The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
New Study says Marijuana May Raise the Risk of testicular Cancer
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
WASHINGTON - 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.
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't there several studies that have the exact opposite conclusion as this one? Did I miss something? I remember seeing citations in the other thread, one of my main purpose's in making this thread is to try and collate those sources to form a counter argument.
I think some studies have shown that marijuana contains chemicals that hamper tumor growth, but that doesn't mean it can't also contain chemicals that cause cell damage and increase the risk of getting cancer. False dichotomy.
There was a study that was released recently that showed that smoking pot actually reduced the size of tumors in lung cancer patients. Yet, it may give you ball cancer. Interesting.
mystikspyral on
"When life gives you lemons, just say 'Fuck the lemons,' and bail" :rotate:
0
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
There was a study that was released recently that showed that smoking pot actually reduced the size of tumors in lung cancer patients. Yet, it may give you ball cancer. Interesting.
Not interesting, bad. How are people supposed to continue their illicit lifestyles with impunity if shit like this is constantly forcing us to acknowledge reality?
It's hard to burn organic matter in general without ending up with something that's a carcinogen, just because of the way combustion works you end up with so many different chemicals in trace amounts in smoke. That doesn't mean there can't be tumor suppressing chemicals as well that are released.
Testicular cancer seems like a very odd thing for people to be getting though, that would seem to imply something in marijuana is acting as a androgen analog, which is not impossible but is not something you'd generally expect.
Edit: Or apparently I'm remembering wrong, it was prostate cancer that increased androgens cause, apparently no currently known substances increase testicular cancer risk, which would make marijuana doing it even more bizzare.
I wasn't aware that there was a rule in this thread stipulating that we aren't allowed to find the subject and its studies and conflicts interesting. Whoops.
mystikspyral on
"When life gives you lemons, just say 'Fuck the lemons,' and bail" :rotate:
0
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
There was a study that was released recently that showed that smoking pot actually reduced the size of tumors in lung cancer patients. Yet, it may give you ball cancer. Interesting.
Not interesting, bad. How are people supposed to continue their illicit lifestyles with impunity if shit like this is constantly forcing us to acknowledge reality?
Lol it's funny because you need studies to validate your opposition to marijuana.
It's a good thing studies on this subject are so clear cut against it, amirite?
I would be interested to know who's doing all these studies all of the sudden. You get the claims that it causes ball cancer (actually, I thought I heard this one before) and the study that says that pot will reduce your ability to play video games effectively, both within a week of the DOJ edict to stop pursuing medical marijuana cases.
I would be interested to know who's doing all these studies all of the sudden. You get the claims that it causes ball cancer (actually, I thought I heard this one before) and the study that says that pot will reduce your ability to play video games effectively, both within a week of the DOJ edict to stop pursuing medical marijuana cases.
I'm just saying the timing is interesting.
Clinical studies can take years to process and publish, there is really no timing for when it gets accepted by a scientific journal, nor when it gets published.
There was a study that was released recently that showed that smoking pot actually reduced the size of tumors in lung cancer patients. Yet, it may give you ball cancer. Interesting.
Not interesting, bad. How are people supposed to continue their illicit lifestyles with impunity if shit like this is constantly forcing us to acknowledge reality?
Lol it's funny because you need studies to validate your opposition to marijuana.
It's a good thing studies on this subject are so clear cut against it, amirite?
So are you going to be completely immature on this subject or acknowledge the growing presence of marijuana research in vivo and in vitro, for better and for worse?
I'm going to predict that the lack of data on the socioeconomics of pot usage caused the study to be skewed by the carcinogen access (okay, wrong word, I can't seem to think of the right word at the moment. It's on the tip of my fingers) of those from a pot-likely background.
Well the video games thing definitely isn't true. I'm pretty sure I don't have ball cancer either.
Yet.
Also, George Carlin once said "Scientists have discovered that saliva causes stomach cancer, but only when swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time."
It's hard to burn organic matter in general without ending up with something that's a carcinogen, just because of the way combustion works you end up with so many different chemicals in trace amounts in smoke.
Well, a safer alternative to lighting up is to use a vaporizer.
Barrakketh on
Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
There was a study that was released recently that showed that smoking pot actually reduced the size of tumors in lung cancer patients. Yet, it may give you ball cancer. Interesting.
Not interesting, bad. How are people supposed to continue their illicit lifestyles with impunity if shit like this is constantly forcing us to acknowledge reality?
If a study came out that brought up 70% increase in testicular cancer correlated with moderate alcohol drinking, would you stop drinking?
I'm going to predict that the lack of data on the socioeconomics of pot usage caused the study to be skewed by the carcinogen access (okay, wrong word, I can't seem to think of the right word at the moment. It's on the tip of my fingers) of those from a pot-likely background.
There was a study that was released recently that showed that smoking pot actually reduced the size of tumors in lung cancer patients. Yet, it may give you ball cancer. Interesting.
Not interesting, bad. How are people supposed to continue their illicit lifestyles with impunity if shit like this is constantly forcing us to acknowledge reality?
Everything causes cancer. Are you breathing? Well, then you're inhaling carcinogens. Do you eat food and drink liquids? You're digesting carcinogens. Pretending that causing cancer somehow makes marijuana magically special, instead of a member of the genus "everything, ever" is fucking retarded.
To be realistic, increasing risk of testicular cancer from the 1 in 20,000 of the general population to 1 in 12,000 or so is pretty small potatoes as cancer risks go.
To be realistic, increasing risk of testicular cancer from the 1 in 20,000 of the general population to 1 in 12,000 or so is pretty small potatoes as cancer risks go.
Personally, I'm banking on the Singularity to happen before I inevitably die of diabetes. I'll just add testicular cancer to the list of things I'm planning on robots curing before I die from.
I'm going to predict that the lack of data on the socioeconomics of pot usage caused the study to be skewed by the carcinogen access (okay, wrong word, I can't seem to think of the right word at the moment. It's on the tip of my fingers) of those from a pot-likely background.
Standard Deviation from median area income?
Isn't pot more popular among rich urbans than poor rurals, like some sort of anti-meth?
Whew, glad I don't have testicles. To think... the devil weed was really sneaking up on me this whole time, waiting to strike a deadly blow to my gonads. I feel like I've just dodged a bullet. Just to be on the safe side: never do anything for more than ten years, more than once a week, or before you're 18. You may get cancer and die. Furthermore, never participate in cancer studies in regards to any particular activity; that seems like especially risky behavior.
Whew, glad I don't have testicles. To think... the devil weed was really sneaking up on me this whole time, waiting to strike a deadly blow to my gonads. I feel like I've just dodged a bullet. Just to be on the safe side: never do anything for more than ten years, more than once a week, or before you're 18. You may get cancer and die. Furthermore, never participate in cancer studies in regards to any particular activity; that seems like especially risky behavior.
Apparently marijuana also does wierd things to female reproductive systems, it has substances that act as estrogen-analogs, causing decreases in fertility and whatnot (come to think of it, this might be a reasonable mechanism for the ball thing as well).
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Yeah, my understanding of pot research is that about 1 in 20 studies find a positive correlation between pot use and disease x, while the other 19 find none. Additionally, many of these studies have been criticized for neglecting to separate tobacco smokers and drinkers in their samples. So, as the OP emphasized, nothing here is definitive. I'm just glad they're doing research.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
This is clear evidence that people who smoke marijuana shouldn't have the right to do whatever they want to with their own bodies, even if they are being responsible about it. We must protect them from themselves.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
Heart-disease is still the #1 killer in America.
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
On this subject it's hard to tell, since that's a real argument real people use. With disturbing regularity.
It's hard to burn organic matter in general without ending up with something that's a carcinogen, just because of the way combustion works you end up with so many different chemicals in trace amounts in smoke.
Well, a safer alternative to lighting up is to use a vaporizer.
Vaporizers are probably the greatest invention ever.
Posts
Not interesting, bad. How are people supposed to continue their illicit lifestyles with impunity if shit like this is constantly forcing us to acknowledge reality?
Testicular cancer seems like a very odd thing for people to be getting though, that would seem to imply something in marijuana is acting as a androgen analog, which is not impossible but is not something you'd generally expect.
Edit: Or apparently I'm remembering wrong, it was prostate cancer that increased androgens cause, apparently no currently known substances increase testicular cancer risk, which would make marijuana doing it even more bizzare.
Lol it's funny because you need studies to validate your opposition to marijuana.
It's a good thing studies on this subject are so clear cut against it, amirite?
I'm just saying the timing is interesting.
Edit: Damn, beat!
Yet.
Also, George Carlin once said "Scientists have discovered that saliva causes stomach cancer, but only when swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time."
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970666737/
Well, a safer alternative to lighting up is to use a vaporizer.
Standard Deviation from median area income?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Isn't pot more popular among rich urbans than poor rurals, like some sort of anti-meth?
Although, as you said, meth is sort of replacing it, especially among the poor rural demographic.
Sorry, had to say it.
Apparently marijuana also does wierd things to female reproductive systems, it has substances that act as estrogen-analogs, causing decreases in fertility and whatnot (come to think of it, this might be a reasonable mechanism for the ball thing as well).
Exactly.
This, ten thousand times.
Can I join the division of the Department of Health and Human Services that throws people in prison for fifteen years for eating too much McDonald's?
McDonald's is an all-American institution, you traitor.
But it's loyal to the pope.
Heart-disease is still the #1 killer in America.
Are you posting from a grassy knoll?
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
On this subject it's hard to tell, since that's a real argument real people use. With disturbing regularity.
Vaporizers are probably the greatest invention ever.