[Wolfie]

Study finds no marijuana-lung cancer link

[robertpaulsen]

So you're stating as a fact that marijuana doesn't cause cancer? Or that this particular study didn't find a link?

Which is it?

[robertpaulsen]

Wasn't that the study that showed that people who smoked marijuana were less likely to get cancer than those who didn't smoke at all?

Let's see. Where did I put that? Ah, here it is.

"There was time for only one question, said the moderator, and San Francisco oncologist Donald Abrams, M.D., was already at the microphone: "You don't see any positive correlation, but in at least one category, it almost looked like there was a negative correlation, i.e., a protective effect. Could you comment on that?" [Abrams was referring to Tashkin¹s lung-cancer-only data for marijuana-only smokers in 1-10 j-yrs category.] "Yes," said Tashkin. "The odds ratios are less than one almost consistently, and in one category that relationship was significant, but I think that it would be difficult to extract from these data the conclusion that marijuana is protective against lung cancer. But that is not an unreasonable hypothesis."

Smoke'em if you got 'em.