3

12/10/2008 8:49:36 PM

legalize everything.

12/10/2008 9:00:40 PM

This thread was good for a laff.

Again, GoldenGirl amazes me with her ignorance. It is incredible.

[Edited on December 10, 2008 at 9:27 PM. Reason : She's not the only one, just probably the dumbest.]

12/10/2008 9:27:35 PM

goldengirl is never right

12/10/2008 9:28:13 PM

Well, I think she might be right about her life being ruined (I mean, how much must it suck to be her?) but I'm sure it isn't because of the effects of weed.

12/10/2008 9:35:20 PM

It's not completely harmless, your lungs definitely take a hit...at least if you smoke.

I'd like to know how marijuana ruined someone's life, though.

12/10/2008 9:50:30 PM

i met a guy who ran a hostel up in Lincoln, NH and he was able to get "medical" marijuana for his condition. Although it was illegal to have it in NH, he got it in mass or where ever it was legal to get his prescription filled.

His vaporizer, if set at the right temperature, has very little effect on your lungs i any. can anyone enlighten me on the vaporizer?

[Edited on December 10, 2008 at 10:01 PM. Reason : d]

12/10/2008 10:01:06 PM

karma is a bitch ronny but looks like karma has been a bitch to you since your whole life.



Sorry I am not a pothead or that I do not sympathize with those who are.

12/10/2008 10:13:00 PM

Unless you smoke a fuckload of weed the smoke is not a health concern

stop being pussies

12/10/2008 10:13:36 PM

lol

12/10/2008 10:16:40 PM

Move to Denver and smoke all you want!

12/10/2008 10:18:09 PM

I smoke all I want now

fuck baseless, draconian laws

12/10/2008 10:21:08 PM

I know a lot of potheads. I mean... a LOT, and none of them have ever gotten busted for weed. In fact, even the guys I know who deal or dealt haven't been busted for weed. None of my friends who smoked in high school, college, or even know as young professionals have ever been busted for pot. Aside from young black men who really gets busted for weed?

12/10/2008 10:22:50 PM

can i look down on potheads while supporting the legalization of it?

because i do

12/10/2008 10:24:00 PM

Quote :

"can i look down on potheads while supporting the legalization of it? because i do"

go fuck yourself you greasy nerd

12/10/2008 10:24:57 PM

Quote :

"legalize everything."

I'm largely in favor of this.

Quote :

"can i look down on potheads while supporting the legalization of it? because i do"

I also look down on people with poor impulse control, like burnt out potheads or sad old drunks who wait outside the liquor store on a Tuesday so they can kill the shakes with a bottle of Kentucky Gentlemen.

It's one thing to enjoy something recreationally or even to excess on occasion, but it's another thing to let it run your life or be the sole focus of your life. What makes it even sadder is if it's something that isn't really physically addictive... like pot.

12/10/2008 10:30:59 PM

Quote :

"karma is a bitch ronny but looks like karma has been a bitch to you since your whole life."

What the fuck are you talking about?

You're the one with a "ruined life." Also, aren't you unemployed and looking to spend about 30 dollar for your significant other's Christmas gift?

Yes, potheads are worthless.

[Edited on December 11, 2008 at 12:15 AM. Reason : .]

12/11/2008 12:14:52 AM

Quote :

"ambrosia stop it you're a shitty troll"

Not that shitty.
A loooooooooooooooooot of you people made it worth continuing.

12/11/2008 12:15:47 AM

^
The truth, ambrosia1231, is that a lot of people are extrememly ignorant, extremely prejudiced, and extremely intolerant of marijuana and marijuana users. However, most intelligent people seem to know that that is just plain silly at best, and down-right harmful at worst.

There are distinctly different philosophies about drug use, addiction, law, etc., and I don't think it's the least bit inappropriate to examine and rank these ideas in order of worth. GoldenGirl and others are at the bottom....clearly. They repeatedly demonstrate a lack of critical logic skills, and typically remain on a superficial emotional level.

The problem with trolling about this and other sensitive issues, is that you give people like GoldenGirl an emotional sense of justification for their ignorant, prejudiced and intolerant views. That just worsens things.


I don't expect a thread in Chit Chat to solve anything, that's for sure. However, I thought I would quote a few things for truth:

Quote :

"it's so completely harmless"

Only if eaten or vaporized. Smoking weed harms your lungs, albeit much less than tobacco.

Quote :

"I agree with your cause, not for usage reasons but for economic reasons."

It's a little known fact that alcohol prohibition ended mostly because of the great depression and the need for tax revenue, not because people started tolerating alcohol or rejecting gangster violence.

Quote :

"it isn't addictive"

Correct.

Quote :

"weed has killed zero people"

As far as I know, this is true. Marijuana is 100% non-toxic, which is extremely rare in the world of chemicals. Of course, some will [incorrectly] claim that deaths that occurred while under the influence of weed would somehow count as a "weed caused death." It is sad that these people have such piss poor logic.

[Edited on December 11, 2008 at 9:09 AM. Reason : ]

12/11/2008 9:07:58 AM

Quote :

"Only if eaten or vaporized. Smoking weed harms your lungs, albeit much less than tobacco."

It's actually been shown to prevent lung cancer. THC when injected in mice has also been shown to slow/stop the spread of cancer.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/17/health/webmd/main2696726.shtml

But there are multiple ways of smoking it that could introduce carcinogens like a blunt, for example, would probably be the worst way.

12/11/2008 9:22:48 AM

Quote :

""i think it's funny. those people aren't going anywhere in life anyway.""

hahah, why dont you go and vandalize some more property?

i smoke with heard nurses, a handful of lawyers, a Duke University Executive (well, he just quit to be a consultant making around $160.00 an hour) and a medical doctor almost on a weekly basis.

yeah, these people suck at life

Quote :

"weed has killed zero people"

in the over 10,000 year history of marijuana there hasnt not been one reported over dose
people may die being involved in the illegal trade of drugs but that is a whole different story.

Quote :

"not entirely true. it may not be chemically addictive like other drugs but it can be addictive. and I've seen its effects. and it has affected my life in a very negative way and no i do not smoke. it has ruined my life."

uhh, very fucking true. pot has 0 addictive properties although it is highly habitual.
just b/c you dont care for it doesnt mean that the medicinal properties of the drugs shouldnt be ignored.

12/11/2008 9:28:43 AM

I'd also like to point out that most, if not all, studies that purport to show that smoking marijuana leads to disease are simply statistical analyses using prohibition-era data. In other words, there are impurities in some weed because it's completely unregulated. You could be smoking fertilizer, glue particles, dust, who knows? Studies purporting any claims that pot smoke is unhealthy should be completely ignored unless the study was done with lab-controlled 100% pure samples and smoked in a manner that didn't introduce any other variables. (No papers, no wooden pipes, no butane lighters, etc.)

12/11/2008 9:41:03 AM

Quote :

"Of course, some will [incorrectly] claim that deaths that occurred while under the influence of weed would somehow count as a "weed caused death." It is sad that these people have such piss poor logic."

Wait, why wouldn't it?

Just like how if someone gets drunk, drives, and killed someone because they were drunk, wouldn't you consider that an alcohol-caused (or at the very least, alcohol-related) death?

12/11/2008 9:55:18 AM

my idea to shoot down

1. legalize it ( i do not smoke)
2. Let the Governemnt tax the holy shit out of it (so i get paid more..)
3. Only US Farmed weed can be used (so nobody can take ourrrr jeeeerbs... and help the economy?!)
4. Continue the war on drugs to prevent drugs from being smugled into country (drug monoploly ftw.. mo money)
5. Someone will abuse the system and screw it up for eveyone (mo money... mo problems)
6. Weed will be outlawed... again (i wont care)

[Edited on December 11, 2008 at 10:10 AM. Reason : .]

12/11/2008 10:06:53 AM

Incredible idea.

Real original.

12/11/2008 10:10:52 AM

^^^
It would be alcohol-related.
Also, car-related, road-related, speed-related, massive-object-related, physics-related, trauma-related, motion-related, wheel-related, time-related, driving-skill-related, how-awake-you-are-related, how-responsible-you-are-with-alcohol-related, etc.

It would not be an alcohol-caused death. Even dying from alcohol poisoning isn't an alcohol-caused death. Alcohol isn't the cause. An excessive amount of alcohol in your system is the cause. And that didn't happen on it's own. Either you voluntarily drank the alcohol, or someone forced it into you. Assuming the former, it's your actions (and/or lack of actions,) that are the cause of the poisoning. It's your [irresponsible] decision making and acting on those decisions that are the cause of the death.

Anyone who defends guns likely knows all about the confusion surrounding claims of [non-sentient] objects being capable of causing harm or death.

12/11/2008 10:15:13 AM

i thought i wasn't that weed was non toxic, just that the ld50 is high enough that you'd have to do something crazy like inject a shit ton of thc directly to the blood stream to die from it

12/11/2008 10:18:20 AM

Quote :

"Smoking weed harms your lungs"

only if you're a huge pussy so this isn't a problem for many people

Quote :

"You could be smoking fertilizer, glue particles, dust, who knows?"

solution: stop smoking hocus pocus like a middle schooler and spend a little bit of money on your crop

Quote :

"in the over 10,000 year history of marijuana there hasnt not been one reported over dose"

gunzz i'm sure if overdose were possible either you or i would have been found dead by now

I want to hear more from GoldenGirl and the "I suck balls at life and need to blame weed -- furthermore I need to ban everybody from using it" crew

12/11/2008 10:32:44 AM

Quote :

"gunzz i'm sure if overdose were possible either you or i would have been found dead by now"

haha, that is very true

12/11/2008 10:37:00 AM

Quote :

"every since that lynching thing, the internets have been so serious"

what lynching thing?

what'd i miss?

12/11/2008 10:57:43 AM

http://www.wral.com/news/news_briefs/story/2019858/

12/11/2008 10:59:20 AM

^^^^^

Quote :

"In November 2007 it was reported that CBD reduces growth of aggressive human breast cancer cells in vitro and reduces their invasiveness. It thus represents the first non-toxic exogenous agent that can lead to down-regulation of tumor aggressiveness.[30][31] .... [30] ^ McAllister SD, Christian RT, Horowitz MP, Garcia A, Desprez PY (2007). "Cannabidiol as a novel inhibitor of Id-1 gene expression in aggressive breast cancer cells". Mol. Cancer Ther. 6 (11): 2921-7. doi:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-07-0371. PMID 18025276. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18025276 [31] ^ Article on BBC site. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7098340.stm"

Quote :

"Excerpt from U.S. Federal Court Decision in the Case of Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics, et al., vs. US Drug Enforcement Administration (IRS): In the Matter of MARIJUANA MEDICAL RESCHEDULING PETITION September 6, 1988. Docket No. 86-22. Francis L. Young, DEA Administrative Law Judge Highlights of the Judge's decision: "Based upon the facts established in this record and set out above, one must reasonably conclude that there is accepted safety for use of marijuana under medical supervision." "To conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious...." "The cannabis plant considered as a whole has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, there is no lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision and it may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II. The judge recommends that the Administrator transfer cannabis ." Detailed excerpts: Section III: Issues To Be Heard and Decided in This Case Principle issue: Whether the marijuana plant, considered as a whole, may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II of the schedules established by the Controlled Substances Act. Subsidiary issues: 1.) Whether the marijuana plant has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions. 2.) Whether there is a lack of accepted safety for use of the marijuana plant under medical supervision. VIII: Cannabis/Marijuana's Accepted Safety for Use Under Medical Supervision 3. The most obvious concern when dealing with drug safety is the possibility of lethal effects. Can the drug cause death? 4. Nearly all medicines have toxic, potentially lethal effects. But marijuana (cannabis) is not such a substance. There is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented cannabis-induced fatality. 5. This is a remarkable statement. First, the record on cannabis encompasses 5,000 years of human experience. Second, cannabis is now used daily by enormous numbers of people throughout the world. Estimates suggest that 20-million to 50-million Americans routinely, albeit illegally, smoke marijuana without the benefit of direct medical supervision. Yet, despite this long history of use and the extraordinarily high numbers of social smokers, there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming cannabis has caused a single death. 6. By contrast aspirin, a commonly used, over-the-counter medicine, causes hundreds of deaths each year. 7. Drugs in medicine are routinely given what is called an LD-50. The LD-50 rating indicates at what dosage fifty percent of test animals receiving a drug will die as a result of drug induced toxicity. A number of researchers have attempted to determine cannabis's LD-50 rating in test animal, without success. Simply stated, researchers have been unable to give animals enough cannabis to induce death. 8. At present it is estimated that cannabis's LD-50 is around 1:20,000 or 1:40,000. In layman terms this means that in order to induce death a marijuana smoker would have to consume 20,000 to 40,000 time as much cannabis as is contained in one marijuana cigarette. NIDA-supplied marijuana cigarettes weigh approximately .9 grams. A smoker would theoretically have to consume nearly 1,500 pounds of cannabis within about 15 minutes to induce a lethal response. 9. In practical terms, cannabis cannot induce a lethal response as a result of drug-related toxicity. 10. Another common medical way to determine drug safety is called the therapeutic ratio. This ratio defines the difference between a therapeutically effective dose and a dose capable of inducing adverse effects. 11. A commonly used over-the-counter product like aspirin has a therapeutic ratio of around 1:20. Two aspirins are the recommended dose for adult patients. Twenty times this dose, forty aspirins, may cause a lethal reaction in some patients, and will almost certainly cause gross injury to the digestive system, including extensive internal bleeding. 12. The therapeutic ratio for prescribed drugs is commonly around 1:10 or lower. Valium, a commonly used prescriptive drug, may cause very serious biological damage if patients use 10 times the recommended dose. 13. There are, of course, prescriptive drugs which have much lower therapeutic ratios. Many of the drugs used to treat patients with cancer, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis are highly toxic. The therapeutic ratio of some of the drugs used in anti-neoplastic therapies, for example, are regarded as extremely toxic poisons with therapeutic ratios that may fall below 1:1.5. These drugs also have very low LD-50 ratios and can result in toxic, even lethal reactions, while being properly employed. 14. By contrast, marijuana's therapeutic ratio, like its LD-50, is impossible to quantify because it is so high. 15. In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can result in toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough cannabis to induce death. 16. Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis cannabis can be safely used with a supervised routine of medical care. 18. There have been occasional instances of panic reaction in patients who have smoked marijuana. These have occurred in cannabis-naive persons, usually older persons, who are extremely anxious over the forthcoming chemotherapy and troubled over the illegality of their having obtained the cannabis. Such persons have responded to simple person-to-person communication with a doctor and have sustained no long term mental or physical damage. If cannabis could be legally obtained, and administered in an open, medically-supervised session rather than surreptitiously, the few instances of such adverse reaction doubtless would be reduced in number and severity. 19. Other reported side effects of cannabis have been minimal. Sedation often results. Sometimes mild euphoria is experienced. Short periods of increased pulse rate and of dizziness are occasionally experienced. Cannabis should not be used by persons anxious or depressed or psychotic or with certain other health problems. Physicians could readily screen out such patients if cannabis were being employed as an agent under medical supervision."

continued...

[Edited on December 11, 2008 at 11:06 AM. Reason : ]

12/11/2008 11:01:02 AM

...continued...

Quote :

" Discussion of Legal Obligations The Act, at 21 U.S.C. 812(b)(1)(C), requires that marijuana be retained in Schedule I if "there is a lack of accepted safety for use of [it] under medical supervision, then it is unreasonable to keep it in Schedule I. The only proper question for the Agency here is: Have a significant minority of physicians accepted cannabis as safe for use under medical supervision? The gist of the Agency's case against recognizing cannabis's acceptance as safe is to assert that more studies, more tests are needed. The Agency has presented highly qualified and respected experts, researchers and others, who hold that view. But, as demonstrated in the discussion in Section V above, it is unrealistic and unreasonable to require unanimity of opinion on the question confronting us. For the reasons there indicated, acceptance by a significant minority of doctors is all that can reasonably be required. This record makes it abundantly clear that such acceptance exists in the United States. Findings are made above with respect to the safety of medically supervised use of cannabis by glaucoma patients. Those findings are relevant to the safety issue even though the administrative law judge does not find accepted use in treatment of glaucoma to have been shown. Based upon the facts established in this record and set out above one must reasonably conclude that there is accepted safety for use of cannabis under medical supervision. To conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious. IX. Conclusion & Recommended Decision Based upon the foregoing facts and reasoning, the administrative law judge conclude that the provisions of the Act permit and require the transfer of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II. The judge realizes strong emotions are aroused on both sides of any discussion concerning the use of cannabis. Nonetheless it is essential for this Agency, and its Administrator, calmly and dispassionately to review the evidence of record, correctly apply the law, and act accordingly. Marijuana can be harmful. Marijuana can be abused. But the same is true of dozens of drugs or substances which are listed in Schedule II so that they can be employed in treatment by physicians in proper cases, despite their abuse potential. Transferring cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II will not, of course, make it immediately available in pharmacies throughout the country for legitimate use in treatment. Other government authorities, federal and State, will doubtless have to act before that might occur. But this Agency is not charged with responsibility, or given authority, over the myriad other regulatory decisions that may be required before cannabis can actually be legally available. This Agency is charged merely with determining the placement of cannabis pursuant to the provisions of the Act. Under our system of laws the responsibilities of other regulatory bodies are the concerns of those bodies, not of this Agency. There are those who, in all sincerity, argue that the transfer of cannabis to Schedule II will "send a signal" that marijuana is "OK" generally for recreational use. This argument is specious. It presents no valid reason for refraining from taking an action required by law in light of the evidence. If cannabis should be placed in Schedule II, in obedience to the law, than that is where cannabis should be placed, regardless of misinterpretation of the placement by some. The reasons for the placement can, and should, be clearly explained at the time the action is taken. The fear of sending such a signal cannot be permitted to override the legitimate need, amply demonstrated in this record, of countless suffers for the relief cannabis can provide when prescribed by a physician in a legitimate case. The evidence in this record clearly shows that cannabis has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress from great numbers of very ill people, and doing so with safety under medical supervision. It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the evidence in this record. The administrative law judge recommends that the Administrator conclude that the cannabis plant considered as a whole has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, that there is no lack of accepted safety for use of it under medical supervision and that it may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II. The judge recommends that the Administrator transfer cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule II. - by Francis L. Young, Administrative Law Judge for the Drug Enforcement Agency"

12/11/2008 11:01:35 AM

i wanna be a pothead

12/11/2008 11:47:31 AM

everybody in this thread who claimed pot users amount to nothing are basically jacklegs themselves

gg

12/11/2008 5:31:30 PM

I know a lot of worthless potheads, but I think it's a correlation and not a causation. They were probably destined to amount to nothing at a very young age and decided sometime after that to smoke pot constantly.

The only negative attribute I associate with marijuana is that it binds strongly to the estrogen receptors in the body, which can have some negative side effects in men. From what I've read, the molecule that specifically competes with estradiol in the body isn't even psychoactive, so scientists could potentially develop strains that didn't even contain the molecule with estrogenic activities. Unfortunately, this type of research is not going to happen in the US under the current drug laws.

12/13/2008 10:59:18 AM

another thread full of pothead lobbyists

why bother reading

12/13/2008 11:07:35 AM

12/13/2008 11:09:02 AM

Quote :

"Quote : "Smoking weed harms your lungs" only if you're a huge pussy so this isn't a problem for many people Quote : "You could be smoking fertilizer, glue particles, dust, who knows?" solution: stop smoking hocus pocus like a middle schooler and spend a little bit of money on your crop "

LOL

12/13/2008 11:12:39 AM

Weed is so fucking white trash - grow up and do some blow like the rest of the adults.

12/13/2008 11:22:16 AM

i simply cannot help but wonder, after seeing the kind of negative image pot was given by the state, if , perhaps, maybe meth or crack really aren't that bad.
it's a huge black eye for the trustworthiness of our officials every time it's legalization is shot down
but i dont smoke because I can't handle chemicals of any sort. I can get goofy on seltzer water i bet

12/13/2008 12:21:20 PM

Quote :

"Weed is so fucking white trash - grow up and do some blow like the rest of the adults."

Wow... everyone knows that there are all types of marijuana users. All you just did was reveal to everyone what a fucking loser you must be to associate marijuana users with "white trash", while also revealing your incredibly immature attitude towards drugs use, as though it were just an element of popular fashion. Grow the fuck up, dude.

Quote :

"You could be smoking fertilizer, glue particles, dust, who knows?"

Quote :

"solution: stop smoking hocus pocus like a middle schooler and spend a little bit of money on your crop"

Translation: The negative health effects of marijuana prohibition disproportionately affect the poor.

Quote :

"it's a huge black eye for the trustworthiness of our officials."

The war on drugs, marijuana in particular, has led an entire generation (or two,) to lose an incredible amount of respect for the rule of law. Truly sad.

12/13/2008 12:45:51 PM

I know several highly successful people that smoke weed, and partaking does not hinder the chase for their goals in life. Most of them are college graduates and some of them have high paying jobs just like myself. Marijuana does not hinder us from doing great things. If you give up the chase for your dreams, then it will be your own doing, and not some plants. There are many more people out there that drink too much, fail at school/life, and end up making nothing of themselves, that fly well under the proverbial radar. At the end of the day, people will believe what they want too about Marijuana, but I challenge anyone to convincingly and scientifically argue that alcohol is indeed less harmful to humanity, than little old pot. It cannot be done. Any logical and reasonable person will attest that this knowledge in-and-of-itself is compelling evidence for the legalization or decriminalization of Marijuana. If that is not possible, then it is only fair by rule to then make alcohol illegal.

[Edited on December 13, 2008 at 1:58 PM. Reason : -]

12/13/2008 1:43:01 PM

what a wonderful thread

[Edited on December 13, 2008 at 2:02 PM. Reason : addictive != habitual ( theres a huge fucking difference )]

12/13/2008 2:01:46 PM

Quote :

"I challenge anyone to convincingly and scientifically argue that alcohol is indeed less harmful to humanity, than little old pot. It cannot be done. "

that is an incredibly short-sighted statement. There are a multitude of health benefits that can be gained by moderate intake of wine and beer. just because a person can fatally overdose on alcohol doesn't mean that alcohol is the scourge of the earth compared to marijuana.

12/13/2008 5:41:01 PM

Alcohol is exponentially more harmful to humanity than Marijuana. When comparing the drugs potential to harm, you should consider worst case scenario situations, including overdosing and prolonged/chronic usage. Granted, with moderate usage, Alcohol is not lethal and can improve some heart conditions. However, Marijuana has medicinal purposes that do not depend on a certain dosage and can never be lethal. Furthermore, that is not really addressing the overall point, which is to measure the potential harmful effects of each drug. When following suit, you will find that alcohol is indeed more harmful to humanity than pot could ever dream of being. It is important to consider all the factors and situations, not just select situations when assessing the entirety of a substance.

-If you are sufficiently dependent on Alcohol and experience a sudden withdrawal as opposed to a gradual detox, it can actually kill you.

-Obviously, Alcohol poisoning/overdosing will kill you.

-There is absolutely no comparison to Marijuana in regards to either case, on any scale. You cannot die from withdrawal or die from overdosing. Both of these factors drastically reduce the harmfulness of the substance by any standard.

It is clear that Alcohol is a much more harmful legal drug compared to little old illegal pot when compared side by side and taking into account all scenarios. Therefore, Marijuana is indeed less harmful to humanity than Alcohol. When carefully accessing both substances, any argument suggesting that Alcohol is less harmful than Marijuana is scientifically ridiculous.

[Edited on December 13, 2008 at 7:10 PM. Reason : -]

12/13/2008 6:48:35 PM

You can't just highlight the dangers of alcohol without looking at the benefits of alcohol. Alcohol has medicinal effects that can benefit nearly anyone. alcohol consumption has been shown to raise HDL levels in the body and reduce hypertension. Moderate alcohol consumption also fights off Type II diabetes, hypertension, the common cold, etc. Scientific testing has proven that people who consume alcohol live longer and healthier lives, suffer from less heart attacks and strokes, and are more likely to survive a heart attack if they do have one. Alcohol can help with improved memory cognition and also reduce the effects of mental deterioration such as dementia and Alzheimers. Alcohol helps maintain healthy kidneys and helps fight off rheumatoid arthritis. The list of heath benefits from alcohol seems to continue endlessly.

The majority of touters for medical marijuana usage are focused on chronic pain relief, with a handful of other benefits such as glaucoma relief and appetite increase thrown in occasionally. These are good uses for marijuana if they are truly treated by the drug, and I'm pretty sure the appetite increase could be very beneficial for people such as AIDS patients or people with muscle wasting diseases. However, these medical uses aren't something that the majority of humanity need as much as some of the global health benefits of alcohol usage.

Also, you can't just make blanket statements about the potentially fatal side effects of alcohol make the drug a bigger curse on humanity than pot. A person that spends every waking moment of their life stoned off their ass isn't any better than a person who spends every waking moment getting drunk. If anything, I would give the upper hand to alcohol in this situation because alcohol will eventually kill off it's worthless dependents and prevent them from becoming a burden to the rest of humanity.

You can't just prioritize what is beneficial to humanity by focusing on how safe they are in an abuse situation. Maybe you want to live in a Nanny State that only allows people to do things that have no potential for harm, but I'd at least like to think that the majority of humanity is capable of protecting themselves on their own.

12/14/2008 10:44:34 AM

http://www.theantidrug.org/advice/shulginuniv.html

Alexander Shulgin - Lecture at the University. anyone who is interested in the current state of the war on drugs and what it is doing to our nation will find this as a good read.

12/14/2008 10:53:02 AM

^^ exactly which is what we are living in now a nanny state

Drugs are illegal because people might abuse them, yet alcohol and tobacco, the latter of which i've never heard be good for anything other than giving you cancer. Tobacco should be outlawed based on the fact that it falls under all 3 requirements to be a schedule 1 drug

from wikipedia

1. The drug or other substance has high potential for abuse.
2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.


how many people do you know of that have to have a smoke, name me the medical treatments its used for(or atleast show me where health officials have said the medicinal purposes outweigh the bad effects), and again dr's all over the place are telling people not to smoke cigaretts

and how many people do you know of who abuse alcohol. the requirements for schedule 2 follow

# The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
# The drug or other substance has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States or a currently accepted medical use with severe restrictions.
# Abuse of the drug or other substances may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence

many people abuse alcohol, i'd say it has a pretty high potential for abuse, it can be used for medicinal purposes in the right dosage, and people can die from withdrawl i'd say thas a pretty severe physical dependence

basically if we want to keep pot on schedule 1 then we should schedule the 2 practically non restricted(you only have to be of age) legal drugs accordingly

[Edited on December 14, 2008 at 11:05 AM. Reason : .]

12/14/2008 11:04:44 AM

smoke em up

12/14/2008 11:19:42 AM