Your thoughts on legalizing marijuana?

[passiflora]

Really now? <_< Hemp grows very quickly and easily. It thrives like a weed and requires little attention, plus it's beneficial to the soil instead of detrimental.

Just to be clear, I meant that hemp was one of the reasons that legalization (or at least relaxing the laws a little) could be a good thing. :P As it stands (at least in Canada), you have to do a ton of paperwork just to get a permit that only lasts for a year. Rinse and repeat next year. It can be discouraging to people who want to grow hemp, which is unfortunate. Maybe legalization of marijuana would make the government less paranoid about hemp growers, I'm not sure.

 

Actually there have been a lot of studies on hemp oil. Hemp oil derives from hemp seeds and has been used for thousands of years in teas and the like for it's medicinal properties. Hemp is one of the most medicinal plants in the world. It's my personal opinion that pharmaceutical companies and big business are withholding more funding of this potentional cure for personal gain. The current restrictions against hemp were put in place simply for big money to make even more money.

 

I personally believe that hemp oil is a legitimate cure for cancer. More studies need to be done of course and more experimentation. It's just hard for me to deny all of this evidence. I've done so much research. I've read so many testimonials about how people were cured of there cancer from hemp oil.

Most sites purporting marijuana as a cure tend to be sensationalist (beware).

 

I don't know of any studies that used hemp oil specifically; they're all usually a specific compound like THC or CBD, which is different than a large mix of different molecules with potential interactions like hemp oil or the marijuana plant would have.

 

My only other issue is that it's almost always a test tube (e.g. TIMP-1) or animal study, or maybe a case-control. That would be an absolutely unacceptable level of evidence for any other drug (and ironically, basing decisions on a similar level of evidence would probably generate a lot of uproar among people who support 'natural' cures if it was a synthetic drug in question).

We need placebo-controlled RCT trials before approving something. Drug testing is horrendously expensive, time consuming, and complicated. Absolutely, we should be trying to find out more about marijuana and it's relation to cancer, but it would be downright unethical for the medical community to consider it a cure at this point in time.

 

Hemp oil can also help decrease anxiety, pain and inflammation in cancer patients. Researchers at the American association of cancer research have done studies stating that THC helps stop the spread of brain cancer in human tumor biopsies. I've yet to find any studies that state it induces growth of any cancer.

I'm not denying it has it's uses and that it may have more uses in the future, I just think it's important to distinguish that it's not a miracle cure for cancer. It's promising for the treatment of some cancers. I've lost my links on inducing cancer growth, but I did find this (it says that some tests indicate marijuana smoke may be mutagenic, case control studies on mouth/throat cancers, casual association with prostate cancer, etc.).

 

I'm not targeting you specifically here - you've made some very good points, and certainly the evidence weighs in more on the positive side. It just doesn't mean that marijuana is harmless, as an alarmingly high proportion of the population seems to believe.

 

They don't, you're right. However I'll say again, it is easier for a minor to get there hands on marijuana than it is alcohol. Someone who is underage can't just walk down the street to the liquore store and buy a six pack. However the age of that kid does not matter to most drug dealers as long as they have the cash. Legalizing marijuana would help to keep kids away from drug dealers, IMO.

I think you're right about this (depending on location though; where I grew up, it was way easier to obtain alcohol, but where my boyfriend grew up it was way easier to obtain marijuana). I saw 'gateway drug' mentioned earlier in the thread and I think this is a pertinent point - I've heard that part of gateway theory is that obtaining marijuana introduces people to illegal channels and can make it easier to obtain other (worse) drugs in the future. Some people think legalization might help curb that. :)

 

This is debateable. There have been plenty of studies from Scientific America, American Medical Assosiation, among any others that state regular marijuana use is not harmful on your lungs. There is still a huge debate among the medical community as to which researchers are right. I'm on the fence with whether or not marijuana use has any detrimental effects on the lungs long term. Whatever the case, it is much better on your lungs than cigarettes. There have also been studies showing that marijuana can actually increase lung function. You can find one of them here - http://www.inquisitr...-recent-study/. More research needs to be done on whether it could actually be used to treat asthma. I'm sure there are probably better treatmeants out there for that.

That's the problem - it's a debate. It's easy to nitpick studies that say it improves lung function or that it's detrimental. I'm on the fence too; it was more to make the previously stated point that, marijuana isn't some kind of conclusively 100% safe medical miracle.

 

I brought up the fact that a basic dosage of marijuana has been shown to NOT effect driving skills. In simulators, people who'd injested a dose of THC drove just as well as sober people.

 

And nobody wants to see me drive not under the influence of weed. I'd probably have a panic attack and accidentally kill everyone on the road.

I copied & pasted what you cited into Google ("The most meaningful recent study measuring driver "culpability" (i.e., who is at fault) in 3,400 crashes over a 10-year period indicated that drivers with THC concentrations of less than five ng/mL in their blood have a crash risk no higher than that of drug-free users.²..."), and found the original study designated by the superscripted 2. Curiously, it states: Drivers with Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in their blood had a significantly higher likelihood of being culpable than drug-free drivers (odds ratio (OR) 2.7, 95% CI 1.02-7.0). For drivers with blood THC concentrations of 5 ng/ml or higher the odds ratio was greater and more statistically significant (OR 6.6, 95% CI 1.5-28.0).

I.e. there is culpability at all levels, it's just higher when >5 ng/mL. Even taking your source at its word and supposing 5 ng/mL is safe, that means that smoking while or up to ~2 hours before driving is still unsafe.

 

Driving & marijuana is another one of those things where it's easy to nitpick studies. While I have no doubt it's possible find studies that say it's safe, it's also possible to find ones that say it's unsafe (like this one and this one).

 

Regardless, we still don't have a way to consistently and non-invasively measure impairment and more research needs to be done.

[~Xandria]

Most sites purporting marijuana as a cure tend to be sensationalist (beware).

 

I don't know of any studies that used hemp oil specifically; they're all usually a specific compound like THC or CBD, which is different than a large mix of different molecules with potential interactions like hemp oil or the marijuana plant would have.

 

My only other issue is that it's almost always a test tube (e.g. TIMP-1) or animal study, or maybe a case-control. That would be an absolutely unacceptable level of evidence for any other drug (and ironically, basing decisions on a similar level of evidence would probably generate a lot of uproar among people who support 'natural' cures if it was a synthetic drug in question).

We need placebo-controlled RCT trials before approving something. Drug testing is horrendously expensive, time consuming, and complicated. Absolutely, we should be trying to find out more about marijuana and it's relation to cancer, but it would be downright unethical for the medical community to consider it a cure at this point in time.

Although this may be a bit unrelated I'd just like to say that the current cancer drugs are a highly profitable and lucrative business to big pharmaceutical companies and doctors alike. They only want to support funding on research for very expensive drugs that don't address the cause of the problem. Despite investing billions of dollars in research in the US we have yet to make a signficant difference in decreasing the cancer rate. That being said, a lot of the drugs that are currently being used for cancer come from very flawed and biased research studies as well. For decades there have been numerous reports of cancer researchers fabricating studies for there own personal gain. I'm sure this doesn't come as a surprise to you coming from America. Our healthcare system is so beyond corrupt it makes me sick.

 

Sorry, I got a bit off topic there. I completely agree that more studies need to be done. I'm not advocating that hemp oil is a cure for ALL cancers. In order to find out which types of cancers it would help cure, there needs to be lots more research. Sadly, I don't think that will come to light anytime soon and it's a shame really, because so far the research looks promising. It's my personal opinion that there hasn't been enough studies on hemp oil for a very specific reason. That reason being that if they did discover it to be a cure for certain types of cancer then those big companies would lose money. This is because whether legally or illegally people can make there own hemp oil relatively easily. So even if they did come out with studies absolutley proving that it is a cure for certain cancers it would most likely be kept away from the public. I hope I don't sound like some sort of conspiracy nut for saying that but it would amaze you how very corrupt and evil these pharmaceutical companies are here in America.

 

I'm not denying it has it's uses and that it may have more uses in the future, I just think it's important to distinguish that it's not a miracle cure for cancer. It's promising for the treatment of some cancers. I've lost my links on inducing cancer growth, but I did find this (it says that some tests indicate marijuana smoke may be mutagenic, case control studies on mouth/throat cancers, casual association with prostate cancer, etc.).

 

I'm not targeting you specifically here - you've made some very good points, and certainly the evidence weighs in more on the positive side. It just doesn't mean that marijuana is harmless, as an alarmingly high proportion of the population seems to believe.

Right. I definitley agree with you. I don't expect that it will cure all cancers or even the majority, but still. Finding a cure for even one type of cancer would be a huge breakthrough. In my other post I was stating that I've yet to find any studies that hemp oil causes cancer, not marijuana smoke. That's a different story. Thank you for your post, because you have brought up some great points as well. After further reading there have been studies linking marijuana smoke to prostate cancer, mouth/throat cancer, and a few others I think. Any kind of smoke entering your lungs is bound to be hazardous in one way or another. There are however much safer ways to ingest THC. Vaporizers inparticular produce the same amount of THC but without the harmful toxins. Several studies have found that that when using a vaporizer there is virtually no exposure to harmful chemicals. There is also edible marijuana which can be heated and made into oils, butters, etc, which are then used to make brownies, cookies, lollipops, and teas.

 

I think you're right about this (depending on location though; where I grew up, it was way easier to obtain alcohol, but where my boyfriend grew up it was way easier to obtain marijuana). I saw 'gateway drug' mentioned earlier in the thread and I think this is a pertinent point - I've heard that part of gateway theory is that obtaining marijuana introduces people to illegal channels and can make it easier to obtain other (worse) drugs in the future. Some people think legalization might help curb that. :)

I disagree that marijuana is a gateway drug. This is a myth. I won't write awhole lot about this because I already said what I needed to earlier in the thread. If you're interested here is a link that explains why the gateway theory is false. At first glace this site would seem biased, but they have lots of links that credit there sources to various studies. So if you have the time, it's a great article. - http://stopthedrugwa...arijuana_not_ga

 

I copied & pasted what you cited into Google ("The most meaningful recent study measuring driver "culpability" (i.e., who is at fault) in 3,400 crashes over a 10-year period indicated that drivers with THC concentrations of less than five ng/mL in their blood have a crash risk no higher than that of drug-free users.²..."), and found the original study designated by the superscripted 2. Curiously, it states: Drivers with Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in their blood had a significantly higher likelihood of being culpable than drug-free drivers (odds ratio (OR) 2.7, 95% CI 1.02-7.0). For drivers with blood THC concentrations of 5 ng/ml or higher the odds ratio was greater and more statistically significant (OR 6.6, 95% CI 1.5-28.0).

I.e. there is culpability at all levels, it's just higher when >5 ng/mL. Even taking your source at its word and supposing 5 ng/mL is safe, that means that smoking while or up to ~2 hours before driving is still unsafe.

 

Driving & marijuana is another one of those things where it's easy to nitpick studies. While I have no doubt it's possible find studies that say it's safe, it's also possible to find ones that say it's unsafe (like this one and this one).

 

Regardless, we still don't have a way to consistently and non-invasively measure impairment and more research needs to be done.

I don't have much to add here, because you covered pretty much everything I wanted to say about this. & Did the research for me. :) I will say that I once watched a documentary that recorded data on a marijuana user, meth/crystal user, cocaine user, heroine user, and an alcoholic. They made them preform various tasks and one of those was driving. They had an open parking lot with cones, stop lights, the whole bit. The meth, cocaine, and alcoholic were all very reckless drivers. They went notably faster than the marijuana and heroine users. When the marijuana user was asked to drive there reaction time was slowed (which is a common side effect of marijuana). While this may not be as dangerous as someone driving under the influence of alcohol, it is still dangerous.

 

I also have personal experience with this as my mother used to drive me around after using marijuana. While we never did have an accident (luckily) there were times when we came close. I was a kid at that time, but I was still always afraid to get in the car with her. Another example would be my uncle, who has drove after using marijuana for ten years now. He has never once had an accident and drives just fine while on it. So I do admit that there are exceptions to this rule. I still don't think it excuses it though. passiflora summed up my thoughts on this pretty well "Regardless, we still don't have a way to consistently and non-invasively measure impairment and more research needs to be done."

 

Yeah. I think you're thinking marijuana plants that produce smokeable bud. Hemp is different. You don't have to control the climate to grow it.

You do know that hemp comes from the marijuana plant, right? It's harvested from the stem of the plant and can be harvested whether or not the plant produces bud. Unless I misunderstood you.

[anorexorcist]

You do know that hemp comes from the marijuana plant, right? It's harvested from the stem of the plant and can be harvested whether or not the plant produces bud. Unless I misunderstood you.

 

It is easier to grow the plant without bud, because it doesn't have to sit as long/doesn't require as much water. Also, from what I understand, does not require daylight cycles, which for me is probably the most frustrating part of growing smokeable pot. If we were to make hemp a cash crop, it would be plants without bud, and the growers would continue to produce the marijuana.

 

I was just saying that hemp is an easier product to grow than actual buds. Since the hemp will be there WAY earlier than the buds.

[passiflora]

Although this may be a bit unrelated I'd just like to say that the current cancer drugs are a highly profitable and lucrative business to big pharmaceutical companies and doctors alike. They only want to support funding on research for very expensive drugs that don't address the cause of the problem. Despite investing billions of dollars in research in the US we have yet to make a signficant difference in decreasing the cancer rate. That being said, a lot of the drugs that are currently being used for cancer come from very flawed and biased research studies as well. For decades there have been numerous reports of cancer researchers fabricating studies for there own personal gain. I'm sure this doesn't come as a surprise to you coming from America. Our healthcare system is so beyond corrupt it makes me sick.

 

Sorry, I got a bit off topic there. I completely agree that more studies need to be done. I'm not advocating that hemp oil is a cure for ALL cancers. In order to find out which types of cancers it would help cure, there needs to be lots more research. Sadly, I don't think that will come to light anytime soon and it's a shame really, because so far the research looks promising. It's my personal opinion that there hasn't been enough studies on hemp oil for a very specific reason. That reason being that if they did discover it to be a cure for certain types of cancer then those big companies would lose money. This is because whether legally or illegally people can make there own hemp oil relatively easily. So even if they did come out with studies absolutley proving that it is a cure for certain cancers it would most likely be kept away from the public. I hope I don't sound like some sort of conspiracy nut for saying that but it would amaze you how very corrupt and evil these pharmaceutical companies are here in America.

I think there is profit in curing cancer, and regardless, hiding a cure isn't profitable for anyone, even if the treatment in question isn't all too profitable in and of itself. I'm not from America so maybe it's different/worse down there, but I just don't see how this line of thinking would be beneficial for pharmaceutical companies. On another note, rates of cancer are increasing because we are living longer and have poor lifestyles, but cancer prognosis is getting better and better due to early detection and more effective treatments.

 

Here are a couple ways of looking at it. They might be considered pessimistic, but I believe they're reasonable conclusions:

• If hemp oil and the compounds within it continue to show promise, this has the potential to help open up the market for synthetic cannabinoids (advantageous for drug companies) - it would be easier to control the dosage of something like this (advantageous for doctors and clinical research studies). Something that is developed to have the same benefits but is less psychoactive might appeal to some people. On the other hand, companies can still profit from selling preparations of natural extracts - again, easier to control and monitor dosages.
  
• Cancers have varying types of pathologies. Say we have an exceptionally high cure rate for cancers that can be treated through the endocannabinoid system: these survivors live longer, but they're not invincible. Even if we could cure the majority of known cancers right now, I'd venture to guess that new cancer pathologies would develop as people lived longer, or other chronic diseases would become more prominent. Pharmaceutical companies won't run out of profitable avenues just because some illnesses might cured with natural products.
  
• Related to above: Right now, we primarily try and motivate people to not get cancer (make healthy lifestyle choices a.k.a. prevention), but having a cure for something will likely lower levels of perceived risk. Would people be more likely to wash their hands if we didn't have antibiotics? If a cure exists, [some] people may be less motivated to make certain healthy lifestyle choices, which again opens up new approaches for pharmaceuticals.
  

 

I disagree that marijuana is a gateway drug. This is a myth. I won't write awhole lot about this because I already said what I needed to earlier in the thread. If you're interested here is a link that explains why the gateway theory is false. At first glace this site would seem biased, but they have lots of links that credit there sources to various studies. So if you have the time, it's a great article. - http://stopthedrugwa...arijuana_not_ga

LOL I have stop trying to defend both sides in the same post, because what I said may have come off wrong. :P Gateway theory seems to be controversial but it's not something I'm particularly interested in. However, if you do run into someone who is adamant about it being true, I just wanted to bring up the point that it could be used to your advantage, because maybe legalization could actually lower some of the [supposed] effects (i.e. shutting down illegal channels).

[evil_minx]

Cancer is the result of a divorce from nature. I saw that on an image once and I believe it to be the best explanation. Nature can cure cancer in many ways. There are some who say Baking Soda therapy works, Balancing your Ph levels which can easily be done with the Gerson Therapy. Essiac tea is a 4 herb tea that has cured thousands who were terminally ill with Cancer. Rene Caisse, read up on her. B-17 found in Apricot kernals and Apple seeds has been shown to kill Cancer.

 

Cancer is completely curable, without chemotherapy or any kind of radiation or surgery. Repeat that over and over till you believe it, because it is the truth and may save your life one day. 1-3 adults will get Cancer in their lifetime.

 

I highly advocate the use of Cannabis Oil in curing Cancer because all you have to do is take the oil and requires very little of the person in need of healing. If you stay away from conventional poisoning..er...treatment and take 60ml of oil as fast as you can, you will be cancer free or near cancer free within 90 days. If you don't forego conventional treatment, it takes longer because your body has to heal the damage from those toxins before it can get to the root of the matter. Yes, getting on a good diet/exercise regimen is ideal, stopping bad habits that are KNOWN to kill people and cause cancer is especially ideal. However, most folks do none of that, just take the oil, and everything that ails them including Cancer disappears within months. This is due to our ECS (Endocannabinoid System).

 

 

What I'm talking about is not Hemp Oil derived from Hemp seeds. It is Cannabis Oil made from the buds and is around 95% THC.

 

I have talked to folks who have been CURED and who have CURED others. Thousands have been cured. Rick Simpson himself I know cured about 5,000 in the past ten year (FOR FREE). He has never charged anything to cure anyone or for any of the information pertaining to the making and ingesting of the Cannabis Oil. He is now selling a book but you can find all the needed information online for free and he encourages duplicating his videos and sharing it. He also encourages that people make their own oil. You can find more about it here: http://www.phoenixtears.ca/

 

Rick Simpsons Run From the Cure

 

As I mentioned before, we all have an endocannabinoid system and here's some more information on that (all relatively short videos):

 

 

 

 

Because Cannabis Oil regulates the body in so many ways you are looking at tanking the Pharmaceutical industry completely. Success stories include but not limited to many kinds of Cancer, Type 2 Diabetes, HIV (stabilized without using any pharmaceuticals), helping MS patients walk, restoring organs to healthy function (kidneys, etc.), restoring eyesight and not just on people but animals too (they have an ECS too). Rick loves working with animals because they are cured faster.

 

 

You won't find the studies that you are looking for because it is a Schedule 1 Drug and that makes it nearly impossible for Scientists to get their hands on it to study it. A hearing in the Supreme Courts to change that was last October, still waiting to hear how they ruled.

 

Cannabis should not be age restricted. Go back to my first comment. It was used in men, women, and children for many reasons for thousands of years. No one has ever died from it, the side effects tend to be much more mild than many of the over the counter pharmaceuticals you can buy, and actually has been shown to be more beneficial over time as more studies are done and more information is gathered. It's high time we stop referring to this plant as a drug. Lavender isn't a drug but is said to influence the mind to induce sleep, etc. I can legally give my child lavender tea, but not Ganja tea. Anytime Cannabis is blamed for something going wrong in the brain a myriad of questions come into my mind. Did this person use alcohol or pharmaceuticals? Was this person exposed to mercury, lead, aspartame, MSG, aluminum, or fluoride and how often? These things are very neuro-toxic and very prevalent in our society, and that's just off the top of my head. Dr. Dreher studied children who ingested Cannabis in teas in Jamaica with some profound results...again see my first comment on this thread.

 

Cannabis started being heavily smoked when it became illegal because of the cost. It is reasonable to assume over time less people would smoke it should it be legal. As far as Cannabis smoke offending your sense of smell...99% of the perfumes and colognes on the market offend my sense of smell, what should we do about that? Those are even more toxic than Cannabis, bet you'd get real sick trying to ingest or smoke them.

[evil_minx]

Researchers reported that subjects frequently substituted cannabis for other substances, including conventional pharmaceuticals. Authors reported:

“Over 41 percent state that they use cannabis as a substitute for alcohol (n=158), 36.1 percent use cannabis as a substitute for illicit substances (n=137), and 67.8 percent use cannabis as a substitute for prescription drugs (n=259). The three main reasons cited for cannabis-related substitution are ‘less withdrawal’ (67.7 percent), ‘fewer side-effects’ (60.4 percent), and ‘better symptom management’ suggesting that many patients may have already identified cannabis as an effective and potentially safer adjunct or alternative to their prescription drug regimen.”

Overall, 75.5 percent (n=305) of respondents said that they substitute cannabis for at least one other substance. Men were more likely than women to report substituting cannabis for alcohol or illicit drugs.

 

 

 

http://www.theweedblog.com/study-shows-cannabis-is-a-potential-exit-drug-to-problematic-substance-use/

[passiflora]

I know this is starting to get off topic, but I just can't resist. :* I'll just leave a disclaimer here similar to what I said earlier in the thread: I don't think a substance's medical usefulness is relevant to whether or not it should be legalized for recreational use.

 

Cancer is the result of a divorce from nature.

Cancer is unregulated cell growth that can occur for a plethora of reasons. Even naturally occurring substances can be carcinogenic.

 

Cancer is completely curable, without chemotherapy or any kind of radiation or surgery. Repeat that over and over till you believe it, because it is the truth and may save your life one day.

This very statement reflects a lack of understanding about what cancer is. Which cancer is curable? All cancers?

 

I highly advocate the use of Cannabis Oil in curing Cancer because all you have to do is take the oil and requires very little of the person in need of healing. If you stay away from conventional poisoning..er...treatment and take 60ml of oil as fast as you can, you will be cancer free or near cancer free within 90 days. If you don't forego conventional treatment, it takes longer because your body has to heal the damage from those toxins before it can get to the root of the matter. ... However, most folks do none of that, just take the oil, and everything that ails them including Cancer disappears within months. This is due to our ECS (Endocannabinoid System).

 

I have talked to folks who have been CURED and who have CURED others. ... He is now selling a book but you can find all the needed information online for free and he encourages duplicating his videos and sharing it.

 

It was used in men, women, and children for many reasons for thousands of years.

 

Because Cannabis Oil regulates the body in so many ways you are looking at tanking the Pharmaceutical industry completely. Success stories include but not limited to many kinds of Cancer, Type 2 Diabetes, HIV (stabilized without using any pharmaceuticals), helping MS patients walk, restoring organs to healthy function (kidneys, etc.), restoring eyesight...

I'm going to try the Red Flags link again with corresponding examples:

• Testimonials
  
• Ancient Wisdom
  
• Secret/Conspiracy
  - Here is some more information about why there isn't a conspiracy. Another kicker: The pharmaceutical industry is actually interested in this stuff too.*
  
• Buy My Book ('for when they can't say "read my peer-reviewed journal article"')
  - I couldn't find a single cited reference or links to any scientific studies on the entirety of Rick's website.
  
• Miracle Cure-All (+ "Quick and Easy")
  
• Natural
  

 

Little, if any, of what you've said proves the safety or efficacy of what you're advocating. It's all just assurances. Scientifically fallacious (see above), if you will.

 

Telling people to forego cancer treatment is grossly irresponsible. People are free to seek out treatments as they wish, but it's always a good idea to inform your doctor and consider all the options.

 

* From the pharmaceutical website:

In the last 45 years it has been possible to demonstrate that CBD has a wide range of pharmacological effects, many of which being of great therapeutic interest, but still waiting to be confirmed by clinical trials. It is important to highlight that many effects of CBD draw a bell-shaped dose-response curve, suggesting that the dose is a pivotal factor in CBD research. The wide range of CBD effects can be explained by the multiple mechanisms through which CBD acts, although further research is needed to clarify the precise mechanisms that underlie some of the potentially beneficial effects of CBD.

 

As I mentioned before, we all have an endocannabinoid system and here's some more information on that (all relatively short videos):

And as I mentioned before, the endocannabinoid system one thing that can influence pathology. It's great if we can use it for certain benefits, but it's not the be-all and end-all.

 

It's high time we stop referring to this plant as a drug.

It's a drug in every single sense of the definition:

• A substance used to treat an illness, relieve a symptom, or modify a chemical process in the body for a specific purpose.
  
• A substance, sometimes addictive, which affects the central nervous system.
  
• A chemical or substance, not necessarily for medical purposes, which alters the way the mind or body works.
  
• A substance, especially one which is illegal, ingested for recreational use.
  

 

Cannabis should not be age restricted.

 

Yes, it should, and parents should be responsible about exposure. Even pro-legalization people in this thread have recognized that it has the potential to affect growing brains - this includes prenatally (2), in infancy, and in childhood and adolescence. Most importantly, there aren't very many studies on it whatsoever so it's wayyyyyy too early to recommend giving cannabis to children.

 

Anytime Cannabis is blamed for something going wrong in the brain a myriad of questions come into my mind. Did this person use alcohol or pharmaceuticals? Was this person exposed to mercury, lead, aspartame, MSG, aluminum, or fluoride and how often?

Scientists recognize confounding factors and control for them when analyzing results. It's just as easy to turn that around, anyway - how do you know all these people you say have been "cured" have been cured specifically by the cannabis oil? Rick Simpson also advocates "other natural things" you can do, and we can't even properly control for confounders because they're all testimonials.

 

As far as Cannabis smoke offending your sense of smell...99% of the perfumes and colognes on the market offend my sense of smell, what should we do about that?

We are doing something about that - more and more places are implementing fragrance-free policies.

[Welcome Back Apathy]

Passiflora--I completely agree with you. There really have not been proper studies so far to show how effective marijuana is at treating--and possibly curing--cancer.

 

HOWEVER...if we are going to deny all that information, we kind of have an obligation to perform scientific studies. So far, studies have not shown that marijuana DOESN'T help. With marijuana being illegal, even for medicinal purposes in so many states, it's incredibly difficult to perform the proper studies. We need the research. We really do.

[halibu_hoodrat]

I'm all for the legalization of weed.. I mean, marijuana. There's nothing wrong with people sitting around smoking a plant.

 

Apparently the makers of the pot documentary "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" are producing a sequel to that movie named "The Culture High." It's going to be playing in theatres in the U.S. and Canada, as well as Australia and possibly the UK.

[~Xandria]

I'm all for the legalization of weed.. I mean, marijuana. There's nothing wrong with people sitting around smoking a plant.

 

Apparently the makers of the pot documentary "The Union: The Business Behind Getting High" are producing a sequel to that movie named "The Culture High." It's going to be playing in theatres in the U.S. and Canada, as well as Australia and possibly the UK.

I really loved The Union movie so I'm excited to see the sequel! :) Thanks for letting me know.

[RazzlyFrazzly]

Im not going to go on some giant rambling response supporting my opinion. But yes, I think it should be legal. I even did a project on it - a lot of research.

For one thing, alcohol and cigarettes cause more damage (and deaths!) than marijuana; those are legal, yet marijuana is illegal.

Hemp should be legal even more so. Barely any THC (the high-creating factor) is in hemp, yet it's barely legal. It can be used to make so many products yet it's not grown very much.

 

also: Marijuana use has been linked to higher chances of certain cancers, BUT it also has been linked to LOWER chances of other cancers.

[MrsRant]

Some things I have not seen mentioned (honestly, I have not read ALL the posts, but..) that may or may not have thought provoking qualities.

 

*If legalized, it becomes an industry, as evidenced in OR/WA/CO/CA ( I have lived in CO OR and CA). There are rules and regulations that have to be followed, and you also see a quality difference. You have a standard to apply. On the street, its good luck to you. Those who do smoke know what I am talking about, the difference between medical grade and dirt weed, or brick. This is good for keeping people from going to "drug dealers" as opposed to dispensaries. Plus, once you know the difference in strains, you can get what you want, a body relax, or a giggly head. Just as those who are looking to get smashed might head to a hard liquor vs a 6 pack.

 

*I hear a lot of what I consider silly arguments. Whats next Meth?!?! really. you went there. ok. NO! Meth heads hurt themselves as well as others. More hardcore drugs like that, meth, coke, heroin etc, you get violence, damage to the body and mind that is above and beyond what a pot smoker will deal with. I have lived long enough to see and lose friends to hardcores. I have watched people tumble down into heroin addiction and the strugle it is to get back up, and some havent. There is a HUGE difference. I do get a little peeved at people who try to make this connection, I think until you have really seen the difference, you cannot fathom it.

 

* I know this one has been pointed out, the economical benefits. How many farmers that are losing their farms piece by piece could save their family land by growing this crop? Not only for smoking or medicinal uses, but hemp is SO useful in so many other ways. Fiber for papaer, cloth, rope, this stuff is STRONG! Oils for lotions, balms, cooking (yeah, works good on popcorn :P). This is a fast growing crop and all parts of the plant are useful. Additionally, the revenue saved by easing our prison populus and collected through a tax on it similar to the taxes on cigarettes and alcohol would be enormous.

 

*Finally, I dunno where this really belongs in this debate, but its a point I would like to make. The recent changes to the marijuana laws have been brought on by people demanding freedom for their choices, options to "traditional" medicines. We need more of this imo!! (here comes my government tirade) We as a country are being crushed by intrusive government, thats not how it was set up to be. Our government spends our grandchildrens money now, and we leave them with what? Less freedoms, more government in their homes, debt they will never be able to handle. These small wins, in states, show us we CAN still make changes that our "government" disagrees with and I am all for that! I love my country completely, I love to travel and see more and more of it, but my government needs fixing, desperately.

 

ok, think I am done :P ish...ness....*giggle*

[Duskitty]

Some things I have not seen mentioned (honestly, I have not read ALL the posts, but..) that may or may not have thought provoking qualities.

 

*If legalized, it becomes an industry, as evidenced in OR/WA/CO/CA ( I have lived in CO OR and CA). There are rules and regulations that have to be followed, and you also see a quality difference. You have a standard to apply. On the street, its good luck to you. Those who do smoke know what I am talking about, the difference between medical grade and dirt weed, or brick. This is good for keeping people from going to "drug dealers" as opposed to dispensaries. Plus, once you know the difference in strains, you can get what you want, a body relax, or a giggly head. Just as those who are looking to get smashed might head to a hard liquor vs a 6 pack.

 

*I hear a lot of what I consider silly arguments. Whats next Meth?!?! really. you went there. ok. NO! Meth heads hurt themselves as well as others. More hardcore drugs like that, meth, coke, heroin etc, you get violence, damage to the body and mind that is above and beyond what a pot smoker will deal with. I have lived long enough to see and lose friends to hardcores. I have watched people tumble down into heroin addiction and the strugle it is to get back up, and some havent. There is a HUGE difference. I do get a little peeved at people who try to make this connection, I think until you have really seen the difference, you cannot fathom it.

 

* I know this one has been pointed out, the economical benefits. How many farmers that are losing their farms piece by piece could save their family land by growing this crop? Not only for smoking or medicinal uses, but hemp is SO useful in so many other ways. Fiber for papaer, cloth, rope, this stuff is STRONG! Oils for lotions, balms, cooking (yeah, works good on popcorn :P). This is a fast growing crop and all parts of the plant are useful. Additionally, the revenue saved by easing our prison populus and collected through a tax on it similar to the taxes on cigarettes and alcohol would be enormous.

 

*Finally, I dunno where this really belongs in this debate, but its a point I would like to make. The recent changes to the marijuana laws have been brought on by people demanding freedom for their choices, options to "traditional" medicines. We need more of this imo!! (here comes my government tirade) We as a country are being crushed by intrusive government, thats not how it was set up to be. Our government spends our grandchildrens money now, and we leave them with what? Less freedoms, more government in their homes, debt they will never be able to handle. These small wins, in states, show us we CAN still make changes that our "government" disagrees with and I am all for that! I love my country completely, I love to travel and see more and more of it, but my government needs fixing, desperately.

 

ok, think I am done :P ish...ness....*giggle*

 

"An error occurred: You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day."

 

LIES! I HAVEN'T EVEN LIKED ANYTHING YET TODAY!

 

*cough* Sorry. If I could like that, I would. I hate it when people compare meth, cocaine and heroin to marijuana. HELLO??!? Have you even seen what meth and those other drugs do? Obviously not, if you're comparing it to marijuana, which is practically harmless compared to the horrors of meth.

[MrsRant]

"An error occurred: You have reached your quota of positive votes for the day."

 

LIES! I HAVEN'T EVEN LIKED ANYTHING YET TODAY!

 

I know this is off topic, sorry but I got the same message Kitty!! noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo lols

 

I do think however, that for those who have not seen it, they lump marijuana into that category because of our government and the "war on drugs". If its in that category it has to be evil and bad right?? :P

[the_microwave]

I'm pro-legalization and I honestly can't think of a single logical reason not to be. Everyone before me has made a strong argument and I don't feel a need to echo what they've said, so I'll keep it brief: Countless studies have provided us with mountains of evidence for the absurdity of keeping marijuana illegal. Ignoring that much evidence is irresponsible of the government and foolish of individuals.

[nadabrovitchka]

I definitely agree with the legalization for the various reasons stated already. The best thing is making it legal and take advantage of that natural source.

[rinoa812]

I definately think marijuana should be legalized. It hasnt been brought up too much , which surprises me, but a lot of the over the counter meds that we take an a daily or weekly basis have more serious side effects than smoking a joint. Now i can see concern for the person who maybe smokes from morning to night but someone who uses it once a day even isnt going to have problems for the most part. Everyone does react differentely to things though. I was put on a very popular antidepressant when i was 18 and it caused me to hallucinate and have night sweats and terrors. My friend took the same kind of medicine and it worked fine. So i stopped taking it. I would assume that the person who reacts badly to marijuana would do the same thing. Financially speaking legalizing and taxing marijuana would do wonders for the economy . Not to mention opening room in the jails for people who actually do deserve to be there. And another reason is hemp. Hemp contains very little THC and it is impossible to get high off of it but it is mostly illegal because of the marijuana stigma. Hemp makes a fine paper, a wonderful rope, clothing, baskets, anything you can name and hemp can be used to make it. Seriously we kill so many trees to make all of the paper we use, what are we going to use when we run out of trees? Because it will happen eventually. The medicianal qualities of marijuana have been documented. No reason should it not be legalized. People bring up the slow and sluggishness. The inevitable accidents. Well I think most of the people that are going to drive high, do it now. And driving high is nowhere as common as driving drunk. Also in my personal experiance being high makes me just want to chill. Being drunk makes me reckless. Maybe that is different from other people though. So yes yes yes marijuana should be legalized.

[maypls]

Depression would possibly have something to do with it. It's like with any drug though, On it you could feel great but coming down can be absolutely horrible and for that reason you go out and get another hit. Well, At least that was my personal experience. When I was coming down I'd get really irritated, Paranoid, depressed and also I'd have a massive craving for the drug. Even when I first started smoking it. I may have an addictive personality. Also, I have mental health issues though so that could contribute greatly to my reactions.

 

But everyone is different.

 

I know this post is a year old, but this describes my experience withdrawing from Prozac, my anti-depressant. Every time I smoked there was a gap of at least three months so I wasn't addicted by any means.

 

My main personal reason for why I would like to see marijuana legalized/decriminalized is the prevalence of synthetics, which are readily available in most gas stations and head shops (though most jurisdictions are starting to crack down on the availability). People get lazy and substitute the real thing for the synthetic when the two are completely completely different. Anyone who has experienced both highs can tell you this, including me. Usually it's explained as good time versus bad time with the synthetic being a bad time. Synthetics gave me generalized anxiety disorder after I had the worst panic attack of my life. I wouldn't wish my experience on anyone else. There have also been innumerable reports of seizures and comas due to synthetic "marijuana".

 

If the stigma against marijuana was erased and it was at least decriminalized everything would just be a lot better, I think.

[missmadiemay]

I just have to put my two cents in on this issue. I'll keep it brief.

 

It we legalize it, think of all the jobs it would create. Producing, selling, distributing, etc.

 

MINUS all the things it may be laced with when you buy it on the street. You have no idea where that stuff is coming from or who tampered with it along the line.

 

TAXES - jails cost money. Where do you think that money comes from? YOUR PAYCHECK. If marijuana were legalized, there would be so many less in prison for selling/buying/etc.

[ineedalifeplease]

I don't know if this has already been mentioned, but did you know it is more or less impossible to overdose on marijuana? You'd have to consume an impossible amount in a very short space of time.

Boom. Legalise please!

[Alishkah]

 

I know this post is a year old, but this describes my experience withdrawing from Prozac, my anti-depressant. Every time I smoked there was a gap of at least three months so I wasn't addicted by any means.

 

My main personal reason for why I would like to see marijuana legalized/decriminalized is the prevalence of synthetics, which are readily available in most gas stations and head shops (though most jurisdictions are starting to crack down on the availability). People get lazy and substitute the real thing for the synthetic when the two are completely completely different. Anyone who has experienced both highs can tell you this, including me. Usually it's explained as good time versus bad time with the synthetic being a bad time. Synthetics gave me generalized anxiety disorder after I had the worst panic attack of my life. I wouldn't wish my experience on anyone else. There have also been innumerable reports of seizures and comas due to synthetic "marijuana".

 

If the stigma against marijuana was erased and it was at least decriminalized everything would just be a lot better, I think.

 

 

I don't know if when I smoked weed if it was ever synthetic, I have no idea how to tell! All I know is sometimes it felt like I'd smoke something else, or maybe that it'd been laced with something (I don't know if that's possible, I'm quite naive when it comes to drugs). I know of other synthetic drugs and heard of them being mixed with other things and basically making a dangerous cocktail.

 

I'm not against it being legalised completely, but with me it was mentally damaging so I worry that others may be effected the way I was, even if it wasn't permanent but lasted a few weeks or months. Still, those few weeks / months were absolute hell! I sympathise with your anxiety and panic attack, wouldn't wish them on my worst enemy.

 

I don't know where to stand on this honestly. I guess the only way to find out if it's a good idea is to legalise it, but under moderation.

 

 

[x3xpotterx3x]

I honestly have just skimmed through this forum.

But fun fact: Marijuanna should have never been illegal in the first place.
I'm actually researching and writing a speech about it right now.

The big plastic company around the time that this legislation was put in place was throwing so much money towards lobbying who constrewed it. (Which is why the term marijuanna is so prevelant verses cannibis). They found out that companies could make plastic out of cannibis for much cheaper and got really upset about it. Used the hispanic slang term for it and tried to push it through legislation before USDA and department of health could find out. They found out the day before voting cannibis = marijuanna and by then it was too late.

Edit- Never smoked a day in my life. Just a fact that it has so many health benefits and agricultural benefits that it was silly to be outlawed in the first place. They definitely demonized it when it shouldn't have been.

[Pookies]

Interesting, x3xpotter.

 

I had a professor say that a drug (I cant remember if it started with marijuana or something else. even if it didn't start with marijuana, it later played a role in this) was introduced to minorities by the government to keep their population in check. Distract the people, get them hooked, and soon make it illegal to keep a majority of them under control. Hence the drug war and mass incarceration for people growing marijuana crops.

 

I wish I could remember more about this class, but if it sparked anyone's interest, you can try to google "prison industrial complex" for more info.

 

As for the topic itself, as many pointed out, there are ANY benefits to hemp.

 

 

[x3xpotterx3x]

Yeah I'm a plant breeder and all the big money and the best PhDS are going to go into hemp breeding. I would say in the next 10 years it will be at least medically available everywhere.

But the more interesting thing will be when companies will allow that to show up on drug tests and not get fired for it.

[passiflora]

I honestly have just skimmed through this forum.

 

But fun fact: Marijuanna should have never been illegal in the first place.

I'm actually researching and writing a speech about it right now.

The big plastic company around the time that this legislation was put in place was throwing so much money towards lobbying who constrewed it. (Which is why the term marijuanna is so prevelant verses cannibis). They found out that companies could make plastic out of cannibis for much cheaper and got really upset about it. Used the hispanic slang term for it and tried to push it through legislation before USDA and department of health could find out. They found out the day before voting cannibis = marijuanna and by then it was too late.

 

Edit- Never smoked a day in my life. Just a fact that it has so many health benefits and agricultural benefits that it was silly to be outlawed in the first place. They definitely demonized it when it shouldn't have been.

 

Do you have any sources for this? Wikipedia seems to suggest that cannabis was made illegal because drug regulation in general was starting to become trendy (including medications, not just recreational drugs). It also sounds like hemp production was starting to slow down before the really restrictive regulations (related to the plastics conspiracy you mention) were even introduced.

 

 

Just a fact that it has so many health benefits and agricultural benefits that it was silly to be outlawed in the first place.

 

Can you name any health or agricultural benefits that don't apply only to specific populations such as cancer/HIV patients or aren't also found in hemp? Hemp isn't illegal.