GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Smoking a joint is equivalent to 20 cigarettes in terms of lung cancer (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=803461)

Paco, of Large Cash. 01-29-2008 10:37 AM

WOW, Hateman!! I am guessing you did not chose your nic. Rather, it was given to you, for your ability to earn it so easily.

Now you have issues with homosexuality. This from a hateful insulting person whom works in the porn industry.

Go back to church, get on your knees, slip your skull under the preacher's frock and hum for forgiveness.

Fletch XXX 01-29-2008 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fletch XXX (Post 13713063)
trolls often reply with statements they know not to be true.

Its one of the most uncreative forms of trolling for replies.

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=803496

http://www.rentatroll.com

hateman 01-29-2008 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyber-Hu$tler (Post 13713199)
Why are you avoiding the question? Are you some kind of hypocrite?

From this point on, you are on ignore list for being a fag.

Talk to the hand, idiot :1orglaugh

CyberHustler 01-29-2008 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh You're an idiot

Paco, of Large Cash. 01-29-2008 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

LOL!!!

Exactly what do you think AAA is all about?

It's not a support group for people whom have issues with agro people!

CyberHustler 01-29-2008 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713269)
From this point on, you are on ignore list for being a fag.

Talk to the hand, idiot :1orglaugh

What an emotional little bitch lol...

WarChild 01-29-2008 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

Whoa, hold up champ, you've got it backwards.

Alcohol is physically addictive. Severe addicts suffer from "alcoholic shakes" ranging from mild to life threatening. YOU CAN DIE. http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/withd.../aa000125a.htm .

Marijuana, however, has no known phsyically addictive properties. :2 cents:

Brother Bilo 01-29-2008 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

Man, you aren't even a good troll. If you're gonna troll, at least be funny with it. You suck at this dude. :helpme

spunkmister 01-29-2008 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sortie (Post 13713212)
So weed is 20 times as bad but 20 times more people died who didn't smoke it. :1orglaugh

to be fair there are only like 100 people in NZ and about 300 million sheep so 20 people is a big chunk of the population ;-)

kowalsky 01-29-2008 10:45 AM

This is not true. Cancer is not a mathematical issue.

Of course any thing different than pure air produce something bad to your lungs, but to make a mathematical relation is a very stupid thing.

hateman 01-29-2008 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paco, of Large Cash. (Post 13713277)
LOL!!!

Exactly what do you think AAA is all about?

It's about retards like you.

You got to be a total fucking idiot and a loser to get addicted to alcohol.

I drink on occasions and never feel the urge to binge on it.


But almost all dopers can't go a day without getting stoned.

D 01-29-2008 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/b...tten-troll.jpg

Bryan G 01-29-2008 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713328)
It's about retards like you.

You got to be a total fucking idiot and a loser to get addicted to alcohol.

I drink on occasions and never feel the urge to binge on it.


But almost all dopers can't go a day without getting stoned.

"Alcohol is not addictive", gotta be the quote of the year :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

horvy 01-29-2008 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by J. Falcon (Post 13712621)
vaporizer.


:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup:thumbsup

hateman 01-29-2008 10:59 AM

Look at all the dumb hippy stoners frothing in this thread!

Priceless

:1orglaugh

notoldschool 01-29-2008 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

qouted for ignorance.

horvy 01-29-2008 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.


thats goin in my sig.

Paco, of Large Cash. 01-29-2008 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713328)
I drink on occasions..

..and are the poster child for why it too should be made illegal. You are as agro as meth, or crack head, that's coming the carpet for the lost rock!

You are a premature poster! You verbally ejaculate before your zipper is even down!


Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713328)
But almost all dopers can't go a day without getting stoned.

twat a sweeping generalization. I guess your not having any (real) friends in your life, as well your being total self-centered, means you do not have anybody close to you to see that that statement is far from true.


Uhm, exactly what did your parents do to you to make turn out like this?

I almost feel sorry for you.

Forest 01-29-2008 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dirty F (Post 13712542)
No no, according to all the stoners (who, in their own words, arent addicted, they just smoke all day long) weed is some kind of miracle drug which does more good than bad to your body.

while pot does have alot of medicinal uses it is far more destructive to the lungs then cigs.

pizzaid 01-29-2008 11:06 AM

cigarettes fucking suck!!!! I hate when people light up around me if you smoke i hope you get a fucking (HOLE IN YOUR THROAT)....

After Shock Media 01-29-2008 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cool1 (Post 13713241)
Basically marijuana being made illegal had nothing to do with smoking it! It had everything to do with big business, DUPONT and MONSANTO and DOW, wanting to makes billions of dollars on clothing made of crappy plastic fibers = Polyester and Nylon as well as other products that hemp would have kept them from making as much money on!

It had nothing to do with that and that is just tinfoil hat territory. It had just about everything to do with an issue we current have today, illegal Mexicans. Just back then at first we needed their labor so it was cool, then the depression hit and people wanted to make them take their asses back to Mexico. So they applied the same tax law that they applied to machine guns in order to make it illegal. Reality was though that the Federal Government wanted nothing to do with it and felt it was a state issue yet the border states forced it.

The Southern states forced cocaine onto the list by associating it with black men sexually violating white women, often by force. Which also was untrue. It was a drug that companies often gave to their dock workers so that they could have them work longer shifts without getting tired.

notoldschool 01-29-2008 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by horvy (Post 13713445)
thats goin in my sig.

:1orglaugh It is a classic statement fo sho.

Bassmaster 01-29-2008 11:10 AM

http://tv.yahoo.com/show/492/photos/5

Drugs are bad MMM kay!!!:1orglaugh

After Shock Media 01-29-2008 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forest (Post 13713474)
while pot does have alot of medicinal uses it is far more destructive to the lungs then cigs.

Again that is a statement based more on illegally produced Government propaganda than anything else. Medical studies showed even to the surprise of the performing doctors that marijuana had the opposite effect of what they figured. Lung destruction, increased cancer risks, and the like.

Just like straight untreated tobacco is nowhere as near damaging to you as commercially produced ciggerettes.

polish_aristocrat 01-29-2008 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat (Post 13712547)
speaking about lung cancer, anyone know the exact stats?


if a person is smoking a pack of cigs daily for a 30 year old period - how likely is he to develop lung cancer?

anyone know the % for that?

no one knows?

you can find stats on what is your risk of getting infected with HIV dependent on the sexual act with a HIV positive person, but there are no stats for getting lung cuncer after 30 years of smoking?

sltr 01-29-2008 11:15 AM

i wonder how big those joints were.

polish_aristocrat 01-29-2008 11:15 AM

hmm found some site:


http://www.ricancercouncil.org/cance...ncer-facts.php

Quote:

Overall, Americans have about a 7% chance of developing Lung Cancer at some point during their lifetimes.

SMOKING - Studies have shown that smoking is responsible for 90% OF ALL LUNG CANCER CASES

Lung Cancer is a very difficult disease to treat and is often not diagnosed until it is in a later stage. It is possible for Lung Cancer to be treated, but in many cases the cancer is too far along to be completely removed. The national five-year survival rate after diagnosis of Lung Cancer is 11-14%
:(

WarChild 01-29-2008 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polish_aristocrat (Post 13713524)
no one knows?

you can find stats on what is your risk of getting infected with HIV dependent on the sexual act with a HIV positive person, but there are no stats for getting lung cuncer after 30 years of smoking?

How do you get HIV? You are either infected with the virus or you are not.

Cancer, on the other hand, can not be broken down that easily. Genetics, enviroment, lifestyle and other factors all play an important roll.

BlackCrayon 01-29-2008 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713242)
Alcohol is not addictive, you retard.

You have obviously never seen someone go through alcohol withdrawl. Its not pretty.

Forest 01-29-2008 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by After Shock Media (Post 13713516)
Again that is a statement based more on illegally produced Government propaganda than anything else. Medical studies showed even to the surprise of the performing doctors that marijuana had the opposite effect of what they figured. Lung destruction, increased cancer risks, and the like.

Just like straight untreated tobacco is nowhere as near damaging to you as commercially produced ciggerettes.

Im am speaking from personal experience.

I was a 24/7 smoker of killer green bud for 20+ years. Since quitting my lung capacity and function has increased dramatically according to my dr.

I dont know what the government propaganda is about the drug. I do believe it should be legalized but I do believe its more harmfull then cigs.

BlackCrayon 01-29-2008 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forest (Post 13713633)
Im am speaking from personal experience.

I was a 24/7 smoker of killer green bud for 20+ years. Since quitting my lung capacity and function has increased dramatically according to my dr.

I dont know what the government propaganda is about the drug. I do believe it should be legalized but I do believe its more harmfull then cigs.

Let me guess, you still smoke cigarettes.

After Shock Media 01-29-2008 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Forest (Post 13713633)
Im am speaking from personal experience.

I was a 24/7 smoker of killer green bud for 20+ years. Since quitting my lung capacity and function has increased dramatically according to my dr.

I dont know what the government propaganda is about the drug. I do believe it should be legalized but I do believe its more harmfull then cigs.

Scientific studies have shown that not to be the case though. Yet I am not about to say inhalling any form of smoke into your lungs is healthful either. So if you shall use it use a vaporizer, tonic, or just eat it.

Then those that use joints also get effects of the paper and thoe who like blunts get processed tobacco added into the mix to boot.

WarChild 01-29-2008 11:38 AM

It's never good to inhale super heated gas in to the lungs. However, the largest study done to date clearly shows NO link between Lung Cancer and Marijuana smoke.

Some have theorized that some property of Marijuana may actively destroy weak or dying cells, leaving only strong and more cancer resistant cells.

hateman 01-29-2008 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild (Post 13713675)
the largest study done to date clearly shows NO link between Lung Cancer and Marijuana smoke.

Got link?

WarChild 01-29-2008 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713686)
Got link?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...L&type=science

After Shock Media 01-29-2008 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild (Post 13713675)
It's never good to inhale super heated gas in to the lungs. However, the largest study done to date clearly shows NO link between Lung Cancer and Marijuana smoke.

Some have theorized that some property of Marijuana may actively destroy weak or dying cells, leaving only strong and more cancer resistant cells.

Problem is, that this will be their last study allowed as it is fairly well known that if you perform a study and want the marijuana exemption that legally allows you to study the drug you must only post negative results which ussually and almost always are overturned by another country who are not so draconian when it comes to drug studies.

xroach 01-29-2008 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713686)
Got link?

posted 3 of them a page ago

hateman 01-29-2008 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild (Post 13713701)

"The new findings "were against our expectations," said Dr. Donald Tashkin, a UCLA pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years."

This pothead has been getting stoned for 30 years straight.

Yeah, he's not biased.

:1orglaugh

WarChild 01-29-2008 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713741)
"The new findings "were against our expectations," said Dr. Donald Tashkin, a UCLA pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years."

This pothead has been getting stoned for 30 years straight.

Yeah, he's not biased.

:1orglaugh

Uhhh it doesn't say he smokes pot. The goverment has been using his findings for a long time AGAINST Marijuana.

SmokeyTheBear 01-29-2008 11:53 AM

gives you low sperm count also , thats why hippies never have any kids..

hateman 01-29-2008 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild (Post 13713759)
Uhhh it doesn't say he smokes pot. The goverment has been using his findings for a long time AGAINST Marijuana.

Are you in denial?

hateman 01-29-2008 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarChild (Post 13713701)

"Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. "

dstaff 01-29-2008 12:01 PM

these facts are skewed against MANY MANY other better studies done.

WarChild 01-29-2008 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713774)
Are you in denial?

In Denial of what? I sort of doubt this doctor is what you describe as a pothead.

However, even if he did smoke everyday for 30 years like you claim, he'd still enormously more qualified by virtue of being a Pulmanologist than somebody like say you, as a source of information about Lung Cancer.

Of course, you don't actually want to discuss or debate any subject, you just want to stir up emotions so there's no sense trying to educate you.

dstaff 01-29-2008 12:04 PM

https://youtube.com/watch?v=Cp2Ntjridp0

10-20 joints a day for 25 years. His lungs are in PERFECT condition

notoldschool 01-29-2008 12:05 PM

Annual Causes of Death in the United States
Tobacco 435,0001 --------------------------------------------------BINGO
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,0001
Alcohol 85,000 1
Microbial Agents 75,0001
Toxic Agents 55,0001
Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,3471
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,0002
Suicide 30,6223
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,0001
Homicide 20,3084
Sexual Behaviors 20,0001
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,0001, 5
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,6006
Marijuana 07 --------------------------------------------------BINGO


(2000): "The leading causes of death in 2000 were tobacco (435,000 deaths; 18.1% of total US deaths), poor diet and physical inactivity (400,000 deaths; 16.6%), and alcohol consumption (85,000 deaths; 3.5%). Other actual causes of death were microbial agents (75,000), toxic agents (55,000), motor vehicle crashes (43,000), incidents involving firearms (29,000), sexual behaviors (20,000), and illicit use of drugs (17,000)."
(Note: According to a correction published by the Journal on Jan. 19, 2005, "On page 1240, in Table 2, '400,000 (16.6)' deaths for 'poor diet and physical inactivity' in 2000 should be '365,000 (15.2).' A dagger symbol should be added to 'alcohol consumption' in the body of the table and a dagger footnote should be added with 'in 1990 data, deaths from alcohol-related crashes are included in alcohol consumption deaths, but not in motor vehicle deaths. In 2000 data, 16,653 deaths from alcohol-related crashes are included in both alcohol consumption and motor vehicle death categories." Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, Jan. 19, 2005, Vol. 293, No. 3, p. 298.)

Source: Mokdad, Ali H., PhD, James S. Marks, MD, MPH, Donna F. Stroup, PhD, MSc, Julie L. Gerberding, MD, MPH, "Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000," Journal of the American Medical Association, March 10, 2004, Vol. 291, No. 10, pp. 1238, 1241.


(2000): "Illicit drug use is associated with suicide, homicide, motor-vehicle injury, HIV infection, pneumonia, violence, mental illness, and hepatitis. An estimated 3 million individuals in the United States have serious drug problems. Several studies have reported an undercount of the number of deaths attributed to drugs by vital statistics; however, improved medical treatments have reduced mortality from many diseases associated with illicit drug use. In keeping with the report by McGinnis and Foege, we included deaths caused indirectly by illicit drug use in this category. We used attributable fractions to compute the number of deaths due to illicit drug use. Overall, we estimate that illicit drug use resulted in approximately 17000 deaths in 2000, a reduction of 3000 deaths from the 1990 report."

Source: Mokdad, Ali H., PhD, James S. Marks, MD, MPH, Donna F. Stroup, PhD, MSc, Julie L. Gerberding, MD, MPH, "Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000," Journal of the American Medical Association, March 10, 2004, Vol. 291, No. 10, p. 1242.


(2003): The US Centers for Disease Control reports that in 2003, there were a total of 31,484 deaths from suicide in the US.

Source: Hoyert, Donna L., PhD, Heron, Melonie P., PhD, Murphy, Sherry L., BS, Kung, Hsiang-Ching, PhD; Division of Vital Statistics, "Deaths: Final Data for 2003," National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, No. 13 (Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, April 19, 2006), p. 5, Table C.


(2003): The US Centers for Disease Control reports that in 2003, there were a total of 17,732 deaths from homicide in the US.

Source: Hoyert, Donna L., PhD, Heron, Melonie P., PhD, Murphy, Sherry L., BS, Kung, Hsiang-Ching, PhD; Division of Vital Statistics, "Deaths: Final Data for 2003," National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, No. 13 (Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, April 19, 2006), p. 5, Table C.


(2003): "In 2003, a total of 28,723 persons died of drug-induced causes in the United States (Tables 21 and 22). The category 'drug-induced causes' includes not only deaths from dependent and nondependent use of drugs (legal and illegal use), but also poisoning from medically prescribed and other drugs. It excludes unintentional injuries, homicides, and other causes indirectly related to drug use. Also excluded are newborn deaths due to mother’s drug use."

Source: Hoyert, Donna L., PhD, Heron, Melonie P., PhD, Murphy, Sherry L., BS, Kung, Hsiang-Ching, PhD; Division of Vital Statistics, "Deaths: Final Data for 2003," National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, No. 13 (Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, April 19, 2006), p. 10.


(2003): "In 2003, a total of 20,687 persons died of alcohol-induced causes in the United States (Tables 23 and 24). The category 'alcohol-induced causes' includes not only deaths from dependent and nondependent use of alcohol, but also accidental poisoning by alcohol. It excludes unintentional injuries, homicides, and other causes indirectly related to alcohol use as well as deaths due to fetal alcohol syndrome."

Source: Hoyert, Donna L., PhD, Heron, Melonie P., PhD, Murphy, Sherry L., BS, Kung, Hsiang-Ching, PhD; Division of Vital Statistics, "Deaths: Final Data for 2003," National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 54, No. 13 (Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, April 19, 2006), p. 10.


(1996): "Each year, use of NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs) accounts for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the United States." (NSAIDs include aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, and tiaprofenic acid.)

Source: Robyn Tamblyn, PhD; Laeora Berkson, MD, MHPE, FRCPC; W. Dale Jauphinee, MD, FRCPC; David Gayton, MD, PhD, FRCPC; Roland Grad, MD, MSc; Allen Huang, MD, FRCPC; Lisa Isaac, PhD; Peter McLeod, MD, FRCPC; and Linda Snell, MD, MHPE, FRCPC, "Unnecessary Prescribing of NSAIDs and the Management of NSAID-Related Gastropathy in Medical Practice," Annals of Internal Medicine (Washington, DC: American College of Physicians, 1997), September 15, 1997, 127:429-438, from the web at http://www.acponline.org/journals/an...ep97/nsaid.htm, last accessed Feb. 14, 2001, citing Fries, JF, "Assessing and understanding patient risk," Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology Supplement, 1992;92:21-4.


(Average 1982-1998): According to Canadian researchers, approximately 32,000 hospitalized patients (and possibly as many as 106,000) in the USA die each year because of adverse reactions to their prescribed medications.

Source: Lazarou, J, Pomeranz, BH, Corey, PN, "Incidence of adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients: a meta-analysis of prospective studies," Journal of the American Medical Association (Chicago, IL: American Medical Association, 1998), 1998;279:1200-1205, also letters column, "Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients," JAMA (Chicago, IL: AMA, 1998), Nov. 25, 1998, Vol. 280, No. 20, from the web at http://jama.ama-assn.org/issues/v280...jlt1125-1.html, last accessed Feb. 12, 2001.


An exhaustive search of the literature finds no credible reports of deaths induced by marijuana. The US Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) records instances of drug mentions in medical examiners' reports, and though marijuana is mentioned, it is usually in combination with alcohol or other drugs. Marijuana alone has not been shown to cause an overdose death.

Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN), available on the web at http://www.samhsa.gov/; also see Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A. Benson, Jr., "Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999), available on the web at http://www.nap.edu/html/marimed/; and US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" (Docket #86-22), September 6, 1988, p. 57.

WarChild 01-29-2008 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hateman (Post 13713794)
"Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. "

Why crop the rest of that paragraph?

" However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous. "

It's pretty easy to follow this stuff so I'm not sure where you got lost. His earlier work has established that while Marijuana contains chemicals believed to be a factor in causing cancers, this study which is a specific study on the links between Marijuana use and Lung Cancer has shown there is none.

Tom_PM 01-29-2008 12:09 PM

Unfiltered cigarettes are 20 times worse than filtered cigarettes too.
blah blah blah nobody cares.

People need to die off somehow. Why else is tobacco legal. debate that.

Fap 01-29-2008 03:37 PM

I heard this statistic before but it's hard to believe..

Nookster 01-29-2008 03:42 PM

Intentionally inhaling ANY type of smoke will give you cancer. What they forgot to mention was that the ingestion or other means of taking THC has absolutely no dangerous side-effects whatsoever.
Anti-pot activists 3 2 1....go!


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123