Is Legalizing Marijuana Worth the Risks?

[Zantra]

And the common folk who don't switch off lights at home every possible chance, and drive instead of walking, cycling or riding a bus, are people who don't care if they are making the big, energy executives rich, because they care only about themselves.

See that's just it. The issue isn't about who makes the money, it's about the kids using drugs before they are old enough or mature enough to make an informed decision. Or using it solely due to peer pressure. Sure if you're 30 years old and a pothead, more power to you, but if you're 15? how about 12? 9? What age is too young? Any substance that alters your sense of reality is affecting your brain in some way, no matter how much potheads try and deny it. And if you're smoking pot at 10, by 15 you'll be using mescaline, pcp, heroin or crack. And you can't say "oh they know better" because if the kid doesn't have the brains to say no to pot, then he's only one step away from snorting stuff because he doesn't want his friends to think he's "a tard" or "lame"

question to all you smokers: one day you'll have kids- you going to let them smoke pot? if not, are you going to hide your use from them? If so, why? I guess I just see things a little differently since I'm a parent.

 

[Zantra]

They just want to use marihuana, they do not want to give anyone money and it should be decriminalized because it is ridiculous to deny people the use of some plant.

Some people might say it's ridiculous to have to risk at the very minimum, lung cancer, mood swings, low sperm count,jail time,job loss, and spend enough money to make ciggarrettes look like a cheap habit- just to TEMPORARILY solve your woes or for kicks Not to mention the fact that like any substance, the more you use it, the less potent to your body it beconmes, as it adapts, so you have to spend even MORE money just to get the same benefit (and I know this as I know some people who spend gobs of money to get very expensive, very potent stuff just to feel normal, because dirt weed won't cut it anymore)..But that's just some people I guess...

 

[decibel]

Any substance that alters your sense of reality is affecting your brain in some way, no matter how much potheads try and deny it. And if you're smoking pot at 10, by 15 you'll be using mescaline, pcp, heroin or crack.

hmmm...That IS true, but only for some people, for me, no. I'v been smoking it for 5 years, and the only "drug" i'v ever tried and will try is marijuana, nothing else, never. I would NEVER EVER do anything like heroid or crack, that's just not cool.

 

[hypnagogue]

Sure if you're 30 years old and a pothead, more power to you, but if you're 15? how about 12? 9? What age is too young?

Sounds like a great reason to legalize marijuana, so its distribution can be regulated and restricted to adults only.

And you can't say "oh they know better" because if the kid doesn't have the brains to say no to pot

Choosing to smoke marijuana is not a matter of not having brains-- when's the last time you chided someone who went to a bar for not having brains? Alcohol is potentially physiologically addictive, after all, while I don't believe marijuana has ever been shown to be anything more than psychologically addictive.

In fact, if there's any drug habit you could say requires a complete failure of rational brain operation, it would have to be smoking cigarettes, not smoking marijuana or even drinking alcohol. (Don't take offense, I'm hooked on 'em too.) At least with marijuana you get some interesting benefits to go with the costs. In general, I think the only drugs that should be strongly discouraged are the physiologically addictive, highly destructive kind-- heroin, cocaine, and yes, tobacco. On the other hand, a lot of people might benefit from exploring the subjective spaces opened up by limited use of non-addictive drugs, such as marijuana or even (gasp) mescalin.

I can't speak for 10 year olds, but I know more than a few people who were apparently brain-deficient enough to try marijuana at around 14 or 15. I don't know anyone who ever even considered doing something like heroin or crack. Contrary to sensationalist caricatures, even young teenagers tend to have some sense of what they can get away with trying and what is best to avoid like the plague.

 

[Smurf]

In a society where the government doesn't pay for your medical costs in any way, that'd be true, but in the USA, the govt pays for a lot of your medical care, so every person who fuks up their own body is an expense to the govt, and every tax-paying citizen, who funds the government.

Or even worse, in a country with Socialized Medicare, like Canada.
but I hear this same arguemnt daily about Tobaco and Alcohol. I think there need to be restrictions that say they won't pay for self-inflicted illnesses.

 

[check]

Or even worse, in a country with Socialized Medicare, like Canada.
but I hear this same arguemnt daily about Tobaco and Alcohol. I think there need to be restrictions that say they won't pay for self-inflicted illnesses.

I’m going to have to strongly disagree with this, Smurf. For example: If someone develops lung cancer, the gov’t could claim that it’s because they smoke and thus, not pay for treatment. Although smoking does significantly increase the risk of lung cancer, it might not have been the cause in all instances even if the person who has developed lung cancer is a smoker.

The better alternative is to charge taxes on things like tobacco products and (unfortunately) alcohol that would cover the cost of treating diseases linked to the use and abuse of these substances. Though this would, in effect, ‘punish’ people who don’t develop any illnesses from the use of these substances, it doesn’t prevent people from receiving treatment.

Now, I know that there are already huge taxes on cigarettes. They’re at almost $8/pack I think in Ontario… however, I’m pretty sure income from these taxes doesn’t all go into the healthcare system (or anti-smoking campaigns). There needs to be a reform of how that revenue is spent.

 

[Evo]

I have to side with Zantra here.

Make two columns. One with the positives of smoking marijuana and one with the negatives.

Which column has more entries?

 

[Gokul43201]

Make two columns. One with the positives of smoking marijuana and one with the negatives.

Which column has more entries?

Do the same with smoking, drinking, watching porn, etc.

 

[hypnagogue]

Make two columns. One with the positives of smoking marijuana and one with the negatives.

Which column has more entries?

For sustained / long term / heavy marijuana use, the costs certainly outweigh the benefits. For infrequent / moderate / responsible use, depending on the mentality of the user, it is likely that that the benefits outweigh the costs.

 

[decibel]

Do the same with smoking, drinking, watching porn, etc.

good point although i think the marijuana column would be more of even on both sides considering that it is used for medicinal purposes, and there hasent been one case ever documented of someone dying of marijuana.

 

[check]

For sustained, long term marijuana use, the costs certainly outweigh the benefits. For infrequent use, depending on the mentality of the user, it is likely that that the benefits outweigh the costs.

Does this mean that if I'm not smoking weed now, I should start?

 

[Smurf]

I’m going to have to strongly disagree with this, Smurf. For example: If someone develops lung cancer, the gov’t could claim that it’s because they smoke and thus, not pay for treatment. Although smoking does significantly increase the risk of lung cancer, it might not have been the cause in all instances even if the person who has developed lung cancer is a smoker.

The better alternative is to charge taxes on things like tobacco products and (unfortunately) alcohol that would cover the cost of treating diseases linked to the use and abuse of these substances. Though this would, in effect, ‘punish’ people who don’t develop any illnesses from the use of these substances, it doesn’t prevent people from receiving treatment.

Now, I know that there are already huge taxes on cigarettes. They’re at almost $8/pack I think in Ontario… however, I’m pretty sure income from these taxes doesn’t all go into the healthcare system (or anti-smoking campaigns). There needs to be a reform of how that revenue is spent.

your right that's a much better idea. make it 10$ a pack

 

[Smurf]

Do the same with smoking, drinking, watching porn, etc.

...watching porn? are there any proven negative effects for that?

 

[Evo]

Do the same with smoking, drinking, watching porn, etc.

Very good, except watching porn may vary greatly depending on the psychological makeup of the individual.

Where it may satisfy the needs of one, it may only fuel the desire of another.

 

[hypnagogue]

Does this mean that if I'm not smoking weed now, I should start?

I don't see any reason why a responsible, well-informed adult without an addictive personality shouldn't try it (presuming that adult has the opportunity to take it legally). If used responsibly, there are no significant long term effects, and there are no physiologically addictive properties to make such responsible use unrealistic.

Thus, it is possible for the right kind of person in the right kind of situation to keep the negative effects to a negligible level, while simultaneously experiencing a potentially deeply rewarding exploration into what consciousness can be. Sometimes it's pleasant, or intellectually stimulating, or emotionally helpful, or even spiritually enlightening, to view the world through qualitatively different kinds of glasses.

As long as utmost care is taken in such pursuits, I see no reason why such activities should not just be allowed but actually enthusiastically endorsed. It's just like any other potentially dangerous but potentially rewarding activities: do it safely and reap the benefits. We let people experience the rush of jumping out of a plane, but only after extensive training and preparation, under proper supervision, etc. Why couldn't the same be done with the suitable kinds of psychoactive drugs? Personally, I think it's a shame that so many people go through life never experiencing anything outside of waking, dreaming, and perhaps drunkenness. There are many other wonderful fruits hiding in the untapped branches of the mind, if only we could learn and teach how to scale the heights safely rather than fear and forbid them.

 

[Gokul43201]

Very good, except watching porn may vary greatly depending on the psychological makeup of the individual.

Where it may satisfy the needs of one, it may only fuel the desire of another.

Agreed. I was merely trying to raise the point that while the goods and bads are "fairly" agreed upon, this thread is about the benefits/drawbacks of legalizing pot.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

As an aside; three pot parties.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=45244

 

[gerben]

Some people might say it's ridiculous to have to risk at the very minimum, lung cancer, mood swings, low sperm count,jail time,job loss, and spend enough money to make ciggarrettes look like a cheap habit- just to TEMPORARILY solve your woes or for kicks Not to mention the fact that like any substance, the more you use it, the less potent to your body it beconmes, as it adapts, so you have to spend even MORE money just to get the same benefit (and I know this as I know some people who spend gobs of money to get very expensive, very potent stuff just to feel normal, because dirt weed won't cut it anymore)..But that's just some people I guess...

That may seem ridiculous to some. But that is no valid reason to prohibit it. This prohibition leads I think to far worse situations (as a very minor example would you like your children to be send to jail and get a criminal record because they smoked a joint). It would be better to just allow it and to inform people of all the dangerous consequences, which are now very unclear, mainly because of totally unbelievable propaganda.

 

[Zantra]

Sounds like a great reason to legalize marijuana, so its distribution can be regulated and restricted to adults only.



Choosing to smoke marijuana is not a matter of not having brains-- when's the last time you chided someone who went to a bar for not having brains? Alcohol is potentially physiologically addictive, after all, while I don't believe marijuana has ever been shown to be anything more than psychologically addictive.

In fact, if there's any drug habit you could say requires a complete failure of rational brain operation, it would have to be smoking cigarettes, not smoking marijuana or even drinking alcohol. (Don't take offense, I'm hooked on 'em too.) At least with marijuana you get some interesting benefits to go with the costs. In general, I think the only drugs that should be strongly discouraged are the physiologically addictive, highly destructive kind-- heroin, cocaine, and yes, tobacco. On the other hand, a lot of people might benefit from exploring the subjective spaces opened up by limited use of non-addictive drugs, such as marijuana or even (gasp) mescalin.

I can't speak for 10 year olds, but I know more than a few people who were apparently brain-deficient enough to try marijuana at around 14 or 15. I don't know anyone who ever even considered doing something like heroin or crack. Contrary to sensationalist caricatures, even young teenagers tend to have some sense of what they can get away with trying and what is best to avoid like the plague.

no offense taken- I've heard far worse-I'm actually I'm my 3rd week of quitting ciggs(again) But I always tell people that they shouldn't smoke. My point was that a child uses weed a lot of times initially for peer acceptance, but then they get "hooked' psychologically, and continue to use it. My view may seem extremist to you, but it's been scientifically proven through many studies that weed is a gateway drug. So someone who's prone to addiction will continually use progressively stronger and more addictive substances.

As far as legalizing it, that wouldn't make it any better. It would make it more accessible, if anything. With risk of reprecussions reduced, you'd see kids hanging outside of 7-11's asking people to buy a dime bag for them instead of a case of beer. And for every case of someone who knew when to stop, I can give ou 10 who didn't.

I have this friend who I've known since we were kids. He's always been a pretty smart guy. We used to play chess and he'd beat the pants off me every time. Well he's been a regular user for probably the last 8 or 9 years. Recently we sat down to a game of chess for the first time in a long time after a few beers (2 wild and crazy guys huh?). Well I beat the pants off of him. It wasn't even close..And he's the kind who hates to loose, so I know he was trying. Weed does affect the brain people.

 

[Zantra]

Thus, it is possible for the right kind of person in the right kind of situation to keep the negative effects to a negligible level, while simultaneously experiencing a potentially deeply rewarding exploration into what consciousness can be. Sometimes it's pleasant, or intellectually stimulating, or emotionally helpful, or even spiritually enlightening, to view the world through qualitatively different kinds of glasses.

If there was a drug that only killed some people with some of the wrong qualities some of the time under the right conditions, should it be sold by drug companies? I'm guessing the families of the people it DID kill would mind. Cocaine at one time was sold as a presciption drug for certain ailments. That doesn't mean it was intended for mass consumption. X is perfectly safe if you use it infrequently, not mixing it with alcohol or other drugs. And if used safely by adults under the right conditions can be safely ingested- should we legalize that too? My point is the line has to be drawn somewhere. Pot users want to draw the line on one side of weed, non users draw it on the other. So that infers that weed smokers are trying to justify their use.

Let's look at what weed does exactly- it slows down motor response, impairs higher brain function and logical deduction. It doesn't have the same affect on your brain as alcohol exactly, but it's similiar. I'm not a chemist ,so I don't know exactly what area of the brain it surpresses (maybe someone more knowledgeable about chemistry can add that in) but prolonged use of it dulls the synapses, slows higher brain function over a period of time, and affects short term memory retention. And this is a healthy drug to use? Personally I'd like to go out of this world with as many wits as I came into it with.

I'd also like to add that in the short term it may not have immediate affects, but long term frequent use does affect the brain. So if you're using it regularly you may not see any affects for the first few years, but eventually it catches up with you like anyhting else.

 

[Kerrie]

For sustained / long term / heavy marijuana use, the costs certainly outweigh the benefits. For infrequent / moderate / responsible use, depending on the mentality of the user, it is likely that that the benefits outweigh the costs.

thank you hypnogogue...for some reason, people have this perception that those who use it are smoking it like cigarettes. those who are responsible users (which is most of the users) will dabble with it like those who consume alcohol socially.

 

[Loren Booda]

How does one know they have an addictive disorder before they become an addict?

 

[mee]

thank you hypnogogue...for some reason, people have this perception that those who use it are smoking it like cigarettes. those who are responsible users (which is most of the users) will dabble with it like those who consume alcohol socially.

Pot has a culure associated with it as well. In my part of the world, people who smoke often smoke socially and peer pressure can be great to smoke it when every person you know says hey come on its the good stuff when you go over to their house. This can mak it hard to stop. I assume this happens with beer as well. Conversely, friendships can become strained when people start showing up to ones house just to smoke your weed. One can find out whose true friends are when one stops smoking weed. Weed also can be amotivational as one often becomes satisfied with life when one has smoked it, regardless of ones social situation. Instead of saying, I need to work and save up to become financially independent and get a better job, one can merely say I need some more pot. Pot needs a better culture associated with it, not often developed by the misanthropes of society, in order to be used safely. It can be a complex way of life as it has so many facets associated with it and popular culture often says more always better. As to it being a gateway drug, it might not be so much so if it were legal. People would no longer have the excuse that "pot is good and the government won't let me use it so other illegal drugs might be just as good or better because the government might be wrong on them as well." One of the worst things about pot is that it can be a gateway to other illegal practices more than just a potential gateway to harder drugs.

 

[Adrian Baker]

For those who think it should be illegal (wether it is good, bad or indifferent for you!) have a look at how Prohibition in the US worked out. Was this abandoned due to a realisation of how good alcohol was for the public? I think not.

It is immaterial whether it is good or bad for the person involved - humans have free will and can make bad choices as well as good ones. What right does the state have to stop a person putting a chemical in their bodies if they wish to?

I race motorcycles. What health benefit is there in that? None! Should it be made illegal as well then? And mountaneering too, and boxing, and riding horses...

What happened to land of the free?

 

[Zantra]

For those who think it should be illegal (wether it is good, bad or indifferent for you!) have a look at how Prohibition in the US worked out. Was this abandoned due to a realisation of how good alcohol was for the public? I think not.

It is immaterial whether it is good or bad for the person involved - humans have free will and can make bad choices as well as good ones. What right does the state have to stop a person putting a chemical in their bodies if they wish to?

I race motorcycles. What health benefit is there in that? None! Should it be made illegal as well then? And mountaneering too, and boxing, and riding horses...

What happened to land of the free?

Then I guess we should legalize cocaine, crack, methamphetmines, MDM, and heroin right away- then people can choose their own fate.

Gotta draw the line somewhere.

 

[Moonbear]

There are a number of fairly recent studies showing the neural effects of THC, the psychoactive compound in marijuana. Many of these focus on the hippocampus and nucleus accumbens. The hippocampus is involved in learning and memory, and nucleus accumbens is part of the limbic system, regulating "hedonistic" behaviors (i.e., sex and drug addiction).

There are effects on synaptic plasticity, or rearrangement of synaptic contacts between cells (measured as long-term potentiation and long-term depression), as reported in these two articles (the first one is available free online, the rest are all available online if you have access via subscription, such as through your library, so I didn't include links because my links won't work for you).

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Aug 18;95(17):10269-73.
Mesolimbic dopaminergic decline after cannabinoid withdrawal.
Diana M, Melis M, Muntoni AL, Gessa GL.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=9707636

J Neurosci. 2003 Jun 15;23(12):4815-20.
Functional tolerance and blockade of long-term depression at synapses in the nucleus accumbens after chronic cannabinoid exposure.
Hoffman AF, Oz M, Caulder T, Lupica CR.

These data demonstrate that long-term exposure to the active ingredient of marijuana blocks synaptic plasticity in the NAc and reduces the sensitivity of GABAergic and glutamatergic synapses to both cannabinoids and opioids.

A paper about to come out (the manuscript is already published online) demonstrates negative effects of smoking marijuana on memory. This focuses on memory while using marijuana, not long-term effects after stopping or after chronic usage.

Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2004 May 7 [Epub ahead of print]
Effects of marijuana on neurophysiological signals of working and episodic memory.
Ilan AB, Smith ME, Gevins A.

Responses in the WM (working memory) task were slower and less accurate after smoking marijuana, accompanied by reduced alpha band EEG reactivity in response to increased task difficulty. In the EM (episodic memory) task, marijuana was associated with an increased tendency to erroneously identify distracter words as having been previously studied.

And two papers that came out in 2001 both show cross-sensitization by THC to other drugs of abuse including morphine, heroin and amphetamine. Sensitization to drugs is an enhancement of the response to the drug that occurs with episodic rather than regular usage (i.e., stronger effects if you only use on weekends instead of every day). Cross-sensitization is the phenomenon where a drug interacts with the same neural pathway as a different class of drugs such that episodic use of one drug leads to a greater effect the first time a different drug is used than if you had no previous drug exposure of any kind.

The article by Lamarque et al. reported that this effect only occurred in "high responder" rats, ones that have been previously shown to be more vulnerable to drug-taking behaviors and are selected based on higher activity levels in a novel environment than the "low responder" rats. So, they posit the hypothesis that marijuana's role as a gateway drug may occur in similarly vulnerable humans. This still leaves unanswered just what makes some individuals more vulnerable than others in order to know who should never try it even once and who could safely try it without becoming quickly addicted or cross-sensitized to other drugs of abuse. The cross-sensitization to heroin was fairly long-lasting (still present 41 days after the last injection of THC, which was the last day of testing in this study).

Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2001 Nov;158(3):259-66.
Behavioural sensitization after repeated exposure to Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cross-sensitization with morphine.
Cadoni C, Pisanu A, Solinas M, Acquas E, Di Chiara G.


Neuropharmacology. 2001 Jul;41(1):118-29.
Chronic treatment with Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol enhances the locomotor response to amphetamine and heroin. Implications for vulnerability to drug addiction.
Lamarque S, Taghzouti K, Simon H.

 

[gerben]

Then I guess we should legalize cocaine, crack, methamphetmines, MDM, and heroin right away- then people can choose their own fate.

Gotta draw the line somewhere.

Yes, we should legalize all those substances. There is no need to draw a line. People can also get high on sniffing glue, but since they know that this is very bad for their health hardly anybody does this. People can make informed choices as long as they have the information, but in the US even research on such substances is mostly forbidden.

 

[Kerrie]

Yes, we should legalize all those substances. There is no need to draw a line. People can also get high on sniffing glue, but since they know that this is very bad for their health hardly anybody does this. People can make informed choices as long as they have the information, but in the US even research on such substances is mostly forbidden.

cocaine and heroine are highly physicially addictive to the point that violent crimes are often committed because of them. this is rarely the case with marijuana because it is not physically addictive. someone mentioned about health care issues using these kind of drugs? with cocaine and heroine being easily available, the health of many could be severely and immediately affected.

 

[Moonbear]

Yes, we should legalize all those substances. There is no need to draw a line. People can also get high on sniffing glue, but since they know that this is very bad for their health hardly anybody does this. People can make informed choices as long as they have the information, but in the US even research on such substances is mostly forbidden.

Where do you get the idea such research is forbidden? I work with a number of people who study drug addiction and neural actions of these drugs. Such research is tightly controlled by the DEA (you need a special license), to make sure people purchasing these drugs for research are keeping it secured so it doesn't get misused, but it is allowed.

 

[gerben]

cocaine and heroine are highly physicially addictive to the point that violent crimes are often committed because of them. this is rarely the case with marijuana because it is not physically addictive. someone mentioned about health care issues using these kind of drugs? with cocaine and heroine being easily available, the health of many could be severely and immediately affected.

I agree the health of people can be serverly affected by the use of cocaine and heroine, in fact the health of many is severely affected by it. The fact that it is illegal makes matters only worse, I do not think that making it legal will cause more problems than there allready are with these drugs and with the crime associated with it because of pohibition.

 

[Moonbear]

cocaine and heroine are highly physicially addictive to the point that violent crimes are often committed because of them. this is rarely the case with marijuana because it is not physically addictive. someone mentioned about health care issues using these kind of drugs? with cocaine and heroine being easily available, the health of many could be severely and immediately affected.

Kerrie, the most recent research is indicating THC is addictive. The addiction may not form as quickly as with other drugs of abuse (some of which can get someone hooked on just the first or second use), but that doesn't mean it isn't addictive. It seems to be more like alcohol in that regard, where some people are very susceptible to addiction and others can use it now and then throughout their entire lives without developing an addiction.

 

[gerben]

Where do you get the idea such research is forbidden? I work with a number of people who study drug addiction and neural actions of these drugs. Such research is tightly controlled by the DEA (you need a special license), to make sure people purchasing these drugs for research are keeping it secured so it doesn't get misused, but it is allowed.

Oh good, it is allowed then. I got the information from various stories and articles. There was some government funded research that was extremely fraud. Does the DEA also check the results of the research? I am still hesitant to trust such DEA-controlled research...

 

[Moonbear]

Oh good, it is allowed then. I got the information from various stories and articles. There was some government funded research that was extremely fraud. Does the DEA also check the results of the research? I am still hesitant to trust such DEA-controlled research...

No, DEA doesn't check the results or have any influence on the studies, just whether or not you'll get the license to buy the controlled substances, and where you can buy them from. The research is pretty much all NIH-funded work, so the scientific component is evaluated by other scientific experts in the field. Providing that funding information to DEA is usually enough for them to know it is legitimate work, along with getting verification you are legitimately employed by a university and don't have a criminal record. I know this because I'm named on one of those licenses (I think I may have signed away my first-born child with all the paperwork ). I don't do any work on drug abuse, but I collaborate with the PI on that license quite a bit, so we decided to make sure I'm covered on it just in case (and as a back-up contact if she's not around should we get inspected or have a problem). There's an entire institute at NIH...the National Institute for Drug Abuse (NIDA)...that funds such work.

 

[Kerrie]

Kerrie, the most recent research is indicating THC is addictive. The addiction may not form as quickly as with other drugs of abuse (some of which can get someone hooked on just the first or second use), but that doesn't mean it isn't addictive. It seems to be more like alcohol in that regard, where some people are very susceptible to addiction and others can use it now and then throughout their entire lives without developing an addiction.

are you referring to the physical addiction where the body goes through pain in withdrawal mode, or the kind of mental addiction that "potheads" are associated with?

 

[Zantra]

are you referring to the physical addiction where the body goes through pain in withdrawal mode, or the kind of mental addiction that "potheads" are associated with?

Does it really make a difference? Addiction is addiction- If you can't stop, the specifics are moot.

 

[ShawnD]

Yes, it does make a difference. Psychological addictions can be very easily stopped. I stopped weed cold turkey like 5 years ago, and I had no withdrawls at all (other than being bored out of my mind).
Good luck trying to get somebody to stop smoking cigarettes or stop shooting heroin.

 

[Zantra]

I know lots of weed smokers who claim "they can quit any time they want" as theier health goes down the tubes, as they develop a smokers cough from long term use- I had one friend recently go to a lung specialist because he was coughing up black flecks all the time... doctor said he was fine, or so he claims.. a week later he was smoking up a storm.. yet he claims he can "quit anytime he wants to"- if you can quit any time, why is it so many don't ?

 

[pace]

I think things should be in balance. First you should legalize it. Then after some time when you have brought down smoking, cause we all know it's affecting our lives in a negative way, we should banish all smoke things slowly. Or maybe making candy-smokes. I really liked that as a kid
This was probably a reaaally stupid post.
I'll go back to bed now.
And I'm not stoned either.

 

[Smurf]

I know lots of weed smokers who claim "they can quit any time they want" as theier health goes down the tubes, as they develop a smokers cough from long term use- I had one friend recently go to a lung specialist because he was coughing up black flecks all the time... doctor said he was fine, or so he claims.. a week later he was smoking up a storm.. yet he claims he can "quit anytime he wants to"- if you can quit any time, why is it so many don't ?

I happen to have over heard a conversation about a week ago between 2 pot smokers. One line that sticks out went something like "I didn't think I'd crave it, but I do crave it" I don't smoke it myself...often.

 

[YourLooks]

What is "quit" ? what is "promises" ? :(

 

[Kerrie]

Does it really make a difference? Addiction is addiction- If you can't stop, the specifics are moot.

it makes a difference when physically addictive drugs such as heroine/cocaine cause violent crimes and marijuana's "mental" addiction is not causing violent crimes that affect others around them. the addiction to marijuana isn't causing violent crimes, but is causing many to go to jail for possession thus clogging up our jails and costing YOU money. ask some police officers what their take is, and I guarantee you they will say that marijuana needs to be legalized simply because of how many people are needlessly getting arrested for it, taking their time away from more important duties the public needs them for.

yes, i agree addiction is addiction, but the mental addiction isn't a physical need that causes the body pain and anguish to the point that one will commit crimes to get their fix. alcohol and cigarrettes even have more of a physical addiction factor then marijuana. this topic is about legalization of the substance, not justification for using it.

 

[Adrian Baker]

Then I guess we should legalize cocaine, crack, methamphetmines, MDM, and heroin right away- then people can choose their own fate.

Gotta draw the line somewhere.

Yes, of course it should all be legalised. Do you understand the meaning of FREEDOM?

In the UK all drugs are availiable pretty much everywhere at cheap prices - what difference does making them illegal make? All it does is pass all the profits to thugs and gangsters who fight territory wars over their 'rights' to sell the stuff. Remember Prohibition?

And what about quality control? Why should addicts be forced to buy gear laced with brickdust, talcum powder or whatever? If the Govt wants a role it should respect people's rights to do what they want to their bodies, but protect them from dodgy gear and protect the rest of the country from drug wars and the crime associated with junkies robbing and theiving to feed their habit.

Supply them with pure clean junk with sterile needles, and stop the criminality.

Live free!

 

[jimmy p]

Adrian! You're back! or I haven't seen you. Either way, welcome back to my world.

 

[ShawnD]

In the UK all drugs are availiable pretty much everywhere at cheap prices - what difference does making them illegal make? All it does is pass all the profits to thugs and gangsters who fight territory wars over their 'rights' to sell the stuff. Remember Prohibition?

For those who don't understand what he's talking about: when alcohol became illegal in the US, the mafia's power grew tremendously.

I have a bigger problem with organized crime and government corruption than I do with druggies. Legalize it

 

[Moonbear]

are you referring to the physical addiction where the body goes through pain in withdrawal mode, or the kind of mental addiction that "potheads" are associated with?

First, let's start with the definition of addiction as is used in the scientific literature:
And since I have been discussing addiction, the definition, as used in scientific literature, should be supplied as well:

Br J Addict. 1990 Nov;85(11):1403-8.
Addiction: definition and implications.
Goodman A.

Integration of addiction into the theory and practice of psychiatry has been hampered by the lack of a definition of addiction which is scientifically useful. A definition is proposed, with diagnostic criteria specified in a format similar to that of DSM-III-R. Essentially, addiction designates a process whereby a behavior, that can function both to produce pleasure and to provide escape from internal discomfort, is employed in a pattern characterized by (1) recurrent failure to control the behaviour (powerlessness) and (2) continuation of the behaviour despite significant negative consequences (unmanageability). Some practical and theoretical implications of this definition are then explored.

There is no scientific distinction between "physical" and "psychological" addiction, because it all requires physical changes to neural structures to become a true addiction. The first set of references I posted (previous post) also addresses cross-sensitization to other drugs of abuse, with a pretty strong cross-sensitization to heroin. This is definitely a physical change in neural functioning, and long-lasting. I don't know if this makes any difference to whether people think it should be legalized or not. There are some compelling arguments that wouldn't depend on whether it is harmful to the user or not. But, if knowing it is physically addicting makes a difference to some, they should be aware of this.

Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry. 2004 Aug;28(5):849-63.
Adverse effects of cannabis on health: an update of the literature since 1996.
Kalant H.

Recent research has clarified a number of important questions concerning adverse effects of cannabis on health. A causal role of acute cannabis intoxication in motor vehicle and other accidents has now been shown by the presence of measurable levels of Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in the blood of injured drivers in the absence of alcohol or other drugs, by surveys of driving under the influence of cannabis, and by significantly higher accident culpability risk of drivers using cannabis. Chronic inflammatory and precancerous changes in the airways have been demonstrated in cannabis smokers, and the most recent case-control study shows an increased risk of airways cancer that is proportional to the amount of cannabis use. Several different studies indicate that the epidemiological link between cannabis use and schizophrenia probably represents a causal role of cannabis in precipitating the onset or relapse of schizophrenia. A weaker but significant link between cannabis and depression has been found in various cohort studies, but the nature of the link is not yet clear. A large body of evidence now demonstrates that cannabis dependence, both behavioral and physical, does occur in about 7-10% of regular users, and that early onset of use, and especially of weekly or daily use, is a strong predictor of future dependence. Cognitive impairments of various types are readily demonstrable during acute cannabis intoxication, but there is no suitable evidence yet available to permit a decision as to whether long-lasting or permanent functional losses can result from chronic heavy use in adults. However, a small but growing body of evidence indicates subtle but apparently permanent effects on memory, information processing, and executive functions, in the offspring of women who used cannabis during pregnancy. In total, the evidence indicates that regular heavy use of cannabis carries significant risks for the individual user and for the health care system.

Eur J Neurosci. 2004 Oct;20(8):2203-13.
Adenosine A receptors are involved in physical dependence and place conditioning induced by THC.
Soria G, Castane A, Berrendero F, Ledent C, Parmentier M, Maldonado R, Valverde O.

Therefore, this study shows, for the first time, a specific involvement of A(2A) receptors in the addictive-related properties of cannabinoids.

I also found this interesting study that shows there may be a link between nicotine and addiction to THC.

Br J Pharmacol. 2002 Jan;135(2):564-78.
Behavioural and biochemical evidence for interactions between Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol and nicotine.
Valjent E, Mitchell JM, Besson MJ, Caboche J, Maldonado R.

The facilitation of THC-induced acute pharmacological and biochemical responses, tolerance and physical dependence by nicotine could play an important role in the development of addictive processes.

 

[Philocrat]

Thanks for the idea on a new thread Goku!

I have to admit I haven't researched in depth, however in my opinion, I think that ANY drug that can cause brain damage as expressed somewhere on this page http://www.amenclinic.com/ac/default.asp shouldn't be legal. It is said to cause short term memory loss, and like a lot of other medical problems there is typically more than one treatment for each one. Therefore, I would rather not bring something that is potentially harmful into the hands of an MD, let along the mind of a sick person.

Most of the chemical substances that are needed to stabilise the human body and mind are absorbed from food and drinks intake naturally. But from the history of drug taking, it seems as if the the body needs more or stronger, or designer substances for various complex reasons. Without making a nightmare out of what in fact is already a very messy situation, it is now a fundamental requirement that the governing institutions comission HONESTand PROPER studies of these substances to discover (1) why people need them in the first place, even at the risk of being criminalised?, (2) what benefits do they have, if any? and (3) what dangers do these substances pose to the users in the wider world, if any?

NOTE: We need to study these substances now and find scientific means of controlling them without necessarily criminalising the whole world on a subject we as of now know very little about.

 

[Kerrie]

moonbear, thanks for the info, however, cannabis should be treated very much like alcohol...i don't think anyone is disputing that here. if one consumes a large amount of alcohol, sure health risks are taken too? same with cigarettes. 6 states have legalized marijuana in it's raw form for medicinal purposes too. it has some positive effects for the right purpose, enough for some of our states to legalize it for medicinal purposes!

addiction can happen with so many substances-sugar, caffeine, nicotine, porn, gambling...do we outlaw all of those because of what the studies have proven? the fact is, many jails are overcrowded because of it, and not because of violent crimes from usage, but because people will continue to use. even a portion of the police force would like to see it legalized and REGULATED (much like alcohol) because jail time is unnecessary except in the case of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence.

also, did you happen to research other reasons why it is actually illegal? as i posted previously, it boils down to the threat of big businesses. next time you see an anti-marijuana ad, notice the stigma the advertising is sending you, and analyze how much you (i am meaning "you" in general) lap up their influences. their goal is to portray it as anyone who uses is a loser. this is not an objective way to send a message, and as supporters of science, we really need to weigh the pros and cons of legalizing it in a more logical way. Canada has done a great job of easing the laws of marijuana.

bottom line, the war on this particular drug will never been won. do we keep spending money to fight it? or do we earn money by regulating it and taxing it?

 

[Kerrie]

here is an interesting website that has some statistics about marijuana addiction vs other substances-both legal and illegal...
http://www.mpp.org/common_q.html

 

[Moonbear]

Kerrie, you may be surprised to find out that I'm not against legalizing marijuana. I'm not exactly for it either. Cigarettes and alcohol are bad for us too, and addictive, but unfortunately, perhaps, their usage has already been made quite acceptable, even expected, in our society, so it's much harder to stop their usage now. I'm not too keen on giving more harmful substances a stamp of approval by making them legal too. On the other hand, making their use subject to criminal codes also has serious flaws. Organized crime (not necessarily mafia, as some associate with that term) flourishes as long as they remain illegal. The stigma attached to addiction also hinders people from seeking treatment. I think you hear more people nowadays admitting to alcoholism as it has been treated more and more as the disease it is rather than as a weakness or character flaw, which really is an improvement (we had no shortage of alcoholics before, but now many more are seeking and getting treatment). So, I guess I lean more in the direction of decriminalization. Somewhere between legal, where people may interpret that as a government stamp of approval that it's safe to use, and illegal, where you have drug wars and addicts being thrown in prison for nothing other than being an addict rather than being offered a treatment program.

There is also work on some THC agonists (synthetic compounds similar to THC) that have the same beneficial effects for treating chronic pain or suppressing appetite that some people seek, but without some of the harmful side-effects. Those seem to be in very early stages of research, so I don't know whether that will pan out in the long-run or not as a safer form for medicinal use. Of course, when it comes to pain management for people with terminal illnesses, I don't see what the difference is between prescription percodan, which is also highly addictive, or allowing prescription marijuana. If either works, do we really worry about addiction and long-term health effects in a terminally ill patient? Let them eat, drink and smoke anything they want if it makes them feel better. In those cases, considering it a controlled substance available by prescription only would be quite reasonable to me too (not that dispensing by prescription only stops these substances from being abused by people who don't need them).

 

[decibel]

Addiction from marijuana is a joke compared to other drugs. Marijuana leaves you satisfied, not wanting more. I'v been smoking for a while (5 years), and today(oct1st) i'v decided to just stop it for a while, i believe i don't think i'll get any craving or problems of such sort, because i'v stopped for a couple of months before, and it was pretty easy. Anyway, i'll let you guys know if i get any "symptoms" of addiction.