Are you a evil smoker

[Lord Flashheart]

Straits,

Well, making alcohol illegal has been tried in the US. It went quite poorly.

No worse than prohibition of other drugs. Oh sorry now we call it a "war" not prohibition.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Lord Flasheart,

I didn't say otherwise.

[Lord Flashheart]

Lord Flasheart,

I didn't say otherwise.

See Scott,

Not trying to put words in your mouth. Just when given an opportunity to spout my anti war on drugs rhetoric I can't help myself.

[Myshkin]

“Tobacco users typically smoke ten to 20 cigarettes/day, and some smoke much more than that. Marijuana users, on average, smoke only two to three times a month, so the typical exposure to marijuana is much lower than for tobacco.”

“And marijuana is one where a lot of people dabble with it in their late teens and 20s, and some people continue with relatively low levels for a long period of time,” Kertesz added.

...

Although there was a suggestion that very heavy use of marijuana might be taking a toll on the lungs, the researchers could not get reliable estimates of the effects of very heavy marijuana exposure, as such smokers were relatively rare in the study population.

Who the fuck were these people studying? "Marijuana users, on average, smoke only two to three times a month"? Bull. Fucking. Shit.

[straits]

Who the fuck were these people studying? "Marijuana users, on average, smoke only two to three times a month"? Bull. Fucking. Shit.

they could have been smoking something whilst studying

[Madfunkymonkey]

Who the fuck were these people studying? "Marijuana users, on average, smoke only two to three times a month"? Bull. Fucking. Shit.

More like to two to three times a day.

[Stego]

Again,

Isn't smoking smoking whether it's Cannibus or Tobacco?

No.

I can smoke a bowl and go work out. It doesn't have the same negative effects on your lungs.

[Wise Fool]

No.

I can smoke a bowl and go work out. It doesn't have the same negative effects on your lungs.

If you're really trying to argue that smoking marijuana doesn't qualify as smoking you probably shouldn't use the word "smoke" to describe what you're doing with it.

[arya_underfoot]

If people choose to fuck themselves up by smoking, then that's their choice. What I particularly detest is people who impose their smoking upon others by doing it in public and forcing everyone else to inhale their smoke. I also loath work colleagues who go out to smoke in their lunch break and don't make any attempt to mask the reek of tobacco on their return. It's thoroughly disgusting. At least they should refrain from talking directly if they can't be bothered to wash themselves and their mouths after smoking. If you want to smoke, you should only do it inside your house where only you are affected by the smoke.

[Lord Flashheart]

If people choose to fuck themselves up by smoking, then that's their choice. What I particularly detest is people who impose their smoking upon others by doing it in public and forcing everyone else to inhale their smoke. I also loath work colleagues who go out to smoke in their lunch break and don't make any attempt to mask the reek of tobacco on their return. It's thoroughly disgusting. At least they should refrain from talking directly if they can't be bothered to wash themselves and their mouths after smoking. If you want to smoke, you should only do it inside your house where only you are affected by the smoke.

Ha! Sounds like nazi Germany to me.

[Stego]

If you're really trying to argue that smoking marijuana doesn't qualify as smoking you probably shouldn't use the word "smoke" to describe what you're doing with it.

That preposterous. 'Smoking' refers to tobacco cigarettes in the modern Western lexicon. I could also smoke some venison, and that alternate use of the word would both be appropriate, and somehow not negate the tobacco meaning.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Stego,

I will be interested to see whether further studies back up people's anicdotal opiniona about the health affects of cannibus.

[Wise Fool]

That preposterous. 'Smoking' refers to tobacco cigarettes in the modern Western lexicon. I could also smoke some venison, and that alternate use of the word would both be appropriate, and somehow not negate the tobacco meaning.

No one is trying to "negate" the tobacco meaning. Smoking refers to the act of deliberately inhaling smoke from slowly burning recreational substances. Marijuana, tobacco, crack cocaine, heroin, DMT, and so forth. It's not some magically unique definition of "smoking" for each particular substance and insisting that it is is truly preposterous and smacks of someone declaring that rap music isn't music, or that it's not really drinking if it's only beer and not whiskey.

[GSP]

Scott

I also hope MJ gets legalized and we get the long terms results of studies on harm. It's just that I'm pretty damn sure we're thinking opposite on what those results are going to be.

:)

[Lord Flashheart]

Results will vary for the damage marijuana causes. If they do a study on vaporizers I'm sure the amount of harm done will be less than that of joints or blunts.

[thecryptile]

Holy ignorance, Batman!

I've got a study too.

SMOKING three cannabis joints will cause you to inhale the same amount of toxic chemicals as a whole packet of cigarettes, according to research published in France today.

Cannabis smoke contains seven times more tar and carbon monoxide, the French National Consumers' Institute concluded in research published in the April edition of its monthly magazine.

The institute tested regular Marlboro cigarettes alongside 280 specially rolled joints of cannabis leaves and resin in an artificial smoking machine.

The tests examined the content of the smoke for tar and carbon monoxide, as well as for the toxic chemicals nicotine, benzene and toluene.

"Cannabis smoke contains seven times more tar and carbon monoxide than tobacco smoke," the institute's magazine says.

Someone smoking a joint of cannabis resin rolled with tobacco will inhale twice the amount of benzene and three times as much toluene as if they were smoking a regular cigarette, the study says.

Smokers of pure cannabis leaves will also inhale more of these chemicals than from a normal cigarette, though the amount varies depending on the quantities.

"Smoking three joints every day – which is becoming frequent – makes you run the same risks of cancer or cardio-vascular diseases as smoking a packet of cigarettes," the magazine says.

So there. Your study compared people who smoked marijuana every other weekend to pack a day tobacco smokers. It's flawed right there- it should compare the occasional toker with the social smoker, and the pack a day smoker with the eighth a day stoner.

If you only smoke infrequently, you won't see the same deleterious effects as someone who does it all day every day. Doesn't matter what it is.

You think that pot is harmless? Look on the inside of your pipe- see all that nasty black shit? That's in your lungs too. That can't be good for you.

Yet a joint does not equal several cigarettes and there have been no known cases of tying weed smoking to cancer.

There hasn't been a lot of research on cannabis and its effects for legal reasons. Many of the studies that have been conducted are biased or otherwise flawed. Remember- it took decades to prove a causal link between smoking tobacco and lung cancer.

All you potheads, you just keep on hoping that inhaling noxious smoke into your lungs is somehow magically not harmful when it comes from cannabis- but that won't make it so. In the meantime- quit looking down on tobacco smokers. You may not be throwing butts on the ground- but you're still smoking. When our weed is illegal, and yours is legal- we'll be the cool kids again.

[arya_underfoot]

Ha! Sounds like nazi Germany to me.

Your grasp of history is obviously rudimentary.

Why should smokers be allowed to impose their pollution upon others?

[Wise Fool]

If people choose to fuck themselves up by smoking, then that's their choice. What I particularly detest is people who impose their smoking upon others by doing it in public and forcing everyone else to inhale their smoke. I also loath work colleagues who go out to smoke in their lunch break and don't make any attempt to mask the reek of tobacco on their return. It's thoroughly disgusting. At least they should refrain from talking directly if they can't be bothered to wash themselves and their mouths after smoking. If you want to smoke, you should only do it inside your house where only you are affected by the smoke.

Hey, if you don't like the fact that your coworkers smoke, you can always just work inside your house where you are not affected by it! Sort of like how when it's raining, I don't go out into the rain; when people are smoking, you don't go near them. Like the rain, whether they smoke is unalterable fact of reality and it's better for you to adapt or accept than just wistfully moan about how things should be different just because you're offended.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

WF,

When smokers congregate near exits to smoke they are rather difficult to avoid.

[Wise Fool]

WF,

When smokers congregate near exits to smoke they are rather difficult to avoid.

Well, I remember that being a problem when I went to college too. But times have changed here; smoking is prohibited within 20 feet of building entrances and exits (at least buildings in the public sphere, like businesses, government, education etc) so it doesn't tend to happen.