Is Legalizing Marijuana Worth the Risks?

[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" ? :(