Cannabis

[Ziltoid]

First off, let's try to not get political about this.

I've been raised in the mentality that pot is bad, burns your brain cells, is going to get you hooked on harder stuff and etc.

Recently I saw a movie called "The Union" for those who knows about that movie, and I'm simply asking myself where's the truth in all this.

I know every story has two side, but seriously what I saw in The Union is the total opposite of what I've always been told, yes the movie seemed biased, but to what extent?

Just being curious about the truth & lies related to cannabis.

Again, let's not get political over it, I don't want to know if it should be legal or if it will, or who will and who does.

[Deluge Of Sound]

Go to your local library and get some reading in on the war on drugs, William Randolph Hearst, and prohibition (with and without a capital P).

[superfunk47]

The truth of the matter is in the studies out there. (And they are out there...oh, are they ever out there.)

You won't see them on any government website, but there are (reputable) studies-a-plenty that have proven, over and over, that it's less harmful to you than alcohol.

Again, the truth is out there, waiting to be found. In much more reputable places than an internet discussion board.

[shackled]

This thread will likely be stricken, but I'll post my opinion first. Pot is a much less dangerous drug than alcohol or nicotine. Period.
It does not lead to the big, bad junkie unless one is already so inclined. Gateway my arse.
There.

Anyone who says otherwise hasn't ever ingested the plant, or is just plain ignorant.

[Ziltoid]

Let's keep the opinion'ing to a civilized level, I don't want this thread to turn out ugly but rather informative and clean.

Originally Posted by superfunk47

The truth of the matter is in the studies out there. (And they are out there...oh, are they ever out there.)

You won't see them on any government website, but there are (reputable) studies-a-plenty that have proven, over and over, that it's less harmful to you than alcohol.

Again, the truth is out there, waiting to be found. In much more reputable places than an internet discussion board.

That's pretty much what they were saying in The Union. As for the truth out there and the other guy who told me to search some books, normally that's what I would do but I'm tight on the time at this point, exams coming up soon and lots of work with college, and I'm curious about this topic.

[MakiSupaStar]

Research is your friend.

[G.Bisson]

another great book on this topic is "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" by Jack Herer.

as a chronic user for 7 years I have never tried any other hard drug, despite the many, many, many times of being offered to for free by the many sleazy low lifes who gravitate towards musical lifestyles.

[superfunk47]

Here's a little something to get you started.

10) MARIJUANA USE HAS NO EFFECT ON MORTALITY:
A massive study of California HMO members funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) found marijuana use caused no significant increase in mortality. Tobacco use was associated with increased risk of death. Sidney, S et al. Marijuana Use and Mortality. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 87 No. 4, April 1997. p. 585-590. Sept. 2002.

9) HEAVY MARIJUANA USE AS A YOUNG ADULT WON'T RUIN YOUR LIFE:
Veterans Affairs scientists looked at whether heavy marijuana use as a young adult caused long-term problems later, studying identical twins in which one twin had been a heavy marijuana user for a year or longer but had stopped at least one month before the study, while the second twin had used marijuana no more than five times ever. Marijuana use had no significant impact on physical or mental health care utilization, health-related quality of life, or current socio-demographic characteristics. Eisen SE et al. Does Marijuana Use Have Residual Adverse Effects on Self-Reported Health Measures, Socio-Demographics or Quality of Life? A Monozygotic Co-Twin Control Study in Men. Addiction. Vol. 97 No. 9. p.1083-1086. Sept. 1997

8) THE "GATEWAY EFFECT" MAY BE A MIRAGE:
Marijuana is often called a "gateway drug" by supporters of prohibition, who point to statistical "associations" indicating that persons who use marijuana are more likely to eventually try hard drugs than those who never use marijuana - implying that marijuana use somehow causes hard drug use. But a model developed by RAND Corp. researcher Andrew Morral demonstrates that these associations can be explained "without requiring a gateway effect." More likely, this federally funded study suggests, some people simply have an underlying propensity to try drugs, and start with what's most readily available. Morral AR, McCaffrey D and Paddock S. Reassessing the Marijuana Gateway Effect. Addiction. December 2002. p. 1493-1504.

7) PROHIBITION DOESN'T WORK (PART I):
The White House had the National Research Council examine the data being gathered about drug use and the effects of U.S. drug policies. NRC concluded, "the nation possesses little information about the effectiveness of current drug policy, especially of drug law enforcement." And what data exist show "little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions prescribed for drug use and prevalence or frequency of use." In other words, there is no proof that prohibition - the cornerstone of U.S. drug policy for a century - reduces drug use. National Research Council. Informing America's Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don't Know Keeps Hurting Us. National Academy Press, 2001. p. 193.

6) PROHIBITION DOESN'T WORK (PART II):
DOES PROHIBITION CAUSE THE "GATEWAY EFFECT"?: U.S. and Dutch researchers, supported in part by NIDA, compared marijuana users in San Francisco, where non-medical use remains illegal, to Amsterdam, where adults may possess and purchase small amounts of marijuana from regulated businesses. Looking at such parameters as frequency and quantity of use and age at onset of use, they found no differences except one: Lifetime use of hard drugs was significantly lower in Amsterdam, with its "tolerant" marijuana policies. For example, lifetime crack cocaine use was 4.5 times higher in San Francisco than Amsterdam. Reinarman, C, Cohen, PDA, and Kaal, HL. The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and San Francisco. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 94, No. 5. May 2004. p. 836-842.

5) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART I):
Federal researchers implanted several types of cancer, including leukemia and lung cancers, in mice, then treated them with cannabinoids (unique, active components found in marijuana). THC and other cannabinoids shrank tumors and increased the mice's lifespans. Munson, AE et al. Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602.

4) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART II):
In a 1994 study the government tried to suppress, federal researchers gave mice and rats massive doses of THC, looking for cancers or other signs of toxicity. The rodents given THC lived longer and had fewer cancers, "in a dose-dependent manner" (i.e. the more THC they got, the fewer tumors). NTP Technical Report On The Toxicology And Carcinogenesis Studies Of 1-Trans- Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, CAS No. 1972-08-3, In F344/N Rats And B6C3F Mice, Gavage Studies. See also, "Medical Marijuana: Unpublished Federal Study Found THC-Treated Rats Lived Longer, Had Less Cancer," AIDS Treatment News no. 263, Jan. 17, 1997.

3) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART III):
Researchers at the Kaiser-Permanente HMO, funded by NIDA, followed 65,000 patients for nearly a decade, comparing cancer rates among non-smokers, tobacco smokers, and marijuana smokers. Tobacco smokers had massively higher rates of lung cancer and other cancers. Marijuana smokers who didn't also use tobacco had no increase in risk of tobacco-related cancers or of cancer risk overall. In fact their rates of lung and most other cancers were slightly lower than non-smokers, though the difference did not reach statistical significance. Sidney, S. et al. Marijuana Use and Cancer Incidence (California, United States). Cancer Causes and Control. Vol. 8. Sept. 1997, p. 722-728.

2) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART IV):
Donald Tashkin, a UCLA researcher whose work is funded by NIDA, did a case-control study comparing 1,200 patients with lung, head and neck cancers to a matched group with no cancer. Even the heaviest marijuana smokers had no increased risk of cancer, and had somewhat lower cancer risk than non-smokers (tobacco smokers had a 20-fold increased lung cancer risk). Tashkin D. Marijuana Use and Lung Cancer: Results of a Case-Control Study. American Thoracic Society International Conference. May 23, 2006.

1) MARIJUANA DOES HAVE MEDICAL VALUE:
In response to passage of California's medical marijuana law, the White House had the Institute of Medicine (IOM) review the data on marijuana's medical benefits and risks. The IOM concluded, "Nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana." While noting potential risks of smoking, the report added, "we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting." The government's refusal to acknowledge this finding caused co-author John A. Benson to tell the New York Times that the government "loves to ignore our report … they would rather it never happened." Joy, JE, Watson, SJ, and Benson, JA. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy Press. 1999. p. 159. See also, Harris, G. FDA Dismisses Medical Benefit From Marijuana. New York Times. Apr. 21, 2006.

[Ziltoid]

Interesting.

[Stigs]

[Ziltoid]

That's the kind of things I'd rather not see in this "serious" thread.

[lunarpollen]

All I know is that it turns most (not all) people who smoke it regularly into kinda like the "pod people" from Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Something... missing...

People tend to be really boring when high, they have lots of intense "conversations" with one another that are just complete chains of non-sequiturs (I guess you have to be high to think they are actual conversations). It really sucks to be stuck with a bunch of stone pot heads "conversing" with one another. And those that do get dependent on it (I know, not everyone does) become really pathetic.

The stuff also smells bloody awful, the stench makes a lot of non-smokers sick when they are subjected to it.

Having said all that, I think the stuff should be legal. Especially with all the beneficial uses of the plant, both medicinal and non-medicinal (hemp seed, fibers, etc). It's not a dangerous drug, and I am opposed to depriving people of their enjoyment of relatively harmless substances, as long as they smoke away from people who don't want to be made sick by the stench and don't want to be forced to have that stench in their hair and clothes for the rest of the day.

[drteeth]

I will not contest that cannabis might be less harmfull than alcohol or nicotine, but there are also studies pointing out (with the necessary caution and reservations) that cannabis is not harmless.

"The strongest evidence that cannabis use may be a risk factor for later psychosis comes from a Swedish cohort study which found that heavy cannabis use at age 18 increased the risk of later schizophrenia sixfold. 1 2 This study could not establish whether adolescent cannabis use was a consequence of pre-existing psychotic symptoms rather than a cause. We present the first prospective longitudinal study of adolescent cannabis use as a risk factor for adult schizophreniform disorder, taking into account childhood psychotic symptoms3 antedating cannabis use."

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7374/1212?etoc

[mike_v_s]

OP: It has it's good points and there will be a mountain of people who want to line up to tell them to you. Even so, keep in mind that inhaling any foreign particulates into your lungs isn't the kind of thing that C. Everett Koop will highfive you for.

Mike

[TheDarkReaver]

Originally Posted by mike_v_s

OP: It has it's good points and there will be a mountain of people who want to line up to tell them to you. Even so, keep in mind that inhaling any foreign particulates into your lungs isn't the kind of thing that C. Everett Koop will highfive you for.

Mike

The great thing about the stuff though, is that you don't have to smoke it.

[EBodious]

whoopee, another pot thread!

i have been, in the past, a part-time pro-cannabis activist of sorts. as such, i have what i consider to be well-researched and strongly held opinions. you can imagine what they are.

because it is a controversial subject there is a ton of information and MISinformation available to you. ultimately, only you can decide what you think is credible, and thus shape your perception of reality accordingly.

you are young and don't have the time to do the research due to school work? good. there is no rush. you have your whole life to discover. take in info at a comfortable rate. and do what you are already doing: asking questions and staying open minded.

caveat: if you live at home and you folks are gonna help pay for your college education and they are strongly anti-drug, do not ask questions and state your open-mindedness to them! they will not react positively. you will be an independent person making your own choices soon enough. as long as you are their dependent, they make the rules.

i can tell you this, if you are dealing with the end of high school and getting into college, etc, you are working your brain very hard. starting to smoke pot now will not make knowledge retention any easier.

both sides of the debate have credible info and extremist bunk to offer. enjoy the ride.



fun fact: there is archeological evidence of cannabis cultivation going back nearly 10,000 years. that is also how long humans have been cultivating any plants. cannabis has been in the service of humans a long time.

[baalroo]

The biggest myth out there is the "gateway drug" argument, which incorrctly replaces corelation with causation. I actually would feel like I was being condescending/patronizing if I attempted to explain any further.

National Geographic did a more objective hour special a few years back that's actually really similar to the union and has a lot of the same information in it.

[Jefenator]

I've had a lot of friends who partake fairly regularly. They're all good folks. So IME the stuff is comparatively harmless.

Some people really play like crap while they're high, though.

[baalroo]

Originally Posted by drteeth

I will not contest that cannabis might be less harmfull than alcohol or nicotine, but there are also studies pointing out (with the necessary caution and reservations) that cannabis is not harmless.

"The strongest evidence that cannabis use may be a risk factor for later psychosis comes from a Swedish cohort study which found that heavy cannabis use at age 18 increased the risk of later schizophrenia sixfold. 1 2 This study could not establish whether adolescent cannabis use was a consequence of pre-existing psychotic symptoms rather than a cause. We present the first prospective longitudinal study of adolescent cannabis use as a risk factor for adult schizophreniform disorder, taking into account childhood psychotic symptoms3 antedating cannabis use."

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7374/1212?etoc

that entire study was debunked within a week of it's release

[Ziltoid]

Originally Posted by EBodious

whoopee, another pot thread!

i have been, in the past, a part-time pro-cannabis activist of sorts. as such, i have what i consider to be well-researched and strongly held opinions. you can imagine what they are.

because it is a controversial subject there is a ton of information and MISinformation available to you. ultimately, only you can decide what you think is credible, and thus shape your perception of reality accordingly.

you are young and don't have the time to do the research due to school work? good. there is no rush. you have your whole life to discover. take in info at a comfortable rate. and do what you are already doing: asking questions and staying open minded.

caveat: if you live at home and you folks are gonna help pay for your college education and they are strongly anti-drug, do not ask questions and state your open-mindedness to them! they will not react positively. you will be an independent person making your own choices soon enough. as long as you are their dependent, they make the rules.

i can tell you this, if you are dealing with the end of high school and getting into college, etc, you are working your brain very hard. starting to smoke pot now will not make knowledge retention any easier.

both sides of the debate have credible info and extremist bunk to offer. enjoy the ride.



fun fact: there is archeological evidence of cannabis cultivation going back nearly 10,000 years. that is also how long humans have been cultivating any plants. cannabis has been in the service of humans a long time.

Yeah I'm pretty open minded on most subjects, I was just being particularly curious about this one. For the record I've never smoked pot or take any type of drugs or smoked anything but cigars (rarely).

The thing is that The Union seemed just too good to be true, that's why I kind of started this thread.