Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cannabis link to Maori cancer
STUFF National News ^ | 10/10/2005 | By DAVID MCLOUGHLIN

Posted on 10/10/2005 11:57:50 AM PDT by A CA Guy

Heavy cannabis use could be a cause of Maori having the world's highest lung cancer rate, groundbreaking research suggests.

Many Maori from children to kaumatua use cannabis in "epidemic proportions", says a study by Richard Beasley of the Medical Research Institute in Wellington.

But cannabis might not be as safe as the proponents of its legalisation say. A paper by Professor Beasley on the health effects of cannabis was among the research that prompted Wellington coroner Garry Evans to urge last week that government policy on illicit drugs be changed from "harm minimisation" to campaigning against drug use.

The paper reviews the literature on cannabis and suggests it is more cancer-causing than tobacco, and, like tobacco, causes bronchitis.

Smoking three cannabis cigarettes a day is equal to smoking more than 20 tobacco cigarettes, it says.

Professor Beasley said last night that his institute was close to finishing what he believed was the world's first study on links between cannabis and lung cancer.

In his paper for the coroner, Professor Beasley said information was urgently needed on the potential role of marijuana in New Zealand's high lung cancer rate, particularly among Maori, who had the world's highest rate and were heavy cannabis users.

Research showed cannabis use had reached epidemic proportions and was generally accepted and tolerated among Maori. "Users range from children through to kaumatua."

Cannabis use was rising. The proportion of the population to have tried it rose from 43 per cent in 1990 to 52 per cent by 1998 and the proportion of regular users from 18 per cent to 21 per cent.

Studies showed regular smokers of three to four cannabis joints a day had chronic bronchitis and other symptoms similar to those of smokers of 20 or more tobacco cigarettes a day.

(Excerpt) Read more at stuff.co.nz ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: 420cigarettes; potheads; potkills
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last
To: stuartcr

Maybe that was their first edible underwear as well. LOL


41 posted on 10/10/2005 1:20:56 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

Or smokable underwear...


42 posted on 10/10/2005 1:25:41 PM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

l8r


43 posted on 10/10/2005 1:27:16 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

"The ONLY reference is to how a lung cancer is different from another cancer, which has nothing to do with what I said."

Baloney!

Recorded history shows cancer as far back as 1600, and you think lung cancer is only a recent phenomena?

Smoking and coal mining are not the only cause of lung cancer!




44 posted on 10/10/2005 1:29:30 PM PDT by Bigh4u2 (Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Bigh4u2

That should have read '1600 B.C.'


45 posted on 10/10/2005 1:36:59 PM PDT by Bigh4u2 (Denial is the first requirement to be a liberal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
You could be right, the cancer from cannabis could be killing everyone andyk. Good point!

Are you saying that increasing the size of the study would encourage people to smoke cannabis? If this were the case, any study that deals with relationships between rates of cancer, and use of substances thought to cause cancer would be unethical.
46 posted on 10/10/2005 1:38:15 PM PDT by andyk (Go Matt Kenseth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

Ok, I get it. If a few people misuse or go overboard with something, and they, or others, are harmed or die, then that thing is undoubtedly evil and needs to be taken from the entire body of the public for our own good - by force, if necessary. So the left - who absolutely loves this style of thinking - must be correct about a few things that also fall into this category:

Fast food
Guns
Capitalism
Religion
Freedom

We'll start with this little green plant and see how it goes from there. Y'all with me?


47 posted on 10/10/2005 8:22:35 PM PDT by itzmygun (Insert "munchie" joke here if you have no valid argument.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: itzmygun

You already can't legally use cannabis and an officer would take it away if they did see you using it.

This stuff affects others as well, so the issue goes beyond the individual.


48 posted on 10/10/2005 11:12:41 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

"Why would anyone want to do any recreational drug?"

Why did Jesus turn the water into wine?


49 posted on 10/11/2005 12:23:53 PM PDT by pnome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: pnome
"Why would anyone want to do any recreational drug?" by A CA Guy

Why did Jesus turn the water into wine? pnome

Well, Jesus was asked to do that by his mother and alcohol was a food purifier in Biblical times that prevented lots of food poisoning.
Are you saying you got involved in recreational drugs at the request of your mother as well? If so, when did that first start?
That could have been child endangerment easily, sure would be horrible parenting.
If that happened to you, I am sorry that a parent would deny you a chance at a normal life. Be strong!

50 posted on 10/11/2005 12:35:29 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
* Smoking three cannabis cigarettes a day is equal to more than 20 tobacco cigarettes

* Research suggests cannabis use had reached epidemic proportions

Might also explain why there aren't so many Maori biochemists, physicists, CEO's, etc ...
51 posted on 10/11/2005 12:38:08 PM PDT by sono (I knew I was going to take the wrong train, so I left early. L Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sono
I've never seen any anti-drug result from a study that libertarian/drug activist ever believed or liked.

It's a crap drug as all the recreational drugs are and the bottom line is that it is not needed.

It is best to perhaps do something Conservative or to buy an island and be a fool where you can't hurt others.

52 posted on 10/11/2005 12:49:17 PM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

Well ... after all the leading recreational drug is still alcohol ... legal since prohibition was an unmitigated disaster ... Wars on Drugs, I've observed, fail. That's not to say recreational drugs are good - they're not. But the devil's in the details when it comes to governmental involvement...


53 posted on 10/11/2005 1:01:26 PM PDT by sono (I knew I was going to take the wrong train, so I left early. L Berra)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

OMG Mrs. Beasley!!!!!!!!


54 posted on 10/11/2005 3:34:53 PM PDT by Gazoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy; coloradan; stuartcr
Study: Smoking Marijuana Does Not Cause Lung Cancer

Keep in mind, that's from the Government's own attack dog on the issue.

55 posted on 10/12/2005 3:39:24 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sono; A CA Guy
I agree with Sono. the War On Drugs is a big resource hungry failure.

We are spending billions and still people want to do drugs.

How much should we spend, how much power should we give to the Police how many special agencies should we set up to win this war.

I don't mind spending money enforcing laws that protect me from others , or others from me, robbery, murder stealing, rape.

But why should much needed funds and resources be diverted from the police agencies that protect me to agencies set up to protect someone who refuses to be protected from them self's.

56 posted on 10/12/2005 3:47:03 AM PDT by tonycavanagh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Why would anyone want to do any recreational drug?

For recreation. Duh.

57 posted on 10/12/2005 3:53:28 AM PDT by humblegunner (If you're gonna die, die with your boots on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy

Ok, so Jesus did that because his mother asked him to.

Ok, so why did he pass around a cup of wine at the last supper? Because it helped him to digest food better?

Simply put, Jesus liked to drink wine. There is no sin in that. Now, consider this, marijuana is safer for you than drinking wine. No one in the history of man has ever died of an overdose of pot. No one, ever.

If Jesus had passed around a joint at the last supper, would we be having this conversation?

Do you drink wine, beer? If so, why would you want to do a recreational drug?


58 posted on 10/12/2005 7:12:25 AM PDT by pnome
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
You already can't legally use cannabis and an officer would take it away if they did see you using it.

Maybe I should have put in some sarcasm tags in there for you. My point was that when the gov starts taking things away in the name of safety, there is no line on where that stops.

This stuff affects others as well, so the issue goes beyond the individual.

And I can easily say the same applies to the other things I listed. For each one of those, there are numerous instances where people have misused them and committed harm. Isn't that the best reason we should forbid people from using them?
59 posted on 10/12/2005 9:15:34 AM PDT by itzmygun (Ban taglines before someone gets killed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: itzmygun
My point was that when the gov starts taking things away in the name of safety, there is no line on where that stops.

True, if we see a bomb, knife, drugs, illegal weapon in the possession of a citizen that is illegal or in the process of a crime, they will be confiscated.

I do agree with you that the ACLU and Libertarian anarchist would fight to keep the more criminal activities out there.

60 posted on 10/12/2005 10:21:30 AM PDT by A CA Guy (God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson