I've yet to see a truly healthy pot smoker.

What does that even mean?

In that case, I've yet to see a truly healthy person who has just finished a Big Mac. Also, I've yet to see a truly healthy person who consumes alcohol or smokes tobacco. Really, I've yet to see any truly healthy people, anywhere.

Oh I am sure in no time the pot defenders will come out in droves and deny deny deny. Addicts always deny what they use.

Hmm, I've yet to hear of pot smokers that have injected high levels of thc into their bodies on a daily basis or at all even, but I do suppose if you injected high levels of anything into your body you will eventually get the same or even more drastic results.

Btw, I do not drink alcohol of any kind ever, nor do I smoke pot or take any other kind of recreational drug as well. Not in defense of the addicts, the only ones in more denial than an addict is a hippocrate.

Let's see . . . first the gov't tells us smoking pot will turn you into a stark raving murderer (see Reefer Madness), then they told us smoking pot would cause men to grow female breasts (actually taught in public high schools and in the health class I took) Recently they said pot causes high blood pressure, when it is medically classified as a dilator (think bloodshot eyes) which cause a drop in pressure not an increase. But hey, Kshark thinks we should trust them this time.

Willie Nelson suffers from supression because of pot . . . no wait that's opression.

Oh I am sure in no time the pot defenders will come out in droves and deny deny deny. Addicts always deny what they use.

Then why would pot smokers come out? It's not addictive.

Marijuana addicts? Doesn't something have to be addictive for someone to become an addict?

You should at least have a clue about what you are talking about before you speak.

It is addicting and it does lower your immunity to sickness and disease, trust me.

If its not addicting then I guess my son who stole everything he could get his hands on just to get more of the pot crap thats not addicting and then getting put in the hospital when my oldest son beat him half to death for forcing his 10 year old sister to smoke that crap with him. Seems the only ones who deny everything is the pot heads themselfs. But I guess its not addictive just because you steal from everyone you know just to get more. ITS ALL HE COULD THINK ABOUT AND ALL HE WANTED TO DO. Not addictive BS. He about tore our family apart with that non addictive stuff. Sick People.

John it sounds like the guy would have been a douche even without the weed.

I can point to thousands of these same kind of stories about alcohol...i can buy that...it's addictive...it's unhealthy...whats the difference?

Pot is no more(or less) addictive than candy, coffee, sex, gambling, or playing your favorite video game. People with addictive personalities, can be addicted to almost anything. Blame the person, not pot.

Sure, if you chainsmoke marijuana, you are bound to receive negative effects on your lungs(most "users" only smoke limited amounts now and then), which in turn can make it harder to fight off colds.

Using a vaporizer to inhale pot, is the best way to avoid most carcinogens(rolling paper and lighter fluid are worse for you than the marijuana is). Getting rid of most of the plant material and smoking the kif(the sticky THC glands that can be rubbed off the buds/flowers), cuts down even more carcinogenic material before consumption.

I won't even get into ingesting marijuana(via butter made from the herb, which can then be used in whaever recipe you wish). Did the scientists study smoking vs ingesting? I doubt it.

Injecting many times the normal smoked amount of THC into a rat(or person), is obviously going to have negative effects. If you injected any chemical in large amounts(even ones that your body produces), you are going to have negative effects. period.

I'd like to see a study where animals(giving them the same amount per body weight/mass, that human pot smokers receive) or humans are given the amount of THC that an average pot smoker receives in a daily/weekly basis(and compare how it's smoked, and also comparing to those who ingest it). That's the only way we can tell the real life effects of THC on our sytems.

I used to smoke pot every day after work/school. Now I only smoke once or twice a year. My short term memory has improved, but I notice the pain in my joints and back more(from a lifetime of injuries and extreme sports), now that I don't smoke regularly. I also have more of a temper, and I'm not as easy going as I used to be.

im 55 years old and ive smoked the mary jane since i was about 14 and i have smoked every pretty much except from 95 to 99 as i was a pow in club fed for YES marijuana , ive been married to the same woman for 32 years i own a construction co and i have 3 kids two of which are in their late 20s and we all seem to make a living ,own our own homes and there are no funny looking growths to be found ,if ur a bum ur a bum dont blame the weed blame the bum , and leave me and my bud alone and willie got busted again today and we all know that he is such a danger to the whole world singin his songs and all LOFL what a waste of tax money , when will everyone get a grip ? wake up propaganda is what this story is ,LIES LIES LIES

John sounds like your son is a bad seed, or came across some bad seeds. Each is own, don't blame your son demented ways on pot, because that seems as rare as smart a kid becoming the uni bomber.

Hey John, your son stole because he is a thief, don't blame the weed. Your the one who is sick, and in denial over your son's ability to take what is not his.
Now back to this BS article. If you have a bad cold, smoke a joint = cold gone. And to Markc. I like that reference to "Reefer Madness", what a joke that piece of garbage that was, and there are people that still believe that today. Must be the same people that believe that the Gulf of Mexico is just fine, no problem at all.
Don't Bogart that joint my friend, send it over to me.

Michael your post SCREAMS

LOSER

Thanks "Great Inventor", I take that as a compliment coming form the likes of people that don't realize that they have their Caps Lock key on.
I'll bet that I am worth a lot more than you, the weed never stopped me from being a success, and it certainly hasn't made me forget to unlock my Caps Key.

Signed: A Winner.

They should just use the money wasted on these 'scientific' studies to buy a big bag of weed,sit down with all the world leaders including Castro,Ahmadijenad,and N.Korea,China and have a massive bong session.Last one standing is in charge.Also,make alaska a part of canada just for good measure and let it be the Hab's problem.

Why give it to cancer victims to combat nausea when the chemo causes the immune system to go down also.

It is impossible to be truly healthy in this society. Too much man made chemical interference. Even in the country, the soils are infected with chemical pesticides and the houses surrounded by the lead run-off of 100 year+ paint.

I would say, probably the smoking part of pot ingestion is the unhealthy part of it all...

Marijuana, like a zillion other things, can be bad for you such as eating too many carrots. The important thing to remember for the dense "dogooders" out there is that marijuana is here to stay in abundance and that will never change under any possible scenario. Get use to it. Booze is irrefutably worse by any possible measure and all with an IQ above plant life already know that and that will never change ever.

Marijuana will be legalized eventually. It is just a matter of time. When that day of certainly does arrive, tax it and control it in much the same way as booze. Then we can cease wasting gubment resources attempting to get rid of what is impossible to get rid of. Marijuana is a weed that anyone can grow anywhere. Making it illegal is a complete waste of time and just as stupid as making any weed illegal.

Save the articles on why marijuana is bad as no one with a brain is persuaded by this garbage any more. Been there, done that and it has never made jack squat of difference.

ABCDE - Seconded. From what I've seen on here, people seem to be distinguishing a Big Mac or a cigarrete from a joint. I think for some reason people have circularly decided "if it is illegal it must be somehow worse than things that are legal".

Legal and illegal are arbitrary distinctions made by society (i.e., you and your peers) at some historical point. In this case, that historical point is right around the time of prohibition.

Just because a previous generation arbitrarily decided to make something illegal does not somehow justify that decision in posterity--or condemn the subject of that arbitrary distinction to eternal "badness". Take alcohol. Just about the same generation also chose to make that illegal. It's demonstrably terrible for you.

Take Tobacco, which is demonstrably more addictive and worse for you . . . Tobacco has never been illegal in the US. Ask yourself why. Why wasn't it orignally covered under the enabling act of the FDA? Why wasn't it scheduled as a class 2 or 3 narcotic--which nicotine is. (sarcasm) It certainly couldn't be because of the size of the Tobacco lobby. The same is true of the Pharma industry--except our drug classifications actually enable its existence.

Stories like this one are perfect examples of trying to get the masses worked up over a statement that, literally, could be made about 70% of the products that are legal and we use. "It causes cancer." Literally everything does.

So, being that this is not an "earth shattering discovery", why then, do you think you are being presented with this information? (sarcasm, again) It certainly couldn't be big Pharma, tobacco, alcohol, etc., could it?

Why not be honest and ask pot users if they would share their useage and medical data.

Yeah ... right. While you're at it, ask for a hand count on illegal aliens. What a sap. See what smokin' that dope gets ya ?

The main point of this study is the weakening of the immune system caused by pot smoking. This is a FACT. I smoked pot myself for years. It IS addictive. It DID lead to harder drugs. It IS a gateway drug. I'm not brainwashed by Big Brother government either. I am speaking strictly from my own 'pot-smoking' experience. I spent a lot of health insurance $$ on lower/upper respiratory infections caused by smoking pot. So quit denying the facts. Pull yourself up and get a life. I now work as an engineer, have a wife and children ... and a LIFE. Pot smokers must live a life in hiding and denial. That's NOT living. Stop trying to put the onus on cigarettes and alcohol. I don't get on a soapbox until potheads start preaching how "full and normal" their lives are ... yeah, right. Dream on.

Why not be honest and ask pot users if they would share their useage and medical data.

Yeah ... right. While you're at it, ask for a hand count on illegal aliens.

See 1.23 above. Obviously, the answer is "because you've made it illegal". This is another circular statement that ignores the initial arbitrary choice to make the substance illegal.

The same is true of "illegal aliens"--except their "illegality is a little more fundamental than an arbitrary prohibition on marijuana . . . their "illegality" or lack thereof is more of a first principals argument (i.e., can an arbitrary historical group of people with guns make an arbitrary something called a "government" that, today, excludes "illegals" from its "borders"--"borders" which are arbitrary lines drawn on a map representing a world which, absent the concept of property ownership, would belong to each human equally?)

Although, now that I'm thinking about it, the same fundamental argument could be made about that same "group" making a substance that freely grows in the soil illegal for others.

The main point of this study is the weakening of the immune system caused by pot smoking.

I disagree. the main point of the study and its publication is to draw your attention to "the weakening of the immune system caused by pot smoking". We already knew pot wasn't "good for you". I didn't argue that pot is good for you. It obviously isn't.

But, that's not the criteria upon which we base our illegal/legal distinctions. The discussion in 1.23 follows.

There are NO chemicals in pot. Boy do these people have an imagination.

Frankly, I am way more healthy than alcohol drinkers and junk food eaters.

I NEVER am sick and I smoke it every day.

Not to mention, many people on Newsvine have posted so many studies proving that POT IS BENEFICIAL.

THERE ARE NO CHEMICALS IN POT. IT'S A PLANT. THERE ARE chemicals in cigarettes that keep the cigarette burning.

@Karen - i just wanted to say, that there are a ton of differenent chemicals in plants. Water is a chemical substance, even. I assume you meant manmade chemicals, of which there could be 'some' depending on whether they use herbicides, growth enhancers, or contaminated soil. I just wante to clarify that there are a TON of chemicals that make it up, but most of them are not man-made. :-P

Like minds think alike.

Same here.

Buzzby--

Then go talk to the scientists and tell them they are full of it. I am sure you can find the Doctor's email address on the University's website.

A friend of mine, Seldon Ari Berstein, a hemotologist researcher that helped create the kennedy mice used for tobacco testing for the government told me in his own words that the government tests could never be conclusive at any level because of the way the tests are conducted. 100 mice are put in a glass cage and filled with smoke to the point you cannot see them. They are taken out once they have expired and if they are not found with a cancer, they are replaced with a new mouse once again bringing their inhabitant number to 100 and this is cycled until they have found a mouse that succumbs to a cancer. The test results are based on the mice that have been found to be cancerous period.

It just goes to show that too much of a good thing can be bad for you. It is true of most medicines, so why would this one be any different?

It's the same thing when they came out and told everyone that drinking soda causes cancer. They had been giving the lab rats about 100 times what a normal person would intake. I might be mistaken but I think that delta-9 THC is the synthetic version so that might have some influence on the outcome also.

Every couple of months there is a study that refutes a study done before. In 6 months to a year another study will say this one was wrong.

Just looked it up. Delta-9 THC and delta-8 THC are naturally occuring in marijuana, so it's not the synthetic version. However, I still believe that another study will refute this one in time.

THERE ARE NO CHEMICALS IN POT. It is a plant.

Karen, let's be as correct for them as we can. There are no chemical "additives" in pot. Of course there are chemicals, but none that have been "added".

addendum: "none have been 'added' [other than pesticides and fertilizers--which are 'added' to all crops]. (another argument for regulation)

Now we're set.

Well I guess that's kind of a reach since most growers don't add pesticides but they do add fertilizers that the plant feeds on. Semantics but it's a point worth noting. Ok we're good.

Point taken. Okay, bring it, prohibitionists.

THERE ARE NO CHEMICALS IN POT. It is a plant.

Karen, you really need to look up the terrible effects of dihydrogen monoxide.

The chemical compound dihydrogen monoxide (or DHMO) has been implicated in the deaths of thousands of Americans every year, mainly through accidental ingestion. In gaseous form, it can cause severe burns. And, according to a new report, "the dangers of this chemical do not end there."

The chemical is so caustic that it "accelerates the corrosion and rusting of many metals, . . . is a major component of acid rain, [and] . . . has been found in excised tumors of terminal cancer patients." Symptoms of ingestion include "excessive sweating and urination," and "for those who have developed a dependency on DHMO, complete withdrawal means certain death."

Yet the presence of the chemical has been confirmed in every river, stream, lake and reservoir in America.

more info:

http://www.dhmo.org/

check the link, tell me what you think, then tell me there are no chemicals in pot (or plants) again...

;)

oh, and DHMO ( dihydrogen monoxide) has been found to in every pot plant that has been tested too...

Danwill- THANK YOU!! Its sad really that those that do smoke thestuff dont really know what they are putting in their body....just that"its a plant" Well so is poisen ivy...you gonna go smoke that??

your welcome, where I'm at, we have had some serious DHMO pollution going on for the past several days

:)

what's really funny is that people would look at the website that I listed, which lists honest and actual facts and decide that DHMO is really terrible, want to ban it , and never figure out both the joke and the pointed reminder about facts, websites, and spin. without ever realizing that there is a common name for DHMO....

they just dont like to hear the truth

DHMO will most likely be found in "all" plants including agricultural plants, not just in pot plants. According to the sources you provided in your link DHMO is pretty much found in or on every single thing you see or touch in your daily lives.

What's not contaminated by man will be contaminated by acid rain so I'm assuming all the hooplah is an effort to simply prove the obvious that there are chemicals in pot plants. Not much of a reach considering that "everything" is made up of some kind of chemical or another.

But the point is taken nevertheless.

al, I can guarantee that DHMO is in going to be found in "all" plants.

note my comment about facts and spin in 4.16. the site is really a commentary on how people can take facts out of context and turn somwthing into something terrible.

the "common name" of DHMO can de found if you break down the name,

Di ( 2 )

Hydrogen ( H )

Mono (1)

Oxide (Oxygen, or O)

in other words, H2O, common name, Water

and every fact about the "negative effects" is true

prolonged exposure to the solid (ice) can cause frostbite, you can drown in the liquid (kill you in minutes), and the gaseous form(steam) can cause severe burns.

and it's found in all those bad things too, liquid industrial waste, cancer tumors, etc.

I agree completely and am aware of all the facts you listed. As for the spin in 4.16, that's what you seemed to be doing and that was what prompted my last comment. But I stand corrected.

I am not arguing your point at all.

*thumps Dean Bressler on the forehead*

When is the med profession going to stop playing with peoples minds. When are all the puritans going to stop all the B.S. I wish walls could talk.

The FDA will not put some drugs on the market that other countries have used for many many years. You can't buy them in the USA. Even though the drug works better. Something is wrong. Got to go out of the country to buy meds. and now that's getting rough. Many drugs that work well in other countries are illegal here. Show me a pot spot in the body.! If i can't get a medication for pain that works well in the USA and can't get it into this country.I just might mix a little pot in my salad.

Yeah, same thing for murderers!

But they have yet to establish problems with humans and pot. Remember this was done on mice, not people. I have yet to meet one pot smoker who was at risk for lung cancer that also did not smoke cigarettes, or work in some sort of carcinogenic environment that would help to promote said cancers. A baseless statement in this place without any valid and verifiable data is worthless. I am not saying your wrong, I am not saying your right, I am saying, back up what you say with more info. That been said, I have a friend with lupus who smokes, and it hasn't helped her a bit with the disease, so I am in doubt of this study.

Ahem... Perhaps this would help?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html

http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/

http://cancer.about.com/od/smokingandcancer/f/marijuana.htm

Myth debunked. Thank you for playing Vielmann.

Now that's a bunch of bull crap right there. My mom, bless her soul (killed by a wreckless driver, that hit her head on at 90) smoked pot daily, since the 60's. Every check up she ever had, never showed signs of ever smoking anything in her lungs. Never showed signs of smoke in her teeth. In fact, for having multiple total hip replacements, fuse vertibrae in her neck, and a few other surgeries (smoked pot for the pain). She walked, when she was told she wouldn't, could run, if she had too, but it hurt her, had multiple college degrees, and was a bilingual teacher (sign was her other language). So, Every person I know, that smokes pot (no, I don't, but I know a LOT), has NEVER had any pot related issues, all have college degrees, including Masters, Bachelors, PHDs etc. So, smoking pot, from a clean plant (non-hybrid, non cut product), does NOT have ANY harmful long term effects on ANY part of the body. It does NOT kill the brain, hurt the lungs, cause cancer, etc., etc. So, all this CRAP is exactly that, a bunch of CRAP, and I'd be willing to stand face to face to any of these "experts" (ex= has been spert=drip under pressure), and call hem a liar, and moron on international TV.

I absolutely hate pot. I hate how it effects me and what it does to me...yet I support its legal distribution on the same level as alcohol.

Hey "Great Inventor". Try some good stuff.

@Michael

Why? I just said I hated pot. Only a complete dumbass would inhale hot smoke into their lungs. Are you a dumbass?

That's why I use a Bong, no hot smoke in my lungs.

All of those rednecks saying 'I know someone who smoked pot daily until 70' sound exactly like those people who were against the warnings about cigarette smoking.

We all know cigarette smokers who have lived long and plentiful lives, so the argument doesn't have a lot of validity.

The last time I smoked pot was from a bong and I got so stoned that I felt extremely paranoid, that I was drifting out of my body, and I felt something like a string going up the left side of my face

never smoked it since

That's a genuinely interesting question. Media is traditionally pretty horrible at reporting scientific findings, but i cringe every time I see people getting upset because the published results of an experiment doesn't support their world view.

Now that we know large doses of THC suppress the immune system in mice more research can be done on the effects of realistic doses, or justify a study in humans.

The end of the article did say that the immune suppression properties of marijuana could be helpful in the treatment of certain diseases.

-PFSC (Pot Free Since Conception)

*dons armor plated suit*

*waits for people to pounce*

Erkel,

No need to put on armor. Pot smokers are not going to try and force you to smoke. It's a personal choice and we can respect that.

I used to drink every weekend, now I never drink. As I would rather get a pot high than a booze high.

probably wrong to say that it does no harm, but it isn't any worse than anything else people use to change their mood. that includes legal and prescription drugs.

I take a walk in nature danwill to change my mood. Pretty sure pot is more dangerous than that.

chemical mood changers were what I intended.

I'm pretty sure a nice walk is better for you than any chemical

:)

That is totally false.

Every pot smoker that I know that smokes on a highly frequent basis is a lazy piece of crap. They've changed dramatically. They have less energy, have less zest for life and are less healthy.

I've also known pot to totally ruin lives.

Pot is not going to kill you or make you sick, but pot creates social dysfunction when used a lot - there is no question about it.

joeman, look at the "rare" effects of some of the anti-depressants.

bone-marrow problems, circulatory system collapse, etc. some rare, but extremely nasty side effects.

Pseudoscience because you don't like the results? It looks like it had the hallmarks of a genuine scientific experiment to me. The title of the article is sensationalist but unless you can point out a genuine reason as to why their measurement of immunosuppression was 'pseudoscientific' I don't see how it is.

Whether you can apply the findings to humans who smoke it is another story.

Marijuana 'is' illegal for a silly reason: mostly because the individuals overseeing prohibition wanted to keep their jobs. The health risks are comparable to that of nicotine or alcohol so its difficult to justify it as a controlled substance.

Impressive, Mr. Schillaci. I should hope to be so healthy at your age!

Any health secrets you'd like to share? (other than smoking pot, I mean... I have that well under control!)

Here Here... I'd puff to that :) !!!!

you sir are my hero

Aye, Pippo! Is that really you? It's me, Pyxmie, of the Wood Elves! We miss you so, since you went to be with the humans, and we hope you come back soon! I just wanted to remind you of a few things. You forgot to tell them that eating hallucinogenic mushrooms helps you talk to the dead, dropping acid helps you understand non-Euclidean geometry, and smoking the leaves of the Exstasy Tree (you remember? the one down by the fairy godmother's place) makes your penis grow as much as three feet, which is kinda impressive on short guys like us! Chewing Elderfin Root though, still turns every Elf under The Four Corner Stars In The Sky a bright shade of blue, before they sprout white hair all over their bodies (in addition to sharp teeth and fangs), and go on a mindless, murderous rampage. I hope ya haven't been dallyin' in that, me brother! As much pot as you say you've smoked, I woulda thought you'd be a better speller by now, old friend! Ha ha ha! Ah well, I got to go off this here magic screen, which I summoned by snorting the grindings of Marshmie Bird droppings, and get back to my game of Phleltelminck with the other Wood Elves. Pimsel always likes to add a few points to his score while I'm away during the intermission. Some things never change! Ah, Pippo, we miss you and we're lookin' forward to your return! Love ya, bro! G'night!

Well Pippo you should be proud of your self...breaking the law for the last 65 years. What an example you set for young people!

I know I'm going to take a lot of crap for that comment but it seems to me that smoking pot is as harmful as smoking cigarettes and even if you haven't had any ill effects from smoking pot in the past it doesn't mean that you never will.

My grandfather smoked cigarettes all of his life and was healthy as well.

Should we encourage children to smoke, since obviously it will make them healthy?

No-- we should allow the option for adults to choose whether they want to use or not, just like we are free to choose to consume alcohol and smoke cigarettes. What one does with one's own body is one's own concern, not the federal governments or anyone else's. The moment someone acts upon another person's liberty in the course of choosing these things (i.e. stealing for drug money, driving drunk and crashing, etc.) then the law should address those crimes in that they actually affected another human being negatively. Marijuana is benign. Decades of regular use by American's have taught us that.

Debbie

It seems to me you have no experience with marijuana or the history of its prohibition. Adults need to make their own decision to use marijuana or not, not the government or people that do not have any experience with it.

Debbie -

I understand your concern but did you know that some rat poisons are made with nicotine as the primary ingredient. There is enough nicotine in one cigarette to kill a mouse outright. marijuana has no nicotine. That alone makes it less harmful than cigarettes.

Actually, this is science.

You are just a commenter.

In my own experience I find this to likely be true.

All of the people I know who are pot-heads are good people, but they are also lazy.