what is your opinion on marijuana?
0
Lelouch24 wrote...
Even if it was harmful, why should marijuana be illegal when Alcohol is legal? unlike marijuana, alcohol threatens the safety of other people; over 10,000 people die each year from drunk driving. So we should have another harmful drug? And I don't buy that marijuana isn't somehow dangerous, I just don't. And won't high driving kill too? Educate me if I'm wrong.
0
Salaryman Man wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
Even if it was harmful, why should marijuana be illegal when Alcohol is legal? unlike marijuana, alcohol threatens the safety of other people; over 10,000 people die each year from drunk driving. So we should have another harmful drug? And I don't buy that marijuana isn't somehow dangerous, I just don't. And won't high driving kill too? Educate me if I'm wrong.
Marijuana affects people differently I believe. In my experience I drive better while under the influence of marijuana. I wouldn't even consider driving while under the influence of alcohol. You can think that marijuana is harmful all you want but science is against you.
0
Salaryman Man wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
Even if it was harmful, why should marijuana be illegal when Alcohol is legal? unlike marijuana, alcohol threatens the safety of other people; over 10,000 people die each year from drunk driving. So we should have another harmful drug? And I don't buy that marijuana isn't somehow dangerous, I just don't. And won't high driving kill too? Educate me if I'm wrong.
I'm saying that Alcohol is more dangerous to other people than marijuana.
0
Jash2o2 wrote...
Salaryman Man wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
Even if it was harmful, why should marijuana be illegal when Alcohol is legal? unlike marijuana, alcohol threatens the safety of other people; over 10,000 people die each year from drunk driving. So we should have another harmful drug? And I don't buy that marijuana isn't somehow dangerous, I just don't. And won't high driving kill too? Educate me if I'm wrong.
Marijuana affects people differently I believe. In my experience I drive better while under the influence of marijuana. I wouldn't even consider driving while under the influence of alcohol. You can think that marijuana is harmful all you want but science is against you.
Marijuana is somewhat harmful in some ways, especially to people who are not yet fully grown. (Stunted brain growth has been one of the effects in several tests.)
Dr. CE Grant in 'Neurobiology of Disease' magazine wrote...
A new study, published in Neurobiology of Disease, states that daily consumption of marijuana (cannabis) in teens can cause depression and anxiety, and have an irreversible long-term effect on the brain.'The use of marijuana by children and adolescents can have profound negative consequences for brain development and lead to long-term intellectual and emotional dysfunction'. It stunts brain growth and development.
The thing is that putting strange things in your body when it's still growing is usually a bad idea, apparently weed is not nearly as harmful once the body is properly developed.
And you really shouldn't drive while stoned either:
In the study, published in the medical journal BMJ, researchers reviewed information on 10,748 drivers who were involved in fatal car crashes and took required tests for drugs and alcohol.
Twice as many drivers involved in fatal car accidents tested positive for marijuana compared with a group of other drivers.
Researchers say about 2.5% of the fatal crashes were attributable to marijuana compared with nearly 29% attributable to alcohol.
The study also showed that drivers who tested positive for marijuana were more than three times as likely to be responsible for the fatal car crash. Researchers say the likelihood of being at fault increased as the blood concentration of marijuana increased.
Twice as many drivers involved in fatal car accidents tested positive for marijuana compared with a group of other drivers.
Researchers say about 2.5% of the fatal crashes were attributable to marijuana compared with nearly 29% attributable to alcohol.
The study also showed that drivers who tested positive for marijuana were more than three times as likely to be responsible for the fatal car crash. Researchers say the likelihood of being at fault increased as the blood concentration of marijuana increased.
Not as bad as alcohol, but still bad.
That being said, i still support weed for recreational purposes, just as I support alcohol for recreational purposes, just don't overdo it, don't do high what you wouldn't do drunk, and with this I hope you aren't someone who'd DUI.
0
Chlor wrote...
And you really shouldn't drive while stoned either:
In the study, published in the medical journal BMJ, researchers reviewed information on 10,748 drivers who were involved in fatal car crashes and took required tests for drugs and alcohol.
Twice as many drivers involved in fatal car accidents tested positive for marijuana compared with a group of other drivers.
Researchers say about 2.5% of the fatal crashes were attributable to marijuana compared with nearly 29% attributable to alcohol.
The study also showed that drivers who tested positive for marijuana were more than three times as likely to be responsible for the fatal car crash. Researchers say the likelihood of being at fault increased as the blood concentration of marijuana increased.
Twice as many drivers involved in fatal car accidents tested positive for marijuana compared with a group of other drivers.
Researchers say about 2.5% of the fatal crashes were attributable to marijuana compared with nearly 29% attributable to alcohol.
The study also showed that drivers who tested positive for marijuana were more than three times as likely to be responsible for the fatal car crash. Researchers say the likelihood of being at fault increased as the blood concentration of marijuana increased.
Not as bad as alcohol, but still bad.
That being said, i still support weed for recreational purposes, just as I support alcohol for recreational purposes, just don't overdo it.
That is a very flawed study. The presence of THC in the body can be detectable up to 30 days or even more after first smoking/ingesting it. The effects of THC last mere hours. There is also no way to correlate marijuana usage with how likely you are to be responsible for a fatal car crash. It is possible that out of all the people in the study that came up positive for THC had not even been under the influence of THC. And to say the long term effects of THC are responsible would also be incorrect.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471489204001973
The long-term use of cannabis, particularly at high intake levels, is associated with several adverse psychosocial features, including lower educational achievement and, in some instances, psychiatric illness. There is little evidence, however, that long-term cannabis use causes permanent cognitive impairment, nor is there is any clear cause and effect relationship to explain the psychosocial associations.
This makes me think that it really doesn't have a permanent physical affect but rather a mental affect. Some people become dependent on the "good" feeling they get from marijuana and adjust their personalities and actions accordingly. A similar association could be made between food and certain cases of obesity.
0
Jash2o2 wrote...
That is a very flawed study. The presence of THC in the body can be detectable up to 30 days or even more after first smoking/ingesting it. The effects of THC last mere hours. There is also no way to correlate marijuana usage with how likely you are to be responsible for a fatal car crash. It is possible that out of all the people in the study that came up positive for THC had not even been under the influence of THC. And to say the long term effects of THC are responsible would also be incorrect.
Not quite, that would still prove that the group that had been under the influence of weed at anytime during the last 30 or so days had a higher risk of being involved in a fatal crash.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471489204001973
Jash2o2 wrote...
The long-term use of cannabis, particularly at high intake levels, is associated with several adverse psychosocial features, including lower educational achievement and, in some instances, psychiatric illness. There is little evidence, however, that long-term cannabis use causes permanent cognitive impairment, nor is there is any clear cause and effect relationship to explain the psychosocial associations.
This makes me think that it really doesn't have a permanent physical affect but rather a mental affect. Some people become dependent on the "good" feeling they get from marijuana and adjust their personalities and actions accordingly. A similar association could be made between food and certain cases of obesity.
I have no retort to this, since we'd just stand word against word, but yes of course that is a factor to be considered. However, it is very logical that cannabis would have an impairing effect on a growing mind, since artificially stimulating certain processes that are yet fully developed often results in them being stunted. The brain will not even try to produce by itself what it gets from the outside, and by taking in substances that makes the brain generate more of something will cause the brain to not produce as much of the substance in it's "normal" state, in this case andandamine right?
0
Not quite, that would still prove that the group that had been under the influence of weed at anytime during the last 30 or so days had a higher risk of being involved in a fatal crash.
It only proves that the association is there. The cause of said association is yet to be determined and until a cause is determined, I will not count this as solid evidence. Until we know for certain why this association exists, it could easily be due to the irresponsibility of the study takers or anything else. It is similar to the argument that murderers have played violent video games, so the games are to blame. There is an association without any substantial support to back it up.
I have no retort to this, since we'd just stand word against word, but yes of course that is a factor to be considered. However, it is very logical that cannabis would have an impairing effect on a growing mind, since artificially stimulating certain processes that are yet fully developed often results in them being stunted. The brain will not even try to produce by itself what it gets from the outside, and by taking in substances that makes the brain generate more of something will cause the brain to not produce as much of the substance in it's "normal" state, in this case andandamine right?
I agree. It's the same concept with the normal over the counter medication. That's why you see the labels that say not to give this to children under 12 and the various children medicines.
0
Don't care, I got like a pound in my dorm and somebody's gotta use them. Wow, can't believe this threads been goin on.
0
Jash2o2 wrote...
It's the same concept with the normal over the counter medication. That's why you see the labels that say not to give this to children under 12 and the various children medicines. I agree that like the use of alcohol and tobacco, were Marijuana to be legalized an age restriction would be the best prevention of abnormal development. Be that as it may, the human body continues to develop well past adulthood and into old age. The negative effects of such substances don't just disappear when someone reaches a certain age, and if they're negative why bother in the first place?
We can also confirm that Marijuana, like tobacco and alcohol, may not have been proven to cause detrimental health effects in the long-term, but it has been shown to increase the likelihood of such affects to those whom are genetically predisposed to them. Being that individuals cannot know if they're predisposed to such effects until after they exhibit the symptoms drug use outside of what is prescribed by a physician is essentially a game of Russian Roulette. An additional bullet is added for the use of street drugs due to the fact that their purity isn't regulated by an institution that is inspected by a third party to confirm it's quality. Add another bullet when you take into consideration the lifestyle of drug dealers and the destructive individuals that surround them, and another bullet for every other drug in a persons system at the time, since any of their individual effects are now putting an additional strain on a person's biological system, and that's not considering drug interactions (another bullet in the barrel). The odds weren't great to begin with and now they're worse; again, why bother in the first place?
And let us not forget the primary reason for the debate: that the use of a controlled or uncontrolled substance as a means to avoid situations within an individual's life (outside of what has been prescribed by a physician) is considered drug abuse. Abuse of any kind causes pain and mistrust to oneself and those around them because, essentially, they'd rather avoid the problems in their life than deal with them constructively like a functional member of society. By not dealing with their problems they become dysfunctional, and once disfunction starts its momentum is hard to stop. This is why so many people who lack the education or followthrough to solve problems turn to drugs in the first place.
0
I agree that like the use of alcohol and tobacco, were Marijuana to be legalized an age restriction would be the best prevention of abnormal development. Be that as it may, the human body continues to develop well past adulthood and into old age. The negative effects of such substances don't just disappear when someone reaches a certain age, and if they're negative why bother in the first place?
We can also confirm that Marijuana, like tobacco and alcohol, may not have been proven to cause detrimental health effects in the long-term, but it has been shown to increase the likelihood of such affects to those whom are genetically predisposed to them. In essence they're playing Russian Roulette. An additional bullet is added for the use of street drugs due to the fact that their purity isn't regulated by an institution that is inspected by a third party to confirm it's quality. Add another bullet when you take into consideration the lifestyle of drug dealers and the destructive individuals that surround them, and another bullet for every other drug in a persons system at the time along with possible drug interactions, since any of their individual effects are now putting even more strain on a person's biological system. The odds weren't great to begin with and now they're worse; again, why bother in the first place?
We can also confirm that Marijuana, like tobacco and alcohol, may not have been proven to cause detrimental health effects in the long-term, but it has been shown to increase the likelihood of such affects to those whom are genetically predisposed to them. In essence they're playing Russian Roulette. An additional bullet is added for the use of street drugs due to the fact that their purity isn't regulated by an institution that is inspected by a third party to confirm it's quality. Add another bullet when you take into consideration the lifestyle of drug dealers and the destructive individuals that surround them, and another bullet for every other drug in a persons system at the time along with possible drug interactions, since any of their individual effects are now putting even more strain on a person's biological system. The odds weren't great to begin with and now they're worse; again, why bother in the first place?
Legalization removes most of those "bullets". That and everything about the cannabis plant is better than tobacco. Smoking it is less harmful and relaxes the lung capillaries rather than constricting them like smoking tobacco does. Hemp has tons of industrial uses. Cannabinoids, constituents of marijuana smoke, have been recognized to have potential antitumor properties.
And let us not forget the primary reason for the debate: that the use of a controlled or uncontrolled substance as a means to avoid situations within an individual's life (outside of what has been prescribed by a physician) is considered drug abuse. Abuse of any kind causes pain and mistrust to oneself and those around them because, essentially, they'd rather avoid the problems in their life than deal with them constructively like a functional member of society. By not dealing with their problems they become dysfunctional, and once disfunction starts its momentum is hard to stop. This is why so many people who lack the education or followthrough to solve problems turn to drugs in the first place.
I've heard this argument before. It too is a flawed argument. "...that the use of a controlled or uncontrolled substance as a means to avoid situations within an individual's life (outside of what has been prescribed by a physician) is considered drug abuse." that right there is why it is a flawed argument. Essentially this is saying that any form of entertainment is a form of abuse. You immerse yourself in another world or setting to escape. It's the same concept.
"...they'd rather avoid the problems in their life than deal with them constructively like a functional member of society." Everyone has a means of "escape" from life. Just because you are using a controversial method does not mean you are avoiding your problems rather than dealing with them constructively. It does not mean you are not a functional member of society.
"By not dealing with their problems they become dysfunctional..." Not all irresponsible people use drugs and not all drug users are irresponsible. I'm using the term irresponsible in this context to refer to someone that doesn't deal with their problems.
Drug usage becomes a problem when you become dependent upon it, be it a physical or mental addiction. Marijuana has been proven to have little physically addictive affects and is in fact less addictive than coffee. There is a possibility for mental addiction, but that has nothing to do with marijuana itself but rather the individual using it. Such individuals that get mentally addicted were indeed looking for an escape from reality and they became dependent on that escape. The marijuana is not at fault in this situation as such an individual could have found his escape in something legal. The people that find their escape in food and get mentally addicted is why obesity is such a problem, but that does not justify making food that is bad for you illegal.
It is completely possible to use marijuana in a responsible manner in the same way you would use any other escape from reality. You watch a movie or play a video game for fun and to escape reality, but you can be mentally addicted to these activities as well.
Just because something can be used irresponsibly does not justify banning it's usage altogether. Let us not allow the actions of irresponsible individuals to strip away the freedoms of everyone else.
0
I think drugs works as a distraction for the people. Drugs for Stress? What? Oh Please. If they legalize that not you, not me but many other people will take advantage of this to make business. After all, all the drugs stop in the USA.
0
Jmac wrote...
Tax it, extra income for the govt. Win, win for everyone..Ah, if only congress was utilitarian enough to realize the potential of this solution.
TheCuban wrote...
I think drugs works as a distraction for the people. Drugs for Stress? What? Oh Please. If they legalize that not you, not me but many other people will take advantage of this to make business. After all, all the drugs stop in the USA. Please read what you wrote out loud. Then, after reviewing the mess of words that came out, please revise it. The topic here is whether or not we should legalize marijuana.
0
Wow my name is really lon wrote...
Jmac wrote...
Tax it, extra income for the govt. Win, win for everyone..Ah, if only congress was utilitarian enough to realize the potential of this solution.
TheCuban wrote...
I think drugs works as a distraction for the people. Drugs for Stress? What? Oh Please. If they legalize that not you, not me but many other people will take advantage of this to make business. After all, all the drugs stop in the USA. Please read what you wrote out loud. Then, after reviewing the mess of words that came out, please revise it. The topic here is whether or not we should legalize marijuana.
I think he means, "Drugs are bad for you, its pointless to take them to relieve stress. If drugs are legalized, the common people do not have any monetary gain as all income flows into large corporations." The last sentence made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
0
I just don't understand why something that relieves stress can't be "bad for you" since a lot of activities that relieve stress are (smoking, drinking, etc.). I'd rather see money flow into corporations to help businesses and the economy instead of out of taxpayers used to combat drug trafficking.
0
Compare Drug Prohibition to Alcohol Prohibition and that sums up my view on the legalization of Marijuana.
0
Loner
the People's Senpai
Legalization= less money wasted on trials and frees up jails and taxation would increase profit for gov.
Even though i said that doesn't mean i like the stuff. The few times i did it, i had a less than thrilling experience. Really angers me when i think of my friend who's been transformed by the drug. At one time me and him got laid of from work for about 4 weeks and he had a little more money saved up than me at the beginning. At the end of those 4 weeks he's bitchin to me about not havin any money, not havin a girlfriend, and always being depressed. One night we wer gonna have some beers but he decided to smoke instead. I tried to have fun but all he did was stare at a wall for 2 hrs blitz otta his mind, eat a bunch of potato chips and then fell asleep by 8:30. I had to stay at his house for another two hrs essentially by myself to sobber up enough to drive home. We used to hang out every weekend or two but now im lucky to see him once a month cuz he's alway smokin. Mybe im old fashioned but i rly dislike that stuff.
Even though i said that doesn't mean i like the stuff. The few times i did it, i had a less than thrilling experience. Really angers me when i think of my friend who's been transformed by the drug. At one time me and him got laid of from work for about 4 weeks and he had a little more money saved up than me at the beginning. At the end of those 4 weeks he's bitchin to me about not havin any money, not havin a girlfriend, and always being depressed. One night we wer gonna have some beers but he decided to smoke instead. I tried to have fun but all he did was stare at a wall for 2 hrs blitz otta his mind, eat a bunch of potato chips and then fell asleep by 8:30. I had to stay at his house for another two hrs essentially by myself to sobber up enough to drive home. We used to hang out every weekend or two but now im lucky to see him once a month cuz he's alway smokin. Mybe im old fashioned but i rly dislike that stuff.
0
I've been doing some more research into this matter recently and I would like to post my findings.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8155-marijuana-might-cause-new-cell-growth-in-the-brain.html
HU-210 is a synthetic cannabinoid 100 to 800 times more potent than natural THC from cannabis and has an extended duration of action.
"They found that giving rats high doses of HU-210 twice a day for 10 days increased the rate of nerve cell formation, or neurogenesis, in the hippocampus by about 40%."
"...in rats this cell growth appears to be linked with reducing anxiety and depression."
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/25/8/1904
"HU-210, alongside other synthetic cannabinoids like WIN 55,212-2 and JWH-133, is implicated in preventing the inflammation caused by Amyloid beta proteins involved in Alzheimer's Disease, in addition to preventing cognitive impairment and loss of neuronal markers. This anti-inflammatory action is induced through the activation of cannabinoid receptors which prevents microglial activation that elicits the inflammation. Additionally, cannabinoids completely abolish neurotoxicity related to microglia activation in rat models."
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8155-marijuana-might-cause-new-cell-growth-in-the-brain.html
HU-210 is a synthetic cannabinoid 100 to 800 times more potent than natural THC from cannabis and has an extended duration of action.
"They found that giving rats high doses of HU-210 twice a day for 10 days increased the rate of nerve cell formation, or neurogenesis, in the hippocampus by about 40%."
"...in rats this cell growth appears to be linked with reducing anxiety and depression."
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/25/8/1904
"HU-210, alongside other synthetic cannabinoids like WIN 55,212-2 and JWH-133, is implicated in preventing the inflammation caused by Amyloid beta proteins involved in Alzheimer's Disease, in addition to preventing cognitive impairment and loss of neuronal markers. This anti-inflammatory action is induced through the activation of cannabinoid receptors which prevents microglial activation that elicits the inflammation. Additionally, cannabinoids completely abolish neurotoxicity related to microglia activation in rat models."
1
I had surgery a few months ago. I was given Vicoden ES 7.5/750 for pain. I could only take it for two weeks before the benefit was not worth the horrible side effects. I literally could not take a shit for 2 weeks. With thorough reasearch, I went on heavy cannabis. It was an absolute godsend. Am I addicted? No. Would I recommend it? Yes.
Vicoden ES = little pain lasting 3-4 hours; ultra constipation, severe nausea, loss of appetite, third trimester-like bloating
Marijuana Indica (inhalation) = slight pain lasting 1-2 hours; dry mouth + increased appetite
Marijuana Indica (edible) = little pain lasting up to 6 hours; no immediate side effect
Cause of death in 2009
All causes 2,436,652
Cardiovascular diseases 779,367
Malignant neoplasms 568,668
Drug induced 37,485
Suicide 36,547
Motor vehicle accidents 36,284
Septicemia (infections) 35,587
by Firearms 31,224
Accidental poisoning 30,504
Alcohol induced 23,199
Homicide 16,591
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 9,424
Viral hepatitis 7,652
Cannabis 0*
*[size=8]The lower brain stem regulates basic body functions, such as respiration. The relatively low density
of cannabinoid receptors in this area probably accounts for the low, virtually non-existent risk of
death from overdosing among cannabis users.[/h]
http://www.cpha.ca/uploads/portals/substance/cannabis_report_2002.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_04.pdf
http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm
Vicoden ES = little pain lasting 3-4 hours; ultra constipation, severe nausea, loss of appetite, third trimester-like bloating
Marijuana Indica (inhalation) = slight pain lasting 1-2 hours; dry mouth + increased appetite
Marijuana Indica (edible) = little pain lasting up to 6 hours; no immediate side effect
Cause of death in 2009
All causes 2,436,652
Cardiovascular diseases 779,367
Malignant neoplasms 568,668
Drug induced 37,485
Suicide 36,547
Motor vehicle accidents 36,284
Septicemia (infections) 35,587
by Firearms 31,224
Accidental poisoning 30,504
Alcohol induced 23,199
Homicide 16,591
Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) 9,424
Viral hepatitis 7,652
Cannabis 0*
*[size=8]The lower brain stem regulates basic body functions, such as respiration. The relatively low density
of cannabinoid receptors in this area probably accounts for the low, virtually non-existent risk of
death from overdosing among cannabis users.[/h]
http://www.cpha.ca/uploads/portals/substance/cannabis_report_2002.pdf
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr59/nvsr59_04.pdf
http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm