snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Urban Legends > Medical

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 31 July 2007, 06:02 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,655
Icon81 1 marijuana joint damages lungs as badly as up to 5 cigarettes

A single joint of marijuana obstructs the flow of air as much as smoking up to five tobacco cigarettes, but long-term pot use does not increase the risk of developing emphysema, new research suggests.

http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/art...ig31-buzz.html
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 31 July 2007, 11:42 PM
ichabodius ichabodius is offline
 
 
Join Date: 05 November 2006
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 57
Icon86

If this is true, then I'm screwed.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04 August 2007, 12:13 AM
Neffti
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I've heard this stat before and often wondered if it's because the method of smoking dope is often different - inhale and hold, rather than inhale and blow straight out again as with a cigarette?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04 August 2007, 12:31 AM
Elwood's Avatar
Elwood Elwood is offline
 
Join Date: 28 February 2003
Location: Fairmont, WV
Posts: 3,832
Default

Let's see, 8 joints are the equivalent of 40 cigs. I've known plenty of people who smoked two or more of cigarettes a day, but I don't think even the most whacked-out of my pot-head friends averages 8 doobies a day.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06 August 2007, 04:41 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 18,964
Glasses

I've never understood why people think taking any kind of smoke into their lungs deliberately is healthy.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06 August 2007, 05:00 PM
Jonny T
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
I've never understood why people think taking any kind of smoke into their lungs deliberately is healthy.
Aside from the occasional blissed out hippie I've never met anyone who sees it as healthy in itself, tho there can be some health benefits depending on what it is you're smoking.

Elwood's got it IMO: most cigarette smokers I know smoke more regularly and in higher quantities than the equivalent cannabis smoker. 20 cigarettes a day every day versus three or four joints a night every other night seems a lot more realistic - tho that's purely anecdotal.

incidentally, I've looked several times for data comparing rates of usage to get beyond the "well, my friends do this..." mindset but have so far been unsuccessful. is it available? wanting specifically the average rates of tobacco and cannabis consumption, comparing like with like (ie pure tobacco cigarettes versus pure cannabis joints, of equivalent size), in terms of both volume and frequency. apologies if something relevant has been posted before and I missed it.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06 August 2007, 05:39 PM
Tarquin Farquart's Avatar
Tarquin Farquart Tarquin Farquart is offline
 
Join Date: 20 November 2005
Location: London, UK
Posts: 16,354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elwood View Post
Let's see, 8 joints are the equivalent of 40 cigs. I've known plenty of people who smoked two or more of cigarettes a day, but I don't think even the most whacked-out of my pot-head friends averages 8 doobies a day.
Plus over here, joints have tobacco in them anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06 August 2007, 05:59 PM
Dog Friendly
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'd love to see any data from studies conducted on the effects of weed smoked through a water pipe. I can certainly see the difference between smoke from a filtered cigarette and smoke from a joint or pipe. Obviously, the pot smoke is hotter, unfiltered, and held in longer -- but to what extent does bubbling that smoke through water, or even iced water, change things?

Back in my stoned days, I always preferred pipes with a large water chamber. Too many cute-looking bongs only held a couple of teaspoons of water, or drew the smoke into the water a bare half-inch below the surface. Both of these were, IMO, counter-productive designs.

Has anyone ever done a scientific study of the harmful effects of water-filtered pot smoke? I won't hold my breath waiting for that one.

And really, what's the point in comparing it to tobacco anyway. Why is that any more or less important a comparison than corn silk, or paint fumes, or auto exhaust? I don't get it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06 August 2007, 06:11 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,569
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Friendly View Post
Has anyone ever done a scientific study of the harmful effects of water-filtered pot smoke? I won't hold my breath waiting for that one.
Bolding mine. Hee hee.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06 August 2007, 08:51 PM
Dog Friendly
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks, Lainie!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08 August 2007, 11:55 PM
daisys747
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Check out this report that is posted on the National Institue on Drug Abuse (NIDA) web site. Read the third paragraph which addresses this thread's topic
http://www.drugabuse.gov/MedAdv/00/NR6-20.html
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09 August 2007, 02:05 PM
major accent
 
Posts: n/a
Default cancer link

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

Here's a link to a google search for "'marijuana' 'lung cancer'".

Hopefully it works.

It seems that in general the studies that find the greatest harm are those that are funded by groups that intend to justify the current cannabis prohibition.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09 August 2007, 03:33 PM
Griffin2020
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by major accent View Post
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

Here's a link to a google search for "'marijuana' 'lung cancer'".

Hopefully it works.

It seems that in general the studies that find the greatest harm are those that are funded by groups that intend to justify the current cannabis prohibition.
Why on earth would you expect that this would NOT be the case?

I personally do not smoke (marijuana or cigarrettes), but I have smoked both in the past. All that I can say is that when I smoked lots of ciggies, I could tell, my lungs hurt deep down. This was not the case when smoking lots of MJ. Perhaps it is because MJ is self-limiting. You (the user) smokes until stoned, then stops. Whereas with ciggies, when one smoke ends, there is no reason not to light another (that is what I did while driving).

Last edited by Griffin2020; 09 August 2007 at 03:35 PM. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09 August 2007, 06:00 PM
major accent
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griffin2020 View Post
Why on earth would you expect that this would NOT be the case?
It seems like I'm stating the obvious because you've already come to this conclusion.

Many people do not believe that the government would fund and produce politically motivated public health research, and the post before mine included a link to a website which is saturated with politically motivated accounts of research into cannabis. I try to not assume that people agree with me when I argue for my opinion.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.