Yall should be ashamed for pushing your bullshit narrative. Severe asthmatic and heavy stoner. Haven't had any attacks since dabbling in the giggle bush.
My best friends uncle died stage 4 lung cancer and all he smoked was weed. It's all bad smoking is effecting your lungs and body whether you agree or not.
It doesn’t have enough research lmao but now it’s fact it’s the Same as cigarettes lmao yeh flavonoids and turpentine’s have the same affects as nicotine water sprayed on paper then shredded in with a mixture of tabaco and other chemicals. You won’t fool me. False narrative. Doctors are people who get payed by other people to persuade you and me to believe all thay say.🖕🏽🖕🏾🖕🏿🖕
gonna put a j in my dog's nose, meaning he eventually will inhale it… because that is where they get an abundance of inhaled oxygen. and submit the video i take on twitter all over the "The Doctors" submission feed.
smoke inhalation over a short period of time is bad, but in this video it says that "it does not mention the fact that (marijuana smoke) can be an irritant; people with asthma, it can lead to asthma attacks, it can lead to an infection." buddy said "it can be an irritant if allergic" ; so can sunlight, cotton, poultry, meats, etc. this does not deem marijuana smoke as an "independent irritant", yet the way marijuana is portrayed in this video makes me believe, as an educated guess, and a consistent assumption under the basis of experience, that they are being bought out by a large tobacco company to speak poorly on marijuana, on their platform. This tactic is a simple business method, used largely. e.g. any advertiser can go onto a social media platform, and pay a popular user, known widely as "influencers" (if u arent a social media demon this is relevant clarification), for an advertisement that appears from xx/xx/xxxx from x:xx(am/pm) on things like stories, pages, tiktoks, comments, following users, etc. The influencers build their reputation to purposely be targeted by a specific audience, so that they can gain popularity and/or relevancy. This means an advertiser for a new "top of the line" phone case that is specifically designed for being waterproof would not target a community of dirt bikers…. they target fisherman, beach lovers, and any social group that has a large involvement with their product. This is to be the most efficient when purchasing an advertisement, Overall, the influencers make the bigger paycheck by doing brand deals rather than the income from the viewership. but I could get into running a successful business later. My point is, this televised show could be watched by people seeking any medical answers, like learning about their body, i think one or more of the doctors are attractive, etc. This audience, (if watching this load of bologna to begin with), is not a genuinely informed audience, but a misinformed one. This causes an issue, which propagates a solution. In this case, I believe a tobacco company paid The Doctors to make this segment, because if clearly they are being asked constantly about marijuana "on twitter" this company could see this extreme uprise in marijuana questions and see a potential risk in their own product, and simply sponsor a segment on the doctors to fix it. Reason I believe this, is because they were very slick about it, in the beginning of the video the question was "Is Marijuana Smoke Worse Than Tobacco Smoke?" and the ENTIRE segment did not show how bad "regular" tobacco smoke. (yes, they actually called it "regular tobacco smoke" not just tobacco/cigarette smoke. Which would be a good comparison, (that if it was genuine, which it probably would be atleast slightly fabricated,) it would have shown the ANSWER… to the entire segment's question… but instead they just run marijuana into the ground with evidence, and leave out the evidence for the tobacco. (this was done on purpose, because they used the "animation" diagram of a lung and referred to the smoke going into the lung as "marijuana smoke" every single time, so do not try and say it was just any smoke. also left green residue in the lungs (for bs dramatization), which would actually just be black…) but it was done on purpose, he makes a statement about tobacco smoke, and says it is 25% of the tar residue as marijuana smoke. and shows a "marijuana lung" more black in color than the "tobacco lung" and without providing cig smoke is bad explanation like he did for mary j, he then switches to focus solely on marijuana, basically changing the segment to "why marijuana is bad" because he didnt mention tobacco smoke once the rest of the segment…?
Lol when they give bs advice like this you don’t believe them about anything. Vaping same as smoking despite non combustion lol not to mention unless your snoop you don’t smoke a pack of 25 a day
Weed has 33 chemicals that can cause cancer, tobacco has thousands upon thousands. Also cigarettes are made with tar and other chemicals to make them more addicting, everything in weed is natural. Also studies show that weed can actually alleviate irritation for people with asthma, and cigarettes usually contain way more tobacco than joints contain weed, not to mention that the paper in cigarettes is dyed with ammonia, acetone, peroxide, silicone ect, while rolling paper is made for inhalation and is usually natural anyway. Quit trying to give weed a bad rep, cigarettes are way worse.
We all here after hitting a bong/joint
That sound when it starts that guy made 😂😂😂
Weed is more potent.goes down hotter
This is the clearest example of big tobacco corporate ownership I’ve ever seen
Tobacco’s endless rival, Marijuana.
ignorance is bliss. i wonder who are the sponsors of this show
Wow, big tobbacco bought and paid for this I guess, bout to spark up some lemon cherry gelato ..
Yall should be ashamed for pushing your bullshit narrative. Severe asthmatic and heavy stoner. Haven't had any attacks since dabbling in the giggle bush.
Me: Tell me you don't know crap without telling me you don't know crap.
THEM::
I smoked weed everyday for 2-3 years and i have no weird mucus or breathing issues , roaches n all
no one has ever died from weed
Long live Bob Marley
wtf, i'm high and hey're freaking me out!
My best friends uncle died stage 4 lung cancer and all he smoked was weed. It's all bad smoking is effecting your lungs and body whether you agree or not.
In other words… None of these ppl have ever smoked weed
Bro if there is 33 chemicals in marijuana then lead to cancer then how come there are no deaths from weed?
wonder how many dislikes this video has
It doesn’t have enough research lmao but now it’s fact it’s the Same as cigarettes lmao yeh flavonoids and turpentine’s have the same affects as nicotine water sprayed on paper then shredded in with a mixture of tabaco and other chemicals. You won’t fool me. False narrative. Doctors are people who get payed by other people to persuade you and me to believe all thay say.🖕🏽🖕🏾🖕🏿🖕
How would you smoke a joint if there was no filter doctor
If your worried about smoke edibles are a thing
gonna put a j in my dog's nose, meaning he eventually will inhale it… because that is where they get an abundance of inhaled oxygen. and submit the video i take on twitter all over the "The Doctors" submission feed.
smoke inhalation over a short period of time is bad, but in this video it says that "it does not mention the fact that (marijuana smoke) can be an irritant; people with asthma, it can lead to asthma attacks, it can lead to an infection." buddy said "it can be an irritant if allergic" ; so can sunlight, cotton, poultry, meats, etc. this does not deem marijuana smoke as an "independent irritant", yet the way marijuana is portrayed in this video makes me believe, as an educated guess, and a consistent assumption under the basis of experience, that they are being bought out by a large tobacco company to speak poorly on marijuana, on their platform. This tactic is a simple business method, used largely. e.g. any advertiser can go onto a social media platform, and pay a popular user, known widely as "influencers" (if u arent a social media demon this is relevant clarification), for an advertisement that appears from xx/xx/xxxx from x:xx(am/pm) on things like stories, pages, tiktoks, comments, following users, etc. The influencers build their reputation to purposely be targeted by a specific audience, so that they can gain popularity and/or relevancy. This means an advertiser for a new "top of the line" phone case that is specifically designed for being waterproof would not target a community of dirt bikers…. they target fisherman, beach lovers, and any social group that has a large involvement with their product. This is to be the most efficient when purchasing an advertisement, Overall, the influencers make the bigger paycheck by doing brand deals rather than the income from the viewership. but I could get into running a successful business later. My point is, this televised show could be watched by people seeking any medical answers, like learning about their body, i think one or more of the doctors are attractive, etc. This audience, (if watching this load of bologna to begin with), is not a genuinely informed audience, but a misinformed one. This causes an issue, which propagates a solution. In this case, I believe a tobacco company paid The Doctors to make this segment, because if clearly they are being asked constantly about marijuana "on twitter" this company could see this extreme uprise in marijuana questions and see a potential risk in their own product, and simply sponsor a segment on the doctors to fix it. Reason I believe this, is because they were very slick about it, in the beginning of the video the question was "Is Marijuana Smoke Worse Than Tobacco Smoke?" and the ENTIRE segment did not show how bad "regular" tobacco smoke. (yes, they actually called it "regular tobacco smoke" not just tobacco/cigarette smoke. Which would be a good comparison, (that if it was genuine, which it probably would be atleast slightly fabricated,) it would have shown the ANSWER… to the entire segment's question… but instead they just run marijuana into the ground with evidence, and leave out the evidence for the tobacco. (this was done on purpose, because they used the "animation" diagram of a lung and referred to the smoke going into the lung as "marijuana smoke" every single time, so do not try and say it was just any smoke. also left green residue in the lungs (for bs dramatization), which would actually just be black…) but it was done on purpose, he makes a statement about tobacco smoke, and says it is 25% of the tar residue as marijuana smoke. and shows a "marijuana lung" more black in color than the "tobacco lung" and without providing cig smoke is bad explanation like he did for mary j, he then switches to focus solely on marijuana, basically changing the segment to "why marijuana is bad" because he didnt mention tobacco smoke once the rest of the segment…?
i'm right.
Lol when they give bs advice like this you don’t believe them about anything. Vaping same as smoking despite non combustion lol not to mention unless your snoop you don’t smoke a pack of 25 a day
Over 33 chemicals in marijuana?🤔
They want people to smoke cigarettes instead?
Lol that’s Hollywood baby
I feel healthier, and I am healthier, inhaling cannabis than I was inhaling tobacco products. 22 medications 💊 down to 5.
Weed has 33 chemicals that can cause cancer, tobacco has thousands upon thousands. Also cigarettes are made with tar and other chemicals to make them more addicting, everything in weed is natural. Also studies show that weed can actually alleviate irritation for people with asthma, and cigarettes usually contain way more tobacco than joints contain weed, not to mention that the paper in cigarettes is dyed with ammonia, acetone, peroxide, silicone ect, while rolling paper is made for inhalation and is usually natural anyway. Quit trying to give weed a bad rep, cigarettes are way worse.
These guys are all on the tobacco pay roll..