U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-17-2018, 02:09 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
13,191 posts, read 10,596,388 times
Reputation: 9363

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea4 View Post
Iím not understanding how acceptance of cannabis is somehow wrong but acceptance of known lethal substances such as alcohol and tobacco is OK.
It's simply that two or three wrongs don't make a right. Marijuana is a mind altering substance; people do not think clearly when under the influence and the more THC they have in their systems the father they distance themselves from reality.

I really have no problems with people that want to smoke themselves into oblivion in their own homes. I have a problem with people that do not pull their own weight at work; it isn't my job to make up for what they don't accomplish. Also I hate sharing a road with distracted drivers - that goes for cellphones, alcohol or any other distraction. Maybe that will change as we get all of the self-driving vehicles on our roads - but it is not here yet.

By the way, if you die in a car accident because you are distracted by pot, that would make marijuana lethal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-17-2018, 03:42 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
15,821 posts, read 4,940,335 times
Reputation: 48090
Fisheye, if you truly believe what you just posted, that people who use cannabis are "'distancing themselves from reality" or "smoking themselves into oblivion," then nothing I can say will change your mind. But I would like to point out that the type of behavior you're describing is more typical of alcoholics and opioid abusers than cannabis users.

If you see cannabis as a moral issue ("Two wrongs don't make a right"), you are entitled to your opinion, but I don't think it's fair to judge others who find that cannabis has legitimate uses. It relieves chronic pain, stops seizures, helps people with insomnia get a good night's sleep and eases anxiety. Some studies are showing that cannabis can actually shrink cancerous tumors. I've even seen reports that cannabis use has helped autistics to speak for the first time. These are promising developments, and none of it has anything to do with right vs. wrong, escaping reality or seeking oblivion unless you believe that relieving human suffering is a moral failing.

People do use cannabis recreationally to get high, too, but I don't see that as a reason to ban the substance. Would you agree to a ban on alcohol because people drink to escape reality? Do you think that people who drink responsibly and in moderation are morally inferior to those who don't drink?

From your remarks about people who don't pull their weight at work, I assume that you have worked with people who are open about cannabis use and you have had to work harder to make up for their laziness. If that's what happened to you, your attitude is somewhat understandable, and I'm sorry. But this type of behavior is far from typical. When people think of stoners, they envision the lazy hippie Cheech and Chong stereotype. Such people do exist, and I'd be the first to admit it, but this stereotype is way out of date.

Times have changed. A lot of people use cannabis now who are business executives, scientists and other professionals. There's been an explosion of cannabis use among senior citizens who use it to relieve arthritis or other chronic pain. One of our local retirement communities even has a cannabis club with hundreds of members. Cannabis: It's not just for hippies any more.

Another point I'd like to make is that thanks to legalization, people can now enjoy the benefits of the cannabis plant without smoking it. There are tinctures, capsules, candies and snacks, even suppositories, for people who can't or don't want to smoke. It's also possible to get the benefits of cannabis without the high. There is a component of the plant called cannabidiol (CBD) that has amazing anti-inflammatory and pain-relieving properties but contains no THC, the intoxicating part of the plant. My 77-year-old husband (who has never used marijuana and has no interest in doing so) uses a CBD pain cream and CBD capsules for his arthritis, and he says it really helps.

Driving while high is something that people often cite as a reason for keeping cannabis illegal, and of course no one should ever do that. My experience is that when I've used cannabis, the absolute last thing in the world I feel like doing is driving a car. While alcohol dulls your judgment and makes you feel invincible, cannabis has the opposite effect. It makes reality a bit more intense.

I would never drive high now, but in the past on the one or two rare occasions when I had to drive myself home after using marijuana, I was the slowest, most careful driver you ever saw. With alcohol you don't know how impaired you are, but with cannabis reality is enhanced so you are acutely aware of it.

I feel the paranoia about auto fatalities caused by cannabis is way overblown. In the stories I've read so far about accidents where the driver had used marijuana, there always seems to be another factor involved such as alcohol. I've never heard of a fatal accident in which the driver had used nothing but cannabis. I believe a study was done on this recently in legal marijuana states that showed there was an increase in minor fender-benders but not in fatal crashes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2018, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
13,191 posts, read 10,596,388 times
Reputation: 9363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea4 View Post
Fisheye, if you truly believe what you just posted, that people who use cannabis are "'distancing themselves from reality" or "smoking themselves into oblivion," then nothing I can say will change your mind. But I would like to point out that the type of behavior you're describing is more typical of alcoholics and opioid abusers than cannabis users.

If you see cannabis as a moral issue ("Two wrongs don't make a right"), you are entitled to your opinion, but I don't think it's fair to judge others who find that cannabis has legitimate uses. It relieves chronic pain, stops seizures, helps people with insomnia get a good night's sleep and eases anxiety. Some studies are showing that cannabis can actually shrink cancerous tumors. I've even seen reports that cannabis use has helped autistics to speak for the first time. These are promising developments, and none of it has anything to do with right vs. wrong, escaping reality or seeking oblivion unless you believe that relieving human suffering is a moral failing.

People do use cannabis recreationally to get high, too, but I don't see that as a reason to ban the substance. Would you agree to a ban on alcohol because people drink to escape reality? Do you think that people who drink responsibly and in moderation are morally inferior to those who don't drink?

From your remarks about people who don't pull their weight at work, I assume that you have worked with people who are open about cannabis use and you have had to work harder to make up for their laziness. If that's what happened to you, your attitude is somewhat understandable, and I'm sorry. But this type of behavior is far from typical. When people think of stoners, they envision the lazy hippie Cheech and Chong stereotype. Such people do exist, and I'd be the first to admit it, but this stereotype is way out of date.

Times have changed. A lot of people use cannabis now who are business executives, scientists and other professionals. There's been an explosion of cannabis use among senior citizens who use it to relieve arthritis or other chronic pain. One of our local retirement communities even has a cannabis club with hundreds of members. Cannabis: It's not just for hippies any more.

Another point I'd like to make is that thanks to legalization, people can now enjoy the benefits of the cannabis plant without smoking it. There are tinctures, capsules, candies and snacks, even suppositories, for people who can't or don't want to smoke. It's also possible to get the benefits of cannabis without the high. There is a component of the plant called cannabidiol (CBD) that has amazing anti-inflammatory and pain-relieving properties but contains no THC, the intoxicating part of the plant. My 77-year-old husband (who has never used marijuana and has no interest in doing so) uses a CBD pain cream and CBD capsules for his arthritis, and he says it really helps.

Driving while high is something that people often cite as a reason for keeping cannabis illegal, and of course no one should ever do that. My experience is that when I've used cannabis, the absolute last thing in the world I feel like doing is driving a car. While alcohol dulls your judgment and makes you feel invincible, cannabis has the opposite effect. It makes reality a bit more intense.

I would never drive high now, but in the past on the one or two rare occasions when I had to drive myself home after using marijuana, I was the slowest, most careful driver you ever saw. With alcohol you don't know how impaired you are, but with cannabis reality is enhanced so you are acutely aware of it.

I feel the paranoia about auto fatalities caused by cannabis is way overblown. In the stories I've read so far about accidents where the driver had used marijuana, there always seems to be another factor involved such as alcohol. I've never heard of a fatal accident in which the driver had used nothing but cannabis. I believe a study was done on this recently in legal marijuana states that showed there was an increase in minor fender-benders but not in fatal crashes.
Many heavy pot users are not simply pot users. Many also smoke cigarettes, drink, and will try other drugs - they have addictive personalities and they always need a distraction to fill in the void. This also gives people promoting marijuana an out: "It isn't my fault or the weed I smoke"! It's kind of like having a car accident while smoking pot and drinking - it was the alcohol that made them crash.

As far as legitimate uses for cannabis: I agree that there are obvious legitimate uses. Where I disagree is that many people, that have no medical problems or need for marijuana, will use the 'medical uses' as an excuse to tune out of society. Just like the alcoholic that tells everybody they need the drink to calm their nerves - medical use of pot is used simply as an excuse. It isn't only that, but like I pointed out before; while it can treat one problem it can also cause another problem (like falling for the elderly and breaking bones). While many hail it as a wonder drug; no two humans are the same. Many other drugs have been hailed as wonder drugs only to discover problems down the road. As more and more use; we will find more problems - that is inevitable.

Like I said before; I have no problems with the person that uses legally in their own space. That is; as long as their space does not come into contact on the road or at work with my space. There are no guarantees that will be the case. Even users, that are normally responsible, will have times where they take a chance driving - there is always an 'emergency' that comes up and they feel they have to drive (while still under the influence). They could also have friends that encourage them to use right before work. Then they might not be able to pull their own weight. It is not fair to coworkers that don't use; as I have stated before. Even though it has been acceptable; I do not approve of managers that drink - I would not approve of any distraction at work. I want any 'team' focused on the job at hand.

As far as I know CBC is legal in most, if not all states. Since it does not contain THC it does not affect job performance or driving. If people get relief from it's use; great!

Maybe I just don't like cheerleaders? I apologize if I seem obstinate. I always have to question 'why' so many want people to use - what is in it for them? It is the same reaction I had to my 'friends', that offered me cigarettes, when I first gave up smoking - who needs friends like those! And, yes, I did get new friends after I gave up smoking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-18-2018, 06:12 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
15,821 posts, read 4,940,335 times
Reputation: 48090
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
Many heavy pot users are not simply pot users. Many also smoke cigarettes, drink, and will try other drugs - they have addictive personalities and they always need a distraction to fill in the void. This also gives people promoting marijuana an out: "It isn't my fault or the weed I smoke"! It's kind of like having a car accident while smoking pot and drinking - it was the alcohol that made them crash.

As far as legitimate uses for cannabis: I agree that there are obvious legitimate uses. Where I disagree is that many people, that have no medical problems or need for marijuana, will use the 'medical uses' as an excuse to tune out of society. Just like the alcoholic that tells everybody they need the drink to calm their nerves - medical use of pot is used simply as an excuse. It isn't only that, but like I pointed out before; while it can treat one problem it can also cause another problem (like falling for the elderly and breaking bones). While many hail it as a wonder drug; no two humans are the same. Many other drugs have been hailed as wonder drugs only to discover problems down the road. As more and more use; we will find more problems - that is inevitable.

Like I said before; I have no problems with the person that uses legally in their own space. That is; as long as their space does not come into contact on the road or at work with my space. There are no guarantees that will be the case. Even users, that are normally responsible, will have times where they take a chance driving - there is always an 'emergency' that comes up and they feel they have to drive (while still under the influence). They could also have friends that encourage them to use right before work. Then they might not be able to pull their own weight. It is not fair to coworkers that don't use; as I have stated before. Even though it has been acceptable; I do not approve of managers that drink - I would not approve of any distraction at work. I want any 'team' focused on the job at hand.

As far as I know CBC is legal in most, if not all states. Since it does not contain THC it does not affect job performance or driving. If people get relief from it's use; great!

Maybe I just don't like cheerleaders? I apologize if I seem obstinate. I always have to question 'why' so many want people to use - what is in it for them? It is the same reaction I had to my 'friends', that offered me cigarettes, when I first gave up smoking - who needs friends like those! And, yes, I did get new friends after I gave up smoking.

Let's break this down and find the points we agree on:

1. Cannabis is not for everyone. It does have risks, and some people shouldn't use it.
2. It can be addicting for people who are prone to substance abuse.
3. It has real medical benefits.
4. It can also get you high.
5. People pretend to have medical conditions so they can get it.
6. Driving while high is not a good idea.

On those points I'm with you.

What we don't agree on:

1. Getting high is a moral failing and is nothing more than a crutch used to escape from reality.
2. Increased acceptance of cannabis use is a bad thing and should be discouraged.


There isn't any point in arguing the moral issue because people's ideas on these matters are usually pretty well set and not easy to change. However I personally believe that seeking pleasure is a normal, healthy human behavior and not something I have to be ashamed of.

To me, increasing acceptance of cannabis use is a good thing. Let me tell you why: In the bad old days, when marijuana was illegal everywhere, people were still using it. The difference is that you never knew what you were getting or what was in it. Now, it's possible to select specific strains for different needs. For example, indica strains are best for relaxation and sleep while sativas are energizing and can fight depression.

Legal dispensaries label all their goods with the strength of the dose, too, so you can know exactly how much you are ingesting. This makes it a lot easier to use cannabis responsibiy and avoid negative side effects. Dispensaries also are required to verify a buyer's eligibility, which of course street dealers do not. I see this as a positive. Regulating a substance like cannabis that has potential risk makes it safer for everyone.

No one is forcing you to try cannabis if you don't want to or think it's evil. That is your choice to make. I'm sorry if I sound like a cheerleader because I have found cannabis to be useful and effective. Maybe I sound that way because I think it's time to retire all the old stereotypes. Cannabis users are not a bunch of burned-out hippies, though these types do exist, of course. The problem is that people think all cannabis users look and act like Cheech and Chong, and they associate cannabis with low-lifes and slackers. If regular people like me keep speaking up and sharing our experiences, maybe these stereotypes will fade eventually. I hope so.

People are going to keep using cannabis whether it's legal or not, just like they have been for thousands of years. The only difference would be that where it is illegal gangsters and thugs control the market instead of local growers and retailers. I don't see how this benefits society in any way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2018, 10:59 AM
 
1,093 posts, read 918,462 times
Reputation: 1663
Default Bones: Now you have...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
I have never seen one claim that marijuana strengthens your bones.

Too much of anything can injure or kill you; even water. In the 1960's and 1970's the TCH levels were around 6% to 8%. Today some of the THC levels can be as high as 51% and they are still racing to get even higher yields. How do we test, how much is too much; there are many unanswered questions with the direction we are headed. I just wished those questions had been answered before we started legalizing.
Now you have:

"Using rodent models, the researchers found that cannabinoids may have a negative effect on young, growing bones. Yet, they found positive effects in older mice.

In older mice, the same compounds that caused trouble for youngins actually decreased bone loss and decreased excess fat accumulation in bones. Fat accumulation contributes to bone diseases like osteoporosis.

Another 2012 review published by the same university articulated that the bodyís natural endocannabinoids, the human version of psychoactive THC, regulate bone mass, bone loss, and bone cell function."

So, if grandma is using, she can likely handle a fall better than her sister, who isn't.

No, you can not ingest enough cannabis to kill you. Not even if you tried really really hard. This is common knowledge but also agreed among all sides, even the Feds.

Also, the argument that THC levels have risen, and therefore cannabis today is not your grandma's cannabis is factually wrong on two counts:

1) In our younger days, cannabis strength was measured on the whole sample, and back then, your purchase included stems, leaves and bud, maybe an occasional critter or two. Today, even cheap versions on the street are all buds. Not only that, but the lab methods used then were different, and not surprisingly, not as reliable or accurate as today.

The plant has been manipulated by selective breeding over the years, so there is a range of potency, but like wine, there is a biological limit on how much THC a plant can produce. Anything beyond that limit is a concentrate, or it has been manipulated with refined THC for more potency - which you will pay for, so you know what you are getting. And just like comparing beer and bourbon, if one is more powerful, you will tend to use less. For example, nobody buys and drinks a six pack of bourbon in one sitting. So more potency, by itself, is not the bogey man prohibitionists like to think it is, but good try!

Many years ago the FDA approved Marinol, which is PURE SYNTHETIC THC. Can't get a percentage higher than that. So if anyone is selling the highest potency, that would be the company producing Marinol - sanctioned by the US government!

2) Back then, as now, there was something the prohibitionists always forget to mention, we had hashish. Much more potent than cannabis, equal or greater in potency than many samples of the high grade stuff you see today, so again, nice try, but no winning. Sad.

Stop trying to conflate the heroin problem with cannabis, they are in no way comparable.

And on a somewhat humorous side note, I see you live in that part of Alabama that is between Pittsburgh, Pa and Philadelphia, Pa, so I can understand where your ideas come from. Your anecdotal stories signify nothing that is verifiable or reproducible, so are not scientifically valid, even though they are obviously important to your opinions. Even though cannabis may have somewhat different affects on each individual, we are all of the same species, so similar results should be expected for most, or testing a drug for effectiveness wouldn't be valid.

Last, This is a discussion forum, so don't expect to put your opinion out there and not expect rebuttal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-19-2018, 08:26 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
13,191 posts, read 10,596,388 times
Reputation: 9363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beaconowner View Post
Now you have:

"Using rodent models, the researchers found that cannabinoids may have a negative effect on young, growing bones. Yet, they found positive effects in older mice.

In older mice, the same compounds that caused trouble for youngins actually decreased bone loss and decreased excess fat accumulation in bones. Fat accumulation contributes to bone diseases like osteoporosis.

Another 2012 review published by the same university articulated that the body’s natural endocannabinoids, the human version of psychoactive THC, regulate bone mass, bone loss, and bone cell function."

So, if grandma is using, she can likely handle a fall better than her sister, who isn't.

No, you can not ingest enough cannabis to kill you. Not even if you tried really really hard. This is common knowledge but also agreed among all sides, even the Feds.

Also, the argument that THC levels have risen, and therefore cannabis today is not your grandma's cannabis is factually wrong on two counts:

1) In our younger days, cannabis strength was measured on the whole sample, and back then, your purchase included stems, leaves and bud, maybe an occasional critter or two. Today, even cheap versions on the street are all buds. Not only that, but the lab methods used then were different, and not surprisingly, not as reliable or accurate as today.

The plant has been manipulated by selective breeding over the years, so there is a range of potency, but like wine, there is a biological limit on how much THC a plant can produce. Anything beyond that limit is a concentrate, or it has been manipulated with refined THC for more potency - which you will pay for, so you know what you are getting. And just like comparing beer and bourbon, if one is more powerful, you will tend to use less. For example, nobody buys and drinks a six pack of bourbon in one sitting. So more potency, by itself, is not the bogey man prohibitionists like to think it is, but good try!

Many years ago the FDA approved Marinol, which is PURE SYNTHETIC THC. Can't get a percentage higher than that. So if anyone is selling the highest potency, that would be the company producing Marinol - sanctioned by the US government!

2) Back then, as now, there was something the prohibitionists always forget to mention, we had hashish. Much more potent than cannabis, equal or greater in potency than many samples of the high grade stuff you see today, so again, nice try, but no winning. Sad.

Stop trying to conflate the heroin problem with cannabis, they are in no way comparable.

And on a somewhat humorous side note, I see you live in that part of Alabama that is between Pittsburgh, Pa and Philadelphia, Pa, so I can understand where your ideas come from. Your anecdotal stories signify nothing that is verifiable or reproducible, so are not scientifically valid, even though they are obviously important to your opinions. Even though cannabis may have somewhat different affects on each individual, we are all of the same species, so similar results should be expected for most, or testing a drug for effectiveness wouldn't be valid.

Last, This is a discussion forum, so don't expect to put your opinion out there and not expect rebuttal.
You cite a study done on mice and you want to tell grandma to go ahead and get dizzy and fall - nothing to worry about! The best way to prevent any bone from breaking is to not fall. Like so many cheerleaders you grasp at straws. Any elderly with weakened bones should not take any medication that can cause dizziness - period! It is not worth taking that chance.

Whether you are talking about 1960's and 70's or today's pot or whatever; users always wanted the best (if they could afford it). If there is a product that has 51% THC that is available and fits their budget; they want it. That is the way it has always been. Of course there will always be some that are looking for specific qualities.

By the way; I am north of Philadelphia and not in between Pittsburg and Philly.

I disagree with your statement that you cannot ingest enough cannabis to kill you. Three of us held back a young woman that wanted to jump out a window because she was paranoid. There are other ways to die from ingesting any substance other than poisoning - but I would not rule that out because of individual tolerances. I was once exposed to a high does of formaldehyde with about ten other coworkers. All of us received about the same amount and one woman in the group almost died; she stopped breathing and turned blue in the face. I know that pot is not formaldehyde; but it is an example of individual tolerance. Our son cannot stand onions or garlic; he has to leave the room when we cook. From my time working on a spill team I would never say never; because we are all different.

The very best thing humans can do is refrain from mind altering substances - unless you have a medical need. I just feel that it is foolish to encourage anybody to partake that does not have a need. I also worry about people that might be pushing the use of this drug because they have a vested financial interest. We really have no idea who the people are that encourage others to use any drug or medication.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2018, 12:01 AM
 
Location: San Francisco
15,821 posts, read 4,940,335 times
Reputation: 48090
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post

The very best thing humans can do is refrain from mind altering substances - unless you have a medical need.
I take it that you don't use alcohol or smoke cigarettes, either. If so, good for you. These mind-altering substances are potentially more dangerous than cannabis.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2018, 07:07 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
13,191 posts, read 10,596,388 times
Reputation: 9363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bayarea4 View Post
I take it that you don't use alcohol or smoke cigarettes, either. If so, good for you. These mind-altering substances are potentially more dangerous than cannabis.
Many, many, years ago and I gave up. Most of my life I have worked jobs that required mandatory, random, drug testing. It was never worth the money to take a chance using drugs or alcohol. With tobacco I started to see the harmful effects on my body and gave up about 20 years ago - I was a heavy smoker. But these arguments are not about me; we are discussing this subject on the health forum.

I am simply saying that marijuana is not a wonder drug. There are still many ways that it can destroy lives. Whether it distracts a driver and causes an accident on the road or whether it precipitates a paranoid delusion were an individual overlooks the true danger; it is still one strike against the drug. We do agree that there are individuals with addictive personalities and for those marijuana is simply one more tool in their toolbox - more is not always better.

I admit that today, on the internet, my thoughts are more like the sound of that one tree falling deep in the woods with no humans to hear. It is not wise to spit against the wind. If we went back forty years ago it was the reverse. I am fighting for a happy medium between the two different opinions. More than that; I would love to see some compromise between the two sides. I feel that our current federal laws are too harsh and the THC levels, to determine whether and individual is under the influence, are far too low. But many users feel that we should have no standards, rules, or regulations. If you could iron out those disagreements I would be considerably more accepting - but you have to have the ability to be flexible and to accept/abide by the rule of law. Right now I just do not see either side expressing the will to negotiate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2018, 02:53 PM
 
1,093 posts, read 918,462 times
Reputation: 1663
Default You're a good little sheep, I get it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post
Many, many, years ago and I gave up. Most of my life I have worked jobs that required mandatory, random, drug testing. It was never worth the money to take a chance using drugs or alcohol.

I am simply saying that marijuana is not a wonder drug. There are still many ways that it can destroy lives. Whether it distracts a driver and causes an accident on the road or whether it precipitates a paranoid delusion were an individual overlooks the true danger; it is still one strike against the drug. We do agree that there are individuals with addictive personalities and for those marijuana is simply one more tool in their toolbox - more is not always better.

I admit that today, on the internet, my thoughts are more like the sound of that one tree falling deep in the woods with no humans to hear. It is not wise to spit against the wind. If we went back forty years ago it was the reverse. I am fighting for a happy medium between the two different opinions. More than that; I would love to see some compromise between the two sides. I feel that our current federal laws are too harsh and the THC levels, to determine whether and individual is under the influence, are far too low. But many users feel that we should have no standards, rules, or regulations. If you could iron out those disagreements I would be considerably more accepting - but you have to have the ability to be flexible and to accept/abide by the rule of law. Right now I just do not see either side expressing the will to negotiate.
They bought your compliance (with their paranoia) with money/job. There is a term for this. Check.

A drug that can stop seizures in their tracks, when NOTHING ELSE works, is NOT a wonder drug? A drug that can starve tumors is NOT a wonder drug? Check.

Paranoia as a side effect of cannabis use is a problem for FIRST TIME users, not for anyone who knows what they are doing. A guide, who you trust and can calm those fears, can handle that. Check.

It's not wise to spit against the wind, and yet you do. Check.

You certainly don't sound like you are for some happy medium. Anyone who reads what you've said and read you anactdoal stories can see that you are biased in the opposite direction than the country is going now. Check.

If a law deserves respect it should get it, but a law founded on racism gets and deserves no respect. You don't seem to understand the difference between drug laws, founded in racism, and traffic laws established for public safety. Check.

Whether you agree that cannabis is non-toxic or not doesn't matter. It's the truth, based on science, and people on both sides of the debate agree with the science on that.

Your turn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2018, 05:24 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
15,821 posts, read 4,940,335 times
Reputation: 48090
I would like to add that fisheye says that he has never had any personal experience with cannabis, and I'm sure that's why he believes all the myths and stereotypes. Anyone who's used it realizes that a cannabis high is really not much difference than the high you get from having a beer or a glass of wine except that cannabis doesn't kill brain cells and numb your judgment the way alcohol does.

Cannabis is not for everyone, I'd be the first to admit it. The young woman that fisheye had to restrain almost certainly had other issues because cannabis alone is not known for causing psychosis. Someone with pre-existing psychiatric issues are likely to find that cannabis makes them feel worse, not better. For the rest of us, using cannabis is no big deal.

As Beacon points out, the people who have bad experiences are usually newbies. But cannabis also has many health benefits, and I'm sure many more yet to be discovered once the Feds decriminalize it so research can be done. Some cannabis strains can actually alleviate mental health issues such as anxiety when used responsibly, intelligently and in moderation. Cannabis is even being used to help addicts kick opiates, which I think is a really promising development. The opiate crisis in this country is destroying more lives than cannabis has or ever will.

fisheye mentioned that one of the risks is falling for senior citizens, and this is a valid point. I am one myself. I am 69 years old, and I've already learned the hard way how a minor fall can break bones. My fall was not related in any way to cannabis use, but it's a good idea for seniors to be extra careful and start with very low doses. As I pointed out earlier, legalization allows people to know exactly what they're getting and how much, and this is why I think it is a good idea.

The one gripe I have with out of legalization, and I hope this will change with time, is that many cannabis edibles are packaged to resemble candy. Because of the risk to children, I think this needs to change. Here in California there are already laws in place to protect children by making the products hard to open and prohibiting products that look like candy or packaging that appeals to children.

It's not true that cannabis supporters don't want to compromise. I am heartily in favor of laws to regulate the industry so that cannabis can be safer for everyone. I hope that whatever tax revenues are generated by legal cannabis will be used toward educating the public about the benefits and risks. But I don't see any benefit at all to shaming people who use it or worse, making it illegal again. On that point, I will never compromise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top