• Top Anti Drug Researcher is for the Legalization of Marijuana
    20 replies, posted
[quote]For 30 years, Donald Tashkin has studied the effects of marijuana on lung function. His work has been funded by the vehemently anti-marijuana National Institute on Drug Abuse, which has long sought to demonstrate that marijuana causes lung cancer. After 3 decades of anti-drug research, here's what Tashkin has to say about marijuana laws: "Early on, when our research appeared as if there would be a negative impact on lung health, I was opposed to legalization because I thought it would lead to increased use and that would lead to increased health effects," Tashkin says. "But at this point, I'd be in favor of legalization. I wouldn't encourage anybody to smoke any substances. But I don't think it should be stigmatized as an illegal substance. Tobacco smoking causes far more harm. And in terms of an intoxicant, alcohol causes far more harm." [McClatchy] We've been told a thousand times that marijuana destroys your lungs, that it's 5 times worse than cigarettes, and on and on. Yet here is Donald Tashkin, literally the top expert in the world when it comes to marijuana and lung health, telling us it's time to legalize marijuana. His views are shaped not by ideology, but rather by the 30 years he spent studying the issue. He didn't expect the science to come out in favor of marijuana, but that's what happened and he's willing to admit it. Here's the study that really turned things around: UCLA's Tashkin studied heavy marijuana smokers to determine whether the use led to increased risk of lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or COPD. He hypothesized that there would be a definitive link between cancer and marijuana smoking, but the results proved otherwise. "What we found instead was no association and even a suggestion of some protective effect," says Tashkin, whose research was the largest case-control study ever conducted. Prejudice against marijuana and smoking in general runs so deep for many people that it just seems inconceivable that marijuana could actually reduce the risk of lung cancer. But that's what the data shows and it not only demolishes a major tenet of popular anti-pot propaganda, but also points towards a potentially groundbreaking opportunity to develop cancer cures through marijuana research. Over and over again, all the bad things we've been told about marijuana are revealed to be not only false, but often the precise opposite of the truth. So the next time someone tells you that marijuana is worse for your lungs than cigarettes, you might want to mention that the world's leading expert on that subject happens to be a supporter of legalization.[/quote] source: [url]http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2009/jun/03/top_antidrug_researcher_changes[/url] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6pBw0bgmgA&feature=player_embedded[/media]
It's not like we didn't already know this, but it's great to see a top anti-drug researcher back it up. [editline]10th April 2011[/editline] also id post this in the news section, it'll get a lot more feedback.
Is the source really true? I mean, it was made in june 09.
I don't see why it wouldn't. I only just found it though.
The UKs top drug researcher was fired for saying that ecstasy was less dangerous than horse riding...
[QUOTE=Doozle;29086635]The UKs top drug researcher was fired for saying that ecstasy was less dangerous than horse riding...[/QUOTE] Prof. David Nutt, he's part of some independent research institute thing now
Fuck mainstream science :(
[QUOTE=Doozle;29086635]The UKs top drug researcher was fired for saying that ecstasy was less dangerous than horse riding...[/QUOTE] If you're talking about the same one I think you are, he said a lot of things that lead up to him being fired. He also agreed that marijuana did not lead to cancer. If its a different one, let me know? :D
[QUOTE=InvalidUsername;29096374]Fuck mainstream science :([/QUOTE] Mainstream scientists have been saying for decades that drugs aren't nearly as harmful as they're made out to be. The anti-drug movement is all politics.
fuck politics makes me sick
Hahaha awesome. It's only a matter of time before this shit gets legalized.
I would honestly be surprised if it happened in my lifetime, at least in Britain.
[QUOTE=Doozle;29086635]The UKs top drug researcher was fired for saying that ecstasy was less dangerous than horse riding...[/QUOTE] Equasy.
Well in Canada apparently in 90 days (because of the election and such) they're re-evaluating the legality of marijuana, and for a few weeks it will be 100% legal until they find out what they want to do with it. But the chance if it being legalized (in BC atleast) are greatly increased as of late
[QUOTE=Paul McCartney;29220847]Well in Canada apparently in 90 days (because of the election and such) they're re-evaluating the legality of marijuana, and for a few weeks it will be 100% legal until they find out what they want to do with it. But the chance if it being legalized (in BC atleast) are greatly increased as of late[/QUOTE] Woah, what? Seriously? Time to pay attention to Canadian politics again. Hello from Ontario!
then im moving to canada and never coming back.
Yah, some stonergirl asked me for a smoke and we talked about it for like half an hour, low and behold it's true. So yes, move up here, you'll regret not doing it sooner [editline]16th April 2011[/editline] I.E. cops catch us blazing and go "don't stumble onto a busy street or something, be safe"
[QUOTE=Prismatex;29119163]Mainstream scientists have been saying for decades that drugs aren't nearly as harmful as they're made out to be. The anti-drug movement is all politics.[/QUOTE] Indeed, it is a shame that the people who are in control have such little relevant knowledge to what they are controlling and are so quick to kneejerk and base legislation on assumption. Not just with drugs, with technology laws too as in those related to the internet. Why should people who don't even know what the internet is be able to discuss and pass laws relating to it? Why can't we just let people with relevant medical knowledge and expertise control the drug laws instead of have them as part of an advisory board that just has it's suggestions and well researched advice tossed aside in favour of laissez-faire shit? [editline]17th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=TrouserDemon;29125275]I would honestly be surprised if it happened in my lifetime, at least in Britain.[/QUOTE] It's all a horrible kneejerking mess over here, keep it as it is because... it is. Our government has some awesome reasoning skills
Any bets that companies that do mandatory drug tests still won't allow those "caught" with it, so to speak, have the job? Even if it's legalized, I mean.
A legalization of marijuana would likely phase out drug testing of marijuana in most businesses. It likely would not be immediate, but more gradual. Most businesses that perform drug tests do it to see if you'd be reliable. I think there is a better word, but they drug test because if you get caught: it could hurt the company's image (imagine teacher), it will hurt the company in that they'd be a man down and need to quickly rush in a replacement, want a "clean" work place, and they want to avoid people with criminal tendencies. I think there should be legal protection for medical marijuana users.
[QUOTE=Mr. Bleak;29228051]Any bets that companies that do mandatory drug tests still won't allow those "caught" with it, so to speak, have the job? Even if it's legalized, I mean.[/QUOTE] Life story of a stoner.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.