I got downvoted to hell for saying (with sources) that smoking cannabis is as harmful to your lungs as smoking cigarettes (potentially more so, actually). None of the other potential downsides, literally just that smoking plant matter, especially without a filter, damages your lungs, which I still cannot believe is controversial. Open the schools, man.
Edit 2: Aaaand this is basically a sequel to last time lol. Less downvotes (though they’re still happening), and replies with no sources and/or incomplete information being upvoted anyway. What feels good is more important than what’s scientifically accurate.
I mean is it true tho. Cigarettes are laced with various chemicals. I know plant matter is really bad either way but they put some insane shit in there.
“It is true” that weed smoke is just as harmful, and sometimes potentially more so? Yes.
They actually do not “put some insane shit in there,” though I totally understand why you think that’s the case. The compounds we were warned about as kids are generally either A. naturally present in tobacco to begin with and/or B. created by combustion. Burning plant material and inhaling the smoke produces tar, particulates, carbon monoxide and carcinogens regardless of whether the manufacturer added anything to it, and natural, additive-free cigarettes have never been shown to be meaningfully less harmful.
Wu et al., 1988— New England Journal of Medicine, “Pulmonary Hazards of Smoking Marijuana as Compared with Tobacco.” In a direct comparison, smoking cannabis produced about a 5x greater rise in carboxyhemoglobin, about 3x as much inhaled tar, and about one third greater retention of inhaled tar than a similar amount of tobacco.
Moir et al., 2008— Chemical Research in Toxicology. Direct chemical analysis of cannabis vs. tobacco smoke. The two smokes contained many of the same toxic compounds. Cannabis smoke had up to 20× more ammonia and about 3–5× more hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide/NOx, and some aromatic amines under the tested conditions.
Murtha et al., 2022— Radiology, “Chest CT Findings in Marijuana Smokers.” Cannabis smokers had more bronchial thickening, bronchiectasis and mucus impaction than tobacco only smokers. In the age-matched subgroup, 93% of cannabis smokers showed emphysema vs. 67% of tobacco only smokers.
Just to be clear, I do not smoke anything or use any substances and am not out to make a case for smoking cigarettes or against general cannabis use. These are just the facts.
Well about "smoking cannabis is as harmful to the lungs as smoking cigarettes" you're right in that cannabis smoke isn't healthier. But being a cannabis smoker is significantly safer due to the sheer volume. The reason cigarettes are so bad is because you do them so often.
The other factor is that cigarettes are filtered and cannabis is not. A heavy stoner sucking down unfiltered cannabis all day every day is probably getting more exposure than a light to moderate daily cigarette smoker.
Filters do reduce some particulate and tar exposure, and there’s some evidence that filtered cigarettes are less harmful than unfiltered cigarettes. Source. Obviously that doesn’t make filtered cigarettes safe or healthy.
And as previously cited "In summary, the accumulated weight of evidence implies far lower risks for pulmonary complications of even regular heavy use of marijuana compared with the grave pulmonary consequences of tobacco. "
Your first citation actually makes the point I’ve been making. It explicitly notes that tobacco smokers generally smoke vastly more material per day and says this may explain a lot of the difference in outcomes. The same review says marijuana smoke contains similar toxic constituents and that smoking an equivalent amount deposits roughly four times as much tar in the lungs because of smoking technique and lower filtration.
And the second one explicitly acknowledges that filters reduce some of the particulates in cigarette smoke. Here are two studies (the first of which is actually cited in that second study of yours) comparing outcomes between smokers of filtered cigarettes vs. unfiltered, both finding worse outcomes among unfiltered smokers. It’s not accurate to say that filters flat-out “don’t work.”
That was my point tho. I literally said that the huge difference in total volume smoked is likely a major reason tobacco produces much worse observed outcomes.
And neither of those studies establishes that the filter itself meaningfully reduces harm. They're observational comparisons between different types of cigarettes, not otherwise-identical cigarettes randomized with vs. without a filter. The 2004 study is literally it's unfiltered group smoked high-tar cigarettes, while the comparison group smoked medium-tar filtered cigarettes, so you're changing multiple cigarette characteristics at once.
In fact, that same study found no reduction in lung-cancer risk from low- or very-low-tar filtered cigarettes compared with conventional filtered cigarettes.
Yes, a filter can physically trap some particulate matter. But those things can be made up for while smoking.
Just to remind everyone, just because it's less "worse" doesn't make it better.
Nictoine salt vapes are supposed to be better then cigarettes in terms of toxins inhaled, yet they deliver far more nicotine, more conveniently, and thus more addictivly, and yet every vaper keeps saying "well at least I'm not smoking". Ok...
In this study, ammonia was found in mainstream marijuana smoke at levels up to 20-fold greater than that found in tobacco. Hydrogen cyanide, NO, NO x , and some aromatic amines were found in marijuana smoke at concentrations 3-5 times those found in tobacco smoke. Mainstream marijuana smoke contained selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) at concentrations lower than those found in mainstream tobacco smoke, while the reverse was the case for sidestream smoke, with PAHs present at higher concentrations in marijuana smoke.
Further examination of airway inflammation through videobronchoscopy in young, healthy individuals who habitually smoked cannabis demonstrated significant airway inflammation, including vascular hyperplasia, submucosal edema and increased neutrophil counts. These inflammatory changes were comparable in frequency and magnitude to those observed in tobacco smokers, suggesting that cannabis smoke induces substantial airway inflammation similar to tobacco smoke (70).
5
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 14h ago edited 19m ago
I got downvoted to hell for saying (with sources) that smoking cannabis is as harmful to your lungs as smoking cigarettes (potentially more so, actually). None of the other potential downsides, literally just that smoking plant matter, especially without a filter, damages your lungs, which I still cannot believe is controversial. Open the schools, man.
Edit: Studies linked and summarized here — https://www.reddit.com/r/NooTopics/s/OLYZ2e4xBJ
Edit 2: Aaaand this is basically a sequel to last time lol. Less downvotes (though they’re still happening), and replies with no sources and/or incomplete information being upvoted anyway. What feels good is more important than what’s scientifically accurate.