New Marijuana Health Study

Hi,

Just uploaded a statistical study to the web that shows
some extreme positive health effects of grass.
I think it would make a good topic here.

data-rider.org

Looking forward to any comments.

Thanks.

 

what effects?

you get happy, sleepy and hungry.
and it cures cancer. what else can you possibly want? :d

 

Well, how about this.

The 25 states with the highest heart disease death rates have a past-month marijuana
use 25% lower. The odds of that happening by chance are about 383 to 1.

Looked at another way, the 25 states with the highest marijuana use rates have
a heart disease death rate 12% lower. The odds for that are about 230 to 1.

There are 132 different factoids about marijuana like the one above,
although the study contains more than 9000 in total.
They're easy to find and sorted by relevance.

Dont read this line.

 

i posted something similar awhile ago about the benefits of marijuana and this guy started arguing that if marijuana is harmless and it should be legal then child sex should be legal, too. and he kept arguing about these stupid points that had nothing to do with my post at all. then he said that hippies are stubborn and arent worth arguing with so he stopped posting stuff. and he called me stupid cuz i used "u" instead of "you". whatever. good post but if you want to check mine out go to http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=294635 or if that doesnt work search for "do u smoke marijuana? if not this is the thread for u, if so u might learn something" its a really interesting post no matter which side youre on.

 

It's good as pain relief and as an anti-depressant in small amounts. Smoking it isn't gonna do you any good in the same way that smoking anything isn't gonna do you any good. Should it be legal, of course it should, it's only harming the user, and people have a right to choose.

 

Yet this study associates massive health benefits with SMOKING it.

I tend to believe the statistics when they contradict my intuition.

Don't read this line twice.

 

why do you keep writing dont read this line i read the last one like three times

 

Data, it's hardly conclusive. There are a lot of other factors involved with those statistics too. I meant to say that smoking it has negative effects (the smoke does contain carcinogens after all) as well as the positive. Whereas eating or vaporising just has the positive.

 

That text kind of lost me when it claimed that pot was an ET plant from the future.

I think the reason that pot is illegal is that it makes people relaxed and happy,
and then they don't want to go to war.

It's that simple. No time travel required.

 

Hi,

As we all know, the immune system regenerates faster when we're relaxed.

What if the boosted immune system from toking outweighs those carcinogens?

For example, less damage from bacteria and viruses due to increased white cells,
and less damage from chemicals due to increased antibodies.

The statistics are strong and this seems to be a reasonable mechanism for them.

 

Perfect! You are the best straight man that money can buy!

Your check is in the mail.

 

Immune system can't help with things like carcinogens. It can only deal with things like viruses, infections ect. The immune system doesn't recognise cancerous cells as a risk (99.99% of the time anyway). The research done suggests that the effects of cannabis on the immune system is pretty inconsequential either way (a lot of antibodies have cannabis receptors VS the help from the relaxed state).

 

Carcinogens are, for the most part, chemicals. Chemicals are detoxified by
antibodies and macrophages. The more of those there are, the quicker the
detox is, the less damage results, and the less cancer results.

 

You make a decent point, but in the end, the changes are pretty unnoticeable, we're dealing with changes in the range of 0.01 to to 0.1 percent changes. Cannabis in a vaporiser/eaten is entirely beneficial (so long as you don't have a history/tendency towards mental health issues) It's not a miracle cure or anything, it just relieves stress and pain. In the same way a lot of things can.

 

You seem pretty closed minded for an anarchist,
and now you're inventing numbers like a professional.

Who are you really?

 

I'm hardly closed minded, I'm pro legalisation of everything. It's just, from looking at proper direct studies, rather than lists of statistics. They've shown that cannabis is useful, but not miraculously so. I was paraphrasing this from an unbiased info site:

Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the major active component of cannabis, or marijuana. Receptors to THC have been found on B cells, natural killer cells, neutrophils, monocytes, lymphocytes and macrophages (Life Sci 1999; 65:637-644). Marijuana has measurable in vitro effects on the immune system, particularly in reducing cell-mediated immunity, which might increase susceptibility to infection. Clinical studies in humans so far, though, haven't demonstrated that these effects are clinically relevant (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1976;58:483-490). Chronic smoking of marijuana, however, can raise one's susceptibility to respiratory infection and cancer (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999;8:1071-1078). If the marijuana is contaminated with mould spores, which is common, smoking it may lead to allergic asthma, infection or hypersensitivity pneumonitis (J Allergy Clin Immunol 1983;71:389-393). PK

I'm just a regular stoner my friend, I accept that cannabis has it's good sides and it's bad sides, same as any drug. It's a wonderfully safe drug compared to other things, but it ain't perfect.

 

Listen, friend, I was just playing with you there.

What you just quoted said that they saw something in a test tube
that looked hopeful, but that nobody wanted to spend a million dollars
on a human study. How does that relate to reality?

Here's the simple scoop: All disease rates are much lower in the
heaviest pot smoking states, and the odds on them are mostly in
the hundreds to 1 range.

Your suggestion that it is invalid due to a a lack of other studies, is wrong.

 

I wasn't saying it's invalid, I'm just saying it's not entirely conclusive. There are plenty of other factors involved, such as poverty levels, pollution levels, water quality, quality of diet.

 

Oh. Yes, of course it is inconclusive. The study clearly shows that pot
smokers eat better and excercise more. But if that's the secret of pot's
apparent disease preventative effect, it would make no difference.
We'd still be living longer.

But if it's water quality or something like that, then some very long-shot
improbabilities must have come true to show the numbers in the study.
That's not impossible, but it's unlikely.

 

I wouldn't say the study shows that. It shows that areas with larger amounts of pot smokers have better rates of exercise. But it doesn't mean the two are linked. It could be a case of areas with larger amounts of pot smokers have more money, and more free time to do exercise. Air pollution levels will come into account too.