Soda vs Marijuana

[Playinghardball]

Found on the Being Liberal Facebook page

[Scootaloo]

1. "Also sold in public schools"

[HopeHoops]

2. K&R

[Robb]

3. Addiction to sugars is hardly a settled hypothesis, HFCS or otherwise.

Also, carcinogens are present in cannabis smoke.

Otherwise a great list.

[Le Taz Hot]

4. Carcinogens are present in cannabis smoke?

Really?

Do you have a link to that?

On edit: A link disclaiming your assertion. There are many more.

http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20060523/pot-smoking-not-linked-to-lung-cancer

[Robb]

5. NORML, actually.

http://norml.org/component/zoo/category/cannabis-smoke-and-cancer-assessing-the-risk

Cannabis smoke contains many of the same carcinogens as tobacco smoke, including greater concentrations of certain aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzopyrene, prompting fears that chronic marijuana inhalation may be a risk factor for tobacco-use related cancers.

The article continues, of course, noting the potential mitigating properties of other chemicals present. The carcinogens are there, however; that much is undisputed.

Edited to add: had you read the article you posted on your edit, you'd see it actually said the same thing.

[Le Taz Hot]

9. The vast majority of articles on the subject,

including the one you linked to, assert that definitive conclusions cannot be drawn:

"To date, similar epidemiologic and/or clinical studies on the use of cannabis and cancer are few and not definitive. However, the public and policy-makers should interpret the ambiguity of these results with caution – neither construing them at this time as an endorsement of cannabis’ safety nor as an indictment of its potential health hazards."

Also note that the article you pointed to was about SMOKING which is only one way to ingest cannabis.

[Robb]

10. Carcinogens are present in cannabis smoke.

This is what I said, this is what you denied was true, this is what everyone else agrees is so -- including the doc at your link. That's it.

You've gone off half-cocked, it appears, and were proven incorrect. Cool your jets.

[yardwork]

8. Carcinogens are present in all smoke from combustion, period.

I'm fully in favor of legalizing marijuana and I think it's less dangerous than soda, but insisting on inaccuracies weakens our arguments.

[yardwork]

6. I think that soda is unhealthier than marijuana, but there are some inaccuracies in the chart.

First, smoking anything is carcinogenic. Taking smoke into your lungs is a risk for cancer, period. Doesn't matter if it is smoke from a fireplace, cigarette, or joint.

Second, I haven't read evidence that HFCS is "extremely addictive." I don't think it's good for people, but is it actually addictive in a way that marijuana is not?

[Robb]

11. There are some really interesting studies on sugar addiction

I'm on a mobile, otherwise I'd link you to them. The upshot is rats display behavior consistent with addiction when presented with sugar. More work to do, of course, and no distinction that singles out HFCS.

[yardwork]

12. That doesn't surprise me. I believe that sugar is addictive.

I believe that marijuana is somewhat addictive, too, based on personal observations.

I have no doubt that soda is less healthy than marijuana. We need to be careful not to exaggerate or use false information in making the case for legalization, though. It just undermines our position, which is inherently strong.

[spanone]

7. 'impairment' hell, that's not impairment.

[Brickbat]

13. Mr. Brickbat often says he'd rather work with someone who smoked pot on his day off than

a 20-year-old boyman who is hopped up AT WORK on Monster and Mountain Dew after a night of drinking. He worked for years in commercial construction and is now a locomotive engineer.