What do you think & know about Weed?

[tiderman]

What will a few joints mean in fifty years even if you smoke monthly or something? You breathe in shit from the air that's as bad everyday in the city

[Caltson]

What will a few joints mean in fifty years even if you smoke monthly or something? You breathe in shit from the air that's as bad everyday in the city

The cities are not as bad as someone smoking. This is because most likely you'll be far more removed from the source (unless you're a dog, baby or anything else that is positioned low on the ground..) than a cigarette.
Also the composition of the biochemical structures are different. In cities you'll be breathing too much CO2 for the main part, In case of cigarettes there are far more components.

And then we're not speaking about radiation caused by mobile phones, wifi, power plants, nuclear reactors in your area. If you want to avoid all of that, then i agree with Que, that you can't avoid all, as they are part of your life. But last named objects are not so lethal to your body than the subject we're discussing.

Studies have proven that mobile phones can increase chances of cancer, same with microwave (that makes your food useless as it destroys all nutrients.) and wireless networks.

Also, don't think that you're more safe in countryside areas. Pesticides from the local farm fields will harm you then. Finding a clean spot to live is almost impossible.

Note that i'm not suggesting a new way of lifestyle here, this are just points made from my own studies. Everyone, including me uses modern technolegy and will be dealing with the bad sides of them aswell, but like Que said, you can ban everything lethal from your life, but perhaps you won't live at all..?

What i just like to state and proof is that the subject (weed) can be avoided and does not in any way improve any lifestyle. Note that i'm not trying to change your mind, Don't insult me personally if you do not agree with my way of thinking.

[Squeak]

I think you are really un-aware of the effects, Weed can be easily avoided and you CAN have a great life without weed as well.

You can have a better one with weed.

What i just like to state and proof is that the subject (weed) can be avoided and does not in any way improve any lifestyle.

Are you speaking from experience? How can you know if you're never been a somewhat frequent smoker?

[duffman]

What i just like to state and proof is that the subject (weed) can be avoided and does not in any way improve any lifestyle. Note that i'm not trying to change your mind, Don't insult me personally if you do not agree with my way of thinking.

You are so wrong, but w/e.

[JDC]

The cities are not as bad as someone smoking. This is because most likely you'll be far more removed from the source (unless you're a dog, baby or anything else that is positioned low on the ground..) than a cigarette.
Also the composition of the biochemical structures are different. In cities you'll be breathing too much CO2 for the main part, In case of cigarettes there are far more components.

The air in certain major cities is so polluted that just staying in them is like smoking a pack of cigarettes a day.

[tiderman]

The cities are not as bad as someone smoking. This is because most likely you'll be far more removed from the source (unless you're a dog, baby or anything else that is positioned low on the ground..) than a cigarette.
Also the composition of the biochemical structures are different. In cities you'll be breathing too much CO2 for the main part, In case of cigarettes there are far more components.

And then we're not speaking about radiation caused by mobile phones, wifi, power plants, nuclear reactors in your area. If you want to avoid all of that, then i agree with Que, that you can't avoid all, as they are part of your life. But last named objects are not so lethal to your body than the subject we're discussing.

Studies have proven that mobile phones can increase chances of cancer, same with microwave (that makes your food useless as it destroys all nutrients.) and wireless networks.

Also, don't think that you're more safe in countryside areas. Pesticides from the local farm fields will harm you then. Finding a clean spot to live is almost impossible.

Note that i'm not suggesting a new way of lifestyle here, this are just points made from my own studies. Everyone, including me uses modern technolegy and will be dealing with the bad sides of them aswell, but like Que said, you can ban everything lethal from your life, but perhaps you won't live at all..?

What i just like to state and proof is that the subject (weed) can be avoided and does not in any way improve any lifestyle. Note that i'm not trying to change your mind, Don't insult me personally if you do not agree with my way of thinking.

I will now personally insult you because I do not agree with you. You looney-toon!

The air in certain major cities is so polluted that just staying in them is like smoking a pack of cigarettes a day.

That is true. Also, the smokers around you wont mind giving you a better chance getting the cancer neither. They light up their cigarettes and exhale that tobacco smoke right in your face without any regard for machine. I know, everyone around me in the city smokes and I'm sure I'm smoking at least a couple of cigarettes a day when I'm out (maybe a couple more a month from the already heavily polluted air)

We are all smokers now

[duffman]

We are all smokers now

Bingo.

[Caltson]

You can have a better one with weed.
Are you speaking from experience? How can you know if you're never been a somewhat frequent smoker?

Squeak, I can promise you that i'm not making up the things that i'm saying, I have sufficient references and own work to realise what I'm talking about.

When you had your first smoke, it did not feel well at all. Perhaps you did like the taste first, i can't say, everyone's different. In my case I didn't like the taste at all...
However, the first times you smoke the body will show clear signs that it is fighting against it. After a couple of days, your body will create anti-bodies against the smoke and you'll be having an high resistant level for the bad particles of it. This will keep stabilised for a long amount of time. This is the time where you feel yourself upper-great with a cigarette, weed and such.
However, in most cases (read: most cases) will have a significant decrease of anti-bodies at later age, leaving your body vurnerable to these substances. This is the part where lung cancer will arise as a warning that you're lungs are being exposed to substances bad for the human body.
Then the problem really starts.. You're going to do radiation therapy, surgeries and chemo, and before you know the therapy, NOT the cancer will kill you.
Every smoker should take at least 3 grams of Ascorbic Acid, better known as Vitamin C to help your body recover from smoking.

This is how it works, this is why you feel good right now, but that feeling won't stay forever and your body will have revenge against the abuse you're commiting. Cancer is nothing but a warning, it is not a desease but a simple warning, which many people fight instead of listening what is wrong.

Cancer is not something you'll die from. A cancer cell is not designed to kill, but to survive, so it won't have any advantage to kill himself. Cancer cells are mutations that will attempt to help your body being vital.
Cancer will therefore only occur in people with low immune system where the cancer is going to try to replace this system by itself. If your immune system is okay, you won't give the cancer a chance to create itself.
So when you have Cancer, it's not too late to start working on your immune system (Not with radiation therapies and surgeries by the way.... ) and there is a chance of 95 percent that you will recover.

However, i'm convinced that you're not eating healty everyday, know your own blood profile and even think about it, that's why you consult a doctor / Professor anyway, isn't it? 

I have much experience with smokers, alcoholics, but they are already aware of the problem. The first step is awareness, the second step is working your way to a better self.

Before sueing me from copying off the internet, TRY to find a source that says exactly the same as what I said, then perhaps you realise this text is written all by myself.

Regards,
R. Caltson

[Que]

Things you're writing at the moment are very very non-related to the plant called marijuana. Before studying cancer, you should start to study what marijuana is and how many death it causes every single year.

[tiderman]

Yeah, potbrownies wont give you cancer

[Caltson]

Things you're writing at the moment are very very non-related to the plant called marijuana. Before studying cancer, you should start to study what marijuana is and how many death it causes every single year.

The points I stated is about the bad sides of Marijuana espescially. This is what you'll be going trough when your body starts opposing your ideals about smoking. They are forming a relation as Marijuana usually brings forth cancer when used on regular basis. The number of Marijuana kills are actually irrelevant to the subject. The actual numbers are way higher, as there are many people that do not admit getting lung cancer from Marijuana, that many people are simply not being noted on those lists but on the list of cancer-issues.

The people that directly die from the plant will be listed, but not those that'll suffer later from it, because the link won't be made directly. The numbers of such lists are therefor inaccurate.

[Que]

Statistically, death directly from marijuana overdose is extremely rare. I believe it was 26 deaths between '99 to '07 where marijuana was the underlying cause, in Unites States, will say. And think about how many that smokes minimum a joint or more in the States.

First of all,
Moderate smoking of marijuana appears to pose minimal danger to the lungs. Like tobacco smoke, marijuana smoke contains a number of irritants and carcinogens. But marijuana users typically smoke much less often than tobacco smokers, and over time, inhale much less smoke. As a result, the risk of serious lung damage should be lower in marijuana smokers. There have been no reports of lung cancer related solely to marijuana, and in a large study presented to the American Thoracic Society in 2006, even heavy users of smoked marijuana were found not to have any increased risk of lung cancer. Unlike heavy tobacco smokers, heavy marijuana smokers exhibit no obstruction of the lung's small airway. That indicates that people will not develop emphysema from smoking marijuana.

Secondly,
There is no evidence that marijuana users are more susceptible to infections than nonusers. Nor is there evidence that marijuana lowers users' resistance to sexually transmitted diseases. Early studies which showed decreased immune function in cells taken from marijuana users have since been disproved. Animals given extremely large doses of THC and exposed to a virus have higher rates of infection. Such studies have little relevance to humans. Even among people with existing immune disorders, such as AIDS, marijuana use appears to be relatively safe. However, the recent finding of an association between tobacco smoking and lung infection in AIDS patients warrants further research into possible harm from marijuana smoking in immune suppressed persons.

I hope you understand it better now.

[Caltson]

Statistically, death directly from marijuana overdose is extremely rare. I believe it was 26 deaths between '99 to '07 where marijuana was the underlying cause, in Unites States, will say. And think about how many that smokes minimum a joint or more in the States.

First of all,
Moderate smoking of marijuana appears to pose minimal danger to the lungs. Like tobacco smoke, marijuana smoke contains a number of irritants and carcinogens. But marijuana users typically smoke much less often than tobacco smokers, and over time, inhale much less smoke. As a result, the risk of serious lung damage should be lower in marijuana smokers. There have been no reports of lung cancer related solely to marijuana, and in a large study presented to the American Thoracic Society in 2006, even heavy users of smoked marijuana were found not to have any increased risk of lung cancer. Unlike heavy tobacco smokers, heavy marijuana smokers exhibit no obstruction of the lung's small airway. That indicates that people will not develop emphysema from smoking marijuana.

Secondly,
There is no evidence that marijuana users are more susceptible to infections than nonusers. Nor is there evidence that marijuana lowers users' resistance to sexually transmitted diseases. Early studies which showed decreased immune function in cells taken from marijuana users have since been disproved. Animals given extremely large doses of THC and exposed to a virus have higher rates of infection. Such studies have little relevance to humans. Even among people with existing immune disorders, such as AIDS, marijuana use appears to be relatively safe. However, the recent finding of an association between tobacco smoking and lung infection in AIDS patients warrants further research into possible harm from marijuana smoking in immune suppressed persons.

I hope you understand it better now.

The study did not mention the biochemical diversity of each person. Nobody is the same and as mentioned it does clearly increase your chance on cancer. The study took healthy people, that had no deficiencies from a specific vitamin, mineral or enzym that are needed to function good.
However it is generally known that the consumption of the avarage food mass is too low to meet the recommended daily dosage of nutrients, that are needed to help you function vital.. These nutrients were supplied to those in the study before taking actual part.

You should be aware that none of us, including me is even close of having a vital body. You may feel yourself vital, because we're young, we still have a little reserve. But none the less i'm sure that your avarage level of nutrients is too low to even meet the minimum criteria.

THIS is what gives even the smallest increase of cancer freeplay, If you're vital enough, eat good, maintain your health with additional nutrients you would have 90 percent less chances of getting cancer from the plant. Cancer is not a desease, but a warning sign. If your immune level is high enough to protect yourself from cancerogen substances, then the risks are significant less to get it.

As you can see, it is a synergy between several factors and not just the plant. It's about how it interacts with your own body, which has too much defecient nutrients to actually defend itself from the cancerogen substances... I'm sure you have too less Vitamin D3, C and the Anti-cancerogen substances like Bromaleine found in Pineapples. Unless you protect yourself the chance remains the same, which is why the study gives such results.

Also be aware that not all studies are even close to being accurate. There are many studies that are not being done right. As you may know the human body produces millions of cancerogen substances each day, so it's actually impossible to test wether substances are made from smoking or not. The only thing they can actually proof is that every human being is biochemically different from each other.

[Que]

You can get cancer out of drinking milk. If marijuana makes people happy, and increases their social capacity, then no one can take it away from them. That's my opinion. People are simply enlarging the whole situation with marijuana and it's very funny to see, but at the same time; very annoying.

Our discussion is more about cancer than marijuana as a drug. I'll leave that to someone else, I already know the true facts due to real life happenings and very educated knowledge when it comes to any substances or drugs.

[Squeak]

Ok, but what if I vaporize my weed, or consume it in edible form?