Laserfiche WebLink
1 3~-~ ~ ! TUE 06 : c. PM <br /> P. 04 <br /> t41 AME3jICAN JOURNAL Of RESMRATORY AND l UL CAgE MEDICINE VOL 151 )997 1 <br /> <br /> ~ MALEB FEARA~ES <br /> A a.oo 9 t.oo j <br /> I ~ <br /> aso _ s.ao~ I <br /> i a.oa ~ s.ao ~ <br /> ? 6.60 1.'~.,_ ` ~ 7.60 ~ - <br /> ~ ~ ~ ~ <br /> a.oo :.9a = <br /> i ' <br /> ~ i L~ <br /> 1.eo w Se .o ~e so as eo 1'w so ss w as w 6s so ~ <br /> AOE (pa) AOi (Tral ' <br /> AmuY aNSn. NS T¦ Md a7i Na Ta Ye YTa <br /> e FEV, eilil ri.a Ili ]Oa as M m, (rp: Md Jed !at Sa] ' <br /> Figure 3. Declines In FEVi (in Illln) witn aye (in yean) by 6mokirg status at any Irleaswement rung estimated from linear rantlom-et)ecU <br /> model In men (A) and women 31ope coefrKgnts for annual decline in FEV, (in milliliters) for earn smoking status arc shown at bottom <br /> of earn panel. Tne modN Includes terms wr toWcco and manjuana smoking status and wbacco-marijuana Interaction. <br /> piStUSSION ~ <br /> ings from this follow-up study fait to demonftrete that habitual <br /> Data from the present prospective studyof 253 Donsrookers and deity smoking of marijuana in amounts as much as 3 joints (or <br /> smoknn of marijuana and/or lobaxo (meluding npptostimatery joinrequivalrnts) per flay is associated with greaur age related <br /> 150 huvy habitual tinoktraof tstuiJutana with orwithout tobacco rata of decline in FEV, than is nonsmoking (Figures 1, 2A and <br /> smoking as study Initiation) who were tared oD 2 to 7 separate 3). These results tie lD contrast to the acLxlerated annunl rag , <br /> omsioas over a maximum span of 8 yr extend the suits of ofdedineinlungtunctionlhatotxvninregular tobaccosmokvs <br /> an earUer crow-sectional survey of IuD>I function in 391 smok• of comparable aye ff)gures 1,18. and 4). Moreoveq no additive <br /> ing and nonsmoking young adulu, whieb foiled to show any im- efforts of nsarijusna and tobacco on the age-Teiated decline in ' <br /> pact of lleavi; habitual muUuanaunoking (averageof>3 joints, lung futsctioa was noted. A negative interaction betwern mariju. <br /> or jant-equivalents, per day)on lures fiatalort. LgsSitudlnal find- goes and tobeeeo, however, was noted (TAbte 4), as suggested by <br /> uaLE ~ <br /> MNDOM EFFECTS MODELS ~ <br /> StOf'E COEfsICIEteTS ones VARWLES 0Y AGE <br /> I <br /> Slg7e [uNicieM <br /> Fgwt WriaWt (SE)T- t P Valet <br /> to NOnfmokeM -25.3 <br /> Matllwn+ -S.S (3.6) 0.9d ~ OJ3 i <br /> Tobaccs -31.0 (ai) 3.6a 400025 t <br /> Manlu+na-IOWCm inurxam -20.0 (t0.% 2.56 0.011 <br /> le Non•aaetn• -29.a <br /> ' Marlluano 3.3 (7.7) 0..6 0.65 <br /> Tobacco' -e.a (7,!) 120 0.11 1 <br /> MarNwna_tobct6 blterrtfl6rr 7.1 (9.6) 0.72 0.0 I! <br /> 2A N6lgnrpllera N maryuaM• -7.36 <br /> Maryuana armlM -0A76 (0.37) 0.099 0.92 <br /> id Nplsmaaara N blNCOt• -].b l <br /> Tobacco amount -0N wt9 <br /> . 7A and a Nomnahn• (2,15) 7.q 0.00067 <br /> ToGgs -nu P.77 3.50 OA0019 ) <br /> MaNIVaM -0.97 (3,6) 0.17 07a ) <br /> . NgYlnatan• -Zl3 <br /> - T°b•ae -13.0 (3.7) 1.56 0.00039 ' <br /> } MNnnct 9•WP. sag +wYK4n ndcaln eaaNnn barn ,Yrmar prwa. <br /> flop rplrifymr tN M par Tarr W raWrp N air,, • <br /> ~ M naArb ¦wtrrdt 1 arm r6r Mgnl toes Yawn). <br /> INetf al amM rmMYq armum: marrywra • ma+bar d awMt la' ~ vYuWI tar r <br /> 6+riTl•^r4rpn0rMSn,6Nnp Wtw WMlarmrgrara o,W tey.rrof ~dwN~acfo+numw. of upsnnn txr <br /> uq. wnyna. R9u•t U antl 6): o. my unr6na t . <w.tnuy in,tY• <br /> ••`rttt +Mencn9rr arm N t for N11a o tar aM tlhn, <br /> h.rrnrr ~w~ng gum ams cFie,YU 7 rM ak t . +twr •mWrd. 7 . Mrmmenl unowirq,) - mmLw+rr. brWng. Srr tin rw , <br /> <br />