So in reality, how harmful is marijuana?

So I see all the propaganda as to why you should never pick up the devils weed, obviously thats BS.....But I started thinking is Marijuana in fact worse for you then cigarettes, being that your not using a filter, but then again better because of weed not having all the chemicals? And could this all be diverted by simply vaporizing!

Do you not smoke? It's cool

I'm vaporizing right now, pretty much allll vaporized THC. Very healthy on the lungs

http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizerstudy2.html


As far as the actual smoking of it... not really as bad a cigarettes because you don't smoke nearly as much....

Yes herb has a lot less of the chemicals, and doesn't cause cancer. You can't find one case of cancer, because of smoking cannabis. Not in the 2000 years of documented cannabis use in the world..

Michael Phelps smokes weed, and that dude won like 8 gold medals in the last olympics? Obviously he wouldn't be smoking buds if it altered his performance, he's an Olympic athlete..





Outline: When you eat edibles, there is no physical health risk, when you vaporize, there is no physical health risk. At least according to science, some people without sources may try to tell you otherwise.



cannabinoids have been shown to have cancer killing properties, as well as making you less prone to many other illnesses/diseases.

That about as good an answer as you can get. Good day.

dude, stop spreading that bullshit that when you vaporize there is no physical risk, that is utter bullshit. the physical risks are REDUCED, they are not non-existent.

and you can try to convince people I"m wrong because I don't have sources, but your sources don't say that it eliminates all risk... it just has reduced numbers of specific things, doesn't mean there isn't other vapor in there that will harm you if you abuse it.

you're right about the edibles. the smoking isn't very harmful if it doesn't take you a whole lot to get high and you don't have any pre-existing lung problems.... quality of weed matters too...

I mean if you can smoke cannabis moderately your whole life and never get emphasema or lung cancer... really what is SO bad about it?

if you don't get over-zealous with smoking you wont catch bronchitis either....

I go by scientific fact man


The minute you post a link to a study, drawing a line between respiratory illnesses and vaporizing I will start to believe you.

The fact that your spreading information, with nothing backing it up bucks the flow of good information.

I have asthma, vaporizing doesn't irritate my lungs.. I get bronchitis, and vape about 15 bags throughout the day - never gets past bronchitis... I vape when I'm sick, and I never get worse, in fact I get better because I rest better and sleep better and eat better...... My significant other will get sick, and if anythin Ill vape MORE weed cause I'm at home, and I will be better than her days before she is... and she is the one who gets me sick. She doesn't even smoke ganja, or vaporize it more than a few hits once a month.

In fact, I found this:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/294969/Medical-Marijuana-Vaporizer-Study

Concern about the respiratory hazards of smoking has spurred the de- velopment of vaporization as an alternative method of medical cannabis administration. Cannabis vaporization is a relatively new technology aimed at suppressing respiratory toxins by heating cannabis to a tem- perature where cannabinoid vapors form (typically around 180-190°C), but below the point of combustion where smoke and associated toxins are produced (near 230°C). The purpose of this is to permit the inhala- tion of medically active cannabinoids while avoiding noxious smoke compounds that pose respiratory hazards. Of particular concern are the carcinogenic polynuclear (or “polycyclic&#8221 aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), known byproducts of combustion that are thought to be a major culprit in smoking-related cancers. While there exists no epidemiologi- cal evidence that marijuana smokers face a higher risk of smoking-re- lated cancers, studies have found that they do face a higher risk of bronchitis and respiratory infections (Polen et al. 1993, Tashkin 1993). This risk is not thought to be due to cannabinoids, but rather to extrane- ous byproducts of pyrolysis in the smoke.

Click to expand...

http://www.canorml.org/health/vaporizers

Like tobacco, marijuana smoke contains toxins that are known to be hazardous to the respiratory system. Among them are the highly carcinogenic polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, a prime suspect in cigarette-related cancers. These toxins are essentially a byproduct of combustion, separate from the pharmaceutically active components of marijuana, known as cannabinoids, which include THC. Although there is no proof that marijuana smoking causes cancer, chronic pot smokers have been shown to suffer an elevated risk of bronchitis and respiratory infections. Respiratory disease due to smoking may therefore rightly be regarded as the primary physiological hazard of marijuana.

Click to expand...

These were the 2nd, and 4th links on Google, after searching, 'vaporizing bronchitis study'.

I work with citations, and medical journals. Your working with personal experiences, and telling people smoking is better than vaporizing because the entire human genome has developed a tolerance to cannabis smoke over a period of 8,000 years. It takes evolution millions of years dude. 1,000,000. Not 8,000. And the entire human race would have to smoke enough ganja to start killing off those with less lung tolerance leaving only those with mutated lung genes. The idea of natural selection, and evolution is 'the survival of the fittest'. Not 'the perpetuation of insignificant traits that effect the entire human race in 8,000 years'

none of those studies you list say it ELIMINATES risk.

you're making a false claim by saying such things... in which case your conclusion is equal to mine, you have experience showing this, I have experience showing that.

my experience is that I never got bronchitis or pneumonia in all the years I've been smoking... I switch to a high end vaporizer for 3 months and after an over-zealous session with a cold I got bronchitis and pnuemonia.

you can try to argue that the vape didn't cause this all you want, but I've never had either condition before using a vape, take it as you will.

the facts are there are studies showing that vaporizing didn't take out everything, there are still tars, there are still toxins, there are still contaminants, you're inhaling the vapor from a heated PLANT... you can't take out everything just because you focus on a specific temperature that may hopefully only vaporize those specific compounds (which it never is that simple.)

so yeah, you're just taking some information in your favor, stretching it miles away, and making a false claim.

why would I need studies when I'm looking at YOUR studies finding information YOU contradicted yourself on?

you said it eliminates risk... when it doesn't. it reduces risk, maybe dramatically, maybe not... but it reduces, not eliminates. that is all I'm debating with you on.

and my experience with the vape isn't wha tI would expect the majority of users to experience, I assume I'm a minority in this... but it did happen, smoking doesn't bother my lungs as much as vaping does, it's quite simple; that's my personal experience and I can assure you I'm not biased. I used to be a vape lover until this shit happened to me....

but the fact is, some people don't ever get bronchitis if they have very specific smoking methods and don't break from them... as well as consistent weed quality...

but the fact is you were the one who said it eliminated the risk, when it doesn't, so if anyone has something to admit to being mistaken it is you.

Sr. Verde said:

Outline: When you eat edibles, there is no physical health risk, when you vaporize, there is no physical health risk. At least according to science, some people without sources may try to tell you otherwise.

Click to expand...

that, is flat out, bullshit. you yourself have 0 evidence to support it, and should admit this claim is false.

Sr. Verde said:

Do you not smoke? It's cool

Michael Phelps smokes weed, and that dude won like 8 gold medals in the last olympics? Obviously he wouldn't be smoking buds if it altered his performance, he's an Olympic athlete..

Click to expand...

Your right, i def am a G

its about as harmful as sucking dick, if you arent into it, dont do it.



if you like the smell of it, go for it.

http://www.drugs.com/pro/dronabinol.html synthetic thc oral form for cancer patients
i would imagine the side effects would be the same as real thc

and i kinda gotta agree with poplers

heating food above 40 degrees celsius causes cancer so does toast anything cooked
will amung the millions of things thats 2
moles freckles are cancer and not always harmless

http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerandresearch/all-about-cancer/what-is-cancer/what-causes-cancer/
and this is just 1 site i didn't read it i figure if it dosn't say what i want i can find another that will

poplars said:

none of those studies you list say it ELIMINATES risk.

Click to expand...

Nothing completely eliminates anything... pollution has traces of all types of crazy shit... in the air a lot of us breathe... and the water we drink. It's just that smoke contains 88% of nasty shit... where vaporizing contains trace amounts. Your shifting your argument.

doesn't mean there isn't other vapor in there that will harm you if you abuse it.

Click to expand...

Actually, it does mean there isn't vapor in there that will harm you.

.The analysis showed that the Volcano® vapor was remarkably clean, consisting 95% of THC with traces of cannabinol (CBN), another cannabinoid. The remaining 5% consisted of small amounts of three other components: one suspected cannabinoid relative, one suspected PAH, and caryophyllene, a fragrant oil in cannabis and other plants. In contrast over 111 different components appeared in the gas of the combusted smoke, including a half dozen known PAHs. Non-cannabinoids accounted for as much as 88% of the total gas content of the smoke.

Click to expand...

http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizerstudy2.html

you're making a false claim by saying such things... in which case your conclusion is equal to mine, you have experience showing this, I have experience showing that.

Click to expand...

I'm posting studies factual evidence. I'm arguing against your point that, 'vaporizing causes more respiratory illness than smoking'. In the quotes I posted, I underlined that vapor contains trace amounts of tars... not 88%, or even 8% of tar by volume

my experience is that I never got bronchitis or pneumonia in all the years I've been smoking... I switch to a high end vaporizer for 3 months and after an over-zealous session with a cold I got bronchitis and pnuemonia.

Click to expand...

Yes I see this as evidence to your following argument, "smoking is better for your lungs than vaporizing, because we as humans have evolved with smoking... vaporizing is a new technology and worse for our lungs"

you can try to argue that the vape didn't cause this all you want, but I've never had either condition before using a vape, take it as you will.

Click to expand...

I'm not stating this dude... a Medical Journal stated this

medical journal said:

.... studies have found that they [smokers] do face a higher risk of bronchitis and respiratory infections (Polen et al. 1993, Tashkin 1993).

Click to expand...

the facts are there are studies showing that vaporizing didn't take out everything, there are still tars, there are still toxins, there are still contaminants

Click to expand...

Poplars said:

there are still toxins

Click to expand...

What now? It eliminates at least 3 toxins, and reduces tars to trace amounts.... So why is vaporizing as bad as smoking?

norml said:

A previous NORML/MAPS study conducted by Chemic Labs found that a vaporizer known as the M-1 Volatizer® (www.volatizer.com) completely eliminated three specific toxins (naphthalene, benzene and toluene) in. the solid phase of the vapor (D. Gieringer, "Cannabis Vaporization: A Promising Strategy for Smoke Harm Reduction," Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics Vol. 1#3-4: 153-70 (2001); www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizerstudy1.html).

Click to expand...

The analysis showed that the Volcano® vapor was remarkably clean, consisting 95% of THC with traces of cannabinol (CBN), another cannabinoid. The remaining 5% consisted of small amounts of three other components: one suspected cannabinoid relative, one suspected PAH, and caryophyllene, a fragrant oil in cannabis and other plants. In contrast over 111 different components appeared in the gas of the combusted smoke, including a half dozen known PAHs. Non-cannabinoids accounted for as much as 88% of the total gas content of the smoke. (http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizerstudy2.html)

Click to expand...

Poplars said:

you're inhaling the vapor from a heated PLANT...

Click to expand...

Yes, HEATED is the key word here. When you combust or HEAT past a certain level, you begin to release the OTHER compounds in the PLANT MATTER. When vaporizing, you are taking specific chemicals from the plant.

Poplars said:

you can't take out everything just because you focus on a specific temperature that may hopefully only vaporize those specific compounds

Click to expand...

Uh yeah, you can... according to science, at least. I mean is that not the point of vaporizing?

The vaporizer produced THC at a temperature of 185° C. (365° F.) while completely eliminating three measured toxins - benzene, a known carcinogen, plus toluene and naphthalene. Carbon monoxide and smoke tars were both qualitatively reduced by the vaporizer, but additional testing is needed to quantify the extent of the decrease.

Click to expand...

Significant amounts of benzene began to appear at temperatures of 200° C. (392° F), while combustion occurred around 230° (446°F) or above. Traces of THC were in evidence as low as 140° C. (284° F). (http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizerstudy1.html)

Click to expand...

I vaporize from 365f-392f.... accurate to 2.2f

so yeah, you're just taking some information in your favor, stretching it miles away, and making a false claim.

Click to expand...

I said something, then directly quoted a number of different sources, WITH sources, to back my points up. That's not stretching things miles, that's a legitimate argument.







My sources directly state: Smoking isn't proved to cause cancer, but it is proved to cause respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis. Therefore; vaporizing greatly reduces, or EVEN eliminates the toxins that CAUSE these illnesses. Vaporizing is a FAR MORE healthy way to deliver THC into the lungs.

poplars said:

why would I need studies when I'm looking at YOUR studies finding information YOU contradicted yourself on?

you said it eliminates risk... when it doesn't. it reduces risk, maybe dramatically, maybe not... but it reduces, not eliminates. that is all I'm debating with you on.

and my experience with the vape isn't wha tI would expect the majority of users to experience, I assume I'm a minority in this... but it did happen, smoking doesn't bother my lungs as much as vaping does, it's quite simple; that's my personal experience and I can assure you I'm not biased. I used to be a vape lover until this shit happened to me....

but the fact is, some people don't ever get bronchitis if they have very specific smoking methods and don't break from them... as well as consistent weed quality...

but the fact is you were the one who said it eliminated the risk, when it doesn't, so if anyone has something to admit to being mistaken it is you.



that, is flat out, bullshit. you yourself have 0 evidence to support it, and should admit this claim is false.

Click to expand...

poplars said:

you said it eliminates risk...

Click to expand...

LOL I said health RISK buddy. You even directly quoted me saying HEALTH RISK. Not "ELIMINATES ANY AND ALL BAD THINGS"

Cross the street and look both ways, your taking a risk. Your not elimating all danger. Who says you don't see some speeder that nails you in the crosswalk

Wear a helmet, you reduce risk of death, but don't eliminate danger.

Everything has risk, we take measures, as humans, to reduce risks. We can't ELIMINATE danger, or tars.


.


.

But we can eliminate toxins, we can DRAMATICALLY reduce tars... and we can make inhaling THC cleaner, and better for our health

.


.

Poplars, if you don't wish to respond to the above, please respond to the below:

The study suggests that medical marijuana patients can avoid the respiratory hazards of smoking by using a vaporizer.(http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizerstudy2.html)

Click to expand...

Is the above quote, NOT exactly what I've been saying? Hazzard=risk. avoid= not have any

Weed itself is virtually harmless, If you can't overdose on something which it is almost impossible to on weed then you kinda get a picture on how harmless weed really is.

Joints are great to smoke if you want something portable.. It's not the healthiest way but it sure beats the fuck out of all the chemicals and shit in cigarettes.
I don't smoke weed as often as I should so I usually just roll a joint and puff it away and relax.

smokajoe said:

So I see all the propaganda as to why you should never pick up the devils weed, obviously thats BS.....But I started thinking is Marijuana in fact worse for you then cigarettes, being that your not using a filter, but then again better because of weed not having all the chemicals? And could this all be diverted by simply vaporizing!

Click to expand...

Cannabis is completely harmless.

How you get it into your system might be.

sso said:

its about as harmful as sucking dick, if you arent into it, dont do it.



if you like the smell of it, go for it.

Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAA!! That is the single funniest thing I have heard all month. Kudos.

I'm mainly putting out all the info, on this argument poplars... it's the one you always bring, here is a specific example though....

poplars said:

look, my point is simple... smoking since the stone age, vaping since less than 30 years ago. to say our lungs are better for vaping than smoking is totally retarded in my opinion because minor evolution occures based on what your ancestors have done... ours smoked. not vaped.

but don't try to claim that it's so much better than smoking when it truly isn't. it's a foreign vapor to our lungs, it will hurt your lungs if you overdo it.

Click to expand...

from this thread: https://www.rollitup.org/medicating/405101-have-you-tried-hemp-rope.html > where like another 10 people are arguing against the smoking better than vaping point..


.

.

just trying to get the good, cited info out there... with links to studies for everyone to read to make their minds up......




I'm just going to keep this central for our smoke vs. vape argument, and we can link people here for themselves to read our arguments and decide for themselves..

yeah I just don't have the energy for your bullshit man I really don't. my main point is because of what happened to me, you can't say there is no health risk.... the health risk is low, but it isn't non existent. to say it is non existent is bullshit, no studies you posted support it, you can post super long posts to make it seem like you're right all you want, I keep it simple, short and sweet, to the point, not like someone trying desperately to impose their view on others.

According to some claims, one would need to smoke 20,000 joints to overdose. You would die from lack of oxygen before you would overdose.

Claim was from one of those marijuana documentaries you be seein on netflix and shit yo.


poplars -- you may have read to much into what Sr Verde was saying... he is right -- and those claims he is referencing are also freely available and readily supported.. sorry to say, but you were wrong here. so very very wrong. I mean, Im not sure you have ever been as wrong in your entire life as you are currently.. thats all im sayin. dont hate the player, hate the game. holla.