For or against legal mar1juana?

My friend and I were in honor classes throughout high school and we were pot smokers throughout high school.

Not exactly.

 

friends*


Lets get that edit function back.

 

About alcohol consumption and driving. The company I work for has conducted studies about how drinking affects your driving ability. Using testers who were very good at judging car speed (within 3mph), they had them consume one alcholic drink. The same testers were now misjudged the speed of cars by 15-20 mph.

Your judgement of moving objects can be severely affected by small amounts of alcohol. Please take care everybody...

 

Ask and you shall recieve. Here are some harmful effects that THC itself will give to your body, slick.

Effects on the Brain

Scientists have learned a great deal about how THC acts in the brain to produce its many effects. When someone smokes mar1juana, THC rapidly passes from the lungs into the bloodstream, which carries the chemical to organs throughout the body, including the brain.

In the brain, THC connects to specific sites called cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors; others have few or none. Many cannabinoid receptors are found in the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thought, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement(5).

The short-term effects of mar1juana use can include problems with memory and learning; distorted perception; difficulty in thinking and problem solving; loss of coordination; and increased heart rate. Research findings for long-term mar1juana use indicate some changes in the brain similar to those seen after long-term use of other major drugs of abuse. For example, cannabinoid (THC or synthetic forms of THC) withdrawal in chronically exposed animals leads to an increase in the activation of the stress-response system(6) and changes in the activity of nerve cells containing dopamine(7). Dopamine neurons are involved in the regulation of motivation and reward, and are directly or indirectly affected by all drugs of abuse.

Other Health Effects

Some of mar1juana's adverse health effects may occur because THC impairs the immune system’s ability to fight off infectious diseases and cancer. In laboratory experiments that exposed animal and human cells to THC or other mar1juana ingredients, the normal disease-preventing reactions of many of the key types of immune cells were inhibited(16). In other studies, mice exposed to THC or related substances were more likely than unexposed mice to develop bacterial infections and tumors(17,18).

Effects on Pregnancy

Research has shown that babies born to women who used mar1juana during their pregnancies display altered responses to visual stimuli, increased tremulousness, and a high-pitched cry, which may indicate problems with neurological development(32). During infancy and preschool years, mar1juana-exposed children have been observed to have more behavioral problems and poorer performance on tasks of visual perception, language comprehension, sustained attention, and memory(33,34). In school, these children are more likely to exhibit deficits in decision-making skills, memory, and the ability to remain attentive(35,36,37).

5 Herkenham M, Lynn A., Little MD, Johnson MR, et al: Cannabinoid receptor localization in the brain. Proc Natl Acad Sci, USA 87:1932-1936, 1990

6 Rodriguez de Fonseca F, et al: Activation of cortocotropin-releasing factor in the limbic system during cannabinoid withdrawal. Science 276(5321):2050-2064, 1997

7 Diana M, Melis M, Muntoni AL, et al: Mesolimbic dopaminergic decline after cannabinoid withdrawal. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci 95:10269-10273, 1998.

16 Adams IB, Martin BR: Cannabis: pharmacology and toxicology in animals and humans. Addiction 91:1585-1614, 1996

17 Klein TW, Newton C, Friedman H: Resistance to Legionella pneumophila suppressed by the mar1juana component, tetrahydrocannabinol. J Infectious Disease 169:1177-1179, 1994.

18 Zhu L, Stolina M, Sharma S, et al: Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits antitumor immunity by a CB2 receptor-mediated, cytokine-dependent pathway. J Immunology, 2000, pp. 373-380.

32 Lester, BM; Dreher, M: Effects of mar1juana use during pregnancy on newborn cry. Child Development 60:764-771, 1989.

33 Fried, PA: The Ottawa prenatal prospective study (OPPS): methodological issues and findings—it’s easy to throw the baby out with the bath water. Life Sciences 56:2159-2168, 1995.

34 Fried, PA: Prenatal exposure to marihuana and tobacco during infancy, early and middle childhood: effects and an attempt at synthesis. Arch Toxicol Supp 17:233-60, 1995.

35 Ibid ref 33.

36 Ibid ref 34.

37 Cornelius MD, Taylor PM, Geva D, et al: Prenatal tobacco and mar1juana use among adolescents: effects on offspring gestational age, growth, and morphology. Pediatrics 95:738-743, 1995.

Is that good enough for you?? I'm not even mentioning studies concerning the effects on lungs and the heart. Such as the fact that mar1juana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke. Or the fact that a mar1juana user’s risk of heart attack more than quadruples in the first hour after smoking mar1juana. We can both assume and argue about what would happen if pot became legal, you have your thoughts and I have mine, but the fact is pot is bad for you and everyone that uses it. Toughguy.

 

If it was made legal less would smoke, more would cook. That is of course assuming it is cheaper than it is now. Maybe not everyone would convert to cooking with mar1juana, but I know I would probably never smoke mar1juana again.

 

It also shrinks your balls like Mountain Dew...
:: peeks down::

You could do a base study on alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine and come up with some similar stuff-they don't kill you but they're obviously drugs that change your body.

Here's an old BBC report about the risk of drug drivers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/309603.stm

IMO, it's still up in the air. A majority of mar1juana related accidents were by drivers that also had alcohol in their bloodstream.

And you haven't seen anymore of these kinds of studies in this politically charged climate....

 

edit

 

Uh, this is a decription of getting intoxicated, not of harm to the body. It is the same effect sought when someone takes a drink. As for the assertions of HARM I will handle those one by one.

 

This doesn't really say there are HARMS of use, but as a pre-empt I will cite for effects on the brain anyway.

"Various studies have claimed that cannabis destroys brain cells (Landfield et al., 1988; Haper et al., 1977; Meyers and Heath, 1979; Heath et al., 1980). However, several other studies found no structural or neurochemical atrophy in the brain at all (Cabral et al., 1991; Paule et al., 1992; Co et al., 1977; Kuehnle, 1977). Furthermore, it should be noted that Heath's work was sharply criticized for avoiding safeguards of bias and reporting "changes" that occur normally in the mammalian brain (Natl. Acad. of Sciences, Inst. Medicine, 1982)."

Before I even start quoting people, can you imagine how stupid the medical community must be for advocating THC (which you claim REDUCES natural immunity) to AIDS PATIENTS! And CANCER PATIENTS! They must be complete morons to give someone who literally has a RAVAGED immune system something that FURTHER reduces their natural defenses from infection. No, they are not that dumb. The majority of the medical community clearly does NOT believe this is the case.

"Cannabis has also been known for its many therapeutic uses, including the treatment of open angle glaucoma, asthma, and the nausea associated with chemotherapy. It has also been described as a tumor r****dant, an antibiotic, a sleep-inducer, and a muscle relaxant (Cohen, 1980)."

"Physically, cannabis is relatively harmless. Studies have observed interesting results, including that it causes structural changes in the brain, depresses male sperm counts, causes chromosome damage, lowers testosterone levels, and damages the lungs. Most of these claims, however, have been unreplicated in humans or have been contradicted by other work. This section will address each of these reported negative side-effects."

"It could also be noted that the mere contents of carcinogenic chemicals doesn't necessarily indicate an extreme health hazard. For example, roasted coffee contains 800 volatile chemicals, of which only 21 have been tested on rodents, and of those, 16 were carcinogenic (Ames, 1990). Coffee has never been considered a great cancer-causing substance, though."

"Last year, Spanish scientists found evidence that mar1juana can destroy tumors in rats...The latest study, released in February 2000, was conducted by Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutence University in Madrid. In the study, brains of 45 lab rats were injected with a cancer cell, which produced tumors. Later, a third of the rodents were given shots of tetrahydrocannibanol (THC), the active chemical in mar1juana. The untreated rats all died within 18 days. But one out of five of those who'd been given the pot were cured completely and the others lived twice as long as the drug-free rodents."

"...a study conducted by Virginia scientists in 1974 yielded the same results. "The active chemical agent in mar1juana curbs the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice, a Medical College of Virginia team has discovered," the Washington Post reported back on Aug. 18, 1974. "The researchers found that THC slowed the growth of lung cancers, breast cancers and a virus-induced leukemia in lab mice and prolonged their lives by as much as 36 percent."

I wouldn't recommend pregnant women use tobacco or overindulge with alcohol, but would not advocate banning those substances as a solution. However,

"While experts generally recommend against any drug use during pregnancy, mar1juana has little evidence implicating it in fetal harm, unlike alcohol, cocaine or tobacco. Epidemiological studies have found no evident link between prenatal use of mar1juana and birth defects in humans.(2) A recent study by Dr. Susan Astley at the University of Washington refuted an earlier work suggesting that cannabis might cause fetal alcohol syndrome.(3) Although some research has found that prenatal cannabis use is associated with slightly reduced average birth weight and length,(4) these studies have been open to methodological criticism. More recently, a well-controlled study found that cannabis use had a positive impact on birthweight during the third trimester of pregnancy with no adverse behavioral consequences.(5) The same study found a slight reduction in birth length with pot use in the first two months of pregnancy. Another study of Jamaican women who had smoked pot throughout pregnancy found that their babies registered higher on developmental scores at the age of 30 days, while experiencing no significant effects on birthweight or length.(6) While cannabis use is not recommended in pregnancy, it may be of medical value to some women in treating morning sickness or easing childbirth."

2. NAS Report, p. 99.
3. Dr. Susan Astley, Analysis of Facial Shape in Children Gestationally Exposed to mar1juana, Alcohol, and/or Cocaine, Pediatrics 89#1: 67-77 ( January 1992).
4. Dr. Barry Zuckerman et al. Effects of Maternal mar1juana and Cocaine Use on Fetal Growth, New England Journal of Medicine 320 #12: 762-8 (March 23, 1989); Dr. Ralph Hingson et al., Effects of maternal drinking and mar1juana use on fetal growth and development, Pediatrics 70: 539-46 (1982).
5. Nancy Day et al., Prenatal mar1juana Use and Neonatal Outcome, Neurotoxicology and Teratology 13: 329-34 (1992).
6. Janice Hayes, Melanie Dreher and J. Kevin Nugent, Newborn Outcomes With Maternal Marihuana Use in Jamaican Women, Pediatric Nursing 14 #2: 107-10 (Mar-Apr. 1988).

"Tashkin et al. (1990) reports decreased gas exchange capacity and the existence of particle residue in the lungs of mar1juana smokers several times greater than for tobacco smokers. Wu et al. (1988) noted that mar1juana is several times more carcinogenic than tobacco. These findings, though, must be interpreted with caution. In both studies, smoked mar1juana was not filtered, while smoked tobacco was. Tashkin et al. notes that, "these differences could largely account for more than twofold greater tar yield from mar1juana than tobacco that was measured using syringe-simulated puffs of similar volume and duration." Smoking cannabis through a water-pipe will filter out water soluble carcinogens and will also greatly cool down the smoke. Furthermore, cannabis need not be smoked: In Middle Eastern countries, it has been consumed through teas and food for centuries, avoiding the carcinogenicity of smoke altogether."

First of that effect is temporary. Second, it is only possibly harmful to someone with a heart condition, and those people also shouldn't ride roller coasters. Should we ban roller coasters? Or scary movies? Or other activities that increase the heart rate (you can use your imagination )...

"The most serious concern is its effects on the pulmonary system, yet, studies have often used poor controls (i.e., no filtration) and their results can mislead an uncareful reader. Smoking the drug with a different apparatus or ingesting it without smoking at all could greatly effect the results of these studies."

"The physiologic effects of mar1juana use include an accelerated heart rate and a minimal rise in blood pressure.15,16 These effects, which seem to be secondary to -adrenergic vascular mechanisms, are transient and usually not deleterious to the otherwise healthy adolescent." (American Academy of Pediatrics; an article AGAINST mar1juana USE)

Sorry chief. Try again. Just for you a little more comparison:

mar1juana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances know to man...There is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented cannabis induced fatality...By contrast aspirin, a commonly used over-the-counter medicine, causes hundreds of deaths every year." - Frances L. Young, Administrative Law Judge Drug Enforcement Administration, Sept. 1998

Driving:

"A growing body of research indicates that mar1juana is on balance less of a road hazard than alcohol. Various surveys have found that half or more of fatal drivers have alcohol in their blood, as opposed to 7 - 20% with THC, the major psychoactive component of mar1juana (a condition usually indicative of having smoked within the past 2-4 hours).(3) The same studies show that some 70 - 90% of those who are THC-positive also have alcohol in their blood. It therefore appears that mar1juana by itself is a minor road safety hazard, though the combination of pot and alcohol is not. Some research has even suggested that low doses of mar1juana may sometimes improve driving performance, though this is probably not true in most cases.(4) Two major new studies by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration have confirmed mar1juana's relative safety compared to alcohol. The first, the most comprehensive drug accident study to date, surveyed blood samples from 1882 drivers killed in car, truck and motorchycle accidents in seven states during 1990-91.(5) Alcohol was found in 51.5% of specimens, as against 17.8% for all other drugs combined. mar1juana, the second most common drug, appeared in just 6.7%. Two-thirds of the mar1juana-using drivers also had alcohol. The report concluded that alcohol was by far the dominant drug-related problem in accidents. It went on to analyze the responsibility of drivers for the accidents they were involved in. It found that drivers who used alcohol were especially culpable in fatal accidents, and even more so when they combined it with mar1juana or other drugs. However, those who used mar1juana alone appeared to be if anything less culpable than non-drug users (though the data were insufficient to be statistically conclusive). The report concluded, "There was no indication that mar1juana by itself was a cause of fatal accidents." (It must be emphasized that this is not the case when mar1juana is combined with alcohol or other drugs). The second NHTSA study, mar1juana and Actual Driving Performance, concluded that the adverse effects of cannabis on driving appear "relatively small" and are less than those of drunken driving. (6) The study, conducted in the Netherlands, examined the performance of drivers in actual freeway and urban driving situations at various doses of mar1juana. It found that mar1juana produces a moderate, dose-related decrement in road tracking ability, but is "not profoundly impairing" and "in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs." It found that mar1juana's effects at the higher doses preferred by smokers never exceed those of alcohol at blood concentrations of .08%, the minimum level for legal intoxication in stricter states such as California. The study found that unlike alcohol, which encourages risky driving, mar1juana appears to produce greater caution, apparently because users are more aware of their state and able to compensate for it (similar results have been reported by other researchers as well.(7)) It should be noted that these results may not apply to non-driving related situations, where forgetfulness or inattention can be more important than speed (this might explain the discrepancy in the Baltimore hospital study, which looked at accidents of all kinds). The NHTSA study also warned that mar1juana could also be quite dangerous in emergency situations that put high demands on driving skills."

3. Dale Gieringer, mar1juana, Driving, and Accident Safety, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 20 (1): 93-101 (Jan-Mar 1988).
4. H. Klonoff, mar1juana and driving in real-life situations, Science 186: 317-24 (1974).
5. K.W. Terhune et al., The Incidence and Role of Drugs in Fatally Injured Drivers, NHTSA Report # DOT-HS-808-065 (1994).
6. Hendrik Robbe and James O'Hanlon, mar1juana and Actual Driving Performance, NHTSA Report #DOT-HS-808-078 (1994).
7. Klonoff, loc. cit.; A. Smiley, mar1juana: On-road and driving simulator studies, Alcohol, Drugs and Driving: Abstracts and Reviews 2#3-4: 15-30 (1986).

Ames, B.N., Gold, L.S. Too many rodent carcinogens: Mitogenesis increases mutagenesis. Science. Vol 149. Pg. 971. 1990.
Bell, J. On the haschisch or cannabis indica. The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal. Vol LVI, No. 11. April 16, 1857.
Cabral, G. et al. Chronic mar1juana Smoke Alters Alveolar Macrophage Morphology and Protein Expression. Fundamental and Applied Toxicolgy. 17:321-32. 1991.
Coggins, W.J., Swenson, E.W., Dawson, W.W., et al. Health status of chronic heavy cannabis users. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 282:148-161. 1976.
Co, B.T., Goodwin, D.W., Gado, M., Mikhael, M., and Hill, S.Y. Absence of cerebral atrophy in chronic cannabis users. JAMA. 237:1229-1230. 1977.
Cohen, S. Therapeutic Aspects. mar1juana Research Findings: 1980. NIDA Research Mongraph 31. 1980.
Glenn, Reed. Daily Camera. Jan. 2, 1992.
Harper, J.W., Heath, R.G., and Myers, W.A. Effects of cannabis sativa on ultrastructure of the synapse in monkey brain. J. Neurosci. Res. 3:87-93. 1977.
Heath, R.G., Fitzjarrell, A.T., Garey, R.E., and Myers, W.A. Chronic marihuana smoking: Its effects on function and structure of the primate brain. In Nahas, G.G. and Paton, W.D.M. (eds) Marihuana: Biological Effects. Analysis, Metabolism, Cullarlar Responses, Reproduction and Brain. Pergamon Press: Oxford. 1979.
Heath, R.G., Fitzjarrell, A.T., Fontana, C.J., and Garey, R.E. Cannabis sativa: Effects on brain function and ultrastructure in Rhesus monkeys. Biological Pschiatry. 15:657-690. 1980.
Kolodny, R.C., Masters, W.H., Kolodner, R.M., and Toro, G. Depression of plasma testosterone levels after chronic intensive mar1juana use. NEJM. 290:872-874. 1974.
Kuehnle, J., Mendelson, J.H., Davis, K.R., and New, P.F.J. Computed tomographic examination of heavy mar1juana smokers. JAMA. 237:1231-1232. 1977.
Landfield, P., Cadwallader, L. B., and Vinsant, S. Quantitative changes in hippocampal structure following long-term exposure to delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol: possible mediation by glucucorticoid systems. Brain Research. Vol 443. 1988.
Mendelson, J.H., Kuehnle, J. Ellingboe, J., and Babor, T.F. Plasma testosterone levels before, during, and after chronic marihuana smoking. NEJM. 291:1051-1055. 1974.
Morris, D. Saint Paul Pioneer Press. May 6, 1991.
National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine. mar1juana and Health. National Academic Press: Washington D.C. 1982.
NCRP Report #95. Radiation Exposure of the U.S. population from consumer products and miscellaneous sources. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement. Dec 30, 1987.
Paule, M. et al. Chronic mar1juana smoke exposure in the rhesus monkey II: Effects on progressive ratio and conditioned position responding. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics. 260: 210-22. 1992.
Shedler, J., Block, J. Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist. Vol 45(5) 612-630. 1990.
Tashkin, D.P., Fligiel S., Wu, T-C., Gong, H. Jr., Barbers, R.G., Coulson, A.H., Simmons, M.S., Beals, T.F. Effects of habitual use of mar1juana and/or cocaine on the lung. Research Findings on Smoking of Abused Substances. NIDA Monograph 99. 1990.
Walton, R.P. Marihuana: America's New Drug Problem. J.B. Lippincott: Philadelphia. 1874. [sic.]
Winters, T.H., Franza, J.R. Radioactivity in Cigarette Smoke. NEJM. 306(6): 364-365. 1982.
Wu, T-C., Tashkin, D.P., Djahed, B., and Rose, J.E. Pulmonary hazards of smoking mar1juana as compared with tobacco. NEJM. 1988.

 

Your smart. Are you high right now? What do you think the term intoxicated means? It means-an abnormal state that is essentially a poisoning.

 

Is that like 'your mean'?

 

First off, are you a cancer patient or an AIDS patient? Thousands of drugs are used to benefit patients, what is your point? Is it that every drug used to treat disease is good for your body and should be legalized?LOL

Secondly take a look at your quotes, I hope you didn't spend too much time finding them. You are quoting a adminitrative Law Judge for medical advice. Hmm, maybe we can ask Judge Judy what she thinks about this. Also, if you take a look at the dates, most are from the 1970's and 1980's. People were reading this when they were wearing bell bottoms and dancing to disco, your argument is out of date. I think medicine has made technical advances in the past few decades.

As far as driving is concerned, weed impaires judment and motor skills, things you need in the best possible condition when your driving a 3000+ automobile. Period.

In closing and to end this argument which I've clearly won, If you want to smoke weed that's fine, just try not to kill any children while you are driving, get some good health insurance, and don't whine when you go to jail.

 

Have you ever driven after an insufficient night's sleep?

 

Unless you're driving golf balls, of course.

 

My smart what? You're high and losing concentration? Finish your sentence!

I could easily have retrieved all those studies and waxed your ass in this argument high. The cognitive effects are not what you read in the ReaganReporter.

Dude, are you a jackass or what? Coffee would fit your definition of poisoning. One drink of alcohol would fit your definition since it would killing brain cells. However, for most of us who live in this world, and not on the planet Wacko, there is a threshold set which determines whether something is on balance good for us or not. Strangely, the medical community, those we charge with advising us on matters of health, also use a threshold, not a 0% rule. So if you asked a doctor whether is was harmful to have a drink of alcohol, they would say 'NO.' They would not say 'obviously dummy, its poison.'

I have to say I really hate it when stupid or dogmatic people LOL. My answer about AIDS & Cancer patients directly refutes your claim that mar1juana hurts the immune system, and makes people more susceptible to disease and infection. Do you understand? You say decreases immune system, I say it doesn't. Except my argument is logical, RESPONSIVE and yours is assertion, and not.

Uh, that was a general quote, from someone in the DEA. One of those agencies dogmatic pricks like yourself bow down to on a regular basis, so I thought it would interest you. I guess those in the government responsible for making policy DON'T know what they are talking about (which really should be MY position, not yours, silly). But EVERY OTHER is from a medical or scientific source, thank you.

First, that is FALSE. Many of the studies/articles are relatively recent. I even specifically mention a study from 2000, which postdates ANY of your studies. Second, what is the relevance of the dates? What is the relevance of FASHION (bellbottoms etc) when the studies were done? How does that indict the scientific conclusions? Third, the 70s and 80s saw MOST of the research into mar1juana and its effects. By the middle of the Reagan administration all government funding was cancelled for any of those studies based on a political agenda.

First, I never advocated legalizing driving intoxicated. No one does. You would be hard pressed to find a legalization advocate who does. Although as indicated some studies concluded that their drivers were SAFER high, I won't go that far. Second, the solution to this risk is twofold, which go back to my ORIGINAL arguments on why legalization of mar1juana would be good - namely that enforcement can be more concentrated and that education is more credible and hence more effective. If you truly believe that a substance that impairs your driving should be banned then you should also advocate the banning of alcohol and a whole list of other substances. I don't care about your 'hypocrisy' but merely your logic. If you are not willing to ban alcohol then your logic is flawed and your point is merely dominated by dogmatic morality disguised as science. THAT is the most dangerous thing of all.

Clearly...

 

Four more years! Four more years!

 

beautiful post. 100% agree.

i also have to say that i am for legalizing prostitution. there are just some things in the world that you are not going to stop, no matter what you do. so you might as well make it a legal profession, put the girls in safe brothels, and tax the hell out of it.

same thing for mar1juana (and i think for just about any drug). it's kinda like the prohibition thing back in early 20th century. by banning it, you open up the product for control by the criminal element. if the product is legal, you can quality control it and then tax the hell out of it like cigarrettes to help restrict it's use.

now, my reasoning for this is obviously pretty damn simple, so i wouldn't be all that surprised if someone ripped it apart with more detailed information on how the two "industries" work. i'm just going by what i know here.

 

Like mar1juana, protsitution is a lifestyle choice that many will look upon as immoral regardless of whether it's legal or not. People who want to do it and have the money are going to do it anyways. Legalization could even reduce the number of STDs.