whatdrought

I’m not arguing about the toxcicity of marijuana... go back and look at the context of the thread. My chief argument is that inhaling smoke is always bad for the body and that it is bad to a greater extent than the consumption of sugar.

You could, and it sounds like you want to try. But without a comprehensive study that demonstrates it, i'm happy with the reality that you're wrong and simply trying to fit your narrative. But have fun with that. and for the second point, do tell me how you know more about lungs than the american Lung association. I wont wait because i'm done with this thread and with people who are willing to deny logical and science to excuse vices. Smoke is harmful to lung health. Whether from burning wood, tobacco or marijuana, toxins and carcinogens are released from the combustion of materials. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke.4-7 https://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/marijuana-and-lung-health.html

What a bunch of Nancys.

Yes, there are... That article clearly indicates the differences. Smoking anything is bad. Clearly. The health issues of pot outside of smoking is another conversation for another day. Smoking pot is bad because it's inhaling smoke into your lungs. It is worse than sugar in it's negative health impact.

Foster against the lions was a thing of beauty. Not sure if that counts as deep, as it was about 40 yards?

I played 8th grade ball and that was it. I loved it but we moved and it never worked for me to play later. That one year did do a lot for me to go from a watcher of the game to actually knowing how it works.

Tomato Tahmato https://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/smoking-facts/marijuana-and-lung-health.html

I don't have evidence and I don't necessarily feel the need to research it myself as It seems (and feel free to disagree with this) pretty instinctual that smoking any kind of substance is worse for the body than consuming a relative equal amount of sugar... One argument for this would be to look at how much sugar the average person consumes during any given day, and then compare the number of deaths related to smoking (which is done by a smaller population than those that consume sugar) and then look at deaths caused by sugar. Again... This doesn't seem like something that is debatable, but maybe I'm missing it... Edit: here's some basic research: https://www.livescience.com/51385-sugary-drinks-global-deaths.html Sugary Drinks Kill 184,000 People Every Year https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States, including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure. This is about one in five deaths annually, or 1,300 deaths every day.1 As for the article that you referenced, it's worthless in this conversation because it doesn't speak to quantities and it isn't comparative. I am willing and able to admit sugar, especially large quantities of sugar, is terrible for the body. That isn't my argument at all. As for the scientist opinion, there is more anti-smoking literature in the world (not to mention laws) than there is ant-sugar.

This is in no way a counter to what I said.

Yep. I am saying that from 0, sugar does less damage than smoking does. Both long term and short term. Now, the issue, and what I imagine will be your counter, is that so many people consume so much sugar, that compared to smoking the effects are definitely more evident in society at large. What I am saying is that blank slate, if somehow we said that xsmoking and xsugar is equal, then had perfectly healthy bodies consume x for so many days, smoking would cause the bigger issue sooner and over time. Our bodies are made to break down sugar- not to the quantities that we eat, but to some level- meanwhile, our bodies don't have a system for dealing with inhaled smoke.

I'm with you on all of that. The recent thing with CBD oil becoming prevalent allowing people to utilize the medicinal properties without the (what some would call) negative properties is incredible.

And that's fine. I'm not begrudging him that right at all. Just curious for why and how and what for his specific circumstances.

You can argue that sugar is bad for you, and even that it may have carcinogenic effects, I don't know anyone who is going to say wholeheartedly that Sugar isn't bad at all... That being said, I don't think you have much room to argue that sugar is as bad, at it's root, for the human body as smoking anything...

The realization that some day, Tom Brady will die. That is 100% healthy for me.

Okay, you say you've been sober for damn near 15 years as a response to me joking about you smoking weed, which, given context, would make it sound like you used to but now do not? At least that you avoid any form of conscious altering vices (I assume that's why you're sober?)- So why a big proponent of weed? I'm not trying to bust your chops, just curios to see what that balance is for you?

Congratulations man, that's great! That being said, you're the only person in here throwing insults and getting up in their feelings.

Speaking of long term negative affects to the brain and overall ability to not be a piece of *****...

Just don't mix the colors. I know they say yellow is universal, but it just doesn't seem worth the risk.

We're growing as a society. We're no longer interested in clean-clean squishies. Now we like that car go-go stuff. It even comes in a myriad of flavors and colors which really heightens the experience.

Only 65 minutes left. You can make it.

Wow. You really are behind on current culture man.

So one could say that you're close minded to close minded people?...

Intake of little debs after smoking maybe.. Jeez. I prefer more southern delivery methods...

I hear great things about snorting antifreeze.... Same logic?