If pot becomes legal, California's health will suffer, Stanford expert says

slimvictor

Bluelight Crew
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
6,477
Location
"Darkness cannot be dissipated with more darkness.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/04/news/la-heb-proposition-19-health-20100803

excerpt:


But if pot is made legal, what would that mean for public health in the Golden State? Nothing good, says Keith Humphreys, a professor of psychiatry and behavioral medicine at the Stanford School of Medicine.

Humphreys, a clinical psychologist who recently spent a year in the Obama administration's Office of National Drug Control Policy as a senior policy advisor, says the health effects of Proposition 19 are being overlooked by the 52% of Californians who supported the measure in a recent poll. In a podcast available on the Stanford website, he says his No. 1 fear is that it would create a lucrative product line for tobacco companies or create an industry that would stand "shoulder to shoulder with them lobbying against every anti-smoking restriction and expansion of public health and every taxation initiative."

Cigarettes still kill 400,000 people each year despite decades of regulation and anti-smoking campaigns, Humphreys said. But there's reason to fear that Proposition 19 could make things worse. In European countries like the Netherlands, tobacco and marijuana are often smoked together and the combination is "both more addictive and more cancer-producing than either of those separately," he said.
 
so if weed is legal, suddenly smokers will have an urge to mix bud with tobacco?
i doubt it.
 
No, he's worried that if weed were legal, it might knock down tobacco sales. Which means that maybe people would be healthier. So he's, it's a health issue.

Lol this guy is an idiot.
 
This guy was a Federal Policy Adviser. No shit he is against pot being legalisaed. And no shit he is speaking through his ass. Has federal policy ever been based on anything else but fear?
 
smoke inhalation is harmful no matter what the combustible is. The answer obviously using a vaporizer but that would only would be used by a small minority just as it is now.
Cannabis produces extremely high tar smoke.
 
smoke inhalation is harmful no matter what the combustible is. The answer obviously using a vaporizer but that would only would be used by a small minority just as it is now.
Cannabis produces extremely high tar smoke.

There really is no excuse for not using a vape these days... you can get good ones for less than the price of a ounce of chronz.

Not only is their health benefits, but you can keep your toking on the down low as the vapour has next to no smell, so toke up anywhere you like.

If california legalised, i would expect health groups to push for vapourizer use.

Isn't the "tar" thing a myth anyway ?
 
the issue is TAR not CARCINOGENS
learn a little plz.
bud DEFINATELY has more tar than tobacco.
 
this guy is grasping at nothing. facepalm
smoke inhalation is harmful no matter what the combustible is. The answer obviously using a vaporizer but that would only would be used by a small minority just as it is now.
Cannabis produces extremely high tar smoke.
legalization would make the vaporizer route much more affordable

cannabis smoke is harmful but won't increase most cancer risks from what i've read. THC suppresses tumor growth while nicotine enhances it. this is the impression i've had at least
 
How can you guys resist smoking cigarettes after smoking bud? That's always perplexed me. Like people that can do coke without smoking cigarettes: that's just bizarre.
 
I can't believe no-one has stated the obvious ...

Tobacco, the big evil drug here ... is actually legally regulated.

Surely if we're trying to suggest prohibition works then the only sensible thing is to legalize marijuana (what with its exemplary safety profile) and make nicotine a controlled substance?

That way we can get all that tobacco off the streets and out of the hands of our kids.

~facepalm~
 
smoke inhalation is harmful no matter what the combustible is. The answer obviously using a vaporizer but that would only would be used by a small minority just as it is now.
Cannabis produces extremely high tar smoke.
who cares
the lead lung researcher last year or the year before stated that marijuana doesnt cause lung cancer,
 
if buds legal people will be turned on to smoking it, hence then they might try smoking nicotine because it'll make you'd feel just as good mixed if its not mixed.
just my 2 rambling cents
EDIT I make no sense
BUD FOR EVERYONE
 
We mix tobacco with weed to expand the volume, so essentially we're cutting it. If weed was legalized, obviously this would become unnecessary cos of lowered prices and heightened availability. And OFC it's more cancer inducing than weed by itself, it has nicotine in it... What a twat.
 
Top