5 ms·

Out of the zillions and zillions of weed smokers over the past 100 years, there has never once been a reported case of someone dying due to carcinogenic respons

by cnp 12y ago

Out of the zillions and zillions of weed smokers over the past 100 years, there has never once been a reported case of someone dying due to carcinogenic responses to the smoke. Granted, there has never been a formal study, but there have been adjacent studies and by all intents and purposes it appears to be safe. Google around: https://www.google.com/search?q=marijuana+lung+cancer https://www.google.com/search?q=marijuana+lung+cancer

Fdndjxjxr 12y ago
That's a nice, made-up anecdote you have there.
- spacemanmatt 12y ago
  Fair enough. I suppose you are sitting on the evidence belying it?
  - mod 12y ago
    An assertion on either side needs evidence, right? He simply pointed out that it's an anecdote.
benologist 12y ago
Today we have have vastly stronger, concentrated wax/oil that can be up to 99+% THC enabling much faster and bigger consumption. Weed consumption and delivery will continue to be refined, a fatal dose is "impossible" only until it is not.
- cnp 12y ago
  Consuming anything with a sort of deadly, self-destructive intent can lead to death, one way or another. But I'm sorry, if you're going for an LD50 experience with weed, you're not going to get there --ever. Its just not possible unless you've created a medical experiment designed to kill the subject, and to get to that place I'm quite certain additional drugs would be required. Another fruitful Google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=ld50+marijuana https://www.google.com/search?q=ld50+marijuana
  - benologist 12y ago
    Innovators and inventors are being empowered by new and changing laws. Someone will invent something more potent than vaporizers until it too is replaced by something more potent. The only reason it hasn't already happened to weed is laws inhibited serious efforts and it came in a naturally consumable form that was good enough.
    - anextio 12y ago
      > more potent than vaporizers It's not the method, it's the toxicity of the chemical itself. As others have mentioned, regardless of the method of extraction, purification, or intake, this does not change the ridiculous amount that would have to be pumped into the blood in order to kill someone. Cannabinoids do not affect the brain stem, the primitive part of the brain that controls respiration and the heart. Many other drug overdoses are affected through this avenue. Cannabis does not and cannot. You would have to adulterate it with another drug, in which case, it is a different discussion.
      - benologist 12y ago
        > it is a different discussion. This isn't a discussion about how far "pure weed" can get you, it's about what's going to happen now that the laws don't deter people from applying technology and science to weed, and whether a 'fatal dose' is just a limitation of the literally stone-age techniques we currently use to consume stone-age quantities of weed in its basic plant form.
    - cnp 12y ago
      Not to sound like an ass (seriously, excuse me), but you apparently are not familiar with the effects of marijuana on the body and do not understand what you're talking about. You cannot get to that place, period. One super high dose of hash oil would knock you completely out, and we all know the story of that poor soul who ate the dense weed brownie unknowingly. You cannot just keep consuming THC in a recreational way that would kill you directly.
      - 12y ago
- techpeace 12y ago
  A "lethal" dosage of THC would require a blood transfusion - literally replacing your blood with THC until you asphyxiated. I've heard the LD50 (the lethal dosage that would kill 50% of the population) of cannabis described as "50 pounds dropped on your head from 50 feet."
  - benologist 12y ago
    That is true with today's weed and today's consumption technology. But that is also very shortsighted. We know that technology, along with research, have proven very beneficial for devising better drugs, better ways to consume drugs, and better ways to produce drugs. We know that already the concept of rolling up dead flowers to smoke has been superseded by vaporizers delivering 5 - 10 times more potency without all the smoke. We know that weed has been excluded from even basic studies, leaving much to be explored and much to learn. Alongside the studies that have not been done lies innovations and technological and scientific enhancements that have not been invented yet. There is no reason to assume we can only ever consume very tiny volumes of weed with fire, like our ancestors 700 generations ago.
    - techpeace 12y ago
      I think labelling me as "very short-sighted" because we might one day, in the future, hypothetically reach THC intake levels that are considered lethal is a bit much. We aren't there yet, and even with the technologies you mentioned, we aren't even close. You would need to ingest a third your bodyweight (conservatively) all at once to kill yourself[1]. Physiologically, you would lose motor function long before you were able to kill yourself. So maybe in 2056 if somebody produces a machine that lets you take in 50kg of THC in a single hit, don't use it. [1]: http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm
- jgrowl 12y ago
  The thing is though that with something like opium, making heroin is more potent but provides an even better feeling. With THC, you'll be more likely to reach a threshold of total discomfort and/or unconsciousness before you reach the fatal dose. It's self correcting like Mushrooms. You can take an insane amount, but there is a good chance you'll be transported to the center of hell for several hours and never ever want to go back.

by cnp 12y ago

Fdndjxjxr 12y ago

That's a nice, made-up anecdote you have there.

spacemanmatt 12y ago
Fair enough. I suppose you are sitting on the evidence belying it?
- mod 12y ago
  An assertion on either side needs evidence, right? He simply pointed out that it's an anecdote.

benologist 12y ago

Today we have have vastly stronger, concentrated wax/oil that can be up to 99+% THC enabling much faster and bigger consumption. Weed consumption and delivery will continue to be refined, a fatal dose is "impossible" only until it is not.

cnp 12y ago
Consuming anything with a sort of deadly, self-destructive intent can lead to death, one way or another. But I'm sorry, if you're going for an LD50 experience with weed, you're not going to get there --ever. Its just not possible unless you've created a medical experiment designed to kill the subject, and to get to that place I'm quite certain additional drugs would be required. Another fruitful Google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=ld50+marijuana https://www.google.com/search?q=ld50+marijuana
- benologist 12y ago
  Innovators and inventors are being empowered by new and changing laws. Someone will invent something more potent than vaporizers until it too is replaced by something more potent. The only reason it hasn't already happened to weed is laws inhibited serious efforts and it came in a naturally consumable form that was good enough.
  - anextio 12y ago
    > more potent than vaporizers It's not the method, it's the toxicity of the chemical itself. As others have mentioned, regardless of the method of extraction, purification, or intake, this does not change the ridiculous amount that would have to be pumped into the blood in order to kill someone. Cannabinoids do not affect the brain stem, the primitive part of the brain that controls respiration and the heart. Many other drug overdoses are affected through this avenue. Cannabis does not and cannot. You would have to adulterate it with another drug, in which case, it is a different discussion.
    - benologist 12y ago
      > it is a different discussion. This isn't a discussion about how far "pure weed" can get you, it's about what's going to happen now that the laws don't deter people from applying technology and science to weed, and whether a 'fatal dose' is just a limitation of the literally stone-age techniques we currently use to consume stone-age quantities of weed in its basic plant form.
  - cnp 12y ago
    Not to sound like an ass (seriously, excuse me), but you apparently are not familiar with the effects of marijuana on the body and do not understand what you're talking about. You cannot get to that place, period. One super high dose of hash oil would knock you completely out, and we all know the story of that poor soul who ate the dense weed brownie unknowingly. You cannot just keep consuming THC in a recreational way that would kill you directly.
    - 12y ago
techpeace 12y ago
A "lethal" dosage of THC would require a blood transfusion - literally replacing your blood with THC until you asphyxiated. I've heard the LD50 (the lethal dosage that would kill 50% of the population) of cannabis described as "50 pounds dropped on your head from 50 feet."
- benologist 12y ago
  That is true with today's weed and today's consumption technology. But that is also very shortsighted. We know that technology, along with research, have proven very beneficial for devising better drugs, better ways to consume drugs, and better ways to produce drugs. We know that already the concept of rolling up dead flowers to smoke has been superseded by vaporizers delivering 5 - 10 times more potency without all the smoke. We know that weed has been excluded from even basic studies, leaving much to be explored and much to learn. Alongside the studies that have not been done lies innovations and technological and scientific enhancements that have not been invented yet. There is no reason to assume we can only ever consume very tiny volumes of weed with fire, like our ancestors 700 generations ago.
  - techpeace 12y ago
    I think labelling me as "very short-sighted" because we might one day, in the future, hypothetically reach THC intake levels that are considered lethal is a bit much. We aren't there yet, and even with the technologies you mentioned, we aren't even close. You would need to ingest a third your bodyweight (conservatively) all at once to kill yourself[1]. Physiologically, you would lose motor function long before you were able to kill yourself. So maybe in 2056 if somebody produces a machine that lets you take in 50kg of THC in a single hit, don't use it. [1]: http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm
jgrowl 12y ago
The thing is though that with something like opium, making heroin is more potent but provides an even better feeling. With THC, you'll be more likely to reach a threshold of total discomfort and/or unconsciousness before you reach the fatal dose. It's self correcting like Mushrooms. You can take an insane amount, but there is a good chance you'll be transported to the center of hell for several hours and never ever want to go back.