studies are done by humans and by the way humans make errors so therefore not all studies are correct....KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Scientific studies are biased how again? Oh yeah, they favor science over emotion, doh!d4rkst4r wrote:
Screw drugs, go home. Give me an unbiased source you tard.
South park ftw.Bertster7 wrote:
Drugs are bad.
so even though scientific studies have showw there's nothing wrong, you still don't want to believe it.killajamz666 wrote:
studies are done by humans and by the way humans make errors so therefore not all studies are correct....
Last edited by citricacidx (2007-07-03 13:45:36)
Yes. The brain aspect of addictivenessDes.Kmal wrote:
its not fucking addictive!stryyker wrote:
this is why exactly?Marinejuana wrote:
marijuana is the COOLEST
Its the exact same as cigarettes in my opinion.
Its still smoke, it still gets in your lungs, its still addictive. It makes you boring, lazy, and a douchebag (personal experience)
lmfao.
are u serious stryyker?
They just.... won't stop talking about getting high. And after they get high they just want to get higher
Yeah, by your logic you must be high as a kite now.killajamz666 wrote:
after a couple years when u start hearing people sayin yo bro whats up man radical dude then u know it has done soemthing to ur head....its bad for you thast why its illegal believe me u can do alot of stupid things on it
i think the key word here is the test was done on monkeys.....lets try it on a human and see what it does to ur brain cellscitricacidx wrote:
It doesn't cause brain damage.Bull3t wrote:
Put it this way, We would pretty much go back to the stone age.
Everyone would be so fucked up all the time they would be stupid because of the lack of brain cells they would normally have without smoking it constantly or at all.
So we would all be cave women, men, boys & girls.
The reason why you ask this is because you probably heard or read somewhere that marijuana damages brain cells, or makes you stupid. These claims are untrue.
The first one -- marijuana kills brain cells -- is based on research done during the second Reefer Madness Movement. A study attempted to show that marijuana smoking damaged brain structures in monkeys. However, the study was poorly performed and it was severely criticized by a medical review board. Studies done afterwards failed to show any brain damage, in fact a very recent study on Rhesus monkeys used technology so sensitive that scientists could actually see the effect of learning on brain cells, and it found no damage.
But this was Reefer Madness II, and the prohibitionists were looking around for anything they could find to keep the marijuana legalization movement in check, so this study was widely used in anti-marijuana propaganda. It was recanted later.
(To this day, the radical anti-drug groups, like P.R.I.D.E. and Dr. Gabriel Nahas, still use it -- In fact, America's most popular drug education program, Drug Abuse Resistance Education, claims that marijuana "can impair memory perception & judgement by destroying brain cells." When police and teachers read this and believe it, our job gets really tough, since it takes a long time to explain to children how Ms. Jones and Officer Bob were wrong.)
The truth is, no study has ever demonstrated cellular damage, stupidity, mental impairment, or insanity brought on specifically by marijuana use -- even heavy marijuana use. This is not to say that it cannot be abused, however.
"The Chronic Cerebral Effects of Cannabis Use I Methodological Issues and Neurological Findings " by Renee C. Wert Ph.D., Michael L. Raulin Ph.D Vol. 21 Iss. 6 pp. 605-628. 1986.
"The Chronic Cerebral Effects of Cannabis Use II Psychological Findings and Conclusions " by Renee C. Wert Ph.D., Michael L. Raulin Ph.D Vol. 21 Iss. 6 pp. 629-642. 1986.
"Neurotoxicity of Cannabis and THC A Review of Chronic Exposure Studies in Animals " by Andrew C. Scallet in "Pharmacology, Biochemistry & Behavior" Vol. 40 pp. 671-676. 1991.
"Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey IV Neurochemical Effects and Comparison to Acute and Chronic Exposure to Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in Rats" by Syed F. Ali, Glenn D. Newport, Andrew C. Scallet, Merle G. Paule, John R. Bailey, William Slikker Jr in "Pharmacology, Biochemistry & Behavior" Vol. 40 pp. 677-682. 1991.
"Behavioral, Neurochemical, and Neurohistological Effects of Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Nonhuman Primate" by William Slikker Jr. et al. in "Marijuana Cannabinoids Neurobiology and Neurophysiology" Laura Murphy, Andrzej Bartke ed. pub. CRC Press Boca Raton, FL, 1992.
(the following are the studies which were found to be flawed)
"Effects of Cannabis Sativa on Ultrastructure of the Synapse in Monkey Brain" by J. W. Harper, R. G. Heath, W. A. Myers in "Journal of Neuroscience Research" Vol. 3 pp. 87-93. 1977.
"Chronic Marihuana Smoking Its Effects on Function and Structure of the Primate Brain " by R. G. Heath, A. T. Fitzjarrell, R. E. Garey, W. A. Myers in "Marihuana: Biological Effects Analysis, Metabolism, Cellular Responses, Reproduction and Brain " Gabriel G. Nahas, W. D. M. Paton ed. pub. Pergamon Press Oxford, 1979.
"Cannabis Sativa Effects on Brain Function and Ultrastructure in Rhesus Monkeys " by R. G. Heath, A. T. Fitzjarrell, C. J. Fontana, R. E. Garey in "Biological Psychiatry" Vol. 15 pp. 657-690. 1980.
(D.A.R.E. says pot kills brain cells)
DARE Officers training manual section T page 5.
Ok, I vote you submit yourself for scientific study.killajamz666 wrote:
i think the key word here is the test was done on monkeys.....lets try it on a human and see what it does to ur brain cellscitricacidx wrote:
It doesn't cause brain damage.Bull3t wrote:
Put it this way, We would pretty much go back to the stone age.
Everyone would be so fucked up all the time they would be stupid because of the lack of brain cells they would normally have without smoking it constantly or at all.
So we would all be cave women, men, boys & girls.
The reason why you ask this is because you probably heard or read somewhere that marijuana damages brain cells, or makes you stupid. These claims are untrue.
The first one -- marijuana kills brain cells -- is based on research done during the second Reefer Madness Movement. A study attempted to show that marijuana smoking damaged brain structures in monkeys. However, the study was poorly performed and it was severely criticized by a medical review board. Studies done afterwards failed to show any brain damage, in fact a very recent study on Rhesus monkeys used technology so sensitive that scientists could actually see the effect of learning on brain cells, and it found no damage.
But this was Reefer Madness II, and the prohibitionists were looking around for anything they could find to keep the marijuana legalization movement in check, so this study was widely used in anti-marijuana propaganda. It was recanted later.
(To this day, the radical anti-drug groups, like P.R.I.D.E. and Dr. Gabriel Nahas, still use it -- In fact, America's most popular drug education program, Drug Abuse Resistance Education, claims that marijuana "can impair memory perception & judgement by destroying brain cells." When police and teachers read this and believe it, our job gets really tough, since it takes a long time to explain to children how Ms. Jones and Officer Bob were wrong.)
The truth is, no study has ever demonstrated cellular damage, stupidity, mental impairment, or insanity brought on specifically by marijuana use -- even heavy marijuana use. This is not to say that it cannot be abused, however.
"The Chronic Cerebral Effects of Cannabis Use I Methodological Issues and Neurological Findings " by Renee C. Wert Ph.D., Michael L. Raulin Ph.D Vol. 21 Iss. 6 pp. 605-628. 1986.
"The Chronic Cerebral Effects of Cannabis Use II Psychological Findings and Conclusions " by Renee C. Wert Ph.D., Michael L. Raulin Ph.D Vol. 21 Iss. 6 pp. 629-642. 1986.
"Neurotoxicity of Cannabis and THC A Review of Chronic Exposure Studies in Animals " by Andrew C. Scallet in "Pharmacology, Biochemistry & Behavior" Vol. 40 pp. 671-676. 1991.
"Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey IV Neurochemical Effects and Comparison to Acute and Chronic Exposure to Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in Rats" by Syed F. Ali, Glenn D. Newport, Andrew C. Scallet, Merle G. Paule, John R. Bailey, William Slikker Jr in "Pharmacology, Biochemistry & Behavior" Vol. 40 pp. 677-682. 1991.
"Behavioral, Neurochemical, and Neurohistological Effects of Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Nonhuman Primate" by William Slikker Jr. et al. in "Marijuana Cannabinoids Neurobiology and Neurophysiology" Laura Murphy, Andrzej Bartke ed. pub. CRC Press Boca Raton, FL, 1992.
(the following are the studies which were found to be flawed)
"Effects of Cannabis Sativa on Ultrastructure of the Synapse in Monkey Brain" by J. W. Harper, R. G. Heath, W. A. Myers in "Journal of Neuroscience Research" Vol. 3 pp. 87-93. 1977.
"Chronic Marihuana Smoking Its Effects on Function and Structure of the Primate Brain " by R. G. Heath, A. T. Fitzjarrell, R. E. Garey, W. A. Myers in "Marihuana: Biological Effects Analysis, Metabolism, Cellular Responses, Reproduction and Brain " Gabriel G. Nahas, W. D. M. Paton ed. pub. Pergamon Press Oxford, 1979.
"Cannabis Sativa Effects on Brain Function and Ultrastructure in Rhesus Monkeys " by R. G. Heath, A. T. Fitzjarrell, C. J. Fontana, R. E. Garey in "Biological Psychiatry" Vol. 15 pp. 657-690. 1980.
(D.A.R.E. says pot kills brain cells)
DARE Officers training manual section T page 5.
Monkeys are the closest living animals to people. Plus, there are few if any scientific studies about how much of X will kill you conducted on humans, and there haven't been any since Hitler
I like that the people who are for pot use logic and reason and sources, and those against it have so far just been like it's bad for you, trust me cause this one girl I know did something stupid.
Last edited by citricacidx (2007-07-03 13:50:34)
The concept that MOST products that are deemed 'safe for use on humans' or 'safe for human consumption' after they are tested on animals is very telling. I am sure you use many products day to day that were never tested on humans. Do you second guess them>killajamz666 wrote:
i think the key word here is the test was done on monkeys.....lets try it on a human and see what it does to ur brain cells
Actually weed from what i've read has no really bad side effects that are long lasting. Besides the fact it stays in your system for 3 weeks.Bertster7 wrote:
Drugs are bad.
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
Thats not even a bad thing. It's not affecting your body for three weeks, it's just absorbed into fatty tissue. As for the length of time, this is dependent upon body type, activity, and metabolism. If you smoke a joint today, depending on those factors, it could be out of your system in 4 days or 4 weeks.PsychoKillers wrote:
Actually weed from what i've read has no really bad side effects that are long lasting. Besides the fact it stays in your system for 3 weeks.
....so drinking Ethanol isn't bad for you? Marijuana is given a bad rep because of the uneducated people who use it. I smoke almost everyday of my life. Yet, I still hold A's in school Physics, Chemistry II, Anatomy & Physiology. Man I must be a retard for smoking pot. THE GOVERNMENT IS WRONG they class PCP and cocaine as a Schedule II drug. Lets see here what schedule II means (from www.erowid.com) ... Schedule II drugs may be prescribed with a written prescription from a licensed physician or nurse practitioner. Go look it up yourself and make sure you go for the actually drug not the precusors. http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.htmlCommieChipmunk wrote:
... I've pretty clearly stated like a thousand times that the pot heads I know are douche bags who are going to go absolutely nowhere in life. But yeah, inhaling any kind of smoke is probably going to help your lungs out a lot. It makes perfect sense tbphDes.Kmal wrote:
lol, the people who dont smoke weed have a hard time finding a valid reason about marijuana being bad. its quite funny to be honest.
Yes, but the general trend is is that there are many people who use/abuse marijuana who are lazy/ignorant/nowhere in life etc... Whether or not that it is drug induced is opinion. Or both personality of the person + Marijuana...Ashford wrote:
....so drinking Ethanol isn't bad for you? Marijuana is given a bad rep because of the uneducated people who use it. I smoke almost everyday of my life. Yet, I still hold A's in school Physics, Chemistry II, Anatomy & Physiology. Man I must be a retard for smoking pot. THE GOVERNMENT IS WRONG they class PCP and cocaine as a Schedule II drug. Lets see here what schedule II means (from www.erowid.com) ... Schedule II drugs may be prescribed with a written prescription from a licensed physician or nurse practitioner. Go look it up yourself and make sure you go for the actually drug not the precusors. http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.htmlCommieChipmunk wrote:
... I've pretty clearly stated like a thousand times that the pot heads I know are douche bags who are going to go absolutely nowhere in life. But yeah, inhaling any kind of smoke is probably going to help your lungs out a lot. It makes perfect sense tbphDes.Kmal wrote:
lol, the people who dont smoke weed have a hard time finding a valid reason about marijuana being bad. its quite funny to be honest.
It sounds like you're talking about heroin... the rest of us are talking about marijuana.stryyker wrote:
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
If the government legalized it they would be able to get people to buy it because of the price. It would be much cheaper the buy from a smoke shop than it is now. The price now is affected by it's legal status, how many hands it touches before it gets to the consumer, and the quality.
The companies could sell it for ridiculously low prices because there would be no legal risk in manufacturing. Plus, if legalized other companies would be producing marijuana so they would be in competition with each other rather than just selling schwag crap weed.
By your model, when the prohibition of alcohol ended, all the alcohol made should've been really crappy and that would've made people get off the stuff.
lol, your logic is impaired.stryyker wrote:
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
u realize how expensive some of the shit is anyway?
plus, if it got to expensive, just grow ur own
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
The price wouldn't lower because the government took over. Hell, the government is already taking in profits from the black market in the US.citricacidx wrote:
It sounds like you're talking about heroin... the rest of us are talking about marijuana.stryyker wrote:
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
If the government legalized it they would be able to get people to buy it because of the price. It would be much cheaper the buy from a smoke shop than it is now. The price now is affected by it's legal status, how many hands it touches before it gets to the consumer, and the quality.
The companies could sell it for ridiculously low prices because there would be no legal risk in manufacturing. Plus, if legalized other companies would be producing marijuana so they would be in competition with each other rather than just selling schwag crap weed.
By your model, when the prohibition of alcohol ended, all the alcohol made should've been really crappy and that would've made people get off the stuff.
And alcohol did become worse after prohibition. Case in point, Coors, Bud light, most American beers.
My main point is, I don't like the stuff. I've done it before. It makes people boring to be around, no matter how good the person feels on the inside. The only thing good I could see from the legalization is; money for the economy, and sales revenue for munchies and Del Taco will go up higher. Nothing more, nothing less.
I'd love to carry on arguing about a fucking plant, but I'm off to work. Think about it in my leave of absence.
Dude, lets try and complete our words, we are in DAST after all.Des.Kmal wrote:
lol, your logic is impaired.stryyker wrote:
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
u realize how expensive some of the shit is anyway?
plus, if it got to expensive, just grow ur own
Yes I know, I dealt for 2 years.
Hydro is expensive, and time consuming. Weed is a very sensitive plant
Last edited by stryyker (2007-07-03 14:18:40)
It affects everyone differently. Either way, your opinion should not cause everyone to not be able to make that choice for themself. Like I already said, if legal, that doesn't mean everyone will have to start smoking it. Some people will choose not to, some people will try it and find it's not for them, some people will use it and not have it affect their lifestyle, and some people won't use it responsibly.
People being lazy because of something isn't a valid reason to keep it illegal. What do you think alcoholics are?
People being lazy because of something isn't a valid reason to keep it illegal. What do you think alcoholics are?
A good time?citricacidx wrote:
What do you think alcoholics are?
Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2007-07-03 14:24:00)
Ofcourse the price would be less, but it wont be cheap. Taxes are the main reason cigarettes are expensive in the UK, and they will have the opportunity to put whatever level of tax they want on weed.citricacidx wrote:
It sounds like you're talking about heroin... the rest of us are talking about marijuana.stryyker wrote:
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
If the government legalized it they would be able to get people to buy it because of the price. It would be much cheaper the buy from a smoke shop than it is now. The price now is affected by it's legal status, how many hands it touches before it gets to the consumer, and the quality.
The companies could sell it for ridiculously low prices because there would be no legal risk in manufacturing. Plus, if legalized other companies would be producing marijuana so they would be in competition with each other rather than just selling schwag crap weed.
By your model, when the prohibition of alcohol ended, all the alcohol made should've been really crappy and that would've made people get off the stuff.
That, and people who are the exact same thing all these people are saying potheads are.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
A good time?citricacidx wrote:
What do you think alcoholics are?
Even still, they would have to get people to come to them instead of going up to sketchy steve for a fat $20 sack.buLLet_t00th wrote:
Ofcourse the price would be less, but it wont be cheap. Taxes are the main reason cigarettes are expensive in the UK, and they will have the opportunity to put whatever level of tax they want on weed.
umm, hydroponics is easy if u have the right equipment. and its not THAT expensive. compare to some of the "crystalize zomgithasTHConthebuds" strains.stryyker wrote:
Dude, lets try and complete our words, we are in DAST after all.Des.Kmal wrote:
lol, your logic is impaired.stryyker wrote:
Legalize it, put 20% on it, rack in the income, lower the national debt.
And after the regular smokers have had the awakening experience of government regulated weed sold at your local smoke shop, im pretty god damn sure alot of people will be off the stuff
u realize how expensive some of the shit is anyway?
plus, if it got to expensive, just grow ur own
Yes I know, I dealt for 2 years.
Hydro is expensive, and time consuming. Weed is a very sensitive plant
2 years dealing with weed in a highly suburban city isnt much time at all stryyker. i knew what a "left handed cigarette" was at 5 years old. my dad and his friends were around me while i was growing up. i remember my dad getting so pissed at his friend for rolling a joint infront of me and his son.
now i, myself, have been dealing with it for about 4 years on my own.
u want me to say "you" instead of "u"? lol.
edit: idk how sensitive a WEED is. lol, it took alot of work to keep it FROM growing cuz it spread so fast. lol. thats not sensitive.
hydroponics is sensitive. not weed itself.
Last edited by Des.Kmal (2007-07-03 14:40:30)
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal
rofl, hydro is what makes the "crystalize zomgithasTHConthebuds" and it's pretty expensive and time consuming.Des.Kmal wrote:
umm, hydroponics is easy if u have the right equipment. and its not THAT expensive. compare to some of the "crystalize zomgithasTHConthebuds" strains.stryyker wrote:
Dude, lets try and complete our words, we are in DAST after all.Des.Kmal wrote:
lol, your logic is impaired.
u realize how expensive some of the shit is anyway?
plus, if it got to expensive, just grow ur own
Yes I know, I dealt for 2 years.
Hydro is expensive, and time consuming. Weed is a very sensitive plant
2 years dealing with weed in a highly suburban city isnt much time at all stryyker. i knew what a "left handed cigarette" was at 5 years old. my dad and his friends were around me while i was growing up. i remember my dad getting so pissed at his friend for rolling a joint infront of me and his son.
now i, myself, have been dealing with it for about 4 years on my own.
u want me to say "you" instead of "u"? lol.
It might make it easier for him to understandDes.Kmal wrote:
u want me to say "you" instead of "u"? lol.
lol, xfire convo.ig wrote:
rofl, hydro is what makes the "crystalize zomgithasTHConthebuds" and it's pretty expensive and time consuming.Des.Kmal wrote:
umm, hydroponics is easy if u have the right equipment. and its not THAT expensive. compare to some of the "crystalize zomgithasTHConthebuds" strains.stryyker wrote:
Dude, lets try and complete our words, we are in DAST after all.
Yes I know, I dealt for 2 years.
Hydro is expensive, and time consuming. Weed is a very sensitive plant
2 years dealing with weed in a highly suburban city isnt much time at all stryyker. i knew what a "left handed cigarette" was at 5 years old. my dad and his friends were around me while i was growing up. i remember my dad getting so pissed at his friend for rolling a joint infront of me and his son.
now i, myself, have been dealing with it for about 4 years on my own.
u want me to say "you" instead of "u"? lol.
Add me on Origin for Battlefield 4 fun: DesKmal