Roaches

Yes, but I haven't felt the urge to do it since I was about 15..... Even a relit cigarette tases like shit; a mocked-up joint tastes like... well, what it is - utterly full of poisonous shite!

You are aware, I take it, that resin is almost 100% tar and carcinogens?

I'm neither that poor, or that desperate, I'm afraid....

 

Marijuana doesn't cause cancer and can even help prevent it, as THC kills cancer cells.

Resin is just a poor man's hash....not poisonous. All you're doing when you smoke weed is pulling the smoke into your lungs anyway, so your lungs are basically coated with resin. So what's the big deal? Also, as you smoke a joint or a blunt, resin coats all of the weed inside, not just the roach, so you're smoking resin the whole time you're smokin weed.

And you don't have to be poor to smoke resin. It has THC in it, so it NEEDS to be smoked, or it's a waste.

 

Yup, this is where all the confusion is coming from in this thread. In the UK/Europe the roach is a piece of cardboard rolled up in the end of a joint to allow you to get a nice clear hit off it instead of sucking really hard on those little matchstick things you Americans call joints

In the US a roach is the end of the reefer, a little bit of paper with a little bit of grass still in it that you probably wouldn't want to smoke...

I don't get why you guys call the cardboard a filter, it doesn't filter anything. I suppose you can't call it a roach though heh.

Over here a filter is like these

To put in your roll up if you don't want it so strong (pussies hehe). No-one makes joints with these...

Well technically nicotine contains lots of Vitamin D -a fairly powerful anti carcinogen- but cigs don't help prevent cancer I'm afraid. Smoking anything is not good for you. If you ingest the weed in another way it could help but not from smoking it...

 

According to studies, marijuana smokers, even heavy users, are at no more risk of getting cancer than people who have never smoked a joint in their lives.

Either way, it's healthier than cigs and ZeroGrrl's reasoning for not smoking roaches is ignorant, IMO.

 

That is the latest notion, yes; however, as yet, there is no conclusive evidence that that is accurate. Personally, I fail to see how smoking any burning plant matter can not poentially cause cancer; it makes absolutely no sense, clinically.

Please be careful with the pro-pot propoganda; a lot of it is as biased and as unreliable as the anti-pot stuff...

Actually, 'resin' is simply the residue left fom the burning matter; ergo, you are not smoking this the whole time you are smoking your joint. In fact, all the time you are smoking the good bits, a lot of these bad bits are being filtered out by the smoking process; this stuff is the dregs, the excretion.... your joints' poop, if you will And since it is almost entirely made from tar (bear in mind, cannabis conains more than tobacco), it certainly is potentially poisonous, as it contains many carcinogens (cancer causing chemicals).

We'll never agree on this one... Personally, I'd sooner stick pins in my eyes....

Given the tiny amount of THC it contains, it really is negligible, IMO.

 

The way you believe everything good you hear about pot, without questioning it, is also rather ignorant, IMO.

Like I said, none of these studies have come up with anything conclusive, as yet. Ergo, not suitable debate fodder.

 

How do you figure you're not smokin resin the entire time you're smoking a joint or a blunt? Each hit you take pulls smoke through, which causes resin to stick on the weed that hasn't been smoked yet, so you ARE smokin resin with each hit of bud, even in a bowl.

Also, just because it's "tar" doesn't mean it's bad, and I get high as fuck from smokin resin. Nobody has ever gotten lung cancer or any other type of cancer from smoking weed, at least not that we know of, but there is scientific evidence that it does, indeed, kill cancer cells. Millions of people have died from smoking cigs, so it's kinda fukt up that you compare the two, as far as health goes. It is also proven that the smoke does contain carcinogens, but it seems to be cancelled out, basically.

And I'm not talking about propaganda. I'm talking about legitimate studies that show that weed has zero detrimental effects on a person's health.

 

Pot has good and bad aspects.....I know that. I'm not an idiot. I did question all of that shit, which is why I looked up sources and did research, and it seems likely that marijuana's anti-cancer properties are real.

 

I know exactly which studies you are referring to, I'm not trying to be an arse, here, but I am a staunch campaigner, have been for yonks, so I do read extensively daily reports about this kind of thing. I'm also a health pro, and an active, long-term smoker, so it is in my interests to be well informed.

You say nobody has ever died as a result of smoking cannabis; how do you know? This is a line of argument abound by pro-pot lobbyists, and most doctors will tell you, this is in no way conclusive, either; all it means is, nobody has had dropped dead while smoking pot, not that their smoking habits had no bearing on their health. It is highly likely that many of these people also smoke cigarettes; clinically, that is what will end up on the death cert. That's just how doctors work. Doesn't mean that smoking pot does not or cannot contribute.

'Seems like' are 'are' are two very different things, and I think it is naive to believe anything without irrefutable evidence, especially concerning a substance subject to prohibition; by it's very nature, it is hard to seperate the wheat from the chaff. Maybe it does 'seem' like it's true, but it is not conclusively proven, yet; this is a fact.

Until they can come up with a clinical reason why smoking all other burning plant matter can cause cancer, but cananbis can't... I stick by my statement. It makes no sense.

I mean you no disrespect, but surely you can see the logic in that??

 

^^ True

The propaganda wagon swings both ways.

The long term effects of prescription meds is still unknown, to certain extent and they (the man) are supposedly in the know (ld, side effects, soft tissue accumulation, blah, blah).

Still the "lil nubbins" goes in the pipe as I feel compelled to incinerate the evidence


Bill

 

Yes I see your logic, but who's to say that it doesn't possess anti-cancer properties? You see my logic? We already know this is an amazing plant, but maybe it's more amazing than we have come to realize so far and maybe it can lead us to the cure for cancer, if it does indeed kill cancer cells.

Notice the bolded part.....if you'll look at my other post, I said nobody has dies from it, AS FAR AS WE KNOW.

 

The laws of medical science...?

 

No. Laws are shit. Every plant is different and scientific studies say THC has cancer-killing properties. ALL smoke doesn't necessarily cause cancer, as all smoke contains different gases and chemicals.

The point is, neither of us knows for sure, but both theories are certainly possible.

 

I never said 'all smoke'; I said 'all burning plant matter'. Completely different spin.

And if laws are shit, how come we have made such advancements in medical science in the last hunded or so years? This seems a very odd comment to make.

You are referring to those studies again, as though they are conclusive; they are not. I'm getting bloody dizzy, here, son...

Yes, technically both theories are possible, but I still feel mine holds more water. In fact, I'd happily bet you over it...

 

I meant all plant smoke. That is what we were talkin about, afterall.

All I am saying is that "smokin plant matter causes cancer" is not a law of medical science. I know the studies aren't conclusive, but there have been quite a few studies that had similar results.

No offense, but please don't call me "son". I hate that shit with a fookin passion.

 

Actually, it pretty much is.... If I had the time (and I really don't), I could find article after article from the Lancet, BMJ, etc etc to support this. It is impossible to do the same at the other end of the argument because it simply has not been researched anywhere near enough yet.

People have been smoking plant material for millenia... and also dying of respiratory complications etc.

Anyways... I really am strting to feel like Polly parrot here, so... I bid you good day. Please take all you read with a huge pinch of salt.

 

If I remember correctly it is the combustion temperature that will produce your complex hydrocarbons - quite similar to a combustion engine's exhaust (to a certain extent mind you).

You could always vaporize that roach - baking has to high a yikes factor

-B

 

Fuck salt. The articles you talk about are no more logical than the ones I was talking about. It's all scientific studies with varying results.

 

Yes, but mine are way more plentiful, way more extensive and backed up by far more evidence than yours.

Anyway, I have customers, so......

 

ZeroGrrl you are so English its unimaginable. I havent seen/heard someone say polly parrot in fucking ages. Spot on. But i'm gunna agree with TopNotch, Roaches do need to be smoked.