— Musings —12.15.2015 10:11 AM
I’m a pot party pooper
If governments take on the sale of marijuana to consumers, it'll sure make lung cancer mass tort litigation easier. One-stop defendants.
— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) December 15, 2015
— Musings —12.15.2015 10:11 AM
If governments take on the sale of marijuana to consumers, it'll sure make lung cancer mass tort litigation easier. One-stop defendants.
— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) December 15, 2015
The tobacco companies could only be sued because for decades they denied smoking causes lung cancer when thier own studies showed that it did. It was a fraud that cost thousands of lives.
Lung cancer. That’s the part everybody forgets about.
I hate the smell, as well.
Inhaling is not the only way to ingest “cannabis sativa”.
Ont govt will have made recreational drug use acceptable. Whats next? LCBO selling branded Heroin ? Rob Ford branded Crack ?
They have been selling alcohol for a long time, which is more dangerous by most measures.
Very little research finds a link. In fact, opposite may be true. But why let medical evidence get in the way of a good tweet.
No, you are actually wrong. Perhaps the “facts” are standing in the way of your agenda?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23846283/
Sigh. I said “very little research finds a link”. You site one source . . . perhaps to prove my point?
Here’s another that found “little evidence” http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.29036/abstract. Here’s more on that study: http://www.leafscience.com/2014/06/27/marijuana-doesnt-increase-lung-cancer-risk/. Here’s the Globe’s take: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/conditions/smoking-marijuana-wont-give-you-lung-cancer/article623681/
Here’s an article on the 2006 study: http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20060523/pot-smoking-not-linked-to-lung-cancer
And here’s a study finding that Cannabis may shrink certain cancers: http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/33/10/4373.abstract#corresp-1
There’s a lot more out there. I may not have expressed it well, but the point was that there is not, yet, a definitive link between marijuana and lung cancer. To suggest there is isn’t correct.
Let’s see what Raphael Mechoulam, the “father” of medicinal pot has to say to the question “Should Marijuana Be a Medical Option?”
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.source.php?sourceID=011075
“My answer is ‘yes’, but as with any other potent drug, its use should be regulated.
1. The psychoactive component in it, namely tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), which we isolated, elucidated the structure and synthesized decades ago, should be within certain limits, between 5-15%. The major non psychoactive component, cannabidiol (CBD), should be present at about 5% at least. CBD lowers the anxiety (or even psychotic experiences) caused by THC in some patients and has a positive impact on acute memory effects caused by THC. It has positive effects of its own, in particular anti-inflammatory effects.
2. Marijuana is not a cure-all drug. It should be prescribed for well defined medical conditions.
3. Further clinical research on marijuana – and its components or mixtures of its components – should be encouraged to determine the medical conditions for which it can be used or not used.”
BTW, there simply isn’t much research in the area of pot causing lung cancer, so the idea that the “good” stuff in smoked pot will counteract lung cancer probably shouldn’t be trotted out as “proof”. That’s how the tobacco companies started…
And the research that has been done starts with the presumption that the reason for the low(er) lung cancer rates among pot smokers is that they smoke less than tobacco smokers. To which I say: “I guess you haven’t met many pot smokers, then”.
Who said there was “proof” “the ‘good’ stuff in smoked pot will counteract lung cancer”? I merely said that not only might it not cause lung cancer but that the opposite may be true. As you point out there isn’t much research. So, this may be the case. You don’t know anymore than I do.
To suggest that any pot smokers consume even close to the same amount as tobacco smokers is just silly.
So the government makes selling marijuana a criminal offense on Monday and then takes a monopoly on the trade on Tuesday.
Don’t forget some studies also show decreased white matter in the brain.
Premier SixPack Wynne(s) the bonehead award.
In a Dec. 15 story in the Globe and Mail, Canada’s pediatricians have taken a stand against cannabis as medicine for children. The doctors say the downside to using cannabis is not worth the benefits. Another potential source of lawsuits.
Don’t be surprised if the LCBO / Government of Ontario tries to get in on the porn industry. Holly’wood’ north, anyone?
About marijuana: decriminalize the damn stuff and let the market take care of the rest. Apply the same standards for smoking (insurance issues, grief from doctors, etc) and let anyone licensed to sell it sell it.
Letting the LCBO take it over would be a disaster!
Not only porn, but wait until she discovers the tax revenues she can get from legalized brothels!
Unfortunately, what has happened is that the support for legal medical marijuana (which is a good thing) has been hijacked by those who want recreational marijuana usage, and further hijacked by those who use junk science to promote marijuana as being a “healthy” alternative to alcohol. It simply isn’t true.
Completely different times, levels of awareness and intent. The government will post the same warnings of potential illnesses that are presently on a cigarette package and let it be buyer beware. There is far more information about the potential dangers available to the public than there ever was about cigarettes – I really don’t think the “Freedom Sticks” slogan used to get women to smoke will be convertible to pot. Finally, pot has a purpose, to get one high, cigarettes have never had a purpose other than trying to look as cool as Humphry Bogart. And make he sellers money.
If he’s determined and were smart, Trudeau would pitch this with an air of reluctance (dare I say “soberly”) as a necessary measure to save law enforcement resources and stop the corruption of the judicial system, and he would prepare himself to give some hard answers about things like children and impaired driving. But if he comes off grinning as proudly liberating the beautiful people and cool kids to finally live out the promise of Woodstock, he’ll buy himself a lot more controversy than he may think. Especially if Wynne keeps popping up to drool about tax revenue and muse about picking up an ounce of the best at the LCBO as the perfect complement to her privately purchased six-pack.
It’s a vice, people. Smart governments don’t boast about enabling vice.
Shhhhh!! Marijuana is medicine now and not something people use to get high. Shhhhhhh!!