 |
|
09-25-2011, 02:45 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iron River
Posts: 5,158
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket Aces
The first sentance, yes I do stand up for the right for people to use marijuana and the right to see the truth.
Your next point, most people think my position is so ludacris its a waste of time to engage? Thats how I felt about you and your extremist views, until I finally decided to post a direct response to your belittling.
As for what most people think, show me the stats Sundance. Can you provide that for 'most people think my position is ludacris' or is that just an extreme thought you conjured up in your head? Last I checked, polls across Canada showed the majority (by landslides), wanted marijuana legalized and wanted the people to have more say. If you can not provide these stats that back up your statement, I WILL, and your next project will be trying to find a way to talk yourself out of that one since you seem to have a hard time admitting your wrong.
So Sundance, either your against marijuana because its bad, your against marijuana because its illegal, or both. Which is it? If tomorrow it was made legal, what would your argument now be? What would replace the line of "I dont support illegal drugs" with?
If it was honestly made legal, would you turn around and support it because its legal? Why or why not? What about if alcohol was made illegal? Would you now be on the side of anybody that has ever had a drink is missing something out of their lives and must be severely hurt souls ect ect because its illegal and therefor must be poison?
Do you support the gun registry? Its the law and apparently you dont support anything thats illegal because of your anti-illegal views, that would include owning guns without having them registered, so I would have to assume your answer would be you do indeed support the gun registry.? Why?
As for personally attacking you, wow. Wow sundance. I respond to your personal attack on other posters and you try to turn that on me making me look like I had you targetted? My post towards you, hardly a personal attack, was my opinion about your extremist views on cannabis use, which 99% of the forum will disagree with you on.
But now im starting to believe you have a serious ego problem considering the fact you brought poaching into this and something about a quality trout fishery? What the heck do those have to do with this thread? Other than making yourself seem better. Your very amazing sundance, I applaude your incredibleness.
"My views do hold little tolerance for breaking laws, hurting families, harming kids and harming our fish and wildlife resources."
No, your views support not researching for yourself, believing the government when they are wrong and lying to you, supporting organized crime, taking control of peoples lives, brainwashing kids and your views on harming out fish and wildlife I couldn't care less about as of now, as that is not what this thread is about. |
X2
Pretty well sumarizes a lot of the toilet spinners he contributes to.
|
09-25-2011, 05:02 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 735
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
Last I checked, chronic fishing mid latency doesn't permanently alter brain chemistry.
|
Neither does THC.
Quote:
|
You need to know that kids in their teens are viewing these posts...
|
God forbid that they should actually have access to open discussion and argument so that they can make informed decisions.
Quote:
|
And like I mentioned in my previouse post, pot is #3 in reported drugs of concern for adults and youth only behind alcohol and tobacco.
|
Of concern to whom, specifically?
Quote:
|
We screen for over 20 addictive drugs on intake, so maybe you should consider reframing your statement to "Marijuana is less addictive than fishing for me".
|
I will bet that it can be shown easily to be less addictive than television...or facebook.
Quote:
|
The correlation and causation argument is weak (maybe had teeth 40 years ago) and modern research has tended to that.
|
Elucidate, please.
|
09-25-2011, 08:27 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 55
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundancefisher
My views do hold little tolerance for hurting families, harming kids
|
So you must be for bringing back alcohol prohibition also?
About 3 million violent crimes occur each year in which victims perceive the offender to have been drinking at the time of the offense.
Two-thirds of victims who suffered violence by an intimate (a current or former spouse, boyfriend, or girlfriend) reported that alcohol had been a factor.
Among spouse victims, 3 out of 4 incidents were reported to have involved an offender who had been drinking. Source: U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. National Crime Victimization Survey 2002.
the odds of any male-to-female physical aggression were more than 8 times (11 times) higher on days when men drank than on days of no alcohol consumption. The odds of severe male-to-female physical aggression were more than 11 times (11 times) higher on days of men’s drinking than on days of no drinking. Moreover, in both samples, over 60% of all episodes occurred within 2 hours of drinking by the male partner. Source: Fals-Stewart , William, James Golden, Julie A. Schumacher. Journal of Addictive Behaviors. 28, pages 1555-1574. Intimate partner violence and substance use: A longitudinal day-to-day examination. Research Institute on Addictions, University at Buffalo, State University of New York
|
09-25-2011, 09:09 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: At the base of a mountain beside a creek
Posts: 2,447
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toirtis
Neither does THC.
|
With all due respect. You are wrong. THC absolutely alters brain chemistry - temporarily in casual use and more permanently in chronic use, especially those their developmental years. THC does not permanently kill brain cells like chronic alcohol or meth use does but it can definitely mess up the wiring - the highest risk period for this happening are in youth under 18. We have cannabinoid receptors in our brains that THC binds to, similar to how opiods bind to our opiod receptors. Here's a very recent release on the topic:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0606131705.htm
[/QUOTE= God forbid that they should actually have access to open discussion and argument so that they can make informed decisions. [/QUOTE]
Agreed. That's why I feel the need to temper some of the blatant misinformation like pot isn't addictive.
[/QUOTE= Of concern to whom, specifically? [/QUOTE]
Our patients. Those who are using/abusing the substance.
[/QUOTE= I will bet that it can be shown easily to be less addictive than television...or facebook. [/QUOTE]
In our work we consider this a "minimizing statement" that sometimes helps a person when they are attempting to continue their use in good conscience and get the "spotlight" off of them so to speak. We call it the "get off my back" stage. This is when someone else has brought up concerns about a persons use - and that can be very uncomfortable for the person.
But to answer your question, of course there are other potentially more harmful behaviors - but we happen to be discussing THC.
Elucidate, please.[/QUOTE]
Cannabis and schizophrenia. A longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts.
Andréasson S, Allebeck P, Engström A, Rydberg U.
Source
Karolinska Institutet, Department of Social Medicine, Huddinge, Sweden.
Abstract
The association between level of cannabis consumption and development of schizophrenia during a 15-year follow-up was studied in a cohort of 45,570 Swedish conscripts. The relative risk for schizophrenia among high consumers of cannabis (use on more than fifty occasions) was 6.0 (95% confidence interval 4.0-8.9) compared with non-users. Persistence of the association after allowance for other psychiatric illness and social background indicated that cannabis is an independent risk factor for schizophrenia.
PMID: 2892048 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Publication Types, MeSH Terms
Probably one of the better reads on the subject from a neurobiological/psychiatry perspective:
http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledg...e_locale=en_GB
Last edited by Spidey; 09-25-2011 at 09:17 AM.
|
09-25-2011, 09:10 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundancefisher
Kids...another way drug pushers and users will get you to "try" it "once" will be to smooth over the risks and tell you something else is just as dangerous or more dangerous than doing drugs. Alcohol is more dangerous. Driving is more dangerous. Over eating is more dangerous...so why not "try" it "once". BUT BEWARE!
You should be very leery of these people as their sole goal is to justify what they do or they themselves are selling.
Getting you hooked or addicted is always their goal. They are vocal...often trying to bully and hit you with as much peer pressure as possible. Often they do it in a crowd to make them feel stronger...hoping a few other druggies are going to join in. They will hope to belittle and embarrass you into trying it or giving up telling others not to try it. They are street smart and know what to say to trick the gullible or those lacking self confidence to say no.
Please use common sense. You are who you are and you don't need drugs to feel better. If something is troubling you, if you have anything that has happened to you to make you feel bad enough to think about trying drugs...don't do it and talk to a doctor, policeman, teacher or a parent or grandparent that is not a part of what made you feel bad to begin with.
The best thing you can do for your mental health is take charge of it and control your own destiny...don't let a drug dealer control you! Please pass this on to your friends!
|
legalize pot and you need to be 22 years of age to buy it,,,, pot is not crack ,you need to remove your rose coloured glasses
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 09:17 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
With all due respect. You are wrong. THC absolutely alters brain chemistry - temporarily in casual use and more permanently in chronic use, especially those their developmental years. THC does not permanently kill brain cells like chronic alcohol or meth use does but it can definitely mess up the wiring - the highest risk period for this happening are in youth under 18. We have cannabinoid receptors in our brains that THC binds to, similar to how opiods bind to our opiod receptors. Here's a very recent release on the topic:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0606131705.htm
[/QUOTE= God forbid that they should actually have access to open discussion and argument so that they can make informed decisions. |
Agreed. That's why I feel the need to temper some of the blatant misinformation like pot isn't addictive.
[/QUOTE= Of concern to whom, specifically? [/QUOTE]
Our patients. Those who are using/abusing the substance.
[/QUOTE= I will bet that it can be shown easily to be less addictive than television...or facebook. [/QUOTE]
In our work we consider this a "minimizing statement" that sometimes helps a person when they are attempting to continue their use in good conscience and get the "spotlight" off of them so to speak. We call it the "get off my back" stage. This is when someone else has brought up concerns about a persons use - and that can be very uncomfortable for the person.
But to answer your question, of course there are other potentially more harmful behaviors - but we happen to be discussing THC.
Elucidate, please.[/QUOTE]
Cannabis and schizophrenia. A longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts.
Andréasson S, Allebeck P, Engström A, Rydberg U.
Source
Karolinska Institutet, Department of Social Medicine, Huddinge, Sweden.
Abstract
The association between level of cannabis consumption and development of schizophrenia during a 15-year follow-up was studied in a cohort of 45,570 Swedish conscripts. The relative risk for schizophrenia among high consumers of cannabis (use on more than fifty occasions) was 6.0 (95% confidence interval 4.0-8.9) compared with non-users. Persistence of the association after allowance for other psychiatric illness and social background indicated that cannabis is an independent risk factor for schizophrenia.
PMID: 2892048 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Publication Types, MeSH Terms[/QUOTE]
should not eat no more than three burgers a year ,causes cardiovascular disease
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 09:20 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
How many people out there right now is sucking back bacon and eggs ?
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 09:21 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: At the base of a mountain beside a creek
Posts: 2,447
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by great white whaler
How many people out there right now is sucking back bacon and eggs ?
|
It bears repeating 
In our work we consider this a "minimizing statement" that sometimes helps a person when they are attempting to continue their use in good conscience and get the "spotlight" off of them so to speak by counfounding the original argument with other variables. We call it the "get off my back" stage. This is when someone else has brought up concerns about a persons use - and that can be very uncomfortable for the person.
|
09-25-2011, 09:30 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 19,045
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket Aces
The first sentance, yes I do stand up for the right for people to use marijuana and the right to see the truth.
|
Hmmmm.... Firstly...everyone will agree that each one of us holds a few hot button topics that we see as black and white...no gray area. For instance...100% of AOF would agree abusing children is wrong. All AOF members that don't use illegal drugs will say it is wrong but some will think trying a different approach may hold cost savings for society. Maybe 99% was high...by my point was intended to say most think illegal drugs are bad. A fraction of drug users will admit it is wrong but they can not stop. The remainder of the drug users just try to attack and justify their use to themselves and to others. So when you said my views are extremist because one of my hot button topics is illegal drugs...I simply checked to see if it was truly my stance on illegal drugs that has you riled so.
So my stand on illegal drugs is as follows:
It is illegal. It is bad for you. It is bad for society. Promoting drugs to children is the lowest of the lows. Attempting to argue others should first is appalling. Attempting to bully people into trying is sick.
If society decided to try deregulating pot...it would be a mistake. We have seen links that show a sharp increase in use in Europe. We have seen links that show it is a gateway drug (read the literature...while not all do try something harder...some do and increasing users only increases this). In Europe...pot is still actually illegal...in Holland they just choose to not enforce. The drugs are still brought in by gangs. Gangs still use pot for business building. We have heard from members in the trenches dealing with drugs that pot is a big problem. Arguing alcohol and pot are the same thing is a stretch just like alcohol...driving under the influence of pot kills. How many pot users drive while stoned? Increase the number of users...how many are now driving stoned?
Having someone complain online that I am mean and nasty because illegal drugs is a hot button topic...and they are a user...well cry me a river.
Someone on the forum that is not a user...thinks trying deregulation is worthwhile...now there is a reasonable person to talk clear headed with. It is their right to say it is fair to try. I don't attack them personally...however the information I see does not make it worth while... So fine we agree to disagree. No harm no foul in a debate.
But any drug user...telling me it is fine for them to use...for kids to use...for others to use...try it before you knock it...I am horrible because I don't use...again cry me a river.
As for other silly questions.
1) Long gun registry. Not needed. There was never any sign long guns are used much in crime. Get rid of it. For the cost...use some of the money to go after drug dealers...that are in business because users can't quit. Put some money into rehab to get it into users thick skull that they are the ONLY cause of illegal drugs in Canada. Without the buyers...there is no market... Because of drug users most violent crime is still happening.
2) Alcohol...that is a debate that is long gone. Society has come a long ways in putting in laws to curb excessive usage. Drunk driving is illegal. The component alcohol is well known and does not have a large family of harmful sub groups like illegal drugs. The saddest thing is some friends I have known when sad and depressed turned to alcohol. In bars they got targeted by drug dealers. They get a bit of pot...then coke. One got meth and is long gone. The one of coke thankfully came back from the dark side...although pretty beat up. I also have some very sad experiences with alcohol abuse growing up. I have therefore been up close and personal with both drug and alcohol abuse. I definitely have not lived a sheltered life. Of the pot users...most of them have not come anywhere close to seeing the other seedy side of the business and societal problems they support.
3) If it was made legal would I now be on side? I would say time would tell. In Europe long term problems are being associated with increased drug usage. I would be very skeptical until proven wrong...but the results would certainly have to be different that we are seeing elsewhere. Is Canada different in such a way the problems of increasing drug usage due to deregulation will not harm individuals, families, society...? I don't think so. Human nature is human nature.
4) As for personal attacks. I have not attacked anyone personally on this thread. If it was taken that way by someone I apologize. I have attacked their right to use illegal drugs. I attacked their support of kids using drugs. I have attacked their attempts to get others to try...and I have attacked their arguments to say why they have a right to use illegal drugs. If you were smoking pot at the time...maybe you missed that fundamental difference between some people clearly attacking me personally for saying drug are wrong. It is not about ego...it is about the fundamental principles of right versus wrong.
5) Will I ever accept current illegal drugs in society. Most of societies ills in our lifetime is attributed to illegal drugs and the activities around it. The only blame to be placed is on the users with a few rare exceptions but the general users are the only cause for the exceptions also getting into trouble because they build and sustain the market. Decriminalizing pot will not make this crime go away. It just builds a larger base of potential users for the harder drugs. Crime lords will be thrilled to have pot become a legal drug. When alcohol became legal...crime lords said "crap" cause there wasn't one type of alcohol made illegal...all alcohol was made legal. All alcohol has the same effects. Drugs have a wide range of types from more benign to highly deadly. For any policy on pot to make sense from a crime argument point...all drugs need to be made legal. That would be so wrong. Looking at the big picture...if all users stopped...crime would plummet...drug funded terrorism would cease...trillions of dollars in world tax spending could fix world hunger and water shortages and likely vaccinate kids everywhere. As for research...read the links on all the posts..not just mine.
|
09-25-2011, 09:31 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
It bears repeating
In our work we consider this a "minimizing statement" that sometimes helps a person when they are attempting to continue their use in good conscience and get the "spotlight" off of them so to speak by counfounding the original argument with other variables. We call it the "get off my back" stage. This is when someone else has brought up concerns about a persons use - and that can be very uncomfortable for the person. |
i feel comfortable in my skin, moderation is key ,i jog walk and exercise daily and no junk food i have never felt so good in me life as i do now
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 09:36 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 24,070
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket Aces
The first sentance, yes I do stand up for the right for people to use marijuana and the right to see the truth.
My post towards you, hardly a personal attack, was my opinion about your extremist views on cannabis use, which 99% of the forum will disagree with you on.
.
|
The RIGHT to use it? Just which RIGHT are you talking about? I dont know of any right that allows LAW to be broken.
And your numbers are very wrong, 99% of the forum do not advocate breaking the law, and are not all pot heads.
Are the guys doing drugs life so bad they have to introduce toxins into their blood just to forget their petty problems? Seek help if it that bad.
There are many in the forum that hate that garbage and just will not speak up. As much as the druggies would love to unite and spew forth their garbage agenda about legalizing that sh1t, the rest of us would rather see you all locked up, from grower to consumer and everywhere in between.
I would gladly pay double tax to get the entire f'ing bunch thrown in 6x8 cells.
My best advice for you, is gather up all your paraphanalia and buddies, go throw a protest in front of police stations and government offices, blowing green smoke, loudly proclaiming "it is my right to smoke, ingest, inject, snort or shove illegal drugs up your ass" if that is your thing, see how that gets you.
__________________
Only dead fish go with the flow. The rest use their brains in life.
Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck
I wasn't thinking far enough ahead for an outcome, I was ranting. By definition, a rant doesn't imply much forethought..... 
|
09-25-2011, 09:37 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,593
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by great white whaler
legalize pot and you need to be 22 years of age to buy it,,,, pot is not crack ,you need to remove your rose coloured glasses
|
22 but you can drive at 15, and go to war and vote at 18?
if we trust people to vote,drive and fight for this country pot or alcohol should be no different,make all legal ages 18.
|
09-25-2011, 10:02 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: At the base of a mountain beside a creek
Posts: 2,447
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by great white whaler
i feel comfortable in my skin, moderation is key ,i jog walk and exercise daily and no junk food i have never felt so good in me life as i do now
|
And that sir, is the key right there. Most of our patients seeking treatment for addiction have lost that balance and their life revolves around a drug and managing the legal, financial, family, mental health, phyical health and financial problems it has created. For them, moderation with a drug is no longer in the cards and they need to move toward abstinence in order to restore balance.
That's my beef with some of the above posts touting the benign nature of THC. Sure, for some, there may be no or very few negative consequences to their use at this time - but does that give them the authority to blanketly say it's not harmful? Addiction is a tricky thing. It's not like a skin rash that suddenly appears over night. Often, it's a nearly unnoticeable slow erosion that gradually sets in while those major life areas get more compromised.
Anyone who has made the decision to stop drinking or smoking for similar reasons can probably relate. Actually most drugs share a similar path to addiction:
No Use
Experimentation
Social Use (casual use - with friends at parties, etc.)
Regular Use (still social in context but now there is predictability to one's use)
Misuse (this is when the one's reasons for use change from social to managing stress, avoiding conflict, or self-medicating in other forms)
Abuse/Dependency - Attempts at controlling use fail, presense of withdrawal symptoms, treatment required
Heck, I bet some of us can put our use of the AO message board on this spectrum somewhere!
I need to restate that not everyone who uses a drug will become addicted but we do know that prevention strategies like delaying first experimentation are key to ensuring people don't stub their toe on a substance.
Last edited by Spidey; 09-25-2011 at 10:23 AM.
|
09-25-2011, 10:03 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by eastcoast
22 but you can drive at 15, and go to war and vote at 18?
if we trust people to vote,drive and fight for this country pot or alcohol should be no different,make all legal ages 18.
|
driving at 15 is to young
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 10:09 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 19,045
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
And that sir, is the key right there. Most of our patients seeking treatment for addiction have lost that balance and their life revolves around a drug and managing the legal, financial, family, mental health, physical health and financial problems it has created. For them, moderation with a drug is no longer in the cards and they need to move toward abstinence in order to restore balance.
That's my beef with some of the above posts touting the benign nature of THC. Sure, for some, there may be no or very few negative consequences to their use at this time - but does that give them the authority to blanketly say it's not harmful? Addiction is a tricky thing. It's not like a skin rash that suddenly appears over night. Often, it's a nearly unnoticeable slow erosion that gradually sets in while those major life areas get more compromised.
Anyone who has made the decision to stop drinking for similar reasons can probably relate. Actually most drugs share a similar path to addiction:
No Use
Experimentation
Social Use (casual use - with friends at parties, etc.)
Regular Use (still social in context but now there is predictability to one's use)
Misuse (this is when the one's reasons for use change from social to managing stress, avoiding conflict, or self-medicating in other forms)
Abuse/Dependency - Attempts at controlling use fail, presence of withdrawal symptoms, treatment required
I need to restate that not everyone who uses a drug will become addicted but we do know that prevention strategies like delaying first experimentation are key to ensuring people don't stub their toe on a substance.
|
Spidey...if anyone needs applause for a post...it is yourself. You have the facts first hand that can not be disputed. For kids...and adults a like. Regardless of the other links in these posts...you are someone here on the front line. You are helping every day people that have gone down the wrong path of drugs to change direction and either crawl out of the gutter or stop from falling all the way into the gutter.
People who read this thread...should recognize people like you trying to give the real facts versus the pot heads who try and convince you to try drugs or support drugs or minimize their problems as what they are... People that made bad choices and are now trying to trick you into falling into the same trap. PEOPLE SHOULD NOT BE TRICKED!
Spidey...I have seen first hand the pain and suffering families go through dealing with drug users/addicts. It is a painful process to watch and you should be commended for trying to fix society...and post your facts on this thread to counter the druggie attitude that is infecting our youth.
Keep up the good work!
Last edited by Sundancefisher; 09-25-2011 at 10:20 AM.
|
09-25-2011, 10:10 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 24,070
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by great white whaler
driving at 15 is to young
|
BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA!!!
Ayfs?
You go on about how responsible every drug user is, no matter the age, then pigeon hole 15 year old drivers?
Lol!
__________________
Only dead fish go with the flow. The rest use their brains in life.
Originally Posted by Twisted Canuck
I wasn't thinking far enough ahead for an outcome, I was ranting. By definition, a rant doesn't imply much forethought.....
|
09-25-2011, 10:11 AM
|
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,593
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by great white whaler
driving at 15 is to young
|
that's true aswell but I don't make the rules.
|
09-25-2011, 10:56 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 19,045
|
|
|
09-25-2011, 11:09 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 390
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundancefisher
|
Whatever Sundance. It is easy to find articles with good and bad for everything. Here's a new article for your viewing pleasure.
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/876346-c...home_multiline
|
09-25-2011, 11:25 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken07AOVette
BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA!!!
Ayfs?
You go on about how responsible every drug user is, no matter the age, then pigeon hole 15 year old drivers?
Lol!
|
i speak my own personal use,,and would never give teenagers pot,,u have been looking down the cut line to long already,,,,,KIDS ,,,PLEASE DO NOT SMOKE POT . i am on prescription pot ,which makes it legal for me.
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 12:24 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 245
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
With all due respect. You are wrong. THC absolutely alters brain chemistry - temporarily in casual use and more permanently in chronic use, especially those their developmental years. THC does not permanently kill brain cells like chronic alcohol or meth use does but it can definitely mess up the wiring - the highest risk period for this happening are in youth under 18. We have cannabinoid receptors in our brains that THC binds to, similar to how opiods bind to our opiod receptors. Here's a very recent release on the topic:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0606131705.htm
[/QUOTE= God forbid that they should actually have access to open discussion and argument so that they can make informed decisions. |
Agreed. That's why I feel the need to temper some of the blatant misinformation like pot isn't addictive.
[/QUOTE= Of concern to whom, specifically? [/QUOTE]
Our patients. Those who are using/abusing the substance.
[/QUOTE= I will bet that it can be shown easily to be less addictive than television...or facebook. [/QUOTE]
In our work we consider this a "minimizing statement" that sometimes helps a person when they are attempting to continue their use in good conscience and get the "spotlight" off of them so to speak. We call it the "get off my back" stage. This is when someone else has brought up concerns about a persons use - and that can be very uncomfortable for the person.
But to answer your question, of course there are other potentially more harmful behaviors - but we happen to be discussing THC.
Elucidate, please.[/QUOTE]
Cannabis and schizophrenia. A longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts.
Andréasson S, Allebeck P, Engström A, Rydberg U.
Source
Karolinska Institutet, Department of Social Medicine, Huddinge, Sweden.
Abstract
The association between level of cannabis consumption and development of schizophrenia during a 15-year follow-up was studied in a cohort of 45,570 Swedish conscripts. The relative risk for schizophrenia among high consumers of cannabis (use on more than fifty occasions) was 6.0 (95% confidence interval 4.0-8.9) compared with non-users. Persistence of the association after allowance for other psychiatric illness and social background indicated that cannabis is an independent risk factor for schizophrenia.
PMID: 2892048 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Publication Types, MeSH Terms
Probably one of the better reads on the subject from a neurobiological/psychiatry perspective:
http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledg...e_locale=en_GB[/QUOTE]
I expect more from a professional
quotes right from your article.
There was a marked increase in receptor activity in those areas that had been decreased at the outset of the study, an indication that while chronic cannabis smoking causes downregulation of CB1 receptors, the damage is reversible with abstinence.
So no permanent damage.
I will not disagree with the statement that use by adolescents can be disastrous. But the fact is healthy adults can use all they want with no alterd brain chemistry.
|
09-25-2011, 01:40 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Trinity bay newfoundland
Posts: 2,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonka
Agreed. That's why I feel the need to temper some of the blatant misinformation like pot isn't addictive.
[/QUOTE= Of concern to whom, specifically?
|
Our patients. Those who are using/abusing the substance.
[/QUOTE= I will bet that it can be shown easily to be less addictive than television...or facebook. [/QUOTE]
In our work we consider this a "minimizing statement" that sometimes helps a person when they are attempting to continue their use in good conscience and get the "spotlight" off of them so to speak. We call it the "get off my back" stage. This is when someone else has brought up concerns about a persons use - and that can be very uncomfortable for the person.
But to answer your question, of course there are other potentially more harmful behaviors - but we happen to be discussing THC.
Elucidate, please.[/QUOTE]
Cannabis and schizophrenia. A longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts.
Andréasson S, Allebeck P, Engström A, Rydberg U.
Source
Karolinska Institutet, Department of Social Medicine, Huddinge, Sweden.
Abstract
The association between level of cannabis consumption and development of schizophrenia during a 15-year follow-up was studied in a cohort of 45,570 Swedish conscripts. The relative risk for schizophrenia among high consumers of cannabis (use on more than fifty occasions) was 6.0 (95% confidence interval 4.0-8.9) compared with non-users. Persistence of the association after allowance for other psychiatric illness and social background indicated that cannabis is an independent risk factor for schizophrenia.
PMID: 2892048 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Publication Types, MeSH Terms
Probably one of the better reads on the subject from a neurobiological/psychiatry perspective:
http://www.cambridge.org/gb/knowledg...e_locale=en_GB[/QUOTE]
I expect more from a professional
quotes right from your article.
There was a marked increase in receptor activity in those areas that had been decreased at the outset of the study, an indication that while chronic cannabis smoking causes downregulation of CB1 receptors, the damage is reversible with abstinence.
So no permanent damage.
I will not disagree with the statement that use by adolescents can be disastrous. But the fact is healthy adults can use all they want with no alterd brain chemistry.[/QUOTE]
Brain stimulation ,sharpins me skills
__________________
wayne : If it didn't hurt than why are you crying ? ;o(
|
09-25-2011, 02:08 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 19,045
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tommyguitar
|
No one said for the right medical reason...cannabis is not a useful tool. However...pots heads all scream it is for medicinal reasons...calms their nerves. Give me a break and cry me a river. It is insulting that some kid or adult says they need it to feel better or the laughable excuse of it "opens my mind and makes me more creative"...compared to someone dying of cancer or being treated for cancer. It is black and white. Illegal drugs are wrong. Period.
But nice article...shows a use to help society...versus pot heads assisting in ruining society.
|
09-25-2011, 03:10 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: At the base of a mountain beside a creek
Posts: 2,447
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonka
I expect more from a professional
quotes right from your article.
There was a marked increase in receptor activity in those areas that had been decreased at the outset of the study, an indication that while chronic cannabis smoking causes downregulation of CB1 receptors, the damage is reversible with abstinence.
So no permanent damage.
I will not disagree with the statement that use by adolescents can be disastrous. But the fact is healthy adults can use all they want with no alterd brain chemistry.
|
Sorry I'm not up to your professional expectations.
Just so you know there are relatively few drugs that will cause permanent brain damage. The three most common drugs that will outright kill brain cells are alcohol, meth, and ecstacy. Not in that group are heroin, pot, and cocaine. Does that make them less problematic? Nope. I guess technically you can hole up in an opium den for a year and not have it impact your "health" either but the fact remains while people are actively using a substance, they are altering their brain chemistry in that moment and are still potentially at risk for negative consequences from use. And yes, the consequences of THC alterning brain chemistry do drop from regular use in adolescence to adulthood - but not completely. Young adults into their 30s are also susceptable, especially if they have markers pointing to potential mental health concerns (i.e. history of MH in the family, childhood abuse, trauma or neglect, attachment disorders, trouble in school and with the law in childhood to name a few.)
And like I mentioned in a previous post (pot as the blessing and the curse drug), most adults we see for THC in our clinic come to us because they have a lot of regrets associated with use, feel demotivated, are frustrated they are chemically dependent. They don't want to travel for fear of not having their supply, they always have to plan ahead around it's use when doing things like visiting family, meeting new people, work, etc. One of the more interesting ways I've heard THC described in my career is that it's like you are tethered to a pole with a bungee cord. With a reliance on pot you can only walk out so far and the further you want to go the more difficult it becomes to exist without it, so you go back to where its more comfortable for you - hence the regrets some folks have.
Now, you may have noticed I'm not putting myself on either side of the legalization debate. In my profession, I don't have to. People come to us for treatment of both illegal and legal drugs. My job is to treat them and to educate people. Our motto is "it's not my job to tell you what to put in your body, it's my responsibility to educate you on any drug you are considering putting in your body." That said, being that alcohol and tobacco are still relatively legal to acquire, they are our number one and two drugs of concern repectively. Next to that is pot, and accodring to policy analysts, this this in large part is because of the grey that is currently being debated on this thread.
Last edited by Spidey; 09-25-2011 at 03:18 PM.
|
09-25-2011, 03:24 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 19,045
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
Sorry I'm not up to your professional expectations.
Just so you know there are relatively few drugs that will cause permanent brain damage. The three most common drugs that will outright kill brain cells are alcohol, meth, and ecstacy. Not in that group are heroin, pot, and cocaine. Does that make them less problematic? Nope. I guess technically you can hole up in an opium den for a year and not have it impact your "health" either but the fact remains while people are actively using a substance, they are altering their brain chemistry in that moment and are still potentially at risk for negative consequences from use. And yes, the consequences of THC altering brain chemistry do drop from regular use in adolescence to adulthood - but not completely. Young adults into their 30s are also susceptible, especially if they have markers pointing to potential mental health concerns (i.e. history of MH in the family, childhood abuse, trauma or neglect, attachment disorders, trouble in school and with the law in childhood to name a few.)
And like I mentioned in a previous post (pot as the blessing and the curse drug), most adults we see for THC in our clinic come to us because they have a lot of regrets associated with use, feel demotivated, are frustrated they are chemically dependent. They don't want to travel for fear of not having their supply, they always have to plan ahead around it's use when doing things like visiting family, meeting new people, work, etc. One of the more interesting ways I've heard THC described in my career is that it's like you are tethered to a pole with a bungee cord. With a reliance on pot you can only walk out so far and the further you want to go the more difficult it becomes to exist without it, so you go back to where its more comfortable for you - hence the regrets some folks have.
Now, you may have noticed I'm not putting myself on either side of the legalization debate. In my profession, I don't have to. People come to us for treatment of both illegal and legal drugs. My job is to treat them and to educate people. Our motto is "it's not my job to tell you what to put in your body, it's my responsibility to educate you on any drug you are considering putting in your body." That said, being that alcohol and tobacco are still relatively legal to acquire, they are our number one and two drugs of concern respectively. Next to that is pot, and according to policy analysts, this this in large part is because of the gray that is currently being debated on this thread. |
Stop with the facts. Some people don't want to hear it. It makes them angry.
You have made very interesting points from the perspective of being on the front lines seeing the problems manifest itself in many people over the years.
You provided some of the problems associated with pot use...and the fears of the users.
Some pot users say they can quit anytime. I believe that is the case for some...but from your experience...are there some people that do get addicted to pot? Rely on it for social reasons? Coping reasons? Jobs are being lost in some sectors due to use.
Is it true a drug test for pot use is hair testing?
|
09-25-2011, 03:27 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 245
|
|
Spidey I was not attacking you. The fact is humans can a do become addicted to anything if there predisposed to it. There is now rehab clinics for video game addicts, study of the neurotransmitters of those afflicted shows altered brain chemistry. The fact is millions of people are hooked on caffeine a benign items society deems harmless and safe yet there no denying dependance is quickly formed.
Society is to blame, if a person is having a hard time we need to coddle them. People want the good life but don't want to work hard to get it. Escaping that reality is achieved through whatever mechanism a person wants to blame. whether a person blames the drugs, booze, nicotine, games ect the fact remains they choose to **** around and not put the work in to get ahead.
|
09-25-2011, 03:33 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 245
|
|
the easiest and widest used test for drug use in a urine test. Pot will show up for as long as 30 days. The opiates will typically be metabolized and not show up after 2 days. Cocaine and similar drugs will be gone around the same 2 day mark. The main use for the hair analysis is used to give a long term picture generally the past 90 days. Hair analysis is a record of the last 90 days or so.
|
09-25-2011, 03:35 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 19,045
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonka
the easiest and widest used test for drug use in a urine test. Pot will show up for as long as 30 days. The opiates will typically be metabolized and not show up after 2 days. Cocaine and similar drugs will be gone around the same 2 day mark. The main use for the hair analysis is used to give a long term picture generally the past 90 days. Hair analysis is a record of the last 90 days or so.
|
Cool. I can't imagine the work and study that goes on for testing of illegal drugs in the sporting industry. Especially with the designer steroids etc.
|
09-25-2011, 03:41 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 245
|
|
the world of sport testing is a different story. Drugs are developed that have exceptionally short half lives and as a result test cannot catch them. The drug test world is a reactionary one, they can only test for a drug once they know about abuse of said drug. The Olympics are great example of the lengths and resources some country are willing to use to cheat.
|
09-25-2011, 03:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: At the base of a mountain beside a creek
Posts: 2,447
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundancefisher
Stop with the facts. Some people don't want to hear it. It makes them angry.
You have made very interesting points from the perspective of being on the front lines seeing the problems manifest itself in many people over the years.
You provided some of the problems associated with pot use...and the fears of the users.
Some pot users say they can quit anytime. I believe that is the case for some...but from your experience...are there some people that do get addicted to pot? Rely on it for social reasons? Coping reasons? Jobs are being lost in some sectors due to use.
Is it true a drug test for pot use is hair testing?
|
I can safely answer "yes" to all your questions, Sun. In our clinic, those that seek treatment primarily for pot come with a lot of regrets like I mentioned but are also self-medicating conditions like social anxiety, depression, job or relationship stress, etc. However, this also can be said for why people seek treatment for alcohol and other drugs as well.
Because of our work, I'm pretty comfortable working in the grey area of legalization or not - no different than a trauma surgeon working in a war zone - whether he has an opinion if a war is justified or not, his job is to tend to the victims.
However, one area I refuse to acknowledge as grey is whether this drug is addictive or not. It absolutely is. Or I should say, it absolutelty can be if you let it.
Edit: yes, hair testing is a common test for THC. However, THC gets stored in adipose tissue and as a result tends to linger in the body for up to a month in some cases vs. getting peed or sweated out in 72 hours like alcohol.
Fun fact: when people enter THC treatment they often have using dreams after approx. one month of abstinence. Reason: that's when the last bit of THC is leaving the body and around the same time cannabinoid receptors start to regenerate on their own.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:02 PM.
|
Linear Mode
