JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Shlomo on October 07, 2014, 07:51:02 AM
-
The terrible truth about cannabis: Expert's devastating 20-year study finally demolishes claims that smoking pot is harmless
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2782906/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-British-expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2782906/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-British-expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html)
- Cannabis doubles the risk of developing psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia
- Cannabis users do worse at school. Heavy use in adolescence appears to impair intellectual development
- Driving after smoking cannabis doubles risk of having a car crash
- Smoking it while pregnant reduces the baby’s birth weight
- One in ten adults who regularly smoke the drug become dependent on it and those who use it are more likely to go on to use harder drugs
- Study's author said: 'If cannabis is not addictive then neither is heroin'
A definitive 20-year study into the effects of long-term cannabis use has demolished the argument that the drug is safe.
Cannabis is highly addictive, causes mental health problems and opens the door to hard drugs, the study found.
Last night Professor Hall, a professor of addiction policy at King’s College London, dismissed the views of those who say that cannabis is harmless.
‘If cannabis is not addictive then neither is heroin or alcohol,’ he said.
‘It is often harder to get people who are dependent on cannabis through withdrawal than for heroin – we just don’t know how to do it.’
Those who try to stop taking cannabis often suffer anxiety, insomnia, appetite disturbance and depression, he found. Even after treatment, less than half can stay off the drug for six months.
The paper states that teenagers and young adults are now as likely to take cannabis as they are to smoke cigarettes.
Professor Hall writes that it is impossible to take a fatal overdose of cannabis, making it less dangerous at first glance than heroin or cocaine. He also states that taking the drug while pregnant can reduce the weight of a baby, and long-term use raises the risk of cancer, bronchitis and heart attack.
But his main finding is that regular use, especially among teenagers, leads to long-term mental health problems and addiction.
‘The important point I am trying to make is that people can get into difficulties with cannabis use, particularly if they get into daily use over a longer period,’ he said. ‘There is no doubt that heavy users experience a withdrawal syndrome as with alcohol and heroin.
‘Rates of recovery from cannabis dependence among those seeking treatment are similar to those for alcohol.’
Mark Winstanley, of the charity Rethink Mental Illness, said: ‘Too often cannabis is wrongly seen as a safe drug, but as this review shows, there is a clear link with psychosis and schizophrenia, especially for teenagers.
‘The common view that smoking cannabis is nothing to get worked up about needs to be challenged more effectively. Instead of classifying and re-classifying, government time and money would be much better spent on educating young people about how smoking cannabis is essentially playing a very real game of Russian roulette with your mental health.’
Cannabis was given a Class B rating when the classification system for illegal drugs was set up in 1971, putting it below Class A substances heroin and cocaine in seriousness but above Class C drugs such as steroids.
The Labour government downgraded the drug to Class C in 2004 – meaning officers did not normally arrest those caught with it – but reversed its decision within five years. Other failed attempts to liberalise the approach to cannabis include that of former Metropolitan Police chief Brian Paddick, who spearheaded a ‘softly, softly’ scheme while borough commander in Lambeth in 2001.
His party leader, Nick Clegg, has previously backed moves to partially decriminalise the sale of cannabis. At the Liberal Democrat conference yesterday, he called for people to be spared jail if they are caught with small amounts of drugs.
To see the videos and for the complete article, click here:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2782906/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-British-expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html
-
The terrible truth about cannabis: Expert's devastating 20-year study finally demolishes claims that smoking pot is harmless
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2782906/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-British-expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2782906/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-British-expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html)
- Cannabis doubles the risk of developing psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia
...- One in ten adults who regularly smoke the drug become dependent on it and those who use it are more likely to go on to use harder drugs
- Study's author said: 'If cannabis is not addictive then neither is heroin'
A definitive 20-year study into the effects of long-term cannabis use has demolished the argument that the drug is safe.
Cannabis is highly addictive, causes mental health problems and opens the door to hard drugs, the study found.
Last night Professor Hall, a professor of addiction policy at King’s College London, dismissed the views of those who say that cannabis is harmless.
‘If cannabis is not addictive then neither is heroin or alcohol,’ he said.
‘It is often harder to get people who are dependent on cannabis through withdrawal than for heroin – we just don’t know how to do it.’
...Those who try to stop taking cannabis often suffer anxiety, insomnia, appetite disturbance and depression, he found. Even after treatment, less than half can stay off the drug for six months.
I don't understand.
I applied for medical cannabis for chronic pain on the Israeli health system and took it legally. It did nothing for my pain, but I found it completely non addictive and had no problems stopping.
The people who supervised us told us to not to worry about addiction because it is completely non addictive.
They said that medical cannabis is a different thing from street cannabis in the same way that medical morphine is different from the street equivalent. Perhaps this research refers to the non medical stuff?
It's true about all that stuff about affecting the brain and schizophrenia
But I am very strongly for greater legalisation for it for the sick and for more of it to be grown medically so that the sick could buy it cheaply. The beuarocratic process to apply legally took me 6 months and it was really unfair to leave me waiting like that, especially when I was paying for it.
I can't imagine what a cancer sufferer who only has a few months to live must feel like to go through that process.
-
Great post Shlomo.
-
I don't understand.
I applied for medical cannabis for chronic pain on the Israeli health system and took it legally. It did nothing for my pain, but I found it completely non addictive and had no problems stopping.
The people who supervised us told us to not to worry about addiction because it is completely non addictive.
They said that medical cannabis is a different thing from street cannabis in the same way that medical morphine is different from the street equivalent. Perhaps this research refers to the non medical stuff?
It's true about all that stuff about affecting the brain and schizophrenia
But I am very strongly for greater legalisation for it for the sick and for more of it to be grown medically so that the sick could buy it cheaply. The beuarocratic process to apply legally took me 6 months and it was really unfair to leave me waiting like that, especially when I was paying for it.
I can't imagine what a cancer sufferer who only has a few months to live must feel like to go through that process.
Medical morphine is just as addictive as the street equivalent. Its use is controlled by medical professionals though. And still, while the medication is being 'regulated' by medical professionals people become addicted to pain medication all the time.
-
Alcohol is a 100 times more dangerous then marijuana.
-
Mariguana should probably be legal. Their isn't a point in incarcerating many people because of this and wasting all of that $ on the legal system with courts and jails.
Medical mariguana should definitely be legal. Their are many people in need of it. Its a lot safer and affective then many of the legal drugs that are out their with a lot less side affects. No one can die from it whereas many people die from the legal prescription drugs that are in the market and that are prescribed.
-
I can't support anyone who is against legalizing medical marijuana. There are a lot of people who have severe chronic physical conditions who need it. And more and more states are legalizing it. I will not send a dime to anyone who is against it.
-
Mariguana should probably be legal. Their isn't a point in incarcerating many people because of this and wasting all of that $ on the legal system with courts and jails.
Medical mariguana should definitely be legal. Their are many people in need of it. Its a lot safer and affective then many of the legal drugs that are out their with a lot less side affects. No one can die from it whereas many people die from the legal prescription drugs that are in the market and that are prescribed.
You need to run placebo-controlled clinical trials to prove claims like this. No one has done it. So people making these claims are simply hucksters.
-
You need to run placebo-controlled clinical trials to prove claims like this. No one has done it. So people making these claims are simply hucksters.
Where has their been a case of.marijuana overdose? Their are.many cases.of legal drug overdose.and. real addiction with.many.deaths each year.
-
Where has their been a case of.marijuana overdose? Their are.many cases.of legal drug overdose.and. real addiction with.many.deaths each year.
I agree that nobody has overdosed on MJ while many more die from addiction and overdose of legal perscription drugs. I know that the pharma companies have been pushing the Oxycontin and Narco pain medicines which are very addictive (my doctor tried to get me addicted and I just put up with the pain rather than take these drugs).
And it is true, according to my experience, that alcohol addiction and destruction is much worse than with MJ....
-
I am reading book right now about positive side of mj. According to this author mj can cure 600 different deceases. He claims that Ford made vehicle shell from mj...addicted smokers are, in my opinion, very strange people but it should be up to them to decide on quitting..war on drugs is lost..
-
I am reading book right now about positive side of mj. According to this author mj can cure 600 different deceases. He claims that Ford made vehicle shell from mj...addicted smokers are, in my opinion, very strange people but it should be up to them to decide on quitting..war on drugs is lost..
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/29/1227509/-Henry-Ford-s-Car-Made-From-Hemp-and-those-Responsible-for-the-Prohibition-of-Hemp-and-Marijuana
Never knew about the Ford car... But apparently that story is true:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YiCk-bwaEI
-
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-addictive
(from the NIH)
Is marijuana addictive?
Long-term marijuana use can lead to addiction; that is, people have difficulty controlling their drug use and cannot stop even though it interferes with many aspects of their lives. It is estimated that 9 percent of people who use marijuana will become dependent on it. The number goes up to about 1 in 6 in those who start using young (in their teens) and to 25-50 percent among daily users. Moreover, a study of over 300 fraternal and identical twin pairs found that the twin who had used marijuana before the age of 17 had elevated rates of other drug use and drug problems later on, compared with their twin who did not use before age 17.
I think it isn't right to make marijuana out to be a wonder drug.
Like any drug there are risks and benefits. The benefits may far outweigh the risks for anyone with chronic, constant or severe pain.
But, I know many people who have their lives derailed by chronic marijuana use. So, as a parent. I would like to err on the side of safety.
No recreational drug use is the best option for a long and healthy life.
-
My position has, and remains, that it is a medicine which should be used as such.
I am against a legalization for 'recreational' use..
-
My position has, and remains, that it is a medicine which should be used as such.
The only proven medical use for marijuana that I'm aware of is for increasing appetite, and that can be prescribed in pill form (Marinol). But marijuana users will say it cures every disease. I'm waiting to hear them claim it cures Ebola, if they haven't already.
-
My position has, and remains, that it is a medicine which should be used as such.
I am against a legalization for 'recreational' use..
I have never really dabbled with the stuff myself however I am very skeptical that it is the cure all that it being touted up to be... I think a lot of old pot smokers who are now reaching middle and old age who's bones are just not what they use to be are using that excuse to legally use pot to take some of the edge off their aching bones and to continue an old pot habit to boot... After all who want's to track down the local drug pusher each time the weed supply runs down... I am all for giving it to people with grave illnesses and even to some folks who it helps in dealing with pain however the program is developing now is making it available to almost anyone that wants it sick or not... The government see's a cash cow here and in the long run I think the overall population will suffer for the liberalizing sales of this substance.
-
It has to be worse than tobacco. Just smell it for crying out loud. It smells like a combination of skunk and dog turd.
-
It has to be worse than tobacco. Just smell it for crying out loud. It smells like a combination of skunk and dog turd.
Quite true... One of the neighboring homes here where I live have some young high school age kids living there... Each afternoon they get home from school and have a pot happy hour session out on their patio :::D The entire neighborhood smells of the stuff when they are puffing away... The properties here are not the size of a postage stamp but even at the distance of a hundred feet or so I am getting a little buzz from the second hand smoke if I am out doing something in my yard... This garbage smells bad enough out in the open... I can't even start to think what it would be like if they smoked indoors... The smell would be around forever... The kids must be wrecked for the entire afternoon after smoking this stuff... Whatever they are smoking now days it smells ten times more powerful then the stuff sold years ago... I wonder if they are smoking it for medical reasons :::D
-
It's a destructive drug that ruins peoples lives & I'm unconvinced that it helps people medically. So I'm 100% against this poison!
-
Me too, which is why I don't do drugs.
It's a destructive drug that ruins peoples lives & I'm unconvinced that it helps people medically. So I'm 100% against this poison!
-
It's a destructive drug that ruins peoples lives & I'm unconvinced that it helps people medically. So I'm 100% against this poison!
It ruins people's lives? Give me a break. I know a chemist, a doctor and a contractor, to name 3, that smoke and/or grow the stuff, and they have no problems, and the contractor uses it for increased sexual stamina. If you live in a crazy country where they put you in jail for it, and promote and/or allow homosexual rape in their prisons, it still didn't ruin your life, the government did, although I don't recommend smoking it in such a place, or living there.
You're not a doctor, so it's completely irrelevant what medical facts convince you or not. By saying poison, by the way, you prove that you know nothing whatsoever about it. Alcohol, any drug or chemical, which includes half the garbage they call food in the States, along with all the rest of poisons are recognized by the body as poison, and the body immediately works to expel it as fast as physically possible. THC, however, is recognized, stored immediately, and used by the body at a regular rate, and it makes no attempt to remove it, because the body can use it. Poison is defined by destroying the body, and having no use for the body (alcohol in itself won't make you healthy, but a glass of wine has positive elements in it, and in very limited quantities does have beneficial health effects, but we're not debating the prohibition right now). THC neither causes damage to the body, nor does the body treat it as waste.
-
I agree that nobody has overdosed on MJ while many more die from addiction and overdose of legal perscription drugs. I know that the pharma companies have been pushing the Oxycontin and Narco pain medicines which are very addictive (my doctor tried to get me addicted and I just put up with the pain rather than take these drugs).
They are pushing them? LOL, people demand those medications because of their pain! Doctors prescribe them. Dpctors are not stupid; they understand the benefits and risks involved with medications they prescribe. Some people have pain which cannot be tolerated without meds. Now many pain drugs are being redesigned to include tamper-resistant and abuse-deterrent formulations that make abuse and addiction more difficult and less likely. Who is doing it? Pharma, of course. Because mom and pop can't just invent drugs in their basements.
No, your doctor was not trying to "get you addicted." He was trying to relieve your pain that you reported to him, using available medication.
-
Where has their been a case of.marijuana overdose? Their are.many cases.of legal drug overdose.and. real addiction with.many.deaths each year.
How does this relate in any way to what I wrote in response to your unfounded comments? You are commenting on a thread whose introductory post explains the dangers of marijuana usage, studied over a 20 year period. The fact that you are not aware of a "marijuana overdose" or that people do overdose and die on other drugs, has nothing to do with whether marijuana is dangerous. It does not contradict the findings of the study cited by Shlomo.
You said: Medical mariguana should definitely be legal. Their are many people in need of it. Its a lot safer and affective[/u] then many of the legal drugs that are out their with a lot less side affects.
These are unfounded assertions that require a placebo-controlled study to prove. Which drug are you saying it's more effective than and with less side effects? Whichever one you have in mind, you have to test it head-to-head in a large double-blinded phase 3 clinical trial in order to make assertions like this and prove it.
No one can die from it whereas many people die from the legal prescription drugs that are in the market and that are prescribed.
No one can die from it? Prove that. (That requires a clinical study).
By the way, exactly what medical condition does it treat? And if it does treat one, go ahead and prove it has a statistically significant benefit in a clinical trial. No one has done that yet. So you cannot claim it has a medical benefit.
-
I think it isn't right to make marijuana out to be a wonder drug.
Like any drug there are risks and benefits. The benefits may far outweigh the risks for anyone with chronic, constant or severe pain.
I say, before we make it out to be a wonder drug, let's not even make it out to be a medical drug at all until it's proven to work in clinical trials and then we can judge the risk/benefit (if any benefit) profile. Anything else is just speculation and pseudoscience which potheads love to promote because it gives credence to legalizing their favorite drug.
-
My position has, and remains, that it is a medicine which should be used as such.
I am against a legalization for 'recreational' use..
It's a medicine? What does it treat?
Point me to the published clinical trial which proved that it provides benefit for a medical ailment.
Snakeoil salesmen make claims like this about the "healing powers" of their voodoo treatments. Many of them end up in jail. If you applied the same lack of scrutiny to marijuana medical claims to all other preclinical or otherwise untested potential drugs, there would literally be snakeoil salesmen on every street corner.
-
It ruins people's lives? Give me a break. I know a chemist, a doctor and a contractor, to name 3, that smoke and/or grow the stuff, and they have no problems,
Anecdotal. This type of testimony means absolutely nothing.
and the contractor uses it for increased sexual stamina.
I could say I use ogre toenail fungus for increased bicep strength, but that does not mean it actually works or that there is even a rationale for why it would work.
-
http://jtf.org/forum/Smileys/super/dancing_jew.gifMy position has, and remains, that it is a medicine which should be used as such.
I am against a legalization for 'recreational' use..
Semantics.
(http://vansunsportsblogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/shiftyclinton.jpg)
Muman, at least be honest and call it what it is....a drug.
-
You are correct Kahane-Was-Right BT. I do think we should have full FDA approval for medicinal use and tight regulation of prescription. We don't seem to have that.
http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm401879.htm
I say, before we make it out to be a wonder drug, let's not even make it out to be a medical drug at all until it's proven to work in clinical trials and then we can judge the risk/benefit (if any benefit) profile. Anything else is just speculation and pseudoscience which potheads love to promote because it gives credence to legalizing their favorite drug.
-
Pot creates illusion and laziness...it is a drug pushed by the government that will create a nation of non-productive do nothings.
-
Pot creates illusion and laziness...it is a drug pushed by the government that will create a nation of non-productive do nothings.
Great point!
-
Anecdotal. This type of testimony means absolutely nothing.
I could say I use ogre toenail fungus for increased bicep strength, but that does not mean it actually works or that there is even a rationale for why it would work.
The anecdote is the best response to unsubstantiated claims about a little weed ruining someone's entire life. Other than being in the States, and getting raped in jail because a cop arrested a guy over a gram, I've never heard of any lives ruined in connection with weed.
OK, I don't know what ogre toenail fungus is, but marijuana increases sexual stamina while you are on it.
-
The anecdote is the best response to unsubstantiated claims about a little weed ruining someone's entire life. Other than being in the States, and getting raped in jail because a cop arrested a guy over a gram, I've never heard of any lives ruined in connection with weed.
Read the study which opened this thread. It is a research study pointing to statistics which indicate potentiial health problems and hazards associated withsmoking weed. It is not your straw man "claim to ruin an entire life."
OK, I don't know what ogre toenail fungus is, but marijuana increases sexual stamina while you are on it.
If you want to make claims like this, Prove It Mr. shaman. Anecdotes don't count.
Kindly point out the MOA while you're at it....
-
Most "downer" narcotics (like weed) kill the sex drive, at least over time. It is medical fact that cannabis lowers testosterone.
-
This topic is truly boring and I loath posting more facts about it because it is politically incorrect here to post positions which support medical use of Marijuana. But there is increasing evidence that Marijuana, and it's THC compound, has cancer inhibiting properties.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4
See the link for the footnotes:
Laboratory/Animal/Preclinical Studies
Antitumor Effects
Appetite Stimulation
Analgesia
Cannabinoids are a group of 21-carbon–containing terpenophenolic compounds produced uniquely by Cannabis species (e.g., Cannabis sativa L.) .[1,2] These plant-derived compounds may be referred to as phytocannabinoids. Although delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary psychoactive ingredient, other known compounds with biologic activity are cannabinol, cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene, cannabigerol, tetrahydrocannabivarin, and delta-8-THC. CBD, in particular, is thought to have significant analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity without the psychoactive effect (high) of delta-9-THC.
Antitumor Effects
One study in mice and rats suggested that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of certain types of tumors.[3] During this 2-year study, groups of mice and rats were given various doses of THC by gavage. A dose-related decrease in the incidence of hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was observed in the mice. Decreased incidences of benign tumors (polyps and adenomas) in other organs (mammary gland, uterus, pituitary, testis, and pancreas) were also noted in the rats. In another study, delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and cannabinol were found to inhibit the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells in vitro and in vivo .[4] In addition, other tumors have been shown to be sensitive to cannabinoid-induced growth inhibition.[5-8]
Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] Two reviews summarize the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13,14] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in glioma cells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[15]
The effects of delta-9-THC and a synthetic agonist of the CB2 receptor were investigated in HCC.[16] Both agents reduced the viability of HCC cells in vitro and demonstrated antitumor effects in HCC subcutaneous xenografts in nude mice. The investigations documented that the anti-HCC effects are mediated by way of the CB2 receptor. Similar to findings in glioma cells, the cannabinoids were shown to trigger cell death through stimulation of an endoplasmic reticulum stress pathway that activates autophagy and promotes apoptosis. Other investigations have confirmed that CB1 and CB2 receptors may be potential targets in non-small cell lung carcinoma [17] and breast cancer.[18]
An in vitro study of the effect of CBD on programmed cell death in breast cancer cell lines found that CBD induced programmed cell death, independent of the CB1, CB2, or vanilloid receptors. CBD inhibited the survival of both estrogen receptor–positive and estrogen receptor–negative breast cancer cell lines, inducing apoptosis in a concentration-dependent manner while having little effect on nontumorigenic, mammary cells.[19]
CBD has also been demonstrated to exert a chemopreventive effect in a mouse model of colon cancer.[20] In the experimental system, azoxymethane increased premalignant and malignant lesions in the mouse colon. Animals treated with azoxymethane and CBD concurrently were protected from developing premalignant and malignant lesions. In in vitro experiments involving colorectal cancer cell lines, the investigators found that CBD protected DNA from oxidative damage, increased endocannabinoid levels, and reduced cell proliferation. In a subsequent study, the investigators found that the antiproliferative effect of CBD was counteracted by selective CB1 but not CB2 receptor antagonists, suggesting an involvement of CB1 receptors.[21]
Another investigation into the antitumor effects of CBD examined the role of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1).[12] ICAM-1 expression has been reported to be negatively correlated with cancer metastasis. In lung cancer cell lines, CBD upregulated ICAM-1, leading to decreased cancer cell invasiveness.
In an in vivo model using severe combined immunodeficient mice, subcutaneous tumors were generated by inoculating the animals with cells from human non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines.[22] Tumor growth was inhibited by 60% in THC-treated mice compared with vehicle-treated control mice. Tumor specimens revealed that THC had antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. However, research with immunocompetent murine tumor models has demonstrated immunosuppression and enhanced tumor growth in mice treated with THC.[23,24]
In addition, both plant-derived and endogenous cannabinoids have been studied for anti-inflammatory effects. A mouse study demonstrated that endogenous cannabinoid system signaling is likely to provide intrinsic protection against colonic inflammation.[25] As a result, a hypothesis that phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids may be useful in the risk reduction and treatment of colorectal cancer has been developed.[26-29]
CBD may also enhance uptake of cytotoxic drugs into malignant cells. Activation of the transient receptor potential vanilloid type 2 (TRPV2) has been shown to inhibit proliferation of human glioblastoma multiforme cells and overcome resistance to the chemotherapy agent carmustine.[30] In an in vitro model, CBD increased TRPV2 activation and increased uptake of cytotoxic drugs, leading to apoptosis of glioma cells without affecting normal human astrocytes. This suggests that coadministration of CBD with cytotoxic agents may increase drug uptake and potentiate cell death in human glioma cells.
Appetite Stimulation
Many animal studies have previously demonstrated that delta-9-THC and other cannabinoids have a stimulatory effect on appetite and increase food intake. It is believed that the endogenous cannabinoid system may serve as a regulator of feeding behavior. The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide potently enhances appetite in mice.[31] Moreover, CB1 receptors in the hypothalamus may be involved in the motivational or reward aspects of eating.[32]
Analgesia
Understanding the mechanism of cannabinoid-induced analgesia has been increased through the study of cannabinoid receptors, endocannabinoids, and synthetic agonists and antagonists. The CB1 receptor is found in both the central nervous system (CNS) and in peripheral nerve terminals. Similar to opioid receptors, increased levels of the CB1 receptor are found in regions of the brain that regulate nociceptive processing.[33] CB2 receptors, located predominantly in peripheral tissue, exist at very low levels in the CNS. With the development of receptor-specific antagonists, additional information about the roles of the receptors and endogenous cannabinoids in the modulation of pain has been obtained.[34,35]
Cannabinoids may also contribute to pain modulation through an anti-inflammatory mechanism; a CB2 effect with cannabinoids acting on mast cell receptors to attenuate the release of inflammatory agents, such as histamine and serotonin, and on keratinocytes to enhance the release of analgesic opioids has been described.[36-38] One study reported that the efficacy of synthetic CB1- and CB2-receptor agonists were comparable with the efficacy of morphine in a murine model of tumor pain.[39]
See also http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/complementaryandalternativemedicine/herbsvitaminsandminerals/marijuana
http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/miracle-cannabis-oil-may-treat-cancer-but-money-and-the-law-stand-in-the-way-of-finding-out/Content?oid=2825695
-
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/279571.php
Previous studies have suggested that cannabinoids, of which tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is one, have anti-cancer properties. In 2009, researchers at Complutense University in Spain found that THC induced the death of brain cancer cells in a process known as "autophagy."
The researchers found that administering THC to mice with human tumors initiated autophagy and caused the growth of the tumors to decrease. Two human patients with highly aggressive brain tumors who received intracranial administration of THC also showed similar signs of autophagy, upon analysis.
The team behind the new study - co-led by Complutense University and the University of Anglia (UEA) in the UK - claims to have discovered previously unknown "signaling platforms" that allow THC to shrink tumors.
The researchers induced tumors in mice using samples of human breast cancer cells. When the tumors were targeted with doses of THC, the researchers found that two cell receptors were particularly associated with an anti-tumor response.
"THC, the major active component of marijuana, has anti-cancer properties. This compound is known to act through a specific family of cell receptors called cannabinoid receptors," says Dr. Peter McCormick, from UEA's School of Pharmacy.
20 Studies which have been done which demonstrate anti-Cancer properties of THC...
http://www.collective-evolution.com/2013/08/23/20-medical-studies-that-prove-cannabis-can-cure-cancer/
-
This topic is truly boring and I loath posting more facts about it because it is politically incorrect here to post positions which support medical use of Marijuana. But there is increasing evidence that Marijuana, and it's THC compound, has cancer inhibiting properties.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4
See the link for the footnotes:
Laboratory/Animal/Preclinical Studies
Antitumor Effects
Appetite Stimulation
Analgesia
Cannabinoids are a group of 21-carbon–containing terpenophenolic compounds produced uniquely by Cannabis species (e.g., Cannabis sativa L.) .[1,2] These plant-derived compounds may be referred to as phytocannabinoids. Although delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary psychoactive ingredient, other known compounds with biologic activity are cannabinol, cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene, cannabigerol, tetrahydrocannabivarin, and delta-8-THC. CBD, in particular, is thought to have significant analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity without the psychoactive effect (high) of delta-9-THC.
Antitumor Effects
One study in mice and rats suggested that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of certain types of tumors.[3] During this 2-year study, groups of mice and rats were given various doses of THC by gavage. A dose-related decrease in the incidence of hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was observed in the mice. Decreased incidences of benign tumors (polyps and adenomas) in other organs (mammary gland, uterus, pituitary, testis, and pancreas) were also noted in the rats. In another study, delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and cannabinol were found to inhibit the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells in vitro and in vivo .[4] In addition, other tumors have been shown to be sensitive to cannabinoid-induced growth inhibition.[5-8]
Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] Two reviews summarize the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13,14] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in glioma cells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[15]
The effects of delta-9-THC and a synthetic agonist of the CB2 receptor were investigated in HCC.[16] Both agents reduced the viability of HCC cells in vitro and demonstrated antitumor effects in HCC subcutaneous xenografts in nude mice. The investigations documented that the anti-HCC effects are mediated by way of the CB2 receptor. Similar to findings in glioma cells, the cannabinoids were shown to trigger cell death through stimulation of an endoplasmic reticulum stress pathway that activates autophagy and promotes apoptosis. Other investigations have confirmed that CB1 and CB2 receptors may be potential targets in non-small cell lung carcinoma [17] and breast cancer.[18]
An in vitro study of the effect of CBD on programmed cell death in breast cancer cell lines found that CBD induced programmed cell death, independent of the CB1, CB2, or vanilloid receptors. CBD inhibited the survival of both estrogen receptor–positive and estrogen receptor–negative breast cancer cell lines, inducing apoptosis in a concentration-dependent manner while having little effect on nontumorigenic, mammary cells.[19]
CBD has also been demonstrated to exert a chemopreventive effect in a mouse model of colon cancer.[20] In the experimental system, azoxymethane increased premalignant and malignant lesions in the mouse colon. Animals treated with azoxymethane and CBD concurrently were protected from developing premalignant and malignant lesions. In in vitro experiments involving colorectal cancer cell lines, the investigators found that CBD protected DNA from oxidative damage, increased endocannabinoid levels, and reduced cell proliferation. In a subsequent study, the investigators found that the antiproliferative effect of CBD was counteracted by selective CB1 but not CB2 receptor antagonists, suggesting an involvement of CB1 receptors.[21]
Another investigation into the antitumor effects of CBD examined the role of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1).[12] ICAM-1 expression has been reported to be negatively correlated with cancer metastasis. In lung cancer cell lines, CBD upregulated ICAM-1, leading to decreased cancer cell invasiveness.
In an in vivo model using severe combined immunodeficient mice, subcutaneous tumors were generated by inoculating the animals with cells from human non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines.[22] Tumor growth was inhibited by 60% in THC-treated mice compared with vehicle-treated control mice. Tumor specimens revealed that THC had antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. However, research with immunocompetent murine tumor models has demonstrated immunosuppression and enhanced tumor growth in mice treated with THC.[23,24]
In addition, both plant-derived and endogenous cannabinoids have been studied for anti-inflammatory effects. A mouse study demonstrated that endogenous cannabinoid system signaling is likely to provide intrinsic protection against colonic inflammation.[25] As a result, a hypothesis that phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids may be useful in the risk reduction and treatment of colorectal cancer has been developed.[26-29]
CBD may also enhance uptake of cytotoxic drugs into malignant cells. Activation of the transient receptor potential vanilloid type 2 (TRPV2) has been shown to inhibit proliferation of human glioblastoma multiforme cells and overcome resistance to the chemotherapy agent carmustine.[30] In an in vitro model, CBD increased TRPV2 activation and increased uptake of cytotoxic drugs, leading to apoptosis of glioma cells without affecting normal human astrocytes. This suggests that coadministration of CBD with cytotoxic agents may increase drug uptake and potentiate cell death in human glioma cells.
Appetite Stimulation
Many animal studies have previously demonstrated that delta-9-THC and other cannabinoids have a stimulatory effect on appetite and increase food intake. It is believed that the endogenous cannabinoid system may serve as a regulator of feeding behavior. The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide potently enhances appetite in mice.[31] Moreover, CB1 receptors in the hypothalamus may be involved in the motivational or reward aspects of eating.[32]
Analgesia
Understanding the mechanism of cannabinoid-induced analgesia has been increased through the study of cannabinoid receptors, endocannabinoids, and synthetic agonists and antagonists. The CB1 receptor is found in both the central nervous system (CNS) and in peripheral nerve terminals. Similar to opioid receptors, increased levels of the CB1 receptor are found in regions of the brain that regulate nociceptive processing.[33] CB2 receptors, located predominantly in peripheral tissue, exist at very low levels in the CNS. With the development of receptor-specific antagonists, additional information about the roles of the receptors and endogenous cannabinoids in the modulation of pain has been obtained.[34,35]
Cannabinoids may also contribute to pain modulation through an anti-inflammatory mechanism; a CB2 effect with cannabinoids acting on mast cell receptors to attenuate the release of inflammatory agents, such as histamine and serotonin, and on keratinocytes to enhance the release of analgesic opioids has been described.[36-38] One study reported that the efficacy of synthetic CB1- and CB2-receptor agonists were comparable with the efficacy of morphine in a murine model of tumor pain.[39]
See also http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/complementaryandalternativemedicine/herbsvitaminsandminerals/marijuana
http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/miracle-cannabis-oil-may-treat-cancer-but-money-and-the-law-stand-in-the-way-of-finding-out/Content?oid=2825695
You cited all preclinical, basic research.
This does not support medical use of marijuana any more than the hundreds and thousands of preclinical basic research studies support the medical use of any other unproven molecules and potential new drugs which seem to show interesting properties in lab experiments. All that you dug up supports further study of marijuana, which *MIGHT have some important medicinal properties (or its components might!), but would require long, detailed, placebo-controlled clinical testing in humans to prove it has any disease-modifying effect whatsoever and proving the benefits (if any) outweigh the risks of whatever side effects its administration would cause. = The same scrutiny every new drug has to go through to get regulatory clearance for sale as a medicine!
Again, the data you provided does NOT support medicinal use of marijuana. It supports the need and the worthwhile cause to further investigate marijuana's (and its components which most likely have to extracted and purified for a real drug) properties with more research and testing. Nothing more.
Otherwise, every witchdoctor and shaman could sell snakeoil on every street corner because he used it to cure cancer in a petri dish. Oh wait, I said this already and you just ignored it.
The vast majority of promising preclinical new drug molecules fail in human testing, due to safety or efficacy or both, and the vast majority do not achieve regulatory approval for marketing because they are not effective medicines. Asking me to believe your favorite pet plant and recreational hobby is going to overcome those odds "Just 'cause, it will, believe me" is a joke. It may or it may not, but there is no reason to give it any special treatment that no other potential medicine receives. Do the human clinical testing and prove it one way or another. There is absolutely no sense to referring to marijuana as "medicinal" in any way until that point is reached.
By the way, please note that the research experiments you cited refer to THC and Cannabinoids. That means they extracted and purified components of your favorite plant! It does NOT mean they blew marijuana smoke on their cell plates lol. They extracted and/or synthesized chemical compounds from within the marijuana plant, purified and concentrated to provide a high enough dose to produce an effect on the cells. That in NO WAY supports smoking a plant any more than the fact that Aspirin has carbon element in its structure means I should lick a pencil tip. (carbon atoms are the backbone of life so almost everything will contain carbon atoms).
You tried. But you failed.
-
What's worse Pot or Mountain Dew?? Mountain Dew shrinks your testicles and pot makes you grow boobs..
Both are not the best for your body, but both should be legal.
Why? Because neither is immediately fatal , nor extremely deadly and addictive such as opiate based drugs, like Heroine or uppers like Methamphetamines, Cocaine, Crack, etc.
If Marijuana could kill you by overdose, I would not be here. I grew up in Oregon and lived around pot smoking hippies and rednecks and got my share.. No, I don't smoke it anymore.
Taxing Marijuana is going to be a great help to the state of Washington. Why not help reduce the tax burden and strip the drug pushers of their illicit ,tax-free gains. Also, drug pushers generate crime and many marijuana dealers are addicted to much stronger drugs and push marijuana as a way to support their hard drug habits, since illegal drug dealing means larger profits, enough to fund other addictions.
Legalizing marijuana is the best option and it does have medicinal properties. Overall, it is an estrogen-laden, heavily tarred and mind-altering herb that has no benefit to people, but neither does a lot of other crap people put in their bodies. Ethanol is a pretty toxic substance yet we saw how effective banning it was in our society.
-
It's a destructive drug that ruins peoples lives & I'm unconvinced that it helps people medically. So I'm 100% against this poison!
I know lots of succesfull people who smoke weed to calm down after a hard day of work. So the weed ruined their lives? Who are you to say that? It's legal in Holland, but it happens everywhere around the world illegal and i believe it happens even more in places where it's illegal. So you are 100% against it in general. Fine.
-
This topic is truly boring and I loath posting more facts about it because it is politically incorrect here to post positions which support medical use of Marijuana. But there is increasing evidence that Marijuana, and it's THC compound, has cancer inhibiting properties.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page4
See the link for the footnotes:
Laboratory/Animal/Preclinical Studies
Antitumor Effects
Appetite Stimulation
Analgesia
Cannabinoids are a group of 21-carbon–containing terpenophenolic compounds produced uniquely by Cannabis species (e.g., Cannabis sativa L.) .[1,2] These plant-derived compounds may be referred to as phytocannabinoids. Although delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the primary psychoactive ingredient, other known compounds with biologic activity are cannabinol, cannabidiol (CBD), cannabichromene, cannabigerol, tetrahydrocannabivarin, and delta-8-THC. CBD, in particular, is thought to have significant analgesic and anti-inflammatory activity without the psychoactive effect (high) of delta-9-THC.
Antitumor Effects
One study in mice and rats suggested that cannabinoids may have a protective effect against the development of certain types of tumors.[3] During this 2-year study, groups of mice and rats were given various doses of THC by gavage. A dose-related decrease in the incidence of hepatic adenoma tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) was observed in the mice. Decreased incidences of benign tumors (polyps and adenomas) in other organs (mammary gland, uterus, pituitary, testis, and pancreas) were also noted in the rats. In another study, delta-9-THC, delta-8-THC, and cannabinol were found to inhibit the growth of Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells in vitro and in vivo .[4] In addition, other tumors have been shown to be sensitive to cannabinoid-induced growth inhibition.[5-8]
Cannabinoids may cause antitumor effects by various mechanisms, including induction of cell death, inhibition of cell growth, and inhibition of tumor angiogenesis invasion and metastasis.[9-12] Two reviews summarize the molecular mechanisms of action of cannabinoids as antitumor agents.[13,14] Cannabinoids appear to kill tumor cells but do not affect their nontransformed counterparts and may even protect them from cell death. These compounds have been shown to induce apoptosis in glioma cells in culture and induce regression of glioma tumors in mice and rats. Cannabinoids protect normal glial cells of astroglial and oligodendroglial lineages from apoptosis mediated by the CB1 receptor.[15]
The effects of delta-9-THC and a synthetic agonist of the CB2 receptor were investigated in HCC.[16] Both agents reduced the viability of HCC cells in vitro and demonstrated antitumor effects in HCC subcutaneous xenografts in nude mice. The investigations documented that the anti-HCC effects are mediated by way of the CB2 receptor. Similar to findings in glioma cells, the cannabinoids were shown to trigger cell death through stimulation of an endoplasmic reticulum stress pathway that activates autophagy and promotes apoptosis. Other investigations have confirmed that CB1 and CB2 receptors may be potential targets in non-small cell lung carcinoma [17] and breast cancer.[18]
An in vitro study of the effect of CBD on programmed cell death in breast cancer cell lines found that CBD induced programmed cell death, independent of the CB1, CB2, or vanilloid receptors. CBD inhibited the survival of both estrogen receptor–positive and estrogen receptor–negative breast cancer cell lines, inducing apoptosis in a concentration-dependent manner while having little effect on nontumorigenic, mammary cells.[19]
CBD has also been demonstrated to exert a chemopreventive effect in a mouse model of colon cancer.[20] In the experimental system, azoxymethane increased premalignant and malignant lesions in the mouse colon. Animals treated with azoxymethane and CBD concurrently were protected from developing premalignant and malignant lesions. In in vitro experiments involving colorectal cancer cell lines, the investigators found that CBD protected DNA from oxidative damage, increased endocannabinoid levels, and reduced cell proliferation. In a subsequent study, the investigators found that the antiproliferative effect of CBD was counteracted by selective CB1 but not CB2 receptor antagonists, suggesting an involvement of CB1 receptors.[21]
Another investigation into the antitumor effects of CBD examined the role of intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1).[12] ICAM-1 expression has been reported to be negatively correlated with cancer metastasis. In lung cancer cell lines, CBD upregulated ICAM-1, leading to decreased cancer cell invasiveness.
In an in vivo model using severe combined immunodeficient mice, subcutaneous tumors were generated by inoculating the animals with cells from human non-small cell lung carcinoma cell lines.[22] Tumor growth was inhibited by 60% in THC-treated mice compared with vehicle-treated control mice. Tumor specimens revealed that THC had antiangiogenic and antiproliferative effects. However, research with immunocompetent murine tumor models has demonstrated immunosuppression and enhanced tumor growth in mice treated with THC.[23,24]
In addition, both plant-derived and endogenous cannabinoids have been studied for anti-inflammatory effects. A mouse study demonstrated that endogenous cannabinoid system signaling is likely to provide intrinsic protection against colonic inflammation.[25] As a result, a hypothesis that phytocannabinoids and endocannabinoids may be useful in the risk reduction and treatment of colorectal cancer has been developed.[26-29]
CBD may also enhance uptake of cytotoxic drugs into malignant cells. Activation of the transient receptor potential vanilloid type 2 (TRPV2) has been shown to inhibit proliferation of human glioblastoma multiforme cells and overcome resistance to the chemotherapy agent carmustine.[30] In an in vitro model, CBD increased TRPV2 activation and increased uptake of cytotoxic drugs, leading to apoptosis of glioma cells without affecting normal human astrocytes. This suggests that coadministration of CBD with cytotoxic agents may increase drug uptake and potentiate cell death in human glioma cells.
Appetite Stimulation
Many animal studies have previously demonstrated that delta-9-THC and other cannabinoids have a stimulatory effect on appetite and increase food intake. It is believed that the endogenous cannabinoid system may serve as a regulator of feeding behavior. The endogenous cannabinoid anandamide potently enhances appetite in mice.[31] Moreover, CB1 receptors in the hypothalamus may be involved in the motivational or reward aspects of eating.[32]
Analgesia
Understanding the mechanism of cannabinoid-induced analgesia has been increased through the study of cannabinoid receptors, endocannabinoids, and synthetic agonists and antagonists. The CB1 receptor is found in both the central nervous system (CNS) and in peripheral nerve terminals. Similar to opioid receptors, increased levels of the CB1 receptor are found in regions of the brain that regulate nociceptive processing.[33] CB2 receptors, located predominantly in peripheral tissue, exist at very low levels in the CNS. With the development of receptor-specific antagonists, additional information about the roles of the receptors and endogenous cannabinoids in the modulation of pain has been obtained.[34,35]
Cannabinoids may also contribute to pain modulation through an anti-inflammatory mechanism; a CB2 effect with cannabinoids acting on mast cell receptors to attenuate the release of inflammatory agents, such as histamine and serotonin, and on keratinocytes to enhance the release of analgesic opioids has been described.[36-38] One study reported that the efficacy of synthetic CB1- and CB2-receptor agonists were comparable with the efficacy of morphine in a murine model of tumor pain.[39]
See also http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatmentsandsideeffects/complementaryandalternativemedicine/herbsvitaminsandminerals/marijuana
http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/miracle-cannabis-oil-may-treat-cancer-but-money-and-the-law-stand-in-the-way-of-finding-out/Content?oid=2825695
Muman, you are offended by anything that tarnishes the reputation of your cherished sacred herb. Give it a rest.
-
The anecdote is the best response to unsubstantiated claims about a little weed ruining someone's entire life. Other than being in the States, and getting raped in jail because a cop arrested a guy over a gram, I've never heard of any lives ruined in connection with weed.
OK, I don't know what ogre toenail fungus is, but marijuana increases sexual stamina while you are on it.
Okay. Anecdotally. My friend, a brilliant guitarist, does nothing with his talent. He just sits around mellowly smoking pot constantly. His brain is burnt out after 30 + years of smoking. Not what I would want for my child.
-
There is nothing sacred or special about the medicinal use of this substance. It has been used for 1000s of years. It is 100x better than the pharmacuetical drugs which are available for mild pain reduction. I have a condition which causes great pain and I loathe taking the Hydrocodone based pain drugs. The addictive qualities of the hydrocodone drugs is much worse than the addiction to THC.
I sure hope that more study is done on this because it seems that a lot of the medicinal qualities of THC has been overlooked because it has been criminalized.
-
There is nothing sacred or special about the medicinal use of this substance. It has been used for 1000s of years. It is 100x better than the pharmacuetical drugs which are available for mild pain reduction. I have a condition which causes great pain and I loathe taking the Hydrocodone based pain drugs. The addictive qualities of the hydrocodone drugs is much worse than the addiction to THC.
I sure hope that more study is done on this because it seems that a lot of the medicinal qualities of THC has been overlooked because it has been criminalized.
:laugh:
-
:laugh:
What is the meaning of this? There was nothing to joke about in my post. Using medicine to control pain and/or cancer growth is a serious issue and one where I think THC have a great impact.
-
I am currently taking Norco (Hydrocodone) for my pain and it is very frustrating because I don't want to get addicted to it. Often I suffer with the pain rather than take a Hydrocodone drug.
http://drugabuse.com/library/the-effects-of-hydrocodone-use/
Long-term Effects of Hydrocodone
Addiction may be one of the most dangerous long-term effects of hydrocodone use. Hydrocodone is an opiate, or narcotic, similar to codeine, heroin and morphine. These kinds of substances are particularly risky, because you can become addicted even when you are taking them as recommended by your doctor. Repeated use of hydrocodone frequently leads to tolerance, so you will need to take more of the drug in order to get the same effect. Tolerance can easily lead to addiction, which happens when your substance abuse begins to have a negative impact on your everyday activities.
Long-term effects of hydrocodone use can include physical problems, such as hearing loss and liver damage, but the most damaging result of being addicted to hydrocodone may be its adverse effect on your personal life. Drug addiction can wreak havoc on family relationships, cause difficulties with job performance and lead to mental health problems. If you are experiencing personal troubles associated with hydrocodone use, you may have an addiction. Call 1-800-943-0566 today, and learn where to find help with prescription drug abuse.
-
Okay. Anecdotally. My friend, a brilliant guitarist, does nothing with his talent. He just sits around mellowly smoking pot constantly. His brain is burnt out after 30 + years of smoking. Not what I would want for my child.
Lazy people can blame weed all they want. Nothing screws up your life unless you use to it screw up your life, or it's something like crack that causes physical and psychological detriment.
-
There is nothing sacred or special about the medicinal use of this substance. It has been used for 1000s of years.
Using it for 1000's of years to get high does not mean it works as a medicine. For anything.
People used bloodletting for a thousand years, does that mean it was a medicine? It's not used anymore because it hasn't shown to accomplish anything. Neither has marijuana.
It is 100x better than the pharmacuetical drugs which are available for mild pain reduction.
The only way to assert something like this is to test them, head-to-head, in double-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trials and then demonstrate a statistically significant superiority for your wonder-herb in efficacy and safety. The fact that you make claims like this when there's been no trial proving it, is absurd. It sounds like you are the local shaman or witchdoctor selling magic beans.
I mean, forget about "100x better" - it's never even been shown to be equally as good.
I have a condition which causes great pain and I loathe taking the Hydrocodone based pain drugs. The addictive qualities of the hydrocodone drugs is much worse than the addiction to THC.
I sure hope that more study is done on this because it seems that a lot of the medicinal qualities of THC has been overlooked because it has been criminalized.
Luckily they are coming out with abuse-deterrent forms, and there are many new biologics in development for pain which likely won't have the same risks as hydrocodone or the risks of NSAIDS, which are another thing people take. NOTICE I SAID, LIKELY WON'T, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW YET, NO ONE KNOWS FOR SURE, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE FULL GAMUT OF TESTING FIRST BEFORE WE CAN MAKE DEFINITIVE CLAIMS ABOUT THEIR RELATIVE BENEFITS. Good gracious, it's not that complicated.
-
I am currently taking Norco (Hydrocodone) for my pain and it is very frustrating because I don't want to get addicted to it. Often I suffer with the pain rather than take a Hydrocodone drug.
http://drugabuse.com/library/the-effects-of-hydrocodone-use/
I'm really confused by this post. You are frustrated with it because you don't want to get addicted?
Are you feeling signs of being addicted to it?
Is it treating your pain effectively?
Mr. Bigshot Weed is 100 times better, did not opt to simply smoke weed all day rather than take the Norco? Gee, could it be because Norco relieves your pain - maybe even 100x better than marijuana ever could?
So why mislead the forum with baseless statements?
-
I'm really confused by this post. You are frustrated with it because you don't want to get addicted?
Are you feeling signs of being addicted to it?
Is it treating your pain effectively?
Mr. Bigshot Weed is 100 times better, did not opt to simply smoke weed all day rather than take the Norco? Gee, could it be because Norco relieves your pain - maybe even 100x better than marijuana ever could?
So why mislead the forum with baseless statements?
shallow breathing, slow heartbeat;
feeling light-headed, fainting;
confusion, fear, unusual thoughts or behavior;
seizure (convulsions);
problems with urination; or
nausea, upper stomach pain, itching, loss of appetite, dark urine, clay-colored stools, jaundice (yellowing of the skin or eyes).
Less serious side effects may include:
anxiety, dizziness, drowsiness;
mild nausea, vomiting, upset stomach, constipation;
headache, mood changes;
blurred vision;
ringing in your ears; or
dry mouth.
This is not a complete list of side effects and others may occur. Call your doctor for medical advice about side effects. You may report side effects to FDA at 1-800-FDA-1088.
Yeah I'd stick with the weed.
-
I'm really confused by this post. You are frustrated with it because you don't want to get addicted?
Are you feeling signs of being addicted to it?
Is it treating your pain effectively?
Mr. Bigshot Weed is 100 times better, did not opt to simply smoke weed all day rather than take the Norco? Gee, could it be because Norco relieves your pain - maybe even 100x better than marijuana ever could?
So why mislead the forum with baseless statements?
You are not thinking clearly and are simply reacting based on bias.
I do not take the Norco because it is so addicting and as I posted above (and apparently you just skipped it) Norco quickly becomes tolerated and you need to take more to relieve the same amount of pain.
And you are making assumptions because nowhere did I say I am smoking weed for my pain. I do know that it has the ability to relieve pain and this is why I hope that it remains legal. You also incorrectly assume that the only way of administering THC is through smoking, as there is also the category of edible medicines which is a better way to administer it.
But I do not need to prove anything to anyone. I have simply been speaking both from what I know, and what I have learned from the medical information. I can also post many more studies which indicate positive medicinal uses of MJ and THC... As I said before, this topic is really bound to go nowhere because of this bias.
-
And for the record KWRBT.... Do you work in the pharma industry? You have been so defensive of this racket ever since I knew you.
-
Let is move the topic to the question of what really motivates people to dismiss the positive uses of Cannibus?
It seems that 'getting high' has a negative connotation. But is 'getting drunk' any better, or is it just 'social drinking'?
As others here have testified, it is possible to become motivated either mentally or physically while experiencing the effects of cannibinoids. As a result a lot of good poetry, literature, music, and other art have been produced while under the effects of this herb. I too have known some of the most brilliant people who have smoked pot regularly, and in my high school where I was in a clique of the 'smartest kids' of the school he was the experimenter who tried pot first. The effects on the person are subjective and different between individuals. Some people get lazy while others get motivated and creative. These are the psychedelic effects of the drug. I do not recommend anyone try it and I do not attempt to paint it as a positive thing, but it does have practical applications and should not be any more illegal than alcohol which does impair a person to a much greater extent.
Cancer is something I must consider as a plague which may visit me (G-d forbid) due to genetics. If there is a cancer cure in Cannibinoids I sure would be happy. It is very interesting to learn that a possible Ebola cure may come from tobacco.
-
You are not thinking clearly and are simply reacting based on bias.
It is obviously you that has the pro-weed bias because you keep making false and unsubstantiated claims and when you are called out on it, you ignore it.
I do not take the Norco because it is so addicting and as I posted above (and apparently you just skipped it) Norco quickly becomes tolerated and you need to take more to relieve the same amount of pain.
Whah?
Quote, Muman: I am currently taking Norco (Hydrocodone) for my pain
Are all these inconsistent statements making you a bit dizzy because I think it's making me dizzy.
And you are making assumptions because nowhere did I say I am smoking weed for my pain.
As always, you are either obfuscating, or you completely misunderstood what I wrote. Most likely it's the former because what I wrote was very clear.
I did NOT say you were smoking weed for your pain. I did not even imply that. In fact, I said the exact opposite.
I posed the question: Why Mr. "Weed is 100x better than pharmaceutical drugs" do you NOT smoke weed to make your pain go away? If it's 100x better than medical drugs, then you wouldn't need to take drugs but could just sit there and smoke and the pain would be gone.
So here you mislead the forum promoting your herbs when you yourself don't even take them. THAT was the comment I made. I did not assume that you smoked weed for pain. I asked why you do not, considering you are pimping the idea to the forum as if weed is a miracle drug. It's blatant hypocrisy that you do not take the miracle drug yourself but rely on pharmaceuticals instead (which at this point it's unclear whether you take them or don't since your statements contradicted each other, as I quoted above). I guess you 'took norco before you didn't take norco?'
I do know that it has the ability to relieve pain and this is why I hope that it remains legal. You also incorrectly assume that the only way of administering THC is through smoking, as there is also the category of edible medicines which is a better way to administer it.
But I do not need to prove anything to anyone. I have simply been speaking both from what I know, and what I have learned from the medical information.
Back to the baseless statements and promotion we go.
It's not medical information because there is none. There have not been clinical trials. There has only been basic research. The same kind of basic research where you can cure diseases in mice or kill cancer cells in a petri dish but 80% of those miracle cures do not work in humans. We could construct a graveyard full of failed drug compounds which looked promising in basic research and preclinical studies. So what you cite about marijuana tells us nothing except that it needs to be studied more.
I can also post many more studies which indicate positive medicinal uses of MJ and THC... As I said before, this topic is really bound to go nowhere because of this bias.
But none of those studies will add anything of value here because of the same reason the first studies you posted didn't. I already explained why, but you ignored my comments. It's basic research. It is not indicative of positive medicinal uses. It is indicative of interesting research, that's it. Go bring your weed to the FDA and bring one of these journal articles, they will slam the door on your face.
-
Let is move the topic to the question of what really motivates people to dismiss the positive uses of Cannibus?
You could work as a PR rep. Why should we change the subject? Becuase you want your stated views to go unchallenged? Several people already challenged them but rather than respond, you ignore them and then say, let's change the subject. Telling.
It seems that 'getting high' has a negative connotation. But is 'getting drunk' any better, or is it just 'social drinking'?
Two wrongs don't make a right. Nice try.
-
And for the record KWRBT.... Do you work in the pharma industry? You have been so defensive of this racket ever since I knew you.
You're saying pharma is a "racket" ?
That is absurd. They are the ones developing new medicines. They are the medicines you would take if you had an illness God forbid. They have saved and extended countless lives. Don't start with this commie nonsense that you don't like how much profit they make. I am opposed to all kinds of nonsense getting spread on this forum, and "pharma is a racket" is one type of nonsense which you often peddle here, which is why I react to it!
-
You're saying pharma is a "racket" ?
That is absurd. They are the ones developing new medicines. They are the medicines you would take if you had an illness God forbid. They have saved and extended countless lives. Don't start with this commie nonsense that you don't like how much profit they make. I am opposed to all kinds of nonsense getting spread on this forum, and "pharma is a racket" is one type of nonsense which you often peddle here, which is why I react to it!
You think I am making it up? I don't care how much they make, and I am no commie and think that drugs should be available on a free market (pay what it costs to develop the drug). But the racket is that the companies are aware that the drugs are addictive, and they are pushing the more addictive ones on the patients. I do not read about this. I have witnessed it myself.
Baruch Hashem my pain went away for almost 2 years and only recently started again. I used to go to the 'Pain Clinic' to get the drugs I needed to relieve the pain from my condition.... But as I said I became concerned with how many Norcos I was going through even though they increased my dosage. It is a drug which quickly becomes tolerated and more is needed.
So they are developing even more addictive medicines, like the oxycontins (which they offered to me also)....
As to their pain relieving effects. Initially when you start to take them they appear to work, but as I said they become tolerated quickly. I just started taking the Norcos on Tueday and initially only one lasted eight hours.... Now one lasts only four hours before the pain becomes distracting.
Maybe when they figure out how to make drugs which don't become tolerated as easily then I will be satisfied. But I really don't need to be addicted to hydrocodone.
-
And KWRBT, could you answer 'yes' or 'no' to my question about whether you are working in the field?
-
You can drink without getting drunk. You can't indulge in cannabis without becoming high.
-
You think I am making it up? I don't care how much they make, and I am no commie and think that drugs should be available on a free market (pay what it costs to develop the drug).
Food companies don't charge what it costs to develop the food. They mark it up and make a profit. That's what a business is.
Appliance stores don't charge what it costs to purchase the appliances from factories. They mark it up and make a profit. That's what business is.
Tech companies do not charge what it cost to make their gadgets. Apple pays chinese slaves 1 dollar a day to fuel their iphone production and their phones cost hundreds of dollars. Is that a racket too? Should the phone cost exactly the cost to produce it? Or can they mark it up a bit and make a profit? How much profit is fair ? They charge whatever the customer is willing to pay. Drug companies charge whatever insurance is willing to pay. The system of health insurance in this country means that you are not directly the consumer of the medicine. So it depends on the payors. There is some pushback from payors on high priced drugs and this will continue to develop in the coming years. Whether certain medicines are overpriced or not has nothing to do with calling pharma a racket.
It costs over a billion dollars and over 10 years of research and development work to get a drug from start to finish line to be sold as a medicine after FDA approval, on average. The vast majority of these compounds fail. Only very few make it past phase 3 testing and get approval. So there are billions "wasted" (no, it's not wasted, it's an investment) on all the failed drugs in addition to the ones that succeed. With the profits these companies pour hundreds of millions (in some cases, for the larger companies, billions) into development of new and better drugs. And they can never just "rest" because eventually the patents expire and the drugs you are selling now, you will not be making much money off them (if any) 10 years from now. So they have to come up with new treatments or face death as a company.
But the racket is that the companies are aware that the drugs are addictive, and they are pushing the more addictive ones on the patients. I do not read about this. I have witnessed it myself.
Patients need medicine for their pain. They cannot bear it without some relief. Doctors prescribe the existing medicines. Some of those are addictive or could be come addictive. Many companies are working on new types of treatments that hopefully won't have those issues. But there is demand for the existing drugs because people need treatment. You admit down below that you yourself took norco. Because the pain can be unbearable for some people. The companies that invented these drugs certainly wish there were no side effects but clinical testing in humans is what establishes risk profiles and quite often a drug may have benefits but very rarely are they completely clean and causing no side effects at all. Believe me, these companies would make a whole lot more money if they could have come up with side effect-free and non-addictive pain meds. They are trying. And it will make more money than what you claim is "pushing" the approved drugs onto patients. I think your claim is a conspiracy theory. They are a business that makes money and they sell drugs and expect doctors to be responsible in distributing them to patients and explaining proper use and all the risks involved. If the doctor doesn't, that is his fault, not pharma's.
Baruch Hashem my pain went away for almost 2 years and only recently started again. I used to go to the 'Pain Clinic' to get the drugs I needed to relieve the pain from my condition.... But as I said I became concerned with how many Norcos I was going through even though they increased my dosage. It is a drug which quickly becomes tolerated and more is needed.
So they are developing even more addictive medicines, like the oxycontins (which they offered to me also)....
And they are developing multiple types of biologics which so far don't seem to be addictive at all. Why do you think and insist that there is some conspiracy to make sure the medicines are addictive? It's laughable really. Don't you know that they will make more money if they can come up with non-addictive medicines? That is a FACT.
Companies are working on a few different pathways for pain relief including Nav1.7, anti-NGF (but the FDA has held that up for a long time now), etc. Others which I can't think of right now.
Maybe when they figure out how to make drugs which don't become tolerated as easily then I will be satisfied. But I really don't need to be addicted to hydrocodone.
Drug development is not easy and obviously they are trying to do just that. If you assume otherwise, I think that's an insane assumption. If only they could snap their fingers and make a perfectly clean and super effective drug, they would. So would any old shmo in his basement. But it doesn't work like that.
-
KWRBT,
You completely trust all business? Do you think companies sometimes don't act in the best interest of the customer in order to increase their profits. This happens in both the food, drug, and tobacco industries. Food companies have known about certain unhealthy ingredients and have paid to have information covered up (look into the story about sugar). Cigarette companies knew from early on that their product was dangerous to health and yet they were able to advertise on TV until the 80s...
I believe in the free market (and when I said that they should charge what it cost to develop, I actually meant that they should be able to recoup their investments in the development) but I also believe that some regulation is necessary in order to prevent chaos. Greed does play a part in a lot of bad deals in business. Putting your trust in corporations does not lead to paradise.
-
http://www.motherjones.com/blue-marble/2014/06/sugar-industry-tactics-to-make-your-food-unhealthy
How the Sweetener Industry Sugar-Coats Science
Food companies have spent billions of dollars to cover up the link between sugar consumption and health problems. That's the conclusion of a new report from the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
(http://www.motherjones.com/files/Screen%20Shot%202014-06-24%20at%2010.40.27%20AM_1.png)
The industry's tactics—similar to those used by Big Tobacco in downplaying the adverse health effects of smoking—were explored by Gary Taubes and Cristin Kearns Couzens in the 2012 Mother Jones investigation "Big Sugar's Sweet Little Lies." But this latest report draws on some newly released documents submitted as evidence in a recent federal court case involving the two biggest players in the sweetener industry: the Sugar Association and the Corn Refiners Association (the trade group for manufacturers of high fructose corn syrup).
The report details companies' plans to bury data and to convince consumers that sugar is "fine in moderation." It also shows how trade groups hired independent scientists to cast doubt on studies that show the adverse affects of sugar consumption—and strategized to intimidate scientists and organizations who didn't tow the industry line.
.
.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOb3e3Yc9T8
-
KWRBT,
You completely trust all business?
Nope. You put words in my mouth.
What I do not do is to equate business with a racket because they make money off their products. If someone is dumb enough to buy (or they just like the stuff and want to buy it) so be it.
Every industry tries to maximize its profits. That is true in food, drug, tobacco, tech, transportation, EVERYTHING. That doesn't mean it's a racket.
I believe in the free market (and when I said that they should charge what it cost to develop, I actually meant that they should be able to recoup their investments in the development)
What about all the failed investments in the drugs that didn't pan out but failed, and what about the future investments in the drugs they are currently developing, many of which will also fail?
No company can stay in business without being profitable. And then who will develop the newer and better drugs when they are gone because we had to limit their profitability for the sake of self-righteousness and picking and choosing which industry is "good" and which is "bad" ?
Drug development is very risky business with huge money on the line that gets poured down the R&D tunnel, much of it never to be seen again. The less you "allow" a company to make profits, the less it will have available to invest in future drugs. That's the basic reality of the situation.
but I also believe that some regulation is necessary in order to prevent chaos. Greed does play a part in a lot of bad deals in business. Putting your trust in corporations does not lead to paradise.
This is just stupid stuff which has nothing to do with what I wrote. Invention of new medicines is not a "racket" or some convoluted conspiracy to destroy people's lives. That does not mean I'm "Putting my trust in corporations" (Putting my trust in them to do what exactly? You mean putting my trust that their my savior ? lol I don't get you). And it doesn't mean I'm going to paradise by trusting a corporation - where do you come up with this stuff?
-
Trusting that they have the best intentions for the consumer....
Doing so is nuts considering the examples of how consumers have been lied to about so many things. This is not an indictment in every business, but I can demonstrate how virtually every field has suffered from corruption and misguiding the public. You must admit that this is the case or I will bring examples of the events in our lifetime where companies have violated the trust of the people.
I have worked for many corporations and believe that they are good for our economy. But up till now I have mainly worked for small publicly owned corporations which do not engage in any corruption or misusing of the public trust. I am considering advancing my application to Google (with which I have already held one phone interview) but I do have ethical concerns about this...
Currently I do not have trust in pharma corporations. I am going to conclude that since you did not answer my question directly that the answer is yes. While I certainly appreciate the availability of the hydrocodone drugs I do not appreciate the addictive quality it has. I will give you the benefit of the doubt (which I hope you are capable of giving me) and trust that they don't have the ability to create non-addictive drugs which don't become tolerated as quickly. But it seems to me that the drug companies are putting a lot into advertising these drugs (you should see the drug adverts at the pain clinic) which most who suffer cronic pain become addicted to.
PS: KWRBT, why do you constantly say I am 'putting words in your mouth' when I simply ask a question. Do you see the question mark at the end of the sentence? When it appears in the sentence it is not a 'statement of fact' but rather a query for information. (I admit the sentence structure is not technically a question, it should be 'Do you completely trust...')
This article examines the corruption in the Pharmaceutical industry:
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/11/30/pharmaceutical-industry-institutional-corruption.aspx
-
I realize we have gone a bit OT (off-topic) but this video discusses some of what that link I posted above examines.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dl9GKn5yszE
-
I wanna defend Muman so bad after that last post but I'll say that 50 years ago, a town of a few thousand people had a nice pharmacist who was forced to sell inferior flea treatment that required far more uses and cost by the pharmaceutical company which supplied most of her drugs, on the threat that her supply would be severed. She gave the good one out to the poor for free and till this day, heroically refuses to take the blood money the Nazis offer, as much as she could use it. You just try to tell me they got less sleazy since then.
Never take any pill of any kind, unless it happens to be good quality vitamins or salmon oil, or you need it to function. I still have their bottles of pain pills and laxatives they gave me after the surgery. It's no wonder America became the way it did, and the wide and unprecedented use of experimental and "established" pharmaceuticals can be easily proven to have played a major role, from the ritalin in the schoolyards to the noticeable percentage of pharmaceuticals in the New York public water supply.
Lol KWRBT, please tell me about how Pfizer cares about the health of their clients and ensures they drug them with only the best affordable options.
-
I wanna defend Muman so bad after that last post but I'll say that 50 years ago, a town of a few thousand people had a nice pharmacist who was forced to sell inferior flea treatment that required far more uses and cost by the pharmaceutical company which supplied most of her drugs, on the threat that her supply would be severed. She gave the good one out to the poor for free and till this day, heroically refuses to take the blood money the Nazis offer, as much as she could use it. You just try to tell me they got less sleazy since then.
It's amazing that you think there are no laws and you imagine these companies operate as a mafia and can just do whatever they want. That is not so. They are under strict regulation which is stronger than most other industries you can think of.
There is far more regulation than 50 years ago. The feds monitor all these situations and people go to jail if they misbehave.
Sales reps have gotten themselves in trouble with unethical practices, and then the govt fines the company billions of dollars. That's true in some companies, and has caused an image problem for these companies. Even if an individual's personal greed motivated their behavior and it was not really encouraged or allowed by the company at all, and probably ticked off all the researchers and other peopl in the company who are ethical. But they are accountable to the law, they do get punished, and they are not just a collection of evil people trying to poison humanity. You refer to them as nazis, that's pretty childish.
Lol KWRBT, please tell me about how Pfizer cares about the health of their clients and ensures they drug them with only the best affordable options.
A patient is the client of a doctor, not a pharmaceutical company. The doctor prescribes the medicine. He can prescribe any treatment he wants. If the doctor is ethical, he prescribes what he thinks will work best for that patient. It's amazing how many places you imagine Pharma has its imaginary tentacles doing magical acts of mind control and controlling the world when they are not even involved. Pfizer tries to sell its own medicines, not the medicines of another company. They try to convince doctors their medicine is better, using whatever trial data they have to suggest that (and if it's not in the trial data, they cannot legally make the claim). Do you think pfizer would recommend merck's statin for a heart patient when pfizer markets its own statin? Only the best affordable options? Does Pepsi encourage people to drink Coke?
There is no choice for pfizer or any company except to sell the medicines their researchers have invented and were approved. It costs whatever it costs. The doctor and patient consider the options available to them, including the cost involved, and try to choose the best one. Take responsibility. There is no giant conspiracy of pharma companies to kill you.
-
Like every morning...this morning six geniuses were standing in the rain a block from the high school smoking. Such brilliant and creative children.
:::D Not.
-
I thought this topic bored a certain person--obviously, it doesn't. :laugh:
-
You refer to them as nazis, that's pretty childish.
You aren't worth me condescending my intellect by talking to you.
-
Mariguana should probably be legal. Their isn't a point in incarcerating many people because of this and wasting all of that $ on the legal system with courts and jails.
Medical mariguana should definitely be legal. Their are many people in need of it. Its a lot safer and affective then many of the legal drugs that are out their with a lot less side affects. No one can die from it whereas many people die from the legal prescription drugs that are in the market and that are prescribed.
China has a great solution for that. It doesn't cost them a thing to get rid of drug dealers and drug users such as people who use poison like marijuana.
And the solution is permanent.
They make a lot of money selling their organs.
-
China has a great solution for that. It doesn't cost them a thing to get rid of drug dealers and drug users such as people who use poison like marijuana.
And the solution is permanent.
They make a lot of money selling their organs.
Your nuts...
-
China has a great solution for that. It doesn't cost them a thing to get rid of drug dealers and drug users such as people who use poison like marijuana.
And the solution is permanent.
They make a lot of money selling their organs.
Half of Canada would be dead. No wonder they keep fleeing here from China. Also, I'd live in Canada over China, along with all normal people.
-
Lol based on the responses, the forum would have me and Muman in rape-me-in-the-ass jail or dead for smoking weed. Better not try to win too many youth votes.
-
I have been, and continue to be, a contributing & tax-paying citizen of this great country. I have worked my entire adult life, from a low-paying engineer to a senior software engineer working at a major Silicon Valley corporation developing leading edge products for digital video applications. I have worked for video game mfg and defense companies in the past. I have a great reputation and am sought by several corporations for my 30 years of skill. I really don't care what people think about my position concerning medical MJ. So far it has not been a detriment to my parnassa (livelihood)...
-
I have been, and continue to be, a contributing & tax-paying citizen of this great country. I have worked my entire adult life, from a low-paying engineer to a senior software engineer working at a major Silicon Valley corporation developing leading edge products for digital video applications. I have worked for video game mfg and defense companies in the past. I have a great reputation and am sought by several corporations for my 30 years of skill. I really don't care what people think about my position concerning medical MJ. So far it has not been a detriment to my parnassa (livelihood)...
The main understanding of politics is that you must always care about others' positions, because they will try to make them law, and this is usually a detriment to a lot more than parnassa.
-
Lol based on the responses, the forum would have me and Muman in rape-me-in-the-ass jail or dead for smoking weed. Better not try to win too many youth votes.
Young people read this forum.
Don't give them false information.
Marijuana should be put through rigorous testing for medicinal use. Like other prescribed medications.
I am not adverse to marijuana being prescribed for chronic pain in terminal patients
But...it is a drug.
Young people shouldn't be led to believe it is totally harmless to experiment with.
-
Young people read this forum.
Don't give them false information.
Marijuana should be put through rigorous testing for medicinal use. Like other prescribed medications.
I am not adverse to marijuana being prescribed for chronic pain in terminal patientst
But...it is a drug.
Young people shouldn't be lead to believe it is totally harmless to experiment with.
My point is that a lot of things are not as harmless as we think. Indeed I agree that young people should not have free access to this medicine. As far as intoxicants go I do think that pot is much less dangerous than alcohol and the hard drugs.
Regarding your question.... When I was in my late teens (18-19) I started experimenting with psycho-active substances. As I stated in another thread I was involved in a small clique of 'smart kids' who first started with alcohol (my High School buddies yearbook inscription reads 'moderation in all things except vodka'). This buddy who went on to go to Cornell and ultimately work for the ultra-high secret DARPA agency, was the one who exposed me to LSD. I had no access to cocaine for several years after I started experimenting. When I moved to CA in 1984 crack cocaine was exploding on the scene. I lived in the Marina Del Rey area with my father for many years, a place where movie-stars, sports heros, and corporate executives lived and almost all of my rich friends were into coke at that time. It was because the drug was so plentiful and so many social contacts were doing it that I tried it.
One of the reasons I think people think pot is a 'stepping stone' drug is because when people find out how harmless pot is they think the hard drugs are also harmless. There are few things more destructive than Cocaine addiction (and thank Heaven I never tried Heroine and others). I stand strong against any measure of legalization for these 'powdered' drugs.
Mariners Villiage (where I lived with dad from 1984-1989)
(http://www.marinersvillage.com/images/gallery/gallery-2.jpg)
-
For being bored by this topic you are sure working hard to participate in it.
-
For being bored by this topic you are sure working hard to participate in it.
I do not expect to change anyones opinion, but I will discuss what I know...
-
LSDBR,
From my experience with you here at the forum I recall you are a fan of some metal bands. Have you gone to metal shows? Don't you get 'contact highs' from all the people smoking in the crowd? I have been to several Metallica and a couple Black Sabbath shows and I can tell you that the air is 'thick'...
-
A few, not many. Nice way to dodge the subject though.
-
A few, not many. Nice way to dodge the subject though.
How so? Is not the subject weed?
You must have been exposed to it if you went to metal shows.
-
Young people read this forum.
Don't give them false information.
Marijuana should be put through rigorous testing for medicinal use. Like other prescribed medications.
I am not adverse to marijuana being prescribed for chronic pain in terminal patientst
But...it is a drug.
Young people shouldn't be lead to believe it is totally harmless to experiment with.
Good for them, they can eat cake. What false information did I give? Hemp was used by pharmaceutical companies as a drug for many ailments before Nixon called it that Mexican word and illegalized it, and further studies, which are much more rigorous than studies for the poisons Americans love to stuff their faces with, have been conducted recently which have lead to the application of hemp for further medical purposes.
It's not harmless to experience with. There will be people that want to put you in rape-me-in-the-ass-jail. It will also decrease your short-term memory and response time, especially if used when your brain is still developing, if abused. Alcohol will do the same thing if abused, along with brain damage, but kids should also not be getting smashed.
-
Good for them, they can eat cake. What false information did I give? Hemp was used by pharmaceutical companies as a drug for many ailments before Nixon called it that Mexican word and illegalized it, and further studies, which are much more rigorous than studies for the poisons Americans love to stuff their faces with, have been conducted recently which have lead to the application of hemp for further medical purposes.
It's not harmless to experience with. There will be people that want to put you in rape-me-in-the-ass-jail. It will also decrease your short-term memory and response time, especially if used when your brain is still developing, if abused. Alcohol will do the same thing if abused, along with brain damage, but kids should also not be getting smashed.
When do you start underwater welding school? You made it sound imminent.
The point of the forum is the youth. The both of us are done.
Let them eat cake! Great idea.
Just keep drugs away from children. You gave the reasons for that in your post.
Also, why compare marijuana to alcohol or prescribed medication?
Did someone say....let children booze it up or take Vicodin?
The discussion is marijuana.
-
My point is that a lot of things are not as harmless as we think. Indeed I agree that young people should not have free access to this medicine. As far as intoxicants go I do think that pot is much less dangerous than alcohol and the hard drugs.
Regarding your question.... When I was in my late teens (18-19) I started experimenting with psycho-active substances. As I stated in another thread I was involved in a small clique of 'smart kids' who first started with alcohol (my High School buddies yearbook inscription reads 'moderation in all things except vodka'). This buddy who went on to go to Cornell and ultimately work for the ultra-high secret DARPA agency, was the one who exposed me to LSD. I had no access to cocaine for several years after I started experimenting. When I moved to CA in 1984 crack cocaine was exploding on the scene. I lived in the Marina Del Rey area with my father for many years, a place where movie-stars, sports heros, and corporate executives lived and almost all of my rich friends were into coke at that time. It was because the drug was so plentiful and so many social contacts were doing it that I tried it.
One of the reasons I think people think pot is a 'stepping stone' drug is because when people find out how harmless pot is they think the hard drugs are also harmless. There are few things more destructive than Cocaine addiction (and thank Heaven I never tried Heroine and others). I stand strong against any measure of legalization for these 'powdered' drugs.
Mariners Villiage (where I lived with dad from 1984-1989)
(http://www.marinersvillage.com/images/gallery/gallery-2.jpg)
I appreciate your reply Muman. But you didn't tell me if you smoked pot first. Or maybe I missed it. I am sorry to hear about the issues you had with cocaine. I am glad to know that they are a past problem and I will pray for your good health in the future.
-
When do you start underwater welding school? You made it sound imminent.
The point of the forum is the youth. The both of us are done.
Let them eat cake! Great idea.
Just keep drugs away from children. You gave the reasons for that in your post.
Also, why compare marijuana to alcohol or prescribed medication?
Did someone say....let children booze it up or take Vicodin?
The discussion is marijuana.
That's the back-up back-up plan. Just going to regular welding school.
I'm 24. I'm admittedly going to improve the world 99.9% less with my back-up plan, which ends with me owning a company, but I'm going to.
Anything can be compared to anything. I didn't talk about prescribed medication, hemp is "marijuana", which is a word Richard Nixon popularized after pharmaceutical companies refused to accept his massive tax hike on medicinal hemp, and so he took that obscure Mexican term and made scare campaigns against it. I mentioned that in response to your demands for rigorous testing, which are several millenia late. More testing is always great.
For alcohol, I know American kids also have problems with meth and crack and whatnot, but here the kids mostly drink a lot and smoke weed, and both are bad for them. It's not cool or fun to stunt your physical and mental development, and if you absolutely must get drunk or high, wait until the body has completely finished developing.
No one said vicadin except for you (the only reason I know what that is I saw that doctor who thinks he's cool on t.v. say it 30 times in the 5 minutes I watched).
In response to your undercover statement, I am not changing the topic or trying to lessen the severity of your warning that kids shouldn't take drugs, nor am I excusing drug use by saying "well alcohol is worse so who cares" (I really loathe having to figure out all the baseless accusations implied in undercover statement questions, and all the other ones, also no.) I was stating that anything which harms the development of youth is bad. I want to say mean stuff now but you're a girl so ugh.
-
I have been, and continue to be, a contributing & tax-paying citizen of this great country. I have worked my entire adult life, from a low-paying engineer to a senior software engineer working at a major Silicon Valley corporation developing leading edge products for digital video applications. I have worked for video game mfg and defense companies in the past. I have a great reputation and am sought by several corporations for my 30 years of skill. I really don't care what people think about my position concerning medical MJ. So far it has not been a detriment to my parnassa (livelihood)...
That's a great resume
(http://user21791.vs.easily.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/we.png)
-
BTW what's your blood type? I may need one of your organs.
-
I appreciate your reply Muman. But you didn't tell me if you smoked pot first. Or maybe I missed it. I am sorry to hear about the issues you had with cocaine. I am glad to know that they are a past problem and I will pray for your good health in the future.
Shalom BC3,
I do appreciate the good sentiment. Thanks..
I started drinking at summer camp at age 16 (when I was a computer instructor for Computer Camps East). I had a bit of independence (being a 'counselor' at such an age) so my roomate and I bought all kinds of alcohol and a book on mixing 300 different drinks (and we tried to mix all 300 of them)... When I got back from that camp and was going to High School I met my incredibly brilliant Estonian friend (he was a 1st generation American, his parents immigrated from Estonia). He was into experimenting with stuff, and I think we did LSD before we smoked pot... I remember I had an Iranian (yeah, I know) girl-friend in my senior year and she could get us pot. When I went to college is when I really was able to get pot (good stuff) from dealers in the fraternities.
Anyway, I am very VERY glad I no longer am involved with those white drugs. I did cocaine, crack, and a little meth when I moved to Los Angeles in the mid 80s. As I said, it was like the TV show 'Miami Vice' when I lived in Marina Del Rey... The guy who lived upstairs from my fathers condo was a limo driver (who in his spare time was a Frisbee champion who won Championships in Hawaii) who also in his spare time sold coke to his clients. I was friends with a Tony 'Spumoni' who looked like Rocky (Sylvester Stalone) and he worked out and took steroids (his muscles were popping). Marina Del Rey is close to Venice Beach (where I used to hang out in the summers) where 'Muscle Beach' is. It is also near Santa Monica where the TV show 'Baywatch' was filmed... I was so caught up in the 'glamour' in those days... Now I can't stand Los Angeles and live in Northern California closer to Napa Valley than San Francisco...
I sometimes jest that I can write a book with all the 'crazy' experiences I had in the 80s-90s...
-
Shalom BC3,
I do appreciate the good sentiment. Thanks..
I started drinking at summer camp at age 16 (when I was a computer instructor for Computer Camps East). I had a bit of independence (being a 'counselor' at such an age) so my roomate and I bought all kinds of alcohol and a book on mixing 300 different drinks (and we tried to mix all 300 of them)... When I got back from that camp and was going to High School I met my incredibly brilliant Estonian friend (he was a 1st generation American, his parents immigrated from Estonia). He was into experimenting with stuff, and I think we did LSD before we smoked pot... I remember I had an Iranian (yeah, I know) girl-friend in my senior year and she could get us pot. When I went to college is when I really was able to get pot (good stuff) from dealers in the fraternities.
Anyway, I am very VERY glad I no longer am involved with those white drugs. I did cocaine, crack, and a little meth when I moved to Los Angeles in the mid 80s. As I said, it was like the TV show 'Miami Vice' when I lived in Marina Del Rey... The guy who lived upstairs from my fathers condo was a limo driver (who in his spare time was a Frisbee champion who won Championships in Hawaii) who also in his spare time sold coke to his clients. I was friends with a Tony 'Spumoni' who looked like Rocky (Sylvester Stalone) and he worked out and took steroids (his muscles were popping). Marina Del Rey is close to Venice Beach (where I used to hang out in the summers) where 'Muscle Beach' is. It is also near Santa Monica where the TV show 'Baywatch' was filmed... I was so caught up in the 'glamour' in those days... Now I can't stand Los Angeles and live in Northern California closer to Napa Valley than San Francisco...
I sometimes jest that I can write a book with all the 'crazy' experiences I had in the 80s-90s...
I got offered all those drugs except for meth but I didn't actually buy them. Did you never see anyone that regularly used those drugs before you did them?