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

Link found between marijuana and emphysema

mitogen said:
I have been a regular (1-2g/week) cannabis smoker for about 4 years. I haven't been smoking recently (maybe once a week,) nearly as much, however. I have had pretty serious problems with my breathing for the last few years, and I believe it is strongly related to the pot I've been smoking. I take this study relatively seriously. Sure, there are some controls that may have been left out, but they definitely have a point when they refer to differences in the inhalation manoevure between cannabis and tobacco smoking. Since I haven't been smoking as much I've noticed a LOT less anxiety related to my breathing.
I wouldn't ignore this... Just because there is a huge amount of bullshit coming from governments and even medical studies concerning the health effects of regular cannabis use, doesn't mean that every study you see that suggests that cannabis is more harmful to your health than you might want to believe, is also bullshit.
Click to expand...

Ditto here. Though the government bullshit machine never stop spewing, we should stop and take a look at this. I wish that an unbiased study could be performed on this. Why can't der nederland do it? U'd think they would be at the forefront of cannabis research since its legal there.
 
crowbar said:
Inhaling burning plant material is bad for you? Who could have guessed.
Click to expand...


this isn't the issue. why are people responding in this way? the answer to the question of whether marijuana causes emphysema and if it does so much faster than tobacco is currenlty unknown and it is extremely important toward the health affects of smoked cannabis. by your logic we should have never done studies to establish the relationship between tobacco smoking and cancer because "everyone knows burning plant material is bad for you". 8)
 
I will be 48 yrs old in june. May 20th will mark 30yrs of REGULAR cannabis use. I have used cannabis for recreation and pain control, I have eaten, smoked, drank,snorted and rubbed cannabis all over me body. But have smoked with no breaks longer than a week, at least a gram a day. save one unwanted six month break after a move to a rural area with no hook -up and no seed. 30 yrs of burning plant material....Just had a chest x-ray. No lesions to report. Just nice pink healthy lungs. I think I'll pull some more Bongloads now just to keep them that way8)
WR
PS have yet to hear of a Rasta with emphysema or a bushman or any other indigenous user for that matter only ciggarette smokers. It is pretty obvious that if a plant used for centuries longer than we've been writing about it caused such a drastic disease as emphysema it would be documented by history. Also additive free tobacco has a long history of safe use the only recent causitive agents for emphysema are ciggarettes and perhaps crack and ice that do not have thousands of yrs of usage with no reported drastic effects such as a disease like emphysema.
 
Last edited:
hmmmmm while i am suspicious of this study all i can say is that i have gotten some dodgey weed in the past and could telll it wasnt flushed properly or was laced with some household shit. This brought on immediate breathing difficulty and would hate to think what this would regularly do to some one

i have asthma, i quit cigarettes about a year ago and i feel fucking great, im on a break from the herb and i feel even better


it may not kill you or give you a cripling lung disease but dont live in ignorance people

you smoke shit - it aint good for your lungs full stop !!!
 
whiterasta said:
I will be 48 yrs old in june. May 20th will mark 30yrs of REGULAR cannabis use. I have used cannabis for recreation and pain control, I have eaten, smoked, drank,snorted and rubbed cannabis all over me body. But have smoked with no breaks longer than a week, at least a gram a day. save one unwanted six month break after a move to a rural area with no hook -up and no seed. 30 yrs of burning plant material....Just had a chest x-ray. No lesions to report. Just nice pink healthy lungs. I think I'll pull some more Bongloads now just to keep them that way8)
WR
PS have yet to hear of a Rasta with emphysema or a bushman or any other indigenous user for that matter only ciggarette smokers. It is pretty obvious that if a plant used for centuries longer than we've been writing about it caused such a drastic disease as emphysema it would be documented by history. Also additive free tobacco has a long history of safe use the only recent causitive agents for emphysema are ciggarettes and perhaps crack and ice that do not have thousands of yrs of usage with no reported drastic effects such as a disease like emphysema.
Click to expand...


thats really great to hear, considering the amount of weed ive smoked i would very much like to believe it doesnt cause emphysema. can i ask you if have any shortness of breath, cough or any other breathing difficulties? ive noticed a change in the sound of my cough since i started smoking and it worries me.
 
Well, it's not difficult to look at the effects each substance has on the users. Tobacco is known to contribute a great deal to cancer. If marijuana is doing the same, it has not been observed to nearly the same degree as tobacco, and I have yet to see an obvious case of cannabis primarily causing cancer.

Is there a study (like those done for tobacco) that can make a strong connection between marijuana and cancer? And not a report like the one at the top of this page.
 
alostlittlebird said:
Is there a study (like those done for tobacco) that can make a strong connection between marijuana and cancer? And not a report like the one at the top of this page.
Click to expand...

Good luck finding a 100% legit report, if there was one then the answer would already be known. Much easier to find first hand experiences =D
 
whiterasta said:
PS have yet to hear of a Rasta with emphysema or a bushman or any other indigenous user for that matter.
Click to expand...

Good point. You'd think that if cannabis smoke was so directly connected with emphysema, that countries like Jamaica would have the highest emphysema rate per-capita, and strangely enough that's not the case.

In fact, if I may take it a step further, they even commonly smoke the cannabis wrapped in a tobacco leaf... something about always having the male with the female or something like that... and yet I *still* dont hear too often about Jamaicans having serious lung problems as a nation.

Makes you think, doesn't it?
 
I hate some of you people here, you are so predictable. A pro marijuana article comes out and you are all for it but something like this comes out, and the government is behind it or its automatically flawed or something like that. You type of people choose what you want to believe in. you are as bad as the anti drug people you hypocrites. im not saying i lean one way or the other in regards to this article. some of you just need to do some thinking for youself
 
ilovebw said:
I hate some of you people here, you are so predictable. A pro marijuana article comes out and you are all for it but something like this comes out, and the government is behind it or its automatically flawed or something like that. You type of people choose what you want to believe in. you are as bad as the anti drug people you hypocrites. im not saying i lean one way or the other in regards to this article. some of you just need to do some thinking for youself
Click to expand...

Well read the fucking article for yourself, theres many things flawed, controlls arent even mentioned, they dont include usage really, and hell when it comes to the herb are they smoking commercial that been sitting out for a year or fresh nug locally grown? I dont know any articles that support either side of the game but I wouldnt just believe any fucking article that came out unless I already supported its hypothesis from the start (hence why us potheads support pro pot articles regardless). We are hypocrites because the the government and these authors of the articles are just as much hypocrites themself. The minute I find an article with support then Ill believe it, this does not include any supporting articles or studies done outside of this specific study and it does not include any specific cases where emphysema came directly from smoking pot.
 
Well the article is just that, it's an article reporting on the findings of a study. It's not the actual report which would have to go into details like control groups, habits of smokers, etc. The arcticle could've glossed over the details and went for a more sensationalistic angle.

It's not like the article is what was presented at the conference ...
 
ilovebw said,

I hate some of you people here, you are so predictable. A pro marijuana article comes out and you are all for it but something like this comes out, and the government is behind it or its automatically flawed or something like that. You type of people choose what you want to believe in. you are as bad as the anti drug people you hypocrites. im not saying i lean one way or the other in regards to this article. some of you just need to do some thinking for youself
Yesterday 23:50

But obviously did not either read or understand this

whiterasta OBSERVES this

PS have yet to hear of a Rasta with emphysema or a bushman or any other indigenous user for that matter only ciggarette smokers. It is pretty obvious that if a plant used for centuries longer than we've been writing about it caused such a drastic disease as emphysema it would be documented by history. Also additive free tobacco has a long history of safe use the only recent causitive agents for emphysema are ciggarettes and perhaps crack and ice that do not have thousands of yrs of usage with no reported drastic effects such as a disease like emphysema.


I must say instead of eating up the dross that yer fed to really think for yourself and look at history. It is a several thousand yr study of cannabis not some study bought and paid for by agendas done over a couple yrs.
OK smoke is bad, but obviously not so bad that we as a race have discarded it as a mode of ingestion which leaves me to wonder where all these emphysema burdened cannabis smokers are as they are not occuring anywhere in my State, at least among the heavy medical users.
WR
 
I love how predictable the people who don't like cannabis are. They all write the same shit.
 
tobacco has a long history of safe use
Click to expand...
]

Dude you have no idea what you are talking about. First off, many people didn't live to the age that most tobacco related health problems arise. 2nd, the folks back then had a very VERY limited ability to understand pathology, and accurately account for the cause of death. Lastly, the way that tobacco was used by indigenous populations is totally different than modern use.

There is no "safe" way to use tobacco. It is bad for you. period.

To get back on topic... it would be interesting to see what the sample size for the study was. Well... it would be interesting to actually see the study in general. Anyone that thinks that inhaling burned marijuana isn't bad for your lungs is in denial or a fool. Your lungs are not built to inhale burned organic material. Doing so will damage them.
 
whiterasta said:
It is a several thousand yr study of cannabis not some study bought and paid for by agendas done over a couple yrs.
Click to expand...

Damn I didnt know this study has been going on for several thousand years.
 
So the fuck what?

I ruined my knees by the time I was 18 from running. The danger to participants in a certain activity should not disallow them from partaking in it. They should just be aware of it.

Also this study was geared towards those damn Aussies with their billies and their cones and such. I guess I feel relatively secure in my moderate marijuana use solely through a 'Cano. I like how they mentioned marijuana having unregulated chemicals in it. I supposed cigs aren't likely to be laced with anything extra that they haven't already been laced with.

It's also more complex than just inhaling plant material. Nicotine produces an effect on the lungs that doesn't allow for the damaged cells to die off and be replaced which is a major reason for lung cancer. I know this is about emphysema but cancer is really what villified cigarettes in my opinion. People equate the feeling they have about cigarettes to other types of smoke in my experience.

And that comment about the tip of the ice-berg? How is this the tip of the ice-berg? People have been getting emphysema for a long time. So what happens when a patient is being treated for emphysema and isn't a cigarette smoker? I wonder how the data could not already be available.

I'm relatively baked at the moment so I don't know how objective this post sounds, but anecdotally and through personal experience I've never heard of or met a person with emphysema caused by marijuana or a person who smokes marijuana. Having activist, Dead-head parents who are in their 60's and in great shape also colours my perspective slightly. When does the article about how great weed is come out? I only hear reports and the negative effects. Where's the… "I vaped with my wife and we had fantastic sex for two hours." or "I chilled with my best friends laughing our asses off playing some great music." Objective reporting my ass.

Peace,
PL
 
History does not lie

Quote:
tobacco has a long history of safe use
]

Dude you have no idea what you are talking about. First off, many people didn't live to the age that most tobacco related health problems arise. 2nd, the folks back then had a very VERY limited ability to understand pathology, and accurately account for the cause of death. Lastly, the way that tobacco was used by indigenous populations is totally different than modern use.

Sorry dude but tobacco related cancer and second hand smoke would have been noticed as problems if they were to have been problems. Give indigenous people some credit for their powers of observation they were able to describe the other ailments which afflicted them , eh? if their people regularly died of wasting or lung cancer they would not have noticed it? yet they noticed the effects of the plants the lived among had on their health as medicines? the only part you got right is how it was used... safely, ritualisticly,ocassionaly.That is the long history of "safe" use. Not chronicly,addictively,and chemicaly prepared to deliver the toxin most efficiently.


Quote:
Originally Posted by whiterasta
It is a several thousand yr study of cannabis not some study bought and paid for by agendas done over a couple yrs.

Damn I didnt know this study has been going on for several thousand years

Out of context quotes are the last resort of a dead argument.

Original full quote

"I must say instead of eating up the dross that yer fed to really think for yourself and look at history. It is a several thousand yr study of cannabis not some study bought and paid for by agendas done over a couple yrs."

History being the study of the past, including past health issues please point to the history which shows cannabis to be anything but medicinal/spiritual until the last hundred yrs that is not attached to an agenda. Specificly point out where Cannabis is shown to debilitate unto death the user and point out examples in modern ganja cultures to verify this to be fact.
look at the jamaican report on chronic ganja usage, it at least is valid science backed up by real world observation.

Lastly Smoke may be bad but there are in todays society many other far more deleterious environmental factors to consider just in ones diet. Cannabis has been studied to death for health problems only to find benefits by and large, Now I am to believe all the previous science is wrong and this one study is "on to something"...FEH! When the 15,000 medical cannabis users in oregon all keel over with emphysema I will consider the possibility of harm until then I will go on history, science and experience to be my guide not some bought and paid for "study"
WR
 
Pin, my point is nobody, or at least not a significant amount of pot smokers would question a pro pot article as to disprove it. and if someone did the diehards (a lot of you) would never take that into consideration as if pot is absolutly flawless. they would back it up to the end regardless of scientific fact.

and whiterasta, first off i wonder why you speak in third person, thats kinda weird. second what you are telling me means nothing, its just your word, your opinion on the matter. nothing you prove as fact, no sources or anything so if you think im gonna believe it just because you said it youre wrong.

Once again I would like to clear up that I have not once yet stated my stance on this article. I myself am a cigarette smoker and a self proclaimed pothead till the day i die. ill smoke the shit until i puke up my lungs if thats the case. all im sayin is QUESTION EVERYTHING. because you people that get your panties tied up over an article like this sayin they have an agenda dont realize the same thing happens on the pro pot side and nobody says shit about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top