Buddy Blank said...
Just take this - https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/hp/cannabis-pdq - and copy/paste it into any browser, comes right up.
Here is the actual study abstract:
Cancer Causes Control. 1997 Sep;8(5):722-8.
Marijuana use and cancer incidence (California, United States).
Sidney S1, Quesenberry CP Jr, Friedman GD, Tekawa IS.
Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program, Oakland, California 94611-5714, USA.
The purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to examine the relationship of marijuana use to cancer incidence. The study population consisted of 64,855 examinees in the Kaiser Permanente multiphasic health checkup in San Francisco and Oakland (California, United States), between 1979-85, aged 15 to 49 years, who completed self-administered questionnaires about smoking habits, including marijuana use. Follow-up for cancer incidence was conducted through 1993 (mean length 8.6 years). Compared with nonusers/experimenters (lifetime use of less than seven times), ever- and current use of marijuana were not associated with increased risk of cancer of all sites (relative risk [RR] = 0.9
Marijuana use also was not associated with tobacco-related cancers or with cancer of the following sites: colorectal, lung, melanoma, prostate, breast, cervix.
Among nonsmokers of tobacco cigarettes, ever having used marijuana was associated with increased risk of prostate cancer (RR = 3.1, CI = 1.0-9.5) and nearly significantly increased risk of cervical cancer (RR = 1.4, CI = 1.0-2.1).
We conclude that, in this relatively young study cohort, marijuana use and cancer were not associated in overall analyses, but that associations in nonsmokers of tobacco cigarettes suggested that marijuana use might affect certain site-specific cancer risks.
Well, it is considered a drug, even if growing naturally and not synthesized in a lab, so the usual cautions are in order. I posted yesterday in another thread how dangerous the NSAIDS(ibuprophen etc) that so many of us take can be.
However, notice the conclusion that this " suggested " that MJ "might" be a problem for non smokers regarding PC. As I am so often told when study after study shows some strong association with some vitamin or food choices and PC or cancer in general, association is not proof. Who could say what variety of habits or lifestyle choices might accompany the crowd who chose to be in the "ever- and current use of marijuana" group?
Also odd about
the non-smokers of tobacco being the only ones at increased risk. What, did smoking cigarettes help cancel out whatever characteristic exists for MJ that might cause cancer?
Then there is my study of one. By their definition, I would fall into the "never used" category, as well as the "smoker" category for much of my life. And here I came down with a nasty high risk PC anyway. As always, it would be interesting to see this broken down among the risk categories for PC. More than once, I have seen some vitamin that was reported to have a U shaped curve for PC, with just the right levels lowering risk of occurrence and the relatively higher levels lowering risk. But when broken down for the higher risk categories of PC that are more likely to kill us, the higher the blood level of the vitamin, the better the results.
Still, this is certainly something to keep in mind and worth knowing. It might actually be that MJ increases risk for PC, at least among non-smokers of tobacco. Thanks, Buddy, for finding this link.