Does smoking kill iagos? All this and more!

[Screenor]

Check his IP this time, I want to see the 24.'s before beleiving this.

Secondly: Beer shouldn't be a recommendation of any kind, weed is the only thing that wont effect you. (Unless at an early age, so I've been told.)

Beer kills brain cells.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE A FAMOUS MYTHIX QUOTE ON BEER FOR THIS.

[xex]

Check his IP this time, I want to see the 24.'s before beleiving this.

Secondly: Beer shouldn't be a recommendation of any kind, weed is the only thing that wont effect you. (Unless at an early age, so I've been told.)

Beer kills brain cells.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE A FAMOUS MYTHIX QUOTE ON BEER FOR THIS.

Weed doesn't effect you? It kills your sperm cells.

[Screenor]

There is a lot of anti-weed propoganda.  There is also a lot of pro-weed propoganda.  Both sides have lots of arguments about the other, and many of them are BS.  Everybody who does studies in either direction has an agenda, and there's nothing to believe.

It seems to me that weed is at least as bad as cigarettes.  I don't see how it could possibly be better, because you're inhaling the same types of chemicals into your lungs.  But people who want you to smoke weed will tell you their BS to keep you smoking, the same way people who don't want you to tell you their BS to make you stop. 

I don't recommend believing any of it.

I don't think weed is nearly as bad as cigarettes, simply due to the fact that you're not inhaling tar, and you can't give someone else cancer from them just being around you. Atleast according to any medical history of it happening, that is.

I'm not saying it's "better", however, it's certainly a lot less lethal when compared to the fact that no one has ever gotten "second hand weed" before.

To be honest, I'm not pro drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.

[iago]

I don't think weed is nearly as bad as cigarettes, simply due to the fact that you're not inhaling tar, and you can't give someone else cancer from them just being around you. Atleast according to any medical history of it happening, that is.

Actually, I'm afraid that it contains more tar than cigarettes. 

'four times as much tar is deposited in the respiratory tract from the smoke of marijuana than from that of a comparable amount of tobacco, thus amplifying respiratory exposure to the cancer-causing substances in marijuana smoke.'

SOURCE: 2000 July - Journal of Immunology

"With regard to the carcinogenic potential of marijuana, it is noteworthy that the tar phase of marijuana smoke contains many of the same carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco smoke, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, such as benz[a]pyrene, which was recently identified as a key factor promoting human lung cancer."

[.........]

    The following lines of evidence suggest that marijuana may play an important role in the development of respiratory cancer.

    * The tar phase of marijuana smoke, as already noted, contains many of the same carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco smoke.
    * One marijuana cigarette was shown by Wu and colleagues (1988) to deposit four times as much tar in the lung as a single filtered tobacco cigarette of approximately the same weight. The higher content of carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons in marijuana tar and the greater deposition of marijuana tar in the lung act together to amplify exposure of the marijuana smoker to the carcinogens in the tar phase.
    * Bronchial immunohisotology revealed overexpression of genetic markers of lung tumor progression in smokers of marijuana.
    * Preliminary findings suggest that marijuana smoke activates cytochrome P4501A1, the enzyme that converts polycyclic hydrocarbons, such as benz[a]pyrene, into active carcinogens."

Donald P. Tashkin, M.D., in his 1997 article for the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; Effects of Marijuana on the Lung and Its Immune Defenses

I'm not saying it's "better", however, it's certainly a lot less lethal when compared to the fact that no one has ever gotten "second hand weed" before.

Regarding the comparison to second hand smoke, there is actually no evidence that anybody has died from second hand cigarette smoke.  The statistical difference between somebody that died who were exposed to a lot of second hand smoke compared to people that weren't is very, very small (something like 0.000001%, which works out to about 5 people in the US, ever).  I dont' have a source on that, but I remember seeing it on a documentary. 

To be honest, I'm not pro drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.

And to be honest, I'm not anti- drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.  In either direction.  You can't trust what you hear from either side.  People who want weed to be legal are going to shift things to their side, and people who don't also will.  Don't believe anybody.

[Screenor]

I don't think weed is nearly as bad as cigarettes, simply due to the fact that you're not inhaling tar, and you can't give someone else cancer from them just being around you. Atleast according to any medical history of it happening, that is.

Actually, I'm afraid that it contains more tar than cigarettes. 

'four times as much tar is deposited in the respiratory tract from the smoke of marijuana than from that of a comparable amount of tobacco, thus amplifying respiratory exposure to the cancer-causing substances in marijuana smoke.'

SOURCE: 2000 July - Journal of Immunology

"With regard to the carcinogenic potential of marijuana, it is noteworthy that the tar phase of marijuana smoke contains many of the same carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco smoke, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, such as benz[a]pyrene, which was recently identified as a key factor promoting human lung cancer."

[.........]

    The following lines of evidence suggest that marijuana may play an important role in the development of respiratory cancer.

    * The tar phase of marijuana smoke, as already noted, contains many of the same carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco smoke.
    * One marijuana cigarette was shown by Wu and colleagues (1988) to deposit four times as much tar in the lung as a single filtered tobacco cigarette of approximately the same weight. The higher content of carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons in marijuana tar and the greater deposition of marijuana tar in the lung act together to amplify exposure of the marijuana smoker to the carcinogens in the tar phase.
    * Bronchial immunohisotology revealed overexpression of genetic markers of lung tumor progression in smokers of marijuana.
    * Preliminary findings suggest that marijuana smoke activates cytochrome P4501A1, the enzyme that converts polycyclic hydrocarbons, such as benz[a]pyrene, into active carcinogens."

Donald P. Tashkin, M.D., in his 1997 article for the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; Effects of Marijuana on the Lung and Its Immune Defenses

I'm not saying it's "better", however, it's certainly a lot less lethal when compared to the fact that no one has ever gotten "second hand weed" before.

Regarding the comparison to second hand smoke, there is actually no evidence that anybody has died from second hand cigarette smoke.  The statistical difference between somebody that died who were exposed to a lot of second hand smoke compared to people that weren't is very, very small (something like 0.000001%, which works out to about 5 people in the US, ever).  I dont' have a source on that, but I remember seeing it on a documentary. 

To be honest, I'm not pro drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.

And to be honest, I'm not anti- drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.  In either direction.  You can't trust what you hear from either side.  People who want weed to be legal are going to shift things to their side, and people who don't also will.  Don't believe anybody.

People HAVE died from second hand smoke, because it caused cancer, which led them to death. It was on the news about two years ago of it happening.

My man standing point is this:

[xex]

I don't think weed is nearly as bad as cigarettes, simply due to the fact that you're not inhaling tar, and you can't give someone else cancer from them just being around you. Atleast according to any medical history of it happening, that is.

Actually, I'm afraid that it contains more tar than cigarettes. 

'four times as much tar is deposited in the respiratory tract from the smoke of marijuana than from that of a comparable amount of tobacco, thus amplifying respiratory exposure to the cancer-causing substances in marijuana smoke.'

SOURCE: 2000 July - Journal of Immunology

"With regard to the carcinogenic potential of marijuana, it is noteworthy that the tar phase of marijuana smoke contains many of the same carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco smoke, including polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, such as benz[a]pyrene, which was recently identified as a key factor promoting human lung cancer."

[.........]

    The following lines of evidence suggest that marijuana may play an important role in the development of respiratory cancer.

    * The tar phase of marijuana smoke, as already noted, contains many of the same carcinogenic compounds contained in tobacco smoke.
    * One marijuana cigarette was shown by Wu and colleagues (1988) to deposit four times as much tar in the lung as a single filtered tobacco cigarette of approximately the same weight. The higher content of carcinogenic polycyclic hydrocarbons in marijuana tar and the greater deposition of marijuana tar in the lung act together to amplify exposure of the marijuana smoker to the carcinogens in the tar phase.
    * Bronchial immunohisotology revealed overexpression of genetic markers of lung tumor progression in smokers of marijuana.
    * Preliminary findings suggest that marijuana smoke activates cytochrome P4501A1, the enzyme that converts polycyclic hydrocarbons, such as benz[a]pyrene, into active carcinogens."

Donald P. Tashkin, M.D., in his 1997 article for the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; Effects of Marijuana on the Lung and Its Immune Defenses

I'm not saying it's "better", however, it's certainly a lot less lethal when compared to the fact that no one has ever gotten "second hand weed" before.

Regarding the comparison to second hand smoke, there is actually no evidence that anybody has died from second hand cigarette smoke.  The statistical difference between somebody that died who were exposed to a lot of second hand smoke compared to people that weren't is very, very small (something like 0.000001%, which works out to about 5 people in the US, ever).  I dont' have a source on that, but I remember seeing it on a documentary. 

To be honest, I'm not pro drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.

And to be honest, I'm not anti- drugs, but, I do dislike when people give false information/impressions on them.  In either direction.  You can't trust what you hear from either side.  People who want weed to be legal are going to shift things to their side, and people who don't also will.  Don't believe anybody.

People HAVE died from second hand smoke, because it caused cancer, which led them to death. It was on the news about two years ago of it happening.

My man standing point is this:

That weed suck and shouldn't be used unless for medical used?

[iago]

People HAVE died from second hand smoke, because it caused cancer, which led them to death. It was on the news about two years ago of it happening.

Where's the studies? Nowhere.  Where's the statistics? Nowhere.  Any facts you hear about that are conjecture, and there is no hard evidence.  Where have studies been done on whether people exposed to second hand marijuana smoke aren't harmed? Nowhere.  What can you prove? Nothing. 

My man standing point is this:

That's just meaningless propaganda.  That's no different from a "don't do drugs" poster. 

[MyndFyre]

People HAVE died from second hand smoke, because it caused cancer, which led them to death. It was on the news about two years ago of it happening.

Where's the studies? Nowhere.  Where's the statistics? Nowhere.  Any facts you hear about that are conjecture, and there is no hard evidence.  Where have studies been done on whether people exposed to second hand marijuana smoke aren't harmed? Nowhere.  What can you prove? Nothing. 

It would be unethical to subject people to a causal experiment to prove this.  Since the alternative hypothesis indicates that they would.... die.

[iago]

People HAVE died from second hand smoke, because it caused cancer, which led them to death. It was on the news about two years ago of it happening.

Where's the studies? Nowhere.  Where's the statistics? Nowhere.  Any facts you hear about that are conjecture, and there is no hard evidence.  Where have studies been done on whether people exposed to second hand marijuana smoke aren't harmed? Nowhere.  What can you prove? Nothing. 

It would be unethical to subject people to a causal experiment to prove this.  Since the alternative hypothesis indicates that they would.... die.

True, but they can do studies on people who are exposed to it anyway, they don't have to force them to.  Or, when somebody is dying, ask them how often they were exposed to second hand smoke.  Not the best way to obtain results, but it beats the current strategy of making them up

[MyndFyre]

Meh, I would still rather make people sit in a small smoke-filled room for 12 hours and see if they develop cancer.

[Sidoh]

Meh, I would still rather make people sit in a small smoke-filled room for 12 hours and see if they develop cancer.

I think a lot of that is based on pure chance and other surrounding factors (temperature, etc).  It's just like Asbestosis.  I've personally been exposed to numerous areas that have tiles treated with Asbestos (drilling through them, peeling them up without face masks, etc).  I don't have Lung Cancer. I was supposed to be taken to the doctor to get chest X-Rays, but they never did it.

[Screenor]

iago: It was on CNN (actually I think there was something on it this year even, due to it happening again) then someone who had never smoked in their life got cancer due to second hand smoke. And weed is just that, a weed, it has nothing to do with tobacco.

iago, if you don't beleive cigarettes can kill you, do this, or stop arguing:

Go buy some cigarettes, and smoke the whole pack in that day, if they're so un-lethal, I want YOU to be the one doing the test, this way you'll know you're wrong when you're 6 feet under the ground.

[xex]

iago: It was on CNN (actually I think there was something on it this year even, due to it happening again) then someone who had never smoked in their life got cancer due to second hand smoke. And weed is just that, a weed, it has nothing to do with tobacco.

iago, if you don't beleive cigarettes can kill you, do this, or stop arguing:

Go buy some cigarettes, and smoke the whole pack in that day, if they're so un-lethal, I want YOU to be the one doing the test, this way you'll know you're wrong when you're 6 feet under the ground.

I don't think iago has ever stated that cigarettes couldn't kill you. If you haven't realized this by now but weed is as bad as tobacco and can kill you faster than tobacco, weed contain 420 chemicals, rather than tobacco only contains nicotine.

[Sidoh]

umm, that aids thing was totally over the top. You should NEVER joke about shit like that.

Completely agreed.  I've been talking to another one of the members that was extremely offended by this.  It was totally uncalled for and inherently unnecessary.

I don't think iago has ever stated that cigarettes couldn't kill you. If you haven't realized this by now but weed is as bad as tobacco and can kill you faster than tobacco, weed contain 420 chemicals, rather than tobacco only contains nicotine.

Natural Tobacco only has nicotine, but cigarettes have way more than that.

[xex]

umm, that aids thing was totally over the top. You should NEVER joke about shit like that.

Completely agreed.  I've been talking to another one of the members that was extremely offended by this.  It was totally uncalled for and inherently unnecessary.

I don't think iago has ever stated that cigarettes couldn't kill you. If you haven't realized this by now but weed is as bad as tobacco and can kill you faster than tobacco, weed contain 420 chemicals, rather than tobacco only contains nicotine.

Natural Tobacco only has nicotine, but cigarettes have way more than that.

More than 420 chemicals?