1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
  1. RoboCodeine7610
    A WARNING about the toxic effects of cannabis was issued last night after a 36-year-old man became the first to die as a direct result of smoking the drug.
    Lee Maisey, 36, who smoked half a dozen “joints” a day, was found dead on the living room floor of his home in Summerhill, Pembrokeshire, after complaining of a headache.

    Michael Howells, the Pembrokeshire Coroner, recorded the cause of death as cannabis poisoning, although the verdict recorded was death by misadventure because Mr Maisey had died while taking part in an illegal activity.

    Philip Guy, a lecturer in addictions at the University of Hull, said that “cannabis has changed. Nowadays it is a lot stronger than it used to be. It is not the nice hippy drug it once was. It is a distinct possibility that someone could die from extreme toxicity.” Dr Guy said death was more likely if the drug had been eaten instead of smoked. “If you eat a large amount of it it can be deadly.”


    "cannabis toxicity"?Is that even a real diagnosis?Sounds like it could have been an aneurism.


  1. TheBigBadWolf
    After complaining of a headache - sounds to me like collapsed bloodvessels due to high blood pressure ( which could come from anything).

    I have lost four of my closer friend to such things and don't believe in cannabis toxic enough to make a human die.
    Just my opinion.

  2. Ellisdeee
    6 joints a day? I read an article/interview with Snoop Dogg once talking about when he tried or was trying to quit smoking marijuana. Think he was quoted saying he was smoking around 2 - 3 ounces a day. And you know he wasn't smoking junk either. He just stands out cause while many are known to be pot heads, that was one of the few who quoted an amount of pot consumption I've heard from a celebrity who can afford all the pot they want and consume huge amounts daily. But Snoop aside, I'm just not sold. If there was toxic potential I don't care how strong marijuana is today, there are plenty of people in todays day n' age and the prior 10 years who smoke way more than 6 joints a day, no matter how big of joints were talking about.

    Seems far fetched. It doesn't seem like they are very certain about what they're reporting. I'm getting the tone that the reporting is vague and a little unsure itself, but went ahead and said it anyway. If you are smoking that much daily, no matter how you die, you're going to die high as shit and be a corpse loaded with THC - now sure how they can conclude it :x
  3. MrG
    The coroner's report stated "Death due to probable cannabis toxicity". It had been reported that Maisey smoked about six joints a day. Mr. Maisey's blood contained 130 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml) of the THC metabolite THC-COOH.

    The validity of the finding did not stand up well under review. As reported on 2004-01-28 in the Neue Züricher Zeitung, the Federal Health Ministry of Switzerland asked Dr. Rudolf Brenneisen, a professor at the department for clinical research at the University of Bern, to review the data of this case. Dr. Brenneisen said that the data of the toxicological analysis and collected by autopsy were "scanty and not conclusive" and that the conclusion "death by cannabis intoxication" was "not legitimate". Additionally, Dr. Franjo Grotenhermen of the nova-Institute in Cologne, Germany said: "A concentration of 130 ng/ml THC-COOH in blood is a moderate concentration, which may be observed some hours after the use of one or two joints. Heavy regular use of cannabis easily results in THC-COOH concentrations of above 500 ng/ml. Many people use much more cannabis than Mr. Maisey did, without any negative consequences."
  4. C.D.rose
    In order for it to be death due to cannabis poisoning, they would have to identify a mechanism of action via which cannabis can kill, no? Such as respiratory depression for opioids. Until they identify that, I certainly remain very skeptical.
  5. corvardus
    The only way that I can think of for cannabis to kill you is only incidental and that is through panic attack. In other words he was scared to death. This would imply that his heart and/or brain has already had an existing problem and a panic attack could have exacerbated the problem.

    That is pure speculation, though.

    This article is, however, exceedingly old. This is January 2004 when it was published. You'd think in 2011 more stories such as this would have come out by now if there were any truth to it. Clearly, the lack evidence of an increased mortality rate directly correlated to strength of cannabis would demonstrate that there is little truth to the claim that cannabis on it's own caused mortality.

    Clearly, in this case, cannabis can only be said to have taken an incidental role in the individuals death. Exercise, sex, getting excited or any other of the "legal highs" could have resulted in the same outcome. Shall we ban them all?
  6. Routemaster Flash
    With respect, whether you "believe in" cannabis toxicity or not has no bearing on what caused this man's death.

    Something that should be born in mind is that even if cannabis plants themselves aren't toxic enough to cause cardiac arrest or whatever, that doesn't guarantee that street weed isn't potentially toxic. The stuff he was smoking could have been sprayed with insecticides or fungicides that might be toxic if inhaled in large doses, and then there's this awful 'grit weed' that's appeared in the last few years (weed adulterated with tiny glass beads to add weight and give the appearance of THC crystals) and has been linked to cases of silicosis.

    Also, strong weed can cause a racing heart and it's not impossible that he had a weak heart that was overstrained by smoking too much.
  7. Plasma
    Pretty sure it's impossible to overdose on edibles. You'd throw up way before eating a toxic enough dose. It is also impossible to die from smoking, you'd die from oxygen dehydration before you could reach the toxicity level. Either a) Like pointed out, he could of have some dodgy stuff going on with his cannabis such as sprays or b) He died from something more complicated, but it's easier to point deaths towards drug use. In this case they pointed it towards one of the most non-toxic substances out there. They may as well have looked in his cupboard for paracetamol and blamed it on that, way more toxic.
  8. MikePatton
    This sounds like complete bullshit, I doubt he was smoking pure cannabis and if he was I doubt it was the actual cause of death.
  9. Space Numpty
    Ok, i did some research on this;

    Firstly, the story is over 6 years old (see the link)

    Philip Guy left Hull University last year. He was a lecturer in politics, and specialised in Terrorism, especially Maritime Terrorism. He was in no way involved in any sort of "addiction"/substance abuse capacity. I have spoken to HR at Hull University and they cannot explain the "title" he seems to have been given by this news report.

    Michael Howells retired from H.M Coroners for Pembrokeshire 2 years ago. I did however speak to a representative there who was at least able to tell me that they have no record of any officially recorded verdict of death by Cannabis poisoning.

    Once again the sweet smell of bullshit wafts amoungst the Roses....

    Im now tempted to take this up with the journalist who reported this tripe as news...... we will see.

    Rest assured, i have read reports where huge quantities of pure cannabis oil have been ingested in condoms that have split "in-transit" and the "mule" has spent about 3 months sleeping to then wake up to the biggest case of munchies they've ever had. Other than that there have been no recorded ill effects.
  10. RoboCodeine7610
    Wow, very nicely researched.

    Robo was aware of how old the story was but was surprised to find it after watching a documentary titled "the 20 most dangerous drugs"

    The list was just ridiculous, with XTC at number 18 followed closely by GHB,Amyl Nitrate,LSD and other drugs with Cannabis at No.11.

    Anyway, after mentioning each drug, the number of deaths caused by each was mentioned and when they got to cannabis, they said there was 1 death a year from it.This was what made Robo google "cannabis deaths" and come across that article.

    It's amazing how the story was entirely fabricated though, Robo knew the media was full of BS but always assumed it was based on a real incident...


    RoboCodeine7610 added 1 Minutes and 44 Seconds later...

    Also, this seems like a pretty curious case and I'd really like to read the story if you don't mind posting a link.
  11. coolhandluke
    i HATE how 50 year olds who were hippies keep saying that "back in my day the weed was not very strong, now days its 20x stronger so thats why it was ok to use back in the 60s but not anymore". there was strong weed back then, though it was not as wide spread and there was hash. its just the way they justify themselves being a hypocrite.
  12. ellavader
    I must say that there is some merit to that documentary titled "the 20 most dangerous drugs" ← can be found on youtube.

    When they say XTC at number 18 they dont mean random pills that can contain anything, they are talking about "pure MDMA" which in all reality if used sparingly is not that bad at all in any toxic means as long as you dont over do it and dont use it very often....

    Cannabis is a very dence smoke and there for bad for the lungs, and is known as a gateway drug...fo me cannabis was the catalyst for harder drug use and from all my experiences i would have to say that the 'pure MDMA' that i was getting and still have a bit is less harmfull then cannabis.

    I have smoked cannabis and certain strains had me almost blacking out and full blown panic attacks, this didnt happen recently as i dont even smoke anymore this occurred when i was a daily pot smoker for over 10 years....just shows that from one strain to the next weed can be very unpredictable in that sense. To this day i feel cuz of those negative episodes with cannabis it messed me up for quite sometime after...... :s
  13. Synaps
    I don't understand your argument. You say that because strong weed existed somewhere in the world in the 60's their argument is invalid? The point is that the weed they smoked was not anywhere near as strong as the weed we smoke today. I do not believe that the increase in strength of cannabis causes lethality, but I do believe that the increased THC content of cannabis today causes more mental issues. This in turn leads to more people having their quality of life decreased and in the most extreme cases, more people who commit suicide due to the negative effects cannabis has on their minds.
  14. C.D.rose
    They way luke worded it, it was a relatively weak argument, but I think his general point is not completely unvalid. I basically agree with your description of the situation regarding the dangers that go along with cannabis consumption, but it's important to take a look at the numbers. The average THC or cannabinoid content in weed has surely risen over time, and this is surely not just due to changes in measuring methods and so on. However, I often see comments like "THC content has increased ten-fold over the last twenty years", and this is certainly either a lie or misinformation. Logically, that would sometimes mean that cannabis now consists of something like 80% THC. So it is important to get the number straight, because the potential for things like mental issues seems a lot bigger when it's an increase of 1000% compared to an increase of 60-70%.

    I have seen far too many people struggle badly with cannabis in order to say that cannabis is harmless, or that regular/daily consumption is nothing to worry about. But when assessing the risks associated with cannabis, I think it's important to keep in mind that, while cannabinoid contents have risen over time, they have not done so to an astronomical level.
  15. Smeg
    Our Maude will be fifty in December. She has numerous recollections of weed and hashish sometimes being hugely potent even thirty years ago.

    There was a general rule that (on encountering such a strain) which was to just use/load less than the standard dose if that was required for psychological and physical comfort.

    The reverse was also practical for those who wanted a more intense experience from a weaker import. Dose more.

    It was all to do with a sensible titration for personal satisfaction: up or down.

    It still is.

    People often learn from their mistakes in the cannabis arena. They did then, and manage to do so now. Not always, but often.

    Previous posters have already made more than reasonable attempts at discrediting a possibly inaccurate deduction regarding this tragic death.
  16. RoboCodeine7610
    I understand that they're talking about pure MDMA, but aside from the risks of MDMA itself that documentary is meant for the general public and can give the impression that street XTC is safe.

    As for cannabis being more dangerous than MDMA I have to point out the various reasons as to why it's absolutely not:

    1.No. of deaths:Due to the various physical dangers such as overheating, tachycardia and overdose people die from taking XTC (About 30 a year in the Uk) .Cannabis users simply don't.

    2.Brain damage:As demostrated in numerous studies, long-term use cause direct damage to the serotonin receptor, sometimes resulting in drug-resistant lifelong depression.On the contrary, cannabis has been shown to be neuroprotective and isn't associated with long term impairment of mental functions.

    3.Adverse mental effects:One of your arguments for putting cannabis above XTC are psychological side effects and panic attacks.Well XTC can cause amongst other things paranoia, manic behavior,depression,anxiety and psychosis.

    4.Gateway drug:Here, all I have to say is:Do you really think XTC is any less of a gateway drug than cannabis?

    Not saying XTC is a terrible or dangerous drug, as a matter of fact it's relatively safer than most.But at least in my opinion, it deserves to rank higher than cannabis hands down.

    Just like the harmless opium poppy sap the Egyptians drank with little ill effects,overdoses or addiction was turned into opium, then mixed with tobacco to speed up absorption, then purified into morphine and finally made into heroin mankind always manages to increase the potency and therefore the risk of pretty much any drug.This is pretty much inevitable in my opinion, and how much or how potent of a drug is used is up to individual choice and responsibility.

  17. coolhandluke
    i was not trying to discredit the fact that since pot is constantly stronger it will lead to more heath complications and the potential for addiction. i was more trying to make the point that people who used marijuana in the 60's who have since moved on and havent smoked since then use the increase in potency to demonize people smoking pot nowadays. just because weed is consistently stronger now than it used to be, that doesn't make it right for older people to pretend that when they smoked it was completely harmless and was hardly even the same drug. i just feel like many use the potency of pot to justify the fact that years ago they were smokers themselves.

    sorry if my post was a little vague, hopefully ive elaborated a little more.
  18. Routemaster Flash
    No-one is denying that cannabis these days is generally a fair bit stronger than it was a few decades ago - the point at stake is how much stronger it is. In Britain, the figure of "25 times stronger" is often bandied about by the newspapers (and not just the right-wing ones, The Independent fell for this garbage too) which is just crazy. I mean, weed or hash has to have at least around 4% THC to be even worth smoking at all, so (assuming weed in our parents' day was worth smoking) that would imply modern cannabis must be " at least 100%" THC!

    Ben 'Bad Science' Goldacre (look him up, very smart and amusing guy) has done a study showing that the average strength of weed/hash in the UK has increased by a factor of about 2, maybe 2.5, since 1980. I imagine something broadly similar happened in the USA. That's still a big difference, I mean you don't drink a 12.5% wine by the pint like you would a 5% beer, but it's only 1/10 as big an increase as has been popularly reported.

    And yes, I think the false idea that cannabis used to be 'harmless' but is now 'evil' is used rhetorically by politicians. It allows them to claim some 'street cred' by claiming they tried it while a student, but that's OK because was 'nice' in those days, while at the same time coming down harshly on modern users, because nowadays it's a 'nasty' drug.
  19. Space Numpty
    Robo, i am trying to find a news report regarding massive "overdoses" of Cannabis oil due to split condoms in a mules stomach and sofar have come up with nothing. I do know of one incident, the one i was thinking of specifically at the time, which was over 30 years ago and was recorded in Barbados, but im still looking for an actual news report.

    2 points id like to comment on, or should i say 2 misconceptions that have been stated in this thread.

    1) Cannabis is a gateway drug. The only reason this is so commonly stated is because society sees Cannabis as the first "drug" people try, and therefore conclude this leads to stronger things. What they fail to understand is the Cannabis is far from the first drug most people try. Consider Caffeine, Nicotine or even Alcohol (Wow, DARE i call Alcohol a drug?!!?). These are all drugs and are all substances that i bet most of us tried way before Cannabis. But why, i hear you ask, are these substances not labelled as "gateway" drugs? All are massive industries that contribute substantially to global finances....so go figure. Also, they are too well imbedded into society. So i beg to suggest, based on the same loose evidence that our various Governments have, that Coffee/Cigarettes/Beer/Insert other, are gateway drugs. Furthermore consider this, they say most Heroin addicts started on Cannabis (although the percentage of cannabis users that end up on Heroin is practically insignificant). Well, you guys addicted to Heroin, you tell me, did you try a joint or a beer first?

    2) Cannabis is waaaay stronger than it was in the 60's. Sorry, incorrect. YES, there are strains of weed that nowadays are designed to be particularly high in THC, and if we are talking weed specifically then yes, gram for gram its stronger than it was (Not 800 million times stronger or whatever BS is begin banded about, just stronger, a bit, somewhat). However, the growing of female only plants to maximise potency has been around for a very very long time (ever heard of "Sensimilla"?), and there are strains or "Sensi" that those ol' Rasta boys where hitting back in the 60's that would still have you running for the nearest Krispy Kreme's. Furthermore, some of the most potent, high grade Hashish's come form the 60's. Ever heard of Yellow Leb? Red Leb? Nepalese Temple Ball?, Charice?, Chara?, Minala Cream?, Manali Cream?.... i could go on. Many are still available in Holland, and are still some of the strongest forms of Cannabis available. So, unless your American and all that you or your parents could get hold of in the 60's was low grade block pressed Mexican weed, then you are incorrent in your assertions. Us folks in the rest of the world where merrily ripped to the tits thank you very much.
  20. RoboCodeine7610
    Thanks for trying, Robo thinks it's pretty interesting to read about the effects of massive THC overdoses.I wander if putting someone into a 1 month coma with massive sub-toxic doses of THC would be an effective treatment for certain types of cancer since even mild, recreational dosages seem to have significant anti-cancer effects as stated by the latest studies.

To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!