A question about LSD.

google this "polonium lung cancer cigarettes"

The main ingredient in tobacco that causes cancer is the radioactive polonium, that is in the tobacco, due to the fertilizers used and the stickyness of the tobacco plants.

As much as 95% of the risk is due to polonium

Also a factor is the amount of plant material smoked.

UndercoverElephant said:
I have been a heavy cannabis user for 20 years. I simply cannot accept that cannabis smoke is harmless whilst tobacco smoke is lethal. It's just absurd.
Click to expand...

Heavy pot smokers and heavy tobacco users use an order of magnitude different amounts of their respective drug.

Try smoking 40 to 60 joints a day.
 
CapelDodger said:
Reefer Madness is exactly the right analogy. "They" knew they didn't like (fill in drug name here) but knew bugger-all about it, so they came up with some way of demonising it. Another common myth was that trippers jumped off tall buildings because "they thought they could fly". How they elicited that fact from pavement-jam is anybody's guess.
Click to expand...

As Bill Hicks once said, if they thought they could fly, why didn't they check it out from the ground first? You don't see pigeons going up in elevators to fly off tall buildings ....
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cigarette

Carcinogens

There are 19 known carcinogenic compounds in cigarettes.[1] The following are some of the most potent carcinogens:

Benzopyrene is a mutagenic compound which is highly carcinogenic. It is formed during the incomplete combustion of organic matter.
Nitrosamine is a carcinogenic compound found in cigarette smoke but not in uncured tobacco leaves. Nitrosamine forms on flue-cured tobacco leaves during the curing process through a chemical reaction between nicotine and other compounds contained in the uncured leaf and various oxides of nitrogen found in all combustion gases. However, switching to indirect-fire curing has been shown to reduce nitrosamine to undetectable levels (less than 0.1 part per million).[2]
Click to expand...
 
bobdroege7 said:
Try smoking 40 to 60 joints a day
Click to expand...

You are talking to a person who, for 20 years, had a joint when he woke up, smoked joints all day long, and finished his day with a joint.

Please do not try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs, er, I mean joints.
 
UndercoverElephant said:
You are talking to a person who, for 20 years, had a joint when he woke up, smoked joints all day long, and finished his day with a joint.

Please do not try to teach your grandmother how to suck eggs, er, I mean joints.
Click to expand...

I got a sawbuck says you dont get lung cancer.

Unless you have other risk factors
 
UndercoverElephant said:
I find that almost impossible to believe. It's about the least addictive drug I can think of.
Click to expand...
Well, I creaved the high, I spent most of my time tripping or waiting to trip. many years after I quit , i started taking Zoloft, and the first day was very similar in some ways, colors were brighter, sounds were echoing and things were more intense for about three hours. I think that I used the LSD so frequently because I was seeking the serotoniin rush, I already had depression and OCD by the age of 14 and it was a not very effective treatment.

There are plenty of people who overuse LSD, addiction is not a drug thing, it is a behavioral thing involving mood altering behaviors. The addictive profile of a drug is often unrelated to it's abuse. And yes in studies with animals other than human LSD and psilocibin have a zero addictive use profile.
 
UndercoverElephant said:
Yep. Turns you into a self-obsessed w*nk*r who thinks he is convinced that everything he says is cool/profound.

Fortunately, it is still very expensive.....
Click to expand...

Cocaine is very destructive to those who use it regularly, it has a much higher addiction profile than heroin. In college my teacher told a story about the rats who self administered heroin living about six months in the experiment or often longer, rats who self administered cocaine were all dead within a month.

The greatest risk with cocaine dependance is damage to the heart and lack of nutrition.

Maybe it was something to do with the little crack pipes they used?
 
UndercoverElephant said:
Err......sounds like dangerous nonsense to me. Why on earth should tobacco smoke increase the risk of about thirty different diseases and cannabis smoke cause none? I am sorry, but this is just ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Unless this was meant as a joke, I will have to disagree with you. The evidence shows no cancer risk from smoking pot, so that's what we have to believe, for now at least. Evidence often leads us to apparently ridiculous conclusions that are actually true. Being a skeptic means going where the evidence leads us. Someone who rejects valid evidence that doesn't support what they already believe is a cynic, not a skeptic.
 
To all:

There are two issues here.

First: There are a whole load of toxic chemicals in tobacco smoke, which cause all sorts of different problems. For examples, there are plenty of oxides of nitrogen, carbon and sulphur. All of these cause problems, though not neccessarily cancer. I still refuse to believe that smoking grass doesn't cause similar problems, since any smoke from vegetable matter contains similar amounts of these oxides.

Second: What I was not aware of was the increased amount of polonium in tobacco smoke, and the specific dangers connected with this. I accept that the evidence seems to indicate that tobacco is particularly dangerous because of this.

So....yes, tobbaco smoke is more dangerous than other smoke. But....no, smoking grass is not harmless. Breathing in carbon monoxide does nobody any good.

Geoff
 
UndercoverElephant said:
Err......sounds like dangerous nonsense to me. Why on earth should tobacco smoke increase the risk of about thirty different diseases and cannabis smoke cause none? I am sorry, but this is just ridiculous. Tobacco is just a plant, which happens to contain nicotine. Nicotine is not the prime cause of the health problems - it just causes the addiction. Now you (and these people) are seriously trying to tell me that smoking another plant, which contains a very similar concoction of chemicals, doesn't increase the risk of disease. Utter nonsense, IMO. I cannot imagine why anyone in their right mind would believe it. I am not a person who is anti-dope. I have been a heavy cannabis user for 20 years. I simply cannot accept that cannabis smoke is harmless whilst tobacco smoke is lethal. It's just absurd.
Click to expand...


Don't ask me to explain how it happens but it just works that way. I read an explanation somewhere but I forget the site. Something about the smoke of Cannabis has some chemicals that somehow counteract the cancer causing chemicals so that the actual effect is zero.

There have even been studies showing marijuana can help PREVENT lung cancer.
 
UndercoverElephant said:
To all:

There are two issues here.

First: There are a whole load of toxic chemicals in tobacco smoke, which cause all sorts of different problems. For examples, there are plenty of oxides of nitrogen, carbon and sulphur. All of these cause problems, though not neccessarily cancer. I still refuse to believe that smoking grass doesn't cause similar problems, since any smoke from vegetable matter contains similar amounts of these oxides.

Second: What I was not aware of was the increased amount of polonium in tobacco smoke, and the specific dangers connected with this. I accept that the evidence seems to indicate that tobacco is particularly dangerous because of this.

So....yes, tobbaco smoke is more dangerous than other smoke. But....no, smoking grass is not harmless. Breathing in carbon monoxide does nobody any good.

Geoff
Click to expand...


I agree that smoking in not good for you and I too was very suprised by the study that it is not as carcinogenic as tobbacco, but then if we look at the plant materials, tobbacco is different than marijuana, so maybe it is like coal and wood smoke, they are both harmful to breathe , one is just full of more harm full stuff.

And then there is the phenomena of mixing tobbacco and marijuana together.
 
Dancing David said:
I agree that smoking in not good for you and I too was very suprised by the study that it is not as carcinogenic as tobbacco, but then if we look at the plant materials, tobbacco is different than marijuana, so maybe it is like coal and wood smoke, they are both harmful to breathe , one is just full of more harm full stuff.
Click to expand...
There's another component to this as well - marijuana smokers smoke much, much less of it than tobacco smokers do. So it stands to reason that it is less likely to cause cancer simply because the exposure is less.
 
WildCat said:
There's another component to this as well - marijuana smokers smoke much, much less of it than tobacco smokers do. So it stands to reason that it is less likely to cause cancer simply because the exposure is less.
Click to expand...



That's a good point as to why there have been a few studies out there showing a link between Marijuana smokers and Lung cancer. Newer studies that eleminate such flaws show no link.

The link exists because MOST marijuana smokers also smoke tobacco.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom