Use of cannabis linked to testicular cancer?

So, I guess in the recent medical journal Cancer studies have shown that people who use cannabis are twice as likely to get testicular cancer? They suspect that the drug may affect the endocannabinoid system, the cellular network that is tied to sperm production. They then go on to say that cocaine can PREVENT the types of testicular cancers that become more likely from using cannabis. Pretty strange/interesting. Can anyone shed anymore light on this? Here's the link to the article I got it from:

www.web2carz.com/trends/offline/1402/marijuana-use-linked-to-testicular-cancer

 

i saw this a couple of days ago as well. looks like some pretty early research, i'll wait to see what else comes out before putting too much stock into it.

 

The important thing to know is that even if it's true, twice the chance is still a very low chance.

 

Well.. The answer to that is to balance the use of Marijuana with Cocaine....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...icular-cancer-risk-reduced-using-COCAINE.html

Now, being an advocate to legalize marijuana myself, I would be really interested in the RAW data these people used. The one thing we need to remember is that statistics and numbers can be skewed to suit out own purposes.

An example being:

300 out of 1000 people preferred Pepsi to Coca Cola.

We can take that number and say "30% of consumers prefer pepsi to coke"

OR.. We can say "70% of consumers DON'T choose Pepsi". Now this second one marketers can have fun with while promoting a different kind of beverage which isn't necessarily coke.. See where I'm going?

 

Bunch of BS. More like using cannabis will DECREASE the risk of testicular cancer.

I bet this study is from the same guys who said that teen pot use can lead to irreversibly lower IQ's.

They're really getting desperate these days. And the link with cocaine is even more ridiculous. You have to be blind not to see through this. There are literally THOUSANDS of legitimate detailed studies that would say otherwise.

But no, we have to trust the government on this one, right? Because THEY'RE the authority!

 

What you say is true. Based on personal experience, I would say that the use of Marijuana should actually DECREASE the risk of testicular cancer.

Why do I say this? Well.. it's kinda embarrassing to talk about, but the truth of the matter is that when one smokes Marijuana one gets sexually aroused (at least in my case), and this leads to "prostate milking", whether through intercourse or otherwise, and as we know, prostate milking can actually reduce the risk of testicular cancer

So... Some conflicting arguments to say the least... But yes.. There are many reasons for NOt legalizing marijuana, one of the big ones is actually the paper industry. HEMP would actually be cheaper and more environmentally friendly to use as a paper base than trees... But that is another story.. :afro:

 

Cannabis definitely has a huge effect on sexual stimulation. And in fact, I'd argue it would help people battle premature ejaculation, since it prolongs achieving climax.

Oh, and using paper for trees is a fucking joke! Seriously.

The truth will set you free.

 

Not only that, but it also (in my experience and opinion mind you) also extended the amount of time and intensity of said delayed climax.

I would also add that it can keep you going afterward as well due to the delayed erection loss too (men don't go limp as fast as blood flow is stimulated).

Of course, many would argue with us

 

:cowboy::groupwave:Well I would not worry to much about this!
According to the same study cocaine is the cure. We all should already know these people and there statistics are a joke.


"But the news isn’t all bad for drug users, because it appears that the antidote for the cancer-causing effect of pot smoking is cocaine use. According to the same study, cocaine can reduce the risk of the same testicular cancers that pot smoking can increase. Of course, researchers don’t recommend that pot smokers take up doing coke to reduce their cancer risk."
http://www.web2carz.com/trends/offline/1402/marijuana-use-linked-to-testicular-cancer

 

the study didn't say that cocaine is the cure, they just said that there was a correlation between cocaine use and lowered rates of testicular cancer, but that the negative effects of cocaine would outweigh any slight benefit to testicular health.

 

Also, not really good to mix.... The thing is, there are many studies from all walks of life. I'm sure I can find some research somewhere that says basically anything you want it to say.

As I mentioned before, numbers can be skewed.

The one thing you need to know is who PAYS for this research? Most likely big PHARMA companies who wouldn't want people to use Marijuana for medicinal purposes, because heaven forbid they use it as a non-addictive pain killer, or use it for other uses that would literally suck millions of dollars out of their pockets!

 

Please pardon me!

Cocaine was a antidote not a cure. As if cannabis is a poison that needs to be counteracted.

The fact remains that this article is BS.

Does anyone have any peer reviewed articles saying that coke is a antidote for anything?

Meth is a antidote for heroin. When you need to wake up.

 

it's amazing how potheads will immediately discount the idea that cannabis could have any negative health effects at all, no matter how minor.

 

When there's people with personal experiences, as well as a lot of independently-funded extensive scientific research that says otherwise, then this article immediately stands out as bullshit.

Any effort to take this seriously whatsoever is further diminished by the cocaine link as an 'antidote'. Pfft, sounds like the CIA needs more customers for its drug trade.

 

My thinking is influenced by my 41 years of observing one lie after another regarding pot coming from the government. I pay more attention to scientists, however.

 

Well, no peer reviewed article.. However cocaine was used as an antidote for pretty much everything from coughing, sneezing, sexual dysfunction, pain and even sleep disorders back in the 1800s.

Also, cocaine was also in Coca-Cola up until people said it was bad for you. The slogan was even "everything goes better with coke!".

Let me see if I can dig something up for you...

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/384/is-it-true-coca-cola-once-contained-cocaine

There it is... So, there you have it, cocaine was used as an antidote for a LOT of stuff. And also used to counteract effects of cold etc. :afro:

 

It's amazing how immediately anyone who has not tried marijuana quickly calls others "potheads".

True, some do go a little too far in their enjoyment of the drug, but you will find that the majority of who you would call "potheads" are not at all like "Cheech and Chong".

The term is kind of offensive, but people use it anyway.

It's almost like me calling anyone who drinks coffee, a caffeine-whore.

Same idea.

 

i smoke marijuana pretty much daily (in fact, i'm going to go outside and smoke a joint after i type this), so that doesn't really work. i can't say that i've ever run into a smoker who has thought that the term pothead was offensive.

 

again, they didn't actually say that you should use cocaine for any reason. the reason cocaine was brought up (or at least, what seemed to be the reason from my admittedly brief read) was to say that they didn't have an issue with healthy people not admitting to illegal drug use.

 

I think they threw it in there to try and get your thought processes working..

IE: cocaine is illegal, we are talking about marijuana, cocaine is REALLY illegal and can get your ass thrown in jail for years and years and years, they are talking about cocaine and marijuana together, THEREFORE, I better stay the F away from marijuana as it is just as illegal, and just as dangerous as cocaine.

I bet something along those lines.. Don't believe me? Lots of these kinds of research papers get backed by some government agency, or even local law enforcement if you dig deeply enough.

If you submit these kinds of research papers, you are trying to "scare" the public into doing something you want. Now, I'm not saying that the actual research is bunk or not, but more often than not these research papers always have a second agenda that isn't always obvious.

For example: I have also seen articles where the information was 100% correct, however, the way the data was presented was very obviously meant to make you scared and lobby against the thing being reported.

The article was about GM Corn and tumors in mice. Yes, they had tumors, but it doesn't say really under what criteria, I mean, did these mice eat a pound, two pounds, an ounce? Over what time frame?

Sometimes they say that some lab animal died from exposure to something, and if you did the conversion, it would take a human 10 TIMES the same exposure for the same effect, which wouldn't happen under normal circumstances.

Enjoy that joint, I have a feeling very soon, that things might get to the point where it will get increasingly hard to do so...