Tobacco.org

Smoking heroin leads teen to deadly addiction 

Dear Straight Talk: I've been hiding my boyfriend in my basement bedroom because his parents kicked him out. What nobody knows is that he is addicted to heroin. We both began smoking it in our cigarettes, or sometimes snorting it, and now he has starting shooting it. Please help.

Medical marijuana science, through the smoke  

But in California, the first state to legalize marijuana for medical use, in 1996, the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment recently declared pot smoke (though not the plant itself) a carcinogen because it has some of the same harmful substances as tobacco smoke.

The active ingredient in marijuana can increase the risk for Kaposi's sarcoma, a common cancer in HIV/AIDS patients, Harvard researchers reported in the journal Cancer Research in August 2007. And British researchers reported in May in Chemical Research in Toxicology that laboratory experiments showed that pot smoke can damage DNA, suggesting it might cause cancer.

The federal government's National Institute on Drug Abuse says that it is "not yet determined" whether marijuana increases the risk for lung and other cancers.

Respiratory problems: Smoking one marijuana joint has similar adverse effects on lung function as 2 1/2 to five cigarettes, according to a New Zealand study published in Thorax in July 2007. A small Australian study published in Respirology in January 2008 showed that pot smoking can lead to one type of lung disease 20 years earlier than tobacco smoking.

Addictive potential: The National Institute on Drug Abuse says "repeated use could lead to addiction," adding that some heavy users experience withdrawal symptoms such as irritability and sleep loss if they stop suddenly. . . .

Bottom line: From a purely medical, not political, point of view, my take is that if I had medical problems that other medications did not help and that marijuana might, I'd try it -- in vaporized form.

Jump to full article »

'Cannabis alters human DNA' -- new study 

A new study published by University of Leicester researchers has found "convincing evidence" that cannabis smoke damages DNA in ways that could potentially increase the risk of cancer development in humans.

Using a newly developed highly sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method, the University of Leicester scientists found clear indication that cannabis smoke damages DNA, under laboratory conditions. . . .

"There have been many studies on the toxicity of tobacco smoke. It is known that tobacco smoke contains 4000 chemicals of which 60 are classed as carcinogens. Cannabis in contrast has not been so well studied. It is less combustible than tobacco and is often mixed with tobacco in use. Cannabis smoke contains 400 compounds including 60 cannabinoids. However, because of its lower combustibility it contains 50% more carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons including naphthalene, benzanthracene, and benzopyrene, than tobacco smoke."

Writing in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology, the scientists describe the development of a mass spectrometry method that provides a clear indication that cannabis smoke damages DNA, under laboratory conditions.

Jump to full article »

Streaming and Interactive at 2:30: Title IX Event with Valerie Jarrett, Billie Jean King and More 

Today the White House will be holding a roundtable on the 37th Anniversary of Title IX featuring Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett, Education Secretary Arne Duncan and an all-star line-up of women athletes and scientists. In addition to the roundtable participants, which include Billie Jean King and Dominique Dawes, 30 local high school aged girls will be in the audience along with several professional athletes and well-known Title IX advocates.

Jump to full article »

Chemicals in Marijuana Smoke May Harm DNA  

The smoke from cannabis, the plant from which marijuana is derived, contains compounds that can damage DNA and increase the risk of cancer just like tobacco smoke, says a new study from the United Kingdom.

In laboratory tests, Rajinder Singh from the University of Leicester and colleagues found certain carcinogens in cannabis smoke in amounts 50 percent greater than those found in tobacco smoke. They noted that light cannabis use could possibly prove to be even more damaging because cannabis smokers usually inhale more deeply than cigarette smokers.

"The smoking of three to four cannabis cigarettes a day is associated with the same degree of damage to bronchial mucus membranes as 20 or more tobacco cigarettes a day," the researchers noted in a news release from the university.

The research was based on tests using a new highly sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method to analyze the cannabis smoke. It looked specifically at acetaldehyde -- a suspected cancer-causing chemical known to affect human DNA that is found in both kinds of smoke.

Jump to full article »

State rules marijuana smoke is a carcinogen, may require dispensaries to post warnings  

Joints and baggies sold at California's medical marijuana dispensaries will soon carry a new warning label. Next to tags like "Purple Haze" and "White Widow" will be the advisory: Contents may cause cancer when smoked.

On Friday, California added marijuana smoke to its official list of known carcinogens, joining the ranks of arsenic, asbestos and DDT. Pot brownies, lollipops and other non-inhalables are not affected by the new ruling.

Scientists found the pungent smoke shares many of the same harmful properties as tobacco smoke, warranting its inclusion on the Proposition 65 warning list. The law requires the state to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, and businesses and government agencies must post warnings when they use such chemicals or sell products containing them.

Jump to full article »

'Cannabis alters human DNA'  

The researchers add that the ability of cannabis smoke to damage DNA has significant human health implications especially as users tend to inhale more deeply than cigarette smokers, which increases respiratory burden. "The smoking of 3-4 cannabis cigarettes a day is associated with the same degree of damage to bronchial mucus membranes as 20 or more tobacco cigarettes a day," the team adds.

"These results provide evidence for the DNA damaging potential of cannabis smoke," the researchers conclude, "implying that the consumption of cannabis cigarettes may be detrimental to human health with the possibility to initiate cancer development."

Jump to full article »

• U.S. senator concerned about finances at UC San Francisco medical school 

A powerful U.S. senator has demanded more information about the financial health of UC San Francisco's medical school, raising questions about whether the entire University of California system may be mismanaging federal research funds.

Sen. Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, has requested that UCSF supply documentation on the amount of federal funds it has received during the last five years, including details of an external financial review performed by the accounting firm KPMG. . . .

Grassley has interjected himself in a long-running and nasty dispute between the medical school and its former dean, David A. Kessler. Kessler, who headed the Food and Drug Administration during the Clinton administration, was fired by UCSF in December 2007 after repeatedly complaining that he had been misled about the school's finances.

Kessler since has sued the University of California in a federal whistle-blower action, seeking reinstatement to his former position, his lost pay and benefits, and punitive damages. He also is party to an ongoing UC administrative review of his firing.

Jump to full article »

How Mac N' Cheese Is Like A Cigarette  

How Mac N' Cheese Is Like A Cigarette Posted by: Cathy Arnst on April 30

You would never give a child a cigarette. Or a drink, or a snort of cocaine. But everyday we American parents are giving our children something almost as addictive—meals laden with sugar, salt and fat. That mac n’cheese we all think is the only thing our child will eat is priming them for a lifetime of “conditioned hypereating.” That is, eating that is excessive, out of control and has nothing to do with satisfying hunger.

This theory of hypereating is laid out in a new book, The End of Overeating, by Dr. David Kessler, a renowned scientist and former FDA director who set out some seven years ago to figure out the reasons behind the obesity crisis besetting the nation.

Jump to full article »

VIDEO: Shaken Not Stirred 

A new spirit that gets inhaled rather than imbibed?

Jump to full article »

Scruggs mystery man hires lawyers 

P.L. Blake, the mystery man attorney Dickie Scruggs agreed to pay $50 million from the 1998 settlement of tobacco litigation, has hired four attorneys to represent him in an ongoing judicial bribery investigation.

Oxford attorney Tom Freeland is representing Blake, whose name surfaced in the investigation as the person to call about securing $40,000 from Scruggs. Scruggs has admitted he used the money in an attempt to bribe Circuit Judge Henry Lackey.

Jump to full article »

More Than Half of Americans Living with Dirty Air  

More than half of the nation's population, 186.1 million people to be exact, live and breathe in communities with dangerously high levels of air pollution, new research shows.

"Six out of ten Americans live in areas dirty enough to send people to the emergency room, to shape how kids' lungs develop and even dirty enough to kill," Charles D. Connor, president and CEO of the American Lung Association said during a teleconference Tuesday to present the findings of the association's State of the Air 2009 report.

"Forty million Americans live in counties where the air quality has failed every single test," he continued. "Even as our nation explores the complex challenges of global warming and energy independence, we still must recognize the problems we have with old-fashioned air pollution."

Jump to full article »

MOONEY: Planetary Smoking is Dangerous 

I must confess I was a tad under-whelmed by the headline last week in The New York Times: “Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate.” Not that it wasn’t an important story. It was. But we’ve known for some time that fossil-fuel company interests and their political allies worked hard, especially during the 1990s but well into this decade as well to sow doubt about mainstream climate science so as to stave off regulatory action. , , ,

In addition, there’s at least some evidence, cited above, that industry at times set out to fight against the science much like the tobacco industry did—a strategy epitomized by the famous tobacco “doubt is our product” memo. . . .

The real question, over the next ten years, is whether a judge will determine that the fossil fuel industry’s tobacco-like strategy merits a tobacco-like legal verdict.

Jump to full article »

APPLEBAUM: Keep the Disease Fighters Focused  

Though it does occupy itself most of the time with concerns such as preparedness for flu pandemics, some of its other priorities reflect its members' political agendas. For example, a large chunk of money is devoted every year to tackling the "social and economic factors that determine people's opportunities for health," such as poverty, education and climate change -- all worthy issues that would nevertheless seem well beyond the scope of an organization that should primarily be concerned with infectious diseases.

It gets worse: Like their U.N. colleagues, WHO bureaucrats spend much unnecessary time writing papers on legally dubious notions such as the "Right to Health"; others are scheming to create an international bureaucracy that would regulate all drug research and development; still others get sidetracked by issues such as obesity and automotive safety. The WHO's 2008-13 strategic plan speaks of promoting "programmes that enhance health equity and integrate pro-poor, gender-responsive, and human rights-based approaches," whatever that means. The organization is not exempt from other aspects of U.N. politics, either: Taiwan's repeated attempts to join the WHO are always vetoed by China, for example, and U.N. officials (speaking of human-rights-based approaches) routinely refuse Taiwanese journalists permission to cover WHO events. When the next epidemic starts in Taipei, we'll be sorry. . . .

Now, just as we might really be on the brink of an emergency, it is worth reminding ourselves that if we want the WHO to be there when we need it, the organization must be constantly monitored and fully funded. U.N. member governments should make absolutely sure it stays focused: After all, only the WHO is equipped to carry out the international monitoring of the spread of a new infectious disease. Let's cross our fingers and hope that this time, it hasn't been distracted by something else.

Jump to full article »

EDITORIAL: Global warming deniers took a page from the tobacco industry 

New documents show that a front group kept sowing doubts about climate change even though its own scientists said the evidence "cannot be denied."

The Global Climate Coalition, an advocacy group financed by the oil, coal and auto industries and other trade groups throughout the 1990s, kept fanning doubts that emissions of heat-trapping gases were leading to global warming even though the group's own experts were telling it that the science was "well established and cannot be denied."

The New York Times' Andy Revkin reported Friday that a document filed in a federal lawsuit gives a peek into how the coalition leaders not only ignored their own scientific and technical experts, but also appear to have suppressed a document that soundly rejected the arguments of climate change skeptics. . . .

The document makes the coalition and its financial supporters, including the American Petroleum Institute and companies such as Exxon Mobile, look more and more like the tobacco companies of their time, deliberately suppressing the truth and trying instead to raise public doubts and confusion about the science. . . .

The question now is how much credibility the public and policymakers ought to give to anything the oil industry and others linked to the Global Climate Coalition have to say about climate change. It's fitting that an industry front group created to raise doubts about the science of climate change ultimately succeeded primarily in raising doubts about the credibility and veracity of the companies that it once spoke for.

Jump to full article »