Look, I can find academic papers that support my claim and cite them too, but the fact is that there isn’t nearly enough data on cannabis consumption to reach a scientific consensus. We know that putting toxins in your lungs is bad for your health overall, but I don’t agree that we can, in the same sentence, say “cannabis good, tobacco bad”. They’re both bad for you, and adults should be allowed to make their own decisions about when and how to use them.
Here, I’m not paying for full access to this paper, but it cites the paper you linked to and this one has itself been cited more often.
Marijuana use and risk of lung cancer: a 40-year cohort study
Russell C Callaghan, Peter Allebeck, Anna Sidorchuk
Cancer Causes & Control 24 (10), 1811-1820, 2013
Purpose
Cannabis (marijuana) smoke and tobacco smoke contain many of the same potent carcinogens, but a critical—yet unresolved—medical and public-health issue is whether cannabis smoking might facilitate the development of lung cancer. The current study aimed to assess the risk of lung cancer among young marijuana users.
Conclusion
Our primary finding provides initial longitudinal evidence that cannabis use might elevate the risk of lung cancer. In light of the widespread use of marijuana, especially among adolescents and young adults, our study provides important data for informing the risk–benefit calculus of marijuana smoking in medical, public-health, and drug-policy settings.
I never said cannabis is good for you. We know for a fact, conclusively, that tobacco causes cancer. Cannabis, on the other hand, may or may not cause cancer. It’s not conclusive. Even the paper you’ve quoted states “might elevate the risk”.
But regardless, I never said “cannabis good”, I said “tobacco bad”.
You didn’t need to say cannabis was good, you suggested that it was better that we think of the plant smoked as cannabis than tobacco as to warn people about the societal ills of tobacco use.
I’m not going to do a lit review of all of the studies about cannabis risk for you, I just picked an article that cited the one you provided with a different conclusion. The point is that there is no academic consensus on this and we don’t need to revise LOTR because of your feelings about tobacco.
Bro I think you might need to back off with the ad hominems.
You’re getting very worked up about the comments of a memes page on a piece of fiction.
It’s not my fault you chose a paper that doesn’t back up your own point.
Jackson chose to portray pipe weed as cannabis. Tolkien wrote it as tobacco. Tobacco is incredibly harmful, to portray pipe weed as cannabis rather than tobacco in future adaptations doesn’t harm the gist of the story in any way. It adds a bit of fun (like Merry and Pippin stoned out their faces raiding Saruman’s stores) and prevents the glorification of what we now know to be an incredibly harmful substance. Tobacco is in the same classification as asbestos for harm, according to the WHO. Would you like to breathe in some asbestos?
Look, I can find academic papers that support my claim and cite them too, but the fact is that there isn’t nearly enough data on cannabis consumption to reach a scientific consensus. We know that putting toxins in your lungs is bad for your health overall, but I don’t agree that we can, in the same sentence, say “cannabis good, tobacco bad”. They’re both bad for you, and adults should be allowed to make their own decisions about when and how to use them.
Here, I’m not paying for full access to this paper, but it cites the paper you linked to and this one has itself been cited more often.
Marijuana use and risk of lung cancer: a 40-year cohort study
Russell C Callaghan, Peter Allebeck, Anna Sidorchuk
Cancer Causes & Control 24 (10), 1811-1820, 2013
Purpose
Cannabis (marijuana) smoke and tobacco smoke contain many of the same potent carcinogens, but a critical—yet unresolved—medical and public-health issue is whether cannabis smoking might facilitate the development of lung cancer. The current study aimed to assess the risk of lung cancer among young marijuana users.
Conclusion
Our primary finding provides initial longitudinal evidence that cannabis use might elevate the risk of lung cancer. In light of the widespread use of marijuana, especially among adolescents and young adults, our study provides important data for informing the risk–benefit calculus of marijuana smoking in medical, public-health, and drug-policy settings.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=946268550444709876&as_sdt=5%2C30&sciodt=0%2C30&hl=en#d=gs_qabs&t=1762525435931&u=%23p%3D9kkM3NKxiJUJ
You’re arguing with yourself here.
I never said cannabis is good for you. We know for a fact, conclusively, that tobacco causes cancer. Cannabis, on the other hand, may or may not cause cancer. It’s not conclusive. Even the paper you’ve quoted states “might elevate the risk”.
But regardless, I never said “cannabis good”, I said “tobacco bad”.
Bro I think you might need a T break.
You didn’t need to say cannabis was good, you suggested that it was better that we think of the plant smoked as cannabis than tobacco as to warn people about the societal ills of tobacco use.
I’m not going to do a lit review of all of the studies about cannabis risk for you, I just picked an article that cited the one you provided with a different conclusion. The point is that there is no academic consensus on this and we don’t need to revise LOTR because of your feelings about tobacco.
Bro I think you might need to back off with the ad hominems.
You’re getting very worked up about the comments of a memes page on a piece of fiction.
It’s not my fault you chose a paper that doesn’t back up your own point.
Jackson chose to portray pipe weed as cannabis. Tolkien wrote it as tobacco. Tobacco is incredibly harmful, to portray pipe weed as cannabis rather than tobacco in future adaptations doesn’t harm the gist of the story in any way. It adds a bit of fun (like Merry and Pippin stoned out their faces raiding Saruman’s stores) and prevents the glorification of what we now know to be an incredibly harmful substance. Tobacco is in the same classification as asbestos for harm, according to the WHO. Would you like to breathe in some asbestos?