Pot not a major cancer risk

[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.

mseerob Reviewed by mseerob on 10-31-2005. Pot not a major cancer risk 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 Rating: 5

[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?"