Marijuana linked to testicular cancer

poledriver

poledriver

Bluelighter
Joined
Jul 21, 2005
Messages
11,543
Marijuana linked to testicular cancer

An increased risk of developing testicular cancer from smoking marijuana is just one more reason not to use the drug, Australian researchers say.

An American study published in the journal Cancer compared 163 young men diagnosed with testicular cancer with about 290 healthy men of the same age.

It found that men with a history of recreational marijuana use were twice as likely to have two types of testicular cancer that commonly occur in younger men and carry a worse prognosis.

The findings confirmed earlier studies which also showed links between cannabis use and testicular cancer.

The founding professor and director of the National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre (NCPIC) at the University of NSW, Jan Copeland, said the results were not surprising because there were cannabis receptors in the testes and smoking marijuana affected sperm development.

"It is just one more avoidable risk factor for the development of a range of health conditions," Professor Copeland said.

"As the peak ages for the development of testicular cancer and cannabis use coincide in young adulthood, protecting health and fertility is just one more reason not to smoke cannabis for this high-risk group."

Cancer Council Australia CEO Ian Olver said although studies that relied on self-reporting drug use could be questionable, the results of this study were convincing.

The study also found that men with a history of cocaine use had a reduced risk of both subtypes of testicular cancer.

The University of Southern California study suggested this could be because cocaine had already damaged or killed sperm-producing germ cells, therefore those cells could not become cancerous.

Marijuana use has previously been linked to and increased risk of schizophrenia, memory loss and learning difficulties.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/national/14809169/marijuana-linked-to-testicular-cancer/
 
How about stop trying to give people "one more reason" not to smoke marijuana and let them make the decision for themselves huh?
 
Daily Mail - Cannabis smokers...testicular cancer...reduced by using COCAINE

Cannabis smokers 'more likely to develop testicular cancer although risk can be reduced by using COCAINE'
Click to expand...

By Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 06:10, 10 September 2012

With reader comments

  • Cocaine said to lower risk of testicular cancer - but is thought to do so by reducing fertility
  • Marijuana users warned to consider cancer risk - and doctors urged to take it into account when administering the drug for therapeutic purposes

Men who smoke cannabis are at greater risk of testicular cancer, a new study suggests, but men who use cocaine may be at a lower risk from the disease. Researchers have found a link between recreational cannabis use and an increased risk of developing subtypes of testicular cancer. The findings say not only should marijuana users consider the risk in smoking the drug, but also doctors who administer it for therapeutic purposes in young male patients.

Testicular cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed in young men aged 15 to 45. To see if recreational drug use might play a role, Doctor Victoria Cortessis, at the Keck School of Medicine at the University of Southern California looked at the history of recreational drug use in 163 young men diagnosed with testicular cancer and compared it with that of 292 healthy men of the same age and ethnicity.

The investigators found that men with a history of using marijuana were twice as likely to have subtypes of testicular cancer called non-seminoma and mixed germ cell tumours.
Click to expand...

The researchers also discovered that men with a history of using cocaine had a reduced risk of both subtypes of testicular cancer. While it is unknown how cocaine may influence testicular cancer risk, the authors suspect that the drug may kill sperm-producing germ cells since it has this effect on experimental animals. Dr Cortessis added: 'If this is correct, then "prevention" would come at a high price. Although germ cells can not develop cancer if they are first destroyed, fertility would also be impaired.
Click to expand...

More...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...icular-cancer-risk-reduced-using-COCAINE.html
 
I think this needs far more research and the study needs to be replicated. It sounds like the author is jumping to conclusions about the study just to get more readers. Just seems like a correlation to me, just like the link to schizophrenia.

edit: merger messed up my post.
 
Last edited:
Why is the headline "Marijuana linked to testicular cancer?" It should be "Cocaine significantly reduces testicular cancer."=D
 
I feel it is bad journalism to not even give a citation of the articles they are trying to spread. Its hard to see how the journalist is interpreting the articles wording, essentially throwing the general public BS that they want to them to believe is 100% fact. Also, I dunno how many studies there are out there investigating this, trying to replicate the data, etc., but one or two studies isn't something that can be definitively said as truth.

Also 23536, http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/threads/418875-Marijuana-may-cause-testicular-cancer , the link you posted to the previous thread on an article talking about the potential for a link between the two was a really weak study that was hardly proof of the correlation. I really wouldn't start assuming that there really is a correlation, even though countless news companies will jump all over it trying to quote it as fact. Its a sad exploitation to paraphrase a scientific article with out giving any citations, and quotations, while using words that persuade people into believing what they read with out recognizing that the research behind this is still young and not proven to be definitive. Its disgusting that the moment any sort of theory of negative physiological responses ties to marijuana, news companies and politicians will jump on it to meet their own agendas.
 
Last edited:
Media is often sensationalism to sell papers, get more readers or to sway people to believe or not believe in something, or to discredit something, lots of things, take it all with a grain of salt, for every person who gets 'nut cancer' as 23536 so eloquently put it there would also be an argument for people who use it for alleviation of pain or whatever.
 
Yet, if it was a study that said marijuana cures testicular cancer after 1 joint, not a single one of you would be bitching about credibility of the source or calling it sensationalism.

Funny how that works.
 
Once again voxide your post contain nothing of value and based only speculation.

funny how that works.

Also analyzing articles by using a journalists poorly paraphrased piece of writing is absolutely silly and applies to any study showing positive or negative results in a study. This site isn't completely filled with individuals who don't question what others claimed as truth. Not everyone is as dense as you.
 
Last edited:
I wont disagree that some people will be happy at a positive outcome in a article on marijuana, or other drugs, but there are many reasons for one to become happy to see such a article, which isn't the same as being upset at a blatant attempt to mislead the public for their own interests. I'd be happy to see a positive article, because journalists are pretty one sided when it comes to reporting information, but at the same time I know I'd be interested in seeing the real article, not a poorly paraphrased piece of writing by a journalist not used to writing impartially. In the example he gave, I know I'm not the only one who would want to see the real article published because pot heads who attempt to put weed on a pedestal and ignore investigating outrageous claims like one joint will save you from testi cancer are just as much of a problem. Also if an article has such a small number of subjects, not everyone would ignore that piece of information. They may be happy for the reason I already gave, but they would recognize that there are still many more studies that need to be done before. I'm sure this would be the same for many people. So yeah, speculating how someone will respond as an attempt to create a fire to feed the flames, is stupid. He is also making a claim for the fact that not a single person would have a different response then what he says, which is ridiculous. It is impossible to assume everyone on this site would respond in the same manner. So no he is not correct.
 
This article at least sites a source
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...ular-cancer/262178/?google_editors_picks=true


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...T+(05:00-07:00+EDT)+for+essential+maintenance

I have full access but haven't finished reading yet:
but from the brief description the above study seems to be largely based on methodical interviews with patients concerning their past and present drug use. They seem to have found a strong correlation but that does not necessarily imply causation. From what I can tell there is little information regarding the underlying science of this statement, "Germ cell function may be influenced by cannabinoids, and 2 prior epidemiologic studies reported that the use of marijuana may be associated with nonseminomatous TGCT." They certainly mention that cannabis use had been linked with decreased testosterone production but fall a bit short in linking that to germ cell function.

I would wait until some more hard science can either back up or refute the findings before passing judgement.

for what its worth the cancer cases in this study were more likely than control cases to have a higher education... stay in school kids. This is a good example of where correlation does not imply causation because I doubt they are really getting at education causing increased risk of this type of cancer.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top