Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
Posted on 10/29/2005 1:36:18 AM PDT by JTN
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Although both marijuana and tobacco smoke are packed with cancer-causing chemicals, other qualities of marijuana seem to keep it from promoting lung cancer, according to a new report.
The difference rests in the often opposing actions of the nicotine in tobacco and the active ingredient, THC, in marijuana, says Dr. Robert Melamede of the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs.
He reviewed the scientific evidence supporting this contention in a recent issue of Harm Reduction Journal.
Whereas nicotine has several effects that promote lung and other types of cancer, THC acts in ways that counter the cancer-causing chemicals in marijuana smoke, Melamede explained in an interview with Reuters Health.
"THC turns down the carcinogenic potential," he said.
For example, lab research indicates that nicotine activates a body enzyme that converts certain chemicals in both tobacco and marijuana smoke into cancer-promoting form. In contrast, studies in mice suggest that THC blocks this enzyme activity.
Another key difference, Melamede said, is in the immune system effects of tobacco and marijuana. Smoke sends irritants into the respiratory system that trigger an immune-regulated inflammatory response, which involves the generation of potentially cell-damaging substances called free radicals. These particles are believed to contribute to a range of diseases, including cancer.
But cannabinoids -- both those found in marijuana and the versions found naturally in the body -- have been shown to dial down this inflammatory response, Melamede explained.
Another difference between tobacco and marijuana smoking, he said, has to do with cells that line the respiratory tract. While these cells have receptors that act as docks for nicotine, similar receptors for THC and other cannabinoids have not been found.
Nicotine, Melamede said, appears to keep these cells from committing "suicide" when they are genetically damaged, by smoking, for instance. When such cells do not kill themselves off, they are free to progress into tumors.
THC, however, does not appear to act this way in the respiratory tract -- though, in the brain, where there are cannabinoid receptors, it may have the beneficial effect of protecting cells from death when they are damaged from an injury or stroke, according to Melamede.
All of this, he said, fits in with population studies that have failed to link marijuana smoking with a higher risk of lung cancer -- though there is evidence that pot users have more respiratory problems, such as chronic cough and frequent respiratory infections.
If marijuana does not promote lung cancer, that could factor into the ongoing debate over so-called medical marijuana. Melamede said he believes "marijuana has loads of medicinal value," for everything from multiple sclerosis, to the chronic pain of arthritis, to nausea caused by cancer treatment.
U.S. government officials, however, maintain that the evidence for medical marijuana is not there. Ten states allow people to use marijuana with a doctor's prescription, but the Supreme Court has ruled that federal law trumps state law.
SOURCE: Harm Reduction Journal, October 18, 2005.
Its hilarious because it is ridiculous. It is possibly the most ineffective piece of propaganda ever produced.
Dr. Robert Melamede is an anti-WOD activist and actually teaches a course on medical marijuana at the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs.
"Dr. Robert Melamede, former chairman of the biology department at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, said he's smoked marijuana for 41 years."
-- hightimes.com
(Most people quit in their 30's. Grow up, doctor.)
By the way, the Editor-in-Chief of Harm Reduction Journal, Professor Ernest Drucker, PhD, is a senior Soros Justice Fellow.
Libertarian ping! To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here.
"Reefer Madness" is a pretty funny movie...despite the fact that @ the time it was made (late '30s/early '40s), it was dead-serious in it's demonizing of this "devil weed". It's been a while since I've seen it, but if I remember correctly, a girl smokes marijuana & jumps out of a skyscraper to her death after being raped @ a party.
Uh-huh....what a bunch of anti-drug propoganda BS.
Fire up a joint & get a good laugh while you watch it...it's a stoner's classic!
Is it as good as Harold and Kumar go to White Castle?
And anti-marijuana "studies" that were cut and pasted directly from the DEA website aren't?
My favorite weed movie is "Friday" with rapper Ice Cube & Chris Tucker. Absolutely hilarious. If you get past the hip-hop and the violent ending, that is.
Wow!
I wonder if people who quit cigarettes might lower their chance of getting lung cancer from the years they smoked tobacco, by smoking marijuana after they quit cigarettes.
I also wonder if they put marijuana in cigarettes along with tobacco, if that also might lower the chance of tobacco smokers getting lung cancer?
I can tell you what my significant other's experience has shown after treating thousands of drug addicts: Most of them started out using pot.
Horrible stuff!
What do you mean? It's actually used as propaganda to get college kids to smoke dope.
Harm Reduction Journal, never heard of it, except the other dozen variations of this article already posted on FR.
You smoke every day, yet you're not addicted. Wasn't there a Richard Pryor joke based on such a premise?
I don't think I'd stake my mortality on some article published in some unknown journal that seems to be more about the promotion of psychoactive drugs than anything else.
"Dr. Robert Melamede, former chairman of the biology department at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, said he's smoked marijuana for 41 years." -- hightimes.com
(Most people quit in their 30's. Grow up, doctor.)
By the way, the Editor-in-Chief of Harm Reduction Journal, Professor Ernest Drucker, PhD, is a senior Soros Justice Fellow.
The Harm Reduction Journal's website claims they are a peer reviewed journal. Thanks for letting us know who the peers are, LOL.
I'll bet most of them started out drinking milk; I guess that's "horrible stuff" too.
The gateway effect, if it exists, is very weak. I have seen work showing that only one out of 104 pot smokers will go on to try harder drugs.
But even if there is a gateway effect the question remains as to its nature. Some have speculated that it could be due to the misleading information the government puts out about the effects of drugs. Once someone tries marijuana and doesn't have any of the horrible experiences he is told he will have, he decides that he was lied to about all the others too. And to a large degree he is probably right.
Another (I think, more probable) explanation is that marijuana is the most ubiquitous illegal drug, and therefore it simply is most likely the first to be encountered.
I'm not familiar w/ the Richard Pryor joke you are taling about...I never liked the guy.
Sometimes I go w/o smoking any weed, & when I do, that's fine w/ me. Sometimes I have other things to do (there IS a lot more to life than smoking pot, regardless of what you may think about those of us who smoke it), sometimes the supply is low, & other times I just might not want to smoke any.
LIKE I SAID: no addiction, no fuss.
I can tell you what every significant other's experience has shown after treating tens of millions of alcoholics: Most of them started out using beer.
It isn't the drug. It is the drug user. People want to get "high". Most drug dealers have a bag full of goodies. Legalizing pot could remove some of the availability of addictive stuff, and make it easier to target those dealers... but that would make sense. Besides there's too much money to be made by lawyers (the guys who write the laws).
Only you can prevent forest fires.
I know. Their side is always claiming that the government is always peering in their windows, knocking down their doors, and throwing them in the federal pen for several years for doing nothing more than smoking a joint every now and then. Yet they still do it for that slight buzz.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.