Study Shows Marijuana Does Not Impair Lung Function

**Monash** · 16 Jan 12,, 12:22

The study originally quoted referred to marijuana consumption equivalent to about 1 cigarette a day. It took decades and hundreds of studies to conclusively link tobacco consumption to cancer based on far higher average rates of consumption. Imagine how long it would have taken to prove a link based on sample groups that averaged 1 cigarette a day! The cancer causing effects of tobacco would have been masked/hidden by the relatively low rate of consumption for a much longer period of time. If marijuana does contain similar irritant compounds similar to those found in tobacco it would take consumption at far higher rates than once or even twice a day for the negative effects to become apparent even in large scale studies. Logic would indicate the need for caution in assuming marijuana is therefore "better" than tobacco in terms of its cancer causing effects. So I'm not confident that the study clears marijuana of any possible links to tobacco related diseases like cancer and emphysema.

Taking the active ingredient (THC) in a synthetic form via a pill is another question but either way it still has long term negative impacts on mental health. (And besides I have vet to meet a more useless /less productive life form than a heavy addicted "stoner". Your average turnip has more get up and go.

**bigross86** · 16 Jan 12,, 13:34

Another important thing to look at here is that many people that smoke weed cut it with cigarettes to make the weed go farther. This means that lots of weed smokers are also getting all the cigarette crap into their lungs as well

**USSWisconsin** · 16 Jan 12,, 13:44

Originally Posted by bigross86

Another important thing to look at here is that many people that smoke weed cut it with cigarettes to make the weed go farther. This means that lots of weed smokers are also getting all the cigarette crap into their lungs as well

There is also a weathly tobacco industry to work against unfavorable studies, and fund favorable work.

Taking the active ingredient (THC) in a synthetic form via a pill is another question but either way it still has long term negative impacts on mental health. (And besides I have vet to meet a more useless /less productive life form than a heavy addicted "stoner". Your average turnip has more get up and go.

THC was approved for medical use as a pill many years ago - there are no long term mental health impacts on record, it isn't very effective though - a pill used for severe nausea isn't likely to be too effective. It isn't particularly adictive either - it is schedule III - in the same catagory as minor tranquilizers, and abuse isn't very popular.

How much productivity/"get up and go do" alcoholics who are heavily intoxicated all day, every day have? Heavy stoners are extreme cases, and they are useless - I agree. Would paying to have them all imprisoned help?

**HKDan** · 16 Jan 12,, 14:52

And besides I have vet to meet a more useless /less productive life form than a heavy addicted "stoner". Your average turnip has more get up and go.

Useless though that stoner may be, when compared with someone who is addicted to the kind of drug that needs to remain illegal(methamphetamine, heroin, cocaine), they are harmless idiots who contribute more to the bottom line of pizza delivery places than the real crime rate.

**Monash** · 17 Jan 12,, 08:35

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

THC was approved for medical use as a pill many years ago - there are no long term mental health impacts on record, it isn't very effective though - a pill used for severe nausea isn't likely to be too effective. It isn't particularly adictive either - it is schedule III - in the same catagory as minor tranquilizers, and abuse isn't very popular.

USS the studies I have heard about/been referred to link prolonged use of marijuana to an increased rink of schizophrenia (or related conditions) in young users. Of course this is the age group where the condition generally manifests itself and spome people may be attempting, unconsiously perhaps to self medicate.

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

How much productivity/"get up and go do" alcoholics who are heavily intoxicated all day, every day have? Heavy stoners are extreme cases, and they are useless - I agree. Would paying to have them all imprisoned help?

In general alcoholics can (usually) remain functional i.e. able to hold down jobs until the end stages of their disease. In any case modelling the behavioural impacts of various drugs is complex due their varied effects on the user and duration of effect. I've dealt with heroin addicts and most of their time they are perfectly functional for lengthy periods depending on various factors until they start to coming off their high - when its like watching a clockwork toy start to wind down. Eccy users get generally get "mellow" but aren’t hard to handle. Don't have much experience with speed but heavy users of that shit just burn out and can be dangerous when they are off their drug. Weed just seems to have a longer lasting impact on its (heavy) users - at least in my experience. As for jail I wasn't suggesting they all weed users be imprisoned, just that this one report doesn't necessarily clear the way for it's unrestricted use, nayomre that I would recommend the unrestricted consumption of alchohol.

Cheers

**Repatriated Canuck** · 17 Jan 12,, 15:48

Originally Posted by Chogy

You guys would be OK with your airline pilot smoking weed? Just checking...

Here's the problem with the "pilot on dope" scenario... with alcohol, there are rules, such as "8 or 12 hours bottle to throttle" and a very specific blood alcohol maximum prior to operation. So let's say weed is now OK. The airlines create a policy - "24 hours minimum between bong and boeing." (<-- Hey, that's mildly funny!) You've got Captain Rasta who really enjoys his weed. He blazes up the morning of his flight. Now, how can you prove he was under the influence when he insists it's been more than 24 hours? There's no quick and easy way to determine blood THC, AFAIK, and unlike alcohol, the effects are hugely different between people, and metabolization is also very different.

You can mouth swab to test. If that comes up positive he is definitely inside 24 hours.

I would rather he smoked a joint 4 hours before takeoff over getting drunk and going to bed 12 hours before. As a contractor in Australian mining I had to take breath tests daily. I've blown 0.000 (or I can't go to work) and still felt tired and shitty from a party the night before. Scaffolding that day is not as fun and if I knew my pilot felt like that I would not feel fantastic about it.

I certainly wouldn't care if he took some medication for a headache though. Your description of pilots in pain made me feel bad for you guys.

Originally Posted by USSWisconsin

funny how that perspective changes when the girl is your daughter

(no offense taken)

When puberty sets in there may be a few years you'd have thought she was evil. I remember my sister being real cranky for a few years! My fiances little sister was even worse.