namelesstavern.net

Marijuana use may increase the risk of developing testicular cancer, in particular a more aggressive form of the disease, according to a U.S. study published on Monday.
The study of 369 Seattle-area men ages 18 to 44 with testicular cancer and 979 men in the same age bracket without the disease found that current marijuana users were 70 percent more likely to develop it compared to nonusers.

The risk appeared to be highest among men who had reported smoking marijuana for at least 10 years, used it more than once a week or started using it before age 18, the researchers wrote in the journal Cancer.

Stephen Schwartz of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, one of the researchers, said the study was the first to explore marijuana's possible association with testicular cancer.

"This is the first study to look at this question, and by itself is not definitive. And there's a lot more research that would have to be done in order to be more confident that marijuana use really is important in a man's risk of developing testicular cancer," Schwartz said in a telephone interview.

The study found the increased risk appeared to be in the form called nonseminoma testicular cancer. It accounts for 40 percent of cases and can be more aggressive and more difficult to treat, Schwartz said.

Experts are unsure about the causes of testicular cancer, which often strikes men in their 20s and 30s. The disease is seen more commonly in men who have had an undescended testicle or have a family history of testicular cancer.

The disease usually responds well to treatment and has a five-year survival rate of about 96 percent, according to the American Cancer Society.

About 8,000 men in the United States are diagnosed with testicular cancer per year, and there are about 140,000 U.S. men alive who have survived the disease, the group said.

The researchers said they were not sure what it was about marijuana that may raise the risk. Chronic marijuana use also can have effects on the male reproductive system including decreased sperm quality, they said.

brinstar wrote:yeah use meth instead

Arlos wrote:Doesn't surprise me there's long-term impacts, same as anything else.

Now, though, ask the following questions: Which one has higher likelihood of negative repercussions from frequent use, and which set of repercussions are worse, when you compare Marijuana to Alcohol? I think you'll find that the health side effects of habitual drinking are FAR more common and FAR worse than those of habitual marijuana use.

Then ask the same question about marijuana and tobacco. You'll get exactly the same answer.

Yet alcohol and tobacco are legal, despite the greater threat of negative repercussions, and pot isn't. Seems strange to me.

Mindia, you don't like the idea of Government intruding into people's private lives, why do you support it in this case? I mean, not exactly like it harms you any if someone kicks back on their couch watching TV and chooses to smoke a bowl rather than have a couple beers....

-Arlos

brinstar wrote:but arlos, the bible says it's bad!

wait, no it doesn't


edit: hey kiddies, use meth instead! then you too can grow up to be a burned out old trucker with holes in your brain! you can even have your very own skeezy lot lizard about to crap out your bastard spawn! sign up now!

leah wrote:our momma was a peace-loving nation of the hippie variety. grass only! :D

Narrock wrote:

Arlos wrote:Doesn't surprise me there's long-term impacts, same as anything else.

Now, though, ask the following questions: Which one has higher likelihood of negative repercussions from frequent use, and which set of repercussions are worse, when you compare Marijuana to Alcohol? I think you'll find that the health side effects of habitual drinking are FAR more common and FAR worse than those of habitual marijuana use.

Then ask the same question about marijuana and tobacco. You'll get exactly the same answer.

Yet alcohol and tobacco are legal, despite the greater threat of negative repercussions, and pot isn't. Seems strange to me.

Mindia, you don't like the idea of Government intruding into people's private lives, why do you support it in this case? I mean, not exactly like it harms you any if someone kicks back on their couch watching TV and chooses to smoke a bowl rather than have a couple beers....

-Arlos

I smoked weed a few times about 18 years ago. The effects of THC are way more severe than the buzz alcohol gives you. One beer will have much less intoxicating results than one joint will. Today's marijuana is also much more potent than what we had 20 years ago. Those are good enough reasons for me to support keeping it illegal.

I smoked weed a few times about 18 years ago. The effects of THC are way more severe than the buzz alcohol gives you. One beer will have much less intoxicating results than one joint will. Today's marijuana is also much more potent than what we had 20 years ago. Those are good enough reasons for me to support keeping it illegal.

Arlos wrote:

I smoked weed a few times about 18 years ago. The effects of THC are way more severe than the buzz alcohol gives you. One beer will have much less intoxicating results than one joint will. Today's marijuana is also much more potent than what we had 20 years ago. Those are good enough reasons for me to support keeping it illegal.

Well, how much you consume will determine how fucked up you get, with any substance. Most of the people I've known who kick back drinking don't stop at one beer, they have a full 6-pack or two. So, 1 beer isn't a good baseline there, IMHO.

In any case, you brought up a fundamental question in your response: the degree of intoxication. As long as someone isn't going out driving, why should you, I, or anyone for that matter care how blotto someone gets? Does it really matter if someone just gets a buzz on or goes to the point they pass out? And either way, does it matter if someone drinks themselves into unconsciousness or smokes themselves there? How are you impacted if they choose smoking over drinking?

Now, please understand, no one's trying to tell you that YOU should use it, that is your choice. You don't like the effects on you, by all means, don't smoke. You want to stop at a light buzz as compared to passing out, that is absolutely your personal choice. Personally, alcohol has far greater negative effects on me than smoking does, actually. If I drink enough to get an alcohol buzz on, I end up with an upset stomach and feeling like crap afterward. The same is not true with marijuana. (not to mention alcohol has a ton of calories and pot has none, etc.)

So again, keeping the fundamental belief I know you have of the government staying out of your private life, why should the government, you, or anyone else care whether someone smokes themselves into a buzz or drinks themselves there, as long as they don't do something no one supports, like going driving, etc? (and even then, CHP studies in the 80s showed alcohol caused far greater driving impairment than pot did, though driving under the influence of anything is incredibly stupid)

-Arlos

Narrock wrote:

leah wrote:our momma was a peace-loving nation of the hippie variety. grass only! :D

That explains a lot of the apparent malfunctioning neurotransmitters in your brother's brain.

Narrock wrote:

leah wrote:our momma was a peace-loving nation of the hippie variety. grass only! :D

That explains a lot of the apparent malfunctioning neurotransmitters in your brother's brain.

Arlos wrote:

I smoked weed a few times about 18 years ago. The effects of THC are way more severe than the buzz alcohol gives you. One beer will have much less intoxicating results than one joint will. Today's marijuana is also much more potent than what we had 20 years ago. Those are good enough reasons for me to support keeping it illegal.

Well, how much you consume will determine how fucked up you get, with any substance. Most of the people I've known who kick back drinking don't stop at one beer, they have a full 6-pack or two. So, 1 beer isn't a good baseline there, IMHO.

In any case, you brought up a fundamental question in your response: the degree of intoxication. As long as someone isn't going out driving, why should you, I, or anyone for that matter care how blotto someone gets? Does it really matter if someone just gets a buzz on or goes to the point they pass out? And either way, does it matter if someone drinks themselves into unconsciousness or smokes themselves there? How are you impacted if they choose smoking over drinking?

Now, please understand, no one's trying to tell you that YOU should use it, that is your choice. You don't like the effects on you, by all means, don't smoke. You want to stop at a light buzz as compared to passing out, that is absolutely your personal choice. Personally, alcohol has far greater negative effects on me than smoking does, actually. If I drink enough to get an alcohol buzz on, I end up with an upset stomach and feeling like crap afterward. The same is not true with marijuana. (not to mention alcohol has a ton of calories and pot has none, etc.)

So again, keeping the fundamental belief I know you have of the government staying out of your private life, why should the government, you, or anyone else care whether someone smokes themselves into a buzz or drinks themselves there, as long as they don't do something no one supports, like going driving, etc? (and even then, CHP studies in the 80s showed alcohol caused far greater driving impairment than pot did, though driving under the influence of anything is incredibly stupid)

-Arlos

Narrock wrote:

Arlos wrote:

I smoked weed a few times about 18 years ago. The effects of THC are way more severe than the buzz alcohol gives you. One beer will have much less intoxicating results than one joint will. Today's marijuana is also much more potent than what we had 20 years ago. Those are good enough reasons for me to support keeping it illegal.

Well, how much you consume will determine how fucked up you get, with any substance. Most of the people I've known who kick back drinking don't stop at one beer, they have a full 6-pack or two. So, 1 beer isn't a good baseline there, IMHO.

In any case, you brought up a fundamental question in your response: the degree of intoxication. As long as someone isn't going out driving, why should you, I, or anyone for that matter care how blotto someone gets? Does it really matter if someone just gets a buzz on or goes to the point they pass out? And either way, does it matter if someone drinks themselves into unconsciousness or smokes themselves there? How are you impacted if they choose smoking over drinking?

Now, please understand, no one's trying to tell you that YOU should use it, that is your choice. You don't like the effects on you, by all means, don't smoke. You want to stop at a light buzz as compared to passing out, that is absolutely your personal choice. Personally, alcohol has far greater negative effects on me than smoking does, actually. If I drink enough to get an alcohol buzz on, I end up with an upset stomach and feeling like crap afterward. The same is not true with marijuana. (not to mention alcohol has a ton of calories and pot has none, etc.)

So again, keeping the fundamental belief I know you have of the government staying out of your private life, why should the government, you, or anyone else care whether someone smokes themselves into a buzz or drinks themselves there, as long as they don't do something no one supports, like going driving, etc? (and even then, CHP studies in the 80s showed alcohol caused far greater driving impairment than pot did, though driving under the influence of anything is incredibly stupid)

-Arlos

Some states have made marijuana legal for medicinal purposes. However, it's still illegal on a Federal level. Don't you think that if the government thought it was "ok" for you to smoke it, even in moderate quantities, that they would make it legal? After all, the Feds would love to tax it and get millions of dollars from the sales of marijuana wouldn't they? The answer is that it's bad for you... very bad for you, thus it remains illegal. Alcohol, in small quantities and in moderate use (since you want to compare and contrast marijuana vs alcohol), actually has health benefits attached to it. Google it if you don't believe me.

Overall, the general consensus is that marijuana is way worse for you than alcohol. It's hilarious to see how people (potheads like Brinstar for example) get all irate as soon as somebody brings up any negative aspects to marijuana use. It should remain illegal for obvious reasons. Brinstar's brain is fried beyond repair, so I don't expect him to accept the facts (like a normal person). And for the love of God... don't bring "prohibition" into the argument (not saying you are). Marijuana has hundreds of toxic chemicals in it that have adverse effects on the human body. You can't say that about alcohol. Uh oh... checkmate. So it *may* have a couple of alleged positive qualities to it, like for cataracts patients, and people with aids because it stimulates their appetite. Yay. /yawn And on a side note, marijuana has a Godaweful odor too. Disgusting.