Marijuana Not Linked To Lung Cancer

If you smoke you die (faster)
Click to expand...
The effect size is certainly less measurable than alcohol or tobacco use. (at least the insurance companies think so).

It is, however, up to the individual to decide what sort of plant matter to burn and inhale (if they choose to do so). It's all a question of relative risks. Who will live longer, the man who enjoys a good wood fire in his fireplace every night, or the twice-weekly cannabis smoker? There are so many other factors involved I think it's hard to tell.

(Related: Curiously, even though cigarettes with a lower tar/nicotine ratio can reduce tar inhalation by up to 18%, it doesn't actually improve respiratory health any.)
 
Last edited:
Psychedelic Jay said:
Again a study not thoroughly done on the basis of "most quit before your midlife..."

What is up with these people? Complete the studies.... LOL

The hindrance looks like more "covering it up" if anything else...
Click to expand...

You have stated that marijuana smoke contains more tar than tobacco smoke.

However, is there any studies which shows exactly how much more tar does the marijuana smoke contain, in comparison to tobacco smoke? Has there been any controlled studies where they compared the tar content of marijuana smoke and tobacco smoke?
 
Last edited:
Elven Warriorr said:
You have stated that marijuana smoke contains more tar than tobacco smoke.

However, is there any studies which shows exactly how much more tar does the marijuana smoke contain, in comparison to the tobacco smoke? Has there been any controlled studies where they compared the tar content of marijuana smoke and tobacco smoke?
Click to expand...

Refer to post #207
 
It means, i looked at the datasets described in the references, and I did some quick math and a little statistics.

(note, here I use the term 'cigarette' to refer to a cigarette or joint as appropriate)
Nicotine/THC Total: Total mass of nicotine, or THC, delivered per cigarette
Tar Total: Total mass of non-nicotine, non-THC, byproducts, delivered per cigarette
Efficiency: Amount of nicotine or THC delivered, as per cent of total inhaled solids.
Nicotine/THC %: Nicotine/THC delivered as per cent mass of a 700mg cigarette
Tar %: Tar delivered as per cent mass of a 700mg cigarette

Average, Median, Maximum, Minimum each show the average, median, maximum, and minimum resp. values of each of these calculations, for a variety of cigarettes (or a variety of marijuana smoking conditions - varying puff length, frequency, and volume). That is, the chart shows e.g. most amount of nicotine delivered in a cigarette, the highest efficiency for a cigarette, etc under the Maximum row, and so on.

In layman's terms:
* Cigarette smokers inhale more tar per milligram of nicotine.
* The best cigarette smoke is only 80% tar, the worst cigarette smoke is 95%. Marijuana is 53 - 72% tar. (as per cent delivered solids)
* Yes, one joint really does contain 9 times as much tar as a cigarette.
* Some cigarettes are essentially the same as inhaling pure gaseous combustion products.
* The tarriest cigarette in 1994 still only delivered about 80% as much tar as the cleanest-burning joint.

Note: this does not make any claims as to the constituents of the tar, nor the actual destructive potential.

There is insufficient evidence, particularly because of the low
number of studies, to assess whether the all-cause mortality rate is elevated among cannabis users in the general population
Click to expand...
(Drug and Alcohol Review, 2010)
http://www.advancedholistichealth.org/PDF_Files/Cannabis_Not_Significantly_Associated_with_Death.pdf


What is up with these people? Complete the studies.... LOL
Click to expand...

I expect you'll see a lot more data on this in the coming years, now that it's not a criminal to be a marijuana smoker in some states. I don't expect the federal government would take kindly to conducting studies just to see how lethal it is, and I bet most pot smokers don't want their insurance company to know!

Most of the data I can find is on cannabis users in treatment for substance abuse. Data would suggest that everyone except the MDMA users is doomed there. (What? Cannabis leads to death but MDMA is safe, who'dathunk?)

(Maybe we should just accept mortality, and have a little fun along the way.)
 
Last edited:
Psychedelic Jay said:
Refer to post #207
Click to expand...

These studies about marijuana's effects seem to be very contradictory. Sekio's chart shows studies which show that marijuana smoke contains higher concentrations of tar than tobacco smoke, but some other studies show the opposite.

Why are so many studies so contradictory? This makes absolutely no sense to me. Why do some studies say one thing, but other studies say something totally different?

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_health2.shtml

1) Most marijuana smokers smoke the bud, not the leaf, of
the plant. The bud contains only 33% as much tar as tobacco.
Click to expand...

Those studies which Sekio has quoted has shown that marijuana smoke contains higher concentrations of tar than tobacco smoke, but why does this study claim that marijuana smoke contains less tar? Why are so many studies contradictory?
 
Why are so many studies so contradictory? This makes absolutely no sense to me. Why do some studies say one thing, but other studies say something totally different?
Click to expand...

Welcome to the world of research, where you have to decide for yourself, depending on context!

You should have learned about this in high school. Anyone can write something and present it as fact. You just have to reject claims that aren't backed by evidence you trust.
 
sekio said:
Welcome to the world of research, where you have to decide for yourself, depending on context!

You should have learned about this in high school. Anyone can write something and present it as fact. You just have to reject claims that aren't backed by evidence you trust.
Click to expand...

Where did this study which states that, "marijuana bud contains 33% as tar as tobacco smoke", even come from?

Is this claim backed up by any evidence, in your opinion? Does this come from any studies, or did somebody just make this stuff up?
 
Psychedelic Jay said:
No, you are using the stoner logic.

They don't know...
Click to expand...

Now, don't be a spammer and just say that you're wrong. You can't rebut just by repeating yourself. Study has been done on this and you can't say those guys are using stoner logic or don't know (yeah they don't know it and they get fucking paid to do it, while you speculate for free).

Who am I going to trust, multiple studies and hundreds of years of evidence or Psychedelic Jay... Damn I'm not sure!


Are you just arguing because you're ashamed of being a tobacco smoker? Or are you just not ashamed and ignorant, good traits.
 
One Thousand Words said:
Bingy Bunny, Duke Reid,Mikey Dread,Jackie Mittoo and Gregory Isaacs are all reggae stars who dies from cancer. Perhaps double skank guitar strokes on the offbeat is carcinogenic?
Click to expand...

lmao!

Smoke Jah herb and chant down Babylon!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJT0xQTa540

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0oEgR2cbNU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mig54twClzI

There was also Bob Marley but I don't buy that he got cancer or melanoma the way they claim he did, and he had an attempted assassination that he survived.
 
Last edited:
Elven Warriorr said:


Which carcinogens does the tobacco plant itself contain? If organic tobacco without radioactive fertilizers, that isn't smoke cured, still causes cancers, then this means that the tobacco plant itself, without any other contributing factors, is carcinogenic. However, do you know which carcinogens are naturally found in the tobacco plant?
Click to expand...


As an addition, can you think of any plants that are not shown to cause cancer when smoked? This would give evidence that it is not the hydrocarbons causing the cancer (I believe the cancer causing potential of tar and plant matter is extremely low compared to the radioactive materials and artificial ingredients in commercial tobacco)
 
However, do you know which carcinogens are naturally found in the tobacco plant?
Click to expand...

Tobacco specific nitrosamines, they are present even at trivial levels (& generated in e.g. the stomach when nicotine is metabolised with other protiens) But from what I've read the cancer risk from e.g. snus and the like (i.e. non-fire-cured, minimally processed chewing/snuff tobacco) is orders of magnitude lower than that of smoked tobacco. Comparable to being a coffee drinker who likes it hot, or eating some nitrite preserved hotdogs now and again.

This doesn't count the whole cardiovascular & dependence risk nicotine carries, though. That's another ballpark.
 
sekio said:
Here's the math.

In this corner, C. Sativa, 14.7% THC, 4.1% water. In the opposite corner, most of Big Tobacco's finer non-mentholated offerings.

Once you crunch the numbers you get this:
G9MnjAv.png


So yes, cannabis does contain more tar than tobacco does, per gram of material burned. Per milligram of delivered psychoactive, though, cigarettes are far worse.

As soon as you move to vaporisation rather than combustion, the efficiency hits pretty close to 80-90% (remainder water, CO2, terpenes).

Refs:
Nicotine, Carbon Monoxide, and Tar content of Cigarettes (1994 data)
Cannabis Smoke Condensate I: The Effect of Different Preparation Methods on Tetrahydrocannabinol Levels
Inhalation Toxicology, 20:801–804, 2008 DOI: 10.1080/08958370802013559
Click to expand...

That chart talks about the tar content of cannabis smoke vs. tobacco smoke. However, is that chart talking about the tar content of marijuana bud, or the tar content of marijuana leaves?
 
Yeah they do, i know some people (and used to know others) who do when they havent got any buds or cant get any buds and the leaves are all they have, some people who grew for example and were waiting for the buds, so they'd trim the leaves, dry them and smoke them. I've done it a bit ages ago, tastes horrible and hardly gets you stoned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top