Marijuana vs. Cigarettes, Source:
NIDA InfoFacts: Marijuana
Effects on the Heart
One study found that an abuser’s risk of heart attack more than quadruples in the first hour after smoking marijuana.7 The researchers suggest that such an outcome might occur from marijuana’s effects on blood pressure and heart rate (it increases both) and reduced oxygen-carrying capacity of blood.Effects on the Lungs
Numerous studies have shown marijuana smoke to contain carcinogens and to be an irritant to the lungs. In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which further increases the lungs’ exposure to carcinogenic smoke. Marijuana smokers show dysregulated growth of epithelial cells in their lung tissue, which could lead to cancer;
Okay – there is is in black and white YET, they still “protect” marijuana by quickly adding:
however, a recent case-controlled study found no positive associations between marijuana use and lung, upper respiratory, or upper digestive tract cancers.9 Thus, the link between marijuana smoking and these cancers remains unsubstantiated at this time.
How can that be? If the carcinogens are the same and the exposure more intense? This makes no sense, IMHO. Especially if you read on:
Nonetheless, marijuana smokers can have many of the same respiratory problems as tobacco smokers, such as daily cough and phlegm production, more frequent acute chest illness, a heightened risk of lung infections, and a greater tendency toward obstructed airways. A study of 450 individuals found that people who smoke marijuana frequently but do not smoke tobacco have more health problems and miss more days of work than nonsmokers.10 Many of the extra sick days among the marijuana smokers in the study were for respiratory illnesses.
Several studies associate workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover.
Sounds to me like this is more detrimental by far than smoking. I have a suggestion for the anti-smoking nazis: Switch gears and go after the pot.
Filed under: anti insanity, health issues, reality check
Do you need someone in your life to die of lung cancer caused by smoking for you to see the light…and who do you know that has died from weed? Betcha can’t tell me….
I know of many people who died and also smoked a lot of wacky weed, frankly.
I also lost an aunt to lung cancer who never smoked a cigarette in her life. I have lost an uncle to lung cancer. Right now I have another uncle being treated – never smoked a cigarette in his life. Neither ever touched wacky weed, either.
Explain that for me, please.
PS. And all those wacky weed smokers died before the age of 50, by the way.
Potbelly, You are quite naive if you think that wacky tobacky is harmless. I personally don’t like the stuff but it is none of my business what you put in your body, it is after all your body. It does not belong to me or the government. That is the part that you don’t get. Even if you had someone you care about die from tobacco use it was their life to live, not yours. Are you one of those people that believe in freedom only when it suits your wants or needs?
Potbelly, on November 14th, 2008 at 5:51 pm Said:
Do you need someone in your life to die of lung cancer caused by smoking for you to see the light?
………………………..
Lung Cancer can be caused by about 3 dozen different risk factors;including, radon exposure,air pollution, asdestos,family history,medical x-rays, cancer spreading from another site and etc.
Were lung cancer victims exposed to none of these risk factors?
If lung cancer victims were also exposed to some of these other risk factors, what percentage of their cancer was caused by them and how much by smoking?
If smoking causes lung cancer;then, less smoking should cause there to be less lung cancer!!
Over the last 40 some years the smoking/SHS exposure rate has gone down by at least 50%.
Lung Cancer death rates have gone up by 121%
http://0-www.cdc.gov.mill1.sjlibrary.org/nchs/data/hus/hus06.pdf
Health,United States,2006
Page 229
Table 39 (page 1 of 3). Death rates for malignant neoplasms of trachea, bronchus, and lung, by age: United States, selected years 1950�2004
[Data are based on death certificates]
If you go back to 1960:
Lung Cancer deaths (age adjusted) were
1960=24.1 per 100,000
2004= 53.2 per 100,000
This is a 121% increase.
You anti-smokers love to talk about the toxins/carcinogins in cigarette smoke.
One of those toxins is Arsenic.
The dose makes the difference.
There are about 32 nanograms(billionths of a gram) of Arsenic in ALL of the smoke (mainstream and side stream) from the average cigarette.
The EPA says that the safe level for arsenic in water is 10 nanograms per gram.
A 12 oz glass of water could contain 3,408 nanograms of arsenic and still be EPA SAFE.
That is the amount of arsenic in all of the smoke from 106.5 cigarettes.
You are going to say that breathing a toxin is different than drinking it.
A m3 = a cubic yard= 27 cubic feet.
OSHA has established a permissible exposure limit (PEL), 8-hour time-weighted average, of 10 ug/m3 for airborne arsenic in various workplaces.
This is the PEL (permissible exposure limit), below which the chemical is considered safe.
And OSHA is being very conservative. According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, no symptoms are evident below about 100 ug.
1 ug is one microgram= 1 millionth of a gram, 1 ng is one nanogram = 1 billionth of a gram.
10 ug =10,000 ng.
The average cigarette has 32ng of arsenic in all of it’s smoke(mainstream and side stream).
10 ug per cubic meter is all of the smoke from 312.5 cigarettes per cubic meter/yard ,on average,continuously for an 8 hour work shift .
The DOSE makes the poison!!!!
http://www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/scoth/PDFS/nfdpm.pdf
Carbon Monoxide(CO) Yield- mg/cigarette
The range is from 1 mg/cig to 12 mg/cigarette.
I will use the average yield of 10 mg/cigarette.
OSHA PEL for Carbon Monoxide(CO) is 55 mg/m3.
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9992
55 mg/m3 is all of the smoke from 5.5 cigarettes per
cubic meter ,on average,continuously for an 8 hour work shift .
The DOSE makes the poison!!!!
Let’s assume a bar/restaurant with an area of 50′ x 40′ x 10′ ceiling.
That 50 feet by 40 feet with a 10 foot ceiling, is about 16.67 meters by 13.33 meters by 3.33 meters, this equals about 740 cubic meters.
For Arsenic that area would have to have 740 x 312.5 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is more than 230,000 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for arsenic.
For CO that area would have to have 740 x 5.5 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is more than 4,070 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for CO.
Which is why OSHA has stated that it’s well-nigh impossible to find any actual workplace where its PEL’s for secondhand smoke or any constituent thereof would be met, let alone exceeded.
Potbelly, on November 14th, 2008 at 5:51 pm Said:
Do you need someone in your life to die of lung cancer caused by smoking for you to see the light.
……………..
Lung Cancer can be caused by about 3 dozen different risk factors;including, radon exposure,air pollution, asbestos,family history,medical x-rays, cancer spreading from another site and etc.
Were your family members exposed to none of these risk factors?
If your family members were also exposed to some of these other risk factors, what percentage of their cancer was caused by them and how much by smoking?
Smoking/SHS exposure causes Lung Cancer???
Then, less smoking should equal less Lung Cancer!!
Over the last 40 some years the smoking/SHS exposure rate has gone down by at least 50%.
Lung Cancer death rates have gone up by 121%
http://0-www.cdc.gov.mill1.sjlibrary.org/nchs/data/hus/hus06.pdf
Health,United States,2006
Page 229
Table 39 (page 1 of 3). Death rates for malignant neoplasms of trachea, bronchus, and lung, by age: United States, selected years 1950 to 2004
If you go back to 1960:
Lung Cancer deaths (age adjusted) were
1960=24.1 per 100,000
2004= 53.2 per 100,000
This is a 121% increase.
Anti-smokers love to say that there are carcinogins/toxins in cigarette smoke.
One of those toxins is Arsenic.
The dose makes the difference.
There are about 32 nanograms(billionths of a gram) of Arsenic in ALL of the smoke
(mainstream and side stream) from the average cigarette.
The EPA says that the safe level for arsenic in water is 10 nanograms per gram.
A 12 oz glass of water could contain 3,408 nanograms of arsenic and still be EPA SAFE.
That is the amount of arsenic in all of the smoke from 106.5 cigarettes.
Antis are going to say that breathing a toxin is different than drinking it.
A m3 = a cubic yard= 27 cubic feet.
OSHA has established a permissible exposure limit (PEL), 8-hour time-weighted average, of 10 ug/m3 for airborne arsenic in various workplaces.
This is the PEL (permissible exposure limit), below which the chemical is considered safe.
And OSHA is being very conservative. According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, no symptoms are evident below about 100 ug.
1 ug is one microgram= 1 millionth of a gram, 1 ng is one nanogram =1 billionth of a gram.
10 ug =10,000 ng.
The average cigarette has 32ng of arsenic in all of it’s smoke(mainstream and side stream).
10 ug per cubic meter is all of the smoke from 312.5 cigarettes per cubic meter ,on average,continuously for an 8 hour work shift .
The DOSE makes the poison!!!!
http://www.advisorybodies.doh.gov.uk/scoth/PDFS/nfdpm.pdf
Carbon Monoxide(CO) Yield- mg/cigarette
The range is from 1 mg/cig to 12 mg/cigarette.
I will use the average yield of 10 mg/cigarette.
OSHA PEL for Carbon Monoxide is 55 mg/m3.
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9992
55 mg/m3 is all of the smoke from 5.5 cigarettes per
cubic meter ,on average,continuously for an 8 hour work shift .
The DOSE makes the poison!!!!
Let’s assume a bar/restaurant with an area of 50′ x 40′ x 10′ ceiling.
That 50 feet by 40 feet with a 10 foot ceiling, is about 16.67 meters
by 13.33 meters by 3.33 meters, this equals about 740 cubic meters.
For Arsenic that area would have to have 740 x 312.5 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is more than 230,000 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for arsenic.
For CO that area would have to have 740 x 5.5 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is more than 4,070 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for CO.
Which is why OSHA has stated that it’s well-nigh impossible to find any actual workplace where its PEL’s for secondhand smoke or any constituent thereof would be met, let alone exceeded.
Outstanding data/research, Gary, thank you!
Here are more PELS and cigarette equivalents.
I use these chemicals because they commonly known and present in the greatest quantity.
Let’s assume a bar/restaurant with an area of 50′ x 40′ x 10′ ceiling.
That 50 feet by 40 feet with a 10 foot ceiling, is about 16.67 meters
by 13.33 meters by 3.33 meters, this equals about 740 cubic meters.
http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show
For instance using Cyanide and Formaldehyde:
Chemical…………PEL/TLV……………amount in cigarette smoke
Cyanide… ……..5,000 mcg/m3….. 716 mcg
Formaldehyde….. 940 mcg/m3…… 856 mcg
OSHA PELS would allow the smoke(SHS/MS) from:
Cyanide=7 cigarettes/m3 burning continuously for 8 hours
Formaldehyde=1 cigarette/m3 burning continuously for 8 hours
For Cyanide that area would have to have 740 x 7 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is more than 5,180 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for Cyanide.
For Formaldehyde that area would have to have 740 x 1 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is more than 740 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for Formaldehyde.
For instance let’s assume a pub 50′ x 40′ x 10′ ceiling; with an occupancy rating of 80 people.
This is more than 740 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for Formaldehyde, or each occupant continuously smoking at least 9 cigarettes.
Antis will say that there will be a smoke build-up and that will compound matters.
From marcus aurelius
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2006/02/air-quality-testing-and-secondhand.html
For instance let’s assume a pub 50′ x 40′ x 10′ ceiling; with an occupancy rating of 80 people.
Building codes where I live would require 2400 cfm fresh air for the example above. (80 people x 30 cfm / occupant).
And 50 x 40 x 10 = 20,000 cubic feet of air. Now to determine what 1 air change is for that 20,000 cubic feet is, divide by 60 (minutes per hour, since fans are rated cfm). So 20,000 / 60 = 333 cfm. Now 2400 cfm / 333 = 7.2 air changes per hour.
60 (minutes per hour) / 7.2 = 8.3 minutes. Meaning that 2400 cfm in the 50 x 40 x 10 building will exchange the air in the pub with fresh air every 8.3 minutes.
It probably takes less time than 8.3 minutes for the average smoker to smoke a cigarette; therefore, the air will be exchanged faster than the smoke wll accumulate.
Health hazard from SHS = ZERO.
This is more than 740 cigarettes burning all of the time to reach OSHA’s PEL for Formaldehyde, or each occupant continuously smoking at least 9 cigarettes.
It probably takes less time than 8.3 minutes for the average smoker to smoke a cigarette; therefore, the air will be exchanged faster than the smoke wll accumulate.
7.2 air changes per hour times 9 cigarettes at a time means that each of the 80 smokers could smoke 63(total for all 80=5,000) cigarettes per hour and we would still not exceed the OSHA PEL for Formaldehyde .
A bartender/cocktail server could be exposed to the smoke from 40,000 cigarettes(5,000×8) during an 8 hour shift and not exceed the PELS for Formaldehyde .
CO would be 220,000 cigarettes during an 8 hour shift .
Cyanide would be 280,000 cigarettes during an 8 hour shift .
Arsenic would be 12,480,000 cigarettes during an 8 hour shift .
Which is why OSHA has stated that it’s well-nigh impossible to find any actual workplace where its PEL’s for secondhand smoke or any constituent thereof would be met, let alone exceeded.
Yet,antis and politicians say that SHS exposure is a health hazard and this hazard trumps an owner’s right to manage their business as they see fit!!
How about mainstream smoking?
As was shown, OSHA PELS would allow the smoke(SHS/MS) from:
Arsenic=312.5 cigarettes/m3
Cyanide=7 cigarettes/m3
CO=5.5 cigarettes/m3
Formaldehyde=1 cigarette/m3
The Calif-EPA says that a sitting person breathes about 7.5 liters of air per minute.
(California Environmental Protection Agency)
http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/resnotes/notes/94-11.htm
15 breaths x .5 liter/breath=7.5 liters per minute.
I have experimented and it takes about 5 minutes for me to smoke the average cigarette and I take 2 puffs per minute.
Of my 15 breaths per minute, two would be inhalations of mainstream smoke(say, 1 liter per puff) and 13 would be SHS of .5 liter per breath.
That is 8.5 liters per minute or 42.5 liters for the 5 minutes per cigarette.
If we take a sealed cube 1 meter on a side(1m3) and have all of the smoke and air staying in that cube, we can approximate the OSHA PELS and my consumption.
1 m3 = 1,000 liters.
1,000 liters divided by my 42.5 liters per cigarette means I inhale only 1/23rd of the available smoke and chemicals.
Even for Formaldehyde(PEL=1 cigarette’s worth), I am inhaling only 1/23rd of the PEL.
For Arsenic I would be inhaling only about 1/7,176ths of the OSHA PEL.
Considering that the real world does not have me breathing in a sealed cube and that there is a continuous air exchange with fresh outside air, my actual exposure is way lower.
Bartender/drink server’s exposure to SHS.
The ACS says that a bartender working in a smoky bar is exposed to enough SHS to equal smoking about a pack of cigarettes.
Let’s assume a bar 50′ x 40′ x 10′ ceiling.
A bartender/cocktail server could be exposed to the smoke from 40,000 cigarettes(5,000×8) during an 8 hour shift and not exceed the PELS for Formaldehyde .
One pack(20 cigarettes) would mean they were exposed to 1/2,000th of the OSHA PEL for Formaldehyde.
One pack(20 cigarettes) would mean they were exposed to 1/11,000th of the OSHA PEL for CO.
One pack(20 cigarettes) would mean they were exposed to 1/14,000th of the OSHA PEL for Cyanide.
One pack(20 cigarettes) would mean they were exposed to 1/624,000th of the OSHA PEL for Arsenic.
Health hazard my hind-end!!!!!
The topic is quite hot on the Internet right now. What do you pay the most attention to while choosing what to write ?