read the fucking articles. he DID find you something that states something to the effect of "in the largest case study of its kind, there was NO LINK FOUND between smoking marijuana and lung cancer, despite the chemicals, even in the heaviest of pot smokers."
i must be a glutton for punishment when it comes to these moments with you. it is an absolute waste of time ever trying to prove a point to you, because you think you know everything about everything, even if your logic is sometimes completely irrational, and oftentimes unintelligible.
They were all asked about their lifetime use of marijuana, tobacco and alcohol. The heaviest marijuana smokers had lighted up more than 22,000 times, while moderately heavy usage was defined as smoking 11,000 to 22,000 marijuana cigarettes. Tashkin found that even the very heavy marijuana smokers showed no increased incidence of the three cancers studied.
the focus of the article is clearly in my favor. you can hardly pick out a few lines and post them out of context trying to prove your argument holds any water. perhaps find your own articles to back yourself up instead of foolishly and/or intentionally misinterpreting the ones krsna referred us to. your laziness, coupled with your inability to see any other point of view and your unwillingness to back down when you are wrong, is baffling.