Slashdot Mirror
Rare "Healthy" Smokers Lungs Explained
Bruce66423 writes: New research suggests that a portion of the population suffers few problems from smoking because their genes enable the smoke's effects to be overcome. The Medical Research Council reports: "The new findings, which used the first analyses of genetic data from participants in UK Biobank, may one day help scientists develop better treatments for diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), a collection of life-threatening lung disorders affecting almost one million people in the UK. The findings could also help improve interventions aimed at helping smokers to give up."
I don't smoke a lot but i smoke cigars daily - usually a few a day, sometimes a bit more but less in the past few years as I no longer drink. I used to smoke cigarettes quite often but not really all that regularly. When I did then I'd go through a pack a night while drinking and not smoke the rest of the time. Today, I smoke cigars.
I'm told that I have the constitution of a horse and that I'll outlive my doctor. Damn it.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I quit all forms of smoking years ago over health concerns. If I found out I had that gene, I'd take up smoking weed again. I miss it.
"By comparing smokers and non-smokers as well as those with the disease and without they discovered sections of our DNA that reduce the risk of COPD.
So smokers with "good genes" had a lower risk of COPD than those with "bad genes"."
Top notch reporting, everyone. Solid work.
That is an oversimplification. First of all where I live relatively few places ban e-cigs, the few that do ban them is more about people not wanting cloaks of smoke, or nicotine steam, sprewed on them.
But to be honest you do not know what is in the vaps. Are they using the "safe" liquids you can buy at the store, or did they mix their own and have other "unsafe" chemicals in them. You are free to smoke, you are not free to poison me.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Vaporizer.
I miss tobacco.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Marijuana is not at all harmful like cigarettes. Inhaling any smoke is not good for you, however, the main difference is that marijuana is just a dried out plant which is basically harmless.
Commercial tobacco, by comparison, is not just a plant but it is loaded with a plethora of toxic chemicals - including ammonia, DDT, arsenic, formaldehyde, carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide - just to name a few. More here.
Marijuana can also have health benefits. I have never heard of medicinal tobacco.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
is this how the usa and israel created a vaccine?
No, they got their vaccine information from our shape-shifting reptilian alien overlords. How else are they supposed to create a control group as they test the effects of chemtrails?
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Marijuana can also have health benefits. I have never heard of medicinal tobacco.
If you look around you can find information on a number of health benefits to tobacco, many of which are legitimate. The problem is, the drawbacks outweigh them.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
> Marijuana is not at all harmful like cigarettes
Right. It's harmful like marijuana, which clearly causes no parallel effects to cigarettes like elevated pulse, vasoconstriction, altered state of consciosness, and has no chance of causing addiction or of introducing naturally carcinogenic chemicals to your mouth and other respiratory passages.
That belief is strange, because it causes _all_ of those according to the reliable medical research. It's even stranger when surveys of the purity of street grade consistently show adulteration with different filler substances and mood-altering substances: a great deal of street grade marijuna is very poor quality, may be pesticide or herbicide contaminated, and is very occasionally still laced with PCP in the US. Moreover, tobacco and nicotine are still used medicinally, and even as an effective toothpaste in some parts of the world.
It's important to keep the scale of risk and benefit in mind for both, but to assert that one is completely harmless and the other completely useless midically is to ignore history and well-executed research on both.
You should not be finding DDT in any product produced in the US. This has been banned since 1972 for any agricultural products. Also I can not believe that all the listed ingredients are in a single cigarette.
It's my god given right to spew whatever chemicals I want. It's in the bible, right next to the second amendment. If I want to eat at a restaurant they should be free to allow me to spray nicotine, carbon dioxide, chlorine, nerve gas, whatever I want! Wear a gas mask if that bothers you, you unamerican commie bum!
And if you don't like that, then you should go find a place that doesn't because that's how the free market works. Keep your damn government meddling out of my chemical spraying!
It's always been a moral crusade, just one that happened to have medical science on its side. Crusaders were happy to use the medical aspect as a way into the hearts and minds of the public who were not so inclined to use the police power of the state to tell people what they can put in their own bodies. When e-cigarettes came about the crusaders viewed it as "cheating" against their elaborate Web of local laws taxing cigarettes and regulating their use. The campaign against e-cigarettes features the same arguments as the campaign against marijuana - "it's a gateway drug for kids ... won't anyone think of the children."
Looking at the research MJ is actually worse than you for recreational smoking than recreational smoking of tobacco. The difference is that you inhale less MJ so over the long run it is not as dangerous.
as for those toxic chemicals and heavy metals they are also present in cannabis. They mostly come from the type of fertilizer you use, so the more modern synthetic the less contamination, and the more animal and organic fertilizers you use the higher contaminants you will have.
Marijuana is not at all harmful like cigarettes. Inhaling any smoke is not good for you, however, the main difference is that marijuana is just a dried out plant which is basically harmless.
Innocuous? Maybe. Harmless? Demonstrably not.
Commercial tobacco, by comparison, is not just a plant but it is loaded with a plethora of toxic chemicals
First off, comparisons with tobacco based smokes is the very definition of damning with faint praise. There is basically nothing redeeming about tobacco based smokes. Second, marijuana has plenty of adverse effects of its own. Just because it isn't as toxic as other products isn't really germane.
Marijuana can also have health benefits
Spare me. "Medical marijuana" is in almost all cases nothing more than a fig leaf to cover people who want to get high. I do not actually care if people want to smoke weed but it offends me that they think I'm so stupid as to think more than a tiny number are doing so for any valid medical reason. I don't have a problem with people using it for actual medicinal properties (and it does appear to have some) but then it should be sold at a pharmacy like any other drug. I really don't have a problem with people smoking weed so long as they do so responsibly. I do have a problem with people pretending it is for medical conditions when it really isn't.
I have never heard of medicinal tobacco.
Tobacco is an important research crop and has its uses. It's not used so much directly as a medication but it does have some positive impact in this regard. Probably the only positive thing about it really.
So move to Colorado/Washington where you can grow your own pot legally. And put as much or as little extra in there as you want.
At least lower one risk.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
No gene, it is called the human nature Every side does this, or atleast it is seen as being that way to the other side.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
Also I can not believe that all the listed ingredients are in a single cigarette.
Why not? It's widely documented.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
I have honestly never ever seen that argument. I have seen,and made the argument that you dont know what is in the vapor, but always seems to be ignored.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
It's not rare at all. Every smoker's grandpa had those lungs.
If you dry out tobacco for smoking, the hippies will call it vile poison and try to have it banned.
If you dry out marijuana for smoking, the hippies will call it a miracle-cure-all medicine and try to have it legalized.
Silly hippies.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
Who said anything about a sign? And how large is the sign? Does it have to be in specific places or can it be hidden? Does it have to be in braille for the blind? What about kids, will the establishment be forced to turn away unaccompanied teenagers?
When you cant win, ad hominem.
And how would I know when I enter a restaurant that half way through my meal the person in the table next to mine is not going to start spewing unknown chemicals in my direction?
They could be required to post a sign on the entrance that states whether it is a smoking, or non-smoking establishment. By the tobacco stench you would probably notice before opening the door more than halfway. Or the ashtrays on the tables might be a clue.
I quit smoking over a decade ago, but I feel there should be places for smokers to do their thing. I prefer to not be around it, but I'm not a militant non-smoker either. Taxes on tobacco does a lot of good. And smokers tend to be less costly on the medical system as well.
Not sure how it works in the States, but the grounding for the EU-wide ban in 2007 was industrial health and safety.
It was intended to protect the establishment's employeees, not people subjected to smoke in their face while dining. That latter effect is just a bonus.
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
Listen to drinky. Nicotine is a really pretty great medicinal. It was Adderall before there was Big Pharma, and it's not a fluke that Native Americans made it a sacrament. The main problem with smoking is not the drug, but the delivery system.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If you're going to ban things that "pollute the common air" based on fear, misinformation, and paranoia I vote we ban scented candles and perfumes.
Scented candles fill the air with an mix of thousands of unknown chemicals. Worse, the FDA has not evaluated their safety! I don't care how much of an idiot you look like with your miniature fires.
Required reading for internet skeptics
Not, they're just stoners who want to justify getting baked all day with some bullshit "Marijuana is the miracle drug of the modern age!" snake-oil horseshit.
Oh this is certainly the case in many places. Cancer is a perfect example. It often requires several genetic mutations for a normal cell to become cancerous, partially because there are many safegaurds against it.
Each individual starts at a random point closer or further away from any particular cancerous state, and in fact, from all of them individually, and this is true not just for cancer but for all manner of subtle variation.
Life is a big game of bet hedging. You toss 100 people naked in the cold, and they will not all die at the same time. Take 100 and toss them in the heat, and you will find the same. Some will survive longer without water, some without food. Its all thousands of subtle variations. Some will be better at developing immunity to flu, some will be better at small pox. If this wasn't true, then we would all be wiped out. Just look at the bannana if you want to know the weakness of monoculture. We don't even eat the same ones our parents did.
Did you know that they have already found drugs that failed in clinical trials, no better than placebo for the general population, but were found to work rather effectively for individuals who had particular genetic variations?
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
maybe if you grow your own or buy in a place that is legal. but illegal marijuana is cut with all sorts of crap that makes it far far worse than the crap tobacco companies put in cigarettes. dealers will cut marijuana with all sorts of shit. and i mean that literally:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.... (tldr: the cdc saw a salmonella outbreak, and traced it to distributors cutting weed with feces)
illegal drugs are horrible to consume as you have zero accountability or responsibility for who put what in it. if something you buy at a store poisons you, you can go after the seller and/ or manufacturer. like this:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/21/... (tldr: company executive faked peanut tests, people died of salmonella poisoning, executive goes to jail for a long time)
in many ways, it's an argument for legalization/ decriminalization/ some sort of safe harbor provision so people aren't being killed by who knows what poison some asshole puts in their drugs. but until such time, you need to either grow your own, move to a place your drug of choice is legal, or find some sort of chain of distribution that you implicitly trust. but taking some pill some low life asshole you don't know says is {XYZ} is a way to get parkinson's disease, cancer, or violently ill
what kind of blows my mind is morons like yourself who rail against evil corporations and modern food growth and distribution, and then will eat/ smoke/ shoot some poison form some random douchebag who is a genuinely amoral asshole
really?
corporations do plenty of evil in the world, but drug dealer's are yet many many levels lower on that measure of integrity or sense of morals. why is that corporations get so much distrust form you, but some shitbag slinging drugs is someone you trust with chemicals you put in your body?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Pot is considered less dangerous because the typical pot smoker smokes way less than your typical cigarette smoker. YMMV.
And do you block all children from entering, or atleast the teenagers coming to eat with friends?
Way to move the goal post. Regardless, I would think it would depend on the legal age for smoking, wouldn't it? Hell, bars already deal with this. If someone's under 21, they have to be accompanied by their guardian in most places. There are tobacco bars as well. Have smoking restaurants follow the same policy.
They contain,
food grade vegetable glycerin
food grade propylene glycol
nicotine
food grade Flavoring agents
Some people will use lab grade which just designates the purity of the substance.
Many point to the flavoring agents as the unknown in the mix. Most are simple essential oils extracted from the plant to provide flavoring. For example, a cool mint e-cig juice will contain a spearmint essential oil.
In most cases, finding out what is in the juice is as simple as reading the list of ingredients on the bottle or the makers website.
All of the ones I have seen stick to stuff that is consumed by people regularly. They dont want the risks of using something that is not food safe.
a great deal of street grade marijuna is very poor quality, may be pesticide or herbicide contaminated, and is very occasionally still laced with PCP in the US
You lie. Not only is this not happening, your little tale doesn't even pass the smell test. Dealers selling bad marijuana are not lacing/spiking it with PCP. The dealers are in this to make money and buying PCP so they can sprinkle on their weed seems like a bad story from a 1982 DARE program speech. What's next, the kid who took LSD and thought he could fly?
How about this instead: a great deal of street grade marijuana is sold because marijuana sells itself. Nothing else needs to be added.
> surveys of the purity of street grade consistently show adulteration with different filler substances and mood-altering substances
Absolutely false.
>very occasionally still laced with PCP in the US
Also an urban myth. There is absolutely no benefit for a dealer to buy a more expensive drug to add to marijuana, given that they would lose money if they didn't outright charge far above street price, and would at that point have to disclose some sort of reasoning. Secondly, nobody buying weed who got something with "laced with PCP" would ever return as a customer (unless they were looking for that to begin with), so it's self defeating in that right as well.
"Perl is my favorite... It's like wiping your ass with unix." - Lord Ender
Also a problem is that smokers tend to saturate their system completely with the insecticide toxins (nicotine is an insecticide that plants naturally evolved). Traditional tobacco and medicinal users smoke occasionally.
That 'rummy' smell of a pickled alcoholic is similar to the saturated nicotine smell of a cigarette addict.
Spare me. "Medical marijuana" is in almost all cases nothing more than a fig leaf to cover people who want to get high
Tell that to the families with children with epilepsy being successfully treated for seizures and other symptoms using cannabis oil. Your information is extremely prejudiced, and out of date. There are many people with debilitating diseases and conditions that cannabis can provide treatment or relief from.
"Perl is my favorite... It's like wiping your ass with unix." - Lord Ender
There is so much fail in this I don't even know where to start.
Marijuana has far more positive health effects than negative. In fact THC the chemical that gets you "high" is anti carcinogenic and has proven cancer fighting effects http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu...
"Purity" of street level product. Oy vey what a statement. You realize your fruits and vegetables have pesticides and herbicides on them as well right? Not to mention all of the nutrient "uptake" from fertilizers is in that plant. You are what you eat, includes plants as well. As for "purity" of the THC content, you either have cheap herb or dank green. Even a plant you grow yourself will have varying quality of THC. In the same way that your vegetables grown in the back yard won't have 100% the same nutritional facts as something grown on a properly fertilized farm.
Finally, PCP laced marijuana? Are you kidding me? Why would any dealer bother lacing weed with PCP? You know PCP is insanely more expensive than marijuana right? Why would a dealer undercut his own prices lacing it with a drug as ridiculous as PCP? Stop quoting DARE literature from 1982.
Want to know a secret about life long tobacco smokers? They're most likely cannabis smokers as well (that anti-carcinogenic effect).
I quit smoking 20 years ago, and now I miss work due to illness once every few years. I sat in on a medical conference back when I smoked, and it seemed like every presenter ended with "...and we never see this disease/condition in anyone under 50...except chronic smokers." I quit soon after that.
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
Medical marijuana has a lot of promise as pain management.
Acetaminophen (paracetamol) doesn't work all that well and can kill your liver if you have a relatively mild overdose.
Ibuprofin and NSAIDs don't work all that well for severe pain and also can have nasty side effects like stomach ulceration.
Opiates do work well, even for severe pain, but they have lots of very nasty side effects, lose effectiveness, and become addictive. These are really horrible drugs.
Humanity is crying out for better painkillers, and marijuana, yes, medical marijuana, has promise there. Or do you not consider management of severe chronic pain a valid medical reason?
And there are not a "tiny number" of people with chronic pain. I'd argue ALL the other drugs are as bad or worse than marijuana for that application.
--PM
i give your troll 2/10
when crafting a good troll, you have to irrationally blame your target for choices that have something to do with them
you get 2 points for the obligatory feigned outrage
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
So the answer here is don't get your marijuana from the "unlicensed pharmacist" on the street corner. Get it from a reputable and licensed retailer instead.
"Nicotine is a really pretty great medicinal."
Perhaps, but I was talking about commercial tobacco -which contains nicotine - but it is very harmful.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
"marijuana...has no chance of causing addiction...it causes _all_ of those according to the reliable medical research."
False. Marijuana is not physically addictive.
"a great deal of street grade marijuna is very poor quality, may be pesticide or herbicide contaminated, and is very occasionally still laced with PCP in the US"
False. Marijuana is very rarely laced with anything. That would be bad for business.
Perhaps you should give up your reefer madness FUD and go smoke a joint for yourself. You might learn something.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
If you're not going to inhale, then please just shut up and pass it on already!
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
Nope. You are comparing apples and car tires.
The only thing that could possibly compared is the amount of tar in a marijuana joint vs a cigarette. Marijuana has more. And that's where the comparison ends.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
Still you should concern yourself of the effect of second hand smoke on others. For those without the Gene, as well for those people who just doesn't like the smell. Attempts for smoking bands in the States (for Tobacco) had no movement until the effects of second hand smoke came across.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
"illegal marijuana is cut with all sorts of crap that makes it far far worse than the crap tobacco companies put in cigarettes"
Maybe on your planet, but here on earth that is not the case at all.
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
Wow, the stupid is strong in this one.
#1 and #2 are on your own property. If you want your property to be smoke free, *thumps up* go for it, that is your right.
#3 is bull shit, driving a car is a privilege not a freedom. That is why you have a license by the state to operate it.
#4) you state: "my freedom to breathe clean air, some vaping or smoking asshole's freedumb to choke everyone around them with their poison"
Wow, just wow. You dont have a freedom to breath clean air. You can however breath all the clean air you want, on your own property and/or in your own house. There is no right to breath clean air. When you exit your house you dont get the choice. It is taken away by that car you drive, the diesel rig that passed you on the highway, The mold growing in your office A/C etc.etc.
If you dont like my smoke or vapor, you do have the right to travel so you can go somewhere else.
Tell that to the families with children with epilepsy being successfully treated for seizures and other symptoms using cannabis oil.
Just as soon as you provide adequate evidence in the form of unambiguous medical studies confirming its effectiveness for the conditions. Right now the evidence for cannibidiol is largely anecdotal and the effectiveness or lack thereof is unclear.
Even if it does work it doesn't follow that because a demonstrably small number of people get genuine medical relief I'm supposed to believe that everybody people seeking marijuana are actually doing so for legitimate medical reasons. You must be either high yourself or dumb if you believe that. I had a dispensary open up (briefly) right next door to my office about 3 years ago. I assure you that NOBODY (or near as makes no difference) that was showing up was the slightest bit ill. These were people looking to get high. The medical exemption was largely an effort for most people to make an end run around federal and state laws against the substance so they could get high. Nothing more.
Your information is extremely prejudiced, and out of date.
Prejudiced? Hardly. I don't give a shit at all if people want to smoke weed recreationally. I just want them to be honest about it and stop pretending that it has anything to do with medicine for all but a tiny handful of cases.
There are many people with debilitating diseases and conditions that cannabis can provide treatment or relief from.
"Many"? Define many. I'll concur that the number is greater than zero. However the real number is a LOT less than the number seeking the product through. My wife is a physician and has been asked plenty of times for a prescription for marijuana by someone with no relevant medical condition.
So I'm fine with the "no smoking" at gov/public sites, but they shouldn't be able to tell a private restaurant owner that he/she has to ban smoking at their establishment.
When you allow members of the general public to walk in and patronize your business (i.e. you aren't a members-only club), your establishment is no longer entirely private. It's been that way in the United States for decades.
Humanity is crying out for better painkillers, and marijuana, yes, medical marijuana, has promise there. Or do you not consider management of severe chronic pain a valid medical reason?
I'll consider it a valid medical treatment when it is sold through a pharmacy like any other drug. It it works for pain management then I am all for it. I'm even willing to accept that there is evidence that it could be an effective treatment for some. HOWEVER, stop conflating the issue. Most people aren't going to get medical marijuana cards for pain management. They are getting them so they can get high. If you believe otherwise you are either naive or you are one of the people trying to get high yourself. I strongly believe that marijuana should be regulated roughly the same as tobacco or alcohol but I'm not dumb enough to believe the transparent arguments that people are making for non-existent medical conditions that conveniently can only be treated by getting high with weed.
If we want to use products of cannabis to treat medical conditions then that is fine but let's do it just like we do for any other drug. It needs to go through the FDA and be tested in double blind studies just like any other drug. Show me the evidence and the properly conducted medical studies and I'm 100% on board if it works.
And there are not a "tiny number" of people with chronic pain. I'd argue ALL the other drugs are as bad or worse than marijuana for that application.
And you received your medical degree from where exactly? You've already spouted off a bunch of half informed nonsense to try to make the side effects of existing medications sound more horrible than they really are. You've also only selected a few of the many pain killers out there. I've dealt with pain management with family members personally including my mother right now. Your argument demonstrates to me that you have no idea what you are talking about on that topic.
smoke kills
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
And a good bonus at that. I seldom visited a restaurant before that ban because I find smoke disgusting.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
I did not move the goal posts in any way. It goes tiredly towards your sign comment, which implies that adults are allowed to make up their mind about what places they enter. This is less so for kids, so just a simple sign does not work.
But you have basically come to the end conclusion of a "club" which can already exist.
When you cant win, ad hominem.
it's an ok troll. i give you 5 out 10. you tried hard, but it was overall weak and unconvincing
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Not sure I follow.
The comparison is "perceived health effect of marijuana smoke vs perceived health effects of cigarette smoke."
Maybe its only tar as you say, maybe its not. I make no claims either way.
If its just tar than my statement holds up: Despite marijuana having more tar, pot smokers use a smaller volume of product than tobacco smokers so there is less of a marijuana tar problem regardless of the per gram tar ratios.
If its more than just tar than the statement still holds up for those as well.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
But you have basically come to the end conclusion of a "club" which can already exist.
That depends on the location. In Maryland, you cannot. The only way it is legal to have the main purpose to be retail sale of tobacco. I actually bring that particular state up as I lived there when they banned smoking. The way the original law was written, it also defined a public place by the number of different people who accessed it during a set period of time. The number was very low and many people's homes would have counted as a public place.
According to Wikipedia Of the 28 states that have smoking bans on public places, only 7 (AZ, CT, IA, KS, MA, NY, OH) allow for private clubs that permit it.
As far as I could tell, the states that exempt bars, do so only if they do not admit anyone under the age of 21. So your question about children appears to already to have been addressed.
Why does "perceived" benefit matter at all? People perceive stuff wrongly all the time. It's not rocket science that inhaling any kind of smoke containing any kind of burned particles is going to have some amount of deleterious effect on one's lungs. In the days of legitimate, sub-60 dollar vaporizors (real ones, not the pseudo vape pens) you're basically an idiot for doing it, but whatever, we all do stuff that's bad for our health.
I join you in your vote. (Even though you seem to be kidding, I would be well pleased if that ban were voted in . . . and enforced with my daughter.)
So, now we know what's "in the juice", but what's in the vapor?
That + water
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
I find it highly unlikely that people who are behaving in a manner which is rude or reckless have deliberately developed a philosophical basis to justify their behavior.
Anyone interested in liberty from a societal standpoint knows that there can be no freedom which infringes on the freedom of others. Most liberty activists also hold private property rights in high regard, so I can't imagine an argument for allowing one's animal to defile the property of others.
At least try talking to your neighbors before calling men with badges and guns to mediate the dispute for you. I've never had a problem with a neighbor that couldn't be settled with dialogue. Most of the time, it's a case of one person having no clue that they were even bothering the other.
"a great deal of street grade marijuna is very poor quality, may be pesticide or herbicide contaminated, and is very occasionally still laced with PCP in the US"
False. Marijuana is very rarely laced with anything. That would be bad for business.
You just claimed a statement was false and then claimed as true a statement which means essentially the same thing. You're high right now, aren't you?
Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
And what are the effects of inhaling vaporized food grade propylene glycol?
Is one of the effects that lung tissue becomes coated in a substance that more readily captures particulate matter as well as gaseous carcinogens and other toxins? What interactions with other compounds? I respected coworker of mine that used to vape mentioned having come across studies that suggested it's not all great news on this front. I'm too lazy to dig for information to confirm or deny this myself.
Eating something is not the same as breathing it. I myself am in the process of using e-cigarettes as a substitute for cigarettes, and while I hope that this is a less-unhealthy alternative, I acknowledge that I have no basis to make such a claim. I'm hoping that I'll be able to kick the habit entirely soon enough and that it'll all be worth it in the end.
you're saying you have the right to pollute public spaces with your filth?
and we can't object to that?
you mean you actually believe that honestly?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
A genetic test that defines who can smoke an who can't, great.
Oh, much, much, more interesting: a genetic variation that allows certain people to maintain the function of a huge and delicate sponge of gas-exchange membrane despite heavy dosing with a grab bag of carcinogens, incomplete organic combustion products, and all sorts of unpleasantness.
The ability to smoke without consequence is peanuts compared to some of the possible applications of working out how that effect is created.
This is what Government does for you, makes our future generations weaker, and makes our current generation of companies weaker.
Any regulation thought up the Washington bureaucrats the takes away the potential profits of a legitimate product is nothing but theft.
Remember the constitutions folks, it starts: We, the corporations of America, in Order to form a more perfect economy ...
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
I'm not sure why anyone who wanted to use nicotine would choose the method that smells awful, severely limits your options in public, and will probably trash your lungs when you can get the same active ingredient in other delivery mechanisms; but nicotine actually has all sorts of interesting properties. The most intriguing, but poorly understood(surprise surprise, given the level of understanding in the area generally), are probably the ones that show up in people with schizophrenia. Effects are less dramatic in the general population; but plants evolved nicotine to interact with pests' nervous systems, so it does tickle the brain in various ways.
That said, even if we stopped being idiots about delivery method; nicotine is [i]crazy[/i] addictive, so it's a bit harder to recommend picking it up on the basis of some intriguing but unverified talk.It isn't terribly harmful if you aren't huffing burning cigarettes like an idiot; but it still punches well above its weight on habit formation.
"may one day help scientists develop better treatments for diseases"
Enough already! Any post with this statement in it should be placed in the same bit bucket as "supermoon".
you do realize stupid and irresponsible people exist, right? it's not about a fucking philosophy you social retard, i'm describing a system of behavior without any conscious effort. people actually commit acts in your world without going "hmm, how do my current actions in this context relate to my overarching ideological motivation?"
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
You have the right to object to it (Freedom of speech) No issue there.
Places like Restaurants, Bar's, Shopping Mall's, etc. are privately owned. IMO they have the right to decide how they want there property used. Thus they can decide to be smoking or not / and you can decide to utilize there space or not.
Outside, well if you dont like it tough shit. You dont have to stand next to me, there is lots of open space on the planet. You can move.
A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Smoking doesn't "cause" cancer, unless you are genetically predisposed for cancer. My grandfather, born in the late 1800's, started smoking unfiltered cigarettes, as an 18 year old draftee in WW1. He smoked unfiltered cigarettes until the 1970's. He quit cold turkey, because, and I quote "I'm not paying no d*mn 75 cents for a pack of d*mn cigrettes". (I could just imagine what he would say now. He lived until he was 99 years, 3 months old. He even had a pacemaker at age 85. When the doc was telling my parents, his caregivers, about what to do/not do, one of the things was to transmit the data via a phone link once a week or something, to monitor the condition of the battery. My grandfather heard battery, and asked the doc how you change the battery. Doc told him that at his age, he shouldn't worry about wearing the battery out. Grandfather didn't miss a beat....Doc, I've already outlived THREE doctors. My parents smoked from the early 1950's, until the mid 70's when their children just flat got tired of the stink. Both in their 80's with no cancer. I think the whole tobacco as the "bad guy" is overblown. Yes, smoking isn't the best thing to put in your LUNGS, considering all the chemicals, but, to say smoking causes cancer, is not really true either, if you have a genetic predisposition for cancer. Considering how much the government gets via a tobacco tax, you'd think they would just love it if EVERYONE smoked tobacco products.
Marijuana has been illegal in all states until recently, and is still illegal at the Federal level. Under those circumstances, it's going to be hard to run double-blind studies. The stuff appears to provide some benefits for some people.
The medicinal uses are for muscle spasms, chronic pain, to suppress nausea in people undergoing chemotherapy, as an appetite enhancer for people with HIV, and (from what I've heard) glaucoma and epilepsy. None of these are necessarily going to be apparent in people on the sidewalk near your office.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
It's rarely a good idea to reply to an AC but I'll bite. I'm not saying it's good or bad for you, I don't know but propylene glycol is the same stuff they use in artificial fog for stage smoke machines. I haven't heard of too many stage manager deaths related to smoke machines. Given the time I spent in rock clubs in my youth I'm sure I've inhaled gallons of the stuff. While it doesn't appear carcinogenic, it can be related to respiratory irritation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Often mis-attributed to Oliver Wendell Holmes, the succinct phrase "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins." sums this sentiment up nicely.
Do you have any idea how much nicotine S C Wright, J Zhong, H Zheng and J W Larrick had to give to lab rats to get to a level where apoptosis was sufficiently inhibited to promote tumor growth? And did you know that the tumors already had to be caused by something else, that wasn't nicotine?
You think there are no pharmaceuticals that are poisons? Don't be a fool. Shall we list the pharmaceuticals that also inhibit apoptosis? They're using caspase inhibitors right now to treat spinal cord injuries with drugs that have about 100 times more apoptosis inhibition than nicotine.
For that matter, why do we use pesticides on our food? Why do we design special GMOs just so we can use more pesticides on our food?
Don't be so simple-minded. Nicotine at the levels casual users use does not cause cancer. It's the delivery system in smoking that causes cancer. And do you not know that there's arsenic in apples? Will you now start posting anti-apple FUD?
You are welcome on my lawn.
i can't imagine anyone honestly believes they have the right to impose on the freedom of others
but apparently he does, and you can't even keep track of the fucking subject matter. i suppose you're the real troll, or genuinely a stupid person, considering this thread
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
you're changing the topic. a public space is a public space. not the middle of the prairie but, just like you said: restaurants, bars, malls, etc
i'll take the lame subject change as you conceding my point in an intellectually dishonest way
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
it does, thank you
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, it can be mildly addictive. Their claims are modest, and credible.
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publi...
It's difficult to estimate the frequency of contamination of marijuana with other substances. But fairly frequent contamination is documented in "Cannabis and Cannabinoids: Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Therapeutic Potential", By Ethan B Russo
https://books.google.com/books...
Ethan cites Johnson's old study of 8000 samples, with a wide array of contaminants, including tobacco and PCP. Johnson's study was from 30 years ago: an article in the Smithsonian magazine from March, 2015 cites the increasing levels of heavy metals and mold in modern marijuana:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...
So I'm afraid that the idea that pot is automatically uncontaminated and therefore safer than tobacco is ill-founded. It may be _less_ harmful, and have a _lower_ level of contamination. But it's apparently quite frequent to find things in actual testing that should not be in pot for human use.
That is an oversimplification. First of all where I live relatively few places ban e-cigs, the few that do ban them is more about people not wanting cloaks of smoke, or nicotine steam, sprewed on them.
But to be honest you do not know what is in the vaps. Are they using the "safe" liquids you can buy at the store, or did they mix their own and have other "unsafe" chemicals in them. You are free to smoke, you are not free to poison me.
You do a lot more poison damage than I do, even where I to smoke 5 packs of ciggies a day. What's that? You want to keep your energy-sucking lifestyle? Yeah, well, I think I'll keep my pack a day.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
you're saying you have the right to pollute public spaces with your filth?
Nope. You said that you should be able to do it using your car, but you want to limit anyone else smoking ciggies who will never even come close to the amount of pollution you put out.
Tyrannical, hypocritical and stupid - well, done, you made a hat-trick.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
What I am saying is that you dont have the right to tell others how to live there life or how to run there business just because you want to go there.
As such, what you think are public spaces are not, they are private spaces that are used by the public and the private owners have the right to do as they see fit with their space. Just as a business has the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason they see fit.
exactly
like smoking or vaping. you're telling people "smell my shit, deal with it." what the fuck gives you the right?
what's odd is your blindness in thinking that telling someone to stop imposing their smelly shit on other people... is the actual initial imposition, somehow
you think telling someone to stop smoking or vaping is a limit on freedom, but you don't think the smell of that cancerous shit is a limit on freedom?
that's some amazing blindness, low intelligence, and/ or willful selfish disregard, you social retard
either way, you genuinely have no fucking clue what freedom is. you think the concept applies only to you, and no one else. this makes you a selfish, stupid piece of shit. not an empty insult, an objective description of your low intelligence "opinion," such as it is. you genuinely are not anyone who loves or understands what freedom is. really, that's the ironclad truth, as evidenced in your words. you're just an irresponsible, immature, selfish douchebag. i feel sorry for people who have to deal with your toxic self-serving bullshit in real life. stop talking about freedom. it has nothing to do with who you are and what you think. nothing at all
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
as long as you don't smoke anywhere near me. And would it killyou to use a breath mint. You guys stink.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
You have no idea whether the people were sick or not. Try going to a sports event and point out all the people with cancer or aids.
A point that might need to be examined is -- how do the various ingredients interact when heated? Do they combine to make some less healthful chemical? Is it significantly more harmful than what you might fry up for dinner?
Tho even if not quite harmless, it still doubtless compares quite favorably to the array of ring carbon compounds etc. in cig smoke.
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Until you burn it in order to inhale it and then things start getting tricky. Also the level of tar in high THC concentration weed is much higher than that of cigarettes.
Read the above again, I am saying the land owner, business owner, home owner, car owner, etc. has the right. Not you and not me, We can only decide if we want to go there, or do business with them.
You are the one who seems to think you have the right to tell other people what to do with their property.
Freedom is a box. This is my box and I control it, that is your box and you control it. What I do in my box is my business and what you do in yours is your business. You can not tell me what to do in my box and I can not tell you what to do in yours.
BTW, there is no freedom from smells. Get out of NY City and onto a farm and you lean that very quickly.
Replace "urban myth" with "government propaganda" and you would have it exactly right.
I truly hope that you are someday afflicted by an illness that is easily treated with cannabis. I also hope that you still have a prejudice against it so that you will suffer through the illness without medication.
Sentences, full. Write them.