.............

Cannabis does have more tar, but that's a misleading statistic.

Cigarette smokers smoke many more cigarettes than pot-users, so they consume much more tar in the long run.

Also, tobacco smoke has been proven to contain radioactive isotopes, which is the main reason for causing cancer

(drags a cigarette...)

So don't let that cunt blow smoke up your ass, and don't worry about what some brain-washed bitch thinks about drugs.

One joint (tar-wise) equals 4 or 5 cigarettes.

well noones died from it so its in no way worse for you
end of story

true statement tho but like the dude said cigarrette smokers smoke on average 14 cigarrettes a day while the average to moderate-heavy pot smoker smokes 4-5 bowls. 3 joints worth compared to probably one and a half.
not the same.

i read somewhere that those numbers were taken from comparing cannabis leaf and tobacco leaf. no one really smokes cannabis leaves, and the thing i read said it was lower in tar content when you compared bud to tobacco leaf...

and its not the tar that fucks you in the end, its the radioactive isotopes that give you the cancer...

and its not the tar that fucks you in the end, its the radioactive isotopes that give you the cancer...

i hope you are talking about cigarettes...

The first thing you know is that most people don't have a clue about these subjects except what they read in the newspaper and they don't remember that very well.

Don't accept answers from anyone who can't give you references, and laugh out loud if anyone cites antidrug.com as a source. The US Government has had an openly stated campaign of lying about marijuana since at least the 1930s. You can find an entertaining history of the subject at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/...

You can find a ton of research on the health effects of marijuana at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer

If deaths produced from lung damage is the measure then tobacco wins hands down, and it isn't even close. You can find a chart of how many people are killed by drugs at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/...

Both plants produce largely the same kind of smoke and can produce the same kinds of damage, with a few exceptions.

Tobacco has nicotine which is a potent poison and highly addictive. It also may contain radioactive elements from the fertilizers that are used on the plant. It is believed by some that the radioactive elements in the fertilizer may be one reason tobacco has a high association with lung cancer.

Marijuana contains THC which has anti-tumor properties. The most recent research by Dr. Donald Tashkin of UCLA (the leading expert on the subject) found that marijuana smokers actually have a LOWER incidence of lung cancer than average. This may be due to the anti-tumor properties of marijuana. You can find newspaper articles talking about this research by searching http://www.mapinc.org

As for the fertilizers used on marijuana, those will vary according to who is growing it but I have met a large number of growers and every one of them expressed great care about choosing the correct (and safe) fertilizers for their product. They put quite a bit of work into each plant so they tend to watch these things very carefully. (This would not apply to ordinary Mexican weed.)

Tobacco also causes emphysema, while marijuana does not.

You will see people allege that marijuana has ten times (or 50 times, as they can't remember their own urban legends) as much tar as tobacco. It is something of a mystery how equal measures of two roughly equivalent plants can produce such hugely different measures of tar, but that is really beside the point. The real point is the measurable overall effects.

One the overall effects, tobacco wins for the major problems -- lung cancer and emphysema. It is not even a contest.

One of the explanations for the differences is the THC vs. nicotine. Another explanation is the fertilizers used. Another explanation is that pot smokers generally don't consume as much as tobacco smokers do. (Although this would not be true in places like Jamaica where some people smoke 28 times as much as the typical US pot smoker. Even at those levels, pot does not come close to the damage done by tobacco.)

One other thing to consider is that it is entirely possible to avoid all the lung damage associated with using marijuana. Marijuana can be eaten or vaporized. Vaporization heats the marijuana to the point (less than 200 degrees) where the active ingredients come off as a gas. There is no smoke and, therefore, none of the tars. If you tried the same thing with tobacco, you would be one sick puppy in short order, possibly dead.

You can find a ton of health references on the effects of marijuana at http://druglibrary.org/schaffer The largest study to date of the health effects of marijuana was done by Kaiser Permanente. They surveyed 65,000 patients over a long period of time and found no significant differences in the health records of pot smokers versus non-pot-smokers. On the other hand, there is a quite clear difference in the health records of tobacco smokers. The full text of the study is online at http://druglibrary.org/crl

i hope you are talking about cigarettes...

yes i am...

This.

From what I understand the amount of tar is like this:
Pot Leaf > Tobbacco > Buds

Also Cannabis kills precancer cells as well as damaged cells in the lungs, unlike tobbacco, which keeps these cells alive. After marijuana smoke kills off tar damaged cells, new healthy ones grow.

Good man, it makes a change to see someone talking some sense on the subject.

Tobacco has nicotine which is a potent poison and highly addictive. It also may contain radioactive elements from the fertilizers that are used on the plant. It is believed by some that the radioactive elements in the fertilizer may be one reason tobacco has a high association with lung cancer.

No no no.. For the last time it's not phosphates that cause radioactive cigarettes. Tobacco plants grown in fields with high deposits of radon in underground rock will absorb radioactive particles through their roots. When you smoke the plant matter contaminated with radon, they say you are subjected to 1000 times the radiation a nuclear power plant worker is exposed to throughout his or her career. Now nuclear plant workers are pretty well protected from radiation hazards so this statistic sounds scarier than it really is. Rn also has a half life of 3.5 days, so the older your cigarettes are, the healthier they are.

How does it feel to smoke radioactive particles that together make up the leading cause of indoor air contamination and cause 21,000 lung cancer deaths per year in the US alone (not including cigs)?

edit:

Marijuana can be eaten or vaporized. Vaporization heats the marijuana to the point (less than 200 degrees) where the active ingredients come off as a gas. There is no smoke and, therefore, none of the tars.

Once again, no! Druggies.. they really like to think they know what they are talking about. Enjoy inhaling "less than 200 degree" hot air next time you vape. I'll be sure to set mine at 390F so I actually get desired effects. And you're still inhaling tars, jackass. As a matter of fact, you're only inhaling tar. Vaporizing just lets you skip out on all that plant matter and ash dirtying up your lungs. I bet you don't believe me..

You're taking a crystalline solid, heating it briefly to vaporize it [solid > gas] and then letting it cool down and condense back into a soild again..where...IN YOUR LUNGS!! Even if you vape, you're still letting hot oils condense all over your avioli and all over the inside of your lungs. You'll just be turning them a nasty orangy/yellow color instead of jet black.

You remind me of mahatmaganja420 too much. I think you are him.

No no no.. For the last time it's not phosphates that cause radioactive cigarettes. Tobacco plants grown in fields with high deposits of radon in underground rock will absorb radioactive particles through their roots. When you smoke the plant matter contaminated with radon, they say you are subjected to 1000 times the radiation a nuclear power plant worker is exposed to throughout his or her career. Now nuclear plant workers are pretty well protected from radiation hazards so this statistic sounds scarier than it really is. Rn also has a half life of 3.5 days, so the older your cigarettes are, the healthier they are.

How does it feel to smoke radioactive particles that together make up the leading cause of indoor air contamination and cause 21,000 lung cancer deaths per year in the US alone (not including cigs)?

edit:



Once again, no! Druggies.. they really like to think they know what they are talking about. Enjoy inhaling "less than 200 degree" hot air next time you vape. I'll be sure to set mine at 390F so I actually get desired effects. And you're still inhaling tars, jackass. As a matter of fact, you're only inhaling tar. Vaporizing just lets you skip out on all that plant matter and ash dirtying up your lungs. I bet you don't believe me..

You're taking a crystalline solid, heating it briefly to vaporize it [solid > gas] and then letting it cool down and condense back into a soild again..where...IN YOUR LUNGS!! Even if you vape, you're still letting hot oils condense all over your avioli and all over the inside of your lungs. You'll just be turning them a nasty orangy/yellow color instead of jet black.


Sources please.

Of course smoking a joint is going to be harsher on your lungs than smoking a single cig. Most of them have filters, wheras the joint's going straight to smoke and in your lungs.

Would I worry about it?

Not extremely.

Even if you vape, you're still letting hot oils condense all over your avioli and all over the inside of your lungs. You'll just be turning them a nasty orangy/yellow color instead of jet black.

Wrong, marijuana vapors condense almost entirely in the bronchioles. Stop correcting people when you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

-N-

I read it on this book on elements I picked up at a book store. I sat down and read it and it had all the elements listed on every page with random facts and pictures and the like. When I got to radon I came across that fact. However I am finding that the source for radiation in tobacco isn't really the phosphates, it is the radon and other radioactive elements like uranium found in phosphate mines.

T.C. Tso, a former researcher of the US Department of Agriculture, found out that phosphatic fertilizers, which contained uranium and its decay product radium-226, are the sources of radioactivity in tobacco. Radium-226 decays into radon, an inert gas. Po-210 and Pb-210 are long-lived decay products of radon. Sticky hairlike structures on both sides of tobacco leaves collect these from the atmosphere. Tobacco roots also absorb some radioactivity from soil. (source (http://www.hinduonnet.com/seta/2003/06/05/stories/2003060500020200.htm))


radon in tobacco (http://www.webspawner.com/users/radioactivethreat/)
radon related lung cancer cases (http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/d0cf6618525a9efb85257359003fb69d/16f240cc3212ef2e852573cc00552cfb!OpenDocument)

As for the vaporizer, the point at which the active chemical you want boils is 392F (http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_chemistry.shtml). Label your numbers if you meant celsius. And use your head, look at the vaporizer's hose. I bet it's coated with a dark orange oily resin, that is tar. You are inhaling a hot gaseous oil that will eventually cool down, condense and then coagulate into that orange resin you see. The same tar being deposited inside your vaporizer's tube is being put in your lungs. Am I saying it's unhealthy? Not really, those sources up above claimed 90% of cigarette smokers who die, die from the radioactivity rather than an overload of tar buildup.