Alcohol is better for you than marijuana because the government tells me so :downs:
[QUOTE=Clunj;32427243]Alcohol is better for you than marijuana because the government tells me so :downs:[/QUOTE]
It's not only the government, in fact it's not the government. If people wanted marijuana to be legal it would probably be.
[QUOTE=Contag;32422789]I think cannabis has significantly more medical applications than alcohol, and for that reason alone, it should be available to doctors (in extracted pill form).[/QUOTE]
..There is absolutely no conclusive, solid evidence to suggest that taking cannabis (and by that, i hope you mean TCH not cannabis) is beneficial to humans. Allowing doctors to prescribe it to patients would be an unbelievably reckless thing to do, as it could turn out to cause more deaths, or be harmful in a way that outweighs its benefits.
Until there is conclusive medical proof and years of human testing, i completely disagree with you
[editline]22nd September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Clunj;32427243]Alcohol is better for you than marijuana because the government tells me so :downs:[/QUOTE]
I challenge you to produce research papers or evidence that states, conclusively, that the risks in taking marijuana are less than that of taking alcohol, in both the long and the short term periods, and thus the government is lying to you about the dangers of marijuana vs alcohol
Pot is a minority while alcohol is the majority. on first use, which is worse? I think it's alcohol. How about if you use it once a week, which is worse? I. Think it's alcohol.
[QUOTE=DaveP;32424289]Although this is colouring outside the lines,
The majority of deaths either simply involve the victim taking MDMA as part of a cocktail of drugs [b](ergo MDMA not being the cause)[/b] or heatstroke, a fairly easily avoided issue if the drug taker keeps hydrated
To compare,[/QUOTE]
Yeah, so he took something else as well, so it's completely harmless.No, really, that doesn't look like a "fair" chart. What causes of death does it compare with? People dying from being old?
Also, I've seen people around getting fucked over from just smoking marijuana, my uncle has got a bit of an alcohol problem (sadly, he's a cool guy), and the other guys are more fucked up. Being completely stoned in school, such things. It might not kill you, but it can fuck you over.
[QUOTE=garychencool;32428678]Pot is a minority while alcohol is the majority. On first use, which is worse? I think it's alcohol. How about if you use it once a week, which is worse? I think it's alcohol.[/QUOTE]
Source, or else you're just pulling this straight out of your arse
Alcohol completely alters your brain and personality. Marijuana relaxes you and really isn't dangerous at all in my opinion. Although if a person does it enough, like a couple times a week, it can really make them lazy. Like "not want to do anything" lazy.
[QUOTE=jbthekid;32431076]Alcohol completely alters your brain and personality. Marijuana relaxes you and really isn't dangerous at all in my opinion. Although if a person does it enough, like a couple times a week, it can really make them lazy. Like "not want to do anything" lazy.[/QUOTE]
..source, otherwise you're just pulling shit out of your arse
Can people please stop making horribly awful personal judgements based on no evidence or experience whatsoever, about alcohol vs weed? It makes you look a bit stupid
Deaths from Weed = ~0 (not counting lung cancer from the smoke, use a vaporizer dammit)
Deaths from Alcohol = ~400,000 (according the the documentary "American Drug War")
Seriously, isn't it obvious?
[QUOTE=jbthekid;32431076]Alcohol completely alters your brain and personality. Marijuana relaxes you and really isn't dangerous at all in my opinion. Although if a person does it enough, like a couple times a week, it can really make them lazy. Like "not want to do anything" lazy.[/QUOTE]
That's dependent on the strain of marijuana you decide to use. Certain strains promote relaxation and get you couch locked, and others get you going. People would be able to choose what form of cannabis they want if it was legalized and sold in licensed dispensaries because it would be identified prior to sale. Not to mention the quality would go shooting through the roof as well.
there is nothing to debate
alcohol is more harmful than marijuana
[QUOTE=Icedshot;32427974]..There is absolutely no conclusive, solid evidence to suggest that taking cannabis (and by that, i hope you mean TCH not cannabis) is beneficial to humans. Allowing doctors to prescribe it to patients would be an unbelievably reckless thing to do, as it could turn out to cause more deaths, or be harmful in a way that outweighs its benefits.
Until there is conclusive medical proof and years of human testing, i completely disagree with you
[/QUOTE]
I was going to reply you seriously until I read
[quote]it could turn out to cause more deaths[/quote]
But, for your benefit and the benefit of others, I will do so anyhow, using an examples of a synthesized cannabinoid found within the cannabis plant.
[B]Nabilone[/B]
Approved by the FDA in [B]1985[/B], it is reasonable example of the medical uses of the constituent pharmacologically active chemicals of cannabis.
[quote][B]Superiority of Nabilone over Prochlorperazine as an Antiemetic in Patients Receiving Cancer Chemotherapy[/B]
Herman et al
N Engl J Med 1979; 300:1295-1297
Abstract
Two double-blind, crossover trials comparing the antiemetic effectiveness of nabilone, a new synthetic cannabinoid, with that of prochlorperazine were conducted in patients with severe nausea and vomiting associated with anticancer chemotherapy. Of 113 patients evaluated, 90 (80 per cent) responded to nabilone therapy, whereas only 36 (32 per cent) responded to prochlorperazine (P<0.001). Complete relief of symptoms was infrequent, occurring only in nine patients (8 per cent) given nabilone. When both drugs were compared, both nausea (P<0.01) and vomiting episodes (P<0.001) were significantly lower in patients given nabilone. Moreover, patients clearly favored nabilone for continued use (P<0.001). Predominant side effects noted by patients were similar for both agents and included somnolence, dry mouth and dizziness but were about twice as frequent and more often severe in patients receiving nabilone. In addition, four patients (3 per cent) taking nabilone had side effects (hallucinations in three, hypotension in one) that required medical attention.
Euphoria associated with nabilone was infrequent (16 per cent) and mild. (N Engl J Med 300:1295–1297, 1979)[/quote]
The efficacy of nabilone as an anti-emetic has been proven continuously throughout the last decade (Tramèr et al 2001).
[editline]23rd September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32434682]Marijuana is smoke, smoke is [i]very[/i] harmful for your lungs, physically it does a lot more damage than alcohol.[/QUOTE]
That completely ignores vaporized cannabis and edible cannabis.
[editline]23rd September 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=HiddenMyst;32425708]Not really. Pure MDMA is actually quite ok on your system. [B]As long as you don't take too much, keep your fluids at an adequate level and don't stay out in the sun, you'll avoid the main causes of death.[/B][/quote]
While cannabis and a couple of the others on that last are far more difficult to kill yourself with.
[/quote]
I normally think of ecstasy as pills that contain MDxx substances. But that doesn't mean that there isn't other stuff in there. Quite often they are cut with some other stimulant, such as meth or BZP (horrible stuff).
See, after a night out taking ecstasy, you feel quite down and moody for the good half of a day. This still happens if you have pure MDMA, but much less intense. I don't quite understand how that works, because I'd have thought you use up roughly the same amount of serotonin either way, but it just seems that the combo of other shit in there makes it much worse.[/QUOTE]
The adulterants probably deplete significant amounts of dopamine at the same time.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32434682]Marijuana is smoke, smoke is [i]very[/i] harmful for your lungs, physically it does a lot more damage than alcohol.[/QUOTE]
you're wrong
some smoke is more harmful than other smoke, sure you're still inhaling plant matter, but there are no carcinogens (or very little, i'm probably wrong) in marijuana smoke
so while its not harmless its not really that awful, causing no permanent damage
apparently there is carcinogens when you burn cannabis but the thing is, thc and other cannabinoids are anti-cancerous and there's been no reports of anyone having any conditions springing just from cannabis smoke alone.
From what we know, Marijuana has little to no dangers at this present time. Previously suggested dangers have strong evidence to support they are untrue. There is some evidence to suggest Marijuana has other dangers that are yet not known (Breast Cancer, etc) but there's no strong evidence either.
Alcohol is known to destroy your liver and can be a very dangerous drug. It also has a higher physical dependency.
If we look at the two, for the average consumer, the immediate danger is alcohol. Marijuana, we are unsure of the long-term effects of Marijuana, as it's legality is still in the air in many countries, so it's difficult to conduct long-term studies of the effects of Marijuana.
With what we know, Marijuana [B]appears[/B] to be safer. Evidence suggests that brain cells dying from Marijuana is EXTREMELY unlikely and that Marijuana does not affect cancer rates.
Cancer Rates can also be circumvented by the use of a vaporizer or by using edible forms.
Alcohol has a higher physical dependency and has a higher immediate danger. It's hard to tell how dangerous Marijuana is, but the only danger we know of is the possibility of developing cancer. However, THC/Cannaboids have also been known to help treat/cure cancer.
I would say Alcohol is more dangerous solely because so far, it appears like you would need to be a fairly heavy smoker of Marijuana to develop cancer, cancer does not always result in death (I know quite a few people who survived cancer), whereas Alcohol poisoning can often be fatal and can be induced in a very short time.
So if you took a heavy drinker vs a heavy smoker. The smoker MAY develop cancer in the future and MAY or MAY NOT survive it. Also, cancer may be cured in the long-term future.
The alcoholic may get alcohol poisoning multiple times in their life and it might just take one fuck-up to end their life in a single night.
So which one is more dangerous? Alcohol. It seems unlikely you'll develop cancer from being an average smoker, and if you do, there's a chance to survive. It's much easier to develop Alcohol Poisoning and it's also quite easy to die from.
[sp]And if you're so concerned, just buy a vaporizer. Then the chance of getting cancer appears to be nil.[/sp]
Apparently I'm a bitch for saying that weed is preferable.
But in response to the OP vaping weed is the best thing since vaginas.
I haven't read the thread yet but I'll assume people have already went DURR SMOKE CANCER WEED IS BAD
Converting a bong to a vape bong takes like 5 seconds and costs nothing.
I really don't take both, but from everything I hear Weed seems to be better.
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;32429815]Yeah, so he took something else as well, so it's completely harmless.No, really, that doesn't look like a "fair" chart. What causes of death does it compare with? People dying from being old?
Also, I've seen people around getting fucked over from just smoking marijuana, my uncle has got a bit of an alcohol problem (sadly, he's a cool guy), and the other guys are more fucked up. Being completely stoned in school, such things. It might not kill you, but it can fuck you over.[/QUOTE]
I saw people getting drunk in school and failing horribly because all they did was drink and party every night.
The drug itself needs to be looked at, not how it can be abused. Every drug can and will be abused by irresponsible people.
[QUOTE=Icedshot;32431188]..source, otherwise you're just pulling shit out of your arse
Can people please stop making horribly awful personal judgements based on no evidence or experience whatsoever, about alcohol vs weed? It makes you look a bit stupid[/QUOTE]
Alcohol really does change personalities depending on the use
[QUOTE=J!NX;32443591]Alcohol really does change personalities depending on the use[/QUOTE]
You restating his opinion doesn't make it anymore true until you can back it up with some statistics
Im not saying it doesnt, merely asking that you please dont make statements with no evidence
marijuana changes the blood flow of a part of the brain, making a lack of oxygen of the very same part, removing some of its functions.
Have you ever heard of weed destroying someones life really? dont give me that gateway bullshit.
[QUOTE=falcont2t;32443909]marijuana changes the blood flow of a part of the brain, making a lack of oxygen of the very same part, removing some of its functions.[/QUOTE]
Because obviously all people who smoke weed are braindead rite?
I think you people are just doing this to annoy me. Can you please provide any evidence either way for your arguments? Because currently, you are a classic example of making an outrageous statement (people who smoke weed have damaged brains as a result), with absolutely no proof whatsoever. You've come to a conclusion with no reasons. Its a completely irrational argument currently
[QUOTE=falcont2t;32443909]marijuana changes the blood flow of a part of the brain, making a lack of oxygen of the very same part, removing some of its functions.[/QUOTE]No, it only causes [url=congestion of the conjunctival blood vessels]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_cannabis#Somatic_effects[/url] not blood vessels everywhere.
[QUOTE=Icedshot;32445312]Because obviously all people who smoke weed are braindead rite?
I think you people are just doing this to annoy me. Can you please provide any evidence either way for your arguments? Because currently, you are a classic example of making an outrageous statement (people who smoke weed have damaged brains as a result), with absolutely no proof whatsoever. You've come to a conclusion with no reasons. Its a completely irrational argument currently[/QUOTE]
oh my god, ok
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4244489.stm[/url]
[url]http://www.marijuana.com/drug-war-headline-news/18139-usa-marijuana-may-affect-blood-flow-brain.html[/url]
[url]http://www.health.am/ab/more/marijuana_may_change_blood_flow_to_brain/[/url]
I guess you're missing the 6 year old date on all of these? There's obviously nothing new on this, and all these link back to one study. Not very conclusive.
you are right, but im not taking any chances with this stuff.
[QUOTE=Atlascore;32434682]Marijuana is smoke, smoke is [i]very[/i] harmful for your lungs, physically it does a lot more damage than alcohol.[/QUOTE]
Use a fucking vaporizer, it uses no smoke, and you'll still get high (higher than using a joint/bong.)
Get your fucking facts right.
[editline]September 23rd,2011[/editline]
Also, the only reason I see weed being illegal is because it has the potential to replace all cold meds, and alcohol, and tobacco. Which is a big tax machine for the U.S Government.
Also, according to the documentary "American Drug War", the largest donors (money-wise) to "A Drug-Free America" are tobacco and alcohol companies, coincidence anybody?
[QUOTE=falcont2t;32446409]oh my god, ok
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/4244489.stm[/url]
[url]http://www.marijuana.com/drug-war-headline-news/18139-usa-marijuana-may-affect-blood-flow-brain.html[/url]
[url]http://www.health.am/ab/more/marijuana_may_change_blood_flow_to_brain/[/url][/QUOTE]
[quote]The research also found that after a month of not smoking, people who had been moderate users - smoking up to 70 marijuana cigarettes a week - showed signs of improved blood flow.
However, a month of abstinence had no positive impact on blood flow among heavy users, who smoked up to 350 joints a week.[/quote]
70 a week even showed signs of improved blood flow. Most people who smoke only smoke once a month or once a week, meaning like a joint or two a week. It is unlikely to impact these people long term.
[QUOTE=Rediscover;32436141]you're wrong
some smoke is more harmful than other smoke, sure you're still inhaling plant matter, but there are no carcinogens (or very little, i'm probably wrong) in marijuana smoke
so while its not harmless its not really that awful, causing no permanent damage[/QUOTE]
Completely wrong. Combustion of plant matter causes the formation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (many are carcinogenic) along with other harmful byproducts in the form of tar (also carcinogenic), along with carbon monoxide and trace amounts of other substances (some of which are carcinogenic). There is no real fundamental difference between the majority of the chemical structure of tobacco, marijuana, and all other plants. The different chemicals such as nicotine and THC, and other slight differences, are generally a very small part of the overall makeup of the respective plants. The most abundant material of all plants on earth is cellulose (long chains of glucose molecules which contain carbon, hydrogen and oxygen) which, when incompletely combusted (impossible not to have incomplete combustion), produce carcinogenic compounds as a byproduct. Wood, for example, is about 50% cellulose (most plants are around 1/3 cellulose) and look what happens when you burn it.
Cancer is probably less common because people tend to not smoke weed as often, they often quit smoking once entering adulthood, THC has a potential protective effect against lung cancer, and few people chain smoke weed. Plus, most of the studies I've seen don't include people over the age of 50 and lung cancer generally starts to occur around age 60.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
