digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Marijuana does NOT cause cancer

washingtonpost.com — The largest study of its kind surprisingly finds that smoking marijuana, even frequently, does NOT cause cancer. With no realisitic overdose, no cancer, and no physical addiction, marijuana is now CLEARLY less harmful than alcohol and cigarettes. LEGALIZE in '08 - and which candidates will do so: Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, and Ron Paul!

Who dugg this? Made popular May 13, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

299 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Ladon, on 10/23/2007, -10/+171"Alright! Cancer is down, now all we have to do is just get lung and brain cancer out of the way and we can legalize marijuana!"

    Those are both cancers, you *****.
  • ajb2015, on 10/11/2007, -12/+98yay for news that is a year old!
  • KlayBorg, on 10/23/2007, -11/+96From the first article:
    "Smoking marijuana often causes temporary problems with memory and learning. Now researchers think they know why."
    Temporary being the important term there.

    2nd:
    "Marijuana may cause pregnancies to fail"
    Any woman who smokes pot when she is pregnant is just irresponsible. However, if it is made legal, we can educate people about these problems rather than just saying: DON'T USE IT!!!

    3rd:
    "Long-term marijuana use may fog the brain"
    This is HIGHLY disputed, with this study not even revealing concrete results or evidence.
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -7/+87@ PsychoticClown

    Look up the effects of alcohol, its much worse, lots of things have effects on your body that doesnt mean they all need to be illegal this country was founded on the idea that you are allowed to make your own decisions that effect your life be them good or bad.
  • KlayBorg, on 10/11/2007, -10/+85Bag of weed: $15 AU
    Ski trip: $2000 AU
    Thinking a packet of Oreo's is talking to you: Priceless.
  • NikoKun, on 10/11/2007, -7/+67Wasn't it discovered that not only does it not cause cancer, but it actually stops cancer growth?

    But of course it's less harmful than alcohol and tobacco... that alone should make it an automatic legal drug... XD but nooo not in america... XD
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -6/+56In addition to my previous reply to PsychoticClown

    Here are direct replies to those three articles:

    1) Did you even read the article, it effects the memory of the rats WHILE THEY ARE HIGH once the THC wore off the effects wore off

    2) Of course it does so does smoking and drinking you have to be a ***** idiot to do it while you are pregnant

    3) While this may be true but it only effects some and while it makes them rusty it doesnt make them complete idiots, its not bad enough to ban in an entire country it should be the people's choice to take it just like Cigs and Alcohol.

    EDIT: klayborg beat me to it.
  • strangewill, on 10/11/2007, -2/+43Strange, being as practically EVERYTHING causes cancer. ;)
  • Jowitz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+44Ski? Paraglide?! Do you have any idea how many people die doing those things? Why would I expose myself to potential death when I can achieve the same state of mind in the security of my house or neighborhood without the inherent possibility of death present in those activities.
  • kaelyiesta, on 10/11/2007, -6/+43In regards to legalization, it should not matter in the slightest whether it is harmful to the user. Its their own damn choice and no one elses what they do to themselves.
  • FabianN, on 10/11/2007, -3/+38@PsychoticClown
    "Maybe public flogging"

    I've heard enough. You're just a crazy. Or Psychotic. Either one works.
  • nymphetamine, on 10/11/2007, -4/+37Hey, I know you. Weren't you on one of those Above the Influence commercials?
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -3/+34@ PsychoticClown

    But don't you see banning it hasn't done anything to its use, just like prohibition. It takes up valuable police time that could be used on actual criminals and it is overcrowding our prisons. It costs this country hundreds of millions in tax payers money that could be used on useful things. If they legalized it they could tax it just like all the other legal substances then use that tax money to increase funding for research and education on the drug along with other useful things this country so desperately needs. Just because you don't want to use it does not mean you should make other people not use it.
  • strangewill, on 10/11/2007, -2/+31Personally I wouldn't take drugs like this (unless of course medical reasons), but as for other people doing it? ***** I'd love to see people getting high instead of drunk... probably be much better for society really.

    I don't really get recreational drugs (in a personal manner), nor would I understand getting addicted to prescription drugs either, but thats just me, not like I'm going to force other people on something I don't fully understand.
  • DyDx, on 10/11/2007, -8/+35@PsychoticClown: It took about two seconds of reading to find a way to discredit this "supposed" evidence..

    “Long-term users found it very difficult to learn through new information given verbally,” says Messinis. “It’s not to do with lack of attention but more the encoding process of memory.” Separate tests to probe attention span found that long-term users were able to pick up information immediately, without trouble.

    This is straight from the 3rd link in your post. This is quite the contradiction..
  • KlayBorg, on 10/11/2007, -5/+29"So we should legalize rape, murder, drugs, etc.?"
    Your a ***** moron.
  • circusbred, on 10/11/2007, -3/+26"Marijuana isn't as harmful but it still can cause harm, and the majority wanting it legalized is not reason enough."

    Last I checked,in a democracy, if a majority wants something legalized, it should be legal.
  • milkmage, on 10/11/2007, -1/+23god you're an idiot.. pot smoke is not the same as cigarette smoke is not the same as barbeque smoke is not the same as house buring smoke.. i agree, inhaling smoke certainly can't be good for you, but that's not what the article says (or did you not READ THE ***** ARTICLE?) - it said it's not nearly as bad as they thought. firemen inhale all kinds of *****.. buring furniture, plastics, carpet - most of those things are MADE with known carcinogens, you burn them, those chemicals get released - that has GOT to be worse for you than smoking a WEED. cigaretts have all kinds of additives (what do you think keeps them burning?)

    the article from the WASHINGTON POST (respected institution) sites a study by UCLA MEDICAL SCHOOL (also a respected institution) - this isn't some random blog entry.

    get your head out of your ass - if you don't WANT to smoke it dont, but why the ***** should you care if ANYONE else does?
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -3/+25Well there is evidence that THC reduces cancer growth while there hasnt been big enough studies to start shouting it all over the world it may be reasoning to why Marijuana doesnt have a higher rate of cancer then someone who doesnt smoke it. Anyway when vaporized you don't get any carcinogens in your lungs.

    BTW: I don't do drugs (Or Marijuana) I just think it should be legalized I am sick of the ***** the government spews out.
  • strangewill, on 10/11/2007, -3/+24@PsychoticClown:
    No one under the legal age should be allowed to (it is still a drug, and minors are not allowed to possess a wide array of drugs...), however once they're 18, they're adults. Sure.

    I dunno if it's just me, but that seemed like a pretty obvious question there.
  • Emack420, on 10/11/2007, -2/+21if u can smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol, you should be able to smoke some weed too, if you dont like weed then dont smoke it, just cause cigarettes are legal doesnt mean you have to smoke them... to each their own :D
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -5/+23It's an article in the Washington Post that cites a study conducted by a UCLA pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years. Who would I rather believe? Firemen who inhale all sorts of crap such as lead and asbestos who apparently claim that all smoke causes cancer, or a research scientist at at top University who even hypothesized that there would be a positive association between smoking marijuana and lung cancer?

    Explain how this is false science. Did you read the study for yourself? What were the flaws in their method?
  • vanadium77, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19There's a vast difference between inhaling asbestos, drywall, and vaporized plastic and who-knows-what-else than there is inhaling marijuana. Your logic sucks.
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18"@ strange will:

    So let's say pot requires parental approval, would you grant that for your 16-year-old? Or not? And if not, why?"

    I wanna answer that one too, yes I would in the safety of my own house, I would want my kids to learn how to smoke responsibly so that they dont learn bad habits from friends.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+21First of all, this is now a surprising result. This is the same result that researchers keep getting. Secondly, you took this opportunity to spam digg with your favorite candidates AGAIN.

    I'm not voting for these lunatics just because they happen to agree with me on legalizing drugs, it's not exactly a high priority.
  • asdfasdf, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19Stop arguing whether Marijuana is harmful to the individual or not. If substances were banned due to how much harm they caused to the individual (or society) then we wouldn't be able to buy alcohol and tobacco.

    Anyone who thinks pot should NOT be legalized must also explain why alcohol and tobacco should stay legal. Anyone who can't, shouldn't expect to have their opinion on pot taken seriously.

    In Islamic countries, you cannot get pork products. If you're not a Muslim and you want to eat pork, you're ***** outta luck. The majority of people believe pork is very dangerous, dirty and immoral. People aren't given a choice on if they want to eat it or not. They just outright banned it and it is illegal to import.

    Anyone who thinks pot should remain illegal in the US is either
    1) joking,
    2) just wants to stand out and finds individuality in being ignorant,
    3) thinks pot is against their religion,
    4) are profiting off of its illegality or
    5) are completely misinformed on what it is and what it does (and does not do).
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17@ PsychoticClown

    That is alcohol I have already stated that alcohol is much worse then marijuana. Anyway the fact it there isn't enough evedence that it is bad enough to be illegal thus it should be legal. One of the ideas that this country was founded on was Innocent until proven guilty why ban something that hasnt been proven worse then what is already out there. I also must ask you your opinion on Caffeine it has many of the same effects or equally harmful effects as Marijuana to your body. These all can be bad too and drinks like the Cocaine energy drink are completely legal even for minors. Do you want to ban coke, dr. pepper, red bull, and coffee to!? My point is just because certain chemicals effect your body in different ways doesnt mean they need to be banned, anything can be harmful especially in large amounts. There are responsible alcoholic drinkers out there who don't do stupid stuff like drive drunk (Or get drunk daily) to say that they aren't allowed to have alcohol isn't fair to them just because others can't control themselves. (And responsible drinkers die of natural causes, just like responsible marijuana smokers do, the human body does not last long enough for moderate use to really effect it.)

    Oh and as I mentioned further down in the comments I don't do drugs (Or Marijuana) I just think it should be legalized because it really is cause more harm being banned then it would being legal.
  • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17@itazura
    Perhaps if the study "prevents cancer" they might be looking into he whole "all smoke causes cancer" angle.

    Firemen breathing smoke of 100+ combustible materials in an average building fire are probably breathing a lot of things that aren't organic -- just a guess.

    >> I've never smoked Marijuana or done any illegal drugs in my life. But I want to "decriminalize it" to use it for industry. I'd rather not make it "legal" to sell it like cigarettes. But if someone wants to grow it for personal use -- why not?

    There are enough people bitching about Seat Belt laws. But I don't want the government regulating vitamins or illegal drugs. There isn't any way to stop people from hurting themselves. Anyone can get high sniffing paint fumes for instance.

    We spend so much on prisons and police -- and swat teams to break into people's houses. There is a whole profit-system based upon throwing people in prison. Yet, I know many well-to-do suburbanites who did drugs, grew out of it, and grew up without ever seeing prison. Now they have great jobs and give back to society. If any of them, had the experience of 5 years in a federal penitentiary like many, young, urban, black males -- they'd be stuck as unemployable and angry too.

    Face it; the drug war is lost. People thrown in prison are pretty much discarded human beings. The arguments for keeping most Drugs illegal have no merit. Meth is now a huge issue -- yet people can create it from cough syrup. THAT is a dangerous drug. Better to narrow our concern for things that really do damage.
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17There have been various articles that proved it has reduced cancer or does not cause cancer... The simple truth is even if this is wrong, going with the public conception of Marijuana it still is safer the alcohol. And depending on who you talk to its safer then Cigarettes too, it should be legalized.

    The truth is if vaporized it is just about as harmful as caffeine and they serve that in schools, one day the stupidity will stop and this war on drugs will be revamped to make sense.
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -2/+16No punishment should be worse then the actual crime, how can you consider smoking a joint an actual crime, and with that how is the current punishment even fair and balanced. (And how would public flogging help that).
  • Kooroo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12waitaminute....I thought everything caused cancer and the only way to cure it was through nonstop prayer...except prayer might cause like...soul...cancer

    we're all proper fscked methinks.

    :-P
  • VitriolAndAngst, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15The government's argument; "We want this Marijuana illegal to protect people" -- is ringing more hollow day by day.

    Does the government keep people from "biggie sizing" their meals? That's been proven as bad for you as smoking. We have soap operas, bad music, and ozone filled air ... yet the government has also NOT made those things illegal.

    IF hemp were grown in the US... we could replace paper made from timber, clothing made from cotton, and fuel made from oil (it's something like >20 times more efficient as a biofuel than corn). So that might give you an idea of the vested interests in keeping this "bad substance" away. PLUS, it would be an "herb" everyone could grow.

    After Katrina, who can say with a straight face that THIS PARTICULAR Government, gives a crap about it's disenfranchised voting public?
  • Netrilix, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Heh, let's just hope no one takes this argument the other way. "Look, marijuana is illegal, and it's not nearly as dangerous as tobacco and alcohol... We should ban those too!"

    I know, I know, it's been tried. And thankfully, it failed. Repeatedly.
  • strangewill, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15@PsychoticClown:
    You realize that sports is more dangerous than sitting at home and smoking pot... when was the last time you got a broken arm from smoking pot? I mean seriously, you run into worse health problems working in a stressful environment than smoking pot (which will probably lead to even more consumption of pot).

    Truth be told: Can't protect your kids forever, especially once they get behind the wheel of an automobile, again, much MUCH more dangerous than smoking pot. Gonna keep them from driving too?
  • KlayBorg, on 10/11/2007, -4/+16Dugg for pun. You can bury me now.
  • etnu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Who gives a ***** if it DID cause cancer? It's good for the public to have the knowledge, certainly, but it should have absolutely no bearing on whether or not it's legal or not to use it.

    Why on earth are people so quick to criminalize things that might be bad for people? Maybe we should also outlaw poor diets and have mandatory exercise requirements for everyone.

    The majority of health problems and death in the U.S. are caused by poor diet, and yet nobody's ever gone to jail for possession of a big mac.

  • f4nt0m4s, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10I don't know how people can even hold a reasonable argument that marijuana is bad.

    Alcohol is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths annually.
    Marijuana isn't.

    How many people have OD'ed from Marijuana? Exactly 0?

    In all seriousness, the only logical argument is that putting smoke in your lungs isn't good for you. No ***** *****. THC comes in vapor form...food form...and smoke form. It's a user choice to smoke it.

    Are cigarettes illegal? No. Is alcohol illegal? No. Do people act more irrational when they are drunk than stoned? In my opinion, YES.

    Seriously. Now add fun facts like THC can reduce cancer growth, or Marijuana does not cause cancer, and you sound like a bumbling ***** arguing that Marijuana is bad.

    Prohibition of alcohol didn't work. Go pick up a book and read about all the bootlegging and gangsters and organized crime. The prohibition of marijuana isn't going to last much longer. Eventually all this anti-pot propaganda ***** is going to fall through and someone is going to do something.

    -the opinion of a drug free college student (me)
  • xvertigox, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13"In regards to legalization, it should not matter in the slightest whether it is harmful to the user. Its their own damn choice and no one elses what they do to themselves."

    Quoted for ***** truth. It's like saying that golf puts people over 60 at a higher risk of heart attacks (higher heart rate) and banning it.
  • AmonAmarth, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11Well uh, to start, marijuana is a bronchial dilator (I guess that's a good thing) and it kills tumors in the lungs. Personally, I think anyone who is against marijuana legalization at this point has the IQ of a small soap dish, even if it DID have some relation to cancer, there's no reason to make it illegal. *****, I could scratch my arm up and down for 3 years straight and have skin cancer as a result, and yet scratching my arm is not illegal. Gimme a ***** break.
  • strangewill, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10And by the same token, just because something is harmful doesn't mean it should be illegal.

    See: Just about anything we eat, use for transport, entertain ourselves with, etc.
  • zarathustra0, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9Why is it that every time I get high there's a digg article about legalizing marijuana?

    We should be concentrating on more important issues, like gay abortion.
  • Shorties, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11@ PsychoticClown

    Your claim seems pretty baseless though, I know plenty of people who are very successful, very intelligent and have plenty of talents and hobbies sure some of them are burnouts but most aren't and the ones that are really are due to their own choice they didn't have much interest in anything before and just used drugs to fill that gap. Yeah sure you could argue that if we ban it they wouldn't but it is banned nothing is going to stop that. And not only that most street gangs are funded by Marijuana legalizing it would end a very high percentage of their cashflow. I have had 2 kids stabbed in my town in the last month thanks to gang related violence (And I live in one of the nicest richest and crime free cities in the world).

    Oh and that poser you posted is telling people not to drink and drive not to not drink. You are just proving that banning alchohol or marijuana is not the answer drinking or getting high is harmless and should be a crime free activity. Doing it before you get into a car now that is bad and the punishment and education on that needs to be increased.
  • inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8I am proficient at 12 instruments, I know two languages thoroughly (German and English), I don't even have my degree in computer science and systems yet but I'm attending one of the top 10 computer schools in the nation (name withheld for privacy) and I already have 5 years and growing professional experience in my field in an ISO certified industrial setting. I have an IQ of 145.

    I also happen to smoke marijuana about 5 out of 7 days a week.

    No one is obliged to believe me -- but marijuana has been smoked since whoever first picked it from the wild and said "wow, this has amazing healing properties to it AND makes me feel relaxed" -- and I just wanted to clarify to the public that not all members of the Western societal movement that so harshly condemns marijuana are being sucked in by the biased anti-marijuana legislature in this country!

    Am I the only one who realizes that the United States was the first nation to strictly enforce anti-cannabis laws? Sometimes I feel like no one else even realizes how backwards it is that a 21 year old can go out, get hammered, and have a fatal accident on his first night of drinking...this has unfortunately happened to several of my friends (being involved in alcohol related injuries and sadly even death) but no one I know has EVER had any accident while using only marijuana.



  • rysp10, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9@newstart: What standard of virtue are you implying to orient a conception of a "real high"? I don't think this is in any way tenable
  • mmacmu1, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
  • christopheles, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Please learn the definition of "physical addiction". A few doses of heroin will teach it to you.
  • nymphetamine, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I'm surprised no one brought up the fact that this article is over a year old. I'm not complaining, just saying.
  • Quake120, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7THC has one of the lowest toxicities of known chemicals, but here's the thing... ANY drug, legal or not, can be harmful if not used in moderation. Smoking ANYTHING can be harmful to your lungs, I'll give the law makers that much. They've proven that THC has many beneficial effects for medicinal use and with its low toxicity, it is safer than drugs people probably take on an everyday basis like aspirin, ibuprofen, Tylenol, etc.

    Here's the thing about the law against marijuana: It puts non violent people who have good jobs, a family, and aren't a drain on society in jail when honestly, the only person they are likely hurting is themselves.

    Lets compare and contrast alcohol prohibition in the USA to marijuana prohibition:

    From the Wikipedia article on Prohibition: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States)

    "Many social problems have been attributed to the Prohibition era. A profitable, often violent, black market for alcohol flourished. Racketeering happened when powerful gangs corrupted law enforcement agencies. "

    The exact same thing is happening with marijuana. Gangs are formed and there are plenty of corrupt law enforcement officials who use their position to obtain drugs.

    "Stronger liquor surged in popularity because its potency made it more profitable to smuggle. The cost of enforcing prohibition was high, and the lack of tax revenues on alcohol (some $500 million annually nationwide) affected government coffers."

    The cost of enforcing prohibition of marijuana is huge, considering police officers in some areas spend many hours staking out drug dealing locations and spend many hours dealing with the arrests of non violent drug users. The tax revenue on marijuana could be huge. The tax money that would be generated from the legalization and taxation of marijuana could be put into education. People would get better education and may very well end up with better jobs.

    "When repeal of prohibition occurred in 1933, following passage of the Twenty-first Amendment, organized crime lost nearly all of its black market alcohol profits in most states (states still had the right to enforce their own laws concerning alcohol consumption), because of competition with low-priced alcohol sales at legal liquor stores."

    This same thing will happen when the marijuana prohibition is lifted. Dealers will lose a lot of customers. There are a lot of people who are interested only in marijuana and not harder drugs such as cocaine, heroin, etc. They say marijuana is a "gateway" drug, but honestly, so is alcohol. Almost EVERYBODY I know that smokes pot started with alcohol first.

    A big argument against legalizing marijuana is that people will then drive while stoned. Does it not occur to these people that people drive stoned anyways? Driving under the influence of ANYTHING is bad. Sleeping pills, alcohol, pot, hell, even too much caffeine could be dangerous if you are so jittery you can't concentrate.

    I think somebody (or all of us) should write down a list of the pros and cons of legalization and I bet the pros outnumber the cons. I bet you could shoot down almost every con with an argument stating there is already something legal that is just as bad or worse.
  • Cerius, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8The funny thing is that when they are high they are more like themselves. Social rules are tossed out of the window to embrace the moment through being oneself outside of social restrictions. In many cases through this different viewpoint people are able to grasp concepts never before conceived or solved.

    I think enjoying myself without assaulting anyone else's rights is a natural right. Fair enough in my book, but people like you believe that you should control what I do to my body out of protection for me. Give me a break, all that's creating is a continual cycle of little drones who work 9-5, come home and watch their American Idol.
  • asdfasdf, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8It doesn't increase the risk of psychosis, nor does it give you 'authentic' psychotic episodes. It might make you paranoid, but that's mainly due to its illegality. "What if I get caught?" or "what if the dealer laced this?" -- You might get stuck in thought-loops like that, but if you're educated on the drug, you can just laugh it off or ignore it and it'll go away.

    The only people who have "psychotic episodes" are people who smoke for the first time and are uninformed about what Cannabis does. Most people simply think it relaxes you, but it's not a downer. It's considered a psychedelic; A common paranoia for the newbie is "my heart is beating too fast, I might get a heart attack! I'm dying!!!" This is due to ignorance. Weed slows down your perception of time, and this is why it only FEELS like your heart is beating faster.

    Another "psychotic episode" might occur if you're inexperienced and smoke way too much. What pot does is it enhances your senses. Suddenly, food is 100x better, sound is 100x better, etc. If you smoke too much, your senses get really sensitive and you get over stimulated; "A stimulus overload." If you understand that this is all that happens, you can be taken out of this thought-loop and calmed down.

    Most people aren't informed on what psychosis really is, or what paranoia really is, just like how most people think a migraine is merely a strong headache. They think that by pot causing "psychotic episodes," it makes you start hearing voices and seeing things that aren't there like in the movie A Beautiful Mind.

    If you get the DEA's creative writer to talk ***** about alcohol, chocolate or a Big Mac, they'll sound just as scary to read about as pot.

    All that being said, It doesn't matter if the drug is harmful to the individual or not. If substances were ever banned due to that harm they caused to the individual, then we wouldn't be able to buy cigarettes and alcohol. The user should be informed on what a substance does, and then given the CHOICE to use it or not.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 299 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.