Skip to comments.
Calif regulators find pot smoke causes cancer
Atanta Journal-Constitution ^
| June 19, 2009
| Associated Press
Posted on 06/20/2009 9:51:39 AM PDT by Peter Horry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 next last
Some studies show that marijuana is not linked to cancer, or actually slows it's growth, this indicates that it is a cause of cancer.
To: Peter Horry
The listing only applies to marijuana smoke, not the plant itself.Ah. Somebody ping Skoal and Copenhagen.
2
posted on
06/20/2009 9:54:10 AM PDT
by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all. -- Texas Eagle)
To: Peter Horry
Oh, the liberals are going to bury this study.....watch how fast California reverses itself on this one!
3
posted on
06/20/2009 9:54:37 AM PDT
by
Erik Latranyi
(Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
To: Peter Horry
This seems like a familiar road that’s been travelled on many times now...
4
posted on
06/20/2009 9:55:19 AM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(30-year smoker, E-Cigs helped me quit, and O wants me back smoking again?)
To: Texas Eagle
I think it is if you smoke pot in California, it is the AIR in California that is causing cancer. That’s what I think. Maybe if they filtered the air and then draught their puff with organic pure air, it would not be cancerous.....a thought.
To: Peter Horry
Everything causes cancer if you live long enough!
6
posted on
06/20/2009 9:56:39 AM PDT
by
SWAMPSNIPER
(THE SECOND AMENDMENT, A MATTER OF FACT, NOT A MATTER OF OPINION)
To: Peter Horry
I’m surprised the libertarians haven’t discovered this thread yet.
7
posted on
06/20/2009 9:57:07 AM PDT
by
samtheman
To: samtheman
Im surprised the libertarians havent discovered this thread yet.What does pot smoke containing carcinogens have to do with libertarianism?
To: Peter Horry
It’s well known it disrupts short term memory, at least it doesn’t cause cancer...
9
posted on
06/20/2009 10:00:52 AM PDT
by
outofsalt
("If History teaches us anything it's that history rarely teaches us anything")
To: Peter Horry
This is terrible news. What should I do with the three bales I have now? Should I call 911?
10
posted on
06/20/2009 10:01:22 AM PDT
by
1rudeboy
To: Peter Horry
"Calif regulators find pot smoke causes cancer"Really? You mean setting plant matter on fire and breathing the fumes deeply isn't good for you?
Who knew?
11
posted on
06/20/2009 10:01:26 AM PDT
by
muir_redwoods
( Hey, remember the last head of state who dictated the design of automobiles?)
To: Trailerpark Badass
Check back in about 2 hours, you’ll see.
Obviously you’ve never read a pot thread in FR before.
A few hours after the initial posting, every pot-head libertarian in FR goes ballistic on the subject.
Stick around. You’ll see.
To: Peter Horry
A new study has been done which shows the actual cause of most cancer is laboratory rats. The more lab rats a cancer lab has, the most likely they will develop cancer. But even a single lab rat can cause cancer in itself. There is no safe minimum number of lab rats.
13
posted on
06/20/2009 10:06:26 AM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, AIG, Chrysler and GM are what Marx meant by the means of production.)
To: Peter Horry
Marijuana smoke has joined tobacco smoke and hundreds of other chemicals on a list of substances California regulators say cause cancer. The incense sticks I have are labeled:
CAUTION! May cause cancer in the State of California.
I guess they don't cause cancer anywhere else.
-----
Geesh! The land of fruits and nuts, indeed.
[With apologies to any California FReepers, of course!]
14
posted on
06/20/2009 10:07:43 AM PDT
by
MamaTexan
(I am NOT an administrative, corporate, collective, legal, political or public entity, or ~person~)
To: outofsalt
I’ve lost my train of thought - what was this thread about?
15
posted on
06/20/2009 10:09:42 AM PDT
by
dainbramaged
(If you want a friend, get a dog.)
To: Peter Horry
If they didn’t find for the carcinogenic aspect of smoke period, they would have to become even more creative with their anti-cigarette smoking agenda wouldn’t they.
I’m alive and quite healthy after smoking for fifty years. I quit April 9, 2009 cold turkey only because I won’t pay the Socialist/Democrat taxes supporting their Socialist agenda.
16
posted on
06/20/2009 10:10:33 AM PDT
by
rockinqsranch
(Dems, Libs, Socialists...Call 'em What you Will, They ALL have Fairies Living In Their Trees.)
To: muir_redwoods
Coulda fooled me too.
Inhaling smoke into your lungs all like like potheads do may cause cancer?
Duh.
To: MamaTexan
CAUTION! May cause cancer in the State of California.
I think it must be some federal regulation.
18
posted on
06/20/2009 10:14:09 AM PDT
by
ThomasThomas
(They don't let you sit anywhere you want even when they have a sign saying so.)
To: KarlInOhio
“A new study has been done which shows the actual cause of most cancer is laboratory rats.”
Interesting prospective on the laboratory rats. How does all this exposure to hazardous substances, (assuming that some of them reproduce) affect their offspring and does that affect future studies?
19
posted on
06/20/2009 10:17:19 AM PDT
by
Peter Horry
(Never were abilities so much below mediocrity so well rewarded - John Randolph)
To: Peter Horry
And here, my friends, is where the “smoke Nazi” shit has hit the fan. Smokers are pariahs, smokes are the new “minority”, smokers are the new everything-hated name you want to give them. But when you start messing with Callie Dopers’ stashes and try to limit them, here’s where you meet your match...
20
posted on
06/20/2009 10:19:03 AM PDT
by
Gaffer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-56 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson