Hacker News Reader

Comment by MeinBlutIstBlau | Hacker News Reader

A lot of marijuana smokers like to pretend weed smoke is somehow less harmful than any other smoke. It's still CO whether it comes from the tobacco or hemp plant. It's still bad and creates a tar residue in your lungs. Any time I bring that up, somehow I become anti-pot even though it's a genuine concern.

Edit: Carbon Monoxide, not Carbon Dioxide. And some additions since this is a tad controversial.

Here is one source - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3340105/

Marijuana inhaled is bad for your body. End of story. Let's not pretend like it's some panacea that the government doesn't want us to know about. It shouldn't be illegal, but a lot of people on here lie to themselves that somehow the harmful effects of CO aren't bad just because it's marijuana. I feel like there is some major cognitive dissonance among pot smokers equivalent to religious people that get upset when you say there is no god.

View on HN

I won't say it's harmless, but there are material differences. Weed is an expectorant. That's why it makes you cough. So it also tends to promote the lung functions that help clean the gunk out, at least partially. Nicotine and the additives in cigarettes on the other hand suppresses these same functions. And lastly, pot smokers don't smoke nearly the same volume as tobacco smokers.

So no, it's not harmless, but it is in fact less harmful, which is why people keep telling you that.

Also, there's plenty of other options for ingesting THC these days.

Also more transparency and a more limited toxic ingredient list in a typical joint than a cigarette. But yes, smoking weed isn't harmless.

I don't think anyone who's serious doesn't think the act of burning organic matter and inhaling it is bad.

That being said, pot simply has a lot less stuff in it than tobacco smoke. Also, almost no one is smoking a pack of day of joints.

Fortunately there are other alternatives too, like sugar free candies.

You hit the nail on the head. Most people I know will smoke like half a joint in an evening and be done. Maybe take a couple bong rips. You don't sit there and smoke all night long. You'd be passed out long before you'd get through a 20 pack of joints.

Meanwhile, it's super easy to pick up a pack of cigarettes and suck down 5-10 of them in an evening.

Sometimes it feels like people who don't smoke really have to justify it hard. All these justifications they come up with which really aren't even an issue. Maybe they're afraid of it, and don't want to admit it... If you don't wanna smoke it, don't smoke it. There's nothing wrong with that. But some of the reasons I read to not smoke weed are ridiculous.

The duration and size of the hit does in fact matter compared to cigarettes.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3340105/

And that is why engineers created the vaporizer.

Eh, there's also popcorn lung to worry about. Think the research is still out on this one.

Popcorn lung is called that because of a specific adulterant which is no longer used in nicotine vapes, and was never prevalent in cannabis vapes.

There is also the risk of getting an illegal cannabis cartridge tainted with Vitamin E, which can be avoided completely if one is lucky enough to live under a medicinal or recreational regime.

It can't be said that vaping is completely harmless, but it's safe to say that responsible blends are orders of magnitude less harmful than inhaling smoke.

I stand corrected - thanks!

Note that the parent comment only applies to liquid vaporizers which function identically to ”e-juice” nicotine vaporizers (not Juul, which is a nicotine salt vaporizer). The safe ones typically contain cannabinoid extracts in a terpene solution.

There are also vaporizers that use dry plant material directly without liquids, e.g. from Storz&Bickel, Arizer, Pax, etc.

Is there any research you know of on vaping of cannabis flower at sub-combustion temperatures in relation to popcorn lung (obliterative brochiolitis)?

I mean, if we want to ignore the additives and difference in typical consumption then sure they are just as bad.

I think you'd get a similar reaction if you said "bikes and motorcycles both have two wheels, thus riding one has all the same risks and dangers as the other". Obviously you'd be right, you can split your skull on either, but you don't go 70+MPH on both.

It is definitely still bad, but I think there is some truth there because tobacco tobacco is especially, extremely harmful.

There's an abundance of ways to use it that don't involve smoking nowadays

Weed actually contains anti-inflammatory and anti-carcinogenic components, that's why people say it is healthier then other plants when inhaled. I'm not making this up, please look for it yourself if you care for the full picture and are genuinely interested as to why people say that.

This literally reads like a stoner in denial

So you don't want to check some facts, you want to stick to your personal opinion, is that what you're saying?

It's your obligation to prove me wrong, not me prove myself wrong.

You would not prove yourself wrong. You would change a viewpoint in light of new information.

CO also in weed smoke is a hell of a lot more harmful than CO2.

I think the evidence of the amount of replies arguing against my comment above goes to show the amount of people that still think weed smoke vs tobacco smoke is still a legitimate argument against "weed smoke is bad for your lungs." It's really funny to see these universally come out of the woodwork every single time this gets brought up.

tobacco smoke is worse but obviously no smoke is good for lungs.

one word: edibles

Reply on news.ycombinator.com