This is your brain on drugs.

[usregimechange]

As we look at side-by-side PET scans of a person who has never used cocaine compared with a cocaine addict, can you tell which brain is more active and healthy? Take a guess. Yes, the brain on the left with an abundance of red is the healthy, active brain.

With a little bit of knowledge about what drug addiction actually is, anyone - not just neuroscientists and neurobiologists - can see the changes in brain activity caused by drug abuse and addiction. The PET scans we’ve looked at today prove that.



What this PET scan shows us is how just 10 days of drug use can produce very dramatic and long-term changes in the brain of a monkey. The drug in these images is amphetamine, or what some people call “speed.” Remember the previous slide showed us what the brain of a chronic cocaine abuser looks like. This slide shows us what using a drug like amphetamine can do in only 10 days to the brain of a monkey.

The top row shows us, in white and red, normal brain activity. The second row shows us that same brain 4 weeks after being given amphetamine for 10 days. There is a dramatic decrease in brain activity. This decreased brain activity continues for up to 1 year after amphetamine use. These continuous brain changes often trigger other changes in social and emotional behavior, too, including a possible increase in aggressiveness, feelings of isolation, and depression.
http://www.nida.nih.gov/pubs/teaching/Teaching5/Teaching5.html



Benzene is a known carcinogen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene
Marijuana contains carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, acetone, benzene, toluene, vinyl chloride, dimethylnitrosamine, methylethylnitrosamine, benz(a)anthracene, benz(a)pyrene, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, and many more. (Huber, Gary: Pharm.Biochem.Behavior Vol.40. P.630, 1991. National Academy of Sciences, Institute of Medicine report, Washington DC 1982, Marijuana & Health 1982)

[mike_c]

1. I don't suppose you'd consider peddling this in the health forums...

...would you? It's clear that you have an ax to grind, but it's also clear that you're only telling a very narrow part of the story.

[usregimechange]

2. Rationalize away...

[Warpy]

23. Rationalize?

I don't know if you've bothered to notice, but the longer term the usage, the more the brain would seem to adapt, with the bottom two sets of images nearly as active as the "clean" images at the top.

Meth and cocaine are bad drugs. They would likely be self limiting if the more benign psychoactive drugs were readily available.

[Mythsaje]

24. The brain is very adaptive, isn't it? n/t

[usregimechange]

29. adaptive? Are you a neurologist? You can read those?

if you smoke pot and just want to make that ok with yourself that is fine but not being up front about it could indicate a desire to protect your use.

[Mythsaje]

34. What's it to you anyway?

Seriously?

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mythsaje]

43. I'm suspecting it's none of your business

whether I do, do not, or have in the past. And entirely beside the point of the debate, though it's a convenient tactic as a means to attack the messenger... Or are we playing by Rovian rules, then?

[usregimechange]

50. Where does all the defensiveness come from?

[Mythsaje]

60. You're fishing for information you're not entitled to have...

that has nothing to do with the quality of the debate. It creeps me out.

[seabeyond]

44. but but but that would be illegal

[CrownPrinceBandar]

46. Casting stones now, are we?............

so easy to do on an anonymous message board.

[usregimechange]

56. I suspect that he smokes pot, I don't think he is going to hell.

[LincolnMcGrath]

62. That is a cheap BS attack, unworthy of even DU!

[nonconformist]

79. Everyone who disagrees with him is just a dumbass stoner, apparently nt

[usregimechange]

87. no, but when people disagree with the idea that drugs may be

unhealthy and they do so like a reflex, I will suspect that that may be the case. That was bullshit by the way.

[Mythsaje]

93. The tendency for some to spread misinformation

and suppress arguments and evidence to the contrary, and attack anyone who disagrees with this misinformation, is a major part of the drug war and those who perpetuate it. It happens to be one of my hot buttons.

Keep your assumptions to yourself.

[usregimechange]

98. My post has nothing to do with the drug war, which I have opposed

for years. It is missinformation? assumptions? Does meth alter brain functioning? Does smoking pot put benzene into your body? Is anyone who believes drugs are unhealthy apart of a drug war?

[Mythsaje]

You SAY you oppose it

but you're using the same tactics they use.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

78. No, you accused him of being a criminal.....

with only his counter to your argument as evidence. Generalizations ahoy!

Anyway, I gotta get up early tomorrow. So, goodnight and peace.

[usregimechange]

91. Counter arguements or defensiveness, what is the difference?

[LincolnMcGrath]

92. You called him a criminal

now you run from it. pathetic.

[usregimechange]

95. Are you emotional? Where does that come from?

[LincolnMcGrath]

106. Yes, I am the emotional one.

I am currently flying high on meth, crack, ganja, alcohol, huffing paint thinner, heroin, and poking badgers with my coke spoon.

You are pathetic.

[usregimechange]

113. Ever had someone you know die from drugs?

That is more pathetic.

[Mythsaje]

114. Amazingly, no...

I do know four people who've commmitted suicide though.

[usregimechange]

122. Well, maybe we can agree that suicide is dangerous without...

being judgemental.

[Mythsaje]

125. I don't know if I'd call suicide "dangerous."

Sad, pathetic, and selfish, perhaps...but killing oneself rather puts one past the point of 'danger,' wouldn't you say?

[seabeyond]

132. not pathetic or selfish, sad.... ok

the chemicals in the brain are screwed up. it isnt a clear thinking act.

[Mythsaje]

144. I think that's the case some of the time...

I'm not sure the rest of the time. I think some people consciously decide it's their best escape.

I could be wrong, of course. But that's how I see it.

Now there's a difference when it comes to the whole "death with dignity" scenario, but I'm talking about people who aren't willing to live with the consequences of their decisions.

[seabeyond]

151. could be

i am thinking here. the only suicides i know have been a couple that were real sick and then a couple three that were real emotional toast. but i can see what you are saying

[usregimechange]

137. Well, on the scale from being mildly hurt to dead I would say

it is a 10. Damn, I thought we could agree on that.

[LincolnMcGrath]

119. Running from your comment is pathetic

Watching a friend get killed in prison for 3 hits of blotter acid is a crime.

Own up to your comment, or bugger off.

[Mythsaje]

123. Oh, that sucks...

Stuff like that is what really sends me over the edge on this issue.

[usregimechange]

124. What comment are you talking about?

[LincolnMcGrath]

143. Gee, I wonder?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=611127&mesg_id=611523

[usregimechange]

156. Oh, well I still suspect that. I could be wrong.

Was that what you were looking for?

[LincolnMcGrath]

163. And that is pathetic

[usregimechange]

250. How? Explain, don't be shy.

[Kire]

330. Why don't you explain why you suspect he uses drugs?

Have you searched his pockets?

[Moochy]

334. Awesome!!

How goes your investigation McGruff the crime dog?

Has Lincoln inhaled? Has he exhaled?

Hey Lincoln... puff puff give, you are fucking up the rotation.

[seabeyond]

120. ya, i had a mom commit suicide while she was massively drunk

on three different pyscho drugs and hormone pills.

now what

why

[TankLV]

242. Listen to them - you are PATHETIC.

Just what is your problem, dude?

Not winning ANY new friends here with this idiotic post tonite.

[usregimechange]

256. I don't always write to make friends, dude.

[Kire]

331. You obviously don't want to influence people, either.

dud

[Mythsaje]

333. Ah, the obligatory

Dale Carnegie reference.

Love it.

[spacelady]

80. I thought this was about cocaine use.

[nonconformist]

81. At the bottom of the original post, there's a snippet about how

marijuana contains carcinogens.

[spacelady]

105. Thank you, I was wandering & wondering. n/t

[Viva_La_Revolution]

51. don't try to mislead people, and we won't bring it up

Those are scans of a speed user, not pot.

and yes, I smoke sometimes.
I also drink.
I also used to be hooked on meth.

I'll pit my personal experience against your 'studies' any day.

[usregimechange]

57. yes, a person can smoke all their life and never get cancer...

but they still have an increased chance of getting it. In other words, experience can spot what studies can.

[shanti]

258. so WHAT!?

you can get lung cancer without being a smoker (of anything - see dana reeves). NOW WHAT?

dude, you are reaching tonite!

[spacelady]

84. Yes, I am a neurologist and I can read these--what would you like to know?

What do these displays have to do with smoking pot?

[mdmc]

100. do you have a herb brain scan?

I'd like to see the effect of the thc on those...nurons

[usregimechange]

103. No effect on brain cells, may cause cancer and sucking...

carbon monoxide may not be healthy. That may make me a right winger drug war advocate but I will let you be the judge of that...

[mdmc]

170. no, I think that you would oppose the drug war on all fronts, except one

most people enter drug treatment due to some "legal" event that pretty much coincided with "hitting rock bottom."

The fact that most, if not all people that go into treatment usually do so as a result of criminal charges. This is the only weak point I encounter when I argue about the drug war (surely not weak enough to support the drug war.

[mdmc]

174. how can herb have no effect on brain activity?

I mean, it gets ya high. Are you sure that it does not have a long term effect on the brain that would register on a cat scan?:kick:

[Spider Jerusalem]

183. Once again:

There is NO EVIDENCE THAT MARIJUANA CAUSES CANCER. None.

POT DOESN'T CAUSE LUNG CANCER, RESEARCHER SAYS

Also Doesn't Seem To Cause Emphysema Or Birth Defects, Senate Hearing Told

(Toronto Star, 12 June 2001)

OTTAWA ( CP ) - Smoking marijuana does not seem to cause lung cancer, emphysema or cause birth anomalies in fetuses, a prominent U.S. researcher told a Senate committee Monday.

John P. Morgan of City University of New York Medical School said heavy marijuana smokers do show some symptoms of lung damage, such as coughing, frequent colds and bronchitis, but not the life-threatening conditions seen among tobacco smokers.

''We are some 30 to 40 years into this marijuana epidemic and still have not seen evidence of pulmonary cancer in marijuana smokers.''
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01.n1045.a03.html

There's also evidence that THC and other cannabinoids present in nmarijuana actually REDUCE THE GROWTH of cancerous cells.

Hypothesis: cannabinoid therapy for the treatment of gliomas?

Velasco G, Galve-Roperh I, Sanchez C, Blazquez C, Guzman M.

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology I, School of Biology, Complutense University, Avenida Complutense, sn, 28040 Madrid, Spain.

Gliomas, in particular glioblastoma multiforme or grade IV astrocytoma, are the most frequent class of malignant primary brain tumours and one of the most aggressive forms of cancer. Current therapeutic strategies for the treatment of glioblastoma multiforme are usually ineffective or just palliative. During the last few years, several studies have shown that cannabinoids-the active components of the plant Cannabis sativa and their derivatives--slow the growth of different types of tumours, including gliomas, in laboratory animals. Cannabinoids induce apoptosis of glioma cells in culture via sustained ceramide accumulation, extracellular signal-regulated kinase activation and Akt inhibition. In addition, cannabinoid treatment inhibits angiogenesis of gliomas in vivo. Remarkably, cannabinoids kill glioma cells selectively and can protect non-transformed glial cells from death. These and other findings reviewed here might set the basis for a potential use of cannabinoids in the management of gliomas. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15275820&dopt=Citation

(note: "apoptosis" is cell death.)

Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol induces apoptosis in human prostate PC-3 cells via a receptor-independent mechanism.

Ruiz L, Miguel A, Diaz-Laviada I.

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Alcala, Alcala de Henares, Madrid, Spain.

The effect of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the major psycho-active component of marijuana, in human prostate cancer cells PC-3 was investigated. THC caused apoptosis in a dose-dependent manner. Morphological and biochemical changes induced by THC in prostate PC-3 cells shared the characteristics of an apoptotic phenomenon. First, loss of plasma membrane asymmetry determined by fluorescent anexin V binding. Second, presence of apoptotic bodies and nuclear fragmentation observed by DNA staining with 4',6-diamino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). Third, presence of typical 'ladder-patterned' DNA fragmentation. Central cannabinoid receptor expression was observed in PC-3 cells by immunofluorescence studies. However, several results indicated that the apoptotic effect was cannabinoid receptor-independent, such as lack of an effect of the potent cannabinoid agonist WIN 55,212-2, inability of cannabinoid antagonist AM 251 to prevent cellular death caused by THC and absence of an effect of pertussis toxin pre-treatment. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=10570948&dopt=Abstract

CANNABINOIDS: POTENTIAL ANTICANCER AGENTS

Manuel Guzmán
Abstract

Cannabinoids — the active components of Cannabis sativa and their derivatives — exert palliative effects in cancer patients by preventing nausea, vomiting and pain and by stimulating appetite. In addition, these compounds have been shown to inhibit the growth of tumour cells in culture and animal models by modulating key cell-signalling pathways. Cannabinoids are usually well tolerated, and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies. So, could cannabinoids be used to develop new anticancer therapies?
Summary

* Cannabinoids, the active components of Cannabis sativa and their derivatives, act in the organism by mimicking endogenous substances, the endocannabinoids, that activate specific cannabinoid receptors.
* Cannabinoids exert palliative effects in patients with cancer and inhibit tumour growth in laboratory animals.
* The best-established palliative effect of cannabinoids in cancer patients is the inhibition of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Today, capsules of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol (dronabinol (Marinol)) and its synthetic analogue nabilone (Cesamet) are approved for this purpose.
* Other potential palliative effects of cannabinoids in cancer patients — supported by Phase III clinical trials — include appetite stimulation and pain inhibition. In relation to the former, dronabinol is now prescribed for anorexia associated with weight loss in patients with AIDS.
* Cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth in laboratory animals. They do so by modulating key cell-signalling pathways, thereby inducing direct growth arrest and death of tumour cells, as well as by inhibiting tumour angiogenesis and metastasis.
* Cannabinoids are selective antitumour compounds, as they can kill tumour cells without affecting their non-transformed counterparts. It is probable that cannabinoid receptors regulate cell-survival and cell-death pathways differently in tumour and non-tumour cells.
* Cannabinoids have favourable drug-safety profiles and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies. The use of cannabinoids in medicine, however, is limited by their psychoactive effects, and so cannabinoid-based therapies that are devoid of unwanted side effects are being designed.
* Further basic and preclinical research on cannabinoid anticancer properties is required. It would be desirable that clinical trials could accompany these laboratory studies to allow us to use these compounds in the treatment of cancer. http://www.nature.com/nrc/journal/v3/n10/abs/nrc1188_fs.html;jsessionid=11A0DF85E3F6B6A3663904E3E09B4BC9

[mdmc]

200. that being said

I bet my lungs are black. :kick: for my lack of cig smoke.

[usregimechange]

223. That is false, see above for several studies that have found this

[Mythsaje]

230. There are a lot of conflicting studies...

but it's interesting to note how many of the negative ones have been financed by certain U.S. agencies with certain agendas.

[usregimechange]

239. do you have a one sided focus of criticism?

How many have you found this for? Who funded the others?

[Mythsaje]

244. If you delve deep

you'll find that the NODCP has its fingers in a LOT of such studies, and has a habit of suppressing anything that doesn't match the "facts" they're looking for.

[shanti]

261. do you always answer questions with questions?

pa-thetic. :eyes:

[usregimechange]

265. Yes, feed socrates that cocktail, pathetic.

[Spider Jerusalem]

241. No, it's not;

the study you cited has been superseded by more recent research; not to mention that all of the links I posted were to articles that appeared in peer-reviewed medical and scientific journals within the last three to seven years. Your flat assertion that what I've posted is "false" does nothing save reveal your own obvious ignorance that the absurdity of your position on this issue.

Marijuana Unlikely to Cause Head, Neck, or Lung Cancer

By Peggy Peck
WebMD Medical News

May 8, 2000 (Boston) -- Marijuana, unlike tobacco and alcohol, does not appear to cause head, neck, or lung cancer, says a researcher from Johns Hopkins Medical School in Baltimore who presented findings from a study here recently at a meeting of internal medicine physicians.

There has been an ongoing debate about whether marijuana is as dangerous as tobacco in terms of cancer development. Daniel E. Ford, MD, tried to sort out the evidence by the lifestyles -- including marijuana, tobacco, and alcohol use -- of 164 persons who were newly diagnosed with head, neck, or lung cancer compared to a group of 526 healthy persons living in the same area. The average age of patients was 49, while the average age of the healthy volunteers was 44. The cancer patients were all treated at four Baltimore-area hospitals, and the "controls" (healthy comparison group) were selected from a large group of people living in the Baltimore area who had been participating in an ongoing study. Ford tells WebMD that he wanted to find out whether the cancer patients were more likely to smoke marijuana or tobacco or to drink than were the healthy volunteers.

According to Ford, he thought he would find an association between marijuana use and cancer, but "that the association would fall away when we corrected for tobacco use. That was not the case. The association was never there." And that surprised him because of the way marijuana is smoked: deep inhalations, with the smoke held in for effect. "It seemed natural that there would be some connection," he tells WebMD.

<snip>

"We attempted to assess both lifetime and current use of substances," he says. Participants were also asked to differentiate between use of marijuana cigarettes, marijuana pipes, or consumed marijuana. Distinctions were also made between weekend and weekday use of marijuana, he says.

"Ever use of marijuana was 66% among controls and 60% among the cases," he says. "Daily marijuana use for a month or more was not associated with increased risk, nor was age at first use, depth of inhalation, or use of a pipe." Surprisingly, using marijuana was not associated with increased cancer risk, even among those who never used tobacco, he says. http://www.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309

[usregimechange]

246. Then saying "NO EVIDENCE THAT MARIJUANA CAUSES CANCER"

is not correct. And I disagree with your conclusion. You can pick apart the other studies as well, if you are so motivated. The real question is what is the general scientific view of this? Has there been a meta-analysis? Are there 5 studies that show no risk and 50 that do?

The same cancer causing agents in pot are also in tobacco. Yet, one causes cancer and the other does not. I don't know but from looking at the research I can't discount the cancer risk in the least bit.

[Mythsaje]

248. Except that OTHER research shows

that THC might actually fight cancer.

[Spider Jerusalem]

254. How about "no CREDIBLE evidence"?

Because there isn't. Here's an article mentioning a research biologist who reviewed the available literature and found no evidence supporting any causative linkage:

No Link Between Pot Smoking, Cancer
Marijuana smoke contains THC, which may inhibit cancer, an expert says

# E-mail this article
# Subscribe to news

WEDNESDAY, Oct. 19 (HealthDay News) -- Even though they're chemically similar, marijuana smoke is less likely than tobacco smoke to cause cancer, according to one expert review of the literature.

The review, by Dr. Robert Melamede of the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, noted that tobacco and marijuana smoke differ in a number of ways, particularly in the fact that marijuana smoke contains tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) , while tobacco smoke contains nicotine. Nicotine increases the cancer-promoting effects of smoke, while THC reduces those effects, he explained.

And even though THC and nicotine act on related cellular pathways, they bind to different receptors to activate these pathways, the review found. Cells in the lungs and respiratory passages are lined with nicotine receptors but these cells don't appear to have THC receptors. This may explain why smoking marijuana has so far not been linked with lung cancer, a major cause of death from cigarette smoking.

Research has also shown that marijuana kills cancer cells and reduces tumor growth. This is, in part, because marijuana reduces the formation of blood vessels that nourish tumors.

More: http://www.healthfinder.gov/news/newsstory.asp?docID=528530

[usregimechange]

257. less likely than tobacco smoke to cause cancer

less likely than tobacco smoke to cause cancer
less likely than tobacco smoke to cause cancer
less likely than tobacco smoke to cause cancer

I am guessing than he thinks it may cause cancer. Less cancer is cancer is it not? Thanks for the help.

[Spider Jerusalem]

260. Did you even bother to read beyond that point?

""not so far been linked with lung cancer"...which is another way of sayong NO EVIDENCE...perhaps you have trouble with reading comprehension?

[usregimechange]

268. yes, clear evidence it does not cause cancer in general

If something has not been linked with lung cancer yet, it must mean that all cancer has been proven not to come from breathing the carcinogens in pot. What is the definition of a carcinogen anyway?

[nonconformist]

271. Now you are really reaching.

So we're going to label pot preemptively as a cause of cancer, are we?

[usregimechange]

292. one of them.

[nonconformist]

263. marijuana kills cancer cells and reduces tumor growth

marijuana kills cancer cells and reduces tumor growth
marijuana kills cancer cells and reduces tumor growth
marijuana kills cancer cells and reduces tumor growth

Sounds like he doesn't.

[usregimechange]

266. Yes, sounds just like something breathing cacinogens would do.

:wow:

[nonconformist]

273. Yet apparently, it does.

Provide evidence to the contrary.

[shanti]

251. ohhh kayy

you have a problem with marijuana....why didn't you just come out and say it? :eyes:

[walldude]

26. Uh.. Ok

Here's my "rationalization". Drugs aren't for everyone, self control is essential, but there are many wonderful things that were created with the help of mind altering chemicals. Many brilliant musicians, artists, filmmakers, writers and entertainers have used drugs to give them a different perspective on the world and thus enhance their art. Personally I think natural drugs, Pot, Mushrooms, Peyote, Opium should be fully legalized. The Meth epidemic proves that the war on drugs doesn't work. People are going to find a way to get high, whether you want them to or not. Maybe if drugs were legal we could work on treatment for addictions and education in responsible use.

[Mythsaje]

27. Might want to add scientists to that list...

Carl Sagan, for example... :)

[usregimechange]

31. arsenic can be natural too. Creativity needs a chemical?

[Moochy]

335. Fasting works

Creativity is an ineluctable quality of ones state of mind, body and soul(if one believes in that sort of thing)

Creativity needs what creativity needs. Some people drink to write, or paint, or whatever. Some people fast.

Pot does not make one creative, it can even stifle creativity. It can make people freak out and get nervous. Others get relaxed. It depends upon many factors.

Lumping all drugs into the same category is dishonest when the anyone does it, NIH, DARE, you, or Mc Gruff the Crime dog.

on edit, fixed typos caused by lack of narcotics. :P

[Mythsaje]

338. I would've added one word...

"Pot doesn't <necessarily> make one creative, it can even stifle creativity."

[walldude]

346. No it doesn't need it but

it some cases it has certainly helped....

[LincolnMcGrath]

13. I agree

[joefree1]

3. What if you eat the Marijuana?

Putting Cocaine abuse next to Marijauna use is like comparing acoholism to overeating. Not the same league.



on edit: I don't use grass but I don't support fear mongering.

[usregimechange]

7. True. Amps and pot very different...

I believe you would not get as many chemicals if you ate pot but I suspect Benzene would be one of them.

[LincolnMcGrath]

15. Listeria monocytogenes

The bacterium which is the cause of listeriosis, Listeria monocytogenes, is widespread in the environment. It can be found in soil, dust, mud, vegetation, silage, sewage and most of the animals that have been tested. It has been found in up to five per cent or more of normal healthy people usually in the gut. For this reason exposure to this bacterium is unavoidable.

It has the unusual characteristic of being able to grow, albeit slowly, at temperatures as low as 0oC. There are several different subtypes which can be distinguished by laboratory tests. There are listerias other than L. monocytogenes, for example L. innocua, which are very similar to it but apparently do not cause disease in man.

[Warpy]

25. you also get a small amount of benzene in many municipal

drinking water systems and also in most soft drinks. Want to ban them, too?

Try to research this antipot hysteria a little more.

[usregimechange]

38. You get arsenic as well but who wants to consume it willingly?

By the way, never heard about soft drinks, have a link? Openess works both ways does it not? If not, what is the hold up?

[tabasco]

42. Baloney. Benzene is from burning marijuana.

As are the other carcinogens listed in your post. Educate yourself before going on tirades.

Eating pot or vaporizing pot eliminates these carcinogens.

Where is your alcoholic brain scan? Funny you did not include the #1 most abused and harmful drug of all.

[usregimechange]

219. I agree alcohol is the most dangerous and I also agree that eating

thc would not include benzene. However, most people obtain thc via smoke.

[spacelady]

86. Well Benzene is a fact of life--ok in moderation. Point Please???

[Viva_La_Revolution]

4. government pot might contain those chemicals...

Seems to be a byproduct of using pesticides/fertilizer. I'd like to see a study that says organic/homegrown does.

That said, everyone needs to see the brain scans

[seabeyond]

5. self deleted, i just looked at pictures, grinnin n/t

[usregimechange]

9. Pot doesn't kill brain cells... But does cause cancer...

[seabeyond]

10. oh ok. well hell now i am really confused

lol lol. gonna go up and re read the article.

[Warpy]

22. Only in quantities that reflect the average tobacco use

however any user who tried to smoke 40 joints a day (the equivalent of a two pack a day nicotine habit) whould find himself sleeping through his life on a quarter that amount. It just can't be done.

If you're going to peddle anti pot hysteria on these boards, be prepared to get corrected. A LOT.

[usregimechange]

40. by a lot of pot smokers?

[nonconformist]

49. Who are lesser people? WTF are you getting at? nt

[LincolnMcGrath]

64. SIlly Dopers!

:eyes:

[usregimechange]

227. never said lesser. you did though.

[nonconformist]

280. Again, your point? nt

[usregimechange]

288. Some people defend pot smoking because they smoke pot.

[Mythsaje]

291. And some people simply because they know people

who do. How would you know the difference, and why should you care?

[usregimechange]

295. I don't know the difference but I do care. Same reason why I care

when Medicaid gets cut, and senseless war get started... People get hurt and often what hurts them is the unwillingness to take a look at information objectively and the emotional, and ideological sources for that rigidness. But, I have to work on that myself.

[Mythsaje]

304. Yet for many people who have direct anectdotal evidence

that conflict with what scientists (allegedly objective, but who knows) may or may not say about the subject. For years and years the government (and those they sponsor) have been spewing crap about pot (I remember when it could make you impotent, or cause males to grow breasts). The disinformation campaign has been going on a long time and we've learned to be pretty skeptical about things they say.

A good friend of mine, several years ago, who just happened to be a 4.0 student with an IQ of about 165, explained to me HIS take on the effects of marijuana on the brain. How, during our normal day, our conscious mind shunts a lot of information to the subconscious as a matter of course. Pot slows down that reaction, so a lot of stuff that would ordinarily go straight to the subconscious, is suddenly available for analysis by the conscious mind.

If this is true, it would explain why many of the pot smokers I've known in my life seemed more or less immune to subliminal or impulse-driven advertising. The tricks advertisers play are simply more transparent.

It was, of course, only a theory. But anacdotal evidence suggests that it might have a basis in fact.

Now the issue is whether or not the alleged (and they are alleged--there is no current credible evidence to support the allegations) carcinogenic effects are MORE detrimental to the user than those of anything else that may cause physical problems.

[usregimechange]

307. Yes, government lied about pot for years, they still stretch things.

[mdmc]

341. a kick for your concession, usregimechange

it is not easy to really believe in something. Hang in there and keep at it. Peace and low stress, mdmc

[nonconformist]

293. And what is the problem with that exactly?

I mean, they'd have first hand knowledge wouldn't they?

[EstimatedProphet]

90. Yeah, by a lot of pot smokers, and others too

Why not? They don't invalidate their views-they prove them correct. Pot smokers know from experience how much shit your post is full of.

[nonconformist]

37. You have some proof to back that up?

Links about people with cancer that can be directly linked to their marijuana use?

[usregimechange]

48. one tid bit, want me to post a mile more?

How about conclusions from the American Cancer Society:

Marijuana contains more tar than cigarettes. Marijuana is also inhaled very deeply and the smoke is held in the lungs for a long time. Marijuana is smoked all the way to the end where tar content is the highest. Many of the cancer-causing substances in tobacco are also found in marijuana. Because marijuana is an illegal substance, it is not possible to control whether it contains fungi, pesticides, and other additives. Medical reports suggest marijuana may cause cancers of the mouth and throat.

From studies like this one:

Zhang ZF, Morgenstern H, Spitz MR, et al: Marijuana use and increased risk of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 6:1071-1078, 1999.

[nonconformist]

52. I would like to see a case where cancer was directly caused by pot smoking

And you cannot provide that information.

[usregimechange]

109. Can you provide a pciture of someone w/ tabacco? And prove...

it was from tabacco? You understand the difficulty in pulling those cases out? Yes, he smoked, yes he has cancer, prove it was from tabacco. You can't but studies can.

[nonconformist]

139. Pathetic.

Back up your own argument instead of trying to tangent off into tobacco use.

And it's tObacco for the love of god, not tabacco.

Are you stoned?

[shanti]

267. LOL!!!!!!

:rofl: this has GOT to be one of the funniest threads that i've ever read here on DU!!

[seabeyond]

142. no studies cant. they are fabricated. it cannot be done. who is to know

if the person who did not smoke wouldnt have gotten cancer anyway. same with the seat belt law. who is to say the person that died without the seatbelt wouldnt have died with a seatbelt. a person can manipulate a study to whatever result their agenda requires

[usregimechange]

162. Ok, may I suggest that researchers have thought of these problems

and have ways to accurately study these things. Like a control group. Like a random sample.

[seabeyond]

164. like agenda. get me the facts from places other than american

cancer society......

[spacelady]

101. All the more reason pot should be legalized, so it will NOT contain

funji, pesticides & other additives because no matter WHAT kind of regime change you may want to effect - EVERYBODY will get stoned.

Plus I Question this study without backup--anyone can say anything if you twiddle the numbers enough-why do you care? Did some pothead knock you down and steal your Twinkie??

[shanti]

274. funny!

:rofl:

[seabeyond]

102. lets see, what is there job. biggest bullshit manipulator

of "studies"

[Spider Jerusalem]

54. No evidence linking marijuana use and cancer...

even in long-term smokers, that I'm aware of. Partly because the particulates in marijuana smoke are, relatively speaking, much larger than those in tobacco smoke and thus can't be inhaled as deeply into the lungs.

And there's been some research that indicates that THC may actually retard the growth of cancerous cells.

Are you on the DEA's payroll, or something? A good bit of what you're saying sounds like "Just Say No" propaganda and misinformation.

[usregimechange]

167. If you need to think that. Drugs may be unhealthy = DEA agent.

[Spider Jerusalem]

192. No...

what I think is that anyone whose arguments consist largely of obvious and easily debunked propaganda rather than anything resembling factual information may have some sinister agenda in spreading misinformation. Of course, you could just be extremely gullible and too lazy to do any actual research on the subject, or perhaps too ignorant to accept any information which contradicts your already established views regardless of its validity.

[usregimechange]

259. were you the guy that posted the biologist saying pot is less likely

to cause cancer as evidence that it doesn't cause cancer?

[Carni]

69. It also causes people to leap off buildings

thinking they can fly...

Or maybe it just causes them to eat too many girl scout cookies?

[RaleighNCDUer]

99. Now THAT'S a problem.

I gave up on dope two decades ago, but I STILL have an awful girl scout cookie habit.

DAMN that mari-ju-wanna!!

[spacelady]

88. As Joe Jackson would say....Everthing gives you cancer.

[usregimechange]

182. So huffing gas is appropriate.

[spacelady]

187. Don't let me stop you.

[Mythsaje]

191. Whatever floats your boat, I guess...

I knew someone in Jr. High who did that. NOT the world's brightest light, but, well, then again, that was probably a problem that preceded the huffing.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

6. The occurrence of harmful chemicals in marijuana.....

comes primarily from combustion. If one simply renders the THC and eats it, an or uses a vaporizing device, the instance of carcinogens is significantly reduced.

http://www.torontohemp.com/mapsnorml.htm

http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/vaporizers.html

[Mythsaje]

11. And of course the vaporization devices

are illegal in the U.S.

[usregimechange]

12. Not sure about vaporizing device but true... only threat than is

psychological addiction.

[Mythsaje]

17. Which puts it in the category

of TV, the internet (including DU), gambling (though far less expensive), fast food, soda, junk food, music (esp for teenagers), porn, reading books, and a host of other behaviors that are or can be psychologically addictive.

[usregimechange]

20. I bet porn tops them all!

[shanti]

276. and you know this how?

c'mon, give us some STUDIES, man!!!

[CrownPrinceBandar]

18. Sure........

but a person could get psychologically addicted to anything. I thought were were talking tissue/organ damage here. I know tons of folks who can't get their day going without a cup of joe. Where's your caffeine warnings?

[seabeyond]

30. hey back off the coffee. has been said that it helps

prevent some sort of cancer too. not to mention other stuff, wink

[usregimechange]

35. Coffee and cancer, not that I have seen. Maybe, you just want...

to shrug this all off?

[CrownPrinceBandar]

41. Hmm........

I never said diddly about ANY correlation between coffee and cancer, you were talking psychological addiction.

Also, I provide a counter to your argument and now I am "shrugging" this off. Sounds to me like you've pretty much made up your mind and are uninterested in any other points of view.

Have it your way.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

36. But... its psychologically addictive.....

so quit right now! :evilgrin:

[seabeyond]

104. i love you....... gigglin

[shanti]

278. hee hee

:P

[Mythsaje]

8. And yet...

May 8, 2000 (Boston) -- Marijuana, unlike tobacco and alcohol, does not appear to cause head, neck, or lung cancer, says a researcher from Johns Hopkins Medical School in Baltimore who presented findings from a study here recently at a meeting of internal medicine physicians.

There has been an ongoing debate about whether marijuana is as dangerous as tobacco in terms of cancer development. Daniel E. Ford, MD, tried to sort out the evidence by the lifestyles -- including marijuana, tobacco, and alcohol use -- of 164 persons who were newly diagnosed with head, neck, or lung cancer compared to a group of 526 healthy persons living in the same area. The average age of patients was 49, while the average age of the healthy volunteers was 44. The cancer patients were all treated at four Baltimore-area hospitals, and the "controls" (healthy comparison group) were selected from a large group of people living in the Baltimore area who had been participating in an ongoing study. Ford tells WebMD that he wanted to find out whether the cancer patients were more likely to smoke marijuana or tobacco or to drink than were the healthy volunteers.

According to Ford, he thought he would find an association between marijuana use and cancer, but "that the association would fall away when we corrected for tobacco use. That was not the case. The association was never there." And that surprised him because of the way marijuana is smoked: deep inhalations, with the smoke held in for effect. "It seemed natural that there would be some connection," he tells WebMD.

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309

or

Marijuana May Yield Cancer-Fighting Drugs

Pot's Active Ingredient Shows Promise in Lab Tests By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Brunilda Nazario, MD
on Tuesday, September 14, 2004


Sept. 14, 2004 -- Marijuana's active ingredient may form the basis for new antiviral drugs that fight cancer-causing herpes viruses.

Professor Peter Medveczky, MD, of the University of South Florida's medical microbiology and immunology department, and H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute in Tampa, and colleagues worked on the study.

Their report appears in the Sept. 15 issue of the journal BMC Medicine.

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/94/102650.htm

[seabeyond]

14. i love it, just love it. my coffee too. lol lol. i would like to see

brain activity of a pot smoker. maybe i will google

[usregimechange]

16. Methodology w/ frequency of use...

He says his conclusions differ from another study reported recently. That study linked marijuana use to cancer, but Ford says he thinks the difference can be explained by the fact that the healthy volunteers in that study "had very, very low use of marijuana." That contrasts to his study, in which "we were investigating the effect of marijuana as it is commonly used in the community," he says. Use of all substances -- tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana -- was common among both cancer patients and controls, he says.

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309

Plenty of others the other way like this one:

Zhang ZF, Morgenstern H, Spitz MR, et al: Marijuana use and increased risk of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention 6:1071-1078, 1999.

[Disturbed]

19. This is the Pres of the USA

[Mythsaje]

21. A little square with an X in the middle?

Yep, sounds like the Prez to me. :)

[Renew Deal]

28. Kneejerk crackheads

Yeah, I know the drug defenders are probably not crackheads. But who has a kneejerk reaction in defense of "drugs", chemicals, and the sort that rot your mind and ruins lives?

[usregimechange]

32. hummm, people that use them....

[seabeyond]

33. it is called free will. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

45. Ever seen what happens to the brain of a chronic alcoholic?

None of this changes my deep set opinion that some drugs, like pot, clearly should be legalized, and the rest should be treated as a health -NOT a law enforcement- issue.

How's your brain look when you're doing a 10 year mandatory minimum sentence in some shithole prison for smoking a joint?

[usregimechange]

59. I agree, the war on drugs was very misplaced an not effective.

[nonconformist]

47. In the amphetamine chart, how much of the drug was taken daily?

I'd really like to see the control numbers on that, because I suspect they're nowhere near an average daily dose of doctor prescribed amphetamines.

[usregimechange]

115. Hey, MD's prescribing the stuff is scary as well.

[spacelady]

131. Hey I could use some pep pills, It is people like you who ruin it for

everyone. Ah the good old days.....

[Mythsaje]

152. You know what struck me?

My wife and I were at the pharmacy one night and watched someone signing the paper for cold medicine and I thought--what if someone came up with a way to synthesize and concentrate caffeine into an amphetamine-like drug? There would be NO way to fight that.

[spacelady]

176. Those NO-DOZE type pills just tear my stomach up. n/t

[Mythsaje]

185. Oh, I know...

Mine too. I was thinking it would probably be possible to concentrate it even further... These damn drug chemists are pretty sneaky.

[TruthStream_dot_org]

53. Leave Pot Alone. NT

[Neil Lisst]

55. Major killers: alcohol, tobacco, fat, sugar, guns, cars, and infections

Where's your God now, Moses?!

[usregimechange]

61. God, am I religious?

[Neil Lisst]

110. That was Edward G. Robinson to Charlton Heston in ...

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

It means, by allusion, that you are worshipping at an altar of your own beliefs, self-assured that your position is right. Meanwhile, you're blind to the real killers.

[usregimechange]

203. Interesting. I still think breathing smoke and snorting meth is unhealthy

[Mythsaje]

218. Hate to tell you this, if you didn't already know...

but when we're born we're already dying.

LIFE is unhealthy.

[usregimechange]

226. so we should advocate going as soon as possible?

[Mythsaje]

228. Hardly that...

but we must, on our own terms, balance out quality and quantity of life.

[usregimechange]

235. I agree, not an easy line to draw. I just think being open to both

sides of this debate is positive. It would be great too if there were more objective sources out there.

[seabeyond]

231. i watched mick jagger run all over stage superbowl nite at 62

and thought what the f*. all the crap he put into his body, and look at him go. i am not doing so bad

[Mythsaje]

233. Hell, it's amazing that Keith Richards is still going...

He's starting to look an awfully lot like the Crypt Keeper.

[seabeyond]

238. Crypt Keeper..... ya well he is still keepin

on edit osborne. ooooosh

[Bonobo]

That made me laugh hard! Giggle madly actually...

Must be all that pot smoking...

:smoke:

:freak:

[Blue_In_AK]

58. Whatever...

I've been smoking marijuana regularly for almost 40 years. I'll be 60 in September, but I look and feel 20 years younger. I don't even have any gray hair. I'm never sick, not even with a cold. I've been gainfully employed all my adult life and have never missed a day of work because of the evil weed. These scare tactics don't work with me. What's your motivation? I can understand sounding an alarm over crack and meth, but pot??? Come on....

[Mythsaje]

63. Sounds like someone I know, Blue...

He's 62 but most people guess him at about 50. Been doing physical work all his life.

[usregimechange]

72. People can smoke all of their life with out many consequences.

but despite your experiences, there is some increased health risk, legal risk, and risk of psycholigical addiction. You can go outside and see a black car but that experience doesn't mean all cars are black.

[Blue_In_AK]

76. ??? Black cars?

You lost me on that one. As for your other points, I don't think I could be any healthier (weight, blood pressure, heartbeat, cholesterol, triglycerides, all A-OK), pot isn't against the law in Alaska, and I have no problem going without if the need arises. Maybe there are people who have problems with pot, but I personally haven't known any, and I can only speak from my own experience.

[Mythsaje]

83. I nearly called an analogy foul on that one myself.

[Blue_In_AK]

94. We are of like mind. :-)

[mdmc]

121. kick

:yourock: buddy! Miss, you haven't lived until you've taken a couple sick days off to smoke and read a good book. For all the health risks and negative lacker stigma, I still think it would be worth a try by you.

[Mythsaje]

128. When I was about twenty

I laid back for a week and read the whole Dune series. From that point on all I needed to do to alter my perceptions was re-read the series.

[Blue_In_AK]

148. Well, I forgot to mention

that back in the old days I did take a "vacation" of about four years. :rofl: I wasn't reading books though -- I was playing my flute on the beach, hanging out with my guitar-picking buddies. Ah, those were the days....

[mdmc]

186. a-HA! (j'acuse!)

memory loss...another risk... I just finished reading One Flew Over the CooCoo's Nest... It is nice to sit back and reread some of the old school stuff. I think that I am going to re-read 2004, I mean 1984, next.

[spacelady]

196. When I was 10, I thought Animal Farm was just about animals & I had

already read it twice.

[mdmc]

222. That puzzled me too as a kid

I recently re-read that while substitute teaching.

[Blue_In_AK]

201. "Old school" ... hahahaha...

Are you a first-wave hippie, too?

[mdmc]

212. Nah, I was born when Nixon was still popular, and in the White House

but I studied impermanence a little bit (it gave me an old soul).

[Pastiche423]

65. I don't understand

Why are you anti-pot?

[leftofthedial]

66. you don't have any pictures of breasts on drugs do you?

just asking.

[nonconformist]

67. PEANUT BUTTER contains known carcinogens

http://www.ehso.com/ehshome/aflatoxin.php

Aflatoxin Introduction

Aflatoxin is a potent human carcinogen. It is a naturally occurring toxic metabolite produced by certain fungi (Aspergillus flavis), a mold found on food products such as corn and peanuts, peanut butter. It acts as a potent liver carcinogen in rodents (and, presumably, humans). They are probably the best known and most intensively researched mycotoxins in the world. Aflatoxins have been associated with various diseases , such as aflatoxicosis , in livestock , domestic animals and humans throughout the world .

[Blue_In_AK]

73. AND it can kill some people... n/t

[usregimechange]

75. Are you judging or being anti-peanut butter? Information is good.

I like it.

[nonconformist]

77. I'm pointing out how virtually everything contains carcinogens

And can, theoretically, cause cancer. But as far as I know, there has never been a single case of cancer directly linked to peanut butter consumption, just as there has never been a case of cancer directly linked to marijuana usage.

[usregimechange]

85. what about tabacco?

[nonconformist]

108. What about tobacco? We're not talking about that

We're talking about marijuana.

And tobacco use has been directly linked to cancer. Marijuana use has not.

[usregimechange]

116. What is in tabacco that causes cancer?

[nonconformist]

129. Are you saying that tobacco does not cause cancer? nt

[usregimechange]

141. I am saying that the cancer causing agents are in both.

[nonconformist]

168. But you would have to use more pot than is physically possible

to even begin comparing it to the effects of tobacco.

Which makes your whole point moot.

[spacelady]

140. T "O" BACCO. If you are going to play expert.

[usregimechange]

146. Feel better?

[spacelady]

149. Much.

[nonconformist]

150. Maybe he's stoned. nt

[usregimechange]

82. Does it contain carbon monoxide, ammonia, and nitrosamine too?

[nonconformist]

130. Only the really good shit. nt

[shanti]

299. ctfu

you are killing me!

[seabeyond]

236. smoked meat, hot dogs, teflon pans, white filters for coffee

and so much more i dont remember at the moment

[Mythsaje]

247. Funny, when you consider

that smoking meat was, not all that long ago, OUR only means for preserving it.

[spacelady]

68. The brain on the left is on cocaine, Right?

Or the right brain is left on cocaine, Right? Or the cocaine in Spain is left mainly on the right brain. Right?

[Mythsaje]

70. ROFL...

Now that was funny!

[spacelady]

74. Yeah, right or left behind? Thanks, I think, I'm thinking much too hardly.

[stop the bleeding]

89. I wonder what DU'ers brain scans look like??

:freak:

[Blue_In_AK]

97. I'm sure mine is psychedelic and beautiful.

:rofl: :hippie:

[spacelady]

147. I just can't bother my beautiful mind with all this SCIENCE!!??

[LincolnMcGrath]

159. lol

[mdmc]

lol

:kick:

[shanti]

300. but of course!

:hi: :hippie:

[Lone_Star_Dem]

71. So, pot is really no worse for you than a cigarette?

If anything it appears to be a bit less toxic. Tobacco smoke also contains benzene along with around 4000 other chemicals listed as toxic for human consumption.

It's no skin off my nose either way, I stopped smoking both years ago. But if it's legal to buy cigarettes and alcohol then it doesn't make sense why pot remains illegal. They can all cause cancer and aren't healthy for you. But then so can many other things that are legal for Americans to consume.


Amphetamines are a prescription drug and as such are highly regulated.

Methamphetamine isn't and has the added issue of being made out of ingredients such as lye, lithium batteries and acetone. This brain scan after the same (excessively large) amount of meth usage would actually be worse.

[mdmc]

96. there is benzene in my herb?

that, my friend, I did not know. I did however, know that... drugs are bad. Drugs are not healthy. To all the kids out there - don't do drugs. Ditto for the old folk.

[Pastiche423]

107. If drugs are bad

then why do some doctors write scripts for medicinal pot?

[Mythsaje]

111. Or, for that matter,

prescribe dangerous anti-depressants to underage patients, or, formerly, prescribe vioxx to potential future heart-attack victims?

;)

[usregimechange]

127. Hey, I would be the first to admit that is a problem as well.

[Mythsaje]

138. One of the suicides to which I referred

was of a 16 y.o. who was put on a very high dose of an anti-depressant that's not cleared for minors.

[shanti]

308. hello!

my sister was reeling off a list of all the prescription drugs she takes daily and i was astounded to find out that she takes seven different pills a day, and she is only 49 years old. hbp, thyroid, diabetes, hormone, antidepressant, etc. and more to counteract them.

f*cking drug companies are vultures.

[mdmc]

135. well, if a doctors says so

then it is kosher! (I think Doctors write those scripts when folks have cancer and stuff).

[Pastiche423]

205. I KNOW doctors write them

for people w/paralysis.

[mdmc]

229. I wonder what it would be used for re: paralysis

perhaps to ease the inflammation of the arteries? to relax the muscles? appetite?

[Pastiche423]

245. Spasms and Central Pain

[mdmc]

342. thanks for the info

:kick:

[spacelady]

117. There are more old potheads than there are old doctors, so let's

not bogart that joint.

[seabeyond]

136. that is funny n/t

[mdmc]

145. now that you mention it, there seems to be more

old stoners then old joggers. What up with that?:kick:

[seabeyond]

112. rule followers just dont get it. all kinds of people in this world

there have been drugs from the beginning of time. there have been people touting the holy bullshit to get people off drugs from the beginning of time. it doesnt work, since the beginning of time

all kinds of people in this world. the person that must cross all t's and dot all i's oh and capatalize at the start of a sentence just does not have a concept of a person that cannot follow all the rules. we just cannot live that pure, clean, walking the line, tucked in shirt, hair above the ear kinda life.

there is NO way. yet..... these rule followers are so pissed they cannot get us to follow law and all their many rules, even legal ones... that they insist on making more law to MAKE us follow law

aint gonna happen

you cant say i am not productive. you cannot say i am not of value. you cannot say i am worthless. i can easily prove otherwise. and i did it not following rules.

i kick ass in life, and i do it my way, and i do it better than a lot of the rule followers..... i will continue to walk life by the song in my head, and rule followers, respectfully, cross every t, and dot every i, you have your place in society too. just leave me the fuck alone.

[Mythsaje]

118. Hey, now... I'm anal about my capitalization...

and spelling, and punctuation. Makes my stuff easy to edit, or so say my editors. :)

[seabeyond]

126. lmao............... for real.

i use to be. when i would type a letter, my challenge was no red and green squiggleys. now.... i see it as a brite colored christmas tree, wink

[usregimechange]

133. My post had nothing to do with laws or rules.

[seabeyond]

154. no coffee, no smoking, no pot, no drugs........ waht else do you advocate

no to

[Mythsaje]

158. Don't drink, don't smoke

what do you do?

;)

[LincolnMcGrath]

161. Is that an ADAM ANT reference?

[seabeyond]

165. are you being emotional again

bah hahahah. teasing. again. late night

and no drinking or smoking, for real

[LincolnMcGrath]

169. LOL

:cry:

[usregimechange]

178. maybe enabling...

[seabeyond]

181. you against enabling now

lol lol lol

[usregimechange]

193. Not against it but if I knew a kid huffing gas the last thing I would do

is find ways to make it ok.

[Mythsaje]

195. Apple, meet orange...n/t

[seabeyond]

202. snorted on that one. funny. we have a lot of funny duers.

i might have to use that one..... who am i kidding, i remember sayings as well as bushie boy

fool me once shame on you and and and

[Mythsaje]

215. Sarcastic one-liners are my specialty...n/t

[usregimechange]

211. I agree.

[seabeyond]

197. i wouldnt hand kid a porn magazine, or a beer, or a cig, maybe a

twinkie, wink

[Mythsaje]

166. From ME?

Nah...couldn't be. :evilgrin:

[LincolnMcGrath]

171. Must be something inside....

:hi:

[spacelady]

184. Antmusic.

[seabeyond]

194. ??? adam ant, ant music .... how come i dont know what you guys

are talking about

and then to bed for me. fun thread though

[Mythsaje]

199. Adam Ant

was a fairly popular new wave pop singer/actor in the 80s.

[seabeyond]

204. i must have been high. was in the 80's wink.... n/t

[Mythsaje]

221. So was I...

And a metal-head. But I lived in Sacramento for a while...the only station there that played rock played new wave too. They'd play Eurythmics and Iron Maiden in the same set.

[spacelady]

206. Music from the 80's- Adam and the Ants--much Native American influence.

[seabeyond]

214. i am not remembering htem at all, i love music

and love native american music. i am not good with band names and titles though. i change words to songs too, wink. thank you. will check them out

[usregimechange]

175. I never said no, I said they may be unheathy, that isn't a law or a rule

[seabeyond]

179. ahhhhh come on. this whole thread and it is merely the suggestion

they MIGHT be unhealthy, really that is all. hm..... ok

[usregimechange]

198. I missed the part where I asked DU to ban medical marijuana

[seabeyond]

210. hey a shift again, i didnt say anything about medical pot, BUT

if it is good enough for a doctor and sick patient, welllllll...... good enough for the rest of us. or if it isnt so bad that a doctor will use it, then......

[Lone_Star_Dem]

134. I've read the entire thread and still don't understand what your point is

I don't get the point of showing the brain scan of monkey on a LEGAL drug, then showing how pot has some of the same toxins as cigarettes.

Where were you intending to take this?

I'm so confused...

[usregimechange]

153. I wanted to raise awareness of the negative aspects of using

these substances. Attack me now.

[seabeyond]

157. lol that was cute

[Lone_Star_Dem]

172. I'm not attacking you

I was just trying to find out what you were getting at is all.

Now that I know here's how I see this.

First, a script for amphetamines is hard to obtain. They're not sold on the average street corner either. Occasionally someone will break into a pharmacy and get some to sell, but now days they have other drugs with better resale values they're after.

Second, If a person is inhaling smoke into their body (of any kind) I don't think they honestly believe it's healthy. I know I never did, but it was my choice to smoke and I enjoyed it.

Third, comparing pot with hard drugs is like comparing grape juice with wine. They're close but not quite the same.

[usregimechange]

188. I agree.

[spacelady]

155. Blue ribbon question of the day. n/t

[Lone_Star_Dem]

213. Do I get a toke for asking the right question.

:P

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[spacelady]

224. No, just a blue ribbon, but I don't have one.

We'll just have to Imagine.

[seabeyond]

160. all that pot and snortin coke, maybe you wouldnt be confused

hence the point

teasing. i was confused at first too

hey, really i want to see the activity of the brain on pot. the brain just goes to really odd places

[Swamp Rat]

180. ... you want to see the activity of 'the brain' on pot?

:D

[seabeyond]

189. i beg to differ..... that is coke all the way

i am seeing me in my car of colorful bumpersticker, peace sign shirt, peace sign on back of car and silver peace sign necklace of my rearview mirror.

love the picture swamprat

[Swamp Rat]

220. nope... rootbeer!

Mmm! Ice, cold rootbeer! :beer:

[seabeyond]

225. lol lol you are horrible

i can just see that coming from laura, with that plastered smile. incorrigible.

[Mythsaje]

208. Excellent work, Swamp Rat...

What program do you use to do that stuff, anyway? Photoshop?

[Swamp Rat]

216. Hempshop 3.0

:rofl: :smoke: :rofl: It's got da coolest plug-ins! :D

[spacelady]

217. Now look what you've done! Why would anyone want to change that??

[Lone_Star_Dem]

209. LOL!

Hey, pot was my favorite back when I could still afford it. Now days the closest I get is at an occasional concert. You'd think living this close to Mexico it'd be cheaper...but nooo. :P

[Blue_In_AK]

234. You know, it's easy to grow

Hey, are the laws still as Draconian down there as they used to be? I had a wheelchair-bound friend back when I was in college at the University of Houston who got busted for a joint, and they actually sent him to jail. Obviously, a very dangerous criminal ...

[Lone_Star_Dem]

237. The laws here read that if you get caught with a seedling

They charge you for 10lbs! They say that's what it would have produced. Whatever!

A joint is a misdemeanor now, though. Anything under 1/4 oz is if I'm not mistaken.

[Blue_In_AK]

252. I'm glad to hear they've lightened up a bit.

I've been in Alaska for so long, where possession of up to four ounces of marijuana in one's home has been basically legal since 1975, that I forget other places are just starting to catch up. Our state constitution has a very strong privacy clause.

[seabeyond]

243. i moved here from calif. a friend telling me it was a felony

no way i say no way..... calif a 65 dollar ticket if under a certain amount. i couldnt believe it. and this is with a seed or residue

on edit this was 20 years ago. man times flies

[Lone_Star_Dem]

249. Hey, me too

I moved here from LA about that long ago. :hi:

[ConsAreLiars]

173. 172 replies and 2 recommendations?

That should tell you something of the quality of your "reasoning."

(edit typo)

[usregimechange]

177. Yes, truth has always been determined by majority vote.

[ConsAreLiars]

190. Non sequitor

Consistent with your attempt to use speed brainscans as relevant to pot. Very simpleminded, and not very pursuasive.

[usregimechange]

207. No, but I thought they were relavent to meth and coc.

I am simple minded? Where did that come from?

[ConsAreLiars]

232. You posted the reference to pot

Making that unsubstantiated association is simple minded, at best. I can post a picture of a brain blown apart by US soldiers in Iraq and then some screed about the dangers of eating meat. If I were to do so, the kindest thing one might say about my "logic" would be to call it simpleminded. I see you are up to 231 replies and 2 recommendations. You must be very proud.

[usregimechange]

240. The reference to pot had to do with a carcinogen not brain damge

go back and look again.

[ConsAreLiars]

253. There are carcinogens in tap water.

Why bring up pot and not H20 or the air in any city? Or Diet Pepsi? Or perfume? Obviously, bringing up pot in that context has more to do with some personal agenda than anything based in reality. You are now at 250 replies, most of which are people trying give you a clue and your refusals to accept same. Too bad.

[usregimechange]

255. We should bring up those things and I have many times.

and you know what? No one on DU disagreed with me, accused me of being a DEA agent, etc. What is the difference?

[ConsAreLiars]

270. If you are trying to argue that there is no real difference between pot

water, then comparing pot to meth is a rather poor start. If you have been compared to a DEA agent (I don't know that - I haven't read the whole useless thread), then you might look up "Harry Anslinger" in Google. You'll find your anser there.

[usregimechange]

279. I was comparing the reaction to what I have wrote to the reaction

you, for example, would have likely gave me for posting information about how air pollution is unhealthy. I then asked, what is the difference?

[ConsAreLiars]

286. You might want to consider a brain transplant (n/t)

[usregimechange]

290. That was harsh, do you mind if I ask if you smoke pot?

[ConsAreLiars]

306. I'll say this much.

I drink water, breathe the air, eat peanut butter and meat. All dangerous cacinogens. Why did you add a reference to pot onto a few pics of brain dysfunction associated with speed? A puzzling irrelevancy that says more about your agenda than anything else. Why don't you explain that great "leap" that made gibberish of your original point, if you had one?

[usregimechange]

310. You didn't answer my question, how come?

[nonconformist]

314. Maybe because it's none of your damn business. nt

[usregimechange]

317. But you told me about the water and the peanut butter! What is so

different about just another chemical?

[Mythsaje]

316. Because it has nothing to do with the subject at hand...

The question is rude, ill-considered, and prying. For starters.

If you notice, I didn't answer it either. It's NOYB.

[usregimechange]

320. Is peanut butter consumption a secret?

[Mythsaje]

326. I wasn't aware you were asking if people partook of

peanut butter.

My mistake.

[ConsAreLiars]

337. You're up to 340 posts and 2 recommendations by clueless morons

by now. Are you looking for an "idiot of the week" award? Congrats. You've achieved your lifelong dream. You've now asserted that both pot and water are carcinogens, and "bad," and therefore just like meth, and thus proven that you can't tell the difference. Excellent work!

[Mythsaje]

339. Well, there's always the possibility that ONE

of the "clueless morons," at least, was nominating the thread as a whole. It was rather entertaining, after all.

[Mythsaje]

294. Not specifically, no...

But I did point out that some of the tactics were remarkably similar...like the assumption that people who were going to the trouble to refute some of the statements here MUST be potheads.

I remember a guy on the CL boards who used to assume that anyone defending gay rights must themselves be gay.

He was pretty damn funny, actually.

[usregimechange]

296. It is not accurate to assume these things but I did suspect them

and I could have been wrong.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

311. Not according to neurobiology they don't

Cocaine and amphetamine produce similar effects , but they do so by different molecular mechanisms.

A person doing any one of these drugs would have a different scan and long term effects are very different.

If you want to make a realistic point on meth or coke you have to provide scans from those.

As it is now you've shown us what is happening to kids brains on Ritalin. I've always thought they were over prescribing that stuff.

[usregimechange]

321. They are, scary since the medical establishment is still on board

[Lone_Star_Dem]

323. So, you're point in the thread was really that Ritalin is over prescribed?

?

[Neil Lisst]

262. This thread establishes one thing.

And that one thing is -

There's nothing quite as self-assuredly annoying as a zealot for his cause.

[usregimechange]

272. And yet noting that air pollution is unhealthy would not get such

responses. What is the difference?

[Mythsaje]

275. Maybe because there's no evidence

to suggest that air pollution might actually have health benefits as well?

Just sayin'

[usregimechange]

282. I don't know but if I had the desire to defend my air pollution

consumption, I bet I could find some way to justify breathing as much as possible. I would certainly try. Anything but take a look at myself.

[Mythsaje]

289. You make a lot of unwarranted assumptions

on facts not in evidence...like the motivation many people may have for bringing up things to refute your statements and position.

Interesting. Is this a common trait of yours, or only one you evince when you're dealing with this particular subject?

[usregimechange]

298. Good question. In full disclosure this subject is more difficult for

me because of past events. I have to keep an eye on that and I thank you for your assistance in that area.

[Mythsaje]

309. I'm curious...

even if I were a pot smoker, would it automatically make my arguments invalid? If not, it's a meaningless question in the scheme of things, and, if so, it rather blinds you to a whole realm of thought you may not have yourself considered.

[usregimechange]

315. I agree but drug users do have a tendency to defend their use

even when it is wrecking their life. That is relavent like my history with it is relavent but I think addiction is a rather difficult thing to admit. If we can't admit our biases, that is when we are slaves to them.

[Mythsaje]

319. Use, abuse, and addiction

are very separate things. It's a dangerous tendency for the government and those who buy into their arguments to stick them all together as if someone who smokes a little pot now and then is practically the same as a strung-out meth head.

[usregimechange]

322. Good point, they are different but please don't view this as a

government anti-government thing. I oppose many thing this government is doing and has done on drug policy.

[Mythsaje]

328. I think it's important to define the differences

and distance oneself from the attitudes foisted on us by organizations and policy makers who have, as they say, a dog in the race.

[nonconformist]

303. Stop evading.

If I support gay rights, does that mean I'm gay?

If I support a woman's choice, does that mean I've had abortions? Or that I'm even a woman?

If I support racial equality, does that mean I'm a minority?

Enough with the condescending accusations when you are backed into a wall.

[usregimechange]

305. Never made one accusation, said I suspected, not knew, stop

mischaracterizing what I said.

[nonconformist]

312. *blam*

That was my head.

It just exploded.

[usregimechange]

318. Ok, that was funny. I expected something else.

[Neil Lisst]

287. again, you're begging the question

The problem is you and your slavish devotion to the narrow opinions you have, like many zealots. The topic matters not, it's your absolute sense of righteousness that is the point of this thread.

We get it. You're against drugs, and you think you have scientific data to support you. You're an advocate for a view of the world, and from the sound of it, you're a captive to that worldview.

I happen to believe that the most dangerous thing in the world is a zealot, someone who constantly tries to make their tiny little sliver of the world what everyone should have.

[usregimechange]

302. Yet, I doubt you would avoid taking a stand if your kid started

using meth. My guess is you might want to try and be a zealot yourself. Might even call it parenting.

[Mythsaje]

313. I sincerely hope that by the time

I have to worry about my kid using meth, I'd have sat him down and explained everything I know about the drug. Which is not an inconsiderable amount. And then I'd threaten him with his mother and he'd most definitely stop.

She still scares ME and we've been split up for about six years.

[Neil Lisst]

344. say good bye

This is the point at which I tell you that I don't intend to talk to you any more because I don't think you're rational, and you use the message board to feed your need to banter incessantly about whatever.

[Katherine Brengle]

264. Great post, but they tested it on MONKEYS? That's shameful. n/t

[obxhead]

269. I would like to see those same brains after they have quit....

using. Those scans never seem to come out.

Now I'll agree that powder of various kinds are very destructive, but at the same time we do not understand the human brain at all.

In depth research in this field must follow users in all stages..... prior use, user, and recovering user... without all three scans the data IMO is completely useless.

[usregimechange]

277. "completely useless" Like data on global warming to *

[Mythsaje]

281. I gotta give you props for tenacity, if nothing else...

Nearly everything you've said in this thread has been refuted either directly or indirectly and yet you persist.

As someone who's occasionally found myself on the opposite side of one of these kinds of debates, I gotta admit, by this time I'm usually SERIOUSLY re-examining my position.

[usregimechange]

284. and I hope I will continue to re-examine mine.

[obxhead]

297. refuted by whom?

That is my question....

Again I'm not saying these drugs are not destructive to your health, but at the same time there has been a propaganda campaign against them since the FDA was formed.

Once again, the various powders are not safe, but I doubt the data from our government is to be completely trusted

We've all heard of the crack user that goes on to be one of the best attorneys ever....

Again, I'm looking at the sources to be convinced of the validity of the scans.

[usregimechange]

301. Let us know what you find. Again, no such scans for pot...

it doesn't do, from what I have read, what the other two substances do as far as effecting brain functioning. I am fairly confident that meth and coc do have those effects.

[seabeyond]

343. years, a couple decades ago

i did meth for a couple years. per those scans you would think my brain would be in total non function. not going to argue with your picture, but from experience i can say while being on the drug i was still capable of putting one foot in front of the other. i still held down jobs and was a responsible junkie, lol lol paying all bills. on the outside surface, perfectly normal. so it is these posts that show a brain on drug and the brain being totally inactive that leads people to question, when we have been in actual experience.

[obxhead]

283. I'm checking your sources right now....

I'm a strong skeptic as we have had 4 presidents ask for detailed reports on MJ and each prez has intensified MJ laws after being told by said reports to decriminalize it....

Like I said, I'm checking the sources.... We've been lied to well before Nixon, why take all of it at face value.

[usregimechange]

285. Good for you. The drug laws in this country need changed, imo.

[obxhead]

325. I feel as if I'm being flamed....

and maybe I deserve it in more than a few ways...

at the same time I'll say that your brain on powder will lead you to a life of loss and sorrow....

At the same time there has been a destructive war on drug users and that the worst destruction has been to small time users that mean no harm (yes there are exceptions). US laws are archaic and obsessive to say the very least.

All I'm asking for...... well, I think we all have bigger worries at this point as the draft is just around that next corner.


So all of you can just go ahead and flame me... because thats what you need to be worrying about - a powder head....

[Mythsaje]

327. I think that the drug war was a test run

for some of the stuff we're seeing now. It gave them a pretty good idea what people would put up with in the name of the illusion of safety. And it WAS an illusion, since drugs are as plentiful and probably more accessible than they've ever been despite the draconian measures enacted to control them.

[obxhead]

329. thank you...

Abortion was the next huge distraction....

Powder is bad, I'll agree regardless of scans, but at the same time I doubt many of the sources that tell me so.

We have much bigger and much more important battles to be fighting.

[Mythsaje]

332. Oh, I won't disagree on the powders...

I've seen tweakers do some seriously weird shit for no discernable reason, and coke-heads lie for reasons that absolutely make no sense to me.

But trust the government to tell me the truth about any of it? Uh-uh. They told me I'd grow tits and be impotent if I smoked pot. So here I am, many years later, without even man-tits and two healthy boys sprung from my loins.

Go figure.

[ComerPerro]

324. (insert Bush joke here)

[Moochy]

336. Some newer studies on cannabinoids

Department of Pharmacology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. [e-mail]

The active compound in herbal cannabis, Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol, exerts all of its known central effects through the CB(1) cannabinoid receptor. Research on cannabinoid mechanisms has been facilitated by the availability of selective antagonists acting at CB(1) receptors and the generation of CB(1) receptor knockout mice. Particularly important classes of neurons that express high levels of CB(1) receptors are GABAergic interneurons in hippocampus, amygdala and cerebral cortex, which also contain the neuropeptides cholecystokinin. Activation of CB(1) receptors leads to inhibition of the release of amino acid and monoamine neurotransmitters. The lipid derivatives anandamide and 2-arachidonylglycerol act as endogenous ligands for CB(1) receptors (endocannabinoids). They may act as retrograde synaptic mediators of the phenomena of depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition or excitation in hippocampus and cerebellum. Central effects of cannabinoids include disruption of psychomotor behaviour, short-term memory impairment, intoxication, stimulation of appetite, antinociceptive actions (particularly against pain of neuropathic origin) and anti-emetic effects. Although there are signs of mild cognitive impairment in chronic cannabis users there is little evidence that such impairments are irreversible, or that they are accompanied by drug-induced neuropathology. A proportion of regular users of cannabis develop tolerance and dependence on the drug. Some studies have linked chronic use of cannabis with an increased risk of psychiatric illness, but there is little evidence for any causal link. The potential medical applications of cannabis in the treatment of painful muscle spasms and other symptoms of multiple sclerosis are currently being tested in clinical trials. Medicines based on drugs that enhance the function of endocannabinoids may offer novel therapeutic approaches in the future.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12764049&itool=iconfft&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_DocSum

Kraft B, Kress HG.

Abteilung fur Anasthesie und Allgemeine Intensivmedizin (B), Medizinische Universitat/AKH Wien, Wien, Austria. [e-mail]

The medical use of cannabis or cannabinoid compounds is controversial. Cannabinoids like the Delta(9)-THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) or the synthetic derivative Nabilone are available against cancer- and HIV-associated cachexia, nausea and vomiting. Over the last 20 years, the cannabinoid receptors CB(1) and CB(2) and their endogenous ligands have been found. The involvement of this endogenous cannabinoid signalling system in feeding, appetite, pain perception and immunomodulation could be demonstrated using animal and in vitro studies. Thus, the concern about immunosuppressive effects in humans using medical cannabinoid preparations grew. However, up to now most human studies have failed to demonstrate a well-defined and reproducible immunosuppressive cannabinoid-effect. Only the smoking of marijuana showed a significant local immunosuppression of the bactericidal activity of human alveolar macrophages.In animal studies, cannabinoids were identified as potent modulators of cytokine production, causing a shift from Th1 to Th2 cytokines. In consequence, a compromised cellular immunity was observed in these animals, resulting in enhanced tumor growth and reduced immunity to viral infections. In vitro, immunosuppressive effects were shown in all immune cells, but only at high micromolar cannabinoid concentrations not reached under normal clinical conditions. In conclusion, there is no evidence that cannabinoids induce a serious, relevant immunosuppression in humans, with the exception of marijuana-smoking which may affect local broncho-alveolar immunity.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15221424&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_DocSum

Oh and whaddya know? it's from nih.gov!!!

[Viva_La_Revolution]

345. My mom has MS, it took my brother and I 2 years to get her to toke up

She would wake up in the middle of the night with horrible spasms in her back and legs. After 2 years of this, we had to hand her the pipe in the middle of an episode. Two tokes and the spasm was over. We now make sure she has a little stuck back at all times. She only needs it a couple of times a month, but it's the only thing that works, and it works almost instantly.

[goodboy]

340. monkey study is monkey-shit. bullshit. flawed. monkeyshit

'Killer' Ecstasy claim was false
Research suggesting just one Ecstasy tablet could harm humans was based on a laboratory mistake, it has been revealed.
US experts found that four out of 10 monkeys died or were severely damaged after a small dose of a drug, at first believed to be Ecstasy.

In fact, a far more potent drug had been given to the animals by mistake.

The Johns Hopkins University team were forced to withdraw their paper from eminent research journal Science.

Experts have expressed amazement as to how the flawed research ever managed to get published in such a well-respected publication.

Obvious flaw

Colin Blakemore, a Professor of Physiology at Oxford University, said that the sheer number of primates left dead or severely damaged already seemed implausible.

He told the BBC: "Whatever we think about the toxicity of Ecstasy, 40% of people using it each weekend do not die."

The original study suggested that even a single episode of Ecstasy use might be enough to produce long-lasting drops in the brain's ability to produce the vital chemical dopamine.


Whatever we think about the toxicity of Ecstasy, 40% of people using it each weekend do not die
Professor Colin Blakemore, University of Oxford
Click to listen to full interview

This, they suggested might be enough to trigger conditions such as Parkinson's Disease.
The doses used on the monkeys, they said, were similar to those used by clubbers, Two of the monkeys died after drug treatment, and two could not continue in the trial due to severe brain damage.

The problem with the study came to light when the researchers, led by Professor George Ricaurte, tried to repeat it using Ecstasy in tablet form rather than in the form of an injection.

The results achieved bore no relation to the earlier findings.

Label error

In his retraction, published on the journal's website, Professor Ricaurte admitted that their Ecstasy sample had arrived at the laboratory in the same package as another, more potent form of amphetamine.

There had been a mix-up between the two, perhaps due to a labelling error, and the wrong drug had been given to the monkeys instead of Ecstasy.

Tests on brains taken from the monkeys which died confirmed the mistake.

However, Dr Ricaurte said: "This apparent labelling error does not call into question the results of multiple previous studies demonstrating the neurotoxic potential of MDMA (Ecstasy) in various animal species."

Professor Blakemore said that the error was likely to damage the credibility of other scientists carrying out perfectly valid experiments on the long-term effects of drugs such as Ecstasy.

He told the BBC: "It degrades respect for science and I think will have a very dangerous and damaging effect on the attitudes of young people towards scientific evidence and advice about drugs."

He said he was unsure how the normally-rigourous "peer-reviewing" procedure - in which other leading scientists are asked to look over research papers prior to publication looking for mistakes - had failed in this instance.

[Hubert Flottz]

347. (.) this is Rush's @$$ on Drugs!

(0) this is Rush's @$$ in jail!

[LincolnMcGrath]

348. OMG I finally got it. "This is your brain on drugs" It's about this thread

man, you were way ahead of the rest of us there. :rofl:

I get it now.

"This is your brain on drugs" was about your posts.

Oh man, I'm splitting a gut now. lol