Marijuana pro and con

Discussion in 'Human Science' started by madanthonywayne, Nov 24, 2007.

  1. madanthonywayne Mourning in America Staff Member

    Many people out there argue that marijuana should be legalized. Frankly, I agree. I think people should be allowed to fuck themselves up however they want (not that I advocate it). I also believe a doctor should be able to prescribe any drug he believes will help a patient. Marijuana clearly has usefulness for problems like nausea and loss of appetite in cancer patients or AIDS patients.(the power of the munchies).

    But many in the pro-pot camp take it a step further and claim that pot is nature's wonder drug. Good for what ales you, safer than tobacco, with no long term effects.

    To me, a major issue with pot is the fact that it's fat soluble. A fat soluble substance can build up in your system and therefore continue to affect you even when you're not using it.

    Alcohol, on the other hand, being water soluble is washed out of your system fairly quickly.

    So, what's the science say? Is pot harmless? It seems that it must increase your risk of cancer and respiratory problems. Sucking up any kind of smoke into your lungs over and over again can't be good for you. More importantly, what about long term effects on your brain? I've known some stoners who seemed fucked up all the time. Maybe they were stupid to begin with, but having persistent levels of a psychoactive substance in your system must have some effect.

    What do you think?
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. leopold Valued Senior Member

    serial killers are also useful.
    yes, if you are a responsible adult.
    legalizing pot is a bad move.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Killian_1_4 Registered Senior Member

    Regardless of whether it is harmless or not government does not exist to protect us from ourselves, IF we are sane, responsible people. And in comparison to tobacco or alcohol it is harmless.
  6. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    If I had to choose the drug my neighbors abused I would definitely go for marijauna over alcohol. Why?
    With M
    relaxed passive out of my face, for the most part
    With A
    often active, aggressive, in my face.

    As a factor in physical violence, rape, car accidents and a sort of generalized domination of public places alcohol seems a vastly greater contributer to me. And by domination of public places I mean how much loud drunk people who have an air of hostility must be circumvented, appeased, avoided etc. I am not thrilled to be around bunch of stoned people, but I am not afraid of them. In fact if I knew a gang was gonna come and kick my ass I'd hope they all shared a big spliff first: 1) there's a good chance they wouldn't come at all. 2) I might be able to take on a big group if they did.
  7. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member


    How about nothing at all? Why isn't that a part of your answer? Can't

    people just not drink or smoke? What's up with everyone having to do

    something to alter their senses of reality and become high?:shrug:
  8. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    I find that shrug emoticon really irritating. I mean why ask a question if that's the attitude.

    But anyway, my answer:
    Alcohol is legal and for me as a non-user it seems much more intrusive and dangerous.
    So I think it is hypocritical to have alcohol be legal and M not be.

    As far as what's up with everyone that is a whole other can of beans.
  9. tablariddim forexU2 Valued Senior Member

    Whether it's legalised or not (which it will never be), drugs in society are now so prevalent that I think drug testing should become the norm in all industries where employees are responsible for the well-being and safety of people, and also for their money. Personally, I wish it could be legal under licence for certain people such as artists, musicians etc. that use it for inspiration.
  10. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    drug testing should cut across class barriers. Members of Boards of Directors should be drug tested and not just the guys, working their asses off, in the plant. Poor decision-making by a drug addicted Board Member could do much more damage to a company than one worker lying in his own vomit in the employee lounge.
  11. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member


    I didn't hear that the great masters like DiVinci, Raphel, Rodan ,Bach,

    Beethoven or other artists used pot for insipation. They used only their own

    talents to create what they did so why do people need anything to be

    inspired? Perehaps they aren't talented enough to create anything without

    being in an altered state?
  12. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    I used it because I cannot understand taking drugs to become high. What's

    the big deal to alter your sense of reality because you always have to

    return to reality sometime and those that can't only become addicts. Isn't

    that a great thing to become, a alcoholic or drug used of some type

    because many times pot users go onto heavy drugs as we all know.
  13. maxg Registered Senior Member

    I agree that drugs should at least be decriminalized and some (like marijuana) entirely legalized. While I wouldn't call it a wonder drug there are a number of potential health benefits to marijuana besides those related to digestion and appetitie--it can inhibit some kinds of tumor growth, is a less dangerous aid to sleep than what's being prescribed now, and improves some neurological conditions, etc. So overall the Federal governments continued war on pot is absurd.

    The fact that it is fat soluble has both good and bad aspects. Because the THC is rapidly absorbed into fat it is almost impossible to overdose from it unlike alcohol, but it will continue to effect someone for a while after smoking.

    from Nahas, GG. The pharmacokinetics of THC in fat and brain: resulting functional responses to
    marihuana smoking. Hum Psychopharmacol. 2001 Apr;16(3):247-255.

    No drug is harmless but marijuana is certainly one of the safest of recreational drugs. Smoking can cause emphysemia and other respiratory conditions but it's not as bad as tobacco in that department (in part because no one is going to smoke pot with same frequency they smoke tobacco).

    Marijuana does affect the brain and there are withdrawal symptoms after long-terms use (in both humans and animals) so it can be addictive.

    It may effect mental disorders--the best researched aspect of this is that it significantly increases the chances that an individual will have a psychotic episode (in other words it appears to trigger psychosis in individuals who may be predisposed to the disorder but would not otherwise have had it surface). Interestingly though, among schizophrenics it also appears to improve their performance on certain cognitive tests. It may also increase anxiety and depression.

    A lot of research has been done showing its negative effects on long-term memory, although those effects do appear to clear up after a period of abstinence. The exception may be people who started smoking at a young age when their brains were still developing but there are other some confounding factors involved there relating to the sorts of kids (I was one of them) who start smoking pot before they were 18. As with other drugs, I also suspect there are also issues involved in contextual learning--i.e., if you learn something under the influence of a drug you will have a better chance of recalling it under the influence.
  14. tablariddim forexU2 Valued Senior Member

    Not everyone is a natural genius, yet we don't really know whether the great minds of the past used or abused certain drugs, the chances are that at least some of them did. In modern times, the great phenomenon of blues, jazz and rock that influences all contemporary music probably just wouldn't have happened had it not been for drugs.
  15. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    The amount of artists who drank, smoke or used other drugs is rather large. YOu think Da vinci didn't drink wine?
  16. madanthonywayne Mourning in America Staff Member

    Sure, if your main criteria is people not annoying you. But my biggest problem with pot is that, being fat soluble, it builds up in your system and continues to affect you even when you haven't smoked it recently.

    Have you ever noticed the reverse tolerance with pot? It seems to take a new user more to achieve the same high as a chronic user. Why should that be? Unless the chronic user is half stoned all the time.
  17. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member


    Can you substantiate your remarks since there were no records of those

    artists I mentioned taking any types of drugs except perhaps wine.
  18. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    I consider rape, assault and drunk driving more than annoying, but I get your point.

    I am thinking on a societal level. That pot has fat soluble compounds affects, primarily the user. So a por for me, especially in terms of legalization, is that the effects are more localized on users.

    I don't know what the neurochemical explanation is, but I believe the brain learns the alternate state. Like an experienced meditator could reduce his heart rate with much less 'effort' than a beginner. There is a groove in the brain and the brain slides over there. Pardon the non-scientific language, but however sloppy this may seem, I think it actually is pointing in the right direction.
  19. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    I didn't say anything about the other artists.
    But as it happens it is pretty common knowledge that Beethovan's health was badly affected by alcohol consumption.

    I think it is common knowledge that Michaelangelo and Da Vinci both drank wine, but I could find no link I felt would be compelling. I have to say I found your attitude rather smug and unnecessary. Many artists, writers, actors...creative people in general have used drugs of various kinds while creating their work. And some wonderful music in the 20th century was made by people who were even destroyed by drugs.

    I am not making the case that drugs are necessary for creativity. It just seemed like you were on a high horse for some unjustified reason.
  20. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    I tried to follow the link above and oddly it does not work though via google the same address brings you there. In any case, the pertinent part of the article:
  21. madanthonywayne Mourning in America Staff Member

    But why don't other drugs follow that pattern? Practically every other drug requires more and more to achieve the same result the longer you use it. I think the effect is due to THC already being in your system.
  22. spidergoat ... Valued Senior Member

    If pot were legal and less expensive, you wouldn't have to smoke it. It can be incorporated into foods and drinks.

Share This Page