If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Over the past few years, Californians have suffered a devastating epidemic of diseases and illnesses, all of which, strangely, only medical marijuana can cure   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 227
    More: Unlikely, Californians, medical marijuana, state Attorney General Jerry Brown, epidemic, city councilman, ballot initiatives, illness, diseases  
•       •       •

7053 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Nov 2009 at 11:07 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



227 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-11-06 12:22:28 PM
tricycleracer

I think it will be a real kick to the head of weed-culture when their beloved plant is advertised in Maxim alongside ads for Ford Mustangs and Axe bodyspray.

No, they'll just do like every other hobby group out there and take comfort in their superiority for reading High Times and smoking the local microbrew.
 
2009-11-06 12:24:18 PM
Baby Diego: Cthulhu Theory

I personally love the way the acidic content eats away at my stomach! It enables you to feel all that carbonation tickling your tummy even better!

Cola (pH >2) does a better job on your stomach lining than the hydrochloric acid already in there (pH <2)?


You don't drink HCL Cola? It's got Moles.
 
2009-11-06 12:24:22 PM
joeflood:

Make marijuana legit and we can tax it. Keep it on the black market, and it's lost tax revenue.


Do you really want the government involved in the control of yet another substance to tax and control all the supply of? I mean, tobacco I can kinda get since it takes quite a bit of acerage, water, fertilizer, etc as well as curing/drying facilities to produce, but how well do you (or anyone in this thread, it's an open question) think it would work for the government to come in and say "ok, it's all ours, no way you can produce it and you have to buy it from a regulated shop." I mean, it doesn't take anywhere near the amount of resources for John Smith down the street to do a little homegrown. I don't see how govenment regulation would ever stop this, it's just not the same. And on that note, I don't see how tax revenues could be improved if it was legalized, there would probably be a drastic uptick in illegal cultivation.

/tobacco farming was the best example I could come up with, so please be gentle
//no good answer for the cannabis dilemma, as far as I can tell
 
2009-11-06 12:25:26 PM
Shostie:
Out of academic curiosity, how exactly would that work? Don't you need a prescription to get it? Would one just go to a quack to get said prescription? Are there little to no controls on dispensing?


To all you poor unfortunates living in other parts of the country, I feel for you.

I NOW PRESENT TO YOU: GETTING YOUR GROOVE ON IN LA

STEP ONE
Go to any one of the brazillion doctors* in the area who do nothing but hand out "recommendations" from a tiny office in a strip mall. Tell them you have any BS malady you can think of (anxiety, back pain, etc). He takes your blood pressure, and asks a few dumb questions. You pay him $50-$100 (it varies) for a one-year "recommendation" (a sheet of paper it can be renewed at lower cost).

*some guy who just came over from the Philippines where he got his "medical license". No way he'd be a regular doctor here. I'm not kidding. I actually saw his "license" on the wall.

STEP TWO
Go next door/behind/across the street from the "doctors" office to the "collective dispensary" (or any one of a zillion others in the area). They look at your drivers license and recommendation, you fill out a short meaningless form to become a "member" of the "collective".

STEP THREE
(cue Willy Wonka music from original movie where the kids first step into the candy forest) You step into a room that's utterly amazing. Glass showcases with clear jars full of every variety of bud, hash, pill, pre-rolled doobs, sub-lingual, and tincture. Refrigerator cases filled with cookies, brownies, "butter" for you to cook with on your own (spaghetti sauce anyone?) You name it. Some places are nicer than others, but in the really nice ones, they'll have a "self medication lounge": A darkened lounge area with couches, multicolored waterfalls, black lights, and so on for you and your fellow "patients". After weighing it, they give it to you in cool little plastic pill jars with labels like "Trainwreck", "New York Sour Diesel", "Blue Dream". It's like shopping for fine wine.

STEP FOUR
Go home, get medicated, and watch Jacob's Ladder again.
 
2009-11-06 12:27:18 PM
Baby Diego: Cthulhu Theory

I personally love the way the acidic content eats away at my stomach! It enables you to feel all that carbonation tickling your tummy even better!

Cola (pH >2) does a better job on your stomach lining than the hydrochloric acid already in there (pH <2)?


Oh, don't take his word for it ((((shhh, I think he smokes weed))). Instead, have a couple of Cokes or Jolt colas on an empty stomach.
 
2009-11-06 12:27:22 PM
specialkae

Compare it to microbrews for a better perspective. Similar space requirements even. Still regulated and taxed.
 
2009-11-06 12:27:57 PM
Racht: Twenty years from now everyone's going to wonder what the big deal was and why it was ever illegal to begin with.

Because, like in the headline, America suffered from an epic crime wave that only criminalizing marijuana could control...
 
2009-11-06 12:28:18 PM
I'm curious: what's the price of dispensary pot vs street pot of the same quality?
 
2009-11-06 12:29:39 PM
Zer0ne: I find it amazing that in 2009, medical science hasn't come up with a better pain medication than inhaled smoke from a burned weed.

Quite a few medicines are derived from plants...Besides painkillers, there are decongestants and anti-allergy medicines.

Besides, have you ever been puking your guts out from food poisoning then smoked some weed? It's AMAZING, like taking asprin when you have a bad headache, suddenly the nausea is gone.

Plus they say it has anti-cancer effects.

And of course, as has been mentioned, you don't have to smoke it.

That being said...I'm going to go smoke some bong hits, as I still have a tiny amount of freedom over my own life, to choose not to give a crap what other people think about me if I want to smoke weed or get drunk or have a *gasp* cigarette or what the hell ever else it is you stupid Nazis say I can't eat, drink, or smoke.

Yes...I've been corrupting children for years...Smoking weed, in my own home that I probably bought from people much younger than me.

It's really terrible...I mean, it's only been illegal for about, what, 50 years?

So you can see how much better it is now that there is gang warfare surrounding a black market for a plant that I see growing in every ditch when I leave the city.

Makes total sense to ruin millions of lives so the police can arrest people and take their possessions and not offer any kind of rehab program if it's so bad.
 
2009-11-06 12:29:40 PM
Baby Diego: argylez

That would be none. Nice troll though.

Sorry, but as an occasional marijuana (and devil's) advocate I simply can't accept that you can inhale smoke daily - with all the free radicals coming along for the ride - and suffer absolutely no ill effects.

All things in medicine are risk vs benefit. What are the risks of smoking pot daily versus the benefits shown? The benefits are well established. The lack of risk isn't, with a lot of research papers leaning either way. The common intersection between cigarette and marijuana use makes studying that risk harder (but not impossible).


I'm sayin I smoke daily, and have no lung butter. I play ice hockey, am a distance runner (mostly 10 mi, and half marathons), and trumpet player.

I agree there isn't much research out there, so I do my own.

Tried to find out if there is increased free radicals, but didn't find much, other than this, which says they aren't increased.

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-04/954970664.Bc.r.html

/vaporize it
 
2009-11-06 12:29:59 PM
Tr0mBoNe: jonasborg: Cannabis is a virtually non-toxic alternative to many prescription drugs. The side effects of it are generally mild and pleasant. Why wouldn't people try that alternative? It's not like you have to smoke it.

Smoke it constantly and every day and see what kind of lung butter you hack up.

No side effects, my ass.


About half of most common medications list sudden death as a possible side effect.

Sorry about your point but it's f*cking moot.
 
2009-11-06 12:31:53 PM
EdNortonsTwin

Oh, don't take his word for it ((((shhh, I think he smokes weed))). Instead, have a couple of Cokes or Jolt colas on an empty stomach.

Indigestion != ulcer, though a constant/long term supply of phosphoric acid could lower the overall pH to the point where ulcers could form.

Remember, pH is logarithmic. That half to one point difference in pH means your stomach acid is already 5 to 10x more acidic than the cola you're drinking.

Moderation is key.
 
2009-11-06 12:33:18 PM
Zer0ne: jonasborg: Cannabis is a virtually non-toxicalternative to many prescription drugs. The side effects of it are generally mild and pleasant. Why wouldn't people try that alternative? It's not like you have to smoke it.

Is that like when something is advertised as "virtually pain-free", meaning there's pain?


No, it means the toxicity is so low that you would have to ingest an unreal amount in order to overdose.

Like water.
 
2009-11-06 12:34:11 PM
Cthulhu Theory 2009-11-06 12:15:16 PM

doubled99: vylasaven: Republicans will soon become unRepublican if they start smoking weed. Either they'll get even more paranoid (unbelievably so) and freak out, before the rest of the nation invites them to sit on their comfy liberal-ish couch and settle down, or they'll chill the fark out and listen to what other people have to say for a few seconds.


I hope you guys don't seriously believe this, do you?
Republicans don't smoke weed? You should really expand your horizons a little. I smoke, and I'm pretty farkin far from a republican, but the thought that if people smoke, their minds will expand and they'll become liberal democrats is a little naive.
And if you think that a world with everyone smoking weed would be peaceful, I would like to introduce you to some members of the Crips, Bloods, or LaRaza here in SoCal.

Where exactly did he say they would become liberals? Please highlight and underline the specific points in his statement that equate this argument


You are correct, he did not specifically say liberal or democrat.
I simply inferred it due to his apparent belief that "republicans" do not smoke weed. It's a natural assumption that he is from the opposite camp. "Listen to what other people have to say" usually is a euphemism for "start believing the correct viewpoint-mine"

He's suggesting that they would more readily listen to what the opposition has to say, is all, rather than being a bunch of stubborn asshats who act like children and name call when they don't get their way

Because only one political ideology is guilty of that, right?

Also, I'm sure the gangmembers you speak of do more than just MJ, perhaps some coke and definitely copious amounts of booze


Probably, but that's my point. Those substances alone don't cause them to be violent, just as smoking would not automatically make you peaceful.
 
2009-11-06 12:40:30 PM
doubled99: Cthulhu Theory 2009-11-06 12:15:16 PM

doubled99: vylasaven: Republicans will soon become unRepublican if they start smoking weed. Either they'll get even more paranoid (unbelievably so) and freak out, before the rest of the nation invites them to sit on their comfy liberal-ish couch and settle down, or they'll chill the fark out and listen to what other people have to say for a few seconds.


I hope you guys don't seriously believe this, do you?
Republicans don't smoke weed? You should really expand your horizons a little. I smoke, and I'm pretty farkin far from a republican, but the thought that if people smoke, their minds will expand and they'll become liberal democrats is a little naive.
And if you think that a world with everyone smoking weed would be peaceful, I would like to introduce you to some members of the Crips, Bloods, or LaRaza here in SoCal.

Where exactly did he say they would become liberals? Please highlight and underline the specific points in his statement that equate this argument

You are correct, he did not specifically say liberal or democrat.
I simply inferred it due to his apparent belief that "republicans" do not smoke weed. It's a natural assumption that he is from the opposite camp. "Listen to what other people have to say" usually is a euphemism for "start believing the correct viewpoint-mine"

He's suggesting that they would more readily listen to what the opposition has to say, is all, rather than being a bunch of stubborn asshats who act like children and name call when they don't get their way

Because only one political ideology is guilty of that, right?

Also, I'm sure the gangmembers you speak of do more than just MJ, perhaps some coke and definitely copious amounts of booze


Probably, but that's my point. Those substances alone don't cause them to be violent, just as smoking would not automatically make you peaceful.


I concur. I know many assholes that smoke weed.
 
2009-11-06 12:40:33 PM
Don't mock my brain cloud!
 
2009-11-06 12:41:22 PM
Baby Diego: specialkae

Compare it to microbrews for a better perspective. Similar space requirements even. Still regulated and taxed.


Thank you for that suggestion. Admittedly, I do not know the regulations of the microbrew industry and that may in fact be a better analogy. However, my point (admittedly somewhat of a dull one) is still this: my brother in law brews his own beer-he's not a microbrewer, just a hobbyist. ATF is not knocking down his door for making illegal hooch. Would you suggest that a similar provision be enacted for hobby cannabis cultivators? If so, then that would be a step in the right direction, along with laws permitting the sale of marijuana along the lines of a microbrewery. What concerns me is that in my state, the "hobbyists" if you will, get their pot permit and are put on a list. Last time I checked, you didn't have to register on a list to be a hobby beer brewer.

I guess that my sense of this debate is that it's been outlawed for so long and the feds and the states simply cannot agree (would be nice if this were simply left up to the states entirely) that it just seems that any attempt to fix this problem results in further catastrophe whether it's trying to get it legalized for medical purposes and then have every Tom, Dick and Jane go to a quack for a recommendation, or the anti-pot folks who swear up and down that the devil weed is the demise of modern society. I just don't feel very confident about the current pot laws for medical purposes; too many people exploit them and then it ruins it for everyone.

and I have been wondering, where are the dispensaries getting their stock from? Is it a government program or private suppliers? And are they registered/licensed/regulated?
 
2009-11-06 12:41:24 PM
specialkae: joeflood:

Make marijuana legit and we can tax it. Keep it on the black market, and it's lost tax revenue.

Do you really want the government involved in the control of yet another substance to tax and control all the supply of? I mean, tobacco I can kinda get since it takes quite a bit of acerage, water, fertilizer, etc as well as curing/drying facilities to produce, but how well do you (or anyone in this thread, it's an open question) think it would work for the government to come in and say "ok, it's all ours, no way you can produce it and you have to buy it from a regulated shop." I mean, it doesn't take anywhere near the amount of resources for John Smith down the street to do a little homegrown. I don't see how govenment regulation would ever stop this, it's just not the same. And on that note, I don't see how tax revenues could be improved if it was legalized, there would probably be a drastic uptick in illegal cultivation.

/tobacco farming was the best example I could come up with, so please be gentle
//no good answer for the cannabis dilemma, as far as I can tell


I don't know. I think I'd equate it more to alcohol and the prohibition years. You had guys making bathtub gin because that was the only way to get it. It's not that difficult to do, but it's not effortless either. Same thing with marijuana. But with it legalized, what's the point to keep doing it yourself? I'm sure some people would try their hand at growing their own, but it becomes more effort than it's worth. Plus, I think that people don't want to be breaking the law if they don't have to. So, I think the demand for illegally cultivated weed would significantly drop if people could just go down to their local liquor store to get it.
 
2009-11-06 12:41:28 PM
Baby Diego: Cthulhu Theory

I personally love the way the acidic content eats away at my stomach! It enables you to feel all that carbonation tickling your tummy even better!

Cola (pH >2) does a better job on your stomach lining than the hydrochloric acid already in there (pH <2)?


I don't know wtf you just said, but I think them thars fightin wurds!
 
2009-11-06 12:42:07 PM
I guess the point of the headline is that marijuana isn't actually much of a medicine, and this is a legal dodge used to allow folks to use it for recreation?

The only thing I don't understand is that subby apparently thinks this is something that's a secret somehow. This is pretty standard form of civil disobedience/nullification for a subsection of a government to use to get around the rules of a larger, more general piece of government in which it's included. It's not that people don't know what's going on (except perhaps the really heavy users), it's that the government can't really do much about a full-scale civil rebellion of this type without going third-world on it. They've been down this road with things like jury nullification and know that the answer is just to let it slide and go after the dangerous versions of the problem (pot smuggled in by mexican warlords and such).

That said, try not to forget that it is mostly an open lie for the purposes of civil disobedience. There's some evidence that pot can alleviate glaucoma and it's a painkiller/intoxicant on par with ethanol... that's about it. If you genuinely believe it qualifies as an alternate cure for much of anything else I've got a great deal for you involving long-distance internet-based reiki massage for only 150$ a session. It'll clear your chakra and cure your cancer and such. 9 in 10 doctors recommend (that I be tried for fraud for suggesting) it (will do anything).
 
2009-11-06 12:42:40 PM
vernonFL
I was in California last week. In Los Angeles the dispensaries are everywhere. There are ads in newspapers and magazines.

Society hasn't broken apart, the world didn't end.


scienceblogs.com
 
2009-11-06 12:43:12 PM
BobNesta420: Cthulhu Theory: doubled99:


So, don't know if you wanted to know all that, but there you go.


Always willing to learn something new, not always willing to look for it. Thanks!
 
2009-11-06 12:43:52 PM
argylez

I'm sayin I smoke daily, and have no lung butter. I play ice hockey, am a distance runner (mostly 10 mi, and half marathons), and trumpet player.

I agree there isn't much research out there, so I do my own.


That's all well and good but it's anecdotal evidence. The Internet is full of anecdotes. Large, repeatable statistical studies are better. Not to poo-poo your experience but remember that plenty of people die of old age having smoked cigarettes all their lives. Simply smoking cigarettes doesn't guarantee lung cancer or other cardiovascular disease, it's an increased risk factor. And I suspect (but can't prove yet) that marijuana smoking is a risk factor, but likely a smaller risk factor than cigarette smoking.

Tried to find out if there is increased free radicals, but didn't find much, other than this, which says they aren't increased.

Now, I don't know if smoking marijuana promotes the collection of free radicals in the body but the simple fact is that combustion creates free radicals. Wikipedia:

Combustion

[...]

When a hydrocarbon is burned, a large number of different oxygen radicals are involved. The first thing to form is a hydroperoxide radical (HOO·), which reacts further into hydroperoxides that break up into hydroxide radicals.


So that's where my theory comes from. Obviously, real scientific tests are better.
 
2009-11-06 12:45:01 PM
Teknowaffle: Lets get one thing straight people.

It it not a medicine. Many people act like it is some magical, wonderful panacea. Many people at my stoner college (UCSC) argued that it cured glaucoma and treated cancer.

It only helps ease the pain.

It is Therapeutic Weed.


Well "the Munchies" are often a blessing to Chemo patients who otherwise have no appetite so it does lgitimately help them recover. Not to mention it generally outperforms the hell out of the next-best anti-nausea drug, phenergin, withoutthe nasty narcotic side effects (like constipation)
 
2009-11-06 12:46:33 PM
Tr0mBoNe: Smoke it constantly and every day and see what kind of lung butter you hack up.

No side effects, my ass.


Smoke cigarettes, drink beer, or take Tylenol every day and see what happens.
 
2009-11-06 12:47:40 PM
Baby Diego: Now, I don't know if smoking marijuana promotes the collection of free radicals in the body but the simple fact is that combustion creates free radicals.

So don't smoke it. Bake brownies instead.
 
2009-11-06 12:48:08 PM
Marijuana

Is there anything it can't.......
 
2009-11-06 12:50:32 PM
FlashHarry: legalize it. regulate it. tax it... profit.

It profits the states, who have wanted pot legal anyway. They have no reason to keep it illegal. It does NOT profit the federal government, who DOES want it illegal. Why? Because they DO profit from it being illegal.

The thing is, there's no constitutional authority for the federal government to tell the states how to act, unless those states are in violation of the constitution. But the precedent has been set, because they've been taking more powers for themselves, away from states, for years. To the point that lawmakers on both sides just accept that this is the new contract.

And the states will likely never try to take that power back, because it would mean federal intervention the likes of which we haven't seen since the civil rights movement, when federal and state authorities squared off, with guns drawn, before the states finally backed down.

Of course, at that time both the constitution and popular support was in favor of getting rid of racial discrimination. But now? I think both things are on the side of the states rights to decide drug policy. Unfortunately, who is right means very little. Just look at how the states were bullied into setting the drinking age to 21.
 
2009-11-06 12:51:02 PM
If it's a medicine, it should be sold only in the pharmacy, and be dispensed by a licensed pharmacist. Having it any other way 100% discredits it as a medical treatment.
 
2009-11-06 12:53:38 PM
Jim_Callahan

marijuana isn't actually much of a medicine, and this is a legal dodge used to allow folks to use it for recreation?

Can't it be both?

There's some evidence that pot can alleviate glaucoma and it's a painkiller/intoxicant on par with ethanol... that's about it.

When used as a painkiller for chronic pain you end up with problems, same as with every painkiller. I'm not up on my glaucoma research, so I'll leave that alone. What I'm strongly in favor of is treating the side effects of chemotherapy with it. There is a lot of really good evidence here and chemotherapy isn't a permanent thing, so tolerance / dependency problems aren't the same.

If you genuinely believe it qualifies as an alternate cure for much of anything else I've got a great deal for you involving long-distance internet-based reiki massage for only 150$ a session. It'll clear your chakra and cure your cancer and such. 9 in 10 doctors recommend (that I be tried for fraud for suggesting) it (will do anything).

It cures nothing. It treats the symptoms of some things. You won't catch me calling it a cure for anything. What it is known to treat well it should be used to treat well.

I advocate recreational use of marijuana entirely separately from my medical advocacy for it. It sucks that this legal dodge has to be made. It sucks because it takes away from the legitimate medical uses. It sucks because people should be able to smoke pot, same as they can drink or smoke cigs. It sucks because it shouldn't be this way in the first place and it sucks to appear to talk out of both sides of my mouth on the issue.
 
2009-11-06 12:55:03 PM
Sxooter: You do all realize the Federal Govt has no constitutional claim for regulating / outlawing pot right? If it hadn't overstepped its bounds this would be a state level issue and solved already by being legal most everywhere.

Farking neocons claiming they want less govt. Until it comes to pot.


You do realize that you have absolutely no idea what your talking about, don't you?
 
2009-11-06 12:55:33 PM
I'm gonna live my life by the Holy Trinity: Beer, Weed, Bacon.

I'll be disease and cancer-free, hung like a moose, and live till I'm 350.
 
2009-11-06 12:56:16 PM
HeartBurnKid

So don't smoke it. Bake brownies instead.

That's all well and good for recreational use but doesn't help the chemotherapy group. But I'd say the chemotherapy group should just go ahead and smoke it, the small increase in risk from that is greatly offset by the risks that come from NOT EATING.
 
2009-11-06 12:56:35 PM
doubled99: Cthulhu Theory 2009-11-06 12:15:16


Probably, but that's my point. Those substances alone don't cause them to be violent, just as smoking would not automatically make you peaceful.


You're arguing the obvious as well as semantics then. People who believe in absolutes are people who don't understand critical thinking. To just assume everyone will react the same way is a fallacy, which I think is your point. On the other hand, I'm sure plenty of people say things contrary to what they really believe just to appear they're being just and right despite the reality thay they might actually disagree with their proposed stance.

If the substance is legalized they might change their tune about it and absorb it into their fold of things that they let hold sway over them like big tobacco and evil maniacal oil companies.

/Whole other rant.
//Corruption with them will never end
///And no, neither party is guilt free of the cry-baby tactics, but at least the dems seem to be more flexible on their standings than the republicans.
 
2009-11-06 12:57:44 PM
ttintagel: If it's a medicine, it should be sold only in the pharmacy, and be dispensed by a licensed pharmacist. Having it any other way 100% discredits it as a medical treatment.

Agreed. But until it's accepted as a legitimate medicine by the government, my guess is that any pharmacy would be shut down as soon as they started dispensing it. In theory, your regular doctor should be allowed to prescribe it, but with the fear of having their medical license revoked, I think many are probably reluctant to do that.

I wonder if that's going to change now that the Obama administration has explicitly stated that they aren't going to go after anyone who is operating legitimately, as stated by their given state's medicinal marijuana laws.
 
2009-11-06 12:57:47 PM
Cthulhu Theory: Baby Diego: Cthulhu Theory

I personally love the way the acidic content eats away at my stomach! It enables you to feel all that carbonation tickling your tummy even better!

Cola (pH >2) does a better job on your stomach lining than the hydrochloric acid already in there (pH <2)?

I don't know wtf you just said, but I think them thars fightin wurds!




I know what Baby D is saying, so I'll post rabbits with a...

img225.imageshack.us

Serious case of the munchies!!!
 
2009-11-06 12:58:01 PM
ttintagel

If it's a medicine, it should be sold only in the pharmacy, and be dispensed by a licensed pharmacist. Having it any other way 100% discredits it as a medical treatment.

Wrong, it doesn't discredit the medical value, that is determined by scientific and medical consensus based on evidence. It has nothing to do with the politics that surround the distribution issue.
 
2009-11-06 12:58:17 PM
HeartBurnKid: Tr0mBoNe: Smoke it constantly and every day and see what kind of lung butter you hack up.

No side effects, my ass.

Smoke cigarettes, drink beer, or take Tylenol every day and see what happens.


Two of those listed are recreational drugs, so not really relevant comparisons... and more generally, the point of the post you're quoting was that, like all drugs, marijuana does in fact have side effects that require some moderation in its use. So... that was a really sarcastic way for you to agree with a post completely there.

Also, things like sudden death and anal bleeding and such listed as effects for prescription drugs are typically extremely rare effects, otherwise the drug wouldn't have made it through trials. Marijuana has a similar possibility of aggravating previously undetectable psychoses into full-blown paranoia or debilitating psychosis... at a similar very, very tiny rate. So a pharmaceutical ad for it would have "risk of debilitating psychosis" in the add, or whatever the specific cases have been. Basically, if you hold it to the same testing and advertising standards as regular medicine, it'll come out moderately scary, too. (Plus, according to the MSDS, THC is a carcinogen even before you consider things like combustion byproducts.)

This is not to knock marijuana. As a recreational drug it's a pretty nice one with the exception of the eternal sickly smell you'll never be able to get rid of (like any smoker), and the risks are relatively low since the manufacture is fairly idiot-proof. Just pointing out that denigrating real medicines to pretend pot is some kind of wonder-drug is kinda... silly, at best. And bound to make people take the legalization movement less seriously.

Summary: stop helping, 'cause it's not.
 
2009-11-06 12:58:46 PM
Huh? What?

What was I saying?

You don't have any pop tarts do you? Man, I'd give one of my kidneys for a pop-tart.
 
2009-11-06 12:59:03 PM
LavenderWolf: doubled99: Cthulhu Theory 2009-11-06 12:15:16 PM

doubled99: vylasaven:
I concur. I know many assholes that smoke weed. Most assholes I know smoke weed.


FTFM

/no cure for d-bagitis
 
2009-11-06 12:59:30 PM
JRoo: Makes total sense to ruin millions of lives so the police can arrest people and take their possessions and not offer any kind of rehab program if it's so bad.

We've got to get people out of the labor pool somehow.
 
2009-11-06 01:01:00 PM
memphisto: Sxooter,

You're right, but that argument died with the Alien and Sedition acts and was buried by the 14th amendment.


He was very wrong, but not quite as wrong as you.
 
2009-11-06 01:02:23 PM
give me doughnuts: I'm gonna live my life by the Holy Trinity: Beer, Weed, Bacon.

I'll be disease and cancer-free, hung like a moose, and live till I'm 350.


Yeah, you keep livin that dream, let me know how your arteries feel in 10 years.

/Assuming you're still around.
 
2009-11-06 01:03:07 PM
AmazingRuss: JRoo: Makes total sense to ruin millions of lives so the police can arrest people and take their possessions and not offer any kind of rehab program if it's so bad.

We've got to get people out of the labor pool somehow.


Everyone I know just stops smoking for a few weeks so they can pass their drug test and then as soon as they have the job they start up again.
 
2009-11-06 01:04:23 PM
ttintagel: If it's a medicine, it should be sold only in the pharmacy, and be dispensed by a licensed pharmacist. Having it any other way 100% discredits it as a medical treatment.

I agree. "Medical" MJ is for the most part BS anyway. Yes, it does have medical advantages (like treatment of nausea etc) but we all know it has not undergone extensive research outside of college dorms.

Let's cut the crap and just make it legal. It is a rather benign substance which has not been properly researched. The amount of medical studies on MJ is so small and biased that it is a joke to call it "medical". I will freely admit that it seems to help keep Ulcerative Colitis / Crohn's from flaring up, but that is just my personal experience. Does it mean there is real medicinal qualities? Nobody knows because the FDA will not take any marijuana research as valid.

Legalize it similar to booze. License, tax and regulate (age restriction) as you see fit. Just make sure individuals may grow at home just like microbrewing.

Then you can have this easy to grow plant available to industry (paper, textiles erc) and medical researchers may begin doing studies on its effect on actual illnesses. Is it good treatment for IBD? Is it good for anxiety? Is it good for glaucoma?

Only then will it be able to be called "medical".
 
2009-11-06 01:06:30 PM
Lung butter? LOL

Riiiight...

Sounds like someone who's never smoked a day in their life.

Being a 'moron' pot smoker myself, I've smoked everyday for the last 7 years (yes...everyday, get over yourself you preachy biatch), and I've never coughed up 'lung butter' from weed.

Oddly enough...I very rarely smoke cigarettes (maybe a few times month whenever friends are over/out for a smoke) and a single cigarette will mess with my lungs and force a cough for a few days...

Grams of marijuana a day for years: no adverse side effects/feelings

One occasional cig: a shiat feeling inside my stomach and an 'itchy' feeling in my lungs.
 
2009-11-06 01:06:53 PM
animalnewyork.com
Weed Card


Everyone knows marijuana's dangerous
And medical pot is really strong
That's why it's so hard it California
To get your weed card
Unless something's really wrong
Gonna pay a visit to my doctor
It's a long shot but I gotta try
She hands me a list of all the ailments
I can have to qualify
Can't believe what I am reading
This is just what I've been needing
A government supply
To get legally high

Weed card, that's what I need
Hardly ever, okay, always
But it's not an addiction
Cause my doctor gave me a prescription

You can get your card for having headaches, bad dreams or anxiety
Propensity for drugs or alcohol,
Anorexia or Obesity
Too fat, too thin, either way you win!
Carpal tunnel syndrome, color blindness,
St-st-stuttering, t-t-tooth decay
Fatigue, depression, motion sickness,
Impotence or TMJ
You can smoke to quit cigarettes
For asthma or motherfarking Tourettes
It's a dream come true
There's nothing pot can't do

Weed card, that's what I need
Hardly ever, okay, always
But it's not an addiction
Cause my doctor gave me a prescription

Got back pain, need mary jane
Can't handle this, need cannabis
Got a stomach ache, gotta wake and bake
Have an injury, need THC
Get farked up for your hyperhydrosis
Which is sweaty palms in case you need a diagnosis
It's not a crime, it's 4:20 time

Weed card, that's what I need
Hardly ever, okay, always
But its not an addiction
Cause my doctor gave me a prescription
 
2009-11-06 01:06:55 PM
Baby Diego:
It cures nothing. It treats the symptoms of some things. You won't catch me calling it a cure for anything. What it is known to treat well it should be used to treat well.


Fair enough. I did leave out that it can be used as an anti-nausea medication for a lot of people (though, obviously, I'm not a doctor, so assumably you should consult one and watch for side effects when using it as such). And I've had doctors recommend that I drink black tea when I'm sick with flu (to keep me from suffering caffeine withdrawal without aggravating the symptoms of the illness like coffee sometimes does) so it certainly isn't out of line for a professional to recommend a recreational drug to a patient if it will help him feel better.

I was more addressing the "Cannabis is a virtually non-toxic alternative to many prescription drugs" dude from the beginning of the thread and the arguments based on "prescription drugs are EVIL" than the actual, rational argument for medical use, which is what you presented.
 
2009-11-06 01:08:57 PM
Baby Diego: argylez

Tried to find out if there is increased free radicals, but didn't find much, other than this, which says they aren't increased.


The dedicated potheads, the daily smokers that I know have nearly all gone to vaporizers so there is no combustion. Occasional tokers (a couple of times a month) probably do not smoke enough for it to affect their lungs much more then cooking on a charcoal grill occasionally or hanging out in a smokey bar once in a while. I do know one guy who is stoned from ten minutes after he wakes till he goes to bed hitting the pipe all day long, but he smokes a couple of packs of ciggys a day too.
 
2009-11-06 01:08:57 PM
iollow: FlashHarry: legalize it. regulate it. tax it... profit.

It profits the states, who have wanted pot legal anyway. They have no reason to keep it illegal. It does NOT profit the federal government, who DOES want it illegal. Why? Because they DO profit from it being illegal.

The thing is, there's no constitutional authority for the federal government to tell the states how to act, unless those states are in violation of the constitution. But the precedent has been set, because they've been taking more powers for themselves, away from states, for years. To the point that lawmakers on both sides just accept that this is the new contract.

And the states will likely never try to take that power back, because it would mean federal intervention the likes of which we haven't seen since the civil rights movement, when federal and state authorities squared off, with guns drawn, before the states finally backed down.

Of course, at that time both the constitution and popular support was in favor of getting rid of racial discrimination. But now? I think both things are on the side of the states rights to decide drug policy. Unfortunately, who is right means very little. Just look at how the states were bullied into setting the drinking age to 21.


Seriously, where in the world do you guys get this shiat?
 
Displayed 50 of 227 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report