Marijuana Laws? (high school, politicians, abuse, state)

[FoRuMRideR420]

Originally Posted by Bob from down south

Yeah, natural selection really is one of God's greatest gifts.

To those who are about to die...errrrrrrr I mean get high...we salute you.

Good riddance! We won't miss you.

haha i keep picturing Bob as the guy who makes weed illegal in beginning of Pineapple Express ....don't worry Bob we wont miss you either old man

[greatmuta]

Originally Posted by FoRuMRideR420

haha i keep picturing Bob as the guy who makes weed illegal in beginning of Pineapple Express ....don't worry Bob we wont miss you either old man

[edesign]

Originally Posted by Bob from down south

Dronabinol is a metered-dose inhaled form of synthetic Delta-9 THC.

I had heard of it, was not aware it was an inhalant.

Your argument was that people can't eat/drink due to nausea, and therefore can't take other drugs. If they can tolerate oral meds, we're back to a whole assortment of better drugs than THC.

Ok...chronic serious pain. Personally I do not tolerate painkillers very well. I believe I am a bit hypersensitive as most people can handle 10mg of hydrocodone just fine but it will make me puke. Even 5mg makes me queasy and very limited mobility. My father and his father also do not tolerate painkillers very well. Most of the time save for extreme pain we don't take anything. I take aspirin or acetaminophen maybe once or twice a year if I'm really hurting...and even then only half the recommended dose as my stomach disagrees with it. I can't tell you how many bottles of 100 count aspirins/tylenols I have had expire before I even got 10% through the bottle...

And of course there are other meds out there that can work on different things but they are often more dangerous and can be physically addictive. But since they are backed by the feds and the pharmaceutical companies you probably think they are A-OK. How many people die from OTC meds and prescription meds (or get addicted to their 'scripts) each year? How many from smoking pot? 'Nuff said.

No, I knew real world dopers, and they behaved as described. Not just one or two, either.

Correction, you know the idiot dopers who can't control themselves. I'm sure you know some beer and liquor drinkers like that too.

We used to do drug testing on employees with absenteeism issues, and we culled out quite a few that way. Turns out there was an elevated positive hit rate in that cohort. Gee, what a surprise.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you did not test them for alcohol use and that you simply assumed that the drugs (was it just MJ or was it other stuff too?) were the culprit? Seems hangovers are the main reason some of my old coworkers didn't come in to work on time or at all. I don't ever recall anyone, be it coworkers, friends, or acquaintanecs, who were unable to get up for work the next day because they smoked too much weed. Stayed up too late on top of it? Yes, but I know people who've done that drinking caffeinated sode and playing video games until 4AM. Mixed it with beer or other drugs? Yes. Just smoked and got at least 5-6 hours of sleep? No.

In fact, I can't trust many of those folks to even show up for work two days in a row.

And if you worked for me, one hair sample would tell me all I needed to know. And you'd be gone...I never had that luxury of allowing that kind of uncertainty in. It's not worth taking a chance on a doper when there is so much uncontaminated good talent out there.

Judging from your prior paragraph and what you said in a previous post it seems that you don't know how to hire the right people if you were having absentee problems with multiple people. Perhaps you should work on your intuition a bit more, you might waste less of your time hiring inept people and more time keeping experienced employees...that or hire someone who knows how to properly screen potential employees during the hiring process so you don't have to waste your money on drug tests, I hear those GC/MS tests to confirm the initial screening can be relatively costly

"Uncontaminated" That's a good one...there are some serious drug abusing losers out there, I'll agree with you on that.

Out of curiosity, what kind of business do you run? The fact you have problems with abusers leads me to believe that the job skills required are not too technical and a college degree may not be required either...so I'm going to guess construction? I'm not saying construction can't be technical as I know FULL well that it can, but general laborers are a dime a dozen and what most abusers I know work. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not trying to dog on your business at all!

[edesign]

Here's another one for ya Bob I think you may be ignoring this thread now for whatever reason but I found a study conducted back in 2001 (published in 2002) by a non-profit, non-government funded clinic about long term health effects and low-grade smoked MJ supplied by the government. Granted, it's not a lot of people but it's from the ones who are still alive since the study began and the feds probably were reluctant to give it to more than a few people anyway. I doubt it will change your mind since it flies in the face of your beliefs but give it a read anyway, peoples' opinions are rarely swayed instantaneously, no response necessary...just food for thought:

Medical Board Commentary for August 1, 2003 (http://www.medboardwatch.com/mbc-August-1-03.htm - broken link)

Missoula Chronic Clinical Cannabis Use Study (2002) Russo, Mathre, Byrne, Velin, Bach, Sanchez-Ramos, Kirlin ("Chronic Cannabis Use in the Compassionate Investigational New Drug Program:
An Examination of Benefits and Adverse Effects of Legal Clinical Cannabis")
(studied 4 of the 7 remaining patients in the program, who have used a known dosage of standardized, heat-sterilized quality-controlled supply of low-grade medical marijuana for 11 to 27 years.)
1st pt in 1976; closed to new patients in 1992.
Conclusions and recommendations:

1. Cannabis smoking, even of a crude, low-grade product, provides effective symptomatic relief of pain, muscle spasms, and intraocular elevations in selected patients failing other modes of treatment.
2. These clinical cannabis patients are able to reduce or eliminate other prescription medicines and their accompanying side effects.
3. Clinical cannabis provides an improved quality of life in these patients.
4. The side effect profile of NIDA Cannabis in chronic usage suggests some mild pulmonary risk.
5. No malignant deterioration has been observed.
6. No consistent or attributable neuropsychological or neurological deterioration has been observed.
7. No endocrine, hematological or immunological sequelae have been observed.
8. Improvements in a clinical cannabis program would include a ready and consistent supply of sterilized, potent, organically grown unfertilized female flowering top material, thoroughly cleaned of extraneous inert fibrous matter.
9. It is the authors' opinion that the Compassionate IND program should be reopened and extended to other patients in need of clinical cannabis.
10. Failing that, local, state and federal laws might be amended to provide regulated and monitored clinical cannabis to suitable candidates.

And a summary of the above study:

MAPS: [] Long-term Pot-Use Study: No Ill Health Effects

LONG-TERM POT-USE STUDY: NO ILL HEALTH EFFECTS
FILED 08/01/01

The government says smoking pot is bad for your health, particularly in the long run. But four of the seven people it supplies have been looked at from every angle, and researchers conclude that their marijuana use hasn't hurt them a bit.


MISSOULA, MT-In the first study of its kind, four recipients of federally provided medical marijuana were examined for the health effects of their long-term cannabis use-and none showed any serious adverse effects.

The Missoula Chronic Clinical Cannabis Use Study-headed by Montana neurologist Dr. Ethan Russo and Virginia nurse Mary Lynn Mathre, cofounder of Patients Out of Time-investigated "the therapeutic benefits and adverse effects" among patients receiving cannabis through the department of Health and Human Services' Compassionate Investigational New Drug program. That program was closed to new applicants in 1991, but continues to supply medical marijuana to seven patients. The four patients studied-one with glaucoma, one with chronic musculoskeletal pain, one with spasm and nausea, and one with spasticity from multiple sclerosis-were run through a battery of tests, including magnetic-resonance-imaging brain scans, chest X-rays, and neuropsychological, immunological and pulmonary-functions tests. The study provided the first opportunity to investigate the long-term physical effects of cannabis-smoking on patients who used a "known dosage of a standardized, heat-sterilized, quality-controlled supply of low-grade marijuana for 10-19 years."

The results, which will be published in the Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics in January 2002, showed "all four patients are stable with respect to their chronic conditions, and are taking many fewer standard pharmaceuticals than previously." Mild changes in pulmonary function were found in two of the four, but no cancer cells were detected. No other negative functions were discovered.

The study, conducted at St. Patrick's Hospital in Missoula, Montana, was sponsored by Patients Out of Time and funded by outside individuals.

"This is a positive result using a poor-quality medicine. What could we expect using a better quality cannabis?" Al Byrne, Patients Out of Time's other cofounder, told HT. Asked whether he thought the study would result in a reopening of the Compassionate IND program, Byrne bristled. "No. I don't think it will, but it should. I think the study's effect on the government will be that they will no longer be able to say that long-term therapeutic cannabis use is bad for you. But will the federal government pay it any heed? Probably not."

When asked why it took a nonprofit to organize the study rather than the government, Byrne noted that "I suppose because they suspected the result of the study would be positive and the government does not want anything positive said about cannabis use as medicine. That's the bottom line."


by Peter Gorman, Special to HighWitness News

Too bad that goes against what you are saying Bob about how weed is bad for you. Maybe it's because the people you have had trouble with who use it are already prone to being irresponsible and lazy (or maybe it was the alcohol that you didn't test for )?

[Mike from back east]

A little bit of weed won't hurt anyone, same as a little bit of vodka won't hurt anyone. A little bit of most things won't hurt you, even arsenic or cyanide can be tolerated in minute amounts.

Of course, no matter the substance, millions go way beyond 'a little bit' and use ever increasing amounts until they have a problem. Then, the REST of us have a problem with the problem people.

No easy answers to this one. If alcohol and tobacco were invented today, they'd be illegal too. Hard to say what is best solution.

[edesign]

Agreed...but how often do you see potheads causing major problems like crack fiends, meth addicts, prescription painkiller addicts, and so on?

Even with legalization I doubt we'd see a surge in new users simply because it was legal and think of the money the DEA could reappropriate for fighting hard drugs (or have it used to treat drug addicts like we do with alcoholics).

You're right though, definitely no easy answer. I'm surprised it hasn't been legalized simply due to the tax income the states and feds could get from it. Then again that would be a bitter pill for the feds to swallow to admit 60-70 years later that they were lying to us for all that time. On the flip side so many people distrust the government as it is that it might actually help their reputation somewhat lol. It may hurt temporarily to admit you were wrong but it goes away and you get more respect in the long run.

[Mike from back east]

Article about a COLO SPGS medical mj dealer in today's Gazette, with a lot of good info.

[edesign]

Thanks Mike...that's the kind of news people need to see more often, especially the part about the Dept. of Health trying to reverse the will of the CO voters when they passed Amendment 20.

[Adamkadmon777]

I love this, all you people trying to change each other's minds. Ah well, a new age is upon and those in look solely to the past for their values will find they have become relics. "Fortune passes everywhere."

[edesign]

I thought this thread had died...you registered just to drag it back up?