Give me 5 reasons psilocybin and cannabis should be schedule 1, while alcohol is legal. (statistics, abortion)

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

You're hilarious that you keep presuming what my profession is. Attempting to use that for your argument proves how unsubstantiated it is.

Alcohol not a drug? HAHAHAHA. Things must only be "drugs" when they aren't sanctioned by the government.

Annnd, yet again...you keep ignoring the studies I posted that were meta-analyses of RCT's showing cannabis and it's use as a therapeutic agent. You also keep ignoring my questions asking you how many deaths you see per year related to alcohol vs cannabis. Must not fit your ridiculous outdated opinion.

YOU are the one playing ignorant, if you dismiss cannabis as having absolutely NO potential medical benefits. Even if cannabis DIDN'T have ANY medical benefits (which it absolutely potentially does according to several studies that you continue to ignore), how can you still justify it being schedule 1? It's impossible to overdose. It is safer than alcohol. It is safer than tobacco. You have NO answer for this.


The government tells you cocaine and many opiates are schedule 2...must be less addictive and safer than cannabis..Oh wait..

By the way..I don't think alcohol SHOULD be a level 1 substance

Here's the bottom line:

You are ignorant to research that exists regarding cannabis and it's potential medicinal value. You continue to choose to ignore it, and use that as your basis (presumably) for why it should remain a schedule 1 drug, despite the fact that it is vastly safer and less addictive than alcohol or tobacco. Hypothetically, even if this research didn't exist and it was proven that cannabis had NO medicinal value whatsoever (which is hard to do, because it is difficult to study schedule 1 drugs in depth), you would still think it appropriate to keep it a level 1 substance, while recreational consumption of alcohol legal, again despite the much more harmful and addictive nature of alcohol. This would keep thousands and thousands of people imprisoned each and every year for minor drug offenses, which ruins lives and burdens society monetarily. If this is your argument, you can have it, but it isn't the least bit compelling or thoughtful, and frankly on the wrong side of history

"Addiction" is simply one (of many reasons) for drug scheduling. Schedule 1 drugs have no medical benefit. Alcohol does have medical benefit, as I have shown you.

Is alcohol addictive? Yes. Is pot addictive? Yes. Is LSD addictive? Yes.

Now as of two weeks ago (I am asked periodically by our state to review studies suggesting a medical benefit of pot), there was NOT ONE SINGLE RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE BLINDED, PROSPECTIVE STUDY WITH SUFFICIENT STATISTICAL ANALYSIS SHOWING A MEDICAL BENEFIT OF POT. Not one- Zero.

What should you do? As you are passionate about this:

1. Go to medical school and get an MD
2. complete your residency
3. Go into academic medicine
4. Write a grant
5. Design and conduct a large scale, randomized, double blinded, prospective study (with valid stats) showing the medical benefit of pot. There is probably funding available for such a study.

Until there is that level of evidence (and despite your heartfelt desires otherwise, there is not ONE PAPER meeting sufficient merit to recognize pot as a beneficial drug) pot will be a schedule 1 drug.

Now if you want to smoke pot and drop acid, that is fine- go for it. Just don't try to rationalize your drug use with pseudo-science.

I am beginning to appreciate that conversing with liberals is like talking to my dog. Despite my wishes to the contrary, my dog is incapable of understanding more than simple concepts like, "fetch", "sit", "outside", "squirrel", "walk", and "treats". I wonder if my dog is a liberal?

[Hyperthetic]

People who have never tried alcohol have no business proffering their opinions on it.

[Haakon]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

8.2 million marijuana arrests from 2001-2010 for possession of small amounts of cannabis, constituting 52% of all drug arrests.

That's a lot of people too stupid or too arrogant to follow the law. Don't want to go to jail? Don't break the law, even a child can usually figure that out, too bad the stoners can't. You think the law should be changed? Then go through the process and get it changed, until then you'll suffer the consequences for breaking the law.

“An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law” - Martin Luther King Jr.

Go ahead and smoke, but don't expect anyone to cry for you if you get arrested for possession or especially for DUI.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

"Addiction" is simply one (of many reasons) for drug scheduling. Schedule 1 drugs have no medical benefit. Alcohol does have medical benefit, as I have shown you.

Is alcohol addictive? Yes. Is pot addictive? Yes. Is LSD addictive? Yes.

Now as of two weeks ago (I am asked periodically by our state to review studies suggesting a medical benefit of pot), there was NOT ONE SINGLE RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE BLINDED, PROSPECTIVE STUDY WITH SUFFICIENT STATISTICAL ANALYSIS SHOWING A MEDICAL BENEFIT OF POT. Not one- Zero.

What should you do? As you are passionate about this:

1. Go to medical school and get an MD
2. complete your residency
3. Go into academic medicine
4. Write a grant
5. Design and conduct a large scale, randomized, double blinded, prospective study (with valid stats) showing the medical benefit of pot. There is probably funding available for such a study.

Until there is that level of evidence (and despite your heartfelt desires otherwise, there is not ONE PAPER meeting sufficient merit to recognize pot as a beneficial drug) pot will be a schedule 1 drug.

Now if you want to smoke pot and drop acid, that is fine- go for it. Just don't try to rationalize your drug use with pseudo-science.

You keep repeating tripe over and over, and you completely fail to see the forest through trees. Please go back and re-read my post, and address some of the questions I asked you, regarding comparison to alcohol and cannabis. You haven't done so yet. Why is it you support alcohol as a recreational drug? opiates are used in medicine all the time, but they are illegal recreationally. Let me hear your (probably poor) logic for why that is.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by Haakon

That's a lot of people too stupid or too arrogant to follow the law. Don't want to go to jail? Don't break the law, even a child can usually figure that out, too bad the stoners can't. You think the law should be changed? Then go through the process and get it changed, until then you'll suffer the consequences for breaking the law.

“An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law” - Martin Luther King Jr.

Go ahead and smoke, but don't expect anyone to cry for you if you get arrested for possession or especially for DUI.

So those Y'all Qaeda "militia" idiots in Oregon must just be stupid. They aren't obeying the law. I guess the one deserved to die.

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

Are you a child?

You asked for reasons as to why alcohol is not a schedule 1 drug. Perhaps you need to educate yourself, as apparently you are not familiar with the DEA scheduling system.

DEA / Drug Scheduling

You are given reasons, but you choose to ignore them. Such behavior is typical of liberals. Let us review again the reasons. Keep in mind that I am no fan of alcohol use either, but here are the reasons as to why alcohol is not a schedule 1 drug.

1. The DEA does not list alcohol as a drug.

2. Alcohol has a medical use as a neurolytic agent in cancer pain management.

3. Alcohol, in consumptions less than 2gm qd, reduces the risk of CAD

4. Alcohol consumption, in moderation, has been associated with a lower risk of dementia.

5. Alcohol is used in the Catholic religious sacrement every mass.

6. LSD and pot have not been shown, in ANY randomized, double blinded, prospective study to have any medical benefit.

7. IV ethyl alcohol infusion is used in the treatment of methanol and ethylene glycol toxicity/ingestion.


Those are the reasons as to why LSD and pot are schedule 1 and alcohol is not. You simply refuse to acknowledge facts (like most liberals) and are therefore incapable of education.


See "Dunning-Kruger Effect".

And yes, I am a physician and you are not. Being a CRNA does not make you a doctor- sorry- that is just the way that the state medical societies and the national board of medical examiners sees it, not me. If you want to be a physician, just take the MCATs and apply to medical school and complete a residency- it was not that hard.

You've managed to spew a lot of words but actually say very little.

Your entire argument is basically, it's the way it is because it's the way it is, and we'll maintain things the way they are by making it nearly impossible to conduct solid peer reviewed research into the subject.

You could just say "I like being able to tell other people what they can and cannot do" and be done with it.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by JasonF

You've managed to spew a lot of words but actually say very little.

Your entire argument is basically, it's the way it is because it's the way it is, and we'll maintain things the way they are by making it nearly impossible to conduct solid peer reviewed research into the subject.

You could just say "I like being able to tell other people what they can and cannot do" and be done with it.

Yep. The lack of nuanced thinking is absolutely striking.

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

You keep repeating tripe over and over, and you completely fail to see the forest through trees. Please go back and re-read my post, and address some of the questions I asked you, regarding comparison to alcohol and cannabis. You haven't done so yet. Why is it you support alcohol as a recreational drug? opiates are used in medicine all the time, but they are illegal recreationally. Let me hear your (probably poor) logic for why that is.

1. I do support alcohol as a recreational drug. (if you want to be a drunk, that is your business)

2. I do think pot should be a legal recreational drug. (what do I care- ruin your life if you want)

3. You asked for reasons why alcohol is a legal DRUG and pot is not- I gave them to you.

4. You asked for reasons as to why alcohol is legal and pot is not- I gave them to you.

5. I do think alcohol is addictive.

6. I do think pot is addictive.

7. There are SOME medical benefits for alcohol (as demonstrated in good studies), but not pot.


I DO NOT CARE whether you are smoking pot, dropping acid, or snorting coke or not. Life is full of choices, including whether one should buy a large soda or a Big Mac, or whatever. Just don't EVER suggest that pot has medical benefit - it does not. Even cocaine has medical use as a local anesthetic (never used now) and a means to reduce nasal bleeding in ENT (try to get it now when you have epistaxis at a surgery center). They really prefer that you use norepinephrine rather than the old cocaine solution

[Raddo]

Originally Posted by ForYourLungsOnly

Yep. The lack of nuanced thinking is absolutely striking.

I don't think that's it, I think the physician has an agenda. I have been doing what you are trying to do for a while, and the ones that are pro-prohibition because of an agenda have become pretty obvious to me.

I appreciate what you are trying to do, but never in the history of the universe has a prohibitionist ever had their mind changed by the use of evidence or logic.

[ForYourLungsOnly]

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

4. You asked for reasons as to why alcohol is legal and pot is not- I gave them to you.

No, no. I see you have comprehension issues. I didn't ask why it is how it is in the original thread title. I asked WHY SHOULD IT be how it is. As in the difference between, "Why is it this way?" and "Why should it be this way?". You seem to have missed the entire point. What a waste of time.

Originally Posted by Raddo

I don't think that's it, I think the physician has an agenda. I have been doing what you are trying to do for a while, and the ones that are pro-prohibition because of an agenda have become pretty obvious to me.

I appreciate what you are trying to do, but never in the history of the universe has a prohibitionist ever had their mind changed by the use of evidence or logic.

Yes. I'm beginning to see it's just a very regressive prohibitionist mentality, surfeited with ignorance and totally lacking of nuanced thinking or logic.