A reader writes:
When I saw your Marijuana and Cancer picture I first assumed it was another The View From Your Window entry. I thought, now here’s a great place to live! Haha.
Actually it’s from a busted underground pot-greenhouse in Tennessee. There’s a lot of green outside my window, but none of it smokable, I’d wager.
A reader writes:
There’s some question as to the facts in the TCS piece on Al Gore. Take for instance the quote in which they state that the ICCC report concludes this:
"No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected."
Here’s the full paragraph from the report that they link to:
"Based on the very few long tide-gauge records, the average rate of sea level rise has been larger during the 20th century than during the 19th century. No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected. This is not inconsistent with model results due to the possibility of compensating factors and the limited data."
And the report goes on regarding this subject:
"The most rapid rise in global sea level was between 15,000 and 6,000 years ago, with an average rate of about 10 mm/yr. Based on geological data, eustatic sea level (i.e., corresponding to a change in ocean volume) may have risen at an average rate of 0.5 mm/yr over the past 6,000 years and at an average rate of 0.1 to 0.2 mm/yr over the last 3,000 years. This rate is about one tenth of that occurring during the 20th century."
In other words, what is happening now is highly unusual. They also link to the Intergovernmental UN report on climate change and suggest it supports their case. Read it and see if you agree.
I should say that I find the evidence for global warming overwhelming; and the man-made motor for a large part of it pretty indisputable at this point. I’m with Gregg Easterbrook on this. I’d also favor Gregg’s proposals for tradable greenhouse permits; and I’ve long backed at least a dollar hike on the gas tax. I was promoting green policies for the Tories back in the 1980s. But counter-arguments are always worth listening to. Context matters – and some of the hysteria on climate change merits some empirical skepticism. The critical issue for me is whether China and India make all our efforts in the West pointless. I’ve yet to read a solid argument debunking that concern. Is there one?
Spokane, Washington, 3.30 pm. There goes the neighborhood.
Pune, India, 8 am, from a reader visiting relatives.
Fact-checking Al Gore.
Less than a month ago, the NYT ran an op-ed backing the FDA’s recent political decision to dismiss the health benefits of marijuana. The basic argument was that smoking marijuana can harm you for the same reason smoking tobacco can harm you. Money quote:
In their 1999 report, the Institute of Medicine’s panel of experts flatly rejected the idea that herbal (usually smoked) cannabis would ever be considered a safe and effective medicine for widespread use. They noted that … because smoked marijuana can increase the risk of lung damage, cancer and complications during pregnancy, it is appropriate only for short-term use (less than six months) by acutely suffering patients who have failed to find relief with other therapies and who are under the close supervision of a doctor.
Today we actually have some new data on the relationship between pot-smoking and lung cancer. There isn’t any:
Marijuana smoking does not increase a person’s risk of developing lung cancer, according to the findings of a new study at the University of California Los Angeles that surprised even the researchers. They had expected to find that a history of heavy marijuana use, like cigarette smoking, would increase the risk of cancer.
Instead, the study, which compared the lifestyles of 611 Los Angeles County lung cancer patients and 601 patients with head and neck cancers with those of 1,040 people without cancer, found no elevated cancer risk for even the heaviest pot smokers. It did find a 20-fold increased risk of lung cancer in people who smoked two or more packs of cigarettes a day.
Why?
[Dr. Donald Tashkin, senior researcher and professor at the UCLA School of Medicine] theorized that tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, a chemical in marijuana smoke that produces its psychotropic effect, may encourage aging, damaged cells to die off before they become cancerous.
You mean smoking pot might even prevent lung cancer? I wish anti-medical marijuana advocates would be honest and simply say: we oppose this medicine because it might give people pleasure as well as helping them. Then we’d at least be able to have an honest debate.
Richards, Grimes County, Texas, 2 pm.
"Anal rape is always an arresting metaphor. For all I know, Rove deploys it hourly for its salutary effect on subordinates, colleagues, and rivals. But on that particular day, he made sure that a well-connected journalist heard every word. Rove was going to f*** somebody, ruin them, f*** them like they’d never been f***ed. And he wanted every asshole in Washington to know about it," – Francis Wilkinson, American Prospect. (Hat tip: Rob.)
The National Park Service wants to thin the elk herd in the Rocky Mountain National Park from around 3,000 to half that. Fine. The cost? $18 million. Tom Elia has a conniption.
The Dish 