fake n' bakin in the winter

[dapimpstress]

im not trying to get into some big thing about this oaky?

i dont believe everything i read on the net, and so what credibility to those stories have? hm? how am i to know they arent jus some fool who is ANTI herb.. cuz baby, there is a PLETHERA.. WAY more than pro-herb ppl. and what is to stop them from putting out propoganda about how weed will kill u from giving you cancer? well?

[galaxie]

^ or vice-versa.

Scientific studies themselves are NOT propaganda, rather studies that are done with the intent to prove or disprove a certain hypothesis. The point of these studies is NOT to prove that the hypothesis is correct, but rather to figure out whether or not the hypothesis is true. The idea behind scientific studies is not to determine the outcome and THEN produce the proof, but it is to come up with an idea, and then do the research to prove or disprove said idea. Granted, scientific studies can be used as propaganda, but generally by outsiders trying to display a certain idea.

The bottom line for me in these two situations is tanning beds may cause skin cancer in SOME people, marijuana smoking may cause cancer in SOME people, but not every person. I say, enjoy life and do as you please, but don't be a hypocrite. I'm not sitting here saying don't smoke weed 'cause it gives you cancer, but I tan, and IMO, you shouldn't be saying the opposite, either.

[Technique]

Ive been using the Tanning beds (Stand Up ) for a year or so now, and I have found in moderation it can make your skin look very good and healthy..plus a little color is always nice..I get extremely white and pale if I dont tan..and that is no fun.

I seem to tan really well, I burn once in awhile but it goes away within a day or so and leaves a good tan, Im not too worried about over-drying my skin or any of that stuff because I use a good tanning lotion (HEMP) and also my moisturizer is very good too..it better be for how much the shit costs!.


Anyways my question was for Galaxie .. you mentioned that you should "Not" use stand up beds ? those are the only ones I use ever..i know they are stronger then the beds..( thats why I use them ) but why do you think they are so bad?

[dapimpstress]

i AM NOT SAYING that you shouldn't tan at all, i was SIMPLY FUCKING trying to make the point, to do it in MODERATION, because if you dont, you will have a HIGHER CHANCE of getting cancer or some other undesirable effects.

I am not a hypocrite because I myself am not to concerned with cancer, as i smoke herb and cigarettes, and have im sure done many other things that could potentially give me cancer, including tanning on occasion in the far past.

regaurdless natalie... /discussion

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by Technique

Anyways my question was for Galaxie .. you mentioned that you should "Not" use stand up beds ? those are the only ones I use ever..i know they are stronger then the beds..( thats why I use them ) but why do you think they are so bad?

www.tanningtruth.com

You'll be able to find all the answers in there.

By the way, you should NEVER burn in a tanning bed, the same way you should never burn outside. It's terrible for your skin.

[Joanne]

Originally Posted by wellbelove's

I do get anoyed at how taning salons smear all this "Vitamin D defeciency" stuff as none of the dr.'s actauly say go fake n bake to cure it.

don't people realize that you can get vitamin D through dietary sources??

Originally Posted by Ashes

if smoking weed causes cancer... then why do they give it to cancer patients?!

because it's an anti-emetic.

Originally Posted by galaxie

You just HAD to challenge me, didn't you?
Enjoy your reading!

http://www.slam.ca/HealthNews/980818_cancer.html
http://www.sarnia.com/groups/antidru.../cncrlink.html
http://www.bdtzone.com/news_details....id=51&index=26

Are those three enough for you?
Obviously pro-marijuana sites are going to say that it's good and OK for you. I remember reading pro-drug sites when I was 15/16 that also said crystal meth wasn't damaging and cocaine wasn't addicitve. If you believe that shit, you're an idiot.

hey, in case you haven't realized, just about everything causes cancer and anyone can simply google (insert anything) + cancer and come up with results.

and by the way, these things don't CAUSE cancer. they can make a person more LIKELY to get cancer.

Originally Posted by galaxie

Scientific studies themselves are NOT propaganda, rather studies that are done with the intent to prove or disprove a certain hypothesis. The point of these studies is NOT to prove that the hypothesis is correct, but rather to figure out whether or not the hypothesis is true. The idea behind scientific studies is not to determine the outcome and THEN produce the proof, but it is to come up with an idea, and then do the research to prove or disprove said idea. Granted, scientific studies can be used as propaganda, but generally by outsiders trying to display a certain idea.

you also completely forgot to leave out the fact that there are studies that are well-done, and some that are just shitty. just because a scientific study was done, doesn't mean that anything is proven (in fact, most of the time, there ISN'T) or that the study was error free.

--Joanne :P

[galaxie]

^ Never said that all were well done, and I never implied it either. I was just trying to give her an idea of the basic concept behind a scientific study, because IMO the way she was thinking of them was twisted.

Obviously you can google, search whatever for results, which is what I did. I provided her with a few studies that say that marijuana can be a factor in cancer, which is what she asked for.

[BrownThug]

dont do it mandy. or allison.

[dapimpstress]

Originally Posted by galaxie

^ Never said that all were well done, and I never implied it either. I was just trying to give her an idea of the basic concept behind a scientific study, because IMO the way she was thinking of them was twisted.

Obviously you can google, search whatever for results, which is what I did. I provided her with a few studies that say that marijuana can be a factor in cancer, which is what she asked for.

i meant CREDIBLE sources... but thats besides the point, and you know you dont have to talk like im an idiot i wasnt thinking of scientific studies being in a twisted fashion, i was simply making the point of your naievity in thinking that these studies are legit. because they aren't... or htey MAY not be... because though you have some good point re: hypothesis, there are OBVIOUSLY ways to manipulate data to the ends in which you seek. THAT is what they teach you first in science, or at least what i was taught...

[Ree Fresh]

Originally Posted by bananasinpjs

hey, in case you haven't realized, just about everything causes cancer and anyone can simply google (insert anything) + cancer and come up with results.
--Joanne :P

Ashes + Cancer on google gave me 80 PAGES!

sorry I really could help it :P

[dapimpstress]

Originally Posted by wellbelove's

Ashes + Cancer on google gave me 80 PAGES!

sorry I really could help it :P

all good, did it really? haha, prolly cuz ashes come from cigarettes in the context they would assume u wanted to search..

[Joanne]

Originally Posted by galaxie

^ Never said that all were well done, and I never implied it either. I was just trying to give her an idea of the basic concept behind a scientific study, because IMO the way she was thinking of them was twisted.

um, you made the statement "SMOKING WEED CAUSES CANCER" and you presented links with studies that you never even read to make an argument.

did it cross your mind that maybe THESE studies were not well-done?

and by the way, I'm not saying that I disagree that marijuana can increase your likelihood of cancer (in fact, I'm sure it does). I just wouldn't blindly present resources to use as "proof" for an argument.

--Joanne :P

[Joanne]

Originally Posted by Ashes

i meant CREDIBLE sources... but thats besides the point, and you know you dont have to talk like im an idiot i wasnt thinking of scientific studies being in a twisted fashion, i was simply making the point of your naievity in thinking that these studies are legit. because they aren't... or htey MAY not be... because though you have some good point re: hypothesis, there are OBVIOUSLY ways to manipulate data to the ends in which you seek. THAT is what they teach you first in science, or at least what i was taught...

and which ARE the credible and noncredible sources? :P

--Joanne :P

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by Ashes

i meant CREDIBLE sources... but thats besides the point, and you know you dont have to talk like im an idiot i wasnt thinking of scientific studies being in a twisted fashion, i was simply making the point of your naievity in thinking that these studies are legit. because they aren't... or htey MAY not be... because though you have some good point re: hypothesis, there are OBVIOUSLY ways to manipulate data to the ends in which you seek. THAT is what they teach you first in science, or at least what i was taught...

Who are you to determine whether or not sources are credible? For that matter, how does one even determine this? If you constantly believe that the data has been manipulated or the source/target group was fixed, how is one ever to believe in the results of a scientific study? If your theory is 100% true, then your opinion of tanning = increased cancer risk could be completely false, due to the fact that those studies may have been rigged to produce those results. Of course, I am not saying that they were, I'm just making the point that it's difficult to determine which studies are truly credible and which studies are not. The only way to determine this would be to read every single piece of research, data, etc. and contact the individuals involved in the study, if possible.

And, for the record, you said find to fine you ONE case where marijuana had a part in cancer - you did not ask me to provide you with "credible" studies.

[BrownThug]

this is making my brain hurt. too much words.

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by bananasinpjs

um, you made the statement "SMOKING WEED CAUSES CANCER" and you presented links with studies that you never even read to make an argument.

did it cross your mind that maybe THESE studies were not well-done?

and by the way, I'm not saying that I disagree that marijuana can increase your likelihood of cancer (in fact, I'm sure it does). I just wouldn't blindly present resources to use as "proof" for an argument.

--Joanne :P

I actually did read over the points in the studies I suggested she read. I would never just put up a link w/out reading it, but I'm glad that you would make that assumption.

Of course I don't know if each study is well-done or not! The only way I would actually know that 100% is if I were THERE, doing the study myself. However, in reading each study I determined that they supported my opinion, and what I was trying to show Ashes, therefore, I posted them.

[Joanne]

Originally Posted by galaxie

I actually did read over the points in the studies I suggested she read. I would never just put up a link w/out reading it, but I'm glad that you would make that assumption.

Of course I don't know if each study is well-done or not! The only way I would actually know that 100% is if I were THERE, doing the study myself. However, in reading each study I determined that they supported my opinion, and what I was trying to show Ashes, therefore, I posted them.

no, I meant reading the actual research ARTICLE, that will indicates HOW the study was done, the variables, constants, what is it a properly randomized study, were the manipulation checks there, discussion, drawbacks to the study etc., not a linking providing a summary of the article. you don't NEED to be at the actual study to know whether or not a research was well done. scientists critique each other's studies all the time. do you think they all stand around WHILE the scientists are actually doing the studies to do it?

--Joanne :P

[Lush]

Originally Posted by Ashes

WHAT?!? you think cuz i BURN HERBS, im a hypocryte cuz i dont GO TANNING?!?

oh lord... okay there is NO CONNECTION... one is for recreation, the other is for vanity.

all im saying, its not good for ur skin, because it GIVES YOU CANCER... im not talking about acne.. acne is temporary, cancer can be PERMANENT. werd? werd.

No, what makes you a hypocrite is the fact that you're making references to cancer when smoking any sort of substance will damage your lungs and make you subject to developing cancer.

Tanning isn't necessarily for vanity, there are tons of reasons people go tanning and if improving ones appearance is one of them then I don't see a problem with that.

[Rhianna]

No deal on the fake tanning for me, at anytime of the year. I have views on it and my time in the real sun.

[tahiti__treat]

i have went to 5 tanning sessions now and my face totally cleared up and has a nice glow! nething can cause cancer now a days!

[Hot Karl]

who cares, let'm fake n bake.

then when the bakers get to around 30ish, they can be the dried up cougars you see at clubs and bars.

i mean the current cougars will eventually retire, so this young batch of pumas need to start tanning now, in their early 20's or teens so they can achieve the dried up orangey look that will be their legacy.

mmmmm dried up so bad, i wouldn't hit it with a gallon of ky.


incidently this can be applied to myself re: smoking.

so y'all can be cougars, and i'll rock it out on the dance floor with my oxygen tank. see ya there!

[bl0nde]

Originally Posted by tahiti__treat

i have went to 5 tanning sessions now and my face totally cleared up and has a nice glow! nething can cause cancer now a days!

what type of bed do you go in?

[tahiti__treat]

my mom has been taning since she was 18 and she still looks amazing! i hope when im her age i look sumthin like her.

i tan in the pryzma and sum stand up one but i forget wut its called.. i go to copper zone in delta!