420 today - anybody uhhh "celebrating"?

[FlaminFeva]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Did you even read my post? I said the guy is a medical doctor/researcher specializing in lungs and has been in that field for 27 years.

I'm a pathologist and have seen the lungs of smokers and pot smokers alike. I'd be amazed if the person to whom you are refering has any hard evidence to back this up. In my 10 years being a doctor I've never seen or even heard anything remotely close to his claim.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by FlaminFeva

I'm a pathologist and have seen the lungs of smokers and pot smokers alike. I'd be amazed if the person to whom you are refering has any hard evidence to back this up. In my 10 years being a doctor I've never seen or even heard anything remotely close to his claim.

Boobaloo, where are you?

I wish I could find that thread...

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Did you even read my post? I said the guy is a medical doctor/researcher specializing in lungs and has been in that field for 27 years.

Yes I did read it. And I'm still not going to take his opinion if he can't produce that research he has been doing for the last 27 years to prove to me that it is 50 to 1 ratio.

I remember a converstaion with my doctor when it came up that I smoked pot and his response was basically said I shouldn't smoke weed but 'could be worse, you could be smoking cigarettes'. Then we have another doctor with 10 years experience who just posted he would be surprised if there was any hard evidence to show that ratio.

Don't get me wrong I'm not stupid enough to think smoking weed is good for me by any stretch but I just find it hard to believe it is 50X worse than smoking a smoke. I just really want to see the research instead of taking someones opinion on it. Like I said if it could be proven to be true I'd quit that day.

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by HOOT

If someone can prove to me it is 50 to 1 I will quit tomorrow and that's no joke!

Aren't you big on supplements? To gain an edge in health and fitness? And you smoke?

Why do you need to quantify the negative effects of smoking weed? Why in terms of cigarettes? Do you even know how bad one cigarette is, let alone 50?

[TheSutterDynasty]

Here's a review of some literature findings for you, Hoot.

Originally Posted by Abstract

There is evidence of psychiatric, respiratory, cardiovascular, and bone toxicity associated with chronic cannabis use. Cannabis has now been implicated in the etiology of many major long-term psychiatric conditions including depression, anxiety, psychosis, bipolar disorder, and an amotivational state. Respiratory conditions linked with cannabis include reduced lung density, lung cysts, and chronic bronchitis. Cannabis has been linked in a dose-dependent manner with elevated rates of myocardial infarction and cardiac arrythmias. It is known to affect bone metabolism and also has teratogenic effects on the developing brain following perinatal exposure. Cannabis has been linked to cancers at eight sites, including children after in utero maternal exposure, and multiple molecular pathways to oncogenesis exist.

Reece, A.S. Chronic Toxicology of Cannabis. Clinical Toxicology. 2009. 47: 517-524.

I'm not sure if you'll be able to acess it online. The author has gathered some of the literature with negative-oriented findings. Of course, there are also studies that haven't found such negative effects. At any rate:

...with a dose equivalent of one cannabis joint to 2.5-5 cigarettes

That's from Lange P. Cannabis and the lung. Thorax 2007; 62:1036–1037.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Aren't you big on supplements? To gain an edge in health and fitness? And you smoke?

Was big into supplments. Now I just take my basics of Fish Oils, Multi-Vits and Vitamin D.

I have smoked weed for probably 10 years and know a ton of high performance athletes that do and it has not hurt their performance in terms of time, weights lifted, how hard/long they can play/train for, etc.

I'm sure later in life they may have a bigger drop off in performance than someone who has been clean all their lives but in their mind (from speaking with them) the trade off of not enjoying something they enjoy isn't worth it.

Why do you need to quantify the negative effects of smoking weed? Why in terms of cigarettes? Do you even know how bad one cigarette is, let alone 50?

I don't.

People use cigarettes because it's a similar act as smoking a joint and it was brought up by others. I'm just saying if someone can prove one joint equals 2 packs of cigarettes I will quit. I'm not too sure what is so hard to understand about why I would have concerns about basically smoking 2-6 packs of cigarettes every night because of the few joints I have.

I guess the way I would look at it is that is someone told me I could drink 50 beers to equal one shot of Tequilla I would never drink Tequilla again. Luckily no one has made up crazy 'facts' like that about shots.

And no I don't know exactly how bad one cigarette is for you, do you?

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Don't know if that was a shot at me but I'm not claiming to be an expert, I'm just looking for actual research or proof on it. Someones opinion even if they are a doctor doesn't mean much if they haven't done the research on it to claim such a thing. If someone can prove to me it is 50 to 1 I will quit tomorrow and that's no joke!

Not a shot at you. Just a general observation of the internet as a whole. People more readily dismiss information as false on the internet due to the anonymity.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by HOOT

But how does that prove that a joint is 50 times worse than a smoke?

I'm not debating smoking weed isn't bad, hell I even give people the 1 for 1 as shown by many studies, but 50 to 1? Where is his reserch to prove such a thing?

I'm pretty sure if it was actually 50 - 1, a lot of us would be dead right now.

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by HOOT

I have smoked weed for probably 10 years and know a ton of high performance athletes that do and it has not hurt their performance in terms of time, weights lifted, how hard/long they can play/train for, etc.

This isn't a shot at you, but man this irks me. A lot of people have this stupid associative complex where they claim that weight loss or muscle gain is directly caused by a certain supplement or method. But when it comes to negative things like smoking, they cannot be convinced that it has its effects.

How do you know it hasn't hurt their performance? Have they gone a year+ without smoking, performing the exact same training under the exact same circumstances?

Strictly controlled research has a hard enough time factoring out error. You can't even begin to guess about the effects of something just based on someone being an athlete, or what have you.

[Temporary_User]

Sorry I haven't been really following this thread as I don't participate in the holiday. Just opened it up as I was curious as to why it was still going on 10 days later.
Anyways if I'm correct someone is spewing out ignorant myths.

Originally Posted by norml.org

Myth: One Joint Equals One Pack (or 16, or maybe just 4) Cigarettes
Some critics exaggerate the dangers of marijuana smoking by fallaciously citing a study by Dr. Tashkin which found that daily pot smokers experienced a "mild but significant" increase in airflow resistance in the large airways greater than that seen in persons smoking 16 cigarettes per day.1 What they ignore is that the same study examined other, more important aspects of lung health, in which marijuana smokers did much better than tobacco smokers. Dr. Tashkin himself disavows the notion that one joint equals 16 cigarettes.
A more widely accepted estimate is that marijuana smokers consume four times as much carcinogenic tar as cigarettes smokers per weight smoked.2 This does not necessarily mean that one joint equals four cigarettes, since joints usually weigh less. In fact, the average joint has been estimated to contain 0.4 grams of pot, a bit less than one-half the weight of a cigarette, making one joint equal to two cigarettes (actually, joint sizes range from cigar-sized spliffs smoked by Rastas, to very fine sinsemilla joints weighing as little as 0.2 grams). It should be noted that there is no exact equivalency between tobacco and marijuana smoking, because they affect different parts of the respiratory tract differently: whereas tobacco tends to penetrate to the smaller, peripheral passageways of the lungs, pot tends to concentrate on the larger, central passageways.3 One consequence of this is that pot, unlike tobacco, does not appear to cause emphysema.
Footnotes
1. D. Tashkin, "Respiratory Status of 74 Habitual Marijuana Smokers," Chest 78 #5: 699-706 (Nov. 1980).
2. T-C. Wu, D. Tashkin, B. Djahed and J.E. Rose, "Pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana as compared with tobacco," New England Journal of Medicine 318:
347-51 (1988).
3. Donald Tashkin et al, "Effects of Habitual Use of Marijuana and/or Cocaine on the Lung," loc.cit.

There used to be a lot of false truths spread around in the past that lead to quite of few of these myths still persisting today. You have to realize that in the past very few researchers were given permission to do research on marijuana, and many that were, were given permission to prove these dangers no matter what they actually found. Thus they would go to great lengths to prove them.

Smoking anything is bad for the lungs. Sitting around the campfire is bad for you. Obviously a joint is one of the worst ways to smoke marijuana, with a vaporizor being one of the best as well as water-pipes.
Eating it (in cookies or brownies) is of course the best for you.

[Temporary_User]

Originally Posted by erowid.org

Many people think smoking marijuana is just as harmful as
smoking tobacco, but this is not true. Those who hold that
marijuana is equivalent to tobacco are misinformed. Due to the
efforts of various federal agencies to discourage use of
marijuana in the 1970's the government, in a fit of "reefer
madness," conducted several biased studies designed to return
results that would equate marijuana smoking with tobacco smoking,
or worse.
For example the Berkeley carcinogenic tar studies of the
late 1970's concluded that "marijuana is one-and-a-half times as
carcinogenic as tobacco." This finding was based solely on the
tar content of cannabis leaves compared to that of tobacco, and
did not take radioactivity into consideration. (Cannabis tars do
not contain radioactive materials.) In addition, it was not
considered that:
1) Most marijuana smokers smoke the bud, not the leaf, of
the plant. The bud contains only 33% as much tar as tobacco.
2) Marijuana smokers do not smoke anywhere near as much as
tobacco smokers, due to the psychoactive effects of cannabis.
3) Not one case of lung cancer has ever been successfully
linked to marijuana use.
4) Cannabis, unlike tobacco, does not cause any narrowing of
the small air passageways in the lungs.
In fact, marijuana has been shown to be an expectorant and
actually dilates the air channels it comes in contact with. This
is why many asthma sufferers look to marijuana to provide relief.
Doctors have postulated that marijuana may, in this respect, be
more effective than all of the prescription drugs on the market.
Studies even show that due to marijuana's ability to clear
the lungs of smog, pollutants, and cigarette smoke, it may
actually reduce your risk of emphysema, bronchitis, and lung
cancer. Smokers of cannabis have been shown to outlive non-
smokers in some areas by up to two years. Medium to heavy
tobacco smokers will live seven to ten years longer if they also
smoke marijuana.
Cannabis is also radically different from tobacco in that it
does not contain nicotine and is not addictive. The psychoactive
ingredient in marijuana, THC, has been accused of causing brain
and genetic damage, but these studies have all been disproven.
In fact, the DEA's own Administrative Law Judge Francis Young has
declared that "marijuana in its natural form is far safer than
many foods we commonly consume."

....

[Temporary_User]

Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...501729_pf.html

[Huntingwhale]

I love smoking joints. End of story.

[Captain_Obvious]

[Hack&Lube]

Nomatter what study you are reading, pyrolyzing something and then inhaling it is not healthy. It will be carginogenic. You might have some compensating factor like natural biology and THC killing off potentially cancerous cells or some other factor giving you protection, but burning anything and sucking it into your lungs is going to cause cancer eventually.

That said, I am not against marajuana usage whatsoever but I'd stick to special brownies if you are really concerned about this. There are other methods of accessing that THC that are probably safer. Perhaps a steamed method like Swedish tobacco snus? I am totally for legalization and innovation for safety.

BTW, if you wanted to grow your own, do hemp stores sell seeds? I thought I saw something like that once.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

This isn't a shot at you, but man this irks me. A lot of people have this stupid associative complex where they claim that weight loss or muscle gain is directly caused by a certain supplement or method. But when it comes to negative things like smoking, they cannot be convinced that it has its effects.

I think they all know there are negative effects of smoking weed.

How do you know it hasn't hurt their performance? Have they gone a year+ without smoking, performing the exact same training under the exact same circumstances?

I don't know. I'm just going off what they say or what they believe. They know their body better than anyone and if they are running the same times or better, hitting the ball further, skating just as good, etc.

Strictly controlled research has a hard enough time factoring out error. You can't even begin to guess about the effects of something just based on someone being an athlete, or what have you.

I'm not guessing, I'm going off of what they believe and what they know about their bodies and their performance 5 years ago to today. Okay it isn't controlled research, but I'm also not claiming it as fact like someone saying 50 to 1 ratio, I'm just going off their words from knowing their bodies and performance their whole lives. My point is no one can prove for certain one way or another, I'm just asking for proof rather than opinion.

edit: Also this Iolite thing is just pure awesome! I've showed three friends so far and two of them have already ordered one.

[Flames_Gimp]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

BTW, if you wanted to grow your own, do hemp stores sell seeds? I thought I saw something like that once.

yes, there is a hemp store in cowtown that sells them.

[Reaper]

nm

[Komskies]

[SeeBass]

I will be over US air space at that time, kinda tough so I started early.