82 replies to this topic

[DJS]

Yeah, Bill Hicks is one of my favorites. He's a very funny guy and died real young from cancer. I'm sure the heavy smoking couldn't have helped his caused.

[roidjoe]

http://youtube.com/w...related&search=

Thanks for the laugh.

[ainsley]

Sorry for the massive post resurrection but when I see completely idiotic comments like this I simply cannot let it slide. I probably won't ever check back here as I just joined to make this post so please, kindly desist with the flaming because of that.

4 ,5 ,6 and 8 are untrue

You along with everyone else who disagreed with anything on this list, obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Also, unless you have sources to backup your rebuttal, then don't bother posting one at all.

4. Cancer patients are prescribed marijuana (in such places where medical marijuana is legal) for nausea from chemo but also because it has been scietifically proven to not only shrink tumours but also prevent tumour growth (several links to sources were provided earlier in the thread).

5. See 4.

6. Marijuana has never been proven to affect the brain or any other organ for that matter (besides the lungs) in any way, shape or form. So are you going to sit there and tell us that it does damage to the brain, whilst every single study attempting to prove so has failed? My brother has smoked pot since he was 13 (he's now 17) and he's graduating in the top 10 (that's ten people, not ten percent) for his entire district. His gpa is 4.0. He has also maintained a healthy relationship with his gf for the last 3 years. Now tell me, how exactly has his brain been effected from 4 years of smoking?

8. This one is open to some speculation. While many people consider it to not be a gateway drug (and as someone who has dozens of friends that have smoked for years, perhaps one or two of whom have at some point done harder drugs, I have to say I agree that it is not) there is undoubtedly a strage facination that comes with your first time trying any drug which can, for the weak minded, lead to trying other things. That is not to say, however, that just because you try some other drug means you will become addicted. Most of the people I know that have done hard drugs, have only done them once though I will not deny that there are people who become addicted as well. Whether or not that is because of past use of marijuana is again, open to some speculation.

uhh... did you read how they did that study?
not exactly what i would call scientific

smoking ANYTHING on a regular basis will cause cancer. cigs, weed, tree bark, dollar bills, notebook paper... ANYTHING.. its the TAR

...

know many heroin addicts that started on heroin?
etc etc
people who smoke weed on a semi/regular basis are much more likely to try other drugs, theres no arguing that.

Uhm... Firstly, no, smoking anything does NOT give you cancer. There are specific chemicals used in cigarettes that cause cancer. Those chemicals (and I'm sure if you looked it up, you could find them) are NOT present in marijuana and they are certainly not present in everything. Though smoking is obviously not good for your lungs in any circumstances, the amount which marijuana effects your lungs could be considered negligible if smoked in moderation. Meaning if you smoke once a day for example, your lungs will be capable of repairing themselves between smokes. However, were you to smoke constantly all day, every day, there would undoubtedly be noticable damage done over a long period of time.

Secondly, just because most heroin addicts started on weed (which, by no stretch of the imagination am I attempting to dignify as being factual, but supposing it were true) does not mean that everyone starting on weed will do heroin. In fact it doesn't even mean that .001% of marijuana users will, beyond any doubt, start on heroin. It literally means nothing. Therefore your point is completely negligible. For example; supposing that A implies B, B does not necessarily imply A and to assume so would be (to quote your own words) "not exactly what I call scientific".

I'll also have to call B.S on

12) Sex gets a whole lot better

I agree, it gets even better than "a whole lot better". Seriously, if you think that was sarcasm, you've obviously never had sex with a good high, and this is coming from a woman.

Fact: People have been smoking marijuana for thousands of years. People have been smoking cigarettes for less than 400. Cigarettes, as I'm sure you know, have been proven to kill people, marijuana has not. Don't you think that if there were any dangerous, long term effects of marijuana, that we would have found them by now?

Fact: One of the earliest studies of Marijuana use was done on Monkeys, Chimps iirc. They gave the monkeys masks which made them inhale marijuana smoke for x ammount of time. All the chimps died. Why? Because they pumped straight smoke into their lungs, now if you know anything about basic science, you'll know that when fire burns it eats up all the oxygen around it. In other words they asphyxiated the chimps by cutting off their air supply. This and every other study since which "proves" that marijuana is harmfull has been completely innacurate in one way or another.

Thank you for reading, I hope you have learned something important today. Lastly, the second part of 21 is a magnificently worded sentence, I shall be using those examples in the future.

Ciao all!

[Doc Eight or DE]

Sorry for the massive post resurrection but when I see completely idiotic comments like this I simply cannot let it slide. I probably won't ever check back here as I just joined to make this post so please, kindly desist with the flaming because of that.

4 ,5 ,6 and 8 are untrue

You along with everyone else who disagreed with anything on this list, obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Also, unless you have sources to backup your rebuttal, then don't bother posting one at all.

4. Cancer patients are prescribed marijuana (in such places where medical marijuana is legal) for nausea from chemo but also because it has been scietifically proven to not only shrink tumours but also prevent tumour growth (several links to sources were provided earlier in the thread).

5. See 4.

6. Marijuana has never been proven to affect the brain or any other organ for that matter (besides the lungs) in any way, shape or form. So are you going to sit there and tell us that it does damage to the brain, whilst every single study attempting to prove so has failed? My brother has smoked pot since he was 13 (he's now 17) and he's graduating in the top 10 (that's ten people, not ten percent) for his entire district. His gpa is 4.0. He has also maintained a healthy relationship with his gf for the last 3 years. Now tell me, how exactly has his brain been effected from 4 years of smoking?

8. This one is open to some speculation. While many people consider it to not be a gateway drug (and as someone who has dozens of friends that have smoked for years, perhaps one or two of whom have at some point done harder drugs, I have to say I agree that it is not) there is undoubtedly a strage facination that comes with your first time trying any drug which can, for the weak minded, lead to trying other things. That is not to say, however, that just because you try some other drug means you will become addicted. Most of the people I know that have done hard drugs, have only done them once though I will not deny that there are people who become addicted as well. Whether or not that is because of past use of marijuana is again, open to some speculation.

uhh... did you read how they did that study?
not exactly what i would call scientific

smoking ANYTHING on a regular basis will cause cancer. cigs, weed, tree bark, dollar bills, notebook paper... ANYTHING.. its the TAR

...

know many heroin addicts that started on heroin?
etc etc
people who smoke weed on a semi/regular basis are much more likely to try other drugs, theres no arguing that.

Uhm... Firstly, no, smoking anything does NOT give you cancer. There are specific chemicals used in cigarettes that cause cancer. Those chemicals (and I'm sure if you looked it up, you could find them) are NOT present in marijuana and they are certainly not present in everything. Though smoking is obviously not good for your lungs in any circumstances, the amount which marijuana effects your lungs could be considered negligible if smoked in moderation. Meaning if you smoke once a day for example, your lungs will be capable of repairing themselves between smokes. However, were you to smoke constantly all day, every day, there would undoubtedly be noticable damage done over a long period of time.

Secondly, just because most heroin addicts started on weed (which, by no stretch of the imagination am I attempting to dignify as being factual, but supposing it were true) does not mean that everyone starting on weed will do heroin. In fact it doesn't even mean that .001% of marijuana users will, beyond any doubt, start on heroin. It literally means nothing. Therefore your point is completely negligible. For example; supposing that A implies B, B does not necessarily imply A and to assume so would be (to quote your own words) "not exactly what I call scientific".

I'll also have to call B.S on

12) Sex gets a whole lot better

I agree, it gets even better than "a whole lot better". Seriously, if you think that was sarcasm, you've obviously never had sex with a good high, and this is coming from a woman.

Fact: People have been smoking marijuana for thousands of years. People have been smoking cigarettes for less than 400. Cigarettes, as I'm sure you know, have been proven to kill people, marijuana has not. Don't you think that if there were any dangerous, long term effects of marijuana, that we would have found them by now?

Fact: One of the earliest studies of Marijuana use was done on Monkeys, Chimps iirc. They gave the monkeys masks which made them inhale marijuana smoke for x ammount of time. All the chimps died. Why? Because they pumped straight smoke into their lungs, now if you know anything about basic science, you'll know that when fire burns it eats up all the oxygen around it. In other words they asphyxiated the chimps by cutting off their air supply. This and every other study since which "proves" that marijuana is harmfull has been completely innacurate in one way or another.

Thank you for reading, I hope you have learned something important today. Lastly, the second part of 21 is a magnificently worded sentence, I shall be using those examples in the future.

Ciao all!

+1
I'd agree about the safety of marijuana, I think the idea that adults can't choose to smoke marijuana is out right ridiculous. Not to mention the data really indicates that legalizing it would be good for economy.

[ajnast4r]

You along with everyone else who disagreed with anything on this list, obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Also, unless you have sources to backup your rebuttal, then don't bother posting one at all.

relax guy. im not anti marjiuana at ALL, quite the opposite. but you need to be realistic about its effects on human physiology.

4. Cancer patients are prescribed marijuana (in such places where medical marijuana is legal) for nausea from chemo but also because it has been scietifically proven to not only shrink tumours but also prevent tumour growth (several links to sources were provided earlier in the thread).

read what i said earlier. the referenced studies were rats injected with synthetic THC, not people smoking pot. i will read anything you have to give me on marijuana SMOKING causing reductions in tumor growth in HUMANS.

6. Marijuana has never been proven to affect the brain or any other organ for that matter (besides the lungs) in any way, shape or form.

another myth.

"the hippocampus of marijuana users was 12 percent smaller, and the amygdala was 7.1 percent smaller than among nonusers."

http://www.bio-medic...Brain--20887-2/
http://www.scienceda...00331090541.htm

Those chemicals (and I'm sure if you looked it up, you could find them) are NOT present in marijuana and they are certainly not present in everything.

"Numerous studies have shown marijuana smoke to contain carcinogens and to be an irritant to the lungs. In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke."

http://www.nida.nih..../marijuana.html



can we be done now?

Edited by ajnast4r, 11 June 2009 - 06:04 PM.

[501characters]

THC, causes the body to overproduce a protein called ApoC-111. ApoC-111 is linked to high triglycerides (blood fats) because of problems with the breakdown of blood fats in the body.

http://www.webmd.com...essage-to-heart

[adamh]

"Researchers with the National Institute on Drug Abuse say..."

That tells the story right there. Another bunch of ho's who will come up with whatever results they are paid to come up with. You think they would keep their jobs if they said pot was good for you?

[rhodeder]

I'll probably barely ever touch marijuana again. After smoking daily for months i developed panic attacks and bad anxiety and overall slow thinking. I been off of the drug for about a month now and am finally feeling normal again.

[happy]

Use a vaporizer kids :]

[TianZi]

4 ,5 ,6 and 8 are untrue

Many items on the list are untrue, not just those four. But it's hard to argue with zealots.

Edited by TianZi, 15 June 2009 - 05:38 AM.

[Gerald W. Gaston]

Tried it a few times years ago. Made me way too paranoid every time.

Here is a recent MJ article in the news:

Marijuana Damages DNA and May Cause Cancer

[russianBEAR]

The part about marijuana being a gateway drug is true, but misleading. With all this bs propaganda equating pot to heroin and other hard drugs in terms of its legal status, and perceived damage...it's only natural that one tries pot, realizes it's not nearly as destructive as the propaganda says...and decides hey, cocaine probably ain't as bad as they say either...And if you go right to heroin, it feels "natural, positive and safe" when you do it the first several times. So it's deceiving like that.

As far as the reasons listed : Smoking anything is definitely not good for you. I wish I had enough pot to cook it in brownies or something not smoke it. Sex is definitely much much better on just about any strain. 


There is a marked physical dependance from pot though. As someone who's been smoking daily for the better part of this decade, let me tell you that the shit is not pleasant: 

-Diahrrea and other digestion problems set in after about 20-24 hours of not smoking.

-Pronounced night sweats also around 24 hours after last ingestion. You also get hot/cold feet for no reason at all, weird stuff with body temperature even when not asleep.

-Dramatic loss of appetite

-Inability to sleep until your brain just shuts off completely. I've stayed up from 10 am to 11 am the next day and had to really make myself get into bed because my brain was close to overheating. 

All that goes away in about 4-5 days, after that you just feel really edgy and have a strong desire to smoke. 

The good part is that weed makes you smart, and is good for your overall health, if you have a constant supply. I say you either smoke it all the time or don't do it at all It's like a natural supplement really, helps with my muscle tone, my body recovers faster from physical activity, stamina increases greatly, and the appetite stays on point. 

If you're lazy by nature then you'd think sittin around high will make you stupid and it's true. But if you're a true explorer you'll be much smarter smokin weed and explorin

[Zamaruni]

Ok, this thread is just a teens bit elderly. But, I am new here; and I simply cannot resist. The post prior to mine makes a great point. I read the first few posts well and then skimmed to the end.

Here's what I have found to be true: Those who fight (or argue, I mean), with all the energy and fervor of a religious zealot on behalf of marijuana.... well, that kind of tells on itself.

That means you like it. A lot. No duh, right? But, the underlying message isn't the specifics of what you're asserting. It's saying, "I do this. I like it. Do not take it away from me."

I think my point is, let's get down to brass tacks. If you're arguing for Marijuana, then you're a user, way more than likely. And, you want it to not only be legalized, but you want the world to agree with you that it is good for you. Harmless. Wonderful.

If you're arguing against it... well, what is your motivation? It's probably a little more varied than the obvious pro-weeders who have a passion in their breast that creates this religious frenzy of protest for their beloved weed-god. To-wit: I am certain that these passionate, pro-weeders don't sit around and smoke, chanting to themselves dutifully, "I don't REALLY want to put this smoke in my body, but I'm doing this for my health. It is going to calm me and lower my blood pressure."

No, they like it.

You can tell by now I'm not a weed user. And, if it were legal, maybe I WOULD use it. Then again, maybe I wouldn't. Nah, probably I wouldn't. I've just been exposed to so many passionate pro-weed users who argue and argue science and math and quantum physics, ad nauseum (how do you spell that?), that it doesn't "harm" you, that the non-weed users are "conservative" and not taking into account the "truth", when in fact, what they're REALly saying is, "Dang, this is fun, and, dang, it makes me feel good. Further, I am pretty sure I'm not screwing up my life while I"m at it. Whew."

Just thought I'd call for some emotional honesty, here. But, I'm not just talking to you pro-weeders, here. I'm talking to everyone of them I've ever met, who treats weed as though they needed to worship it. Matter of fact, I saw a banner on a weed site that said, "In Weed We Trust". That's free speech, ain't nuthin wrong with that, I'm just sayin', it kind of feeds my perception that when someone gets that passionate about something they use which is putting smoke in their lungs... They Gots a Problem On Their Hands. Leastways, that's how it seems to me.



I could be wrong.

[paranoidlabrat]

8) Marijuana is NOT a gateway drug.


many dealers nowadays soak thier weed in Methamphetamine to give it that extra kick. sometimes it is soaked in Heroine.

[niner]

8) Marijuana is NOT a gateway drug.

many dealers nowadays soak thier weed in Methamphetamine to give it that extra kick. sometimes it is soaked in Heroine.

Oh BS. I don't believe you. Don't you think people can tell the difference between weed, speed, and (quick, what's a name for heroin that ends in "eed"?) umm, sky liquide? whatever.

[niner]

Since this antique thread is already resurrected anyway, I'd like to say that Zamaruni's Jul 4 post above has it quite right, IMO. You can sure tell who the pot addicts are in this thread. A long time ago, I liked it, but it gradually became non-fun for me because it just didn't really work with my physiology. If I didn't have so many friends who were addicts, I'd probably be more positive on it. As it is, I'm neutral to slightly negative. I think people ought to at least be realistic about it. If you do it, use a vaporizer.

[paranoidlabrat]

8) Marijuana is NOT a gateway drug.

many dealers nowadays soak thier weed in Methamphetamine to give it that extra kick. sometimes it is soaked in Heroine.

Oh BS. I don't believe you. Don't you think people can tell the difference between weed, speed, and (quick, what's a name for heroin that ends in "eed"?) umm, sky liquide? whatever.

it's not BS. how are you suppossed to know until you take a hit? even then it would be such a low dosage that you might not be able to tell, but you're judgemnet skills will have already been impaired. Marijuana can lead to depression, especially when you downgrade from good weed to not as good. Meth is known to cause psychosis. weed and Meth mixed can cause Depressive Psychosis. you the smoker being so arogant as to think that you could tell will not realize what has happened and that you are experiencing a psychotic state, and could end up doing something very stupid that could hurt you or someone else and then will later wake up to regret it and have no idea why you would do anything so irrational. on a more subtle level, where you can't even tell if there is Meth in the weed or not, these effects can be even more dangerous.

[paranoidlabrat]

Since this antique thread is already resurrected anyway, I'd like to say that Zamaruni's Jul 4 post above has it quite right, IMO. You can sure tell who the pot addicts are in this thread. A long time ago, I liked it, but it gradually became non-fun for me because it just didn't really work with my physiology. If I didn't have so many friends who were addicts, I'd probably be more positive on it. As it is, I'm neutral to slightly negative. I think people ought to at least be realistic about it. If you do it, use a vaporizer.

and can i recommend that you get it from a store licensed to sell medical Marijuana, rather than a street dealer...

[lynx]

8) Marijuana is NOT a gateway drug.


many dealers nowadays soak thier weed in Methamphetamine to give it that extra kick. sometimes it is soaked in Heroine.

I don't even smoke weed anymore and I know that statment is idiotic. Most Pot in the US is domestically grown and adding narcotics and speed is unnecessary and costly. I mean, where the hell did you get that from, other than 5th grade gov't anti-pot propaganda films.

[ajnast4r]

many dealers nowadays soak thier weed in Methamphetamine to give it that extra kick. sometimes it is soaked in Heroine.

old wives tail... 1) the first priority of selling drugs is profits and adding extra drugs to pot would reduce overall profits. 2) the effects of meth and dope are way different, people buy pot looking for a pot high 3) meth and heroin arent consumed in the same way. if you sprinkled some dope on pot and tried to smoke it, it wouldnt do much. they need to be vaporized not burned.

[Shannon Vyff]

It can be dangerous for people with certain genes, I've seen it cause psychosis before:

http://www.cannabis-...n_2008_04_1.pdf

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/18723841

http://www.schizophr...ail.asp?id=1355

The debate will go on, the point is that cannabis can be helpful for some people, innocuous for some-and dangerous for a few--you just have to be careful and discuss any adverse side effects with your doctor if you use it and have them.

[VampIyer]

and can i recommend that you get it from a store licensed to sell medical Marijuana, rather than a street dealer...

I've known licensed clubs to purchase from my friends (who are both licensed and unlicensed growers). The product actually IS clean, but there's no easy way to verify this. The same stuff is sold outside of clubs...

I can also say that laced weed is uncommon (at least amongst the circles I've seen, which are HUGE). That would give a distributor a bad reputation. A lot of people smoke weed exclusively.

I have seen some tainted weed, but not from any known growers. I've seen added dye and spices. That product is sent back (yep, they'll do returns).

That said, I've been clean for over a year and a half. I think I enjoyed the horticulture and the plant itself more than anything... never was a big user... too much negative impact on my cognition.

Edited by VampIyer, 29 October 2009 - 06:56 AM.

[Brain_Ischemia]

Marijuana does not cause cancer

Maybe not in the amounts typically smoked (as compared to cigarette chain smoking), but...umm...smoke is a carcinogen, like it or not.

My guess is that the preference should be to opt for marijuana baked goods and foods. Higher concentrations of THC and no smoke inhalation. (if you go for that sort of thing)