Youtube Video "Proving Cannabis Is Harmful"

born2killspam

Well-Known Member
Aggressiveness and apathy are often found in the same ppl.. Which one is expressed at any given time can be a craps shoot.. Think about some ppl with BPD or schizophrenia.. Now think about that crazy chick you actually thought was the one..:)
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
[video=youtube;GJmQ16cGBHU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJmQ16cGBHU[/video]

There we go, Federal US Governments study on the health effects of Marijuana through UCLA.
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
Oh yeah, and look at how many diabetics lives would be saved if it were legal:

http://www.internalmedicinenews.com/single-view/marijuana-smoking-associated-with-66-decrease-in-diabetes-risk/40de87806e.html

"DENVER – Marijuana use may be associated with a markedly decreased risk of diabetes.


Dr. Magda Shaheen



A provocative new analysis of data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) indicates marijuana users had 66% lower odds of having diabetes after adjustment for numerous potential confounding factors, Dr. Magda Shaheen reported at the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association.

This robust observed benefit has a biologically plausible mechanism, she noted.

In addition to defects in pancreatic beta cell function and insulin sensitivity, the pathogenesis of diabetes is thought to involve systemic inflammation. Marijuana contains bioactive cannabinoids that have been shown to have an anti-inflammatory effect. This was borne out in the NHANES III analysis, where the prevalence of an elevated C-reactive protein level in excess of 0.5 mg/dL was significantly higher in nonusers of marijuana, at 18.9%, than in past users, with a 13% prevalence of elevated CRP, current light users (16%), or current heavy users of the illicit drug (9%), according to Dr. Shaheen of Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles.

The study population consisted of 10,896 NHANES III participants aged 20-59 years; they constituted a statistically representative sample of the broader U.S. civilian population in 1988-94, when the survey was conducted.

The majority of subjects – 55% – reported never having used marijuana. Another 37% were past users, meaning they hadn’t used marijuana during the previous month. The 6% of subjects who reported currently using the drug 1-4 days per month were categorized as current light users, while 3.3% of subjects were current heavier users.

The age-adjusted prevalence of diabetes in this cross-sectional study was 4% in nonusers and significantly lower at 3% in marijuana users.

Current and past users of marijuana were significantly younger, had a lower body mass index, and were more physically active than were nonusers. They were also more likely to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and use cocaine. In addition, they were more likely to have an HDL level greater than 40 mg/dL and had lower mean total cholesterol, LDL, and triglyceride levels.

In a multiple logistic regression analysis adjusted for socio-demographic factors, comorbid conditions, laboratory values, and inflammatory markers, marijuana users had a 66% lower likelihood of having diabetes. This benefit was confined to the 41- to 59-year-old age group, where the reduction in diabetes risk associated with marijuana use was 67%. In contrast, the 7% reduction in risk among 20- to 40-year-olds was not statistically significant. These findings could be the result of the markedly higher occurrence of diabetes in middle age.

Unlike in diabetes, marijuana use was not associated with a lower prevalence of the other chronic diseases that Dr. Shaheen and coworkers looked at in which systemic inflammation also plays a role: myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, and hypertension.

"This was probably due to the lower prevalence of these diseases in this age group," she commented.

Dr. Shaheen noted that the lowest prevalence of diabetes was found in current light users of marijuana, although past users and current heavy users also had lower rates than did nonusers.

"This finding in light marijuana users is similar to the effect of alcohol on diabetes mellitus and the metabolic syndrome. Studies have shown that mild alcohol use was associated with a lower prevalence of diabetes and metabolic syndrome, and higher use was associated with a higher prevalence," she observed.

Dr. Shaheen stressed that as this was a cross-sectional study, it can’t establish causality. The findings, while provocative, ought to be interpreted cautiously.

"Prospective studies need to be performed in rodents and humans to determine a causal relationship between cannabinoid receptor activation and diabetes. Until those studies are performed, we do not advocate the use of marijuana in patients at risk for diabetes mellitus," the investigator stressed.

The study was funded by Omics Biotechnology, which is pursuing potential medical applications for nonpsychotropic cannabinoid receptor agonists. Dr. Shaheen declared she has no relevant financial relationships."
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
OH yes and also http://www.jci.org/articles/view/37948

Right there why Smoking marijuana makes it harder for you to get cancer. Currently Marijuana Smokers have only 25% of the head neck and lung cancers of NON marijuana smokers. (If both groups don't smoke cigarettes)

The facts are out there.
 

born2killspam

Well-Known Member
And french fries can save your life too in a pinch.. Generally hearts and lungs don't respond well to smoke, and brains tend to not motivate/learn as well when they're intoxicated.. Alcohol can also carry health benefits for some ppl..
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
And french fries can save your life too in a pinch.. Generally hearts and lungs don't respond well to smoke, and brains tend to not motivate/learn as well when they're intoxicated.. Alcohol can also carry health benefits for some ppl..
Smoke is bad for the lungs BECAUSE it constricts the bronchial tubes creating a perfect environment for little cancers to start which eventually grow into large areas of lung cancer.

However, Cannabis contains that active ingredient called THC which opens and expands the bronchial tubes. It acts as whats called an antioxidant. Meaning now all of your bronchial tubes are open getting more oxygen to the body and brain, and creating a lung environment that PREVENTS cancer. This isn't a case of "well anything bad is good for you sometimes" but rather an explanation why Cannabis smokers only get 25% of the lung cancers of the general non-tobacco using public.

Smoking Cannabis DECREASES the chances of lung cancer in a way no other medicine on earth can. Also they found there is no point where you smoke So much weed that suddenly it becomes dangerous. The studies find that although to prevent lung cancer you only need to smoke once every two weeks, smoking way more then that does not diminish the cancer prevention either.

If doctors invented marijuana in a lab it would be hailed as the greatest find to medicine ever.

I can tell you didn't watch the video. I hope i'm not too preachy but it bothers me when lies about medicine are told so much that they become part of the conversation. Its not your fault, I used to think it was somehow bad or dangerous as well until I started reading the scientific studies on it. I'm mad that the propaganda of lies from Hurst in the 1930s has led to good smart people like yourself to have misinformation on the truth of the cannabis plant.
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
Where is your proof of harmful?
His proof is a little video with a robot voice (because nobody would use their voice to make such lies) about how it has so many carcinogens in it, which it does, but they fail to mention that the smallest amount of thc makes those carcinogens powerless. As a doctor told me, "it would be like eating a small amount of poison followed by a large amount of antidote." If there was no THC in the marijuana it would be as dangerous to smoke as a cigarette because your bronchial tubes would constrict and hold those chemicals in them. Its very misleading, I hope my post is the antidote.
 

Gary Busey

New Member
Disliked it. Flagged it as inappropriate.

I should log into my older youtube accounts and dislike it from there too.

Idiots....
 

Ebb n Flo

Active Member
what a stupid video! this is the reason why a lot of people are against it. because of biased so-called "facts". this shit is such a lie it disgusts me! To me this video was made to influence people towards prescription drugs so the healthcare industry can keep em sick with medication and keep raking in the money! So misleading....
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
what a stupid video! this is the reason why a lot of people are against it. because of biased so-called "facts". this shit is such a lie it disgusts me! To me this video was made to influence people towards prescription drugs so the healthcare industry can keep em sick with medication and keep raking in the money! So misleading....
When will we ban water? I mean seriously, lets use their logic. Water is dangerous as there are thousands of drownings every year. Not to mention they use H2O in such horrible things as Pesticides, and liquid poisons, and NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS!!! Do we want to put something that is used in Nuclear Power plants in our bodies??? Do you know how quickly you would die if you ingested Pesticides or liquid rat poisons? Water is used in concrete, it makes it from a sandy consistency to hard as a rock. If something like that happend with the food in your stomach from drinking water then your stomach would be filled with cement and you would die! They use this stuff in car engines!!! NO way can that be good for you. Seriously, we need to stop this blatant abuse of H2O in our society. Anyone found ingesting or carrying any water on them should really be put in prison for 5 years because of the dangers. Did you know that a baby can drown in just 2" of water in a bathtub? Don't we want to prevent deaths in children? Lets make this evil Water, or as its known in Mexico the sinister Agua, Illegal once and for all and protect our children and our countries future!

I'm simply being honest, laying out facts, and doing it in the same logical way as that video. Just showing that the misinformation they created using facts without using them in context is just silly.
 

born2killspam

Well-Known Member
Smoke is bad for the lungs BECAUSE it constricts the bronchial tubes creating a perfect environment for little cancers to start which eventually grow into large areas of lung cancer.

However, Cannabis contains that active ingredient called THC which opens and expands the bronchial tubes. It acts as whats called an antioxidant. Meaning now all of your bronchial tubes are open getting more oxygen to the body and brain, and creating a lung environment that PREVENTS cancer. This isn't a case of "well anything bad is good for you sometimes" but rather an explanation why Cannabis smokers only get 25% of the lung cancers of the general non-tobacco using public.

Smoking Cannabis DECREASES the chances of lung cancer in a way no other medicine on earth can. Also they found there is no point where you smoke So much weed that suddenly it becomes dangerous. The studies find that although to prevent lung cancer you only need to smoke once every two weeks, smoking way more then that does not diminish the cancer prevention either.

If doctors invented marijuana in a lab it would be hailed as the greatest find to medicine ever.

I can tell you didn't watch the video. I hope i'm not too preachy but it bothers me when lies about medicine are told so much that they become part of the conversation. Its not your fault, I used to think it was somehow bad or dangerous as well until I started reading the scientific studies on it. I'm mad that the propaganda of lies from Hurst in the 1930s has led to good smart people like yourself to have misinformation on the truth of the cannabis plant.
I never said it didn't have certain possible benefits, I just know what happened to my strength and stamina when I was smoking excessively, compared to times I wasn't.. Clearly not good..
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
I never said it didn't have certain possible benefits, I just know what happened to my strength and stamina when I was smoking excessively, compared to times I wasn't.. Clearly not good..
For me my strength and stamina have gone way up. I am much more lazy without it. As someone who has smoked cigarettes 2 packs a day for years only to quit and now smoke lots of ganja, I have found none of the breathing problems, none of the coughs, none of the weakness that cigarettes gave me. It has no dangers.. Did you know more people die of water than die of marijuana??? IF it doesn't work for you don't smoke it, but don't tell others not to. Cannabis has made me a stronger person able to do more things physically. I guess its like Soda. Some people drink a Monster Drink and have energy, while other people drink a Monster Drink and feel sick and can't do anything. Its all your personal physiology, but you have to admit cannabis is less harmful to you physically than almost all other legal drugs.
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
Ahh so you agree that reducing smoke intake is good for your health..
I don't hold smoke in my lungs. I suck the smoke in through a double filtered bong or vaporizer and blow it out without waiting. The idea that holding it your lungs makes it stronger is false, its the movement of the smoke that gets it absorbed. If you want the same head high from holding your breath do it AFTER you blow out the smoke then its less dangerous.

I agree that using marijuana in smoke form prevents cancer and is not toxic. So to answer, it DEPENDS what kind fo smoke. its like saying do you hate pizza? if not then you hate all bread products. Its not related. Do you think putting any substance in your lungs is bad? (including air)
 

euthanatos93420

Well-Known Member
Ah no, Holding cannabis smoke will let your body absorb more psychoactive/PR chems. It's not about exercise, it's about efficiency and efficacy.
 

tardis

Well-Known Member
Ah no, Holding cannabis smoke will let your body absorb more psychoactive/PR chems. It's not about exercise, it's about efficiency and efficacy.
Wives tale. It is the friction of the smoke moving in and out which gets absorbed, not by sitting there. Holding ones breath is a really inefficient way to absorb gas. Also its worse for your lungs. I suck the smoke in I blow it right out and I get super ripped. Don't take my word for it, smoke your first bowl of the day by not holding it in, and after 10 minutes see if you arn't very high.
 

born2killspam

Well-Known Member
Wives tale. It is the friction of the smoke moving in and out which gets absorbed, not by sitting there. Holding ones breath is a really inefficient way to absorb gas. Also its worse for your lungs. I suck the smoke in I blow it right out and I get super ripped. Don't take my word for it, smoke your first bowl of the day by not holding it in, and after 10 minutes see if you arn't very high.
I find it so ironic that you're dissing "wife's tales"..:) Read up a bit on THC antagonistic cannabinoids/metabolites.. The reason you get higher is because most ppl smoke too much to experience the acute effects of THC.. Load less in your bowl, and hold it in and you'll get the same result for less money.. Saying that absorbtion time is irrelevant is assinine.. If that was the case then you could marinate a steak by just dipping it for a moment before putting it on the grill..
 

Shadeslay

Active Member
Cannabinoids
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/17

As evolution proceeded, the role that the cannabinoid system played in animal life continuously increased. It is now known that this system maintains homeostasis within and across the organizational scales of all animals. Within a cell, cannabinoids control basic metabolic processes such as glucose metabolism [17]. Cannabinoids regulate intercellular communication, especially in the immune [18] and nervous systems [19]. In general, cannabinoids modulate and coordinate tissues, organ and body systems (including the cardiovascular [20], digestive [16], endocrine [21], excretory [22,23], immune [18], musculo-skeletal [24], nervous [19], reproductive [25], and respiratory [26] systems).

The homeostatic action of cannabinoids on so many physiological structures and processes is the basis for the hypothesis that the endocannabinoid system is nothing less than a naturally evolved harm reduction system. Endocannabinoids protect by fine-tuning and regulating dynamic biochemical steady states within the ranges required for healthy biological function. The endocannabinoid system itself appears to be up- or down-regulated as a function of need. As will be detailed later in this article, endocannabinoid levels naturally increase in the case of head injury and stroke [28], and the number of cannabinoid receptors increases in response to nerve injury and the associated pain [29]. In contrast, the number of cannabinoid receptors is reduced when tolerance to cannabinoids is induced [30].

When a body is physically damaged, the endocannabinoids are called on to reduce inflammation, protect neurons [136], regulate cardiac rhythms [137] and protect the heart form oxygen deprivation [20]. In humans suffering from colorectal cancer, endocannabinoid levels are elevated in an effort to control the cancer [74]. They help relieve emotional suffering by reducing pain and facilitating movement beyond the fears of unpleasant memories [119].

Journal
 
Top