cannabisnews.com: Cannabis 'Could Kill 30,000 a Year' Cannabis 'Could Kill 30,000 a Year' Posted by CN Staff on May 01, 2003 at 18:14:33 PT By David Derbyshire Source: Daily Telegraph UK Cannabis could be a "major health hazard" that kills up to 30,000 people every year in Britain, doctors report today. Although the long-term health risks are poorly understood, researchers believe that the drug could be placing a huge burden on society.The estimated death toll, which appears in a paper in the British Medical Journal, is based on the known risks of cigarette smoking and assumes that cannabis causes as much harm. Although cannabis cigarettes are smoked less frequently than tobacco ones, smokers often inhale much deeper and for longer.Prof John Henry, a specialist in accident and emergency medicine at Imperial College, London, said: "Even if the number of deaths attributable to cannabis smoking turned out to be a fraction of the 30,000 we believe could be possible, cannabis smoking would still be described as a major health hazard. If we also add in the likely mental health burden to that of medical illnesses and premature death, the potential effects of cannabis cannot be ignored."Prof Henry and his colleagues argued that if 120,000 deaths are caused among 13 million smokers each year, the corresponding figure among the estimated 3.5 million cannabis smokers would be 30,000 - assuming the health effects were the same.The level of the active ingredient in cannabis, THC, has increased from an average of 0.5 per cent 20 years ago to almost five per cent today, the doctors said. THC has marked effects on the heart and blood vessels.The report points out that regular use of cannabis is associated with a higher risk of mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia and depression. It also causes chronic bronchitis and emphysema, and there were reports of lung, tongue, and other cancers in cannabis users.Source: Daily Telegraph (UK)Author: David DerbyshirePublished: Friday, May 02, 2003Copyright: 2003 Telegraph Group LimitedContact: dtletters telegraph.co.ukWebsite: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ Related Articles & Web Site:Drugs Uncovered: Observer UKhttp://freedomtoexhale.com/dc.htmCannabis May Become Aspirin of the 21st Century http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread16007.shtmlCannabis a Medical Miracle - It's Official http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11254.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #27 posted by FoM on May 02, 2003 at 22:01:49 PT Mike Hi to you too! I know a couple of Mikes so I'm not sure which one you are but Hi back at ya! [ Post Comment ] Comment #26 posted by Lehder on May 02, 2003 at 19:24:10 PT partying with Udey and George "Saddam was like the Talibans who does not let anyone smoke."-ffIt's hard to get a straight story about some of these topics. Under Saddam, I'm sure one was not allowed to smoke weed, even though he himslef drinks wine. An issue of Atlantic Magazine a few months ago carried a long article that told how his son, Udey, held wild parties with lots of girls and loads of booze. Udey would drink himself to oblivion and sometimes spray the revelers with machine guns, killing some. Attendance at his parties, for those invited, was mandatory. But I have seen pictures captioned, "Taliban fighters smoking hashish on a break." Also, I read more than a year ago that the penalty for growing weed under Taliban rule was that the grower was jailed until his family uprooted the plants, then released. Anyway, we have fifty states. And the idea was that each state should have great latitude in making its own rules. The results of those policies would be plain for all to see, and each state would learn form the successes and failures of others. Fifty experiments in democracy, and at least one place where anyone can fit in. But our inflexible system enforces uniformity in all states. Worse, the more problems a foolish law creates in our system, the more vigorously it is enforced. Ours is like one big mandatory party in Baghdad, and lots of people get hurt. [ Post Comment ] Comment #25 posted by freedom fighter on May 02, 2003 at 18:40:45 PT Awww shucks, Ledher Maybe the Internet will be the key? I checked the goggle, and came up with many sites devoted to growing tobacco.. http://www.google.com/search?q=growing+tobacco+&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8Your idea might just work or it might just backfire, my friend. Bush's kinfolk sounds very talibainious!Few weeks ago, I found it ironic when a reporter asked an Iraq? how he felt when Saddam is gone, he said he was so happy because Saddam was like the Talibans who does not let anyone smoke. That article was written for msnbc.com.. I wished I had posted that article here. oh well!pazff [ Post Comment ] Comment #24 posted by Lehder on May 02, 2003 at 13:59:32 PT arcata sounds like a smart choice. watch for me. [ Post Comment ] Comment #23 posted by illustro1a4 on May 02, 2003 at 10:59:53 PT Prof. John Henry: -1, Troll I have little doubt he's receiving money (personal and professional) for his pro-prohibition stance. My advice when it comes to his comments is "don't inhale". The man is a professional troll.From "Imperial College News 71 - 11 April 2003" http://www.ic.ac.uk/P4134.htm"Professor John Henry of the Division of Surgery, Anaesthetics and Intensive Care has warned of growing evidence that regular use of cannabis increases the risk of developing schizophrenia . "People who want to smoke cannabis ought to be aware that it has equal effects to cigarettes on the body and worse effects on the mind,' he comments. 'You've got the fact that regular cannabis smokers develop mental illness. There's a fourfold increase in schizophrenia and a fourfold increase in major depression. That is something very, very different from what smoking does to you. There's a lot of epidemiological evidence from as far apart as Sweden and New Zealand that cannabis actually causes these problems.'"From "Imperial College News 17 - 13 December 2001" http://www.ic.ac.uk/P3094.htm"Professor John Henry from the Division of Surgery, Anaesthetics and Intensive Care has warned a Commons Select Committee that the long-term effects of cannabis may not be clear for many years. Giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee inquiry into UK drug legislation Professor Henry said: 'Many of the long-term problems and mental health problems, damage to lungs and cardiovascular systems will not become apparent for years. We do not know how this health detriment is going to evolve with time because we are at a relatively early stage of cannabis use in this country. I think the long-term damage in terms of lung damage and lung cancer are likely to be greater than cigarettes.'""Mental health warning over rise in cannabis smoking" http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_768237.html "Smoking cannabis causes similar illnesses to smoking cigarettes, such as heart disease and cancer, but is far more dangerous than tobacco for mental health, according to Professor John Henry. Professor Henry, a toxicologist at Imperial College London, told the BBC cannabis could cause a four-fold increase in schizophrenia and depression. 'Regular cannabis smokers develop mental illness,' he said." [ Post Comment ] Comment #22 posted by Jose Melendez on May 02, 2003 at 08:12:35 PT courtesy drudgereport.com POT AND PORN OUTSTRIPPING CORN: Marijuana, pornography and illegal labor have created hidden market in United States which now accounts for 10% of the American economy, according to a study... click here for more... [ Post Comment ] Comment #21 posted by phil_debowl on May 02, 2003 at 07:47:06 PT NOOOOOOOOOO don't make tobacco illegal here! Of course, hehe, in the town square, you can't smoke tobacco, but you can herb. So I guess we're half way there (hiding in my basement now smoking a camel) [ Post Comment ] Comment #20 posted by phil_debowl on May 02, 2003 at 07:44:57 PT Hey Hey, i live in arcata :). Not too many yuppies here, just a bunch of hippies. [ Post Comment ] Comment #19 posted by Lehder on May 02, 2003 at 05:20:08 PT "headblast" great idea.it would be instructive to implement mike's idea on a municipal or township scale somewhere and extend it to an absolutely ridiculous extreme - an extreme that exactly mirrors the drug war.maybe a town of freaks somewhere, like arcata ( but maybe only yuppies live there, i wouldn't know ), could delcare tobacco and all forms of nicotine illegal. laws could be passed making the possession of nicotine punishable, under local mandatory sentencing guidelines, by decades-long prison terms. the local radio station could spew a constant stream of propaganda against the character of people who use tobacco. motorists entering the town would be ordered at gunpoint to get the fuck out of their cars which would be torn up in search of tobacco. undercover tobacco cops would keep their their eyes peeled for anyone lighting a cigarette who could then be instantly cuffed and taken to jail, with additional charges for smoking within 1000 feet of a school. and all the usual additional abuses of the drug war could be implemented in this most contumacious little town of anti-tobacco freaks, all to the extreme inconvenience of any unwary visitors.am i serious about this? yeah. if there's a town somewhere that's populated by yippies and abbie hoffmans, then maybe this sort of drug war could actually be implemented in some form of street theatre to educate people. of course, in order to handcuff them, arrest them, drag them out of their cars, an actual law against possession would have to be passed. no problem - what kind of a person would oppose this law?what would be the response of the federal government after a few dozen people had been arrested and sentenced? where would the line between street theatre and actual destruction of lives be drawn? hey, maybe there'd be no line. zero tolerance. [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by Kegan on May 02, 2003 at 05:11:53 PT Reports and there were reports of lung, tongue, and other cancers in cannabis users.Where? What reports? Done by who, and when? I would like to see those reports because I smoke it a lot and was a bit worried about just such a problem. [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by dhc on May 02, 2003 at 04:04:59 PT: Professor John Henry Professor John Henry is a well known UK apologist for prohibition. If they need someone to argue against legalisation he's the person they roll out. I've watched him for years, met him on a couple of occasions and believe very little he says. What's more, in coming up with their main claim, that cannabis could kill as many people as tobacco, they refer heavily to a discredited report by the British Lung Foundation. This report was criticised by Action on Smoking and Health - an anti-smoking lobby group! Their rebuttal is below: ASH's rebuttal of the BLF report [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on May 02, 2003 at 03:21:27 PT Oops Meant to add this URL: Reefer Madness article [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by JR Bob Dobbs on May 02, 2003 at 03:20:34 PT LTE Sirs, What the British Medical Journal has published in this case is not science, it is speculation. It is based entirely on the false assumption that cannabis smoke and tobacco smoke will have the same effects since they are both smoked. One could use the same fuzzy logic to scare people into banning water, since both water and alcohol are consumed the same way.-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=On a related note - just checked Reefer Madness out of my local library. It's quite a good book so far, and I was very pleased to see it right there on the new arrivals shelf. [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Robbie on May 02, 2003 at 02:24:47 PT oi my vey It COULD kill 30,000 a year.And some lovely young supermodel COULD be in my bed, but COULD doesn't translate to WILL!I mean, these are doctors, right? They KNOW through even the most superficial look at the available evidence, the idea that 30,000 could be killed (obviously none of them through overdose) is ... I don't know, laughable?Why is this even considered rational? If my doctor was a part of a group of doctors that made wild claims without any basis in fact or common sense, I'd drop him/her. I'll drive to Montana for doctor visits.Why is it that these hoaxes can be perpetrated on sane, rational people?On second thought, all I need to do is look around my own country. Safe Access to Medicine [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by john wayne on May 02, 2003 at 01:26:01 PT prison, on the other hand, is, of course, perfectly safe. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by Mike on May 01, 2003 at 23:27:40 PT Another thought... Concern over .05% cocaine in consumables led to its virtual prohibition, and refinement. Imagine illegal tobacco refined to extract the nicotine into a white power and snorted or injected. Maybe given a fancy name like "headblast".. I could see many overdoses and deaths from this alone.. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by Mike on May 01, 2003 at 23:14:27 PT Consider this... If tobacco were illegal, it would be worth what cannabis is today. People would thus smoke it in a similar manner and inhale more deeply to preserve it, after all you might as well be smoking solid gold if you are a straight consumer. People would even save up the old resin for emergency smoke. ::shudder:: The better the tobacco, the better the "rush" People would be jailed and labeled criminals after police dogs sniff out a small baggie... Meanwhile newer and better breeds of tobacco are developed to bring our a variety of flavors and "highs"Has anyone ever asked John Walters if he thought tobacco and alcohol should be illegal? It would force him into a corner either way he answered, and kill his "debate"... His only way out would be not to answer. Truly a coward.(Hi FoM!) [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by Lehder on May 01, 2003 at 22:12:32 PT speking of global fascism, here... have something better to read - a web site about our bullshit work ethic:http://www.whywork.org/about/links.html#newFind out why some people, like the author of "Cannabis 'Could Kill 30,000 a Year'", sink to depths of degradation unknown to the skinniest junkies in detroit. One of the linked articles is by anis shivani:http://www.counterpunch.org/shivani0925.htmlshivani's usual topic is repression and tyranny. he warns constantly of the global tragedies to come, courtesy of your elite. he's thoroughly familiar with hannah arendt's work and is the most insighful and chilling writer today on totalitarianism. he's brilliant, a harvard graduate in economics. read on,http://www.counterpunch.org/cgi-bin/htsearch?config=conf%2Fcounterpunch.org&words=anis+shivanithen run. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by Lehder on May 01, 2003 at 21:44:35 PT fishy Supposedly this is a peer reviewed journal? Then I suspect the author of this article is unable to read the journal, or else a prohibitionist authority, also unable to read, has interpreted it for him because the article here makes no sense at all, not a single statement in it.>>The estimated death toll, which appears in a paper in the British Medical Journal, is based on the known risks of cigarette smoking and assumes that cannabis causes as much harm. okay,The estimated death toll, which appears in a paper in the British Medical Journal, is based on the known risks of drinking everclear and assumes that drinking kikkapoo joy juice causes as much harm. The whole article reads as nonsensically and there's something really fishy or misrepresented here, par for the drug war. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by afterburner on May 01, 2003 at 20:47:23 PT: On the Other Hand. The names of many terminal cannabis patients, who died without their medicine, due to DEA confiscation, are known to the compassion clubs, which attempted to ease their suffering. That is, not smoking cannabis could continue to lead to painful deaths. This is fact, not speculation.ego transcendence follows ego destruction, and suddenly there is no problem. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by SoberStoner on May 01, 2003 at 20:32:52 PT 30,000 divided by 365 = ~82 It's actually 82.19178 but you get the idea..Thats 82 people a day on average that die from cannabis useGive me one name of a person that died from smoking cannabisONEThats allGo ahead..I'll wait..Canada wontStrange how this article appears on the verge of the Canadian supreme court possibly deciding that it should listen to the citizens of its country and throw out its barbaric and archaic laws that were founded on lies.Did the BMJ hire the Iraqi Information Minister?Peace and love brothers and sisters..the wall is crumbling, and the prohibitionists are trying to plug the gaps with toilet paper.Oh..and for anyone that is in the DC area, the MMM is saturday may 3rd at McPherson Square (Take the metro to McPherson Square stop then use the Vernmont St exit) Hopefully the turnout will be good. I am definitely planning on being there, the time for silence is over, we must make all of our voices heard before any more of us are subjected to the horrors of a cage because of a plant.SS [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by charmed quark on May 01, 2003 at 20:19:55 PT Vaporizers, eating ... Whenever you see a suspicious study like this, it seems it is being used to conclude that cannabis should be banned ( ignoring the health impact of incarceration and forced treatment and the like).How come you never see as the conclusion that the government should be pushing vaporizers and oral ingestion to avoid the supposed harms of smoking it?Just wondering...Pete [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on May 01, 2003 at 20:14:06 PT ekim That would be so cool! I wonder what Michael Moore is doing these days? I really like him. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by ekim on May 01, 2003 at 19:46:24 PT people lets hear your idea for a movie Comment #6 posted by ekim on April 17, 2003 at 11:16:48 PT Trout Mask has me smilen Iraqi Minister of Information -- that would be a great parity of our great minister of information John Pee Walters. I can just see it now with Michael Moore and Woody with Cheech and Chong and Bill Maher (sic) and a host of others. I can see Michael going in to a large Hospital and asking to see the records of all the deaths caused only by the evil plant. Where he runs into the two Mash doctors Cheech and Chong which then take him on a long and funny look for the elusive Cannabis corpse. Along the way Michael could go back in time to the Senate hearings of 1937 when the great plant was lied about and many people were slandered to bring about the Cannabis prohibition as we know it, Bill Maher could be the wonderfull Dr. Woodward who supported the use of Cannabis but was asked to leave the Senate hearings because he was not helping the outlaw makers do there evil deeds. Then on to Nixon and his attempt to demonize the plant-- Woody would be great a neat tricky Dick. All the while Michael is still looking for the dead bodies and Cheech and Chong get in trouble like offering information to the Shaffer Commission commissioned by Nixon which came back with the recomendation to legalize. Then on to the DEA Adminstrative Law Judge Francis Young which heard over 5000 pages of evidence and came to the conclusion that Cannabis was one of the safest herbs know to man. All the while the minister of misinformation would be telling the woppers of how bad this herb is and what it is doing to the people. Good place in the film to interview some noteable figures that have been imprisoned like Todd Mcorkmick and countless others.I am sure what ever the tack of a film all these great movie people could make a lasting tribute to the lie that Cannabis kills. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on May 01, 2003 at 19:22:15 PT The GCW That's good. They are keeping track of SARS deaths. If they say that 30,000 might die because of Cannabis per year I want to see proper records to show me it is true. Just the facts! Question:How many people know anyone that died that smoked Cannabis exclusively? I haven't met anyone. I have known people who have died from Heroin and Prescription Drugs. I also knew people who died from abusing alcohol. I haven't met anyone that died from smoking cigarettes either. I'm in my mid 50s. How long are we suppose to live anyway. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by The GCW on May 01, 2003 at 19:14:46 PT You would think if there are going to be 30,000 deaths later that there would be 1 today.There is not one single death due to anything like cig smoke.Cigs kill over 1,000 per day in the land of the free to smoke cigs.Cannabis in over 5,000 years of documented use has killed zero.ZERO0 Like spiritual dislexia? [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by FoM on May 01, 2003 at 18:33:30 PT Related Article from The Independent UK Cannabis Smoking Could Cause 30,000 Deaths a Year, Study Claims: http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread16142.shtml [ Post Comment ] Post Comment