This is unexpected.

I don't know how is everyone else smoking their joint, but i cut it with tabacco therefor i'm still smoking a cigarette.
 
well, not all pot smokers are drug addicts....:rolleyes:
 
It's not really that strange actually. Everyone with half a brain knows cigarettes and a hundred-fold worse than weed.

In technical terms all you are inhaling is the smoke from the cooking of the leaves of one plant (as opposed to the thousands of carcinogens in a nicotine cigarette). I'm not suprised it doesn't have a positive correlation with cancer.

Not to say I support pot smoking (though I do think it should be legal), seems a waste of time & brain cells and also to decrease intelligence. There were some studies done on this but the potheads never showed (busy apparently :smoke: ) so the results couldn't be tabulated. The researchers made the mistake of setting time for the apptitude tests for 4:20.
 
rmsharpe said:
Cancer or not, I think I'd still rather be an unhealthy normal person than a healthy drug-addicted goon.
I'd rather be neither.

By the way, pot isn't physically addictive. Especially compared to nicotine, caffine, alcohol, food additives and apparently (judging by Britney Spears, Pink, that SOS song, etc.) terrible music.

By the way, do you use the word goon in real life? :lol:
 
Yeeek said:
I don't know how is everyone else smoking their joint, but i cut it with tabacco therefor i'm still smoking a cigarette.

That's because you're addicted to the tobacco. I'm not, and I don't want to be - so I only smoke the good stuff.
 
How to drown out the smoking noise, though?

Really, how many pot smokers aren't exposed to cigarette smoke in much larger quantities
 
Narz said:
In technical terms all you are inhaling is the smoke from the cooking of the leaves of one plant (as opposed to the thousands of carcinogens in a nicotine cigarette). I'm not suprised it doesn't have a positive correlation with cancer.
I am. It's the frikken smoke from burning plant material!

The suggestion that THC may have a protective effect seems a more likely explanation to me than any lack of carcinogenic compounds.
 
well cigarettes also have more carcinogens than a normal blunt, so they would obviously have a great effect on the lungs but marijuana is generally just the leaves and the paper
 
I still see Pot as dangerous, no matter what researchers say.
 
It's not really that strange actually. Everyone with half a brain knows cigarettes and a hundred-fold worse than weed.

Well, actually, I read in a CNN article that Marijuana tar contains about 50% more cancer causing chemicals than Tobbaco tar does. On top of that, joints are rolled looser than cigarrettes, which means you inhale more particles, which are held in your lungs longer, because of the way people smoke pot.

The real news is "THC may prevent cancer."


Of course, I'm still extremely opposed to any narcotic drugs, including Marijuana, as well as Tobacco, and to a lesser extent alcohol. I don't see why people would need distortive drugs, especially for recreational purposes.
 
Where you expecting it to cause cancer? I bet smoking things does increase risk of lung cancer, but nobody smokes three packs of joints a day.
 
"However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous. "

That wonderful feeling is just youth!
 
No wonder I feel so child-like after a toke :smoke:
 
Pot = mostly smoked via a water filtration which removes impurities
Tobaco - mostly smoke via fiber filtration dose little

Thats why Tobaco smoke causes cancer
 
Top Bottom