Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The truth is that 20% of all lung cancer patients were non-smokers. I don't recommend smoking anything, but trying to vilify marijuana because of one death is just plain silly.
These are not attacks. Rather, they are just posts pointing out how you pick and choose your information based on the desired outcome rather than actual facts.
Your "not completely reliable" approach gives you license to do that, and you do it freely.
Regardless, nice job of ignoring the other links provided to you.
You are completely closed-minded when it comes to anything positive about the cannabis plant. I dare you to say something positive about it without throwing up.
Whatever Raddo.
The OP thread title has to do with lung cancer and someone smoking pot.
If you want to point out positives of smoking pot, start a thread.
Who are you to say that I have to like the pot plant at all?
Who do you think you are you to tell people what they should like ?!
That there is the problem right there, Raddo. Cause someone doesn't like what you like you attack them and think they are wrong.
And me saying that WebMD isn't completely reliable is not me picking and choosing info.
Beaconowner post on the American Lung Association and how there could be special interest companies having a sway makes sense. It only benefits everybody from knowing that.
Again, point blank, you put smoke in your lungs, and it can cause health risks.
I said “completely reliableâ€
Get a grip on your drooling attacks.
Drooling attacks? Poster intelligently pointing out that you cited the exact same website that you decried as not completely reliable is a drooling attack? Interesting point of view to have. Let me guess, the only part of WebMD that is reliable on the topic are the negative effects, right?
My 11-year-old wouldn't even attempt that in a discussion.
The OP thread title has to do with lung cancer and someone smoking pot.
.
Yeah. And no information linking the two. Whatdaya bet the guy wore shoes too ... Connection?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atalanta
If you want to point out positives of smoking pot, start a thread.
.
Well, I'd just like to say it sure helped get me through Vietnam in the late 60’s ... and here I am still today ... no lung cancer! And I'm 'bout the same age as Peron ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atalanta
And me saying that WebMD isn't completely reliable is not me picking and choosing info..
It is if you use it selectively and speciously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atalanta
Again, point blank, you put smoke in your lungs, and it can cause health risks.
Do you eat anything with sugar in it? Worst thing a person can put in their body. And yet, I indulge myself a bit ... and no type 2 diabetes and I'm not overweight ... go figure!
Of course we all eventually die...I just love when posts appear like this.
My son in law picked up cigs at 10, stopped when first child was born in his 40's and along the way grew and smoked grass, he died of lung cancer at 55. It spread everywhere in his body. Never saw his first born graduate high school and now enter college. At 79, no way do I want to destroy my lungs.
I use some CBD ointment on my knee but it doesn't do much re: pain.
The other side of the coin: My mother was one of 10 kids, all of whom began cigarette smoking at very early ages, some as young as 8. My mother and one sister were the only non-smokers, non-drinkers in the family. My mom died of cancer at 44. All of her siblings are still living well into their 90s. My dad is 94. This is my worst nightmare. Some folks live way beyond any real quality of life. Others die young. Both scenarios are unfortunate but we all have choices. For me, I'm all about moderation. If I die sooner than I expected, so be it. But should I live that long, sometime in my early to mid 80s I will take matters into my own hands. The 90s suck for most folks.
The article didn't say he died of lung cancer. It said he had lung cancer. People can suffer from a fatal disease and die from something completely different. For example, people can have Lou Gehrig's disease and get shot to death in a robbery. And even if he did, he may have been a heavy cigarette smoker or had a genetic predisposition to lung cancer.
C'mon.
Other articles DO attribute his death to lung cancer. Oh, and he WAS a cigarette smoker--marijuana cigarettes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
