131–140 of 162 posts
I don't think free to play has anything to do with it. People used to say that World of Warcraft was way too addictive and that's pay to play.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hadn't thought of cannabis consumption as being unequivocally associated with cancer risk. I haven't paid much attention, but there was a pretty big JAMA paper a decade or so ago that didn't demonstrate much risk at something like "a joint per day for 40 years" level consumption. Vaping may well have its own -- perhaps even greater -- risks, but I hadn't assumed propylene glycol to be particularly carcinogenic. Is…
Smoking causes cancer. Not tobacco. Not marijuana. Inhaling smoke causes cancer, pretty much independent of what is being burnt. (Though obviously some substances are even worse still.) For some reason people think it is tobacco that causes lung cancer, and therefore joints are safe/healthy. Ridiculous. It is inhaling all that ash that gives you lung and throat cancer. Vaping avoids the carcinogens of cigarette smoke…
There are also vaporizers that just pass hot air over marijuana flower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah it really bugs me how inconsiderate weed and vaping smokers can be. I’ve had weed smokers casually walk by my family blowing smoke everywhere without care, like this was the 1950’s. In a sense this is even worse as not only did I not agree to me or my kids breathing in this cancerous cloud of smoke, but it is psychoactive too.
I'm with you that we should consider clean air a human right. Personally, I find vehicular exhaust a much bigger problem than weed smoke though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm with you that we should consider clean air a human right. Personally, I find vehicular exhaust a much bigger problem than weed smoke though.
Yah the thing is weed smokers know a small bit of weed smoke is nearly harmless compared to an equivalent bit of smoke from a tobacco smoker. It is absolutely still inconsiderate but as far as I know there is little evidence that second hand weed smoke inhalation is much of a threat to anyone. Vehicular exhuast is most definitely far more of a health threat
There is no reason to believe that weed smoke is any better or worse than cigarette smoke. Burnt plant matter is burnt plant matter and contains lots of garbage--most of which isn't good for anybody.
The only difference nowadays is that a lot of people consume both nicotine and THC using vaping and concentrated liquid. This is probably less damaging in terms of secondhand smoke as the temperature is lower and the goal is vaporization rather than oxidation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah it really bugs me how inconsiderate weed and vaping smokers can be. I’ve had weed smokers casually walk by my family blowing smoke everywhere without care, like this was the 1950’s. In a sense this is even worse as not only did I not agree to me or my kids breathing in this cancerous cloud of smoke, but it is psychoactive too.
Not to be pendantic, but 1950s would be if that was happening indoors. I assume this happens to you and your family outdoors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yah the thing is weed smokers know a small bit of weed smoke is nearly harmless compared to an equivalent bit of smoke from a tobacco smoker. It is absolutely still inconsiderate but as far as I know there is little evidence that second hand weed smoke inhalation is much of a threat to anyone. Vehicular exhuast is most definitely far more of a health threat
> It is absolutely still inconsiderate but as far as I know there is little evidence that second hand weed smoke inhalation is much of a threat to anyone. There is no reason to believe that weed smoke is any better or worse than cigarette smoke. Burnt plant matter is burnt plant matter and contains lots of garbage--most of which isn't good for anybody. The only difference nowadays is that a lot of people consume both…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Smoking causes cancer. Not tobacco. Not marijuana. Inhaling smoke causes cancer, pretty much independent of what is being burnt. (Though obviously some substances are even worse still.) For some reason people think it is tobacco that causes lung cancer, and therefore joints are safe/healthy. Ridiculous. It is inhaling all that ash that gives you lung and throat cancer. Vaping avoids the carcinogens of cigarette smoke…
The amount of combusted material that one is exposed to makes a big difference in cancer rates (and other disease rates).[1] I imagine that this is orders of magnitude lower for marijuana smokers than tobacco smokers, especially in this era with most flower being >20% THC by mass. 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6235683/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hadn't thought of cannabis consumption as being unequivocally associated with cancer risk. I haven't paid much attention, but there was a pretty big JAMA paper a decade or so ago that didn't demonstrate much risk at something like "a joint per day for 40 years" level consumption. Vaping may well have its own -- perhaps even greater -- risks, but I hadn't assumed propylene glycol to be particularly carcinogenic. Is…
Smoking causes cancer. Not tobacco. Not marijuana. Inhaling smoke causes cancer, pretty much independent of what is being burnt. (Though obviously some substances are even worse still.) For some reason people think it is tobacco that causes lung cancer, and therefore joints are safe/healthy. Ridiculous. It is inhaling all that ash that gives you lung and throat cancer. Vaping avoids the carcinogens of cigarette smoke…
This reads like medieval miasmatic theory.
In other news, breathing and living is the #1 cause of death.
The quality of the air you breathe is what affects your risk of developing cancer. Burning tobacco releases the most amount of harmful particles, and even then, many people spend years inhaling it without ever developing cancer.
Vaporizing marijuana is done by exposing it to much lower temperatures, which doesn't release the same particles as burning. Thus, it's not the same kind of smoke.
Additionally, marijuana doesn't have the chemicals linked to cancer to begin with. Tobacco even if ingested can increase the risk of cancer.
But ultimately, everything you do, from the city you live in, to your household environment, to your genetic predisposition and lifestyle choices, affects your risk of developing cancer. Living is a balance act between these risk sources and actually enjoying your life.
Vaping marijuana is probably not great for you, but many people do so for many years without negative consequences, and the risks compared to smoking tobacco are much, much lower. All of this is handwavy, of course, since the effects of marijuana have been historically poorly researched.
But making a blanket statement that all smoke causes cancer is fearmongering at best, and objectively wrong at worst.
If you like this article, I would suggest reading these too: I Don’t Want to Be an Internet Person: https://www.palladiummag.com/2022/11/04/i-dont-want-to-be-an... The Internet is Made of Demons: https://www.damagemag.com/2022/04/21/the-internet-is-made-of... When traveling, I carry a dumb phone, specifically a Nokia feature phone that doesn't even connect to The Internet. The only distraction on it is the Tetris app…
Serious question and not snarky (despite appearances): How come you comment on HN? It looks like it falls in addictive experiences, albeit maybe necessary to keep on top of IT news. If the theory of “quitting” was right, we wouldn’t see anyone commenting about quitting while still online. I’m asking because I wonder how to keep on top of things / what part should news-reading take in my less-dopamine life.
When you limit, articles like this pique your interests (my thinking: "New smoking? I would say it's internet/smartphone addiction, I wonder if I'm right"). So I believe it's not unusual that you find a lot of quitters/limiters in threads like this. Is it still addiction?
Also it's very hard to talk about experiences of quitting Internet. 99% of my friends don't want to quit, don't see anything wrong with Internet. I am alone and can talk about that only through Internet. Ironic I know, but what gives? Internet is not 100% toxic like alcohol, limiting totally would be not only very hard but also probably too strict.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To clarify, are you claiming that nicotine's psychoactive effects are minor or even positive?
When operating a moving vehicle, in comparison to THC? Yes, absolutely. That was the context in which I was speaking. Nicotine calms nerves while improving focus. There's a reason people like smoking tobacco. Marijuana, on the other hand, slows your reaction time and hampers decision making, as well as (in a small percentage of people, but including me) triggers depression, paranoia, and psychosis. Although it is leg…
I do think we can agree that the weed tobacco comparison is not very useful, as weed is more closely comparable to alcohol.