• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

Can Weed Really Kill..? The Scientist

Si Dread

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 29, 2002
Messages
3,226
Can Pot Be Lethal - The Scientist

It is possible for cannabis alone to cause death, according to German researchers who performed post-mortem examinations of 15 people. Two of those deaths could not have been caused by anything but cannabis intoxication, the researchers suggest in a study published in Forensic Science International this month (February 14). Benno Hartung of University Hospital Düsseldorf and colleagues examined 15 people whose deaths were linked to cannabis, performing a battery of tests, including autopsy, toxicological and histological testing, and immunohistochemical analyses, in an attempt to isolate the effects of the drug and rule out other factors, such as liver disease and alcohol use. “It’s a diagnosis of exclusion so you have to rule out all other possibilities,” Hartung told New Scientist.

Recent studies have suggested that marijuana use is not as harmful as once believed, and advocates of medical use of the drug commonly cite the statistic that there has not been one recorded incident of someone overdosing on pot. But Hartung and his team claim that two of the deaths they studied, caused by cardiac arrhythmia, were triggered by cannabis use, though a mechanism whereby marijuana can cause such drastic changes in the heartbeat remains elusive. “These deaths are rare and will remain rare,” David Raynes at the UK National Drug Prevention Alliance told New Scientist. “The real risks are from long-term effects on the young brain."

Still, Hartung recommended that other researchers investigate deaths involving marijuana. “Even though it may be rare, I hope others investigate death by cannabis intoxication in other cities,” he said, “particularly in light of the increased use of cannabis for pain relief,” he told New Scientist.

from - http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/39256/title/Can-Pot-Be-Lethal-/
 
Hmm. Not sure what to think of this guy. He is basically saying that weed caused them to have arrhythmic heart beats. People have idiopathic arrhythmia way more often than people supposedly die from cannabis intoxication. He needs to get a much, much larger sample size to be able to prove something like this. Even with a larger sample size how they can equate smoking weed and having an arrhythmia to the weed causing the problem? How such a conclusion could possibly be drawn is beyond me, let alone with only 15 samples. The media shouldn't be allowed to publish such a thing, and he shouldn't talk about it like its some break through if he doesn't want to look retarded among his peers.

I sincerely hope this fellow is being misrepresented.

Here is a slightly more legitimate source, but still doesn't make the theme any less retarded.
http://www.focus.de/gesundheit/ratgeber/psychologie/krankheitenstoerungen/forscher-sicher-weltweit-erste-cannabis-todesfaelle-nachgeweisen_id_3639974.html
 
So if these people decided to run a marathon and it triggered their cardiac arrhythmia would we say that the marathon killed them, or their genetically weak heart?
 
So if these people decided to run a marathon and it triggered their cardiac arrhythmia would we say that the marathon killed them, or their genetically weak heart?

The genetically weak heart, the marathon simply precipitated its ultimate effect. However, in the case of cannabis, we can't even verifiably say it triggered the arrhythmia, whereas we know a marathon is an enormous heart stressor with absolute certainty.
 
The genetically weak heart, the marathon simply precipitated its ultimate effect. However, in the case of cannabis, we can't even verifiably say it triggered the arrhythmia, whereas we know a marathon is an enormous heart stressor with absolute certainty.
In this instance I would say it was the combination.

I am sure weed has invariably precipitated many deaths. I mean, a rose thorn has killed plenty of people. You have to be specific and give things perspective.

The marathon killed them but wouldn't kill you. They would be alive if they had not run a marathon. They would be alive without a heart condition, but that is impossible, if it was a genetic defect they couldn't be alive without their heart.

Just like how after getting stabbed, removing the knife kills a person. They had to be stabbed, but that did not kill them because if they had known how to remove the knife they wouldn't have died. So you cannot say getting stabbed killed them.

Basically people die when they are pronounced dead. People have survived incredible falls, on the other extreme.

Its a gray world out there. The fall does not kill you, neither does hitting the ground really, when the doctor comes along and says, you're dead. That kills you.

Or as the saying goes, nobody is dead until the last time their name is spoken.
 
Being pronounced dead is not what what kills you, Jesus Christ.... It is just the official pronouncement for the records. Death when your heart stops that is why people are said to have been brought back to life if their heart stopped for a time and restarted. Enough of these idiotic semantics.

The heart condition would have killed this person at some point anyway. An event ( like smoking pot) that cannot ever kill you without extremely rare circumstances around it cannot be called the cause of death. The combination may have lead to the death ( or not, since getting angry or frustrated increases you blood pressure just as much, that could have caused it) but saying weed is the cause is simply a dishonest representation intended to mislead and scare for propaganda purposes. Weed only raises heart rate and blood pressure in a way roughly equivalent to mild exercise at most, it is not considered a stimulant or a heart stressor.
 
Last edited:
Which came first, the chicken or the differrence between correlation and causation?

This is fantastic haha

Also cannabis could easily have been considered to be the cause of death of money because of people driving stoned.
I know I am a much worse driver when I'm baked.
Just like they attribute deaths from drunk driving to alcohol, so should they to marijuana.
 
Being pronounced dead is not what what kills you, Jesus Christ.... It is just the official pronouncement for the records. Death when your heart stops that is why people are said to have been brought back to life if their heart stopped for a time and restarted. Enough of these idiotic semantics.

The heart condition would have killed this person at some point anyway. An event ( like smoking pot) that cannot ever kill you without extremely rare circumstances around it cannot be called the cause of death. The combination may have lead to the death ( or not, since getting angry or frustrated increases you blood pressure just as much, that could have caused it) but saying weed is the cause is simply a dishonest representation intended to mislead and scare for propaganda purposes. Weed only raises heart rate and blood pressure in a way roughly equivalent to mild exercise at most, it is not considered a stimulant or a heart stressor.
It is not semantics. Not even close to being semantics. Nor is it idiotic.

You call this heart stopping/starting business being "brought back to life"; well, it is only so because you call a stopped heart being dead. Who says they are dead? Does it make them dead? You really prove what I said is true by your example.

It was a combination.

People that disembark planes from high altitude do not die. These people are parachutists and they go about living happy lives. Also, people that go around without parachutes are not the walking dead because of it. It requires a combination of two specific events.

They die because A and B. A being the dominant reason. Namely jumping out of planes. Having the metaphorical knife stuck in your chest would not kill you (having a weak heart) removing the knife (stressing the heart) kills you in combination. You would in say the knife being pulled out was the actual cause of death and live indefinitely with it in your chest. They do this with bullets.

Yes they could die any number of ways. Running, laughing, choking on food. But then that is what kills them. They ALWAYS had the heart condition. The event that occurred shortly before death is clearly what killed them.

Another way of looking at the problem is this. Everyone of us, except you, is superman. We can all be shot, run over, pushed out of planes, and be fine. Then one day you get smashed by a piano. Should your epithet read, "died because weak", or should it say, "died because piano"?

I would suggest look more carefully at what marijuana can do to blood pressure, I guess, before dismissing this as a hoax. I have heard from people having such issues.
 
Last edited:
My example proves it is idiotic semantics that you are using. Have you heard of flatlining? The medical establishment says I am correct about the heart stopping example, that is how they determine that death has occurred.

Cannabis has has a therapeutic index in the tens of thousands. This would not be true if this groundless, unfounded stress on the heart had basis in reality. The article is full of shit and so are you.

Try reading my whole whole response next time. I am even putting a lot of spaces in this reply so your mind won't wander while reading.

If cannabis stressed the heart more than a typical daily experience ( frustration, mild exercise) than it would not have such a high therapeutic index. There is no evidence weed was even the cause of death, correlation is not causation. Weed was merely detected in their system.

Also, your anecdotal reports you "heard" about are meaningless. Cannabis's toxicity has been tested endlessly while this bogus phenomenon only seems to occur in these bullshit propaganda articles.
 
inb4 potheads with no medical expertise start refuting the claims of these researchers who work in a field they have no experience with. inb4 correlation vs. causation, as if these researchers don't employ statistical methodologies and analysis to determine whether or not a factor is causative. inb4 accusations of corruption, propaganda, big pharma this, police state government that.

i would not be at all surprised if cannabis could cause death by arrhythmia in certain very rare instances, its ability to increase heart rate and blood pressure is well documented. they're not saying its common, just that its possible and its reasonable to believe that it probably has happened before, according to the current evidence. they even say that further research is needed.

cannabis is still an extremely safe drug nonetheless. even if it turned out that deaths from cannabis were orders of magnitude more common than previously believed, it would still be one of the safest drugs that exists.
 
Last edited:
To draw this conclusion from a sample size of 15 is not good science however clear cut the results may be.

These results are far from clear cut. There are quite a few things that can cause an arrhythmia fatal or non. Sometimes we can figure them out, but idiopathic diagnoses within this area are very common, and in some cases, as with atrial fibrillation, they are the majority.

Not all of us are lay people. I offer information and starting points, it is up to you to follow it, or to pose a legitimate question perhaps.

Edit: I would agree that it is possible, but I disagree that this new pseudo-study shows anything of merit. On another note, east Germany (before, west too) used to perform autopsies on quite a few people, and I believe Austria at one point used to conduct an autopsy on nearly every citizen. I think their statistics indicated that many of the pre-autopsy causes of death (~50% ) were inaccurate. Would be interesting to see what modern medicine would come up with.
 
Last edited:
Being pronounced dead is not what what kills you, Jesus Christ.... It is just the official pronouncement for the records. Death when your heart stops that is why people are said to have been brought back to life if their heart stopped for a time and restarted.

Actually, the semantics are far from idiotic, and can be pretty serious. There are various definitions of death, but to be legally dead differs from country to country. There are simply specific requirements that must be fulfilled in order to declare someone dead.
 
^So will electricity. Ban electrons!

Seriously, I think people who die from weed were already about to give up the ghost at the least provocation. Exercise, stress, caffeine... practically anything could do it. To say it's weed's fault is complicating a simple issue, and only adds confusion & controversy where there should be none. Disinformation is a bigger killer than cannabis will ever be.
 
Study Links Marjuana to Deaths

A recent German study claims to have documented the first known deaths resulting from marijuana use.

While researchers studied 15 people whose deaths were allegedly linked to marijuana use, 13 of those deaths were confirmed to be caused by other factors. Researchers said, however, that the drug was to blame in two isolated cases of two seemingly health people, one 23 years old and another 28. Autopsies found that younger had a serious undetected heart problem, suggesting that people with cardiological issues should be aware of marijuana risks, and the older had a history of alcohol and drug use.

“To our knowledge, these are the first cases of suspected fatal cannabis intoxications where full post-mortem investigations… were carried out,” researchers said in the study, published in Forensic Science International this month. “After exclusion of other causes of death we assume that the young men experienced fatal cardiovascular complications evoked by smoking cannabis.”

The new study cuts against many others showing pot use does not have serious medical repercussions. The German Association for Drugs and Addiction criticized the study on Wednesday, The Local reports.

“Cannabis does not paralyze the breathing or the heart,” said Jost Leune, who heads the group. He said the dangers of marijuana are “exaggerated” and that “deaths due to cannabis use are usually accidents that are not caused by the substance, but to the circumstances of use.”

From - http://healthland.time.com/2014/02/27/marijuana-deaths-german-study/
 
So did the marijuana cause the deaths or did the "serious undetected heart problem" cause the death? I hope they can finally find one death attributed to marijuana so all these people can then waste their time on something more productive to society as even if they are able to pin a death on marijuana it will still remain the worlds safest drug.
 
Try reading my whole whole response next time. I am even putting a lot of spaces in this reply so your mind won't wander while reading.

If cannabis stressed the heart more than a typical daily experience ( frustration, mild exercise) than it would not have such a high therapeutic index. There is no evidence weed was even the cause of death, correlation is not causation. Weed was merely detected in their system.

Also, your anecdotal reports you "heard" about are meaningless. Cannabis's toxicity has been tested endlessly while this bogus phenomenon only seems to occur in these bullshit propaganda articles.
I read everything you wrote. That does not necessarily mean I understood everything the first time through. My mind wanders and that is just the way I am. Many other people are the same way and that is why we need to repeat things and reread things.

"Marijuana also raises heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug" -NIH

Now, I don't know what study they are referring to or if the study was any good, but this is exactly the kind of statistical information they would use to link marijuana with thousands of deaths.
 
Top