Marijuana does not increase the risk of lung cancer

popNfresh44

Active member
it has been questionable to me until now. this test was done at the university of california, and was the biggest controlled test done.

Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection

By Marc Kaufman

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, May 26, 2006; A03

The

largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking

marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.

The

new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of

the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has

studied marijuana for 30 years.

"We hypothesized that there would

be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and

that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said.

"What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion

of some protective effect."

Federal health and drug enforcement

officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make

the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still

believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects

appear to be of less concern than previously thought.

Earlier

work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals

as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana

also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and

keep them from becoming cancerous.

Tashkin's study, funded by the

National Institutes of Health's National Institute on Drug Abuse,

involved 1,200 people in Los Angeles who had lung, neck or head cancer

and an additional 1,040 people without cancer matched by age, sex and

neighborhood.

They were all asked about their lifetime use of

marijuana, tobacco and alcohol. The heaviest marijuana smokers had

lighted up more than 22,000 times, while moderately heavy usage was

defined as smoking 11,000 to 22,000 marijuana cigarettes. Tashkin found

that even the very heavy marijuana smokers showed no increased

incidence of the three cancers studied.

"This is the largest

case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very

extensive questionnaire about marijuana use," he said. "Bias can creep

into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as

we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning."

Tashkin's

group at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA had hypothesized

that marijuana would raise the risk of cancer on the basis of earlier

small human studies, lab studies of animals, and the fact that

marijuana users inhale more deeply and generally hold smoke in their

lungs longer than tobacco smokers -- exposing them to the dangerous

chemicals for a longer time. In addition, Tashkin said, previous

studies found that marijuana tar has 50 percent higher concentrations

of chemicals linked to cancer than tobacco cigarette tar.

While

no association between marijuana smoking and cancer was found, the

study findings, presented to the American Thoracic Society

International Conference this week, did find a 20-fold increase in lung

cancer among people who smoked two or more packs of cigarettes a day.

The

study was limited to people younger than 60 because those older than

that were generally not exposed to marijuana in their youth, when it is

most often tried.

 
some one should post the link for the article in the 420 cult about cannabis preventing cancer, and/or aids i forgot which one
 
1 love!!!!! shout out to all the heads out there. dont take good grass for granted, im living in a city where it is IMPOSIBLE to find good smoke with out taking serious heart palpitating risks, its been tuff, those horrible days were the only thing on your mind is coming home taking a hot bath and cooling out to some music with a spliff in hand. not an option, so ya next time you all burn, take drag for those of us who have the bad weed blues!! :(
 
Er, why? Given that people are doing studies about using it to treat brain cancer what evidence do you have to the contrary?
 
bahahahaha, please tell me you were being sarcastic. btw sarcasm doesn't translate well across the internet.
 
That "Just say NO" bullshit is partly the reason this country is full of brainwashed idiots.

But to the thread creator, you're preaching to the choir brother. No new news there.
 
Yeah, there isn't a intelligent ganj smoker out there who will tell you smoking does nothing to your lungs. What this study is saying that its not gonna give you lung cancer like the comatose bureaucrats up in washington are telling the country.
 
well said. but i'd say heavy smog 24/7 vs. 3 joints a day could probably do the same amount of damage. thats just speculation though.
 
yeah, thats quite obvious. it can eventually sorta clog ur avioli or whatever there called, but nothing major. theres also the tar/resin. it probably increases the risk of bronchitis and infections too, but actually is prescribed as a remedy for asthma.
 


flash_video_placeholder.png

 
i hate how so many people smoke weed just because it doesnt cause cancer or they think its not as bad as smoking cigaretes, because in most cases it definitely isnt. its still bad for you in other ways even if u dont get cancer. dont get me wrong, being high is probably the best feeling ever, but even though the chances are very slight that something will happen, so many people smoke it believing that nothing bad will ever happen to them.
 
and im sure another study will disaprove this too.

it may not cancer but heavy use will still fuck you up in other ways.
 
Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.

KILLS AGING CELLS???!! haha excellent!
 
very true. There are sooo many health effects, good and bad, that no single study on weed should suddenly convince you that it's good or bad.

sure, it's an effective treatment/ painkiller for some things....but honestly, coming from someone who smokes regularly, you eventually have to admit that smoking anything, including weed, has an overall negatve effect in some way rather than not smoking at all.

It's just a tradeoff, and most of us are willing to put up with the possible negtive effects later in life...but don't kid yourself, your're definitely not helping your body by blazin up
 
Very true. Although I think it would be very difficult to find a weed smoker who thinks they are doing nothing to their body. It's just nice to know that its way healthier and way better for you than alcohol or cigarettes.
 
hahhahahhahahaha yeah dude that kids a fucking idiot, it causes minimal damage to your respiratory system, but smoking a blunt wraps arent that great for you
 
i could get high by eating a chocolate bar if i really want to, or vaporize my weed, no smoke, no harm
 
so cannabis decreases your chance of having unprotected sex with a person who has aids? Now i know that being high does some things to you, but i doubt better sexual choices are on that list. And as for the cancer things, it's never really been proven by anyone, but it's out there. It's mostly just used as a painkiller for people who for some reason can't use conventional ones.
 
Back
Top