Printable View
ok. every fucking day i have the same debate with the same kid. he is trying to tell me that smoking weed can, and will give you lung cancer and you will die if enough is smoked. his argument is that smoking anything (smoke inhalation) will give you cancer and youll die. and i say...hmm...that explains why there has never been a single documented case of lung cancer or death as a result of cannabis alone....
if im wrong, please someone tell me, but lets hear what you guys think.
I don't think it can't happen. But from wht I read, and found out the truth n how the govt lied to us n ur friend,plus 2 days daily factoid chances are very very slim. *looks < to > all of a sudden paranoid* F U uncle sam 4 all the bullshit propaganda u poisned us with n if ur watching n try 2 seize me I warn u my house is wired 2 blow. N no I'm not some crazed hippie *tokes a bowl*
it cannot happen. i have found many credible sites, a few that clearly say "An exhaustive search of the literature finds no credible reports of deaths induced by marijuana" which is a direct quote btw. and hes still telling me that it will give you cancer and die.
you think there would have to SOME reported case of a guy who blazed daily for 50years or something and got lung cancer, if weed could give you lung cancer.
Wht about smokin weed withblunts all the time? I hear they have nicotine. Is there a chance of getting cance, u think?
nextlineismine: exactly. there has never ever in the history of the world been a documented case of death directly related to smoking cannabis, (deaths while under the influence not included).
here:
http://www.reconsider.org/issues/pub...ed_deaths_.htm
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm
tell him yeah it does give you lung cancer so go start smokin fuckhead :-)
Have you brought up the polonium argument yet? I'm lazy, so I'm just copying and pasting this from another post of mine.
Now, smoking anything is harmful to you, but there are other ways to use cannabis. For example, you could eat or vaporize.Quote:
Originally Posted by graph
Ok, this calls for us to think about it logically.
Cannabis has no direct link whatsoever with any form of cancerous tissue, although, i hate to say it, any smoke will be bad for your lungs, altohugh maybe cannabis really isnt. What i do know is, no one has ever died from cannabis, no one will ever die from cannabis, which makes me think, maybe it actually doesnt cause cancer, and maybe it does prevent it. I dont know, but im gunner carry on smoking it, and if i get cancer, i'll let you know.
Your friend is brainwashed by government propaganda im afraid
We should all assume smoking weed *could* give you cancer just due to the sheer fact that you are smoking it.
But, really, would any of us stop smoking weed if we found out it causes cancer? I somehow don't expect to see most smokers stopping.
yea. my arguement is so logical. i kept saying, "yes, you are smoking, therefore it cant possibly be good for you. however, no one has ever died from smokig weed, and no one has ever gotten cancer"Quote:
Originally Posted by LIP
then he comes back with some quote from Whang Zu or something like that which said soemthing like "as a result, i have now linked cannabis consumption with head and neck cancer"....
i was like are u kidding me lol.
then i was liike ok dude im starting a debate on cann.com, come post, (hes already a member) and hes like "well no shit no one on there is going to admit that its harmful and can cause cancer"....
we need some 100% true facts guys.
:rasta: tell youre mate he is full of utter shit and dosnt have a clue what the fuck he is on about and boot him in the nuts.
Shit on cancer. In the netherlands every one in three persons gets it, so how about I would rather get cancer for sure and smoke weed, instead of not smoke weed and still get cancer. I'll die anyway.
There was actually a purpose to this post but I forgot. Oh yeah. I do believe cannabis can give you cancer. It doesn't cure cancer anyway, you can get cancer even from eating potatoe chips. Everything is causing cancer these days, and I don't see why smoke (God didn't *really* mean humans to set plants on fire and then inhale all the smoking hot fumes of that) wouldn't cause cancer any less
Your buddy is dead wrong, ppl get cancer for cigarrets because of the fact that the government has growers grow the tobacco in some kind of soil that has small amounts of radioactivity, I wich I could remember the soruce, if any has heard of this post it. But anyways ya its the radioactivity that is giving ppl lung cancer not so much the carbon from the smoke. Im not saying carbon from the smoke is good but its not even close to the main cause of the cancer, I think like only 1-2% of lung cancer was caused by the carbon, and the rest was air pollution and the radioactivity in cigarrates.
I think you have to be incredibly stupid to think that pulling smoke into your lungs is going to have anything but negative effects on the tissue.
Yeah, mj is probably a contributing factor to lung cancer. Of course, these days, so is breathing the air downtown in a major metropolitan area. Pick your poison I guess. It's not like we're going to live forever afterall. Live by the smoke, die by the smoke...
This discussion interests me, and so I asked my husband, who's a cardio-pulmonary physician, about it. My sister has advanced cancer and smokes to alleviate the symptoms of chemo, so no one here is very worried about her getting lung cancer since she already has it somewhere else But anyway, my husband is now a big advocate of medical MJ, and here's what he said.
"You won't find many reasonable, educated folks going around recommending that people inhale combustible raw vegetable matter of any kind into their lungs. Unless you grow it yourself and know what's been/not been sprayed on it, you simply can't fully know what you're getting, but chances are that the tar and the carcinogens folks get in cigarettes aren't present in MJ in the same way. We know cigarettes cause cancer because we've seen decades of evidence of that and because we know the cigarette companies manipulate their contents. But no one has ever actually done tests on MJ smokers, and since the FDA is so stupidly against the substance, we probably won't find out anytime soon."
He said that even the heaviest grass smoker probably doesn't take in nearly as much smoke as a cigarette smoker does. "If folks are really worried about the carcinogenic effects--or if causes breathing problems in some individuals--they ought to take it some other form." He figures most folks don't get enough smoke to be worried. Someday if they make it legal, perhaps we'll know because we can study the long-term effects. To me, it'd be interesting to go to Amsterdam and see if cancer rates among long term, frequent MJ smokers are higher.
Anyway, thought I'd pass that on. . .
^ yea i agree. im not denying that its bad for you, and im sure inhaling burning plant matter does have some of the same cancer causing toxins, however, they must be so small and miniscule that no one has ever gotten cancer as a direct result from cannabis consumption...i really dont know. i wish someone who had hardcore proof would step up and say the facts one way or the other. "will excessive cannabis smokers get lung cancer"???
I can tell you I have had cancer twice and after lots of surgery I am in remission only since I have started smoking it. I still have a small spot on my arm that has now had no changes in 4 years. Funny that is when I stopped taking meds from the dr and switched to MJ.
So that is my testimony.
your friend is only gonna believe what he wants to. That is the curse of ignorance. Tell him you respect his misguided opinon and what ever he says will not change the truth for you. That you agree to disagree. Steal the wind back and make it a non issue. Then maybe you won't get bothered by it everyday.
If his mouth is open, his ears are closed. Sad.
I hate it when people try and preach to me and get the facts wrong. Makes me wanna make a homie bat.
Good Luck!
;)
You are a absolute moron, its people like you that will never get cannabis legalized "my house is wired to blow" .....Idiot your probably like 15Quote:
Originally Posted by VA KID
Quote:
Originally Posted by LIP
Noone here knows what there talking about 100%(on this subject) , only what they have read or been told. Unless you are a Research Doctor , im pretty sure none of us can say for sure.
However i do agree with You LIP and some of the others but im a stoner so im bias man:thumbsup:
[QUOTE=Polymirize]I think you have to be incredibly stupid to think that pulling smoke into your lungs is going to have anything but negative effects on the tissue.
lmao
http://www.hempworld.com/HempPharm/a...nabinoidsantic....
http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabi...ournal/1975_mu...
http://www.counterpunch.org/gardner070220005.html
Also NORML has some interesting stuff on cancer and pot.
lol none of those links work...Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Crow
Quote:
Have you brought up the polonium argument yet? I'm lazy, so I'm just copying and pasting this from another post of mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by graph
Cancer is a very dangerous thing, and there have been arguments back and forth about what is worse. Keep in mind, while tar has shown to be one of many contributing factors in lung cancer, what has shown to be more prevalent in causing any type of cancer is radioactivity. Tobacco industries use polonium-210, which is a radioactive substance, to grow tobacco plants. While the FDA says that polonium-210 was shown to have no negative side affects while ingesting plants grown using the radioactive substance, it is still inconclusive if smoking such plant can cause lung cancer. Also, keep in mind cannabis users don't smoke leaves, but the bud, which contains 33% less tar, and cannabis does not narrow the air passages in the lungs like tobacco.
Tobacco crops are fertilized with calcium phosphate fertilizers derived from the mineral apatite which does contain traces of radium, polonium 210 and lead 210. When the tobacco is growing these particles get trapped and concentrated on the leaf. Polonium 210 is the only ingredient in tobacco tar that has been proven to cause cancers in lab animals by itself.Quote:
Your buddy is dead wrong, ppl get cancer for cigarrets because of the fact that the government has growers grow the tobacco in some kind of soil that has small amounts of radioactivity, I wich I could remember the soruce, if any has heard of this post it.
http://www.acsa2000.net/HealthAlert/...e_tobacco.html
http://www.ukcia.org/research/cancer2.htm
http://nepenthes.lycaeum.org/Drugs/T...ancer.rad.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_...obacco_smoking
Wholehearted agreement here....Quote:
Originally Posted by krustythfreakinclown
While a typical cannabis joint may contain as much as 150% of the tar of a cigarette, think of how many joints you smoke in a day compared to even a light tobacco smoker. Tobacco also contains many other chemicals that brew into a nice cocktail of carcinogens.
That being said, there are many other lung diseases other than cancer, and many are helped along by breathing in tar which coats and damages the tiny scillia in the airways. But the same is true (and probably moreso) with smoggy air, and I don't see any health nuts wearing gas masks on the street :D
To my mind, the benefits far outweight any perceived threats. Okay, said my piece :dance:
-=The King=-
Smoking anything isn't good for your lungs and I would be more supprised if there was no chance of getting cancer than if there were.
Here in NY we have no laws to protect victims of Cancer or Aids hiv Glaucoma waging a war against the suffering in this country has to end while Bush has to clean his ass of the mexicans on our borders who bring us dirt weed.:pimp: