Long-term pot smoking has no significant effect on lung functions: new study

[jd4083]

without reading your nonsense second paragraph, it's because

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

you might want to get one too. just make sure you buy a good one from an authorised retailer.

You're not doing much for the whole "stoners are idiots" stereotype with this crap. Take note, I'm not calling you an idiot, but you sure are posting some idiotic shit. Move along, you're clearly not emotionally or intellectually capable of discussing matters like an adult.

 

[waveguide]

well that's okay bro, but i'm saying this out of genuine concern, before you hurt yourself or someone you care about,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

 

[waveguide]

never mind, i can see that you're not a very nice person.

 

[jd4083]

never mind, i can see that you're not a very nice person.

Yeah, typically when folks make personal attacks and then completely ignore the points being made I am a bit less inclined to be polite.

 

[PotSnob420]

The government just like its still a schedule 1 drug supposedly worse than cocaine lol

 

[mr.brunch]

You are in Research
So, you thought it was the tar that caused cancer...

by Sol Lightman
Think again. Cigarette companies will have you believing anything just as long as you continue to buy their products. The fact is, although insoluble tars are a contributing factor to the lung cancer danger present in today's cigarettes, the real danger is radioactivity. According to U.S. Surgeon General C. Everette Koop (on national television, 1990) radioactivity, not tar, accounts for at least 90% of all smoking related lung cancer.

Tobacco crops grown in the United States are fertilized by law with phosphates rich in radium 226. In addition, many soils have a natural radium 226 content. Radium 226 breaks down into two long lived 'daughter' elements -- lead 210 and polonium 210. These radioactive particles become airborne, and attach themselves to the fine hairs on tobacco leaves.

Studies have shown that lead 210 and polonium 210 deposits accumulate in the bodies of people exposed to cigarette smoke. Data collected in the late 1970's shows that smokers have three times as much of these elements in their lower lungs as non smokers. Smokers also show a greater accumulation of lead 210 and polonium 210 in their skeletons,though no studies have been conducted to link these deposits with bone cancer. Polonium 210 is the only component of cigarette smoke which has produced tumors by itself in inhalation experiments with animals.

When a smoker inhales tobacco smoke, the lungs react by forming irritated areas in the bronchi. All smoke produces this effect. However, although these irritated spots are referred to as 'pre-cancerous' lesions, they are a perfectly natural defense system and usually go away with no adverse effects. Insoluble tars in tobacco smoke can slow this healing process by adhering to lesions and causing additional irritation. In addition, tobacco smoke causes the bronchi to constrict for long periods of time, which obstructs the lung's ability to clear itself of these residues.

Polonium 210 and lead 210 in tobacco smoke show a tendency to accumulate at lesions in specific spots, called bifurcations, in the bronchi. When smoking is continued for an extended period of time, deposits of radioactivity turn into radioactive 'hot spots' and remain at bifurcations for years. Polonium 210 emits highly localized alpha radiation which has been shown to cause cancer. Since the polonium 210 has a half life of 21.5 years (Due to the presence of lead 210), it can put an ex-smoker at risk for years after he or she quits. Experiments measuring the level of polonium 210 in victims of lung cancer found that the level of 'hot spot' activity was virtually the same in smokers and ex-smokers even though the ex-smokers had quit five years prior to death.

Over half of the radioactive materials emitted by a burning cigarette are released into the air, where they can be inhaled by non-smokers. In addition to lead 210 and polonium 210 it has been proven that tobacco smoke can cause airborne radioactive particles to collect in the lungs of both smokers and non-smokers exposed to second hand smoke. Original studies conducted on uranium miners which showed an increased risk of lung cancer due to exposure to radon in smokers have been re-run to evaluate the radioactive lung cancer risk from indoor air radon. It turns out that tobacco smoke works as a kind of 'magnet' for airborne radioactive particles, causing them to deposit in your lungs instead of on furniture. (Smoking indoors increases lung cancer risks greatly.)

It has been estimated that the total accumulated alpha radiation exposure of a pack-a-day indoor smoker is 38 to 97 rad by age 60. (Two packs a day yields up to 143 rad, and non-smokers receive no more than 17 rad.) An exposure of 1 rad per year yields a 1% risk of lung cancer (at the lowest estimate.)

Don't smoke. Or if you do, smoke lightly, outdoors, and engage frequently in activities which will clear your lungs. Imported India tobacco has less than half the radiation content ofthat grown in the U.S.

Nicotine, the active ingredient in tobacco smoke, has long been known to be highly addictive. In fact, doctors and pharmacologists are not in consensus as to which is more addictive -- nicotine, or heroin.

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:

Most marijuana smokers smoke the bud, not the leaf, of the plant. The bud contains only 33% as much tar as tobacco.
Marijuana smokers do not smoke anywhere near as much as tobacco smokers, due to the psychoactive effects of cannabis.
Not one case of lung cancer has ever been successfully linked to marijuana use.
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.

Sources:

(radioactivity)
E.A. Martel, "Alpha Radiation Dose at Bronchial Bifurcations From Indoor Exposure to Radon Progeny", Proceeds of the National Academy of Science, Vol. 80, pp. 1285-1289, March 1983.
Naoimi H. Harley, Beverly S. Cohen, and T.C. Tso, "Polonium 210: A Questionable Risk Factor in Smoking Related Carcingenisis."
"Radiactivity: the New-Found Danger in Cigarettes," Reader's Digest, March 1986.
"Would You Still Rather Fight Than Switch?," Whole Life Times, Mid-April/May 1985.
(secret ingredients)
"What Goes Up In Smoke?," Nation, December 23, 1991.
(marijuana)
"The Emperor Wears No Clothes," Jack Herer, HEMP/Queen of Clubs Publishing, 1992
Source: ukcia

 

[RetroGrow]

Tobacco crops grown in the United States are fertilized by law with phosphates rich in radium 226. In addition, many soils have a natural radium 226 content. Radium 226 breaks down into two long lived 'daughter' elements -- lead 210 and polonium 210. These radioactive particles become airborne, and attach themselves to the fine hairs on tobacco leaves.

So, the question is: why wouldn't these radioactive particles attach themselves to Cannabis also? Phosphates are also used in fertilizers for Cannabis.

Nicotine, the active ingredient in tobacco smoke, has long been known to be highly addictive. In fact, doctors and pharmacologists are not in consensus as to which is more addictive -- nicotine, or heroin.

This one I have heard before many times, and I always have to laugh at it. Having used both tobacco and opiates, I can assure you that opiates are infinitely more difficult to quit than cigarettes/nicotine. There is no comparison. Withdrawal from nicotine is mildly irritating, but takes only a couple of weeks and you are fine. Contrast that to opiates like heroin, withdrawal can last up to two years in extreme cases for heavy long term users, and the withdrawal symptoms are extreme: pain, extreme anxiety, sleeplessness that go on and on. I went through withdrawal that lasted for 6 months. In that time, the longest continual period of sleep I had was 2 hours, when I would wake up in a cold sweat like waking from an extreme nightmare. No comparison between nicotine and heroin withdrawal.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[mr.brunch]

Agreed, no comparison between nicotine withdrawl and opiates. Although I have seen many similarities between opiate and alcohol withdrawal- have seen both up close.
I am merely posting studies and articles as published, so I can't speak for the authors opinion, but I would suggest that the reasons we don't see the radium problem with cannabis is that most of us don't spray feed, and that if it did attatch to leaves in the same way.. We don't smoke the leaf as is done with tobacco.

 

[DrFever]

Every one scream organic marijuana and next time someone says this is organic grown ask them to show you there certification hahaha
bet you will not find one CERTIFIED

 

[mr.brunch]

I could certify my outdoor crop if it was legal - but obviously this is not possible so it is a moot point.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]

 

[DrFever]

Reporting from Watsonville, Calif. — Want to buy organic carrots? No problem. Organic strawberries? Widely available. Organic honey? Try your local grocery store. But organic medical marijuana? Doesn't exist — at least not in an official sense.

Organic crops and products are certified by private agencies through the U.S. Department of Agriculture — a program developed after decades of advocacy by organic farmers and their allies. Pot — medicinal or otherwise — need not apply."What the USDA doesn't recognize as a legal crop, we can't certify because we're certifying to their standards," said Jane Wade, development specialist at Santa Cruz-based California Certified Organic Farmers, the largest organic certification agency in the country. "That leaves medical marijuana out in the cold."

It also puzzles consumers interested in making sure they're not ingesting pesticides or other toxins along with their chosen pain reliever.

 

[mr.brunch]

Not far off though.
In all but name, let's say.....




FAST COMPANY

CLEAN GREEN CERTIFIED IS LIKE USDA ORGANIC FOR MARIJUANA
GONE ARE THE DAYS WHEN YOU HAD NO IDEA WHERE YOUR POT—WE MEAN, YOUR FRIEND'S POT—CAME FROM OR HOW IT WAS GROWN. NOW THE ORGANICALLY CONSCIOUS SMOKER CAN GET THE CLEANEST, GREENEST WEED.
BY ARIEL SCHWARTZ
30 SHARES
marijuana bud

The USDA Organic seal of approval has long reassured health and environmentally conscious consumers that their produce is free of genetically modified ingredients, antibiotics, and synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, among other things. But while fruit and vegetable consumers can use the organic label to differentiate between products, consumers of another popular plant--marijuana--don't have that luxury. That's why Chris Van Hook, a lawyer and USDA accredited organic certifier, started the Clean Green Certified program.

The initiative, which began in 2004, uses all the same procedures and protocols as the national organic program. "If the USDA were to say tomorrow that you can get cannabis certified as organic, everyone who is Clean Green Certified could roll right in," says Van Hook.

Growers have to be in compliance with local and state laws, and they have to jump through a number of hoops: a 300 pesticide soil sample test (sent to a federally licensed agricultural lab), a thorough review of crop inputs (i.e. natural pesticides) and a standard agricultural inspection to make sure that plants are disease and mold-free.

As of this year, growers also need to have a carbon footprint reduction plan in place--because as we have noted previously, the cannabis industry uses a huge amount of energy. For an indoor grower, a reduction plan may mean switching to CFL bulbs, solar panels, and recycling potted soils. Outdoor growers can cut down on their footprint by ensuring that their plants are of a high enough quality to make it to market. Otherwise, they may lose a significant amount of their crops to spoilage and mildew--and that means more energy goes into growing a fewer amount of usable plants.

According to Van Hook, this is the only certification program of its kind. The whole thing costs $2,000 annually for a grower, but Van Hook maintains that it's worth it, at least partially because it differentiates growers from their competition. "If you're handling uncertified cannabis, you have no idea when you buy it if it's illegally grown on national forests or if it's cartel cannabis," he says. "In this oversupplied market, a lot of growers are looking for a way to bolster their own compliance and differentiate their product in the marketplace."

So far, Clean Green certifies about 60 growers each year, and the number is growing fast. Clean Green growers are also quickly becoming noticed; for the second year in a row, a Clean Green Certified strain took the top prize in the High Times Medical Cannabis Cup--a big deal in the industry.

The certification initiative is only operational in California at the moment, but Van Hook has plans to expand. With new states quickly approving medical marijuana laws (New Jersey just gave the go-ahead this week), it's likely that there will be plenty of growers--and customers--demanding his services in the near future.Y

 

[m314]

Every one scream organic marijuana and next time someone says this is organic grown ask them to show you there certification hahaha
bet you will not find one CERTIFIED

My bud is 100% organic and certified as far as I'm concerned. I only grow with organic soil ingredients like peat moss, coco coir, and perlite along with fertilizers like blood meal, bone meal, and worm castings. I'm not selling it, so I don't have to have some government agency come into my home to give it their personal approval.

 

[oldchuck]

I buy organically certified tobacco. $20 a pound. Good quality. I expect I'll be able to do as well with organic Cannabis in a few years.

 

[Boys from south]

I smoked cannabis 7years nonstop with littarly no breaks in between, ive had my first 14 day break now and my lungs feel like the old.. no coughin etc.. doesn't seem like cannabis have done alot of damage so they might be right!

 

[MJPassion]

Reporting from Watsonville, Calif. — Want to buy organic carrots? No problem. Organic strawberries? Widely available. Organic honey? Try your local grocery store. But organic medical marijuana? Doesn't exist — at least not in an official sense.

Organic crops and products are certified by private agencies through the U.S. Department of Agriculture — a program developed after decades of advocacy by organic farmers and their allies. Pot — medicinal or otherwise — need not apply."What the USDA doesn't recognize as a legal crop, we can't certify because we're certifying to their standards," said Jane Wade, development specialist at Santa Cruz-based California Certified Organic Farmers, the largest organic certification agency in the country. "That leaves medical marijuana out in the cold."

It also puzzles consumers interested in making sure they're not ingesting pesticides or other toxins along with their chosen pain reliever.

ORGANIC WHAT? ???
Organic certification is a joke, as far as I'm concerned. It is absolutely useless & nothing more than a label used to gain more bottom line.

Why do I say this?

Because certified organic farmers are still using round up in their certified fields. I watch a couple of these folks go out & spray their fields and the patches that get sprayed are dead for 3-5 years.

I'm not exactly positive of the process of certification but I think that the certifier needs to inspect every square foot of every cultivated location in question & they choose where to get soil samples from. I'm pretty sure there is a measure of cooperation between the certifier and the farmer whereby the farmer chooses the soil sample locations. A good farmer, seeking cert, would choose sample locations based upon. his knowledge of where his/her fields were sprayed.

 

[MJPassion]

ORGANIC WHAT? ???
Organic certification is a joke, as far as I'm concerned. It is absolutely useless & nothing more than a label used to gain more bottom line.

To expand on this slightly...
Organically grown crops benefit those that consume them, as long as they are truly organic...

Organic certification only benefits the certifier & the farmer. The certifier benefits because he has a paid position whereby his only job is purely administrative. He produces nothing that the farmer didn't previously have, other than head aches dealing with the cert process.

The farmer benefits due to the label.
Whether the farmer is truly in compliance or not is a complete mystery.

My comments are based upon my personal observations of the practices of farmers in my location.
Nothing more.

Anyway...
Discussion of Organic certs is slightly off topic for this thread.

Hack, cough, choke, hack, cough.
My lungs are still congested from smoking cannabis all day every day.
I need a break but I like to sleep once in a while.