Does anyone have any MEDICAL PROOF that smoking marijuana causes cancer?!
Question: Does anyone have any MEDICAL PROOF that smoking marijuana causes cancer.?
I know cigarettes put you at a very high risk....but what about marijuana.?.?.?Health Question & Answer
Answers:
Here's the abstract from a review of the current evidence. It's a long read but recent, evidence-based and peer-reviewed.
"Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States and is considered by young adults to be the illicit drug with the least risk. On the other hand, marijuana smoke contains several of the same carcinogens and co-carcinogens as the tar from tobacco, raising concerns that smoking of marijuana may be a risk factor for tobacco-related cancers.
We reviewed two cohort studies and 14 case-control studies with assessment of the association of marijuana use and cancer risk. In the cohort studies, increased risks of lung or colorectal cancer due to marijuana smoking were not observed, but increased risks of prostate and cervical cancers among non-tobacco smokers, as well as adult-onset glioma among tobacco and non-tobacco smokers, were observed. The 14 case-control studies included four studies on head and neck cancers, two studies on lung cancer, two studies on non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, one study on anal cancer, one study on penile cancer, and four studies on childhood cancers with assessment of parental exposures. Zhang and colleagues reported that marijuana use may increase risk of head and neck cancers in a hospital-based case-control study in the United States, with dose-response relations for both frequency and duration of use.
However, Rosenblatt and co-workers reported no association between oral cancer and marijuana use in a population-based case-control study. An eightfold increase in risk among marijuana users was observed in a lung cancer study in Tunisia. However, there was no assessment of the dose response, and marijuana may have been mixed with tobacco.
Parental marijuana use during gestation was associated with increased risks of childhood leukemia, astrocytoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma, but dose-response relations were not assessed. In summary, sufficient studies are not available to adequately evaluate marijuana impact on cancer risk.
Several limitations of previous studies include possible underreporting where marijuana use is illegal, small sample sizes, and too few heavy marijuana users in the study sample. Recommendations for future studies are to (1) focus on tobacco-related cancer sites; (2) obtain detailed marijuana exposure assessment, including frequency, duration, and amount of personal use as well as mode of use (smoked in a cigarette, pipe, or bong; taken orally); (3) adjust for tobacco smoking and conduct analyses on nonusers of tobacco; and (4) conduct larger studies, meta-analyses, or pooled analyses to maximize statistical precision and investigate sources of differences in results. Despite the challenges, elucidation of the association between marijuana use and cancer risk is important in weighing the benefits and risks of medical marijuana use and to clarify the impact of marijuana use on public health."Health Question & Answer
"Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States and is considered by young adults to be the illicit drug with the least risk. On the other hand, marijuana smoke contains several of the same carcinogens and co-carcinogens as the tar from tobacco, raising concerns that smoking of marijuana may be a risk factor for tobacco-related cancers.
We reviewed two cohort studies and 14 case-control studies with assessment of the association of marijuana use and cancer risk. In the cohort studies, increased risks of lung or colorectal cancer due to marijuana smoking were not observed, but increased risks of prostate and cervical cancers among non-tobacco smokers, as well as adult-onset glioma among tobacco and non-tobacco smokers, were observed. The 14 case-control studies included four studies on head and neck cancers, two studies on lung cancer, two studies on non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, one study on anal cancer, one study on penile cancer, and four studies on childhood cancers with assessment of parental exposures. Zhang and colleagues reported that marijuana use may increase risk of head and neck cancers in a hospital-based case-control study in the United States, with dose-response relations for both frequency and duration of use.
However, Rosenblatt and co-workers reported no association between oral cancer and marijuana use in a population-based case-control study. An eightfold increase in risk among marijuana users was observed in a lung cancer study in Tunisia. However, there was no assessment of the dose response, and marijuana may have been mixed with tobacco.
Parental marijuana use during gestation was associated with increased risks of childhood leukemia, astrocytoma, and rhabdomyosarcoma, but dose-response relations were not assessed. In summary, sufficient studies are not available to adequately evaluate marijuana impact on cancer risk.
Several limitations of previous studies include possible underreporting where marijuana use is illegal, small sample sizes, and too few heavy marijuana users in the study sample. Recommendations for future studies are to (1) focus on tobacco-related cancer sites; (2) obtain detailed marijuana exposure assessment, including frequency, duration, and amount of personal use as well as mode of use (smoked in a cigarette, pipe, or bong; taken orally); (3) adjust for tobacco smoking and conduct analyses on nonusers of tobacco; and (4) conduct larger studies, meta-analyses, or pooled analyses to maximize statistical precision and investigate sources of differences in results. Despite the challenges, elucidation of the association between marijuana use and cancer risk is important in weighing the benefits and risks of medical marijuana use and to clarify the impact of marijuana use on public health."Health Question & Answer
Basically, it's the fact that it's burning plant matter, not what sort of plant it is. While marijuana smoke contains subjectively more carcinogens, there seem to be certain other components that retard the development of cancer.
Look at it this way. You're taking a substance into your lungs that contains stuff known to cause cancer, so cancer is a valid concern. The research on marijuana is so difficult to do and so muddied by politics that it's difficult to get a clear answer on exactly -how- comparatively bad it is. Right now it looks like it's really not all that bad.
Emphysema and other lung problems do show up however, lungs weren't meant to handle smoke.Health Question & Answer
Look at it this way. You're taking a substance into your lungs that contains stuff known to cause cancer, so cancer is a valid concern. The research on marijuana is so difficult to do and so muddied by politics that it's difficult to get a clear answer on exactly -how- comparatively bad it is. Right now it looks like it's really not all that bad.
Emphysema and other lung problems do show up however, lungs weren't meant to handle smoke.Health Question & Answer
marijuana has more carcinogens than tobacco, but is less harmful than cigarettes(contain harmful additives). Research suggests that for some reason marijuana use isn't a major causer of cancer, though the smoke can still damage lungs in other ways
there are compounds in marijuana that literal stop cancer from growing, mj even contains antibiotics,Health Question & Answer
there are compounds in marijuana that literal stop cancer from growing, mj even contains antibiotics,Health Question & Answer
Marijuana has 50-70% more carcinogens than cigarettes.
http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/mariju...
edit: Here is another article. Even though marijuana contains more carcinogens, studies have shown that regular marijuana users aren't at any higher risk of developing lung cancer.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1966...Health Question & Answer
http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/mariju...
edit: Here is another article. Even though marijuana contains more carcinogens, studies have shown that regular marijuana users aren't at any higher risk of developing lung cancer.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1966...Health Question & Answer
there is no medical proof. and now people are copying what i say and using it against me. How can people be so ignorant to believe everything they hear from the marijuana haters on tv.? The ones on TV are not educated any more then you or I, they are just on TV!!!!!! god... it doesnt give them any special knowledge. Cigarettes are definatley worse then marijuana. The facts are staring at you in the face. Open YOUR eyes. Legalize it Today.
I bet half the people you know have tried it, or still do it.Health Question & Answer
I bet half the people you know have tried it, or still do it.Health Question & Answer
It is unfathomable that there are actually people so ignorant to think that marijuana is harmless. There is an ENORMOUS amount of medical evidence showing it is 4 times more poisonous than cigarettes! It also kills brain cells every time you use it , slows down motor skills, I mean, the list is endless.Health Question & Answer
I started smoking Mary-Jane's fine bud during the war and have had the pleasure if inhaling this fine herb for over 40 years. Has the herb-superb caused cancer in me yet.? Heck no!
I lost both my elbows due to a bought with the gout, had my knees removed due to a case of the kneesles, even lost a toe from the Tolio. My left lung was removed and cut my smoking in half and I had a steel plate sewed into my Doma from a fight with a Melanoma.
But I ain't caught da Cancer from my sweet Mary Jane! Excuse me while I light this spliff, oh god I gotta take a lift...from reality I just can't drift, that's why I'm staying with this Riff!Health Question & Answer
I lost both my elbows due to a bought with the gout, had my knees removed due to a case of the kneesles, even lost a toe from the Tolio. My left lung was removed and cut my smoking in half and I had a steel plate sewed into my Doma from a fight with a Melanoma.
But I ain't caught da Cancer from my sweet Mary Jane! Excuse me while I light this spliff, oh god I gotta take a lift...from reality I just can't drift, that's why I'm staying with this Riff!Health Question & Answer
see www.drugwarfacts.org. This site compiles data from numerous government sources and states that 0 deaths have been attributed to marijuana use. Although this does not address your question directly, it implies that it doesn't cause any fatal illnesses.
Several posters have suggested that it may be relate to emphysema however, if you check out www.jackherer.com his research has noted it providing relief from emphysema in extremely advanced cases. MJ does not damage the small passage ways of the lungs the way tobacco does.
To MONKEY: the root of the word "assassin" is from a guild of killers defending their homeland during the 3rd crusade. circa 12th century AD.Health Question & Answer
Several posters have suggested that it may be relate to emphysema however, if you check out www.jackherer.com his research has noted it providing relief from emphysema in extremely advanced cases. MJ does not damage the small passage ways of the lungs the way tobacco does.
To MONKEY: the root of the word "assassin" is from a guild of killers defending their homeland during the 3rd crusade. circa 12th century AD.Health Question & Answer
There actually isn't any proof that marijuana smoking is associated with lung cancer the same way that cigarette smoking is. There was actually one study a few years ago that suggested it may protect AGAINST lung cancer.
It can cause emphysema/asthma however.Health Question & Answer
It can cause emphysema/asthma however.Health Question & Answer
There is no proof that it causes any harm to anyone...
the only thing that it does is make you sleepy and hungry...
apparently it kills brain cells, but my homegirl says it makes her smarter when she takes tests and stuff...
and there's nothing wrong with me either :)Health Question & Answer
the only thing that it does is make you sleepy and hungry...
apparently it kills brain cells, but my homegirl says it makes her smarter when she takes tests and stuff...
and there's nothing wrong with me either :)Health Question & Answer
Banana Blitz, it is unfathomable how ignorant you must be.
There is no proof.
MJ is NOT 4 times worse than cigarettes.
Where did you hear that.? Do your research again and try not to say things that you think make you sound smart.
goodness....Health Question & Answer
There is no proof.
MJ is NOT 4 times worse than cigarettes.
Where did you hear that.? Do your research again and try not to say things that you think make you sound smart.
goodness....Health Question & Answer
I had to do research on marijuana and I found that there has never been any deaths that were caused directly by it. There is no proof that it causes cancer. Health Question & Answer
There's zero proof MJ does any harm to anyone. Only propaganda to try to make sure you don't do it. Health Question & Answer
Marijuana has worst health effects than cigarettes here is a source.Health Question & Answer
Its not the weed its the tobacco in the roll that causes cancer, this confuses some people.Health Question & Answer
Marijuana, or Cannabis sativa, is a dioecious plant (which is a fancy way of saying it's a sexy plant; there are separate male and female plants, and they've got to get it on in the pistil and stamen scene), containing upwards of four hundred chemicals. The psychoactive agent, THC, or, for you chemistry savants, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, is much more abundant in the female buds. THC is what makes you laugh uncontrollably at the lamest possible thing when you're stoned.
In colonial America, "hemp" was a major agricultural crop; both Washington and Jefferson raised it. Hemp was valuable because you could use its fibers for rope and canvas and its seeds for soap, lamp oil and birdseed. Preoccupied with finding practical uses for weed, people from temperate climates did not realize the great fun you could have simply by smoking it. Folk weren't so benighted in hot regions like India and North Africa. Here the plant fairly oozes with sticky resin, and is fit to be boiled for tea, ingested, and . . . you guessed it . . . smoked. Here also, perhaps under the psychoactive influence of the drug, they started giving it really cool names like dagga, ganja, bhang and hashish, from which we get the word "assassin."
Along with absinthe, hashish was de riguer for French artists and writers in the late 19th century. At the same time, physicians, who had been recommending tinctures of marijuana for pain relief, began switching to synthetic drugs marketed by a burgeoning pharmaceuticals industry. As the drug became associated with marginal groups - Mexican laborers, blacks, jazz musicians, prostitutes - many states started passing laws against it. In the 1930s, the Bureau of Narcotics (now the Drug Enforcement Agency) got interested in pot. This was the era of "reefer madness," when the government tried to convince the public that marijuana made you crazy, horny and violent, or some unwholesome combination of the three. Pot finally went underground with the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937, only to emerge thirty years later as the drug of choice of socially-aware, middle-class college students.
In the 1970s, larger segments of society were toking up. A number of states, among them California, recognized this and decriminalized possession of small amounts. However, the relaxation of America's marijuana laws was only temporary: Reagan's ascendancy to the top job in 1980 heralded a national shift to the right, and legislators responded with acts carrying harsher and harsher penalties for drug offenses. Under President Clinton, the "war on drugs" has continued to receive massive federal funding.
Americans are funny about marijuana: present them with a pile of facts showing that the enforcement effort is wasteful and ineffective and you'll be greeted with an angry glare. Simply put, a majority of Americans find marijuana morally offensive, although, if the studies are right, a third of them had to try it a few times before they could be sure.
Furthermore, most Americans, except maybe some in Idaho, aren't warm to the libertarian point of view, which goes something like this: "Where does the government get off telling me what I can and can't do with my own body.? Humans have always used drugs, natural or otherwise, and it is paternalistic to tell us which ones are okay to use and which ones are not." A more nuanced offshoot of this school of thought suggests that the ultimate answer is to allow people to grow their own and use it themselves or give it away, but not to sell it.
Intelligent people can still disagree as to the health risks of chronic marijuana use. Pro-marijuana folk blame the government for this, saying the government only gives lip service to the need for further study of pot, as it will not freely release it to scientists to studyHealth Question & Answer
In colonial America, "hemp" was a major agricultural crop; both Washington and Jefferson raised it. Hemp was valuable because you could use its fibers for rope and canvas and its seeds for soap, lamp oil and birdseed. Preoccupied with finding practical uses for weed, people from temperate climates did not realize the great fun you could have simply by smoking it. Folk weren't so benighted in hot regions like India and North Africa. Here the plant fairly oozes with sticky resin, and is fit to be boiled for tea, ingested, and . . . you guessed it . . . smoked. Here also, perhaps under the psychoactive influence of the drug, they started giving it really cool names like dagga, ganja, bhang and hashish, from which we get the word "assassin."
Along with absinthe, hashish was de riguer for French artists and writers in the late 19th century. At the same time, physicians, who had been recommending tinctures of marijuana for pain relief, began switching to synthetic drugs marketed by a burgeoning pharmaceuticals industry. As the drug became associated with marginal groups - Mexican laborers, blacks, jazz musicians, prostitutes - many states started passing laws against it. In the 1930s, the Bureau of Narcotics (now the Drug Enforcement Agency) got interested in pot. This was the era of "reefer madness," when the government tried to convince the public that marijuana made you crazy, horny and violent, or some unwholesome combination of the three. Pot finally went underground with the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act in 1937, only to emerge thirty years later as the drug of choice of socially-aware, middle-class college students.
In the 1970s, larger segments of society were toking up. A number of states, among them California, recognized this and decriminalized possession of small amounts. However, the relaxation of America's marijuana laws was only temporary: Reagan's ascendancy to the top job in 1980 heralded a national shift to the right, and legislators responded with acts carrying harsher and harsher penalties for drug offenses. Under President Clinton, the "war on drugs" has continued to receive massive federal funding.
Americans are funny about marijuana: present them with a pile of facts showing that the enforcement effort is wasteful and ineffective and you'll be greeted with an angry glare. Simply put, a majority of Americans find marijuana morally offensive, although, if the studies are right, a third of them had to try it a few times before they could be sure.
Furthermore, most Americans, except maybe some in Idaho, aren't warm to the libertarian point of view, which goes something like this: "Where does the government get off telling me what I can and can't do with my own body.? Humans have always used drugs, natural or otherwise, and it is paternalistic to tell us which ones are okay to use and which ones are not." A more nuanced offshoot of this school of thought suggests that the ultimate answer is to allow people to grow their own and use it themselves or give it away, but not to sell it.
Intelligent people can still disagree as to the health risks of chronic marijuana use. Pro-marijuana folk blame the government for this, saying the government only gives lip service to the need for further study of pot, as it will not freely release it to scientists to studyHealth Question & Answer
there's no proof, but ive been smoking mj for 5 years (NO tobacco ever) and i cough up some narsty black ****Health Question & Answer
No, because there is no proof.Health Question & Answer