Reply #64: Sorry, science disagrees with you

[wyldwolf]

For the first point, I made no claim that pot use causes more auto accidents. You assumed I did, though. This is what I said:

While it is true that no deaths due to diseases have been recorded from marijuana use, that doesn't take into account deaths occuring while unde the influence of pot.

Kaiser Health researchers have published a study showing that marijuana use is correlated with a significant increase in the risk of hospitalization due to injuries. The study, published in the April 2003 edition of the Annals of Epidemiology, covered 64,657 subjects from Northern California, of whom 13,971 were current marijuana users. Researchers found that among men, current marijuana users had a 28% higher rate of hospitalization due to injuries than non-users; among women, the increase was 37%.

http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/kaiseraccidentstudy.html

What I am pointing out is that although one joint has more four times as many carcinogens than one cigarette, one pack of cigarettes have at least five times as many carcinogens as one joint. And few people smoke five joints every day.

Many users do - including the one this thread is about. But that is really irrelevant. The point of this subthread was that pot isn't dangerous. Which it clearly is.

The UCLA study you quote was conducted by a Dr. Tashkin, who measured the lung function of 131 heavy marijuana users, 112 smokers who used both tobacco and marijuana, 65 tobacco smokers, and 86 nonsmokers in Los Angeles (Tashkin et al. Am Journ Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine</I> 155:141 -148, 1997). Participants were tested up to six times over seven years, but only 75% (255) of the subjects were followed up. The use of marijuana did not cause a decline in lung function by itself nor did it worsen the decline of lung function observed in tobacco smokers. The test for lung function used in this study, FEV, measures the amount of air expelled from the lung after one second and is used to test lung function in patients with emphysema and obstructive lung disease. The author comments, and has shown previously, that marijuana causes precancerous changes in lung cells, and bronchitis in people who smoke the drug alone, similar to those changes noted in tobacco smokers (Tashkin, D. et al Am Rev Resp Dis 135:209-216, 1987). While marijuana is not, according to those data, a risk for chronic lung disease, there is a higher incidence of acute bronchitis, chronic bronchitis, infection, and probably malignancy. The lung function test does not exclude those effects of marijuana and, as the authors state, "the data do not imply that regular marijuana smoking is free of harmful pulmonary effects."

The results of this study need to be put in context since it was done in Los Angeles and all groups had a decrease in this lung function with age. This change, which may be due to environmental factors such as smog, makes it difficult to detect adverse changes with this small number of patients since lung function declines in everybody in the study. The follow-up period is short for chronic emphysema, and only 65% of participants were followed. Also, the group not followed (35% of total initial participants) may not be representative. For example, during this period eight marijuana/tobacco smokers, two marijuana smokers, and three tobacco smokers died compared to one nonsmoker. The non-smoker died of breast cancer whereas AIDS (two deaths), violence (three deaths), suicide (one death), and drug overdose (one death), were all seen in marijuana users. For a 25-49 year old age group this is a high death rate, i.e., 4% for marijuana users, 4% for tobacco users and 1.1 % for non-smokers. The only conclusive outcome of this study is that marijuana smoking, like tobacco, has serious negative impact on life expectancy.

http://www.sarnia.com/groups/antidrug/research/1997-07.htm

And as for the AIDS patients, Marijuana is often prescribed to help with the severe nausea associated with HIV medicine. So it actually HELPS them keep their life saving medicine down.

But we weren't discussing whether pot is helpful but, rather, if it is harmful. Some things can help and hurt. Milk has good benefits and bad benefits, for example. So does alcohol for that matter.

But the point being raised in regards to AIDS, as proven by science, is that smoking marijuana regularly (a joint a day) can damage the cells in the bronchial passages which protect the body against inhaled microorganisms and decrease the ability of the immune cells in the lungs to fight off fungi, bacteria, and tumor cells. For patients with already weakened immune systems, this means an increase in the possibility of dangerous pulmonary infections, including pneumonia, which often proves fatal in AIDS patients.

As for physical addiction, sure - marijuana isn't classified as physically addictive but it does build physical tolerance. Researchers and health professionals have long maintained that marijuana is psychologically addictive. Recent research, like that of a University of Connecticut Health Center study conducted by Ronald Kadden, Ph.D. shows that marijuana is also physically addictive, although withdrawal effects after discontinuing use are not as debilitating as those seen with alcohol, heroin, cocaine, amphetamine or barbiturate dependence.

But all this is really just irrelevant at this point. Like I said earlier, the point of this subthread was that pot isn't dangerous. Which it clearly is.

We weren't discussing it's level of danger, or how it compared to other drugs legal and illegal, or even if users could handle the dangers. The statement was made that "There is no HARM in smoking reefer."

But there clearly is.

Even though I advocate it being legal or at least decriminalized.