growhi
Member
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...icular-cancer-risk-reduced-using-COCAINE.html
seems like they come out with new theory's every week
seems like they come out with new theory's every week
Cannabis smokers 'more likely to develop testicular cancer'
- Thread starter growhi
- Start date
What a crock!
What a crock!
What a crock!
I can't believe you had the balls to post that!
~mT
~mT
ya it was on da news.now everyone reach down grab your boys and feel for bumps LOL report back
where's mynameCYRUS when ya need him???
i heard a few stories about t cancer. one was about an exploding nut. dont know how true that one was tho.
H
h^2 O
bullshit
not only does cannabis great for people going through things like chemo therapy or having MS but they are now seeing that it actually KILLS and PREVENTS cancer.
Fuck....ancient EGYPT
not only does cannabis great for people going through things like chemo therapy or having MS but they are now seeing that it actually KILLS and PREVENTS cancer.
Fuck....ancient EGYPT
yes but cancer isnt just one thing,, it is caused by many different breakdowns of specific systems, and feeds off different chemistry but can jump to similar areas easier ie calcium in the bones and breasts but they usually always have something to do with free radicals which is why antioxidants are so well recognised for fighting cancers..
maybe ganja smokers spend more time sitting on their balls? anyway according to the mail we can all take their drug of choice to sort it out
take a little of everything and you will be safe, just make sure you know what everything is..
maybe ganja smokers spend more time sitting on their balls? anyway according to the mail we can all take their drug of choice to sort it out
take a little of everything and you will be safe, just make sure you know what everything is..
1
187020
Closet vasectomy...
Closet vasectomy...
Snipping sloppy sours
Closet vasectomy...
Snipping sloppy sours
This is just the excuse Ive needed to get deep ball therapy at the local PT joint. You know an ounce of prevention is worth two pounds of balls.
1
187020
And forks make people fat. Believe they said the same thing a couple of years ago.
Look! That asian girl is holding a bowl full of all the balls she has personally cured of cancer... but I'll try "A lot" of asians girls just to be sure the cure lasts. Repeat applications damnit if thats what it takes.
There does seem to be an agenda... It made my local news too.
Wonder why they don't say that breathing the city air causes cancer... Or drinking the water supply... Or eating through the processed foods channels... Or living under the nuclear clouds... Or letting your kids roll around on new carpet... Or anything else from modern industry...? Nah, it's the weed... But they got a pill to fix us, no doubt.
If you read the article, it says there was only 163 people surveyed.. that small of a sample size tells us nothing, other than the bias of the researcher...
Also, it mentions that for frequent users there is no increased risk...
“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.”
Homer Simpson
Also, it mentions that for frequent users there is no increased risk...
“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything. 14% of people know that.”
Homer Simpson
That article cited: Both groups had been interviewed about their health and drug use between 1987 and 1994.
Nobody picked up on some testicular cancer risk for users prior to 1987? Weed has been around for a long while....most prominent and past recent use was the 60's and 70's....how are those pairs of balls doing? Any increased risk there?!
People started eating and doing all sorts of other shit in the 80's including all sorts of other designer drugs.
They mentioned cocaine use in that study didn't increase the risk of testicular cancer....BUT wanna make a bet that folks that use cocaine + weed most probably use unknown other drugs in unknown quantities at unknown frequencies and therefore MAY contribute to ball problems?
It's a bit hard singling out any one particular thing. Do you think that that orignal study accounted for all sorts of other drug use including but not limited to prescription drugs...which include things such as vaccinations, allergy medication, acne medication, etc....etc....etc.
Things that may or may not have been in rotation prior to 1987. Let's face it, folks are giant sacs of pharmaceuticals.........so just MAYBE there's some interaction between all that shit at certain developmental stages in puberty or thereafter. Don't look at connections between all that jazz however......use fear and politicking to scare folks off marijuana....that's the ticket!
I was taught that there's only correlation in science, very often there's no definitive way to define causality. You can show an increased correlation, but that's about it.....and for the mostpart you can show correlation between things using one variable reliably. That in no way demonstrates that it's the only reason or only possibility. Quite possibly there's some occult or unknown variable that's not being observed and therefore accounted for. Much better to come out and scare folks tho.....especially in a CANCER journal.
You know, there's one thing that appeared slightly competitive with cancer treatments in the "alternative" realm: marijuana. If you wanted to take out your chemotherapy/radiation competition, it might be best to start poking holes in the competitors: ie-marijuana the great evil. Next thing you know, Pepsi or Coke is going to fund a study that clearly demonstrates that increased milk and orange juice consumption leads to diabetes....
Nobody picked up on some testicular cancer risk for users prior to 1987? Weed has been around for a long while....most prominent and past recent use was the 60's and 70's....how are those pairs of balls doing? Any increased risk there?!
People started eating and doing all sorts of other shit in the 80's including all sorts of other designer drugs.
They mentioned cocaine use in that study didn't increase the risk of testicular cancer....BUT wanna make a bet that folks that use cocaine + weed most probably use unknown other drugs in unknown quantities at unknown frequencies and therefore MAY contribute to ball problems?
It's a bit hard singling out any one particular thing. Do you think that that orignal study accounted for all sorts of other drug use including but not limited to prescription drugs...which include things such as vaccinations, allergy medication, acne medication, etc....etc....etc.
Things that may or may not have been in rotation prior to 1987. Let's face it, folks are giant sacs of pharmaceuticals.........so just MAYBE there's some interaction between all that shit at certain developmental stages in puberty or thereafter. Don't look at connections between all that jazz however......use fear and politicking to scare folks off marijuana....that's the ticket!
I was taught that there's only correlation in science, very often there's no definitive way to define causality. You can show an increased correlation, but that's about it.....and for the mostpart you can show correlation between things using one variable reliably. That in no way demonstrates that it's the only reason or only possibility. Quite possibly there's some occult or unknown variable that's not being observed and therefore accounted for. Much better to come out and scare folks tho.....especially in a CANCER journal.
You know, there's one thing that appeared slightly competitive with cancer treatments in the "alternative" realm: marijuana. If you wanted to take out your chemotherapy/radiation competition, it might be best to start poking holes in the competitors: ie-marijuana the great evil. Next thing you know, Pepsi or Coke is going to fund a study that clearly demonstrates that increased milk and orange juice consumption leads to diabetes....
I'm hesitant to even bump this because it's such bullshit and even talking about it lends more credence than it deserves, but this has been on my mind all day and I need to vent please.
I was channel surfing this morning and saw Dr. Drew was on The View. I usually don't like that show with those biddies talking over each other and sometimes just asinine subjects, but I always thought Dr. Drew was cool.
Except he mentioned that link from that study of ~165 people that had a higher incidence of ball cancer and had toked when young. One of the researchers was trying to find a link/causation and mentioned that correlation as being there. Cancer magazine caught that comment and ran with it. Then media outlets caught it and ran with it changing what was said to fit there agendas, get more readers. Now he didn't say all that, only about the possible link and said it was, "as yet unsubstantiated". Wait... so it will be? That alone didn't annoy me much. But when he said pot was the hardest drug to quit compared to opiates, alcohol, cocaine or even heroin I really got riled.
I can't believe a professional, scientist, physician saying that shit. This has gotten way out of hand. I've heard Drew say pot is relatively benign. Holy shit. He sure did a 180.
A little about me. I'm 57, stated smoking way back in the early '70s. I quit in the early 80s after a few years serving my country and didn't want to get caught by the golden flow tests (I had buddies who did) and also raising a family. Then my Korean wife didn't like that "happy smoke" either. Gotta keep the queen happy so the house is happy, ya know? She died in 2006. I've been growing and toking since a few months after that. I had a kind of scientific career as a weather forecaster for the AF. I know scientific bullshit when I hear it. I did some of that myself. This is way beyond the pale, not even close. Makes you wonder about Drew's motives. I think he sees big pharma money and wants a chunk or wants to keep those creeps happy. Whatever. What an ass. Fuck him.
I was channel surfing this morning and saw Dr. Drew was on The View. I usually don't like that show with those biddies talking over each other and sometimes just asinine subjects, but I always thought Dr. Drew was cool.
Except he mentioned that link from that study of ~165 people that had a higher incidence of ball cancer and had toked when young. One of the researchers was trying to find a link/causation and mentioned that correlation as being there. Cancer magazine caught that comment and ran with it. Then media outlets caught it and ran with it changing what was said to fit there agendas, get more readers. Now he didn't say all that, only about the possible link and said it was, "as yet unsubstantiated". Wait... so it will be? That alone didn't annoy me much. But when he said pot was the hardest drug to quit compared to opiates, alcohol, cocaine or even heroin I really got riled.
I can't believe a professional, scientist, physician saying that shit. This has gotten way out of hand. I've heard Drew say pot is relatively benign. Holy shit. He sure did a 180.
A little about me. I'm 57, stated smoking way back in the early '70s. I quit in the early 80s after a few years serving my country and didn't want to get caught by the golden flow tests (I had buddies who did) and also raising a family. Then my Korean wife didn't like that "happy smoke" either. Gotta keep the queen happy so the house is happy, ya know? She died in 2006. I've been growing and toking since a few months after that. I had a kind of scientific career as a weather forecaster for the AF. I know scientific bullshit when I hear it. I did some of that myself. This is way beyond the pale, not even close. Makes you wonder about Drew's motives. I think he sees big pharma money and wants a chunk or wants to keep those creeps happy. Whatever. What an ass. Fuck him.
