Heavy pot smoking does not cause lung cancer

[Snowguy716]

I don't think I personally attacked you... There was a certain father of three from Grand Rapids, Michigan who called those three people stupid (not smart, just good salesmen), and who also told everyone who smokes pot to "keep smoking while the rest of us run the world". I simply put three nationally prominent politicians up there as examples of smart people who have smoked pot and went on to actually run the world. I would have used other examples if I could have, but not too many people out there make it publicly known that they used to be potheads (or in Bush's case, a coke fiend!). It's the nature of politics that everyone is aware of your past. Not all of them had their lives handed to them. Gore and Bush sure had an easier path, but what about Bill Clinton?

I'm pro-legalization of all drugs, but I can at least see what they're saying when they tell you crack is bad. Pot is as harmless as any drug you'll ever find.

I kind of got the wrong context. That's the problem with text. It disguises the true meaning of the statement sometimes.

I too am confused as to why we can purchase sleep medication and things like sudafed, but marijuana is illegal...

[Greens!]

We all know that smoking weed is a federal crime. What can be done to change that?

In my opinion, it might take some of the criminal element out of doing drugs. This way the government can focus on enforcing the more dangerous and accessible drugs.

[damus]

Honestly, I don't know what we can do other than to hope that public opinion continues to sway more and more in favor of legalization. This is a civil rights issue, and unfotunately the people who would benefit most from the legalization of this are either too busy smoking to do anything, or stuck in jail.

[dpbaker]

The article calls that heavy smoking? A truly heavy smoker will smoke than many cigarettes in one to two years. The fact of the matter is, anytime you burn organic matter like that, carcinogenic compounds are produced. Does smoking pot cause cancer? Maybe not. Could it? It could certainly be a contributing factor compounded with other environmental elements.

In this day and age where the body is subjected to modern chemiclas, pollution, etc., why exacerbate a potential problem even more by smoking pot or tobacco? Eliminate as many factors from the equation as you can.

Unfortunately, pot is often the first step to a bigger drug "career", so I can't say legalize it.

[hood]

The article calls that heavy smoking? A truly heavy smoker will smoke than many cigarettes in one to two years. The fact of the matter is, anytime you burn organic matter like that, carcinogenic compounds are produced. Does smoking pot cause cancer? Maybe not. Could it? It could certainly be a contributing factor compounded with other environmental elements.

In this day and age where the body is subjected to modern chemiclas, pollution, etc., why exacerbate a potential problem even more by smoking pot or tobacco? Eliminate as many factors from the equation as you can.

Unfortunately, pot is often the first step to a bigger drug "career", so I can't say legalize it.

Really? you know anyone who smokes more than 22,000 joints in a year or two? Lets do the math: one joint is roughly .5 grams, thats 11,000 grams, or just shy of 50 pounds, that would mean smoking over two pounds a month over two years, thats about a $2000/month habit. A "heavy" smoker on average may smoke a quarter once a day, thats still quite a bit, 14 joints/7 blunts, especially for one person.

Also, the whole "marijuana is a gateway drug" deal is BS, I don't care what the feds or studies say about that, I know enough people to prove that wrong. When people do try other drugs it's generally just because they are into doing drugs whether or not they started out with weed. Its like blaming music for peoples actions, its not the music that made the person that way, the person chose to listen to it because they were already that way.

[Mith242]

I'd still have to see more studies before I believed heavy pot smoking doesn't causes lung cancer. I think smoking anything, whether it be pot, tobacco or anything else, just isn't good for your lungs.

[monsoon]

Unfortunately, pot is often the first step to a bigger drug "career", so I can't say legalize it.

Actually that is not true. Just like most people who drink booze "another mind altering substance" don't have any issues with it.

[dimebag1980]

Actually that is not true. Just like most people who drink booze "another mind altering substance" don't have any issues with it.

Of course it's not true in all cases, but in many it is.

To be quite honest with you, of all my friends who started smoking pot in high school (I can name 8 right off the top of my head) only one of them didn't go on to doing harder drugs at some point. Of course these are just a few people I know, who make up a mere fraction of the populace. I do believe, however, given their varying backgrounds and upbringing, that they would make for a pretty accurate cross-sectional representation of pot smokers.

[GRDadof3]

The comparison to drinking booze though is not apples to apples. Most people I know who drink do not do it from morning until night. Many pot smokers on the other hand, at least the ones I knew in college, did. And many pot smokers start freaking out when their stash starts running low. Not a very healthy sign of a recreational drug.

[damus]

The comparison to drinking booze though is not apples to apples. Most people I know who drink do not do it from morning until night. Many pot smokers on the other hand, at least the ones I knew in college, did. And many pot smokers start freaking out when their stash starts running low. Not a very healthy sign of a recreational drug.

But you can't prove that a majority, much less all, pot smokers are like that. Most alcoholics do drink from morning to night, and not only freak out but start exhibiting serious withdrawl symptoms when they don't get their fix. I knew a lot of people who only smoked now and then in college, the people I knew who smoked day and night typically didn't make it to college. Pot is far and away a much better alternative to alcohol.

[GRDadof3]

I knew a lot of people who only smoked now and then in college, the people I knew who smoked day and night typically didn't make it to college.

Hmmm, wonder why they didn't make it to college?

[runawayjim]

to add some truths to the myths being spread in this thread...

pot has never been proven to lead to harder drugs. if you consider acid and shrooms harder, you're kidding yourself. the myth that pot leads to harder drugs is something that DARE and the gov't want you to think. it's not true. sure, some people start with pot and go onto other things, mainly because they're interested in the stronger high that you can get from the harder drugs.

pot actually kills fewer brain cells than alcohol. if you use the killing of brain cells as a reason to keep it illegal, why is alcohol legal?

pot does not make you stupid. piece of trivia... only one president has ever been a rhodes scholar. guess which one... yup, bill clinton, everyone's favorite jazz fan, grateful dead fan, and pot smoker. for the record, george w bush (the lesser) was a coke addict.

many of today's lawyers, doctors, teachers, etc attended woodstock and smoked a lot of pot (and probably other things as well). most musicians have done serious drugs. does that make them stupid? most of them had better ideals than our leaders.

the reason pot was made illegal has nothing to do with nixon being anti-hippie. it's actually in part because of william randolph hearst. yeah, the newspaper guy. it was found that hemp made for better paper way back then. he didn't want to lose money to the hemp industry so he lobbied congress to make pot, including hemp, which cannot be smoked and has very little THC, illegal. i suggest you all do some research into why marijuana was outlawed. start here

some more food for thought... many of your upstanding citizens, people you see daily and talk to daily, are potheads. they go home and smoke a bowl. they get just as much work done high as they would otherwise. the simple idea that pot makes you lazy is one of those myths.

[damus]

Hmmm, wonder why they didn't make it to college?

For some of the same reasons a heavy alcohol abuser usually doesn't... People whose lives revolve around pot (or any mindless activity) in high school typically don't have time for things like homework, getting a job, applying for college.

There are high functioning potheads in this world, but when you're in high school smoking too much pot it either means 1: your parents grow it (i was lucky enough to be good friends with one of those) or 2: you're selling it. If you fall into category 1, you're probably seeing trade school in your future (yay smoking on the job!), lucky number 2 sees a future working at Wal-Mart or jail. That's a VERY general interpretation but if you were to categorize it that's how it is. It's nothing like what alcohol does to you... the worst effects from pot seem to come from it being illegal.

[runawayjim]

For some of the same reasons a heavy alcohol abuser usually doesn't... People whose lives revolve around pot (or any mindless activity) in high school typically don't have time for things like homework, getting a job, applying for college.

There are high functioning potheads in this world, but when you're in high school smoking too much pot it either means 1: your parents grow it (i was lucky enough to be good friends with one of those) or 2: you're selling it. If you fall into category 1, you're probably seeing trade school in your future (yay smoking on the job!), lucky number 2 sees a future working at Wal-Mart or jail. That's a VERY general interpretation but if you were to categorize it that's how it is. It's nothing like what alcohol does to you... the worst effects from pot seem to come from them being illegal.

kids in high school should not be smoking pot just like they shouldn't be drinking. they generally aren't mature enough to handle it (although many adults are also not mature enough). pot needs to be legalized, but restricted in the same way that alcohol is. no driving under the influence, no public use, and you gotta be 21.

[Recchia]

Can I just add, pot leading to to harder drugs, etc., that's B.S. People doing harder drugs after pot is because they have an addictive personality. It's ridiculous to me that pot is illegal, just as ridiculous as prohibition was.

[damus]

to add some truths to the myths being spread in this thread...

...

the reason pot was made illegal has nothing to do with nixon being anti-hippie. it's actually in part because of william randolph hearst. yeah, the newspaper guy. it was found that hemp made for better paper way back then. he didn't want to lose money to the hemp industry so he lobbied congress to make pot, including hemp, which cannot be smoked and has very little THC, illegal. i suggest you all do some research into why marijuana was outlawed. start here

I believe DuPont or whoever made nylon was big on making illegal, too. The Marijuana Tax act of 1937 was ruled unconstitutional in 1969 when Timothy Leary challenged the law. There were no federal laws on the books until 1970.

[runawayjim]

I believe DuPont or whoever made nylon was big on making illegal, too. The Marijuana Tax act of 1937 was ruled unconstitutional in 1969 when Timothy Leary challenged the law. There were no federal laws on the books until 1970.

the federal law that makes pot illegal and supposedly "trumps" all state laws is because it's assumed that pot sales cross state lines. when that happens, it's covered by the federal law. otherwise, the feds are poking their hands where they don't belong.

[damus]

the federal law that makes pot illegal and supposedly "trumps" all state laws is because it's assumed that pot sales cross state lines. when that happens, it's covered by the federal law. otherwise, the feds are poking their hands where they don't belong.

Yes ... and from 1969 to sometime in 1970 there was no federal law...

I'm afraid another Bush appointee would be needed before the pot laws could get overturned .... the "liberal" judges were the ones who held the majority opinion in New London vs Susette Kelo, the eminent domain ruling. With people like that on the bench, I'm getting frightened at what our country is going to become. A lot of people are afraid of the Patriot Act for good reason, but I don't think the current government has bad intentions ... I think the danger is if someone down the road abuses these powers. This supreme court is one that will rewrite the constitution to uphold this kind of crap, and that's scary.

[monsoon]

Actually it was the current Bush Administration that successfully argued in front of the Supreme Court in 2005 that it was constitutional for the Feds to take whatever action they deemed appropriate to stop marijuana smoking regardless of any state laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raich_v._Ashcroft

Smoke some pot, and talk about it, and because of the domestic spying we have now, the feds can knock down your door and throw you in jail.

[damus]

There was also a case where the police are allowed to search houses based upon detection of heat (the halogen or whatever bulbs used for indoor growing) and an increased power bill with no other evidence.

[runawayjim]

Yes ... and from 1969 to sometime in 1970 there was no federal law...

I'm afraid another Bush appointee would be needed before the pot laws could get overturned .... the "liberal" judges were the ones who held the majority opinion in New London vs Susette Kelo, the eminent domain ruling. With people like that on the bench, I'm getting frightened at what our country is going to become. A lot of people are afraid of the Patriot Act for good reason, but I don't think the current government has bad intentions ... I think the danger is if someone down the road abuses these powers. This supreme court is one that will rewrite the constitution to uphold this kind of crap, and that's scary.

i think the current gov't has good intentions of creating these new powers so that they can abuse them... wiretapping anyone?

[GRDadof3]

The fact that not many people have weighed in on this topic (except a handful of pro-pot people) tells me you guys are on shaky ground with the "legalizing drugs" argument. At least people who drink alcohol admit that they drink it to make them unintelligent. Be honest with the American public and just say you want to do it to get stoned, act stupid and have a good time. You'd probably get more support.

Also, if smoking pot is OK, why not let kids do it? Why not let kids drink alcohol like many other countries? And what's wrong with Cocaine (as in the comment about Bush) if there is nothing wrong with today's marijuana (which is nothing like the weak weed our parents smoked in the 70's). Live and let live right? If we are not to judge any behavior, why stop at any threshhold? Why judge Bush then?

[runawayjim]

The fact that not many people have weighed in on this topic (except a handful of pro-pot people) tells me you guys are on shaky ground with the "legalizing drugs" argument. At least people who drink alcohol admit that they drink it to make them unintelligent. Be honest with the American public and just say you want to do it to get stoned, act stupid and have a good time. You'd probably get more support.

Also, if smoking pot is OK, why not let kids do it? Why not let kids drink alcohol like many other countries. And what's wrong with Cocaine if there is nothing wrong with today's marijuana (which is nothing like the weak weed our parents smoked in the 70's). If we are not to judge any behavior, why stop at any threshhold.

This silliness if probably going to drive a lot of people away from UrbanPlanet if you ask me.

you speak more myths. today's pot is no stronger than the pot of the 60's and 70's.

i have no issue with legalization of cocaine either. in fact, i think all drugs should be legalized, however, i am opposed to supporting products whose production causes social issues (cocaine and heroin come to mind, but so does non-fair trade coffee).

i drink alcohol, not to make me "unintelligent" but because i really like the taste of a good beer. that's really the sole reason i drink. if beer did not exist, i probably wouldn't drink (although i do like a good pina colada and a good whiskey on occasion).

i don't get stoned to have a good time, i don't get stoned to get "unintelligent" or "more intelligent" or whatever you want to give me a reason. i get stoned because it enhances certain senses and helps clear the mind of other distractions. i used to do homework while high because i was able to concentrate better. i played my best game of pool when i was high because i was able to concentrate better.

a lot of urban planet users don't really care about this stuff either. they're here for urban planning type discussion, not other discussion. it doesn't put us on shakey ground. fyou have yet to provide a cold hard fact as to why marijuana should remain illegal. i gave a pretty good reason why kids should not use it. they aren't mature enough, same with alcohol. their bodies are also not developed to the point where they cna fully handle it (although they can handle pot more than alcohol). if you look at the facts, marijuana is moving closer and closer to being legalized than it is to be more criminalized. more states are jumping on the medical marijuana bandwagon. and many localities are de-criminalizing possession for personal use (which is usually anything less than 1-4 ounces depending on the state). i do predict that i will see pot legalized in my lifetime. maybe not other drugs, but definitely pot.

for the record, i never judged bush. i stated for the record that he had a coke addiction. there is no such thing as a pot addiction. anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. it's the only drug you cannot OD on that is illegal, yet alcohol, which you can definitely OD on, is perfectly legal.

[damus]

for the record, i never judged bush. i stated for the record that he had a coke addiction. there is no such thing as a pot addiction. anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. it's the only drug you cannot OD on that is illegal, yet alcohol, which you can definitely OD on, is perfectly legal.

To be fair, while there is little to no physical addiction, some people do become psycologically addicted to pot.

[monsoon]

.....

Also, if smoking pot is OK, why not let kids do it? Why not let kids drink alcohol like many other countries? And what's wrong with Cocaine (as in the comment about Bush) if there is nothing wrong with today's marijuana (which is nothing like the weak weed our parents smoked in the 70's). Live and let live right? If we are not to judge any behavior, why stop at any threshhold? Why judge Bush then?

Well, I am old enough to have smoked weed with your parents and I will tell you there was nothing weak about it. Nobody that I knew turned into drug addict for doing it. Pot in those days was much more accepted and it was widely smoked in my high school with some teachers even joining in. This was the attitude towards it in those days. Despite this, we had less crime, the races got along better, heavy drugs were not an issue as it is today, and generally society worked better than it does now. Was Pot resposible for this? NO. But it proves that Pot does not cause the malidies that are attributed to it.

The nation banned all alcohol sales in the 1930s mostly due to the same arguments that are used to keep the ban on Mary Jane. The end result of that was that it created organized crime in the USA and it did nothing to improve society. And BTW, when I was in high school the drinking age was 18. Yet there was far less problems with teen drinking in those days than there is now. If kids are given a M-1 rifle and given the responsibility to shoot at an enemy in the military, then I say they are responsbile enough to have a drink. It's not a question of legal drinking age, its a question of teaching your kids to behave responsibly. Same for Pot, Same for Alcohol. Sadly this is lacking in many families these days.