 Flashpacker
Male, 18-29, Europe
 650 Posts
|
Thursday, August 30, 2012 1:10:20 PM
Isn't this old news? thought it was confirmed years ago that still-developing brains can get jacked to a certain degree after smoking extensive amounts of pot.
Anyway, weed is awesome. but it have to be used with caution like any other drug.
If you, for some reason, still are against marijuana in 2012 and think it's the devils drug, go drat yourself. You're a dummy. |
|
 RoboPatton
Male, 30-39, Western US
1947 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:41:26 PM
That sounds depressing, good thing I don't understand it. |
|
 Junq
Male, 18-29, Southern US
80 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:39:55 PM
In other news. Pot makes people more peaceful, docile, lovable, huggable, and sexsay. Win. |
|
 HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 1:27:15 PM
@patchgrabber: Couldn't have said it better myself.
I would like to point out our most recent debate. |
|
 patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 12:29:44 PM
@HA: But, in the interest of maintaining
rivalry... |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 12:22:01 PM
@HA: I think as long as we stick to non-economic related issues we'd get along swimmingly. I think it's partially because you're intelligent and logical, and also because your brand of arrogant smuggery rivals my own.  |
|
 zombunny
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
2524 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:38:14 AM
Too many big words. |
|
 Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
9438 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:34:57 AM
@HumanAction
Shouldn't be surprised, we libertarians are after all socially liberal. |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:28:17 AM
@patchgrabber: Wow - we agree on something for once. I feel like something must be done to break the uneasiness of our unlikely alliance:
government-granted monopoly on production of medical marijuana
Hehe. |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:10:07 AM
@HA: Well I take science seriously. Even though I'm still skeptical about this posts study, I'll accept it until i see solid evidence to refute it. (even though I don't care much for the results) |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:05:30 AM
@patchgrabber: Interesting - thanks for the link. I just took a moment to search for research on the PubMed.gov database and there seems to be several pilot studies reinforcing your claim. |
|
 Viewtifreak
Male, 18-29, Canada
40 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:59:24 AM
I started smoking when I was 20 so I guess I'm alright :D |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:52:13 AM
@HA: Here's one study. They only looked at CO concentrations, not polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and oxidant gases, but they also said that "the observation of little or no CO exposure suggests little or no exposure to these other compounds." |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:45:09 AM
@patchgrabber: However substitution of vapourizers like I said removes even lung damage from potential negatives.
Agreed - at least in the sense that the potential negatives of smoke inhalation would be negated. I haven't done any research into vaporizers so I don't have the knowledge necessary for reasonable input.
I would love to see the results of that study though; like I said before, I'm confident that the negative effects of marijuana are less than alcohol or tobacco. |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:39:43 AM
@HA: Ok then. However substitution of vapourizers like I said removes even lung damage from potential negatives. |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:37:31 AM
@patchgrabber: Now there is possibly some bronchial damage from the smoking itself
This is what I was saying... |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:36:42 AM
@patchgrabber: And yet a study funded by the NIDA found that marijuana smoking doesn't cause lung cancer, and there are studies that suggest that it fights cancer.
I didn't say cancer - I said lung damage. I also clearly stated that ALL prolonged smoke inhalation carries and increased risk of causing lung damage. |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:35:44 AM
@patchgrabber:
Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.
International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Department of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:34:55 AM
Here's the actual study. |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:33:27 AM
@HA: And yet a study funded by the NIDA found that marijuana smoking doesn't cause lung cancer, and there are studies that suggest that it fights cancer. Now there is possibly some bronchial damage from the smoking itself, but substitute a vapourizer and that problem is gone, but the NIDA won't fund vapourizer studies, coincidentally. |
|
patchgrabber
Male, 30-39, Canada
5252 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:25:51 AM
@HA: The NIDA has publicly admitted that they do not fund or support any study concerned with the positive aspects of marijuana use. Shirley Simson, a spokeswoman for NIDA, said “As the National Institute on Drug Abuse, our focus is primarily on the negative consequences of marijuana use. We generally do not fund research focused on the potential medical effects of marijuana.”
Since the NIDA has a government-granted monopoly on production of medical marijuana for research purposes. So they have an anti-weed agenda and are the gatekeepers for marijuana research in the US. Not a very credible organization. |
|
HumanAction
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
1124 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:18:03 AM
@SarahofBorg:
[quote">Many researchers agree that marijuana smoke contains known carcinogens, or chemicals that can cause cancer much like those in tobacco smoke[/quote">
Cancer.org
Like I said before, ALL instances of prolonged smoke inhalation carries a heightened risk of causing lung damage - ask a doctor. |
|
Cajun247
Male, 18-29, Southern US
9438 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 9:58:13 AM
Sorry guys, but the fact is, it's a carcinogen with negative psychological effects
It's nothing compared to the negative social effects enforcing its prohibition has. |
|
 SarahofBorg
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
3526 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 9:57:15 AM
Human Action, there is absolutely no evidence that smoking weed causes lung problems of any kind. There have, however, been studies showing your risk of lung cancer is reduced if you smoke weed. I don't have the links right now but they are out there. Also, weed is absolutely full of anti-oxidants, which explains it's preventive powers. |
|
SarahofBorg
Female, 18-29, Eastern US
3526 Posts
|
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 9:55:15 AM
Know what else can screw up your IQ if you start using it regularly as a teenager? Alcohol. And for that matter, how do we know all the kinds on ritalin aren't going to be screwed up for life? |
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}