Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Disclosure:

The statements in this forum have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are generated by non-professional writers. Any products described are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Website Disclosure:

This forum contains general information about diet, health and nutrition. The information is not advice and is not a substitute for advice from a healthcare professional.

Smoke v. THC - the physiological consideration

Discussion in 'Apprentice Marijuana Consumption' started by abv the ignrnce, May 9, 2011.

  1. #1 abv the ignrnce, May 9, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 9, 2011
    The last thing I want, is to piss off a bunch of closed-minded stoners who would never believe that their beloved weed would do anything to harm them. But it would seem to the objective observer that pot is not without its' drawbacks. I myself, am fairly liberal in my opinions and am quite in favor of legalization, but that does not prevent the question:
    Why smoke it??
    Smoking anything is bad for you. From marijuana, to crack, to banana peels, to a bbq grill even, any post combusted organic matter that deposits tar and other carcinogens on your lungs is BAD for your health.. -right?
    The flagship answer to this question seems to be always readily available (and often quite heatedly and defensively) "There's never been a case of lung cancer caused by marijuana."
    I find this nearly impossible to believe. Partly because it is often so poorly worded. In the life of a stoner who (let's be honest) has smoked more than just weed in their life [cigarettes for example] it would be impossible to discern which carcinogen was the straw that broke the camels back so to speak. I know of almost no one who has smoked marijuana exclusively their whole life. And for the few that do, good for them for not needing chemo - yet. Studies often rely on the user's reported use, which are undeniably unreliable. You simply cannot rely on the integrity of a stoner to determine the outcome of a study. (That's not a stab at stoners, it's universal - human nature) But on top of that fact, it would also seem that the amount of people who exclusively smoke marijuana, consistently for a large portion of their lives (like many tobacco users) is fairly limited. So much so, that it would be difficult for a study to create a large enough (and reliable enough) sample to make any sound inferences of any significance.
    Studies argue, with conflicting results from equally respectable sources, as to the amount of carcinogens deposited from smoking weed. I will concede, that both pro and anti weed sources have reasonable arguments supporting their findings, but unanimously, every study I've come across finds that there are at least some levels of tar and other carcinogenic compounds deposited in the lungs from smoking.
    Carcinogens! Cancer causing materials! So, even by definition, one must concede that weed at least has the potential to cause cancer - right?
    I mean, millennia of evolution have geared the human species to avoid smoke. There is an evolutionary reason as to why you cough when you first smoke. Surely nature must know something that everyone else doesn't seem to get.

    I'm open minded and am willing to hear other info/perspectives on the matter. I'm simply looking for answers as I have no moral qualms about marijuana itself. I mean no disrespect. I'm also avoiding any legal connection to the matter. I'm merely concerned about the physiological dangers of inhaling any carcinogenic compounds into an organ which has zero tolerance, defense, or ability to repair itself against such trauma.

    But if I am correct, why doesn't everyone just vaporize or ingest weed orally [such as brownies] where the carcinogens created by combustion can be avoided? As it is reported to me, vaporizers are like, the 'everclear' of weed, and I'm told brownies last much longer than any smoked high. If not only is it more enjoyable to get high in these manners, but it is also exponentially safer for you physiologically, then why doesn't everyone do that? And worry about the potential molecular dangers of THC later.

  2. To be honest I'm too lazy to read the whole thing. Smoking is an act that I enjoy. I could care less about the minimal damage smoking marijuana is doing to me. The pack of cigarettes I go through is always on my mind though.

    Not everyone is a health nut. You only live once. (as far as we know).
  3. You're about 4 grades above grasscity's reading level.
  4. V a p o r i z e r
  5. I just love marijuana, and I'm a social smoker as well. Id have to say the benefits out way the negatives. If any exist. Though one day I do plan on buying a vape.
  6. I smoke cigs I have no care about what smoking weed is doing to my lungs. I know the dangers of tobacco yet I still use it, you only live once and you have to live it to the fullest and sometimes that means doing things you probly shouldn't in the longrun healthwise...
  7. since this is your first post, my first instinct is to assume you're actually an agent of the man trying to infiltrate the underground weed forum boards to seed doubt amongst the pro pot movement. You're probably right, but the last thing weed needs right now is to be associated with cancer.
  8. Cannabis smoke doesn't contain the radioactive lead and polonium isotopes that tobacco does. I'd also posit that cannabis users generally smoke far less of their respective substance than tobacco users. I cede that cannabis smoke contains irritants and carcinogenic organic compounds, but with the concentration of these compounds and the intermittence with which cannabis is often smoked, I can't say that cancer is the most rational health concern to be occupied with.
  9. been a pothead for over 10 years, and i'd say the psychological addiction is way more dangerous to your health than the physical stuf, like inhaling smoke... it's dangerous to your mental health anyway.

    that being said, i'm very pro legalization/liberal... better to smoke a joint than drink a 6 pack every night, thats for sure.
  10. Humans are creatures in constant search of instant gratification. Ingesting marijuana in a food source take 45 min- 2 hours to reap any sort of "benefit". I personally have a digital volcano (700usd) and I never use it. High quality vaporizers cost $300 usd +. This is not a feasible for your average 25 year old making 25k or less a year, who could get a months worth of medicine instead. Also, vaporizers are big and bulky. I smoke in my car, outside restaurants after my appetizer, pretty much at every given moment that I can. So having a bowl or joint to burn is far easier. I will admit that on long road trips I connect a power converter and hook my volcano up in my car. Or when my wife and I take a vacation I will bring it as to not lose the deposit wherever were staying. I hope I brought some insight into the subject for you.

  11. Fair enough. I would agree that people do not smoke weed with the same regularity that tobacco users do, but one study found that the length and depth of a single puff was extremely higher in marijuana users (understandably where pot users take the biggest, longest breath possible, whereas cig smokers take short, light drags) and that this significantly increased the tar left behind in the lungs
  12. Makes sense. I get the instant gratification thing. I've only been high once in my life, and it was from a handheld vaporizer. I was told it cost around $250 but it was incredibly portable, shaped for a pocket, and easy to use. also, it seems like $250 isn't that much when you consider how much people spend on weed anyway, not considering potential costs for the occasional POM citation every now and again ;)

  13. weed + 6 pack = delicious

  14. Before I moved to a legal state I received 5 Possessions of Paraphernalia and 3 POMS... If the cop is cool hell give you the PDP, which is a 600 dollar ticket and you don't have to see a judge.
  15. smoking isn't good for you. No logical person would ever deny that. That being said, its possible that THC encourages autophagy. Old cells are encouraged to die earlier before they might become cancerous.
  16. #18 stickybuds420, May 9, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: May 9, 2011
    people smoke it because the benefits far out weigh the risks.
    i mean for times when smoking is most convenient or the only way. or if you really like smoking or only like smoking it

  17. I think its cause its 200$ for a vape vs 2$ for papers.

Share This Page