Im wondering if some of you posting in this thread have even done weed. Marijuana makes your senses more acute so Im sure they wouldnt have a DUI for it.
<strong>Im wondering if some of you posting in this thread have even done weed. Marijuana makes your senses more acute so Im sure they wouldnt have a DUI for it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
yeah, but they want "scientific proof" (and yet they can take some things based on faith... ) not some ignorant stoner's view.... (eventhough i aggree <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" /> )
FWIW driving while high is MUCH different then driving drunk and DUI of canabis is impossible to proove so its a moot point anyway... (since the THC stays in your system for 30+ days, there is no way to tell if you were high during the drive or high a month before you drove....)
Edit: and it doesnt matter whether or not the people discussing this issue have used or not... it still effects them one way or the other...
Oh, and you dont have to smoke (read: the bad parts, carcinogens, tar, etc...) in order to get high.... baking is much more effective, a better high, and you can do it on planes.... (and other areas where it is not ideal to smoke... just sneak some brownies in...) smoking is bad for you, that should be illegal
Anxiety, paranoia and panic attacks<hr></blockquote>
If the above side effects are the result of smoking marijuana, lets see how if compares to another popular, but legal drug, Prozac, as quoted by the manufacturer, Eli Lilly:
Frequent - Prozac (Fluoxetine) Side Effects:
Allergic or Toxic: Rash, Pruritus (skin inflammation).
Neurological: Dysarthria, Dystonia, torticollis, Decreased reflexes,Nystagmus, Paralysis, Paresthesia, Carpal tunnel syndrome, Stupor, Coma, Abnormal EEG, Chronic brain syndrome, Dyskinesia and movement disorders (including worsening of preexisting conditions or appearance in patients with risk factors {e.g.,Parkinson's disease, treatment with neuroleptics or other drugs known to be associated with movement disorders})
Behavioral: Antisocial reaction, Hysteria,
Suicidal ideation and violent behaviors.
Cardiovascular: Bradycardia, Ventricular arrhythmia, First degree A V block, Bundle branch block, Myocardial infarct, Cerebral ischemia, Cerebral vascular accident, Thrombophlebitis
Here are some of the adverse reactions to Ritalin, a drug heavily prescribed to children:
Gastrointestinal: Nausea and abdominal pain may occur at the start of treatment and may be alleviated if taken with food.
Cardiovascular: Palpitations, blood pressure and pulse changes (both up and down), tachycardia, angina and cardiac arrhythmias.
Skin and/or Hypersensitivity: Rash, pruritus, urticaria, fever, arthralgia, and alopecia. Isolated cases of exfoliative dermatitis, erythema multiforme with histopathological findings of necrotizing vasculitis, and thrombocytopenic purpura.
Hematologic: Isolated cases of leukopenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia.
Other: Weight loss during prolonged therapy.
In children, loss of appetite, abdominal pain, weight loss during prolonged therapy, insomnia,
and tachycardia may occur more frequently; however, any of the other adverse reactions listed above may also occur. Minor retardation of growth may also occur during prolonged therapy in children (see Warnings).
Overdose:
Symptoms: Signs and symptoms of acute overdosage, resulting principally from CNS overstimulation and
from excessive sympathomimetic effects, may include the following: vomiting, agitation, tremors, hyperreflexia, muscle twitching, convulsions (may be followed by coma), euphoria, confusion, hallucinations, delirium, sweating, flushing, headache, hyperpyrexia, tachycardia, palpitations, cardiac arrhythmias, hypertension, mydriasis and dryness of mucous membranes.
Treatment: Appropriate supportive measures. The patient must be protected against self-injury and against external stimuli that would aggravate overstimulation already present. If signs and symptoms are not too severe and the patient is conscious, gastric contents may be evacuated by induction of emesis or gastric lavage. In the presence of severe intoxication, use a carefully titrated dosage of short-acting barbiturate before performing gastric lavage.
Intensive care must be provided to maintain adequate circulation and respiratory exchange;
external cooling procedures may be required for hyperpyrexia. Efficacy of peritoneal dialysis or extracorporeal hemodialysis for methylphenidate overdosage has not been established.
*******
The point is, all drug have adverse side effects, and marijuana is no exception. However the extraordinary hysteria attached to marijuana use is blown wildly out of proportion to the danger posed by its use. Marijuana has been used by the human race for 5000 years: that should be enough time to determine that it is of a very minor player in the danger category:
It is easy to overdose on almost any drug, from aspirin to heroin with fatal results. Marijuana is probably the most difficult drug to die from re. an overdose. I haven't heard of a report of anyone dying from a direct result of a chemical overdose of the active ingredients of marijuana by smoking. Before succumbing to THC etc. poisoning, the smoker would have already died from carbon monoxide inhalation.
Most probably the mass hysteria (typified by the propaganda movie "Reefer Madness") re. marijuana was more a societal kneejerk reaction against the variety of people who are, and have been attracted to it. (Artists, musicians, non conformist or creative people in general, immigrants, people of color etc). Anslinger's attitude seemed to encapsulate the general tone of the powers-that-be towards counterculture groups, and the desire of certain powerful interests to dump industrial hemp in favor of cotton and nylon etc. helped the laws get passed.
They should legalize it after people come out with their real reasons for using it. This whole medical marijuana issue is bunk. It's a front. Who cares? Don't make up reasons why you use it. People who smoke weed do it to get high. I have no problems with that in general.
In a way weed is better than cigarettes...mental addiction vs physical addiction...
Marijuana does foul up your brain permanently though, so anybody who uses it a lot for the rest of his life reaps what he sows.
Because of the above, nobody should be allowed to smoke it in public...and this should be strictly enforced.
It might foul up your brain but its not permanent.
and all these little counter-arguements to make a case against weed are silly . .,
it still boils down to It should be my right to smoke it.
Put restrictions on its use that could limit its misuse in such ways that might effect others . . . but it definitely should be legalized.
making something illegal because it may or may not impair concentration?!?!?!?! gimme a break, if that were followed by the letter half of everything that we do would be illegal!!!
<strong>It might foul up your brain but its not permanent.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I beg to differ. Sure, if you google it, you'll get a 100 results from pro-legalization sites that say it's not going to cause brain damage or permanent memory loss. I have seen its results in my 4 years at Berkeley...it screws you up permanently if you're a real pot junkie.
Of course this has no bearing on whether it should be legal or not. Alcohol is poison, but I drink it, legally. Cigarettes are still legal, cause all kinds of illness.
Marijuana should be legalized, but with big restrictions -- more severe than California smoking laws type of restrictions. No smoking it in public, at all. It should also be taxed heavily...cigarettes too. The government needs to get something out of this, and the added funds could be used for some good.
<strong>making something illegal because it may or may not impair concentration</strong><hr></blockquote>
It doesn't just impair concentration:
Problems with memory and learning
Distorted perception
Difficulty with thinking and problem solving
Loss of coordination
Increased heart rate
Anxiety, paranoia and panic attacks
impaired motor skills
impaired concentration.
People will not just smoke it at home if its legalized and thats where it starts to affect everybody else.
It doesn't matter if it doesn't have long term affects. If you're stoned at that point in time that you decide to drive, operate machinery, or are involved in any way with other people's lives you've become dangerous to them.
<strong>So, Willoughby, do you think alcohol should be made illegal? (Disregarding corporate interests)
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Mac The Fork ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think alcohol is different. As long as you drink in moderation, are old enough, and refrain from drinking and driving, it is fine. In this way, it is only addictive to those who are hereditarily predisposed to alcoholism. Unless you are somewhat careless with the way you hold your drink, no one can complain of involuntary "second-mouth-drinking."
Tobacco products should be made illegal though. Using the legality of tobacco in justifying legalizing marijuana shows just how far you can stretch one bad thing to justify many bad things.
[quote]I think alcohol is different. As long as you drink in moderation, are old enough, and refrain from drinking and driving, it is fine.<hr></blockquote>
Alcohol is not fine, as you blandly put it. OK, a glass of wine or a beer has been shown to be not harmful (even beneficial but that's not scientific). A larger dose, and things go very quickly downhill from there. Alcohol abuse kills more than 150,000 Americans each year: that is thirty times more than die from all illegal drugs combined.
[quote]In this way, it is only addictive to those who are hereditarily predisposed to alcoholism.<hr></blockquote>
Not true. Alcohol is an addictive drug, period. Yes, there are people who are more genetically predisposed to alcoholism, but anyone can become addicted if they drink heavily or regularly enough. Many alcoholics just dont realize or acknowledge their own addiction though.
[quote]Unless you are somewhat careless with the way you hold your drink, no one can complain of involuntary "second-mouth-drinking."<hr></blockquote>
True. But alcohol is the prime mover in criminal behavior:
1. On an average day in 1996, an estimated 5.3 million convicted offenders were under the supervision of
criminal justice authorities. Nearly 40% of these offenders, about 2 million, had been using alcohol at the time of the offense for which they were convicted.
2.About 6 in 10 convicted jail inmates said that they had been drinking on a regular basis during the year before the offense for which they were serving time. Nearly 2 out of 3 of these inmates, regardless of whether they drank daily or less often, reported having previously been in a treatment program for an alcohol dependency problem.
3.About a quarter of the women on probation nationwide had been drinking at the time of their offense compared to more than 40% of male probationers (figure 30). For those convicted of public-order crimes,nearly two-thirds of women and three-quarters of men had been drinking at the time of the offense.
4. For more than 4 in 10 convicted murderers being held either in jail or in State prison, alcohol use is reported to have been a factor in the crime. Nearly half of those convicted of assault and sentenced to probation had been drinking when the offense occurred.
Source: Greenfield, Lawrence A., US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Alcohol and Crime: An Analysis of National Data on the Prevalence of Alcohol Involvement in Crime (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, April, 1998), pp. 21-24.
But none of these facts constitute a valid reason to make it illegal, as was found out by the Prohibition experiment/disaster.
[quote]Willoughby: People will not just smoke it at home if its legalized and thats where it starts to affect everybody else.<hr></blockquote>
If someone wants to smoke pot, or is interested in trying it for the first time, then they will seek it out and smoke it, legal or otherwise. Legalizing or decriminalizing pot isn't going to generate a new crop of smokers: things will remain pretty constant. There aren't suddenly going to be more accidents at work, and car wrecks from stoned drivers.
A benefit of legalization will be to free up law enforcement to going after real criminals, vacating up to 400,000 spaces in the overcrowded jail system, saving the US taxpayers some $15 billions annually. I would prefer to see police resources spent in hunting kidnappers, violent offenders, rapists and terrorists, rather than throwing nearly a half million stoners behind bars each year because of our puritannical traditionalist hangups.
And another deplorable aspect of the illegality of marijuana is the resulting huge "prison slave labor" force that is used by corporations for the profit motive; yet another force in the powerful lobby against a sensible marijuana policy that represents civilised values.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
Will that stop people smoking it? Didn't anyone learn anything from Prohibition?
What penalties do you propose for selling, growing and possession of tobacco?
What are the advantages of creating yet another huge black market economy?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You see, people are addicted to this drug. They have little power in quitting when compared to the power that addiction exerts. It certainly would not stop many victims from yielding to that addiction. I think some sort of voluntary rehabilitation program should exist for a specified time after such a law is passed. Meanwhile, all sellers and growers would be incarcerated. There is no excuse for encouraging the continuation of someone's addiction through physical substantiation, ie. the product itself. After a certain time passed, mandatory rehabilition sentences would be given out for those convicted of possession or use.
Wiping out the US' role as a major tobacco producer will indeed encourage the tobacco black market to proliferate. Obviously, the DEA's role as America's Anti-Drug task force would increase to police the black market in America. As far as learning from our country's mistakes in failing to successfully prohibit alcohol, I think we will. The problem with tobacco is much larger than alcohol's because the latter can be consumed moderately without oneself or hurting others. Tobacco, besides benefiting those who profit from it, only hurts.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
Alcohol is not fine, as you blandly put it. OK, a glass of wine or a beer has been shown to be not harmful (even beneficial but that's not scientific). A larger dose, and things go very quickly downhill from there. Alcohol abuse kills more than 150,000 Americans each year: that is thirty times more than die from all illegal drugs combined.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I realize our country's problems with alcohol abuse remain large and will continue to grow larger. However, like I said, drinking in moderation is fine.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
Not true. Alcohol is an addictive drug, period. Yes, there are people who are more genetically predisposed to alcoholism, but anyone can become addicted if they drink heavily or regularly enough. Many alcoholics just dont realize or acknowledge their own addiction though.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My father has drank (or has drunken? which one is right?) one or two glases of red wine daily for twenty years. He neither cruises the bar scene nor drinks heavily at home. By that example, can people who are not genetically predisposed to alcoholism become addicted through regularily drinking a moderate amount of alcohol? It doesn't appear to be true.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
True. But alcohol is the prime mover in criminal behavior:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's interesting- though unnerving- how it correlates to criminal behavior. Are we talking abuse or simple consumption here?
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
But none of these facts constitute a valid reason to make it illegal, as was found out by the Prohibition experiment/disaster.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It may shock some to find out that I'm not against someone smoking pot. I just wish the pro-pot lobby would leave "medical" marijuana out of it. I'm a cynical person and I don't think the reason the "medical" marijuana lobby spends all its time and money on this campaign is to get a needed drug for the sick and dying. I think the only reason they spend the money is for their own selfish goal. To get pot legal so they can smoke it and get high.
That's a fine intuition; however, one must show why exactly medicinal marijuana should not be used. You think it's an excuse, but what makes you say that?
<strong>These studies from the 70s (almost 30 years ago) do not necessarily reflect today's teenagers views. </strong><hr></blockquote>
ok. <a href="http://www.cga.state.ct.us/lrc/drugpolicy/drugpolicyrpt2.htm#SecD7"; target="_blank">link</a> 1997. [quote]Studies of states that have reduced penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana have found that (1) expenses for arrests and prosecution of marijuana possession offenses were significantly reduced, (2) any increase in the use of marijuana in those states was less than increased use in those states that did not decrease their penalties and "the largest proportionate increase occurred in those states with the most severe penalties", and (3) reducing the penalties for marijuana has virtually no effect on either the choice or frequency of use of alcohol or illegal "harder" drugs such as cocaine.<hr></blockquote>
So, if I lived in a state where they still have marijuana as a crime, I am more likely to increase my pot usage. I think thats a reasonable interpretation. Plus, numbers 1 & 3 are pretty clear as is.
[quote] Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce:
<strong>The end result of rehabilitation is the elimination of that person's drug use. The power of addiction contradicts that end result- even when a person wants to quit. Furthermore, no wants to go to jail either, but the legal system dictates that for drug use. Rehabilitation is a better way, and also a mandatory one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
marijuana is not physically addictive. there is no withdrawl. if some1 wants to quit marijuana it typically doesn't take any more than a single thought. it is NOT addictive. All you ave to do is go, "i don't want it anymore." my friend quit like that.
[quote] Originally posted by Scott:
<strong>I'm a cynical person and I don't think the reason the "medical" marijuana lobby spends all its time and money on this campaign is to get a needed drug for the sick and dying. I think the only reason they spend the money is for their own selfish goal. To get pot legal so they can smoke it and get high.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] (from NORML's mission statement):
<strong>NORML's mission is to move public opinion sufficiently to achieve the repeal of marijuana prohibition so that the responsible use of cannabis by adults is no longer subject to penalty.</strong><hr></blockquote>
the national organization for the reformation of marijuana laws is the main body behind the pro-pot lobby. they seek to get medical marijuana legal first, because its the first step. radical reformations rarely happen. a gradual approach is more likely to win. plus, marijuana has legitimate medical uses. that you dont believe in medicinal marijuana is disheartening, but you are not (i'm guessing) an m.d. doctors have performed studies, and found legitimate medical uses for marijuana. (i've linked them a coupel of times in this thread). marijuana can aide asthma, glaucoma, and cancer (probably more things too). they are also investigating new uses for it.
You see, people are addicted to this drug. They have little power in quitting when compared to the power that addiction exerts. It certainly would not stop many victims from yielding to that addiction. I think some sort of voluntary rehabilitation program should exist for a specified time after such a law is passed. Meanwhile, all sellers and growers would be incarcerated. There is no excuse for encouraging the continuation of someone's addiction through physical substantiation, ie. the product itself. After a certain time passed, mandatory rehabilition sentences would be given out for those convicted of possession or use.
Wiping out the US' role as a major tobacco producer will indeed encourage the tobacco black market to proliferate. Obviously, the DEA's role as America's Anti-Drug task force would increase to police the black market in America. As far as learning from our country's mistakes in failing to successfully prohibit alcohol, I think we will. The problem with tobacco is much larger than alcohol's because the latter can be consumed moderately without oneself or hurting others. Tobacco, besides benefiting those who profit from it, only hurts.</strong><hr></blockquote>Nd you want the Government to "know what's best for you" by making cigarrettes illegal. . . . persoally I like to be able to make up my mind about what I do.
This is part of the contemprorary loss of public and private space. What was once private is now the matter of legislation, what was once Public and governmental now takes the role of house keeping and mothering.
If you say that weed is as addictive as cigarrettes then you obviously have no experience with the substance.
what clinches it for me is this: just picture all the people that you know who have smoked pot . . . now think of them in jail for smoking pot. Its absolutely absurd that people are getting jail time, with rapists, murderers and molesters, for smoking pot... or even distributing it.... its hardly believable.
Comments
<strong>Im wondering if some of you posting in this thread have even done weed. Marijuana makes your senses more acute so Im sure they wouldnt have a DUI for it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
yeah, but they want "scientific proof" (and yet they can take some things based on faith...
FWIW driving while high is MUCH different then driving drunk and DUI of canabis is impossible to proove so its a moot point anyway... (since the THC stays in your system for 30+ days, there is no way to tell if you were high during the drive or high a month before you drove....)
Edit: and it doesnt matter whether or not the people discussing this issue have used or not... it still effects them one way or the other...
Oh, and you dont have to smoke (read: the bad parts, carcinogens, tar, etc...) in order to get high.... baking is much more effective, a better high, and you can do it on planes....
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Paul ]</p>
Problems with memory and learning
Distorted perception
Difficulty with thinking and problem solving
Loss of coordination
Increased heart rate
Anxiety, paranoia and panic attacks<hr></blockquote>
If the above side effects are the result of smoking marijuana, lets see how if compares to another popular, but legal drug, Prozac, as quoted by the manufacturer, Eli Lilly:
Frequent - Prozac (Fluoxetine) Side Effects:
Allergic or Toxic: Rash, Pruritus (skin inflammation).
Neurological: Headache, Tremor, Dizziness, Asthenia.
Behavioral: Insomnia, Anxiety, Nervousness, Agitation, Abnormal dreams, Drowsiness and fatigue.
Autonomic: Excessive sweating
Gastrointestinal: Nausea, Disturbances of appetite, Diarrhea.
Respiratory: Bronchitis, Rhinitis (inflammation of the nasal mucous membranes), Yawn.
Endocrine: Weight loss.
Musculoskeletal: Muscle pain, Back pain, Joint pain.
Urogenital: Painful menstruation, Sexual
dysfunction, Urinary tract infection, Frequent micturition.
Miscellaneous: Chills
Less frequent - Prozac (Fluoxetine) Side Effects
Allergic or Toxic: Chills and fever, Urticaria, Maculopapular rash.
Neurological: Abnormal gait, Ataxia, Akathisia, Buccoglossal syndrome, Hyperkinesia, Hypertonia,
incoordination, Neck rigity, extrapyramidal syndrome, Convulsions, Photophobia, Myoclonus,
Vertigo, Migraine, Tinnitus, Hypesthesia, Neuralgia, Neuropathy, Acute brain syndrome.
Behavioral: Confusion, Delusions, Hallucinations, manic reaction, Paranoid reaction, Psychosis, Depersonalization, Apathy, Emotional Lability, Euphoria, Hostility, Amnesia,Increased libido.
Autonomic: Dry mouth, Constipation, Urinary retention, Vision disturbance, Diplopia, Mydriasis, Hot flushes.
Cardiovascular: Chest pain, Hypertension, Syncope, Hypotension, Angina pectoris, Arrhythmia, Tachycardia.
Gastrointestinal: Vomiting, Stomatitis, Dysphagia, Eructation, Esophagitis, Gastritis, Gingivitis, Glossitis, Melena, Thirst, Abnormal liver function
Respiratory: Asthma, Dyspnea, Hyperventilation, Pneumonia, Hiccups, Epistaxis.
Endocrine: Generalized edema, Peripheral edema, Face edema, Tongue edema, Hypoglycemia, Hyperprolactinemia, Weight gain.
Hematoligic: Anemia, Lymphadenopathy, Hemorrhage.
Dermatologic: Acne, Alopecia,Dry skin, Herpes simplex,
Musculoskeletal: Arthritis, Bone pain, Bursitis, Tenosynovitis, Twitching.
Urogenital: Abnormal ejactulation, Impotance, Menopause, Amenorrhea, Menorrhagia, Ovarian disorder, Vaginitis, Leukorrhea, Fibrocystic breast, Breast pain, Cystitus, Dysuria, Urinary urgency, Urinary incontinence.
Miscellaneous: Amblyopia, Conjunctivitis, Cyst, Ear pain, Eye pain, Jaw pain, Neck pain, Pelvic pain, Hangover effect and Malaise.
Rare Side Effects: (less than 1 in 1000)
Allergic or Toxic: Allergic reaction, Erythema multiforme, Vesiculobullous, Rash, Serum sickness, Contact dermatitis, Erthema nodosum, Purpuric rash,
Leukocytoclastic vasculitis, Leukopenia, Thrombocythemia, Arthralgia, Angioedema, Bronchospasm, Lung fibrosis, Allergic alveolitis, Larynx edema and Respiratory distress.
Neurological: Dysarthria, Dystonia, torticollis, Decreased reflexes,Nystagmus, Paralysis, Paresthesia, Carpal tunnel syndrome, Stupor, Coma, Abnormal EEG, Chronic brain syndrome, Dyskinesia and movement disorders (including worsening of preexisting conditions or appearance in patients with risk factors {e.g.,Parkinson's disease, treatment with neuroleptics or other drugs known to be associated with movement disorders})
Behavioral: Antisocial reaction, Hysteria,
Suicidal ideation and violent behaviors.
Cardiovascular: Bradycardia, Ventricular arrhythmia, First degree A V block, Bundle branch block, Myocardial infarct, Cerebral ischemia, Cerebral vascular accident, Thrombophlebitis
Gastrointestinal: Bloody diarrhea, Hematemesis, Gastrointestinal hemorrhage, Duodenal ulcer, Stomach ulcer, Mouth ulceration, Hyperchlorhydria, Colitis, Enteritis, Cholecystitis, Hepatitis,
Hepatomegaly, Liver tenderness, Jaundice, Increased salivation, Salivary gland enlargement, Tongue discoloration, Fecal incontinence, Pancreatitis.
Respiratory: Apnea, Lung edmea Hypoxia, Pleural effusion, Hemoptysis.
Endocrine: Dehydration, Gout, Goitre, Hyperthyrodism, Hypercholesteremia, Hyperglycemia, Weight gain.
Hematologic: Bleeding time increased, Leukocytosis, Lymphocytosis, Thrombocytopenia, Thrombocytopenic purpura, Thrombocythemia, Retinal hemorrhage, Petechia, Purpura, Sedimentation rate increased, Aplastic anemia, Pancytopenia, Immune-related hemolytic anemia.
Dermatologic: Eczema, Psoriasis, Seborrhea, Skin hypertrophy, Skin discoloration, Herpes zoster, Fungal dermatitis, Hirsutism, Ecchymoses.
Musculoskeletal: Bone necrosis, Osteoporosis, Pathological fracture, Chrondrodystrophy, Myositis, Rheumatoid arthritis, Muscle hemorrhage.
Urogenital: Breast enlargement, Galactorrhea, Abortion, Dyspareunia, Uterine spasm, Vaginal hemorrhage, Metrorrhagia, Hematuria, Albuminuria, Polyuria, Pyuria, Epididymitis, Orchitis, Pyelonephritis, Salpingitis, Urethritis, Kidney calculus, Urethral pain, Urolithiasis.
Miscellaneous: Abdomen enlarged, Blepharitis, Cataract, Corneal lesion, Glaucoma, Iritis, Ptosis, Strabismus, Deafness, Taste loss, moniliasis,
Hydrocephalus, LE syndrome.
......
Here are some of the adverse reactions to Ritalin, a drug heavily prescribed to children:
Gastrointestinal: Nausea and abdominal pain may occur at the start of treatment and may be alleviated if taken with food.
Cardiovascular: Palpitations, blood pressure and pulse changes (both up and down), tachycardia, angina and cardiac arrhythmias.
Skin and/or Hypersensitivity: Rash, pruritus, urticaria, fever, arthralgia, and alopecia. Isolated cases of exfoliative dermatitis, erythema multiforme with histopathological findings of necrotizing vasculitis, and thrombocytopenic purpura.
Hematologic: Isolated cases of leukopenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia.
Other: Weight loss during prolonged therapy.
In children, loss of appetite, abdominal pain, weight loss during prolonged therapy, insomnia,
and tachycardia may occur more frequently; however, any of the other adverse reactions listed above may also occur. Minor retardation of growth may also occur during prolonged therapy in children (see Warnings).
Overdose:
Symptoms: Signs and symptoms of acute overdosage, resulting principally from CNS overstimulation and
from excessive sympathomimetic effects, may include the following: vomiting, agitation, tremors, hyperreflexia, muscle twitching, convulsions (may be followed by coma), euphoria, confusion, hallucinations, delirium, sweating, flushing, headache, hyperpyrexia, tachycardia, palpitations, cardiac arrhythmias, hypertension, mydriasis and dryness of mucous membranes.
Treatment: Appropriate supportive measures. The patient must be protected against self-injury and against external stimuli that would aggravate overstimulation already present. If signs and symptoms are not too severe and the patient is conscious, gastric contents may be evacuated by induction of emesis or gastric lavage. In the presence of severe intoxication, use a carefully titrated dosage of short-acting barbiturate before performing gastric lavage.
Intensive care must be provided to maintain adequate circulation and respiratory exchange;
external cooling procedures may be required for hyperpyrexia. Efficacy of peritoneal dialysis or extracorporeal hemodialysis for methylphenidate overdosage has not been established.
*******
The point is, all drug have adverse side effects, and marijuana is no exception. However the extraordinary hysteria attached to marijuana use is blown wildly out of proportion to the danger posed by its use. Marijuana has been used by the human race for 5000 years: that should be enough time to determine that it is of a very minor player in the danger category:
It is easy to overdose on almost any drug, from aspirin to heroin with fatal results. Marijuana is probably the most difficult drug to die from re. an overdose. I haven't heard of a report of anyone dying from a direct result of a chemical overdose of the active ingredients of marijuana by smoking. Before succumbing to THC etc. poisoning, the smoker would have already died from carbon monoxide inhalation.
Most probably the mass hysteria (typified by the propaganda movie "Reefer Madness") re. marijuana was more a societal kneejerk reaction against the variety of people who are, and have been attracted to it. (Artists, musicians, non conformist or creative people in general, immigrants, people of color etc). Anslinger's attitude seemed to encapsulate the general tone of the powers-that-be towards counterculture groups, and the desire of certain powerful interests to dump industrial hemp in favor of cotton and nylon etc. helped the laws get passed.
In a way weed is better than cigarettes...mental addiction vs physical addiction...
Marijuana does foul up your brain permanently though, so anybody who uses it a lot for the rest of his life reaps what he sows.
Because of the above, nobody should be allowed to smoke it in public...and this should be strictly enforced.
What is the point of comparing those 2 drugs to a drug that people want for social use? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">
and all these little counter-arguements to make a case against weed are silly . .,
it still boils down to It should be my right to smoke it.
Put restrictions on its use that could limit its misuse in such ways that might effect others . . . but it definitely should be legalized.
making something illegal because it may or may not impair concentration?!?!?!?! gimme a break, if that were followed by the letter half of everything that we do would be illegal!!!
<strong>It might foul up your brain but its not permanent.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I beg to differ. Sure, if you google it, you'll get a 100 results from pro-legalization sites that say it's not going to cause brain damage or permanent memory loss. I have seen its results in my 4 years at Berkeley...it screws you up permanently if you're a real pot junkie.
Of course this has no bearing on whether it should be legal or not. Alcohol is poison, but I drink it, legally. Cigarettes are still legal, cause all kinds of illness.
Marijuana should be legalized, but with big restrictions -- more severe than California smoking laws type of restrictions. No smoking it in public, at all. It should also be taxed heavily...cigarettes too. The government needs to get something out of this, and the added funds could be used for some good.
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Eugene ]</p>
<strong>making something illegal because it may or may not impair concentration</strong><hr></blockquote>
It doesn't just impair concentration:
Problems with memory and learning
Distorted perception
Difficulty with thinking and problem solving
Loss of coordination
Increased heart rate
Anxiety, paranoia and panic attacks
impaired motor skills
impaired concentration.
People will not just smoke it at home if its legalized and thats where it starts to affect everybody else.
It doesn't matter if it doesn't have long term affects. If you're stoned at that point in time that you decide to drive, operate machinery, or are involved in any way with other people's lives you've become dangerous to them.
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Mac The Fork ]</p>
<strong>So, Willoughby, do you think alcohol should be made illegal? (Disregarding corporate interests)
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Mac The Fork ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
I think alcohol is different. As long as you drink in moderation, are old enough, and refrain from drinking and driving, it is fine. In this way, it is only addictive to those who are hereditarily predisposed to alcoholism. Unless you are somewhat careless with the way you hold your drink, no one can complain of involuntary "second-mouth-drinking."
Tobacco products should be made illegal though. Using the legality of tobacco in justifying legalizing marijuana shows just how far you can stretch one bad thing to justify many bad things.
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: ShawnPatrickJoyce ]</p>
<strong>
It doesn't just impair concentration:
Problems with memory and learning
Distorted perception
Difficulty with thinking and problem solving
Loss of coordination
Increased heart rate
Anxiety, paranoia and panic attacks
impaired motor skills
impaired concentration.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
sounds like a good buzz from drinking
Will that stop people smoking it? Didn't anyone learn anything from Prohibition?
What penalties do you propose for selling, growing and possession of tobacco?
What are the advantages of creating yet another huge black market economy?
Alcohol is not fine, as you blandly put it. OK, a glass of wine or a beer has been shown to be not harmful (even beneficial but that's not scientific). A larger dose, and things go very quickly downhill from there. Alcohol abuse kills more than 150,000 Americans each year: that is thirty times more than die from all illegal drugs combined.
[quote]In this way, it is only addictive to those who are hereditarily predisposed to alcoholism.<hr></blockquote>
Not true. Alcohol is an addictive drug, period. Yes, there are people who are more genetically predisposed to alcoholism, but anyone can become addicted if they drink heavily or regularly enough. Many alcoholics just dont realize or acknowledge their own addiction though.
[quote]Unless you are somewhat careless with the way you hold your drink, no one can complain of involuntary "second-mouth-drinking."<hr></blockquote>
True. But alcohol is the prime mover in criminal behavior:
1. On an average day in 1996, an estimated 5.3 million convicted offenders were under the supervision of
criminal justice authorities. Nearly 40% of these offenders, about 2 million, had been using alcohol at the time of the offense for which they were convicted.
2.About 6 in 10 convicted jail inmates said that they had been drinking on a regular basis during the year before the offense for which they were serving time. Nearly 2 out of 3 of these inmates, regardless of whether they drank daily or less often, reported having previously been in a treatment program for an alcohol dependency problem.
3.About a quarter of the women on probation nationwide had been drinking at the time of their offense compared to more than 40% of male probationers (figure 30). For those convicted of public-order crimes,nearly two-thirds of women and three-quarters of men had been drinking at the time of the offense.
4. For more than 4 in 10 convicted murderers being held either in jail or in State prison, alcohol use is reported to have been a factor in the crime. Nearly half of those convicted of assault and sentenced to probation had been drinking when the offense occurred.
Source: Greenfield, Lawrence A., US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Alcohol and Crime: An Analysis of National Data on the Prevalence of Alcohol Involvement in Crime (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, April, 1998), pp. 21-24.
But none of these facts constitute a valid reason to make it illegal, as was found out by the Prohibition experiment/disaster.
[quote]Willoughby: People will not just smoke it at home if its legalized and thats where it starts to affect everybody else.<hr></blockquote>
If someone wants to smoke pot, or is interested in trying it for the first time, then they will seek it out and smoke it, legal or otherwise. Legalizing or decriminalizing pot isn't going to generate a new crop of smokers: things will remain pretty constant. There aren't suddenly going to be more accidents at work, and car wrecks from stoned drivers.
A benefit of legalization will be to free up law enforcement to going after real criminals, vacating up to 400,000 spaces in the overcrowded jail system, saving the US taxpayers some $15 billions annually. I would prefer to see police resources spent in hunting kidnappers, violent offenders, rapists and terrorists, rather than throwing nearly a half million stoners behind bars each year because of our puritannical traditionalist hangups.
And another deplorable aspect of the illegality of marijuana is the resulting huge "prison slave labor" force that is used by corporations for the profit motive; yet another force in the powerful lobby against a sensible marijuana policy that represents civilised values.
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Samantha Joanne Ollendale ]</p>
<strong>
Will that stop people smoking it? Didn't anyone learn anything from Prohibition?
What penalties do you propose for selling, growing and possession of tobacco?
What are the advantages of creating yet another huge black market economy?</strong><hr></blockquote>
You see, people are addicted to this drug. They have little power in quitting when compared to the power that addiction exerts. It certainly would not stop many victims from yielding to that addiction. I think some sort of voluntary rehabilitation program should exist for a specified time after such a law is passed. Meanwhile, all sellers and growers would be incarcerated. There is no excuse for encouraging the continuation of someone's addiction through physical substantiation, ie. the product itself. After a certain time passed, mandatory rehabilition sentences would be given out for those convicted of possession or use.
Wiping out the US' role as a major tobacco producer will indeed encourage the tobacco black market to proliferate. Obviously, the DEA's role as America's Anti-Drug task force would increase to police the black market in America. As far as learning from our country's mistakes in failing to successfully prohibit alcohol, I think we will. The problem with tobacco is much larger than alcohol's because the latter can be consumed moderately without oneself or hurting others. Tobacco, besides benefiting those who profit from it, only hurts.
<strong>
Alcohol is not fine, as you blandly put it. OK, a glass of wine or a beer has been shown to be not harmful (even beneficial but that's not scientific). A larger dose, and things go very quickly downhill from there. Alcohol abuse kills more than 150,000 Americans each year: that is thirty times more than die from all illegal drugs combined.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I realize our country's problems with alcohol abuse remain large and will continue to grow larger. However, like I said, drinking in moderation is fine.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
Not true. Alcohol is an addictive drug, period. Yes, there are people who are more genetically predisposed to alcoholism, but anyone can become addicted if they drink heavily or regularly enough. Many alcoholics just dont realize or acknowledge their own addiction though.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
My father has drank (or has drunken? which one is right?) one or two glases of red wine daily for twenty years. He neither cruises the bar scene nor drinks heavily at home. By that example, can people who are not genetically predisposed to alcoholism become addicted through regularily drinking a moderate amount of alcohol? It doesn't appear to be true.
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
True. But alcohol is the prime mover in criminal behavior:
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's interesting- though unnerving- how it correlates to criminal behavior. Are we talking abuse or simple consumption here?
[quote]Originally posted by Samantha Joanne Ollendale:
<strong>
But none of these facts constitute a valid reason to make it illegal, as was found out by the Prohibition experiment/disaster.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I believe you're right.
[ 08-17-2002: Message edited by: Scott ]</p>
<strong>These studies from the 70s (almost 30 years ago) do not necessarily reflect today's teenagers views. </strong><hr></blockquote>
ok. <a href="http://www.cga.state.ct.us/lrc/drugpolicy/drugpolicyrpt2.htm#SecD7"; target="_blank">link</a> 1997. [quote]Studies of states that have reduced penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana have found that (1) expenses for arrests and prosecution of marijuana possession offenses were significantly reduced, (2) any increase in the use of marijuana in those states was less than increased use in those states that did not decrease their penalties and "the largest proportionate increase occurred in those states with the most severe penalties", and (3) reducing the penalties for marijuana has virtually no effect on either the choice or frequency of use of alcohol or illegal "harder" drugs such as cocaine.<hr></blockquote>
So, if I lived in a state where they still have marijuana as a crime, I am more likely to increase my pot usage. I think thats a reasonable interpretation. Plus, numbers 1 & 3 are pretty clear as is.
[quote] Originally posted by ShawnPatrickJoyce:
<strong>The end result of rehabilitation is the elimination of that person's drug use. The power of addiction contradicts that end result- even when a person wants to quit. Furthermore, no wants to go to jail either, but the legal system dictates that for drug use. Rehabilitation is a better way, and also a mandatory one.</strong><hr></blockquote>
marijuana is not physically addictive. there is no withdrawl. if some1 wants to quit marijuana it typically doesn't take any more than a single thought. it is NOT addictive. All you ave to do is go, "i don't want it anymore." my friend quit like that.
[quote] Originally posted by Scott:
<strong>I'm a cynical person and I don't think the reason the "medical" marijuana lobby spends all its time and money on this campaign is to get a needed drug for the sick and dying. I think the only reason they spend the money is for their own selfish goal. To get pot legal so they can smoke it and get high.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] (from NORML's mission statement):
<strong>NORML's mission is to move public opinion sufficiently to achieve the repeal of marijuana prohibition so that the responsible use of cannabis by adults is no longer subject to penalty.</strong><hr></blockquote>
the national organization for the reformation of marijuana laws is the main body behind the pro-pot lobby. they seek to get medical marijuana legal first, because its the first step. radical reformations rarely happen. a gradual approach is more likely to win. plus, marijuana has legitimate medical uses. that you dont believe in medicinal marijuana is disheartening, but you are not (i'm guessing) an m.d. doctors have performed studies, and found legitimate medical uses for marijuana. (i've linked them a coupel of times in this thread). marijuana can aide asthma, glaucoma, and cancer (probably more things too). they are also investigating new uses for it.
<strong>
You see, people are addicted to this drug. They have little power in quitting when compared to the power that addiction exerts. It certainly would not stop many victims from yielding to that addiction. I think some sort of voluntary rehabilitation program should exist for a specified time after such a law is passed. Meanwhile, all sellers and growers would be incarcerated. There is no excuse for encouraging the continuation of someone's addiction through physical substantiation, ie. the product itself. After a certain time passed, mandatory rehabilition sentences would be given out for those convicted of possession or use.
Wiping out the US' role as a major tobacco producer will indeed encourage the tobacco black market to proliferate. Obviously, the DEA's role as America's Anti-Drug task force would increase to police the black market in America. As far as learning from our country's mistakes in failing to successfully prohibit alcohol, I think we will. The problem with tobacco is much larger than alcohol's because the latter can be consumed moderately without oneself or hurting others. Tobacco, besides benefiting those who profit from it, only hurts.</strong><hr></blockquote>Nd you want the Government to "know what's best for you" by making cigarrettes illegal. . . . persoally I like to be able to make up my mind about what I do.
This is part of the contemprorary loss of public and private space. What was once private is now the matter of legislation, what was once Public and governmental now takes the role of house keeping and mothering.
If you say that weed is as addictive as cigarrettes then you obviously have no experience with the substance.
what clinches it for me is this: just picture all the people that you know who have smoked pot . . . now think of them in jail for smoking pot. Its absolutely absurd that people are getting jail time, with rapists, murderers and molesters, for smoking pot... or even distributing it.... its hardly believable.