marijuana

It does imp are you but not In the same way. It makes you paranoid so most people that drive when high say they drive slower because of the paranoia.. don't misread me I do not condone it. Just what they have told me. And from what I have read there are very very few deaths directly contributed to it. And there is millions that smoke it. And some do drive. If it impares the person ad alcohol does why sent there more instances?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Double

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

in regard to "smoking" it ......... the method of delivery is not healthy period.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Do you have proof of this? Anything to back it up

 

Never made me paranoid nor any of my friends who also smoked it. We never drove because we were to stoned to do so. If it becomes legal there will be more accidents because there will be millions of new smokers that will be on the roads. The accident rate will go up since more people will use it. Why should we put more impaired drivers, pilots, police, doctors, teachers, and on and on and that's going to create more problems IMPO.

 

Possibly. But that is all speculation. Millions use it now and there are very very few incidents if u multiply the users up to levels of alcohol 5here will still be way less incidents yes that is also speculation but based in facts we have now

 

Sorry, got your posts confused with Fraggle's.

In any case, you can't possibly be unaware of the negative effects of pot and if you think all anti-pot research is just propaganda, then there really isn't anything to discuss. It's all just conspiracy theory.

 

I guess that you don't know what driving under the influence, DUI, means. It is different than driving while intoxicated , DWI , intoxicated is drunk, influence is drugs of some type. Many are arrested and cause accidents that are stoned and are arrested for DUI. So saying that this won't create more accidents isn't very wise.

 

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=DWI

I would beg to differ I have many friends that have been pulled over and got a DUI and DWI. All were alcohol related no other substance involved. So they are both one in the same up to the officer how he words it


DUI
unknown
1. driving under the influence (of alcohol or drugs): often used as an official police abbreviation


*
DWI
An abbreviation for driving while intoxicated, which is an offense committed by an individual who operates a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or Drugs and Narcotics. An abbreviation for died without issue, which commonly appears in genealogical tables.

Sources
url]http://m.dictionary.com/definition/dui[/url]

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=DWI

 

But usually the police use DUI for drugs when a field sobriety test can't determine what, if anything, a person is using. I'm not saying they do not use both terms for both things but only say that one is used for dugs and the other alcohol.

 

Again the War on marijuana is idiotic look at what we have accomplished on it. Neutral experts will tell you no where!

Our idiotic government classes marijuana as a class 1 or schedule 1 drug

Schedule I

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all the drug schedules with potentially severe psychological or physical dependence. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:

heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote

this BOLD section shows how idiotic it is. that has been proven false and the government isn't budging on it when scientific studies directly contradict it. which is why states are legalizing it. YET even in those states its still a FEDERAL offence. beyond that look at what other drugs are in the catagory.

if you read further alcohol, and tobacco fit the definition of schedule one to a T yet where are they?.

cocaine, methamphetamine, methadone, hydromorphone (Dilaudid), meperidine (Demerol), oxycodone (OxyContin), fentanyl, Dexedrine, Adderall, and Ritalin

all of these drugs in the governments eyes are less dangerous than marijuana. do you not see how laughable that is?

the Heath tulane study is the one the government sites to make marijuana illegal in that study
-n a laboratory in New Orleans, rhesus monkeys were forced to smoke the equivalent of two cannabis cigarettes a day for nearly a year. that is what the government says but in reality this is what happened

In the report, Heath concluded that Rhesus monkeys, smoking the equivalent of only 30 joints a day, began to atrophy and die after 90 days [that's 2700 joints, or an average of 1.25 doobies per hour 24 hours a day, for 90 days!]
The Heath "Voodoo" Research methodology, as reported in Playboy: Rhesus monkeys were strapped into a chair and then strapped into gas masks and given the equivalent of 63 Colombian strength joints in "five minutes, thru the gas masks" losing no smoke.

so the government takes the initial study of 5 a day and says it causes brain damage. YET the findings of the study the government uses as its foundation actually gave the animals well over 30 a day. and it was given in the from of smoke ALL IN 5 min. and this was over only 3 months not 1 year as you have heard. this caused lack of oxygen which in return caused the brain damage.

here is clip from the documentary. remember i have cited the governments OWN foundation study even tho this is a pro weed documentary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRrQWIX2QcA

In October 2003, the federal government awarded the Department of Health and Human Services a patent titled “Cannabinoids as Antioxidants and Neuroprotectants,” which states: “Cannabinoids…are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia.”

the own federal government gave out the award for marijuana. yet keep it as a schedule I drug how can they classify it as one thing yet give out awards showing its medical benifits

1. THC and other plant cannabinoids are not only effective for the management of cancer symptoms (pain, nausea, loss of appetite, fatigue, etc.); they also confer a direct anti-tumoral effect, according to peer-reviewed studies by scientists at the California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco and Complutense University in Madrid, Spain.

2. Investigators at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California, found that THC inhibits an enzyme involved in the accumulation of beta amyloid plaque that disrupts communication between brain cells, the hallmark of Alzheimer’s-related dementia.

3. According to researchers at Kings College in London, cannabinoid receptor signaling choreographs neurogenesis (the creation of new brain cells) in adult mammals and also regulates the migration and differentiation of stem cells.

4. Chinese scientists have shown that the painkilling effects of acupuncture are mediated by the same cannabinoid receptors that are activated by THC.

5. Pharmaceutical companies are exploring ways to induce therapeutic outcomes by manipulating levels of the body’s own cannabinoids. Animal studies indicate that it’s possible to attenuate a wide range of pathological conditions (including hypertension, colitis, neuropathic pain and opiate withdrawal) by preventing or delaying the enzymatic breakdown of endogenous cannabinoids.

So all in all the government used a study done in 1974 as there foundation twisted and turned the results lying to the public about it. YET today all the research being done is saying almost the exact opposite. the government puts it at a CLASS 1 drug with no medical use. and very dangerous, to giving out rewards showing for new medical treatment when its administered.



Sources
http://www.art.net/~hopkins/Don/hemp/prohibition/no-clothes.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/october/2/newsid_2540000/2540141.stm

http://www.alternet.org/marijuana-miracle-5-exciting-new-discoveries-about-pot

http://www.scripps.edu/news/press/2006/080906.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...tes-growth-of-brain-cells-in-rats-510869.html

 

None of that is directly related to your OP. Do you acknowledge now that you are aware that there are harmful effects of marijuana use?

 

i can put this very simply:
immortality isn't harmful to the user either but it would mean the end of society as we know it.

 

Any drug policy should be a "Least Harm" strategy, locking up potheads does more harm to society than the pothead is doing, even to himself. The same cannot be said for Alcohol or Tobacco.

 

nicotine is a very powerful poison.
i've heard that ONE DROP delivered through IV would kill you.

 

so?
and?
this in no way logically proves marijuana should be legalized across the board.
not even close to it.

 

That's nonsense, every bit of it.
1. Nicotine has not been found to be a carcinogen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicotine#Toxicology
2. THC is not the only thing inhaled using a vaporizer.
3. The vast majority of the thousands of chemicals in tobacco are also present in pot - they are very similar in chemical makeup (both are plants afterall). Hundreds of them are known to be harmful and dozens are known carcinogens: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/cessation
4. If using vaporizers was a viable replacement for cigarettes for health reasons, tobacco users would use them as well. Indeed, you almost certainly have the issue backwards: vaporizers are much more cumbersome to use, but since pot is illegal in most places, most smoking is done at home where it isn't as much of a problem to use them. If legalized completely and people want to use everywhere, they will switch to pot cigarettes (joints) because of their inherently better portability.

The main issue with research on the detrimental health impacts of marijuana is that because it is illegal it is difficult to study. Once it is legalized and use explodes, we'll get even better data.

 

Don't know where you live, but in my world these are becoming quite common.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette

 

yes but cancer is not one. actually opposite is true it kills lung cancer. brain damage is a farce also. so the negative effect is. your under the influance

there are harmful effects of eating a hamburger. not sure what your going for here. there are harmful effects for every single thing we put into our bodies.