Hazards of secondhand marijuana smoke

Hazards of secondhand marijuana smoke

So it had to happen eventually. What are the effects of secondhand marijuana smoke? CBS opens up its article with this nice bit of fearmongering.

That whiff of pot that drifts your way at a rock concert or outdoor event could damage your heart and blood vessels as much as secondhand cigarette smoke does, preliminary research suggests.

Yeah no, I don't even have to read further in the article to know this is a load of crap. Getting a whiff of smoke from a nearby group of people toking at a concert isn't going to effect you negatively, even if that smoke was from tobacco. The exposure level just isn't high enough.

In any case, now that that is cleared up. I'll post the rest.

Blood vessel function in laboratory rats dropped by 70 percent after a half-hour of exposure to secondhand marijuana smoke -- similar to results found with secondhand tobacco smoke, researchers from the University of California, San Francisco reported Sunday.

Reduced blood vessel function can increase a person's risk of developing hardened arteries, which could lead to a heart attack.

"Smoke is smoke. Both tobacco and marijuana smoke impair blood vessel function similarly," said study senior author Matthew Springer, a cardiovascular researcher and associate professor of medicine in the university's cardiology division. "People should avoid both, and governments who are protecting people against secondhand smoke exposure should include marijuana in those rules."

Fair enough. I think that we can all agree that smoke is harmful no matter if you are the primary or secondary ingester. Though it must be said that in the study, the lab rats were subjected to FAR more marijuana secondhand smoke than anyone would normally encounter (outside of baking up a closet).

"The amount of second-hand smoke used in this experiment is probably well beyond what most people would endure in a casual setting. But repeated exposures are likely to take a toll," said Mitch Earleywine, a psychology professor at the State University of New York at Albany and chairman of NORML, a non-profit that works for the legalization of marijuana.

"We consistently encourage all cannabis users to consider vaporizers instead of smoking implements. Anyone hanging around cannabis users should certainly avoid smoke-filled rooms and encourage all their friends to vaporize rather than smoke," Earleywine added.

Also keep in mind that marijuana is shared among friends. Rarely does one sit down with a joint and smoke it to the face. Instead it gets passed around to a group of friends. This is in stark contrast to cigarettes which tend to be enjoyed solo. The difference being that in a room of say four friends smoking, they all could have a lit cigarette in their hands, but most likely they'll only have one lit joint going around between the four of them. Much less marijuana smoke in the air in that example.

Marijuana, being an intoxicant, is harder to chain smoke as well. Unless your tolerance is super high, you won't be likely to finish a joint then light up another one within 15 minutes or so.

Now you may be wondering where I'm going with this, my point is as well as a question I pose to the reader. Secondhand marijuana smoke is definitely harmful, but can we really put it on the same level as cigarette smoke being that you are unlikely to ever be in an area that has heavy marijuana smoke concentration unless you are a smoker yourself? I reason that it is unnecessary to treat marijuana like cigarettes in this effect and force them to go smoke outdoors or something. A nicely ventilated area set aside could function just as well. OR the establishment could encourage vaporizing (which will probably be the case).

So my question is, after taking my points into consideration, do you think that marijuana smoke should be treated the same as cigarette smoke in regards to secondhand smoke? Keep in mind, just because you smell marijuana, doesn't mean you are getting a harmful dose of secondhand smoke like the beginning of the article alludes.

ETA REMINDER: DON'T DISCUSS PERSONAL USAGE

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Like you said this is utter crap, there is no hazard regarding second hand smoke from Marijuana. Simple scaremongering.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yeah no, I don't even have to read further in the article to know this is a load of crap. Getting a whiff of smoke from a nearby group of people toking at a concert isn't going to effect you negatively, even if that smoke was from tobacco. The exposure level just isn't high enough.

Hey then breathing what is said to be fresh air should have killed off humanity during the industrial revolution.

Hey if you smell a fart what happens to you then according to these geniuses?

but can we really put it on the same level as cigarette smoke being that you are unlikely to ever be in an area that has heavy marijuana smoke concentration unless you are a smoker yourself.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Yes we can. As a kid I really had no control over the fact that the adults smoked it indoors. I know many children, in the past and current, who have to put up with their parents smoking it indoors around them.

a reply to: FinalCountdown

That would be super harsh and nasty. Have you ever inhaled stale smoke before? It's not fun. If you want to picture it, just smell someone who smokes a lot of cigarettes in their car with the windows up and has their air set to recirculate air.

i don't get why people are so keen on defending weed.
My opinion is that you can do whatever you want to your body, i haven't treated mine exactly like a temple.
But how people defend weed makes me think more of an act of rebellion type of thing, it's illegal, but it's the weakest illegal thing out there, so people feel rebellious for defending it.
Is it really up for debate that inhaling anything that comes from a combustion can't be all that good for you?
sure, the research seems to show that smoking it can help with certain ailments, but it's not like everyone defending it has glaucoma or some crap.
most people just want to get high, and don't care about the pros or cons.
so at least be intellectually honest.
(general observation, not directed at OP)

a reply to: calstorm

But my point was that the concentration of smoke never really matches that of cigarettes since there is less produced (due to sharing/not needing to smoke as much).

a reply to: AgentShillington

There is literally zero harm from ingesting e-cig smoke since it is mostly water vapor. You'd have to shotgun it down someone's throat to have them get any negative effects (and even then I'm doubtful of it). So no, not all smoked products are equal. I want to know why we have to treat them all as such.

ETA: Don't discuss personal usage.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: FinalCountdown

That would be super harsh and nasty. Have you ever inhaled stale smoke before? It's not fun. If you want to picture it, just smell someone who smokes a lot of cigarettes in their car with the windows up and has their air set to recirculate air.

True, but maybe this device could compress the captured smoke and produce a pill that contains almost 100% the and cbc, etc.

a reply to: InhaleExhale

Think about a group of people sitting around a campfire (especially during a cold night) and inhaling all THAT smoke all night long.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

All I know is that from my own experiences, people where more thoughtful when it came to tobacco exposures and opening windows or going outside than marijuana. I have no memories of being choked by tobacco smoke as a kid, but I sure do of marijuana and very little of it was due to sharing. One pipe and one person can produce a lot of smoke.

a reply to: calstorm

Well for one, you are talking about the privacy of your home. I am firmly against any laws that tell you can't smoke even tobacco indoors when at your own home. I'm more talking about public areas like bars where people mingle and smoke (and have to abide by the establishments rules as well as general laws of the area).

*** ATTENTION ***

NO DISCUSSION OF OR MENTION OF PERSONAL USE !!!

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: AgentShillington

There is literally zero harm from ingesting e-cig smoke since it is mostly water vapor. You'd have to shotgun it down someone's throat to have them get any negative effects (and even then I'm doubtful of it). So no, not all smoked products are equal. I want to know why we have to treat them all as such.

ETA: Don't discuss personal usage.

Exhaled vapor has nicotine.

ntr.oxfordjournals.org...

Nicotine poisoning is a real danger for children.

Biggest hazard is the people who make marijuana out to be the scapegoat for other non related problems. It's smoke people, remember when the world smoked on airlines. Have we seen a decrease in heart attacks since they banned smoking onlanes? Of course not...

Oh noes! Who will think of the smelly smokey clothed folks. Smoky smelling clothes!!! Ahhhhhh!!!!

a reply to: Salamandy

The real hypocrisy lies in the fact that walking along the road, standing at a Bus stop or sitting in traffic during rush hour exposes you to far more carcinogens and other toxic by-products that smoking a pack of 20 cigarettes. Is all just politically correct bull crap designed to erode away our basic freedoms day by day.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I'm more worried about how car exhaust affects my health. People are quick to slam a smoker, but will turn around and jump in there souped up truck that affects everyone.