New Research: Smoking Marijuana is 114 Time Safer Than Drinking Alcohol

I found this from 2005.

Furthermore, compounds found in cannabis have been shown to kill numerous cancer types including: lung cancer [9], breast and prostate [10], leukemia and lymphoma [11], glioma [12], skin cancer [13], and pheochromocytoma [14]. The effects of cannabinoids are complex and sometimes contradicting, often exhibiting biphasic responses. For example, in contrast to the tumor killing properties mentioned above, low doses of THC may stimulate the growth of lung cancer cells in vitro [15].

In conclusion, while both tobacco and cannabis smoke have similar properties chemically, their pharmacological activities differ greatly. Components of cannabis smoke minimize some carcinogenic pathways whereas tobacco smoke enhances some. Both types of smoke contain carcinogens and particulate matter that promotes inflammatory immune responses that may enhance the carcinogenic effects of the smoke. However, cannabis typically down-regulates immunologically-generated free radical production by promoting a Th2 immune cytokine profile. Furthermore, THC inhibits the enzyme necessary to activate some of the carcinogens found in smoke. In contrast, tobacco smoke increases the likelihood of carcinogenesis by overcoming normal cellular checkpoint protective mechanisms through the activity of respiratory epithelial cell nicotine receptors. Cannabinoids receptors have not been reported in respiratory epithelial cells (in skin they prevent cancer), and hence the DNA damage checkpoint mechanism should remain intact after prolonged cannabis exposure. Furthermore, nicotine promotes tumor angiogenesis whereas cannabis inhibits it. It is possible that as the cannabis-consuming population ages, the long-term consequences of smoking cannabis may become more similar to what is observed with tobacco. However, current knowledge does not suggest that cannabis smoke will have a carcinogenic potential comparable to that resulting from exposure to tobacco smoke.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I've heard hundreds of times that inhaling burnt plant material MUST cause cancer. I have yet to see proof that this applies to Mary J.

I know it's a crazy concept, but I have zero reason not to believe marijuana smoke is actually harmless to the lungs.

I was a 9-1-1 dispatcher and supervisor in Alaska for 5 years. I compiled the statistics. 86 percent of our Calls For Service were etoh - alcohol related. That means SOMEONE on scene was perceptibly intoxicated - the reporting party, an assailant, a trespasser, etc. etc. The ONLY pot calls I ever got (a total of 2) were both demands that an officer come over and help the caller either get back the money that they paid for pot they never got...or get the weed from Bobby Joe and bring it over. Seriously - 2 calls in 5 years - different callers - and that is what they wanted.

Of course, it was illegal to SELL alcohol out where I was. Residents could mail order booze in from Anchorage, but they could not resell it. SUUUUUURE they can't. When a 15 dollar pint of cheap whiskey sells for 70...that's profit. And that same pint further out in smaller villages would net the bootlegger 200 dollars. A pint. So much for Permanent Dividend Fund.

From THAT Law Enforcement aspect alone - marijuana is far safer than alcohol. A cop, once reading the following, agreed 100 percent.

When approaching a stop sign, a drunk will speed up and blow through it. A stoner stops and waits for it to turn green.

originally posted by: GoShredAK
I have zero reason not to believe marijuana smoke is actually harmless to the lungs.

Unfortunately, it's not really about what you believe. We need further study. Until then, I've got my g-pen.

originally posted by: Shakawkaw

originally posted by: GoShredAK
I have zero reason not to believe marijuana smoke is actually harmless to the lungs.

Unfortunately, it's not really about what you believe. We need further study. Until then, I've got my g-pen.

Not unfortunate, I'm not claiming anything.


Not sure what that is but I think I want one

a reply to: Shakawkaw

Those g pens are nifty.

And yes shred, you very much do want one. Good luck finding it tho unless you are in a medical/legal state.


I find it strange that meth is so far down on this list though. Haven't read the full article yet so maybe I am just missing something.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: Shakawkaw

Those g pens are nifty.

And yes shred, you very much do want one. Good luck finding it tho unless you are in a medical/legal state.

Tomorrows the big day!

Feb. 24, 2015, is a historic day in the Last Frontier: Alaska becomes the third state in the U.S. in which recreational cannabis use is legalized.

www.adn.com...

So hopefully sooner than later my lucky day will be.

a reply to: Sremmos80

I'm thinking that meth users burn themselves out, end up in jail or dead? I would also imagine it would be a little easier once a meth addict is "clean" for a while to stay clean assuming they avoid old friends. Alcohol on the other hand is everywhere. It's all over TV and movies, at parties, receptions, weddings, get togethers, bbq's...it's really hard to avoid alcohol in America. Generally speaking, people newly sober from a substance want to try and avoid it. It's probably a lot easier to avoid references to hard drugs than alcohol.

I was reading today that opiate addicts that quit on their own usually do so in about 11 years. And, most of the US soldiers coming back from Vietnam with opiate addictions kicked them on their own once home.

Sometimes people just outgrow their addictions. Those are the fortunate ones...

originally posted by: GoShredAK

originally posted by: Shakawkaw

originally posted by: GoShredAK
I have zero reason not to believe marijuana smoke is actually harmless to the lungs.

Unfortunately, it's not really about what you believe. We need further study. Until then, I've got my g-pen.

Not unfortunate, I'm not claiming anything.


Not sure what that is but I think I want one

www.grencoscience.com

Tell me something i don't know.
Anyone who has, will, or does smoke cannabis knows this already.
For those saying its bad for the lungs, look at the numerous amounts of studies on cannabis smokes. It's not even in the same class as cigarettes. Though inhaling things generally is bad for you, get a vape if you're worried about it. Or start ingesting it through food. Vaping is 400x better than combustion.

Cupcakes. Cookies. Cakes. Buns.

With each of these studies that is published, it becomes increasingly hard to deny the fact that the social impact of incarceration for possession of marijuana is disproportionate to the health risks from consuming marijuana.

Yet, contrary to what empirical data is telling us, we're actually trending in the wrong direction:



Marijuana related arrests have more than doubled since 1991. When a law has an exponential greater negative impact than the thing it is meant to discourage, then I don't see how anyone, regardless of political ideology, can justify its existence.

a reply to: theantediluvian

and not drinking and driving is 100 times safer than drinking and driving.

Trying to rationalize by making an argument that it is not as bad cuts both ways. While being shot in the heart is bad, being shot in the stomach is not as bad. However both can be fatal.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: toastyr

What do you mean? There are no incidences of cancer from smoking marijuana, it actually has protective properties against it.

Really? I didn't know that. I would think inhaling any kind of smoke over time would eventually cause cancer or some other kind of damage to the lungs.

The only studies that have been done regarding marijuana and cancer risks had confounds which made the studies unreliable. For example, I have not seen one study that involved marijuana smokers only, whom did not either smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol. Therefore, the cancer could have been caused by either the cigarettes and alcohol (as many marijuana smokers partake in one or the other). In my opinion, smoking marijuana is less harmful than cigarettes, though it is still a risk for causing lung cancer. Any type of repeated inhalation of smoke increases the risk of developing cancer to some degree. But modern edibles or vaporizers that contain THC and such I would almost guarentee have no cancerous effects relating to the use.

Nice to see another study showing the relative harmlessness of cannabis even when compares to legal substances...nonetheless, I'm not sure where they come up with this number 114 times less deadly...literally no one has ever died from cannabis...it would seem to be infinitely less deadly...

a reply to: Shakawkaw

I haven't gone through all the comments, so if somebody has already replied to your post, please excuse me.

In a cross-sectional analysis using data from two rounds of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), researchers found that adults aged 18 to 59 who smoked one marijuana cigarette — aka joint — a day were still able to forcibly exhale the same volume of air in one second (known as forced expiratory volume, or FEV1) as someone who didn’t smoke marijuana. Measuring a person’s ability to exhale is called spirometry, and it’s the go-to method for diagnosing respiratory diseases, which impair lung function.

Source
Study

It is fairly harmless, except for the lungs, in my opinion. Most heavy pot smokers that I know, smoke heavily as well. Double trouble for the lungs.

The only thing I don't like is that people think it's okay to get high before work or with non pot smokers etc. That's not okay. get high in your house and well away from me. I dislike slow, stupid stoned people.

I don't like being around drinkers either for the same issue.

originally posted by: amazing
It is fairly harmless, except for the lungs, in my opinion. Most heavy pot smokers that I know, smoke heavily as well. Double trouble for the lungs.

The only thing I don't like is that people think it's okay to get high before work or with non pot smokers etc. That's not okay. get high in your house and well away from me. I dislike slow, stupid stoned people.

I don't like being around drinkers either for the same issue.

It would be inaccurate to say you automatically become stupid after smoking

originally posted by: TheJourney

originally posted by: amazing
It is fairly harmless, except for the lungs, in my opinion. Most heavy pot smokers that I know, smoke heavily as well. Double trouble for the lungs.

The only thing I don't like is that people think it's okay to get high before work or with non pot smokers etc. That's not okay. get high in your house and well away from me. I dislike slow, stupid stoned people.

I don't like being around drinkers either for the same issue.

It would be inaccurate to say you automatically become stupid after smoking

Based on my experience with stoners, I'd say that's an accurate statement. It just is. Zone out, forget things, become stupid. You may be the exception and maybe the people I know are the exception, but I base that statement on personal experience. It has been true for me.

a reply to: amazing

Insults and stereotypes, you've been watching too many hollywood movies, lol. Stupid, slow, stoners, give it a rest as it's obvious you don't have a clue what you speak of.

originally posted by: cronemel


When approaching a stop sign, a drunk will speed up and blow through it. A stoner stops and waits for it to turn green.

That made me laugh, but your point rings true.

Most pot smokers are overly cautious when they get behind the wheel. Can't say the same about drinking and driving and plenty of stats obviously back that up.