Weed According to Mayo Clinic


Tomato, tomata it's all the same. Which was essentially my point, also about smoking any "organic substance" that produces carcinogenic tar in the lungs. According to the Mayo Clinic it does impair thinking. Reduces balance and coordination. Increases chances of having a heart attack. Heightened risk of chronic cough, and respiratory infections. Potential for hallucinations, and withdrawal. I do know Atripla does have most of these same common side effects. Why would anyone want to increase their chances, is my concern? They also state marijuana has 50 to 70 percent MORE carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke. It also should be noted according to the Mayo Clinic your statements about benefits are about right, but you fail to point out any of these risks that I'm only trying to point out, except that they might get arrested.
I'm including the following link. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/medical-marijuana/GA00014

As well as: http://www.atripla.com/#iso I hope people can weigh the pros and "cons" (pun intended) and make up their own minds. Burn the weed fields in NC.



Nancy? Nancy Reagan, is that you?

OK, OK, yes, yes, as I mentioned, inhaling any kind of smoke is probably not good for mucous membranes and lungs. My point is that the risks of an occasional joint are really not all that different whether you're "virally enhanced" or a neggie. Please note a comparison between cigarettes and marijuana can be deceiving. Even Willie Nelson or Bill Maher doesn't smoke the equivalent of two packs per day of weed.

However, I do agree we are all grownups and should be able to make up our own minds about what level of risk we find acceptable from driving a few miles above the speed limit to swimming in the ocean to voting Republican to sparking the occasional doobie. OK? Nancy, let me guess, you are going to just say "no," right"?

Dr. Bob