Marijuana raises risk of testicular cancer

Well then boys hands of my weed, Cannabis is a female so meebee it's only meant for chicks lol! More for me ;)

Unless they were smoking the green without tobacco then this test and article is worthless.

For a more informed educated look at cannabis, check out the documentary below:

The Union The business behind getting high.

Part 1 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/sT4Ko1MHzBA/the-union-0111.html

Part 2 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/MiajhAVNbpg/the-union-0211.html

Part 3 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/R4IOODbrjtM/the-union-0311.html

Part 4 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/SK_ceoa2Eyc/the-union-0411.html

Part 5 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/2uZsrW2cia4/the-union-0511.html

Part 6 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/KKJ38cgsM8o/the-union-0611.html

Part 7 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/e2u1HJMNYS0/the-union-0711.html

Part 8 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/KwALCF_tmFM/the-union-0811.html

Part 9 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/Ip1dqY_RHt4/the-union-0911.html

Part 10 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/UGsXc1C92G4/the-union-1011.html

Part 11 - http://www.cannabis-videos.com/watchthis/DW_FPiuKiTM/the-union-1111.html

This is what Steve Shoptaw, a professor in the department of family medicine and psychiatry at UCLA, said about this study:

1) “hypothesis" that needs further testing.

2) weak association

3) study should be taken with a grain of salt

This can't be true.

Marijuana is perfect and without a single weakness.

What medicine doesn't have negative side effects?

Damn it! So women can have multiple orgasms AND smoke weed safely?! Fuck, this Josh guy isn't awesome at all...Josh the downer

Oh yea, and another thing. The title on this page at current says "Marijuana Raises Risk of Testicular Cancer".

However the title at the link is, "Marijuana May Raise Testicular Cancer Risk".

They key word here, of course, is "may". Lets not jump to conclusions and start making wild assumptions over this ok. And besides, as someone else already pointed out:

"Everyone must understand rule #1 in any scientific study....

Correlation Does Not Equal Causation!"

I'm no scientist, but this sounds like such a load of shit. Like an earlier comment says, I smell a cannabis demonizing rat.

Didn't they also say that Mountain Dew would make you sterile?

And didn't they also say that smoking pot will make you insane and out of control? Oh wait, or was it that pot will make you lazy and demotivated?

dude,

please don't harsh my mellow

Everyone must understand rule #1 in any scientific study....

Correlation Does Not Equal Causation!

In all fairness, as the study I mentioned was as old as I am, in 2006 a small (601 people) study at UCLA said their data pointed to no greater risk of lung cancer among marijuana smokers.
The quote:
"The study looked at 611 people in Los Angeles County who developed lung cancer, 601 who developed cancer of the head or neck regions, and 1,040 people without cancer who were matched on age, gender and neighborhood. The researchers used the University of Southern California Tumor Registry, which is notified as soon as a patient in Los Angeles County receives a diagnosis of cancer.
They limited the study to people under age 60. "If you were born prior to 1940, you were unlikely to be exposed to marijuana use during your teens and 20s--the time of peak marijuana use," Dr. Tashkin said. People who were exposed to marijuana use in their youth are just now getting to the age when cancer typically starts to develop, he added.

Subjects were asked about lifetime use of marijuana, tobacco and alcohol, as well as other drugs, their diet, occupation, family history of cancer and socioeconomic status. The subjects' reported use of marijuana was similar to that found in other surveys, Dr. Tashkin noted.

The heaviest smokers in the study had smoked more than 22,000 marijuana cigarettes, or joints, while moderately heavy smokers had smoked between 11,000 to 22,000 joints. Even these smokers did not have an increased risk of developing cancer. People who smoked more marijuana were not at any increased risk compared with those who smoked less marijuana or none at all.
The study found that 80% of lung cancer patients and 70% of patients with head and neck cancer had smoked tobacco, while only about half of patients with both types of cancer smoked marijuana.

I don't buy into a U.S. study on Marijuana unless they started using higher quality buds.

The U.S. policy is to use low-quality smoke for research.

Thank goodness I don't have testicles.

A short pipe is called a "midwakh" in the United Arab Emirates. In north Africa a "dabous" and a "khabour" are cited as names for small containers (even plastic) or ember fired techniques for inhaling hashish.

I guess I'll stick to cigs, jk.

Booze Does Much Much More DAMAGE !

I will check on the use of the word chillum--it may be my mistake. later,...

They don't use chillums in North Africa - chillums are exclusively Indian, Afghan and Nepalese.

you know what else raises you risk for cancer?
being fucking born.

That's what I was thinking.

Funny how in those countries in which men have been smoking or eating cannabis for centuries, the incidence of testicular cancer is no higher than everywhere else, and even lower than everywhere else. I smell a cannabis-demonizing rat...

What about eating or vaporizing?!? Run from the cure is a must see!

Watch Rick Simpson's "Run from the Cure" at www.phoenixtearsmovie.com.