Banner
    Marijuana Use Can Damage DNA - Study
    By News Staff | June 16th 2009 12:00 AM | 14 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
    University of Leicester researchers writing in the journal Chemical Research in Toxicology say they have found "convincing evidence" that cannabis smoke damages DNA and it 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 say they have found clear indication that cannabis smoke damages DNA under laboratory conditions.

    The researchers are Rajinder Singh, Jatinderpal Sandhu, Balvinder Kaur, Tina Juren, William P. Steward, Dan Segerback and Peter B. Farmer from the Cancer Biomarkers and Prevention Group, Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine and Karolinska Institute, Sweden.

    Rajinder Singh said, "Parts of the plant Cannabis sativa, also known as marijuana, ganja, and various street names, are commonly smoked as a recreational drug, although its use for such purposes is illegal in many countries. 

    "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."

    In their study, the scientists describe the development of a mass spectrometry method that they say provides a clear indication that cannabis smoke damages DNA under laboratory conditions.

    The authors added, "It is well known that toxic substances in tobacco smoke can damage DNA and increase the risk of lung and other cancers. Scientists were unsure though whether cannabis smoke would have the same effect. Our research has focused on the toxicity of acetaldehyde, which is present in both tobacco and cannabis."

    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."

    The study was funded by the European Union Network of Excellence ECNIS, the Medical Research Council and Cancer Research UK. 

    Article: Rajinder Singh, Jatinderpal Sandhu, Balvinder Kaur, Tina Juren, William P. Steward, Dan Segerback and Peter B. Farmer (2009) Evaluation of the DNA Damaging Potential of Cannabis Cigarette Smoke by the Determination of Acetaldehyde Derived N2-Ethyl-2′-deoxyguanosine Adducts. Chemical Research in Toxicology, 22, 1181-1188.

    Comments

    My question: Why in the hell did it take the latest cutting edge techniques and technologies being utilized by some of the brightest people in the world to tell us that pot smoke is 5 to 6 times as bad for your mucus membranes than tobacco smoke? What a waste of money it seems to be to prove that hot, combusted smoke is bad for your lungs. What is the next study going to be? How about how smoke of dried maple leafs is damaging to your lungs? I'm composing my abstract....

    If it really was 5 OR 6 TIMES as bad as tobacco smoke wouldnt potheads be dying of lung cancer and emphysema left and right? What is the difference between pot and tobacco? Pot DOES NOT have to be combusted to be ingested however when it is combusted, far less is needed to attain the desired effect than tobacco. Cannabis can be eaten or vaporized and is the most widely used "drug" on the planet. In every single day of 2006, 6000 Americans tried marijuana for the first time. 6000 new revenue possibilities each and every day.

    Hank
    In every single day of 2006, 6000 Americans tried marijuana for the first time. 6000 new revenue possibilities each and every day.
    Oh, you rascally Republicans, making everything about smaller government and more revenue streams.
    Want more no-nonsense, independent science? Buy Science Left Behind
    Wow, this is the first time ever I have been mistaken for a Republican! I'm very, very far from it Hank. I assure you. However, I am for smaller government if and when government intervention creates more of a problem than the problem itself. Marijuana is a textbook case of that but even still, I would like it regulated. I want government to be involved but just not on the law enforcement/incarceration end.

    Also, Repubs just want to whine about lowering taxes. They dont care about actually making money for the government. They got theirs and if you cant get yours, too bad.

    And not only the DNA structure. The problem is that marijuana does more bad things. I saw plenty of people who ended up in drug rehab centers and I don`t wanna be like one of them. My advice is to keep yourself away from this.

    Narconon,
    Have you ever tried pot? What are the other bad things it does? Have you ever compared what prohibitionists say are the "bad" things to what dozens of medical organizations say are the benefits (let alone what recreational users say the benefits are)? If you had tried it I'm sure you would realize it is NOT even in the same league as drugs like cocaine, meth, heroin, ecstacy etc etc. Yet it is scheduled higher (worse) than coke, and amphetamines. It is not physically addictive and anyone who ended up in drug rehab for marijuana alone is wasting time and money. Its about as addictive as television or your favorite video game. The gateway theory is complete bs and has been debunked, scientifically, several times.

    The gateway EFFECTexists only because of prohibition itself as in order to acquire pot, you must be introduced to the black market and to someone who sells many other things. Pot is the most widely used illicit drug in the world so if the gateway theory is correct, there would be many, many more hard drug users out there. Like i said above, everyday in 2006, 6000 people tried pot for the first time so where are all the thousands or hard drug users?

    Narconon....I bet you never had the experience of smoking pot...If you would've have that experience you wouln't even dare say what you just said. No Marijuana does not cause any damage toy your DNA, read verifiable information sources. People are more prone to go to Marijuana Rehab because when they get cought by police, Judges offer them two choices...you either go to rehab or go to jail, what would you do?Less than 5% of marijuana smokers admited on detox facilities are there by their own will, and if you ask them they would go back to MJ anytime.

    Its unfortunate that ppl like you have the ability to spread your propaganda to the masses. You should stop narconon, get it? Drug use is spiritual to an extent and chemicals such as DMT and Ketamine have serious existential properties that have yet to be studied. Do some research before you decide to interject your opinion, because some ppl cannot distinguish the difference.
    Ammies Best master grower

    Gerhard Adam
    Regardless of the results from this study, I'm failing to see why any of this should be a legal issue.
    If marijuana does damage DNA, it's effect is probably minimal. People tan everyday which is terrible for DNA and accelerates cancer. A recent study in Britain showed that soda damages DNA. Millions drink soda, millions tan, and millions aren't dying. People won't die from cancer because of marijuana use.

    As a legal mmj grower who actually produces grade A organic, floride free cannabis I find this slightly offensive. Cannabis is now having the opposite effects on cancerous tumors in breast cancer patients by causing the cells to eat themselves out from the inside. This is a huge discovery and its very unfortunate that this misinformation is being distributed in the scientific community. Cannabis has never killed anyone...........ever. To overdose on herb you'd have to consume some incredible amount, somewhere around 2 tons in the matter of a couple of hours. BTW..... You've all heard how the potency has increased 20x in the last 10 years....ya that was me. It's also shown to regenerate braincells....so get over it....
    Ammie's Best Master Grower

    I don't understand how anyone can claim anything has never killed anyone. How could one even pretend to have such knowledge especially for something that is documented to have carcinogenic compounds, which causes cancer..which kills people. For a website about science blogging, I sure read a lot of unscientific fallacies. A "I know it in my heart" feeling is not scientific truth! :( makes me sad.

    @geotek: Yes marjiana contains PAHs (Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) as does wood, coal, diesel, fat, tobacco, and incense. The difference is Marijuana also has anti-cancer properties. As other PAH containing compounds do not. So in a way even though you are taking in carcinogenic chemicals, you are also becoming resistant to the cancer that the PAHs could cause. Once again this study was based on smoking 3-4 Marijuana cigarettes (Joints) a day. Which is way more than even alot of heavy duty smokers do in a day. And you also have to remember that smoking a joint is the most toxic way to consume Marijuana. As you have many other options as such a water pipe, vaporizer or eating it. Which the later 2 do not contain ANY PAHs/carcinogenic chemicals.

    You would have a better chance of getting cancer by driving behind a diesel powered school bus on the way home from work at rush hour.

    This is another biased article and if you look on many other news sites reporting this they have turned off the comments so no one can debate it. Go figure, the research was probably paid by the Alcohol industry, just like they tried to stop prop 19 in California.

    Well, if your study is la creme de la crop then why don't you enter it in MMP
    http://mppnv.org/home/
    They will give you 10,000 dollars if your study is correct.
    Haha, that's what I thought, what government agency paid you to write this nonsense article?

    Gerhard Adam
    Unless you were smoking before you read this article, I can't imagine on what plane of existence your statements make any sense with respect to this article.