Pot Causes Cancer?

I’m not sure on the specifics, but the study my professor friend is currently working on, explains that the water filters very little. Many toxins are not filtered out… and there was something else about the dangers of 2nd hand smoke around the hookah is increased because of the lack of any filter. Basically, you are breathing in the same smoke over and over and over again, and the toxicity of the air only increases with more and more continuous use.

Basically, that the hookah being smoked in a room releases a great deal of un-filtered smoke into the room.

I’m not sure about the specifics, so I can’t say much. Quite obviously.

I’ll ask her if she has gotten anywhere in the study, as it is on-going. It has to be peer-reviewed, etc. as well.

[quote]ShaneM686 wrote:
I’m not sure on the specifics, but the study my professor friend is currently working on, explains that the water filters very little. Many toxins are not filtered out… and there was something else about the dangers of 2nd hand smoke around the hookah is increased because of the lack of any filter. Basically, you are breathing in the same smoke over and over and over again, and the toxicity of the air only increases with more and more continuous use.

Basically, that the hookah being smoked in a room releases a great deal of un-filtered smoke into the room.

I’m not sure about the specifics, so I can’t say much. Quite obviously.

I’ll ask her if she has gotten anywhere in the study, as it is on-going. It has to be peer-reviewed, etc. as well.[/quote]

Filters are available for hookah. If I remember correctly, it is about as useful as a cigarette filter(So pretty much useless). But, I am sure the toxicity of the smoke depends largely on the type and makeup of the coal. Using Japanese coals or carbonized wood coals should be much less toxic then the quick lights(A few seconds under a flame and they start to burn due to a chemical coating). If the ventilation of the room is sufficient, it should circulate the air.

When this is published, please post some the link.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
DanErickson wrote:
I don’t know about this. I used to smoke weed heavily and smoke cigarettes heavily. Finally I quit smoking tobacco and only smoked weed for a while. I smoked a cigarette and it was harder to breathe then after smoking a joint. Despite the fact that the joint has no filter. Mind you I have no proof that how hard or easy it is to breathe is linked to getting cancer.

Marijuana, unlike cigarettes, causes bronchodilation. That is why it was easier to breath.[/quote]

Isn’t menthol also a bronchodilator, meaning mentholated cigarettes would have a similar effect?

Who the fuck uses a hookah for weed anyway?

Most I know use a normal bong or joints.

[quote]Sxio wrote:
Who the fuck uses a hookah for weed anyway?

Most I know use a normal bong or joints. [/quote]

Exactly.

[quote]Sifu wrote:
They base their study upon at least a joint a day for ten years. With good chronic two tokes should be able to get you stoned for quite a while, especially if you use a bong.[/quote]

Absolutely. A joint a day for ten years or two a day for five years is a pretty good amount of pot. That’s why it irks me when people use these studies as evidence of why pot is dangerous/should be illegal.

On another note, the American Thoracic Society did a study in 2006 in Los Angeles that concluded that there was no link between marijuana and lung cancer. The study used a sample size of over 1000 as opposed to the 79 used in the New Zealand study.

[quote]abcd1234 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
DanErickson wrote:
I don’t know about this. I used to smoke weed heavily and smoke cigarettes heavily. Finally I quit smoking tobacco and only smoked weed for a while. I smoked a cigarette and it was harder to breathe then after smoking a joint. Despite the fact that the joint has no filter. Mind you I have no proof that how hard or easy it is to breathe is linked to getting cancer.

Marijuana, unlike cigarettes, causes bronchodilation. That is why it was easier to breath.

Isn’t menthol also a bronchodilator, meaning mentholated cigarettes would have a similar effect? [/quote]

Despite the sensation you may feel from menthol, menthol is not a broncodilator. All tobacco casues broncoconstriction which narrow your airways and not bronchodilatation

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
abcd1234 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
DanErickson wrote:
I don’t know about this. I used to smoke weed heavily and smoke cigarettes heavily. Finally I quit smoking tobacco and only smoked weed for a while. I smoked a cigarette and it was harder to breathe then after smoking a joint. Despite the fact that the joint has no filter. Mind you I have no proof that how hard or easy it is to breathe is linked to getting cancer.

Marijuana, unlike cigarettes, causes bronchodilation. That is why it was easier to breath.

Isn’t menthol also a bronchodilator, meaning mentholated cigarettes would have a similar effect?

Despite the sensation you may feel from menthol, menthol is not a broncodilator. All tobacco casues broncoconstriction which narrow your airways and not bronchodilatation[/quote]

Thanks. I always assumed it was since taking mentholated lozenges,teas, and stuff like vaporub always seems to make it much easier to breathe during colds.

Many people drink coffee with their cigarette. Xanthines like caffeine are bronchodilators(most asthmatics know quick relief from an attack is only a cup away). I wonder if that would have any effect on countering/reducing constriction caused by cigarettes.

Most people couldn’t smoke a pack of marijuana cigarettes a day. So I doubt there will be an “epidemic of marijuana cancers”, due to an increased potency over tobacco.

But I wouldn’t rule it out in the worst abusers, either.

Anyways, you can grind marijuana and simmer it in ghee or coconut oil, strain and drink the shit straight or make brownies. No cancer from that!

[quote]Kailash wrote:
Most people couldn’t smoke a pack of marijuana cigarettes a day. So I doubt there will be an “epidemic of marijuana cancers”, due to an increased potency over tobacco.

But I wouldn’t rule it out in the worst abusers, either.

Anyways, you can grind marijuana and simmer it in ghee or coconut oil, strain and drink the shit straight or make brownies. No cancer from that![/quote]

But according to the article, 1 joint=1 pack.

That seems a bit ridiculous to me, though, as the amount of organic plant matter being burned and inhaled in one joint is roughly the same as a cigarette. Actually, most marijuana smokers would take less drags.(an American Spirit cigarette takes me about 15-20 drags to finish in 10 minutes. If I took that many hits off a joint in 10 minutes, I’d pass out)

Just use a vaporizer.

[quote]abcd1234 wrote:
Kailash wrote:
Most people couldn’t smoke a pack of marijuana cigarettes a day. So I doubt there will be an “epidemic of marijuana cancers”, due to an increased potency over tobacco.

But I wouldn’t rule it out in the worst abusers, either.

Anyways, you can grind marijuana and simmer it in ghee or coconut oil, strain and drink the shit straight or make brownies. No cancer from that!

But according to the article, 1 joint=1 pack.

That seems a bit ridiculous to me, though, as the amount of organic plant matter being burned and inhaled in one joint is roughly the same as a cigarette. Actually, most marijuana smokers would take less drags.(an American Spirit cigarette takes me about 15-20 drags to finish in 10 minutes. If I took that many hits off a joint in 10 minutes, I’d pass out) [/quote]

Look, I find this study total rubbish. But, generally, the way a joint is smoked does more damage to the lungs than a cig. For one thing, you keep the smoke in longer, often do not use a filter and smoke it till your lips burn (all consequences of the insane prices because some jackasses decided to make it illegal). So no, I do not believe it is anywhere close to a pack but common sense tells me it’s more harmful than a classic cigarette.

More bad news for tokers.

Marijuana Smokers Face Rapid Lung Destruction – As Much As 20 Years Ahead Of Tobacco Smokers

ScienceDaily (Jan. 27, 2008) �?? A new study finds that the development of bullous lung disease occurs in marijuana smokers approximately 20 years earlier than tobacco smokers.
A condition often caused by exposure to toxic chemicals or long-term exposure to tobacco smoke, bullous lung disease (also known as bullae) is a condition where air trapped in the lungs causes obstruction to breathing and eventual destruction of the lungs.

At present, about 10% of young adults and 1% of the adult population smoke marijuana regularly. Researchers find that the mean age of marijuana-smoking patients with lung problems was 41, as opposed to the average age of 65 years for tobacco-smoking patients.

The study “Bullous Lung Disease due to Marijuana” also finds that the bullous lung disease can easily go undetected as patients suffering from the disease may show normal chest X-rays and lung functions. High-resolution CT scans revealed severe asymmetrical, variably sized bullae in the patients studied. However, chest X-rays and lung functions were normal in half of them.

Lead author Dr. Matthew Naughton says, “What is outstanding about this study is the relatively young ages of the lung disease patients, as well as the lack of abnormality on chest X-rays and lung functions in nearly half of the patients we tested.”

He added, “Marijuana is inhaled as extremely hot fumes to the peak inspiration and held for as long as possible before slow exhalation. This predisposes to greater damage to the lungs and makes marijuana smokers are more prone to bullous disease as compared to cigarette smokers.”

Patients who smoke marijuana inhale more and hold their breath four times longer than cigarette smokers. It is the breathing manoeuvres of marijuana smokers that serve to increase the concentration and pulmonary deposition of inhaled particulate matter �?? resulting in greater and more rapid lung destruction.

This paper is published in the January 2008 issue of Respirology.

Adapted from materials provided by Blackwell Publishing.

20 cigarettes daily is kind of a lot, but if you smoked a whole joint to yourself you’d piss your pants.

[quote]Dirty_Bulk wrote:
20 cigarettes daily is kind of a lot, but if you smoked a whole joint to yourself you’d piss your pants.[/quote]

If you spread it out over the course of the day(or smoke the equivalent in a pipe) it would be a different deal. Most smokers sure as hell would get sick chain-smoking a whole pack straight without building up a tolerance first.(a 4-5 pack a day smoker might, but your average smoker would not)

[quote]mundele wrote:
On another note, the American Thoracic Society did a study in 2006 in Los Angeles that concluded that there was no link between marijuana and lung cancer. The study used a sample size of over 1000 as opposed to the 79 used in the New Zealand study.

Study Finds No Link Between Marijuana Use And Lung Cancer -- ScienceDaily [/quote]

Yep - I was going to post that if no one else did.

Also, saying a bong filters nothing is beyond laughable. Trust me, it does - as someone else said, take a big sip out of a bong and see if the water has “absorbed nothing.”

So, we’ll call this - more GOOD news for tokers…

Study Finds No Link Between Marijuana Use And Lung Cancer
ScienceDaily (May 26, 2006) �?? People who smoke marijuana–even heavy, long-term marijuana users–do not appear to be at increased risk of developing lung cancer, according to a study to be presented at the American Thoracic Society International Conference on May 23rd.

Marijuana smoking also did not appear to increase the risk of head and neck cancers, such as cancer of the tongue, mouth, throat, or esophagus, the study found.

The findings were a surprise to the researchers. “We expected that we would find that a history of heavy marijuana use–more than 500-1,000 uses–would increase the risk of cancer from several years to decades after exposure to marijuana,” said the senior researcher, Donald Tashkin, M.D., Professor of Medicine at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA in Los Angeles.

The study looked at 611 people in Los Angeles County who developed lung cancer, 601 who developed cancer of the head or neck regions, and 1,040 people without cancer who were matched on age, gender and neighborhood. The researchers used the University of Southern California Tumor Registry, which is notified as soon as a patient in Los Angeles County receives a diagnosis of cancer.

They limited the study to people under age 60. “If you were born prior to 1940, you were unlikely to be exposed to marijuana use during your teens and 20s–the time of peak marijuana use,” Dr. Tashkin said. People who were exposed to marijuana use in their youth are just now getting to the age when cancer typically starts to develop, he added.

Subjects were asked about lifetime use of marijuana, tobacco and alcohol, as well as other drugs, their diet, occupation, family history of cancer and socioeconomic status. The subjects’ reported use of marijuana was similar to that found in other surveys, Dr. Tashkin noted.

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.

The study found that 80% of lung cancer patients and 70% of patients with head and neck cancer had smoked tobacco, while only about half of patients with both types of cancer smoked marijuana.

There was a clear association between smoking tobacco and cancer. The study found a 20-fold increased risk of lung cancer in people who smoked two or more packs of cigarettes a day. The more tobacco a person smoked, the greater the risk of developing both lung cancer and head and neck cancers, findings that were consistent with many previous studies.

The new findings are surprising for several reasons, Dr. Tashkin said. Previous studies have shown that marijuana tar contains about 50% higher concentrations of chemicals linked to lung cancer, compared with tobacco tar, he noted. Smoking a marijuana cigarette deposits four times more tar in the lungs than smoking an equivalent amount of tobacco. “Marijuana is packed more loosely than tobacco, so there’s less filtration through the rod of the cigarette, so more particles will be inhaled,” Dr. Tashkin said. “And marijuana smokers typically smoke differently than tobacco smokers–they hold their breath about four times longer, allowing more time for extra fine particles to deposit in the lung.”

One possible explanation for the new findings, he said, is that THC, a chemical in marijuana smoke, may encourage aging cells to die earlier and therefore be less likely to undergo cancerous transformation.

The next step, Dr. Tashkin says, is to study the DNA samples of the subjects, to see whether there are some heavy marijuana users who may be at increased risk of developing cancer if they have a genetic susceptibility for cancer.

Adapted from materials provided by American Thoracic Society, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

[quote]Dirty_Bulk wrote:
20 cigarettes daily is kind of a lot, but if you smoked a whole joint to yourself you’d piss your pants.[/quote]

You mean a blunt right? A single joint is about one smoking session for a once to twice a week smoker.