|
05-22-2011, 01:16 AM | #1 |
Elitist
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Moto: Gix 750
Posts: 11,351
|
^ Heavy pot smokers having less cancer than non-smokers? I am calling bs. Yeah, I know the claim that pot acts as an "expectorant", but please......if you're a "heavy" smoker of ANYTHING, you're going to cause some damage. Besides, why even smoke it when there are safer ways of using it?
|
05-22-2011, 02:16 AM | #2 |
Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Here to integrity
Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja
Posts: 7,482
|
Dude, it was all over the news. I posted links. It's the largest study ever done. The heavy pot smokers were the least likely to develop lung cancer.
If that fucks with your reality too much, you probably want to ignore the statistic that chronic alcohol drinkers outlive non-drinkers also.
__________________
Insert free thought here. |
05-24-2011, 12:57 AM | #3 | ||
Follower
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,549
|
Quote:
Everything that I have found on that study says that MJ does not increase the odds of lung cancer but I have seen nothing from that study showing it decrease the odds. In fact, according to what i have read on that same study: Quote:
__________________
Racing For Smiles |
||
05-22-2011, 04:03 AM | #4 |
Elitist
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: SF Bay Area
Moto: Gix 750
Posts: 11,351
|
Define "chronic".
And how did they control the different groups to make sure they led the same type of lifestyle? (i.e. diet, exercise, sleep, etc.) |
05-22-2011, 10:44 AM | #5 |
Hopster
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Austin, TX
Moto: 2009 Buell 1125R
Posts: 4,743
|
__________________
“Well, obviously before; after was all gendarmes and dick stitches.” |
05-22-2011, 11:04 AM | #6 |
Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Here to integrity
Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja
Posts: 7,482
|
Google motherfucker, do I look like Louis?
__________________
Insert free thought here. |
05-22-2011, 01:03 PM | #7 |
AMA Supersport
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,756
|
This is great, everybody arguing over the misinformation about their drug of choice.
Blaming Savage's death on any one thing is pretty likely to be hopeless. The lifestyles of professional wrestlers tend to lead to early deaths. I can't think of another "sport" where chronic steroid abuse, chronic alcohol abuse, chronic recreational drug abuse, and chronic prescription drug abuse are all present, if not encouraged. We can factor in the constant abuse their bodies take and injuries that aren't given time to heal as well. All this has lead to a lot of deaths at relatively young ages. Macho Man made it to his late 50s which is actually pretty good. There are a ton of pro wrestlers who have died in their 30s and 40s. I have to say I'm with Apoc though, he made his choice and I'm not about to start shedding tears over it. |
05-22-2011, 01:10 PM | #8 |
Crotch Rocket Curmudgeon
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Here to integrity
Moto: Li'l red baby Ninja
Posts: 7,482
|
Of course. You can turn up the wick, but it burns out sooner. I doubt any of the people in that particular part of show business aren't keenly aware of the inherent risks of their occupation.
__________________
Insert free thought here. |
05-24-2011, 03:25 AM | #9 |
Chaotic Neutral
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cherry Hill NJ
Moto: GV1200 Madura, Hawk gt
Posts: 13,992
|
what killed savage was OAK not coke
__________________
TWF Post whore #6 |
05-24-2011, 09:37 AM | #10 |
Moto GP Star
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 11,022
|
just saw this on yahoo and thought it was interesting.
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/post/O...?urn=top-wp132 |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|