Quote Originally Posted by birdgirl73
To everyone who makes the absolute statement "marijuana won't give you lung cancer," you need to learn some things about absolutes in medical science. There are none. And so you can't say that absolutely.

The research shows that THC and the other cannabinoids have good anti-cancer protective effects. But there haven't been any in-depth, lasting studies done over decades with thousands of subjects to prove there's absolutely no cancer risk. You don't know, for instance, that cannabis doesn't set in motion DNA changes in folks who, say, had earlier exposure to chemicals or particles like radon, asbestos, pollution, or second-hand smoke which may hasten the later development of pulmonary cancers in those people. You don't know that the other carcinogens in cannabis smoke won't cause cancers in certain elements of the population. You can't say for sure that people who've spent an entire lifetime smoking pesticide-laced Mexican schwag won't develop lung cancer. You can't say that inadequately flushed hydroponic cannabis won't cause cancer in certain groups.

The bottom line is you don't know how different bodies will respond to cannabis smoke because every single body is unique and responds differently to different substances.

So as nice as it sounds to make those absolute statements, the only people you're fooling is yourselves and some of the very gullible, uninformed, non-scientifically inclined kids out there who want to believe the black-and-white it's-all-good health absolutes. By doing that, you're doing yourselves and others a great disservice.
You know what, you're absolutely right. But something you're overlooking is that unfortunately, there's not evidence to point the cause of lung cancer in any instance to marijuana. It simply cannot happen, and has been proven in Dr. Tashakin's study..."The heaviest smokers in the study had smoked more than 22,000 marijuana cigarettes, or joints, while moderately heavy smokers had smoked between 11,000 to 22,000 joints. Even these smokers did not have an increased risk of developing cancer. People who smoked more marijuana were not at any increased risk compared with those who smoked less marijuana or none at all." And if you're referring to me as a non-scientifically inclined kid, you're entitled to your opinion. However, anything that I say/post about marijuana anywhere is based on a scientific study/scientific research. Bottom line, I know way too many people that are in just as good if not better health as normal people...yet they have smoked marijuana the entirity of their lives. And something you said about nasty laced schwagg weed might give someone cancer, or inadequately flushed hydro might...that's not marijuana causing cancer in any way...it's environmental factors..whatever's in the mexican weed, and the chemicals in the hydro cause the cancers if any, not any chemical that's naturally in cannabis. Once again, the ABSOLUTE is that I know ten to fifteen people who have smoked since their young years and are absolutely fine.
Markass Reviewed by Markass on . I told my doctor I smoked weed My doctor asked if I smoked so I told him weed and that I know the ups and downs to it and he asked me to name some. I told him I know it doesn't contribute to lung cancer and isn't as bad as the government says. I explained to him how tobacco is grown with radiation in the fertilizer and how a normal person gets about 80 units of radiation a year while someone who smokes a pack and a half a day gets about 80,000 units of radiation a year and how most lung cancer is from radiation or is Rating: 5