Growing attention is being paid to the unusual increase in colorectal cancer among young people, and there is also rising strong concern over the emerging chronic disease epidemics affecting people under 50, including different specific kinds of cancer, childhood and adult obesity, and diabetes.
“Global surge in cancers among the under 50s over past three decades”
An overlooked source of the colorectal cancer and chronic diseases afflicting people at younger ages than in the past may be that millions of young people now in their 20’s, 30s and 40s have been smoking and vaping Cannabis since adolescence, and Cannabis not grown specifically pesticide-free for medical purposes is almost universally contaminated with multiple pesticides.
There is plenty of science on pesticide exposure of any kind or duration and colon cancer, and the news is all bad.
“Association between Pesticide Exposure and Colorectal Cancer Risk and Incidence: A Systematic Review (2021)“
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694176/
“Pesticide exposure and the microbiota-gut-brain axis“
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41396-023-01450-9
When you look at the published evidence on pesticide exposure of any kind, long-term pesticide exposure by inhalation from Cannabis, with or without parallel tobacco use, certainly looks like a candidate for close attention when we’re thinking about colorectal cancer in young people born after 1970.
By the way, while pesticide residues are allowed in Cannabis by state regulators at ‘approved’ levels, the fact is that these ‘safe’ residue levels are a complete scam. The states have zero scientific basis for setting any Cannabis pesticide residue levels, and none of the pesticides used on Cannabis (or Tobacco) have ever been studied for the chronic effects of multi-chemical inhalation. Pesticide residue levels are set by EPA based almost exclusively on one-time lethal dosage, not by inhalation, not by chronic low-level exposure, and not with the multi-pesticide exposure that’s typical of Cannabis and Tobacco. For that there’s zero science, zero research, zero basis in fact. Every agency at every state and federal level is simply pulling these Cannabis numbers out of their collective asses, while actively suppressing public knowledge of pesticide residues in tobacco products, which have been the actual, hidden killers in cigarette smoking since the late 1940s.
Then in the 1960s as American kids began turning on and tuning out to the lies of the US government, that government began worldwide spraying of what they knew were incredibly toxic herbicides like paraquat and Agent Orange (and many others) on Cannabis, Opium, and Coca crops. They called it the “War On Drugs”, and they used all the chemical warfare weapons at their disposal. And the young were the enemy. So of course those sprayed crops got harvested and everyone smoking Mexican and Colombian marijuana anytime from the 60s onwards has been inhaling these chemical weapon residues, even today in the 2020s. Did you, or your mother, or your grandmother smoke Mexican weed in the 60s or 70s? Are you experiencing any chronic health problems way before you should? Here’s what the government knows about Paraquat:
Oops. When you pair this with the fact that since the 1950s tobacco products have been heavily contaminated with these same kinds of herbicides, fungicides and other pesticides, and when you realize that the cancer, obesity and diabetes epidemics now hitting young people are the same diseases that have been killing generations of tobacco smokers in increasing numbers since the 1960s (all called ‘smoking-related diseases’), there’s just a hint of a connection, don’t you think?
Here’s one of many studies that show exactly what’s going on. (I’ll include more links later.) This study focused on the potent obesogen DDT, which was almost universal in cigarettes through the 1970s, and which still appears in some brands. Many of the pesticides that appear in today’s cigarettes and cannabis, as you’ll see in the data below, are also obesogenic – meaning they cause genetic mutations leading to transgenerational obesity.
Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance of Obesity Susceptibility
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8260009/
“Ancestral exposure to the pesticide dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) was shown to dramatically increase the susceptibility to obesity in F3 generation male and female rats.”
“In 2013, Skinner et al. identified a 50% incidence of obesity in rats ancestrally exposed to DDT, and several F3 generation DDT sperm DMR were associated with known obesity genes. A follow-up study utilizing an expanded assessment of obesity identified similar patterns, as well as a unique obesity-specific sperm epimutation signature.”
“The results indicate that the male obesity phenotype may be inherited through either the male or female germline, whereas the female obesity phenotype may require inheritance of both paternal and maternal alleles.”
“Interestingly, the great-grandchildren (F3 generation) of many of the F0 generation human females exposed to DDT during pregnancy are adults today. Therefore, ancestral exposures to environmental toxicants such as DDT should be considered a potential component of the current obesity epidemic.”
Epigenetic Transgenerational Inheritance of Obesity Susceptibility
Why am I talking about grandchildren of women smokers in the 1950s-1980s being obese because grandma or great grandma were exposed to DDT? Check this 2022 CDC document showing clear institutional awareness of DDT on Tobacco products since the 1970s – with not a word uttered in public about the risk to smokers and their families.
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 2022. Toxicological Profile for DDT, DDE, DDD . Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.
Toxicological Profile for DDT, DDE, and DDD
“Djordjevic et al. (1995) assessed the chlorinated pesticide residues in U.S. and foreign cigarettes manufactured from the 1960s to the 1990s. Concentration ranges of DDT-related compounds in samples of cigarettes manufactured between 1961 and 1979 and between 1983 and 1994 were:
p,p’-DDD,
(1961–1979 levels) 1,540–30,100 ng/g (Ed. note: 30,100 ng/g is approximately equal to 30.1 ppm.)
(1983–1994 levels) 12.6–99.7 ng/g;
o,p’-DDD,
(1961–1979 levels) 396–7,150 ng/g,
(1983–1994 levels) ND-19.0 ng/g;
p,p’-DDT,
(1961–1979 levels) 720–13,390 ng/g, (Ed. note: 13,390 ng/g is approximately equal to 13.99 ppm)
(1983–1994 levels) 19.7–145 ng/g;
o,p’-DDT,
(1961–1979 levels) 105–1,940 ng/g;
(1983–1994 levels) ND-88 ng/g;
p,p’-DDE,
(1961–1979 levels) 58– 959 ng/g,
(1983–1994 levels) 6.6–15.8 ng/g;
p,p’-DDMU (1-chloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethylene),
(1961–1979 levels) 92.7–2,110 ng/g,
(1983–1994 levels) ND–27.5 ng/g.
“The transfer rate from tobacco into mainstream smoke amounts to 22% for DDD, 19% for DDT, and 27% for DDE.” (p. 332)
To be clear, Cannabis is a blessing for people with cancer. People with colorectal cancer, and the 200+ other kinds of cancer, have had life-changing results using Cannabis to deal with pain, nausea, and the other grim experiences that accompany this disease.
However, there’s also solid research showing that licensed recreational Cannabis, and especially unlicensed black-market Cannabis, is widely contaminated with multiple pesticide residues of all kinds, and there’s strong science linking any chronic exposure to pesticides with the development and progression of colon cancer.
This suggests in the strongest terms that people with medical needs must grow their own Cannabis or buy only from trusted local growers. It also argues strongly that health-conscious recreational Cannabis users must demand and be willing to pay for Cannabis grown without neurotoxins and other kinds of pesticides.
Here are just a few supporting citations – you’ll find many more with a simple search “pesticides colon cancer”.
Increased exposure to pesticides and colon cancer: Early evidence in Brazil (2018)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0045653518311937
Association between Pesticide Exposure and Colorectal Cancer Risk and Incidence: A Systematic Review (2021)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694176/
Association between cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer sidedness: A multi-center big-data platform-based analysis
https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-021-02815-4
Amazingly, there’s quite literally never been any research on the health effects of inhaling low levels of single, much less multiple pesticides over time. This is especially strange considering the never-ending anti-smoking campaigns that surround us with never a mention of the health effects of steadily inhaling a fusion of pesticides with every puff of those terrible cigarettes.
- All ‘allowable’ levels of Cannabis pesticides set by state regulators are based on extrapolations from data on dietary and skin exposure and in many specific instances these extrapolations are clearly not based on science.
- There has been zero consideration of interactions or synergies between individual pesticides or between classes of pesticides, like insecticides and fungicides, when multiple pesticides are aerosolized and volatilized together and inhaled during regular, often daily Cannabis smoking or vaping.
In spite of the absence of any research data, and regardless of the abdication of their duty to protect on the part of state regulators, we are all free to grow our own organic Cannabis, if we have the means to do so, and commercial growers with an eye to future prosperity would be well-advised to begin finding ways to grow organically. That’s because once the role of inhaled pesticides in human health is fully understood there will be new, unlimited opportunities for the courageous organic Cannabis growers who are struggling to survive these days against corporate Cannabis with its reliance on chemical technology for economic advantage.
Oregon’s experience is broadly representative of the pesticide contamination found on both medical and recreational Cannabis, and on ‘black market’ Cannabis in other US states, Canada and the EU. Given the broad range of pesticides shown below there’s little doubt that individual Oregon smokers and vapers have been and are being exposed to fusions of multiple pesticides, each with its own toxicity profile and none ever tested for the effects of exposure by inhalation, alone or in combinations that are commonly known to be present, with every toke of any Oregon Cannabis flower that hasn’t been grown by organic standards.
Table 1.
Pesticides found in Oregon Cannabis 2015-2019.
| Chemical classes | Pesticidesa | On ODA listb | WHO classificationc | Sourced |
| Avermectins | Abamectin* | No | Non-hazardous | Both |
| Azoles | Imazalil* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both |
| Myclobutanil | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Propiconazole* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Tebuconazole* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Benzenoids | Metalaxyl* | No | Moderately Hazardous | Both |
| Carbamates | Fenoxycarb | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational |
| Carbaryl | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Propoxur | No | Moderately hazardous | Recreational | |
| Carbofuran* | No | Highly hazardous | Recreational | |
| Methiocarb* | No | Highly hazardous | Both | |
| Oxamyl* | No | Highly hazardous | Recreational | |
| Aldicarb* | No | Extremely hazardous | Recreational | |
| Cynopyrroles | Fludioxonil* | No | Non-hazardous | Both |
| Keto-enols | Spiromesifen | No | Non-hazardous slightly | Both |
| Spirotetramat | No | Hazardous | Both | |
| Neonicotinoids | Acetamiprid* | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational |
| Thiamethoxam* | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational | |
| Imidacloprid* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Thiacloprid | No | Moderately hazardous | Recreational | |
| Organophosphates | Malathion* | No | Slightly hazardous | Both |
| Acephate | No | Moderately hazardous | Recreational | |
| Chlorpyrifos* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Diazinon* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Dimethoate* | No | Moderately hazardous | Recreational | |
| Naled* | No | Moderately hazardous | Recreational | |
| Phosmet | No | Moderately hazardous | Recreational | |
| Dichlorvos* | No | Highly hazardous | Both | |
| Ethoprophos* | No | Extremely hazardous | Both | |
| Methyl-parathion* | No | Extremely hazardous | Both | |
| Plant Growth Regulators | Bifenazate* | No | Non-hazardous | Both |
| Daminozide | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational | |
| Paclobutrazol | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Pyrazoles | Chlorfenapyr | No | Moderately hazardous | Both |
| Fenpyroximate | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Pyrethroids | Etofenprox | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational |
| Bifenthrin* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Cypermethrin* | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Prallethrin | No | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Pyrethrins* | Yes | Moderately hazardous | Both | |
| Beta-cyfluthrin* | No | Highly hazardous | Both | |
| Cyfluthrin* | No | Highly hazardous | Both | |
| Pyridines | Boscalid | No | Non-hazardous | Both |
| Flonicamid* | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational | |
| Spinosyns | Spinosad* | No | Slightly hazardous | Both |
| Strobilurins | Kresoxim-methyl | No | Non-hazardous | Recreational |
| Trifloxystrobin | No | Non-hazardous | Both | |
| Synergists | MGK-264 | Yes | Non-hazardous | Both |
| Piperonyl-butoxide* | Yes | Non-hazardous | Both | |
| Tetrazines | Clofentezine | No | Slightly hazardous | Both |
a Restricted-use pesticides are indicated by * that require a certified pesticide applicator (CFR, 2019).
b Pesticide is present on the Oregon Department of Agriculture’s (ODA’s) recommended pesticide list for cannabis.
c Classification based on World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines (WHO, 2010).
d Pesticides found in samples from recreational, medicinal, or both sources.
Table 2
Pesticides found in 5 tobacco brands
Finally, here are the pesticides found in a 2022 commercial cigarette study by the Saudi Ministry of Health – the first such study in over 50 years by any government agency or private institution anywhere.
Since according to some very good recent research there’s a substantial overlap between Cannabis & and Tobacco product smokers, the issue of pesticide exposure and its relationship to the rise in colon cancer in young people needs some serious attention regardless of source. That’s especially true because there’s no need for any pesticide residues in either Cannabis or Tobacco. Both can be grown and produced very profitably and supplied to people at reasonable prices without the use of pesticides that leave any residues – in other words, grown organically. That’s a simple fact. From there it’s a matter of enough people gaining awareness and voting with their money.
panaceachronicles 