Secondhand bong smoke worse than that from tobacco, study finds

1 Like

Dabs are the solution.

11 Likes

"They measured levels of fine particulate matter before, during and after eight cannabis social-smoking sessions in the living room of an apartment near campus.

They found that secondhand bong smoke contains fine particulate matter in much higher concentrations and is more dangerous compared with secondhand tobacco smoke.

The students, who provided their own cannabis and bongs, remained anonymous and were not observed during the two-hour smoke sessions."

For starters why would the test be on such a small sample 10 people not enough data points to conclude anything. Not to mention they had 8 SESHES IN 2 HRS IN AN ENCLOSED APARTMENT. They were NOT OBSERVED DURING THE SMOKE SESH. i know plenty people who smoke stoges before/after a sesh, plenty that add tobacco while they at it.

Let cigarette smokers have a 2 hr sesh in a apartment with 8 there toking it up, guarantee the lvls they found to be higher would be a joke in comparison

11 Likes

Less carcinogens for sure but we still don’t know how these levels of terpene concentrations/alcohols/esters etc affect us.

1 Like

Tobacco causes cancer because it is radioactive. To compare weed smoke to tobacco smoke is ridiculous.

2 Likes

Skip the garbage can article and go straight to the study:

Pretty much junk. No controls, too many variables. For example, in 8 sessions they find in 2 of which show a 20 fold increase, 6 of which show a 100-1000 fold increase. All that tells me is they don’t control for anything, including air flow.

That’s not to discount the observations of the study, they’re worth investigating. But, maybe, in something a little more controlled setting than ‘smoke all you want in your house bro’.

8 Likes

Tobacco causes cancer because its radioactive??? Give me a break.

It’s counter intuitive that tobacco should be any more or less radioactive than marijuana or, for that matter, parsley, wheat and anything else that grows in soil.

Tobacco studies are all slanted to foster outrage in those exposed to second hand smoke. I remember when rabid anti-smokers cited test results that there was arsenic, phosgene, mercury, pcb’s and every other bad thing in second hand smoke.

Every potentially harmful material and situation have perfectly safe levels. The poison is in the dose.

2 Likes

Uh, no, tobacco is not radioactive
Wow!

1 Like

The craziest part of being in the cannabis industry, to me, is how many people believe smoking cannabis doesn’t have deleterious effects on health, that somehow cannabinoids “cancel out” the many carcinogens and particulate produced via combustion.

People seem to totally ignore pulmonary diseases as well, somehow thinking cancer is the only possible side effect of inhaling combustion byproducts. Jury is out on concentrates too, but most likely also not a good thing.

What’s even crazier is that people think it is actually somehow beneficial to their overall health to smoke.

18 Likes
7 Likes

What the fuck
Haven’t read them yet but I stand corrected!

3 Likes

Read those links. The first 2 admit that the research adds to the reasons why smoking should be avoided.

“Trace amounts of radio isotopes”. Horse semen has trace amounts of radio isotopes.

The last study cited Chernobyl and European plants grown during/after the event.

Yes I’m cynical, but I’ve learned not to trust people and organizations with clearly defined ulterior motives.

5 Likes

god forbid we have a honest conversation on the possible negative effects of marijuana use. some people will damn near rip your head off the second you say anything remotely negative…

5 Likes

Like the tobacco companies? They knew this stuff in the 1950s.

There are lots of places in the Caribbean where you can find plenty of old rasta men who have been smoking weed for 50 and 60 years. If smoke itself or particle matter is what caused cancer, they would have it too, and they don’t. They also don’t have schizophrenia, psychosis, man boobs or any other ridiculous story made up about weed.

Setting your meds on fire and huffing the results, while effective, is pretty fucking primitive. It’s also provably bad for you.

Warming them up and huffing the results is arguably better, but even that is about immediacy and efficacy not safety imo.

7 Likes

This study brought to you by the marijuana gummy association.

13 Likes

Who cares. I live not even 3 miles from a power plant which is right near the new casino in Massachusetts. Literally can not even bullshit you, the power plant is right across the street from the Encore Casino.

So… I’m already dieing of cancer somewhere, probably
… We all are nothing won’t give you cancer or fuck up your lungs by being around it these days

I also live on the outskirts of Boston but not in the nice outskirts like Woburn or Winchester so my area has a lot of addicts smoking and polluting the air with fuck-cunt knows what.

Then the factories and the industrial zones… Like… I think bong smoke is the least of anyone’s worries.

But if you’re in a small enclosed room with a window and a plug use a damn box fan pointed out the window.

2 Likes

POWER plants dont pollute.

Well whatever the fuck else is over there has some good smoke stacks going.

I fish at the nuclear lake, they have huge stripers because its warm all year. Its moe vapor stacks than smoke