Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nope - the effects of cannabis are due to the various chemicals in it, THC, CBD, CGB, terpenes. It doesn't work by magic - it works because chemicals in the cannabis bind to receptors in the body - CB1 and CB2 receptors for example. That's what drugs are - chemicals (natural or not) which have biological therapeutic effects due to some physical action in the body.
I think the spirit of his post is that the drug called Marijuana should be thought of more like this:
Exactly. I have leukemia. People I know have used cannabis and cbd oil for it. They are dead I am alive. I can get Medical Mj any time I want it. I have no pain, no nausea, no trouble sleeping. I don't need it. If there were the slightest valid proof it worked I would be the first to try it. Same with dandelion tea. I belong to an online group of over 200 people with my type of aggressive leukemia called CMML (not CML). Some are into diet, vitamins, supplements, cannabis, it makes no difference. How long you live is a crap shoot. The median survival time for CMML is 9 to 30 months, but some people die quickly,
some have been around for 4 or more years, and very few up to 10 years. No one knows why. The only cure is a stem cell or bone marrow transplant, but for those over 70 with other problems like heart disease it is not an option. Chemo can help if your blood counts sink dangerously low or high, but it is just to help the symptoms. It is not a cure. Other types of cancer do have cures. I previously had b cell lymphoma which was cured with a biologic chemo called Rituxan. There has been no trace of it in over a year. CML (not CMML) can be put into remission for 20 years or more with a chemo pill called gleevac. It's a breaktrough treatment. We can hope for a gleevac for CMML but it hasn't been discovered.
Spreading false stories with no proof on natural cancer cures really seems like a cruel hoax To me. Amazon is full of books on natural cancer cures. Do you know how I know they are all bull? Not one person left a review that the method cured their cancer. One doctor (of nutrition) claimed his protocal cured 30,000 patients. Besides the fact that would be logistically impossible to treat, cure and follow up on that many patients for one doctor, there was not one single review by a patient claiming they were cured. Not one of 30,000. If someone cured my cancer I'd be making youtube videos, posting my blood tests online and would at least thank him in a review of his book. But no one has done this. People cay CBD oil cured their cancer, offer no documentation, no before and after blood tests, and if you follow up you find out they died. They might as well say tootsie rolls cured their cancer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bg7
Nope - the effects of cannabis are due to the various chemicals in it, THC, CBD, CBG, terpenes. It doesn't work by magic - it works because chemicals in the cannabis bind to receptors in the body - CB1 and CB2 receptors for example. That's what drugs are - chemicals (natural or not) which have biological therapeutic effects due to some physical action in the body (binding receptors, enzymes etc.).
It does have side-effects - just like any drug - although they are acceptable to many people. Btw - the chemical name for THC is (−)-(6aR,10aR)-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-pentyl-6a,7,8,10a-tetrahydro-6H-benzo[c]chromen-1-ol.
It does seem to have more than its fare share of beneficial effects - like aspirin does - but a lot are overstated. The cannabis "cure for cancer" - which you quoted for example - zero peer-reviewed evidence that it cures cancer, just anecdotal. Like shark cartilage. Some cannabis extracts can kill some tumor cell lines in the lab - but many drugs do that and still can't cure cancers in the real life setting of the body
Its primary therapeutic effects are those which act on the central nervous system - like nausea, seizures, wakefulness etc.
My perspective comes from 2 sides. Now in my 38th year in LE with 30 years in a uniform working the streets. And a family member who started on Marijuana and became addicted to other things. He admitted that if he'd never started smoking Marijuana he would not have moved on. (True or not, no way to really know) I know many feel it's not a gateway drug but I'm not sure it isn't.
Do I believe there is a medicinal benefit for some people? Yes I have been convinced that this is reasonable. But making it legal for anyone to smoke is something I don't believe I can be convinced
of.
So is marijuana a gateway drug because once you use marijuana, you need to chase a different high - or - is it a gateway drug because the illegal seller will sell you anything - ecstasy, coke, heroin, etc.? If you purchase marijuana legally, you will never be offered anything else. The gateway is the illegal seller with motivation to sell you other drugs. When you drink alcohol, do you feel the need to chase a different high like cocaine or heroin? If you eliminate the contact with the illegal seller, there is a good chance you will eliminate the gateway.
If you make an illegal drug, legal, what do all the folks whose job it is to fight the war on drugs do with their time now?
You can reassign all those "pot cops" to duty on the U.S. / Mexico border instead of building that $70-billion wall that the U.S. population doesn't want.
So is marijuana a gateway drug because once you use marijuana, you need to chase a different high - or - is it a gateway drug because the illegal seller will sell you anything - ecstasy, coke, heroin, etc.? If you purchase marijuana legally, you will never be offered anything else. The gateway is the illegal seller with motivation to sell you other drugs. When you drink alcohol, do you feel the need to chase a different high like cocaine or heroin? If you eliminate the contact with the illegal seller, there is a good chance you will eliminate the gateway.
Glad I read all the way to end before I responded in the same manner. You managed to make the point better than I would have.
Killers do get stoned and kill people. Sober people kill people all the time. I have been drunk thousands of nights over a 50 year period and drove on at least half of those nights. I never killed anyone, or even got a citation driving, and I never beat anyone up. I believe it's the person to blame. The substance doesn't matter. If you get violent or drive recklessly when you drink its not the drink, it's you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed067
I don't recall a stoned driver killing anyone nor can I recall any stories of anyone being high beating someone up.
I've lived in a state where it's legal, and one where it's not legal. The only big difference I see is that in the state where it's legal, it's more accepted and okay to drive stoned. In the state where it's not legal, people (obviously) hide their usage more, and that even translates over to driving too, and being way more conscious (paranoid?) about getting behind the wheel buzzed.
For those who no longer smoke (or never had), we see a safety issue that increases when it's made legal. I have no doubt of the drivers I've seen behind the wheel totally stoned and shytfaced; driving erratically and unable to stay in the lane, their attention all over the place but the road.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
