JAH - Ganja talk - View Messages

I've bowed out & won't get back onto the merry-go-round here about the fact that epidemiological studies have yet to confirm a positive correlation between ganja smoking and cancer (or the fact that a correlation by itself does not equate to causation without proper controls to allow for the elimination other potential causative factors). I just want to clarify that while Bob Marley reportedly died of cancer, we cannot positively assert that he's "dead from carcinogen" because cancer also occur spontaneously in human tissue.

The initiation process in carcinogenesis is neoplasia initiation or the formation of a neoplasm which is a new and abnormal growth of tissue in some part of the body, especially as a characteristic of cancer. The term "cancer" implies malignancy, but neoplasms can be subclassified as either benign or malignant . Anyway, neoplasia initiation is essentially irreversible changes in appropriate target somatic cells. In the simplest terms, initiation involves one or more stable cellular changes arising SPONTANEOUSLY or induced by exposure to a carcinogen (including radiation).

At the end of the day, who knows what "causative or accelerative effects" walking barefoot in the sunshine or breathing smoke from cooking fires or smoking giant spliffs "had on Marley's flesh demise" -- perhaps none at all as there's no more reason to believe his cancer (reportedly originating as a melanoma on his foot) was induced by carcinogen exposure than there is to believe that it was the result of a spontaneous neoplasia initiation. If it was triggered by exposure to a carcinogen, sunlight would be high on the list of possible culprits.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/13/2019 12:55:11 PM

All of that was a little unnecessary.

Sunlight to his toe? Melanomas that develop in less sun exposed areas HAVE different gene changes and aetiological pathways to that of more classically sun exposed areas such as the face or hands.

Also, Cancer suggests malignancy? I never used the word cancer....nevertheless Bob Marley died from a MALIGNANT melanoma...So the correlation if true would be correct.

Smoke in general is known to cause an increase in Tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF) and possibly mellatoprotease in the body which are both linked to an increased aggressiveness of Melanomas.

All of that a side.... Giving you every benefit of the doubt...I feel my point still stands. Removing all sense of none preventable causes and definitive links between smoke being carcinogebic here's how my statement would look regardless:

"I'm just saying it's interesting and arguably monomaniacle, ones drawn to ganja (SMOKE).... a (COMPLETELY PREVENTABLE, POSSIBLE CAUSE OF AGGRESSIVE MALIGNANT MELANOMA)..... by a man dead from (AGGRESSIVE MALIGNANT MELANOMA)."

To me the point still stands. It's ok if you don't get it. I just dont feel this needss the merry go round of scientific semantics.

Blessed

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/13/2019 1:09:30 PM

D-Browns drug problems possibly lead to his early demise. As my favourite reggae singer, this would even MORESO act as a deterrent for me engaging in similar drug abuse patterns as I am still affected and saddened by his passing. Even if the two cannot be definitively linked, the fact this is a completely preventable logical possibility is why it would be a deterrent.

The same point goes for Bob Marley someone who many class as their favourite, a loved singer and responsible for even having some people pick up Rastafari. He was also a champion of promoting ganja smoke. He is dead from malignancy. There is a possible logical link between the cause and then the aggressiveness of his malignancy and his exposure to smoke...something completely avoidable and dependant on human choice. Again, to ME ONE, this would seem crazy to not act as a deterrent.

There's no need to really debate how I look upon this or to agree. But the point or logic of MY comprehension of said events still stands..

Messenger: Nesta1

Sent: 2/13/2019 2:22:08 PM

I accept the point that smoking too much of anything isn't good for your lungs. Smoke is harsh and not overdoing it is a sound medical recommendation.

I just see that in this particular case you're far overreaching. It's pure speculation disguised as science to try to make an anti-ganja punchline using the death of Bob Marley as its centerpiece.

No one knows what caused Bob Marley's disease and it's as likely as not that it occurred spontaneously without any causative agents triggering or exacerbating it. What you're peddling in these specific comments about Bob Marley's illness is purely wild speculation for anti-ganja propaganda purposes.

I celebrate Bob Marley, his music, his message and his ganja smoking. It was his choice and I seriously doubt there was any connection between his death and ganja smoking (if it was lung cancer that he had suffered from, such idle speculation might take on some air of credibility). Bottom line: Nobody knows.

I see Bob Marley as a man who gave more to the world than most; a very special person. He'd did what JAH created him to do and then moved on to Zion. Let's not dance on his grave second-guessing the manner in which he chose to live his life. He earned and deserves at least that much respect.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/13/2019 2:48:19 PM

"Wild speculation" "overreaching" this is no over reach or speculation to state the evidence shows correlation between aggressive behaviour of Melanomas and Smoke. There is no fallacy in LOGIC to suggest that it is likely heavy smoke consumption played an either causative or proliferative role in Marleys death. And the COMEDIC IRONY

I have no time to enter into this with you so left alone the point of smoke causing the cancer and substituted this for smoke leading to more AGGRESSIVE behaviour of Melanomas once present. Via the TNF and possible mellatoprotease pathways Maybe you failed to comprehend this.. even if formed spontaneously...by the time of his death it was highly MALIGNANT.

I have NO INTENTION of debating this further as there is a more important point to be made here with the way you respond to comments..... You don't need to criticise my comprehension if by your comprehension you come to a different conclusion. You have a pattern of doing this..... you can state your own conclusions without criticising that of others. I know I use the scientific method in the correct way as have been trained to do so and actually may be more qualified and experienced with the scientific method then you....but let's not go there as we wouldn't know.

The point is when somebody uses their logic to state A+B=C

And you disagree and think A+B=D. Say it! And how you came to the conclusion...which you DID say to be fair...but ... The "over reaching" "propaganda" "highly speculative" "racist undertones" etc or the "let's not do this" comments are not needed in any capacity. And I will not on this occasion bow to the potential inflammatory nature of them. Also note how in my post above I speak in terms of 'possibly' and 'likely'. Look how in comparison you speak in terms of definitives as you are so assured of your correctness. When in actual fact this wouldn't be scientifically true. But that's me criticising your comments so let me stop.

Still, look at the way this is worded...And ask yourself how you still managed to find a problem

"There is a possible logical link between the cause and then the aggressiveness of his malignancy and his exposure to smoke...something completely avoidable and dependant on human choice. Again, to ME ONE, this would seem crazy to not act as a deterrent.�"

Messenger: speaks from the chalice

Sent: 2/13/2019 6:48:03 PM

Garveys Africa, can I just make this a terse reasoning. Ive spent weeks reading your views on herb. Do you think you overdone smoking too much as not in the moderation. I think you miss it and it makes you speak out against it more. Just my opinion G.A.

Messenger: speaks from the chalice

Sent: 2/13/2019 8:51:05 PM

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/13/2019 11:56:20 PM

This whole thread is directed mainly at heavy smokers of GANJA. As many Rastafari are. But even for those who smoke moderately it should be noted that Haile Selassie didn't smoke and ganja was illegal in his country

Messenger: Nesta1

Sent: 2/14/2019 2:25:07 AM

If we want to use logic and be scientific about it, this is what we can state with scientific certainty:

"The illness that Bob Marley developed and which proved to be terminal may have been triggered spontaneously within his own body or may have been triggered by natural or man-made exogenously-produced carcinogens. Their is no case-specific evidence to indicate that cannabis smoking played a role in triggering or exacerbating his illness."

That's it. End of story. That's all SCIENCE can say. Much more can be said if we embark on an anti-ganja-motivated crusade of wild speculation and creative fabrication using cherry-picked, patchwork science narratives. I know that the medical/scientific reality of this is dry & boring. That's the problems with science. Often the answer (as in this case) is that there's simply no way of knowing or inferring any more than the most basic conclusion without straying off into Alice in Wonderland fantasy land.

From the scientific standpoint at least, Bob Marley's illness and death don't provide any useful ammunition or a cause c�l�bre for intellectually honest anti-ganja crusaders. There's no "comedic irony" in Bob Marley's death and I personally find it disrespectful to pretend there is.

101 - 110