Log in

View Full Version : MSNBC No marijuana link to lung cancer


Ganjasaurusrex
06-03-2006, 02:54 AM
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12943013/


If link doesnt highlight use search box.
CBsDankNugs
06-03-2006, 03:42 AM
wow thats pretty sweet. now finally people might realize that pot isnt worse then cigs.
benagain
06-03-2006, 03:50 AM
Fuck Yea :thumbsup: Good news. Everyone has known it but no one wanted to admit it. Allthough theres still tar and shit in any kind of smoke (paper, weed, sawdust) theres not as much shit in weed as tobacco in cigs. Smoking too much weed at once can be a bitch on your lungs, but as with all good things, use in moderation is allways the best way to go :D
beachguy in thongs
06-03-2006, 04:13 AM
wow thats pretty sweet. now finally people might realize that pot isnt worse then cigs.

Except for those Fox News Channel viewers.
orangeman
06-03-2006, 04:27 AM
wow thats pretty sweet. now finally people might realize that pot isnt worse then cigs.

Why would they think that in the first place?
beachguy in thongs
06-03-2006, 06:56 PM
Why would they think that in the first place?

Because cigarettes have filters?
Stellar
06-06-2006, 09:32 PM
Why would they think that in the first place?

I think less than 5 years ago, there were news reports about Marijuana smoke being more dense with carcinogens than Cigarrete smoke. They were saying something like one joint equaled 5 ciggs.
Nullific
06-06-2006, 11:12 PM
Cannabis lacks the radioactive elements. That's a very important detail to me that lots of people overlook.
1234abcd
06-07-2006, 02:03 AM
Yeah I read this study a couple weeks ago, Im glad it made it over to msnbc.com :thumbsup:
Stellar
06-07-2006, 11:46 PM
Cannabis lacks the radioactive elements. That's a very important detail to me that lots of people overlook.

?

Radioactive particulates are a by-product of most combustion. Radioactive Particulates are in cannabis smoke, just as they are in cigarette smoke, and virtually all burned plant materials.
Nullific
06-08-2006, 07:58 PM
^ Source it. AFAIK cannabis contains no significant traces of any radionuclides, at least no more than any other ordinary plant or organism on this planet.
Tobacco (http://consensus.nih.gov/1986/1986SmokelessTobacco053html.htm) is a special case though because it is grown in soil fertilized (http://www.library.ucsf.edu/tobacco/batco/html/9600/9604/) with calcium phosphate derived from apatite mineral containing radium, lead 210 and polonium 210. These radionuclides become stuck in the tobacco trichomes and concentrated on the leaf.
Stellar
06-08-2006, 09:52 PM
Two different ballgames.

Tobacco suffers from two different sources of pollution, which causes it to become more cancerous than it would naturally be: Fertilizers and topical pesticides. Both of which are never properly flushed out of or off of the plant. Not to mention the added common variable of the soil having been fertilized and having pesticides flushed through it for countless generations of crops, adding more to the overall toxicity of the matter.

However, radioactive particulates are a product of actually burning the plants. There is really no way to avoid them entirely, unless you eat the plant. As for which smoke would contain more? I am not sure. As far as which plant is overall more toxic, commercial tobacco versus Cannabis which has been responsibly grown, no brainer.