JAH - Ganja talk - View Messages

Definitives again

Studies indicate smoke can be an accelerant on the aggressive nature of melanomas and may be a causative agent. Nothing definitive either way but theoretically relevant

Which I find highly ironic

Simple as

Messenger: speaks from the chalice

Sent: 2/14/2019 5:36:22 AM

I wouls also like to say Peter Tosh cutting of PROF I's dreads for not smoking was not a humane thing to do. So I don't listen to much Peter Tosh (not because he done that) but because.. again most of his songs are black supremecy.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/14/2019 6:42:10 AM

You can't take Peter Tosh nor black supremacy away from Rastafari. You may not follow it and choose to ignore it but you cannot separate it

Messenger: Nesta1

Sent: 2/14/2019 7:07:37 AM

Yes, studies clearly demonstrate that the ultraviolet (UV) rays in sunlight are a major cause of melanoma. No doubt about it. Light-skinned people like me are definitely at the greatest risk of melanomas from sunlight. So I've got to chose between exposing my skin to sunlight and hiding out, staying covered continually here in the tropics. I suppose I could get my Vitamin D mainly from dietary supplements, but I like to have my body synthesize it as the most natural way to get Vitamin D. So I choose to expose my skin to sunlight in moderation knowing full well the risk of melanoma involved. Such is the nature of my faith in JAH RastafarI -- that He will protect me until the time He has selected to call me to Zion (i.e., I just cannot live in fear of smoke or sunlight, or closed in a closet).

Now if I got to "take a lift" I just may fire up a spliff like I've done so many times before over the years. It's far less risky than going out into the sunlight with bare skin exposed, so it's an easy choice if I want to lift my spirits. It's no problem. I wouldn't give it a second thought.

"Excuse me while I light my spliff
Good God I gotta' take a lift
From reality I just can't drift
That's why I'm staying with this riff"
- Bob Marley & the Wailers "Easy Skanking"

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/14/2019 7:14:46 AM

Messenger:�GARVEYS AFRICASent: 2/13/2019 5:55:11 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.

You can't reduce I to stupidity
Fast becoming one of the more annoying people to reason with. As it seems you haven't taken thr time to actually read my initial posts to which you respond. Or you would have appreciated that I had already accounted for that which you bring up. Such as the DIFFERENT pathological pathways for less sunlight exposed areas of the body as opposed to that of the more sunlight exposed areas. Secondly to the point of smoke being linked to the more AGGRESSIVE and MALIGNANT characteristics of Melanomas as opposed to the more benign slower growing kinds. Thirdly to the fact this whole reasoning is about HEAVY smoke consumption such as that propagated by Marley not your Argument of lighting up an occasional spliff. How very sad to repeat and repeat. This is pointless....

stick bruk ina dem ears

Messenger: Nesta1

Sent: 2/14/2019 7:38:11 AM

Oh, I assure you that sunlight can induce the most AGGRESSIVE and MALIGNANT forms of melanoma. I've heard the warnings from dermatologists my entire life and had at least two close friend who've perished from what their oncologists concluded where likely UV-induced malignant melanomas.

I can also assure you that there aren't any dermatologists I've known who've made any anti-ganja-smoking recommendation with respect to melanoma, only anti-sunlight-exposure recommendations.

Bob Marley simply does not constitute a good poster boy for your anti-ganja propaganda, GA. Maybe you can find a case where indications suggest that ganja was actually played a role in someone's disease even if they're not quite as glamorous a cause c�l�bre to a Rasta audience as Marley.

Messenger: Nesta1

Sent: 2/14/2019 11:01:04 AM

Garvey's Africa: "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."

This seems to be presented to suggest that UV from sunlight would not play a role in triggering malignant melanomas on the feet. Such a generalization is not definitive or absolute. I'm not sure what type of climate you live in, but life in a tropical climate, like Jamaica, can entail a person's feet receiving abundant solar (UV) radiation exposure. I live in the tropics and the tops of my feet, including my toes, are among the first areas to burn from direct overexposure to the sun (i.e., everybody here wears sandals all the time). The soles of the feet are regarded as "less sun exposed areas"; not necessarily the tops or sides of the feet in geographies wear donning sandals or going barefoot are common. UV-induce malignant melanoma can occur in the skin of the foot (or toes). How could you proffer statement to suggest otherwise?

This is the problem I have with throwing around scientific information without regard for the state-of-the-science in a loose and casual manner, and then representing such a slipshod treatment of the science as definitive or dispositive evidence for the sake of argument.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 2/14/2019 1:27:49 PM

You still don't get the difference between causative effects and accerelants. Its coming accross as plain ignorance.

BOB MARLEY CANCER WAS UNDER HIS TOENAIL. THIS IS NOT CONSIDERED A SUN EXPOSED AREA. To further this point... he died of ALM which I TOLD YOU have little to do with UV light. You can GWAN with all that...

"Two relatively uncommon types of skin cancer are usually unrelated to sun exposure � acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM) and mucosal melanoma. ALM is most often found on the palms of the hands, soles of the feet, and under the nails."
-Skincancer.Org

Now what was it you said?

"This is the problem I have with throwing around scientific information without regard for the state-of-the-science in a loose and casual manner, and then representing such a slipshod treatment of the science as definitive or dispositive evidence for the sake of argument."

JAHKNOW.

Im done.

Gwan continue when a 1 tells you he's done.

Marley early demise as a champion of Ganja is ironic as fuck. To me.

I'm sure all dermatologists I have ever known have said smoke is both a causative and aggrevating factor. Ive reasoned with and studied with at least 30 to 40 dermatologists oncologists and haematologists and worked with the patients of such. You are talking to somebody who is medically trained in practice and in research. I can 100%tell you haven't seen the research I have on the aggressive vs benign behaviour of different melanomas and the reasons behind both I can also tell you have little consideration for the DIFFERENT types of Melanomas and their aetiologies.

Let's move past Marley as I sense the sensitivity meter is on red right yah now as soon as Marley boy is mention

Messenger: speaks from the chalice

Sent: 2/14/2019 6:44:39 PM

G.A. would you like to leave Marley out of this thread becase Peter Tosh called him "son of whiteman" and Chris Blackwell "Whitewell" showing his true racist language? That's why you like him so much as you seem as if you follow his ideology.

You would think a man of your education and I have to compliment you on that - would let it go. I've been listening to Rasta music for almost 35 years and I find what I love most about it is its power to make you feel happy when you're down. I smoke herb or hashish maybe about 2 or 3 spliffs a day though not every day. i do not believe I'm harming myself smoking in such moderation. There is no other music in my opinion on Earth that correlates lyrics and spirituality to make me feel good and become a better person for it. So I don't care what you say about white brethren and your black superior rants claiming blacks are superior.

You spoil a learned mind with such nonsense. It's saddening.

Messenger: Nesta1

Sent: 2/15/2019 9:35:27 AM

Pretending like one knows the triggering mechanism for Bob Marley's disease is absurd when no REPUTABLE medical professional or scientist would venture such pure speculation [or if they did venture it upon being pressured to speculate they would qualify it as PURE CONJECTURE]. Pretending to know and then using such conjecture as disinformation (in this case about Bob Marley) to support an overall anti-cannabis narrative is simply propagandistic.

THIS IS THE PROBLEM I have with throwing around scientific information without context, or regard for the state-of-the-science, in a loose and casual manner, and then representing such a slipshod treatment of the science as definitive or dispositive evidence for the sake of one's own argument. That's not science, it's CHARLATANISM.

You're NO AUTHORITY on this by virtue of having read some articles or being able to cut&paste definitive-sounding snippets out of scientific context. Even professors of medicine and toxicology wouldn't venture the kind of speculation you proffer here. If we convened a dozen medical professors in a room to talk about this every single [reputable] one would give the same answer: There's no way to know as we sit here today what exogeneous factor or factors, if any, played a role in triggering Mr. Marley' disease.

Accelerant effects? Immunosupression? Ganja smoke exacerbation? All pure unknowns in the case of Mr. Marley.

Believe me this get old for me too, but it's hard to sit back and say nothing when I see people misusing science and/or peddling junk science to sound authoritative.

You can talk Marcus Garvey all day long and I defer to your knowledge of the man and his history because I haven't studied it extensively, but when you start talking science, specifically exposure to carcinogens and their effects, you're in MY HOUSE. Nearly 4 decades I spent with doctors, epidemiologists, toxicologists et al working with carcinogen contamination, toxics exposures and public health, and the most common phrase out of their mouths when it came to attribution of disease causes was by far "there's simply no way to know for sure". I came to recognize over the course of my career that the really smart guys (the true top level, best scientists) were the ones who said "I don't know" the most often and the ones who always seem to have all the answers were often charlatans.

111 - 120