|
Large Study Finds No Link between Marijuana and Lung Cancer
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Cosmic Fur |
| quote: |
The smoke from burning marijuana leaves contains several known carcinogens and the tar it creates contains 50 percent more of some of the chemicals linked to lung cancer than tobacco smoke. A marijuana cigarette also deposits four times as much of that tar as an equivalent tobacco one. Scientists were therefore surprised to learn that a study of more than 2,000 people found no increase in the risk of developing lung cancer for marijuana smokers.
"We expected that we would find that a history of heavy marijuana use--more than 500 to 1,000 uses--would increase the risk of cancer from several years to decades after exposure to marijuana," explains physician Donald Tashkin of the University of California, Los Angeles, and lead researcher on the project. But looking at residents of Los Angeles County, the scientists found that even those who smoked more than 20,000 joints in their life did not have an increased risk of lung cancer.
The researchers interviewed 611 lung cancer patients and 1,040 healthy controls as well as 601 patients with cancer in the head or neck region under the age of 60 to create the statistical analysis. They found that 80 percent of those with lung cancer and 70 percent of those with other cancers had smoked tobacco while only roughly half of both groups had smoked marijuana. The more tobacco a person smoked, the greater the risk of developing cancer, as other studies have shown.
But after controlling for tobacco, alcohol and other drug use as well as matching patients and controls by age, gender and neighborhood, marijuana did not seem to have an effect, despite its unhealthy aspects. "Marijuana is packed more loosely than tobacco, so there's less filtration through the rod of the cigarette, so more particles will be inhaled," Tashkin says. "And marijuana smokers typically smoke differently than tobacco smokers; they hold their breath about four times longer allowing more time for extra fine particles to deposit in the lungs."
The study does not reveal how marijuana avoids causing cancer. Tashkin speculates that perhaps the THC chemical in marijuana smoke prompts aging cells to die before becoming cancerous. Tashkin and his colleagues presented the findings yesterday at a meeting of the American Thoracic Society in San Diego. --David Biello
|
Source:http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?ch...55F83414B7F0000
Thought this is an appropriate time to post this amidst all the cigarette smoking bans. :cool: |
|
|
| Hantu |
| Yeah, I seen this earlier on the news. But this has been known for a few years now, just not getting media attention. |
|
|
| Euphorica |
| i dont fully agree with it.... I think more studies need to be done. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
i cant wait until they reveal that cigarette smoke is only a small factor in a huge combination of things that cause most lung cancer deaths. Oh wait, they already have. I guess thats why they always have to say that "smoking is the largest PREVENTABLE cause of lung cancer". Sadly people ignore the word preventable in their hysterics.
Always read the fine print. |
|
|
| The Highroller |
| Hopefully this study will ease up the currently ridiculous medicinal marijuana regulations. |
|
|
| NuERA |
| well thats good news. perhaps ill celebrate |
|
|
| neuromancer |
| ^^ yeah, good to know :-) |
|
|
| Orko |
lol
I recently spoke to a girl in my class, and told her i smoked pot. She said "but why, it kills!". Her high school science teacher actually told her that pot can kill you if you smoke, and in the short term!
Wait, in this report they say the 'leaves'...who the hell is smoking the leaves!? They are seriously missing out on the good stuff (buds). I just hope that was them using an incorrect term in the article, and not what the study was based on. |
|
|
| Halycon |
| good news to know... |
|
|
| preppie chick |
| that's great news. i celebraeted. :) |
|
|
| MarkT |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jayx1
i cant wait until they reveal that cigarette smoke is only a small factor in a huge combination of things that cause most lung cancer deaths. Oh wait, they already have. I guess thats why they always have to say that "smoking is the largest PREVENTABLE cause of lung cancer". Sadly people ignore the word preventable in their hysterics.
Always read the fine print. |
um...while I know what you're saying, that statement does *not* necessarily imply that smoking isn't actually the largest contibutor in and of itself.
YOU are reading into that phrase what YOU see fit to read ;)
identifying it as PREVENTIBLE could just as easily be intended to highlight that there is simple and definite action that can be taken on an individual basis to prevent it.
regardless of whether or not smoking is even a small factor, let's say 5%...the fact that it is EASILY preventable on an individual level, unlike something like genetics or environmental pollution, could be reason enough to have strong anti-smoking advocacy and legislation.
I can't do much myself about car pollution or family history of cancer...but I can not smoke...and I can have people not smoke around me.
back to the topic at hand...WHOOHOO!!! :D
I will now spark a j IN THE PRIVACY OF MY OWN HOME WHERE NO ONE ELSE IS AFFECTED BUT ME :p |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
And that is why we had DSRs. That is, until after this weekend.
People who didnt want to be around smoke had no obligation. Unfortunately now the government thinks it knows better. |
|
|
|
|
