Pipe Smoking Dangerous or Not?

[yaebginn]

Started from the thread, 'while you wait'. I am not opposed to fact, if you show me fact. If you give me proof that what I'm doing is dangerous, give it here. Show me a report of someone who has died or gotte nseriosuly screwed up by smoking regular pipe tobacco in a pipe. A link or whatever. Not a guy who smokes pipes and cigarettes. Strictly pipes. bring it people.

[Darth Groovy]

 

*Sighs*

 

Moved to the senate, because I KNOW what direction THIS thread is heading in....

[ET Warrior]

Ah! You beat me to it by like, 2 minutes Groovy!

[yaebginn]

yeah, I saw that coming. better now then having to change 2 pages in.

[wassup]

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/88/99703.htm?lastselectedguid={5FE84E90-BC77-4056-A91C-9531713CA348}

 

http://www.meerschaumstore.com/health.htm

 

Just like any other activity on earth, pipe-smoking, when done moderately and intelligently, is fine for human beings and many times will bring great benefits for them. However, keep in mind the word moderation.

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by wassup

Just like any other activity on earth, pipe-smoking, when done moderately and intelligently, is fine for human beings and many times will bring great benefits for them. However, keep in mind the word moderation.

exactly.

[Darth Groovy]

Originally posted by ET Warrior

Ah! You beat me to it by like, 2 minutes Groovy!

 

That's why i'm still the man !

 

[SkinWalker]

It's not the vector of nicotine delivery that has been demonstrated to cause health problems, its the nicotine. Pipe tobacco is largely unfiltered and more concentrated than cigarette tobacco. While the cigarette smoker will, on average, smoke more tobacco than the pipe smoker, the pipe smoker smokes a more concentrated form and has an increased risk (Consumer Reports, 1999) of coronary disease. And while pipe smokers are usually less likely to inhale the smoke, nicotine is readily absorbed through the lining of the mouth. Pipe smoking promotes cancer of the mouth, tongue, and throat.

 

Henley, et al (2004), found that in a study of 15,000 male pipe smokers, that pipe smoking carried a similar risk of cancer and other disease as cigar smoking. Compared to non-tobacco users, pipe smokers had five times the risk of lung cancer; nearly four times the risk of throat cancer and more than double the risk of esophageal cancer. Colon cancer risk increased by forty percent, pancreatic cancer by sixty percent and cancer of the larynx by thirteen percent. The study also found pipe smokers were at greater risk of other tobacco-related diseases. They had a thirty percent risk of heart disease and nearly three times the risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

 

I'd say the evidence is conclusive enough to indicate that any form of nictotine consumption is a serious health risk.

 

 

References:

 

Consumer Reports (Jul 99) On Your Mind. Consumer Reports on Health Vol. 11 Issue 7, p12

 

Henley, et al (2004). Pipe Smoking and Mortality From Cancer and Other Diseases. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 96 (11): 853-861

[CapNColostomy]

Bah! Smoking of all sorts is perfectly healthy! Do it as much as you want! Ask anyone. It's great. It makes you feel great too! And don't let people tell you it's bad for your health, because it's also a safety measure. I think you should always place a flaming, smoking barrier between yourself and the outside world. Can't have just anyone getting all in yer grill. If someone gets too close, pull a big ol' plume of the stuff into your pefrectly healthy lungs, and blow it right in their face. See if they stick around long. I recomend doing this in ALL department stores, resteraunts, and ESPECIALLY churches. They'll love it. And it's nice to share. Can I get you a light?

[Druid Bremen]

Originally posted by CapNColostomy

Bah! Smoking of all sorts is perfectly healthy! Do it as much as you want! Ask anyone. It's great. It makes you feel great too! And don't let people tell you it's bad for your health, because it's also a safety measure. I think you should always place a flaming, smoking barrier between yourself and the outside world. Can't have just anyone getting all in yer grill. If someone gets too close, pull a big ol' plume of the stuff into your pefrectly healthy lungs, and blow it right in their face. See if they stick around long. I recomend doing this in ALL department stores, resteraunts, and ESPECIALLY churches. They'll love it. And it's nice to share. Can I get you a light?

 

[yaebginn]

I agree with the guy who said it was ok if you be careful about it. all your links sya 'have th risk of getting...' show me some actual happenings please. I ogtta go, so I cant dwell on every1s elses points. I'll be back myabe around noon.

[SkinWalker]

Compared to non-tobacco users, pipe smokers had five times the risk of lung cancer

 

From Henley, et al (2004) above. That was a study with a large sample size (15,000 male pipe smokers + a comparable number of non-smokers).

 

But, if you are looking for justifications that will allow you to continue doing the inappropriate thing, whether it be in regards to health ideological decisions, you'll always be able to find it. Hell, I work with kids that can justify in their minds using marijuana, several forms of cocaine and alcohol to the point of gross intoxication.

 

Btw, nicotine is a drug. And an illicit one if you're under 18.

[Reborn Outcast]

Originally posted by SkinWalker

Btw, nicotine is a drug. And an illicit one if you're under 18.

 

Isn't it only if you buy it? I thought kids were allowed to smoke, just not allowed to buy them.

 

 

 

And yaebginn, if you read what SkinWalker posted, you would see that he doesn't need to give specific person examples. What he posted should be enough to convince you that it is a dangerous thing to do.

[ET Warrior]

Originally posted by yaebginn

I agree with the guy who said it was ok if you be careful about it. all your links sya 'have th risk of getting...' show me some actual happenings please.

 

For them to get those numbers and percentages in the studies, it means that the people they were studying (The people smoking pipes) had to actually get those cancers, and then they had to be compared to the control group (Those that did NOT smoke pipes). Ergo, even if you're "Careful" about it you are still increasing your risks of lung cancer 5 fold, among the other cancers you're endangering yourself to.

 

Now, you're not GUARANTEED to get cancer from it, but you're a WHOLE lot more likely to than if you didn't smoke at all.

[yaebginn]

In Lost World (just started that) The guy who builds vehicles for the expedition hates theories. I am in agreement with him. Theories are often wrong. and I thought nicotine was the thing that makes it addictive, cause pipe smoke isnt addictive. and all you guys are showing me is theories, speculation. No actual proof. The only study I've actual seen about pipe smoke was a whiel ago and that said that pipe smokers have a longer life expectantcy. and why would it need justification? Because its not illegal? Because it looks awesome and hobbits do it? No need to justify that. When I get mouth cancer, I'll let you know. and its only illegal to buy, not smoke if under 18. and the kids you say you work with, skinwalker, have convincedin their minds that its ok. Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind. What mind-altering does pipe smoke do exactly? My oddness comes straight from me noggin'. comparing the two is like comparing apples and a wooden rocking chair. they are both came from a living thing. they were/are plants. but in reality, they are very little alike.

[ET Warrior]

These aren't just THEORIES Yaeb, they're actual documented tests that have been conducted by professionals. It has been shown that smoking of any kind is in fact dangerous to your health. You are ignoring scientific evidence that is being shown to you.

 

Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind.

Nicotine is a drug.

[El Sitherino]

weed > tobacco.

Tobacco is pointless, atleast marijuana gets you high. Tobacco just messes up your lungs.

[Elijah]

Originally posted by yaebginn

In Lost World (just started that) The guy who builds vehicles for the expedition hates theories. I am in agreement with him. Theories are often wrong. and I thought nicotine was the thing that makes it addictive, cause pipe smoke isnt addictive. and all you guys are showing me is theories, speculation. No actual proof. The only study I've actual seen about pipe smoke was a whiel ago and that said that pipe smokers have a longer life expectantcy. and why would it need justification? Because its not illegal? Because it looks awesome and hobbits do it? No need to justify that. When I get mouth cancer, I'll let you know. and its only illegal to buy, not smoke if under 18. and the kids you say you work with, skinwalker, have convincedin their minds that its ok. Drugs do that to you. Alter your mind. What mind-altering does pipe smoke do exactly? My oddness comes straight from me noggin'. comparing the two is like comparing apples and a wooden rocking chair. they are both came from a living thing. they were/are plants. but in reality, they are very little alike.

I see you asking why it needs to be justified, but your the one making a post just to try and say "no one can prove its not healthy"... Anyone with any scientific knowladge knows that the human body was not designed to take smoke into the lungs.

 

Im not anti pipe smoking, infact I like the smell of a pipe and a cigar, and the tast, on a rare occasion. But I think YOU are the only one here trying to justify anything. If you like smoking pipes, then do it, but know anything that was not designed for somthing, over times, breaks it down.

 

The reason a pipe smoker has less of a chance of getting cancer or somthing than a cigarett smoker is the simple fact that *most* pipe/cigar smokers, smoke about 1/50 the amount of someone who smokes cigaretts.

[toms]

Originally posted by InsaneSith

weed > tobacco.

Tobacco is pointless, atleast marijuana gets you high. Tobacco just messes up your lungs.

 

indeed.

 

That stuff Skin gave seemed pretty conclusive to me. (and it wasn't a "theory" it was hard scientific facts - based on 5000 individual pipe smokers with hard disease if my maths is right).

 

But hey, I have no problem with you smoking if you want, it is up to you to decide the risks to your own body and which are worth taking. By not smoking i reduce the risk of death by 90%, therefore i can go off and go snowboarding and whatever and still be more likely to survive than a smoker. Heh heh.

 

I just don't like coming home smelling like an ashtray when i go out in the evenings, and i wouldn't want the first thing everyone noticed about me to be the smell and my teeth... but then maybe i'm picky.

 

You did ask for facts, so:

 

Smoking is the main cause of death from fire in the home.

 

Fires caused by smoking make up 10% of accidental dwelling-fires. They killed more than 2,000 people, equivalent to a third of all fire fatalities, and caused 20,000 injuries over the last 10 years.

 

In 1998 alone, smokers’ materials started 5,500 fires, causing one in every five injuries from fire in the home. Smokers’ materials (cigarettes, pipes) cause 75% of all smoking-related fires. Matches and lighters start the rest.

Lots more stats: fire brigade

 

Lung cancer was rare until tobacco hit the scene.

 

This is the most common type of cancer in men, with over 100 new cases per 100,000 men diagnosed each year in the UK. 31% of all deaths from any cancer are from lung cancer. 30,000 men develop it each year, compared to 14,000 women, but women are catching up. More women than men smoke, most of them young women.

-The peak age for lung cancer is between 65 and 75. It is relatively rare below the age of 40.

-Only 8% of people survive lung cancer.

-Tobacco smoking in its various forms is the single biggest cause

-The more cigarettes smoked and the younger the age at which smoking started, the greater the risk.

-Cigar and pipe smokers have a lower chance of developing lung cancer, but their risk is still higher than for non-smokers.

-Inhalation of tobacco smoke by non-smokers - known as passive smoking - has also been shown to be a risk factor for lung cancer.

from the NHS

 

and you wanted an individual:

 

One of West Michigan's -- perhaps America's -- most unsung heroes from World War II died Wednesday at his Muskegon Township home at age 79.

 

While a Marine in World War II, Donald J. Glover almost single-handedly stopped a massive Japanese counterattack on Iwo Jima in March 1945 and saved his decimated battalion.

"He was one fearless person who would always protect this country and the freedoms that we have with his life," said Chuck Carlson, Glover's closest friend since boyhood and a fellow veteran. "God followed him all through the battles for our freedoms."

 

Glover had been ill with throat cancer, finally succumbing to the disease after a long fight. He was a pipe smoker, even to the point of clenching his old briarwood in his teeth while swimming to meet the Marines' requirements as a recruit. He always maintained that God had spoken to him in a foxhole.

mlive.com

and that is only this week. (click on outside US if you get a form and don't want to fill it in)

 

So, less addictive than ciggarettes, comparable dangers (lower lung, higher mouth), may or may not lead to a shorter life.

[yaebginn]

for starters, you are a real moron if you start a fire with a pipe. Unlike cigs, they go out if you dont smoke them after a few seconds. Unless you are smoking it while unattending it, it wont start a fire. That only applies to cigs. and I'm not even sure nicotine is in pipe weed. from what I heard, thats the thing that makes cigs addictive, and I am not addictive to pipe smoking, I dont do it except for some occasions. the only thing that was even valid to this thread was the thing about pipe smokers having a higher risk than non pipe smokers. the rest was mainly about cigs. and they have a higher risk, but havent been proven to get it at all. and I know the lungs are designed to take in smoke, thats why you dont inhale it into your lungs. and InsaneSith, weed isnt etter than pipe smoking, it gets u schitzo, leads to other, more harmful drugs, and can get you landed in jail. I dont need that kind of stuff, my heads messed up enough as it is. I'm gonna need to see a little more than that. He was 79 years old for one. for two, he was a Marine, possibly got wounded. Ill check out the story myself to check it out. and if hes been smoking since before he was in the war, and it took all those years for him to die, by what mya or may not have been from smoking a pipe, that sounds good to me. Now to check out ur links.

[Ray Jones]

tar, anyone?

 

make sure you take a look at the "Smoker's Lung Pathology Photo Essay", too..

 

err.. and remember you do this not only to your lung and body, other people do inhale "your" smoke too..

 

and that could be murder then..

 

and why are you asking if you completely reject what we say, anyways??

also, it is generally known that people die of lung cancer because they smoked, why should we post "examples"? google for it. and there are other deseases caused by smoking not only cancer.

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by yaebginn

and InsaneSith, weed isnt etter than pipe smoking, it gets u schitzo, leads to other, more harmful drugs, and can get you landed in jail.

not really, I've been smoking pot for 3 and a half years, I tried ecstacy it sucked, decided to just stick with weed.

people who go from weed to harder drugs have already made that decision before they even started with marijuana. whether they know it or not. I have chosen to refrain from harder drugs, as they aren't worth the risk they pose. Ecstacy has a nice high, but not a good enough one for me to risk a long drawn out death from dehydration and lockjaw suffering. Cocaine has a horrible high that doesn't last very long when taking in to consideration the risks that it poses.

 

Weed has actually made me more mellowed out and calmed down. I'm more rational about my thoughts and decisions, less termpermental.

All commercial tobacco contains nicotine, it's what makes it addictive and dangerous, it's not just the smoke that messes you up. Pipes are unfiltered smoke, this is much more dangerous than a cigarette, but if you smoke as much tobacco from a pipe as you do from a cig, you will be worse off than if you just kept smoking those cigs.

 

that said, I dont' care if you smoke your tobacco, I just don't see the point, I find weed to be a much more purposeful smoke, also you don't even need to inhale it, you can digest it, still get a high and avoid all the health risks.

Marijuana has many possitive attributes to it. Tobacco has nothing but negative (ignoring "it tastes good" statements).

[yaebginn]

RayJones- When I do smoke, I smoke only with others who are currently smoking, if there is any danger, I am posing it to no one.

 

InsaneSith- What are the attributes exactly? It isnt the best for the job, and when the doctors offered to use it for patients, but take outthe THC, the peopel said ,'No, No' provingthe only reason they wanted it was to get high, not for any medical reason. And it doesnt reduce all the risks. It still makes u nuts. and I read somewhere that it does something to your boys. I'm talking downtown. and pipe smoke does have good attributes. People who smoke pipes have a longer life expectantcy. booyah!

[Ray Jones]

Originally posted by yaebginn

People who smoke pipes have a longer life expectantcy. booyah!

I'm sure you can give us an statistic or study underlying that?

 

also, if you smoke, where do you smoke? only in the cellar?

[El Sitherino]

uhmm... THC isn't taken out of prescription marijuana, it is why they are given in the first place.

 

Who cares if my sperm count is lower, I'm at a point where I'm debating if I ever want kids or not. So I could care less.

 

it is a very well founded anti-psychotic.

it has proven good for cases in glaucoma.

 

 

Professor Donald Abrams, MD, who has conducted U.S. Government approved research at U.C. San Francisco into the effects of smoked marijuana and AIDS patients, noted in a lecture on May 17, 1999:

 

"When we look at the pharmaecopia, when taken by mouth, delta-9 THC [Marinol] has a very low 6 to 20 percent absorption, and it's very variable from one person to another.

 

Peak plasma concentrations of delta-9 THC [Marinol] occur within one to six hours and may remain elevated for several hours with a half-life of 20-30 hours. So it sticks around for a long time, and it takes a long time to reach a peak concentration.

 

Then the delta-9 THC is broken down into the liver to a by-product of 11 hydroxyl THC, which has potent psychoactive effects. You get less of this when you smoke it.

 

Smoking THC, the THC is rapidly absorbed into the blood stream and redistributed with a considerable amount of it destroyed by combustion. Peak plasma levels are achieved at the very end of smoking and decline rapidly over 30 minutes, as if it were given intravenously, whereas, if taken by mouth, it's a slow and doesn't reach very high peaks and takes a long time to disappear.

 

The amount of THC one is exposed to might be the same, but certainly the effects are much different. In patients who say, "I can control the onset and the duration much easier if I smoke than if I swallow it" are telling us just what we know from the pharmaecopia."

(5/17/99) DA

 

Joycelyn Elders, M.D. wrote in a 3/26/04 editorial published in the Providence Journal in Rhode Island:

 

"The evidence is overwhelming that marijuana can relieve certain types of pain, nausea, vomiting and other symptoms caused by such illnesses as multiple sclerosis, cancer and AIDS -- or by the harsh drugs sometimes used to treat them. And it can do so with remarkable safety. Indeed, marijuana is less toxic than many of the drugs that physicians prescribe every day."

(3/24/04) J. Elders

 

New England Journal of Medicine Editor, Jerome Kassirer, MD, wrote about marijuana's medical value in the magazine's January 1997 editorial:

 

"I believe that a federal policy that prohibits physicians from alleviating suffering by prescribing marijuana for seriously ill patients is misguided, heavy-handed, and inhumane. Marijuana may have long-term adverse effects and its use may presage serious addictions, but neither long-term side effects nor addiction is a relevant issue in such patients.

 

It is also hypocritical to forbid physicians to prescribe marijuana while permitting them to use morphine and meperidine to relieve extreme dyspnea and pain. With both these drugs the difference between the dose that relieves symptoms and the dose that hastens death is very narrow; by contrast, there is no risk of death from smoking marijuana. To demand evidence of therapeutic efficacy is equally hypocritical. The noxious sensations that patients experience are extremely difficult to quantify in controlled experiments.

 

What really counts for a therapy with this kind of safety margin is whether a seriously ill patient feels relief as a result of the intervention, not whether a controlled trial "proves" its efficacy."

(1-30-97) JPK

 

I'll just give you a link, let you see some pro's and cons for yourself.

 

clicky