelution, i've been studying this for a year at uni so dont question me on it before u go and read even a high school text book! And i've explained the chicken pox thing and why it isnt evelution, it's a form of addaption.

Second smoking weed is very similar ot cutting yourself with a razor blade, and again please read through my earlier posts and give me a good reason why it isn.

lastly where on earth did u get the idea that you could run out of phlegm!?! it is the mucus lineing of your lungs and keeps getting produced when u lose it, this is a good thing but it takes time to regenerate it and during this time the chance of an infection or deadly carsonagenics getting into your lungs is a lot higher then normal. And there is no proof that weed provents cancer! there is a chance one chemical in it does but then what about the countless more! to put it in units: all the THC in one joint may provide 1 unit of cancer protection while all the other chemicals in that joint may provide 20 units of cancer, so once all the cancer proventions units are cancled out you still have 19 cancer units!

Another thing for all of you saying that weed cant kill you, remember that no one has ever dies directly from AIDS.

[Goodman3eb]

Evolution, in the Darwinian sense, is a select form of adaptation. Actually, Darwin never uses the term evolution in his writings-- he favors natural selection. What you call adaptation, I call evolution. We're talking about the same thing.

As for the razor blade thing: granted, weed isn't going to be good for your lungs, but comparing it to hacking away at your lungs like a razor blade is the kind of sensationalistic propaganda that one tends to see from the likes of Harry J Anslinger and other DEA cronies.

Also, I didn't say that you run out of phlegm-- however, the more you smoke, the more phlegm you cough up, and since your body only produces phlegm at a certain rate, the more you smoke, the longer you go having an inadequate amount of phlegm to protect your lungs. Smoking doesn't cause you to run out of phlegm, it just uses the phlegm quickly, leaving your lungs exposed to infection.

As to the weed preventing cancer, check out this article:
http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner07022005.html
If you read it, you'll find that marijuana smokers had less occurrence of cancer than even the control group. If you read this article:
http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4900.shtml
you will find that THC is an effective treatment for brain tumors.

Finally, not a single case of lung cancer has been linked to weed and weed alone.

So you've been studying this stuff at a university level, but don't know the difference between evolution and natural selection, and provide your in-depth, science-based rebuttals in terms of "cancer units?"

[MullManiac]

Ok for the last time evelution is a term used to decribe the effect of natural selection over time. Natural selection happenes every mateing season when the female will chose the most sutable (and most genectily fit) male to mate with, that isnt evelution but if this happens over a number of years and is coupled with mutation, immergration or any other mechanism of evelution then it will result in evelution, any other use of the term, no matter how popular it is, is incorrect.

As for the hacking at you lungs with a razor blade i never said any such thing, i said smoking killing healthy cells and allowing them to grow back is like say cutting your arm, ie killing healthy cells so that they can grow back, seems very simmilar if you ask me.

And as for those links i wouldnt call them credible sources, if i looked how many sites do you think i could find that say wedd give you cancer, 60 years ago they thought one drag would make you go crazy.

Lastly there are very few lung cancers directly associated with smoking tobbaco, it doesnt matter how much weed you have smoked in your lifetime, if you have ever had a drag of a cig theres a chance you could have got cancer from that so they cant say it is from the weed as there is doubt there.

And i recognise there are a lot of people in this forum that no almost nothing about cancer/the human body ect so i am trying to make it as simple as possible. If i had the time i could write pages and pages on this sort of stuff. So please dont question my inteligance when all i did was simplify my answer for the benifits of others.

[Goodman3eb]

1) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=evolution

2) I wasn't commenting on the subject matter of your post so much as the imagery used.

3) Who's to say your sources are any more credible than mine? Studies have been done showing both sides; I was just posting links to the ones that supported my case. If you can show me any studies (that aren't government funded) that showed the lung cancer risk-- and I mean studies, not just anecdotes or pamphlets--please post them.

Also, the government never thought marijuana would make you go crazy; they simply made that the basis of their anti-hemp campaign to hide their ulterior political motives. If you want, you can read my term paper on the subject here:
http://boards.cannabis.com/showthread.php?t=37653

4)Source on that tobacco statistic? AFAIK it's flat-out wrong. Moreover, the study I posted showed the numbers, which thus far, you have failed to do.

5)I don't mean to question your intelligence so much as your fact-finding. Also, it's not spelled "inteligance" (or "evelution", either). Have you even read Darwin's "Origin of Species"?

[MullManiac]

I infact own Origin of Species and am very intrested in evelution, also you shot yourself in the foot with that link as it shows nothing surgesting that a natural responce to an infection can be termed as evelution. But as for dictionaries these days, did you know google is in the new macquary dictionary (as in the internet site). I guess anything can be classed as a word these days.

And as for my source i do enough of that at uni and i just cant be bothered scaning stuff. Andjust because something is govenment funded doesnt mean its wrong... where else are they gonna get enough money from to fund a reliable experiment.

I'm not sure exactly how many cases of lung cancer a year are caursed exclusivly by smoking cigs but it cant be many, have you got any idea how hard it is to outright prove something lile that? very difficlt soemtimes.

What is the problem with some of you guys here, sure the gov hasnt done everything right but they do what they do in the intrests of the majority of the people, just because the gov said it doesnt make it wrong!

Ps. what does AFAIK mean?

Pps. oh yeah the spelling... i'm dyslexic