ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
strawmanYeah you're right, cannabis should stay prohibited, it is so bad for you, says the FDA.
again man the fuck up
strawmanYeah you're right, cannabis should stay prohibited, it is so bad for you, says the FDA.
How exactly can he "man up" in this scenario? Go to prison?strawman
again man the fuck up
It isn't a strawman, I am just going off of what the studies say. That is what you insist on right?strawman
again man the fuck up
funny cause i've posted about studies in this thread that didnt agree with your contentionsIt isn't a strawman, I am just going off of what the studies say. That is what you insist on right?
Funny cause I don't give a shit what the studies say about cannabis.funny cause i've posted about studies in this thread that didnt agree with your contentions
I stand by that statement with the Hippocratic oath too. Cannabis WILL NOT HARM YOU. It is NONTOXIC AND THE LD50 IS ASTRONOMICALLY HIGH.Funny cause I don't give a shit what the studies say about cannabis.
none of this discussion has been about the LD50 you make big claim yet only source you shown is a bullshit alternative medicine bookI stand by that statement with the Hippocratic oath too. Cannabis WILL NOT HARM YOU. It is NONTOXIC AND THE LD50 IS ASTRONOMICALLY HIGH.
"I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up."Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment. I have seen all the studies. I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up.
I cannot cite a study to back my claims about cannabis.none of this discussion has been about the LD50 you make big claim yet only source you shown is a bullshit alternative medicine book
"I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up."
good fucking luck with that one
At first they were just saying, "fuck it he is going to die anyway, let him smoke", but when some of em started getting really healthier and treatments became more effective, they said, "Let's study". So we are finally on the right track.Its called thinking outside the box.
Look you dumb cunt I suggest you retire you keyboard I am so not cherry picking. READ THE ARTICLE PLEASE this study is very unique in that the person conducting it has been trying to prove that it does cause cancer for over 2 decades and finally had to just admit that it doesn't! He is one of your DEA cronies, why not just ask him? I am so sick of dumbass Haters please leave us be I am sorry for the tragic childhood event you endured that caused you to turn into an evil MOFO but the rest of us prefer to be stand up folks.cherrypicking articles i see
http://cancerhelp.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancer-questions/does-smoking-cannabis-cause-cancer#evidence
[h=2]Evidence on cannabis and cancer[/h] Several research studies have shown a link between cannabis and cancer. But other studies have shown no link. This makes it difficult to say exactly what the risk is. There have been a couple of systematic reviews that have tried to draw some conclusions on this.
In 2005 a review looked at the results of several studies into marijuana use and cancer risk. The researchers looked at 2 cohort studies and 14 case control studies. The case control studies involved many different types of cancer. Results were mixed and the researchers could not make any firm conclusions about the risk of cancer. It was also difficult to draw conclusions because of limitations in the studies. They included small numbers of people, involved too few heavy marijuana users and possibly underreported marijuana use in those countries where it is illegal.
In 2006 a systematic review looked at marijuana use and lung cancer risk. Although they could not find a significant link between marijuana and cancer, the reviewers reported that smoking marijuana increased tar exposure and caused changes to the lining of the small tubes in the lungs. They recommended that, until we have more definite evidence, doctors should warn people of the possible harmful effects of marijuana smoking. A New Zealand study in 2008 compared people with lung cancer to people who did not have lung cancer and found that regular cannabis use does increase the risk of lung cancer.
In early 2006 doctors reported on a possible link between cannabis and bladder cancer. Smoking is one of the main causes of bladder cancer. This study looked at men with bladder cancer under the age of 60, who had smoked marijuana, and compared them to men who hadnt smoked it. The study showed that marijuana may be a possible cause of bladder cancer. But as the study was small, researchers need to investigate further to find out for certain.
A 2009 study showed an increase in risk of testicular cancers in cannabis smokers compared to non cannabis smokers. The researchers say there was still an increase in risk after they accounted for tobacco and alcohol use. But the study was too small to draw any definite conclusions, so we still need more research into this.
Two American studies found that cannabis seemed unlikely to increase cancer risk. One, in 2006, found that there was an increased risk of cancers of the upper airways and digestive system (for example, the mouth, throat and food pipe). But when they adjusted the data to account for smoking cigarettes and other common risk factors, they found that the link with cannabis disappeared. In their data, it didn't seem to be the cannabis that was increasing the risk, but other factors such as smoking tobacco. They concluded that if cannabis did affect cancer risk, the effect was likely to be small. The other study, in 2009, looked at head and neck cancers. They found that risk of head and neck cancers in smokers and drinkers seemed to be lower in people who smoked cannabis as well. But this is only one study and we would need more research to show whether this was a reliable finding or not.
Finally, there is laboratory research looking at the effect of some chemicals in cannabis smoke on cancer cells. There is evidence that some of these substances can kill prostate cancer, breast cancer and brain tumour cells in the lab. The researchers do point out that using these pure substances in the lab is very different from smoking cannabis. They used far higher concentrations of each substance in their tests than you could get from smoking cannabis.
So at the moment we don't have clear evidence either way. We do know that smoking is unheal thy. And that, like tobacco, cannabis contains cancer causing substances. Therefore it would seem likely to increase cancer risk. But we need more research to know this for sure.
thank you its much better for our side if we stick to the factsI cannot cite a study to back my claims about cannabis.
making shit up helps no oneIts called thinking outside the box.
+rep+rep+repThe research about finding more tar is completely useless. Herb that is dried and cured well produces FAR less tar than weed that is hastily dried and not cured. This is the type of study that can be manipulated the same sort of way some guy put a gas mask on monkeys and suffocated them to show that cannabis kills brain cells. Benzopyrene is a carcinogen that is created when lipids combust. Since all cannabinoids are lipids, cannabis will produce more benzopyrene the better it is. Those same cannabinoids have been found to have a range of anticancer effects. The link between cancer and cannabis has been studied extensively, the studies have been controlled in ranging degrees of bias from torching shitty uncured weed to vaping dank. Cannabis has been conclusively proven not to cause, agitate, catalyze, potentiate, complicate or even to have a synergistic negativity with cancer, but in every case, there is some indication of treatment. I have seen all the studies. I'm also going to be an oncologist when I grow up.
yeah but picking one article out of many does not truth makeLook you dumb cunt I suggest you retire you keyboard I am so not cherry picking. READ THE ARTICLE PLEASE this study is very unique in that the person conducting it has been trying to prove that it does cause cancer for over 2 decades and finally had to just admit that it doesn't! He is one of your DEA cronies, why not just ask him? I am so sick of dumbass Haters please leave us be I am sorry for the tragic childhood event you endured that caused you to turn into an evil MOFO but the rest of us prefer to be stand up folks.
In 2006 a systematic review looked at marijuana use and lung cancer risk. Although they could not find a significant link between marijuana and cancer, the reviewers reported that smoking marijuana increased tar exposure and caused changes to the lining of the small tubes in the lungs. They recommended that, until we have more definite evidence, doctors should warn people of the possible harmful effects of marijuana smoking.
abandonconflict for the case of you causing harm by misinformation i present exhibit A+rep+rep+rep
Hey nice info on the curing! I've always just because I'm a weed snob but now I have health reasons to cure properly
right ok thank you but i dont consider your conpiracy theories or your alternative "medicine" to be remotely credible
ginja if no fucking pothead!Take this as personal advice from one pot head to another, it is beneficial to your health if you dry and cure your buds properly. Take it or leave it.
call me what ever you want you fucking idiot just dont misrepresent what i say fuckwit
Now why shouldn't we call you PIG?