Harmful Cannabis Trumps Tobacco

by ScienceDave | July 31, 2007 at 09:02 am
2914 views | 59 Recommendations | 9 comments

Photos

Soft Pink Smoke

Soft Pink Smoke

see larger image

uploaded by Pink Sherbet

Here's another hit to the proverbial groin of cannabis advocates. A recent advanced copy of scientific journal Thorax published a study claiming cannabis was 2.5-5 times worse than cigarettes.  I downloaded a copy of the paper, and have summarized its findings below.

Inclusion Criteria
339 people were recruited into four study groups
  • Non Smokers (life time exposure of one pack per year of tobacco, 20 joints of cannabis)
  • Cannabis Smokers (life time exposure of 5-joint years, with one joint per day)
  • Smokers (one pack of cigarettes per day, for at least one year)
  • Tobacco and Cannabis users (see above)


The researchers were careful to exclude non-users who yielded positive urine tests for either substance, as well as users of other drugs.  The study used a sample of opportunity (i.e. ads in newspapers, flyers), because of the 3500 random individuals they mailed questionnaires to, only 19 were suitable "cannabis only" users.

Although this will undoubtedly provide some bias in their data (towards those with a concern for their health), the authors argue, "This meant that many potential participants were ineligible, particularly the heaviest cannabis users who were more likely to have used other drugs. As a result, these criteria preferentially excluded such heavy users, suggesting that the effects observed may represent a conservative estimate."

Tests Performed
The following three categories of testing occurred on all subjects.

  • Lung Function Tests (a barrage of physiological testing to determine how well the lungs are working)
  • CT Scanning (to search for emphysema)
  • Blood/Urine Tests (to measure metabolites of THC and nicotine)
  • Questionnaires ( smoking history, passive smoking exposure, respiratory symptoms, family history, occupation and known respiratory illnesses, as well as their life time history of cannabis use and preferred method of use)


Study Results
Indeed, joint use was 2.5-5 times worse than tobacco cigarettes.  However, emphysema was not associated with cannabis users as was in tobacco smokers.

According to the authors, "In conclusion, these findings suggest that the predominant effects of cannabis on pulmonary structure, function and symptoms are in causing the symptoms of wheezing, cough, chest tightness and sputum production, large airways obstruction and hyperinflation, but not emphysema."

Interestingly, when subjects were asked to estimate the number of joints they had smoked over the life time (according to a reference in the present study, marijuana users are more accurate in remembering previous use then other drug users), there was a dose dependent response- the more you smoke, the worse the aforementioned symptoms are.

As an interesting side note about the habits of cannabis and tobacco users, the study also demonstrated that, "Cannabis smokers used similar amounts of cannabis whether or not they were also tobacco smokers. However, tobacco smokers who smoked cannabis smoked less tobacco than those who smoked tobacco alone, with a difference of 7.4 pack-years."

Study Implications
So why might cannabis be worse?  Well, from personal experience cannabis smokers a) don't filter the smoke they inhale as tobacco users do; b) inhale and keep the smoke in their lungs much longer than tobacco users.  Although, it is interesting to note that the smoker-group smoked 20 'coffin nails' a day compared to one joint.  That is plenty!

As for public health, the authors only had this to say, "The dose equivalence of 1:2.5–5 between cannabis joints and tobacco cigarettes in causing airflow obstruction is of major public health significance."

If marijuana joints are indeed worse than 'lung darts', might we expect to see more and more pot users sufferring from these afflictions?  

I'm not so sure.  As the authors' put,  "The requirement for cannabis smokers to have a history of at least 5 joint-years was based on the data that one cannabis joint results in three to five times higher levels of carbon monoxide and tar deposition, respectively, thereby achieving an a priori equivalence between the lower limit of cannabis and tobacco smoking levels."

That said, it seems for every year of pack-a-day smoking is near equivalent to 5 years of cannabis use.  However, if cannabis is 5 times worse per joint, as the study's upper limit suggest, then the two are on par (as long as both are being used according to the study's requirements)

What do NowPublic readers think?

Advertisement
recommend This comment thread is now closed
ryan
ryan
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 10:16 on July 31st, 2007

nouseforadave, Good stuff. It seems to make sense to me, no filter...

angryindian
angryindian
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 10:37 on July 31st, 2007

Good one with the data made plain.  A goodie nouseforadave.

meyers
meyers
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 15:44 on July 31st, 2007

nouseforadave, Good Stuff...and just remember (if you still can) that for every one study there are five others that say the opposite.

0
ScienceDave

True, but the five others might not have been looking hard enough, or at the proper variables.

Of course, the very same might be true for the present study.  Now, to verify this work before 'reefer madness' sets in among the general public.

Victoria Revay
Victoria Revay
flagged this story as Good Stuff

at 15:51 on July 31st, 2007

nouseforadave, I could definitely see how this would be true.  no filters on joints...

0
txnflfan

One of the interesting things about this study is what it didn't find. Originally, as the 60's generation got older, they expected to find high incidences of lung cancer in both former smokers and of course the "forever hippie".


Interestingly they didn't find the correlation. Actually, there was a lower incidence of lung cancer in current/former pot smokers as they reached their 50's.


The theory is that there is a chemical or a combination of chemicals that inhibit the formation of cancer cells.. Which of course is good news if they can find and isolate the substance(s) and incorporate it into current preventative therapies/cures.

0
ScienceDave

Very interesting.  Could you point me in the direction of that work? Cheers

0
txnflfan

 


http://www.terradaily.com/reports/No_Cancer_Link_For_Pot_Smokers.html


 


Here you go.. Pretty neat read

0
ick911

Excellent point of view; I am sorry to say I have had to divert attention away from the hemp issue to focus on the war deception. They are well aware of this and are taking aim at "reefer madness" style propanganda to further the same ruling corporate class agenda that has been exploiting us and laughing loudly while doing it for years. I applaud your article and apoligize if I read too much into it.

This story was created over 3 months ago, the comment thread is now closed.

NowPublic on Facebook

What is NowPublic?

NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.

Find out more

Crowd Power

ryan
First Flagged at 10:16 AM, Jul 31, 2007 by ryan
These members have powered this story:

Most Recommended Stories in Health

 

closeSign in to NowPublic

is reporting from