Music Banter

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)
-   The Lounge (https://www.musicbanter.com/lounge/)
-   -   What is your addiction? (https://www.musicbanter.com/lounge/175-what-your-addiction.html)

adidasss 08-05-2005 02:25 PM

i'll lighten up when you do, lord knows noone here likes you except for urban, i wonder why....maybe because you tend to attack people and insult them without provocation ( a certain incident with my beloved stu springs to mind )

Spike*Spiegel 08-05-2005 02:28 PM

thats kind of funny, cuz i just started a do you hate me poll and im the only one (so far, that is) that clicked on yes ... 5 min later: AWWWWW they closed it :(

Urban Hat€monger ? 08-05-2005 02:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fenixpunk
Moderate smoking of marijuana poses 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 is lower in marijuana smokers. There have been no reports of lung cancer related solely to marijuana. 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.

Fair enough , you won`t get emphysema. But it says 3 to 5 times worse , that means for every joint you`re basically causing the same damage as smoking 3 to 5 filterless cigarettes which makes the less frequent arguement pointless & was basically my arguement anyway.And thats not even taking account all the long term damage it does to the brain.

But hey if you want to smoke it , it`s up to you. Personally I don`t

Fenixpunk 08-05-2005 02:35 PM

you do realize that all of this info youre getting is from a Narcanon website dont you?

Urban Hat€monger ? 08-05-2005 02:36 PM

if that bothers you i`m sure i can find it on plenty of others

Edit: I should point out i`m not getting my infomation from this site , i`ve heard the same thing said on both documentaries about the subject & from magazine articles. That was the first site that I came across when you asked for proof thats all.

Fenixpunk 08-05-2005 02:43 PM

ya, i would like a differant site, preferably one that is based on scientific evidence rather than one that has an obvious conflict of interest.

Urban Hat€monger ? 08-05-2005 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fenixpunk
ya, i would like a differant site, preferably one that is based on scientific evidence rather than one that has an obvious conflict of interest.

OK then how about the BBC , one of the most liberal news agencies in the world, who in this article cover both sides of it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopi...abis/low.shtml

Quote:

Cannabis smokers also inhale more smoke for longer periods than cigarette smokers, so they take in four times more tar. If you also smoke normal cigarettes on top of this, your tar intake can hit the roof.

Additionally, the tar phase of cannabis smoke contains higher concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) than tobacco smoke. As PAHs are carcinogenic, the lung cancer risk gets even higher. A recent study by the British Lung Foundation found that just three cannabis joints a day cause the same damage as 20 cigarettes

Fenixpunk 08-05-2005 03:07 PM

If your only argument is the cause that smoke (any smoke for that matter) has on your lungs then think to yourself about how paraphernalia laws directed against marijuana users make it difficult to smoke safely. How these laws make water pipes and bongs, which filter some of the carcinogens out of the smoke, illegal and, hence, unavailable. and, if marijuana were legal, it would be more economical to have cannabis drinks like bhang (a traditional drink in the Middle East) or tea which are totally non-carcinogenic. This is in stark contrast with "smokeless" tobacco products like snuff which can cause cancer of the mouth and throat. When all of these facts are taken together, it can be clearly seen that: marijuana is much SAFER than tobacco

adidasss 08-05-2005 03:28 PM

Werd!

Urban Hat€monger ? 08-05-2005 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fenixpunk
If your only argument is the cause that smoke (any smoke for that matter) has on your lungs then think to yourself about how paraphernalia laws directed against marijuana users make it difficult to smoke safely. How these laws make water pipes and bongs, which filter some of the carcinogens out of the smoke, illegal and, hence, unavailable. and, if marijuana were legal, it would be more economical to have cannabis drinks like bhang (a traditional drink in the Middle East) or tea which are totally non-carcinogenic. This is in stark contrast with "smokeless" tobacco products like snuff which can cause cancer of the mouth and throat. When all of these facts are taken together, it can be clearly seen that: marijuana is much SAFER than tobacco

Yeah but i`m talking about smoking it , I`m not saying putting it in tea or drinks damages your lungs. In fact I have no idea why this has been bought up , it`s pretty obvious i`m talking about cannabis smoking.I mean we are talking about the effects of cannabis over tobacco.
The fact is , you take an unfiltered joint & an unfiltered cigarette & the joint has the worst effect on your lungs , thats the point i`m making. Yes there may be ways to combat it through bongs & such but thats besides the point. You can pretty much use the same arguement about cigarettes.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:09 PM.


© 2003-2024 Advameg, Inc.