Science Suggests Smoking Pot Raises Risk of Testicular Cancer, Schizophenia and Infertility - and Lo
381 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Zephyrs;37700685]Allow me to clarify. I have firsthand experience with misleading horeshit being fed to people, namely young children. The DARE program, at least in my area, is one of the biggest farces and money dumps that I know of. They spend enormous amounts of time telling people that all manner of compounds, especially that marijuana will literally rot out your cerebral cortex and may turn you into a vegetable.
And the kids being 10-13 years old believe them. Then when they find something that shows that, wow, pot doesn't actually rot my brain and cause my teeth to fall out, they almost instantly discard the ENTIRE program as outright lies. In the future they reject a lot of information they get about negative side effects as invalid.
You see this with abstinence only sexual education. This is for all intents and purposes an extension of that. I'm not advocating teaching people how to properly shoot up, just as I'm not advocating teaching sexual education with live demonstrations, but misinformation is only harmful in the long run.[/QUOTE]
ill give u a live demo of sex ed
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;37700751]ill give u a live demo of sex ed[/QUOTE]
pls no think of the children
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37700766]pls no think of the children[/QUOTE]
He is.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37700623]If its so easy, show me.[/QUOTE]
Someone just did ? If you're going to accept every "scientific" study based on confirmation bias, you're as bad as the "420 blaze it faggot" crowd you seem to hate so much.
Not saying this one is false, it's fairly known, and likely accurate, but we have enough shit labeled as scientific to justify the skepticism.
I like how everyone rates OP winner like this is some victory for them.
[QUOTE=FuzzyPoop;37701294]Someone just did ? If you're going to accept every "scientific" study based on confirmation bias, you're as bad as the "420 blaze it faggot" crowd you seem to hate so much.
Not saying this one is false, it's fairly known, and likely accurate, but we have enough shit labeled as scientific to justify the skepticism.[/QUOTE]
What are you even saying? I don't accept every single scientific study based on the fact it has science in its name.
If you show me something which suggests that I'm totally wrong, I'll be sceptical, I'll do my research, and if you're wrong, I've escaped being mislead. If I do my research and it turns out you're right, I've once again avoided being mislead.
No one showed me anything. All I got was one article from the Daily Mail, which may as well have been on fox news for all the truth there'd ever be in there, and one on the BBC from 1974.
I looked at that study, and I saw a misunderstanding, that the scientists mistakenly thought it was the THC lowering brain function, when it was the smoke stopping air getting to the brain, and the government took that as an excuse to launch a smear campaign.
Look. I don't like weed, I don't like 'stoners', and I don't particularly like you. But if you show me that I'm wrong in believing that weed is harmful enough to justify its status as illegal, then you win. Seriously. It's that easy. Show me your haymaker, your holy grail, what makes you KNOW that weed isn't a bad thing. Because all I'm getting is "b-b-b-but me and all my friends smoke it..." and "dude this study is all propaganda".
[QUOTE=Conscript;37701665]I like how everyone rates OP winner like this is some victory for them.[/QUOTE]
I don't think you understand what the winner rating means.
[QUOTE=Tucan Sam;37701755]I don't think you understand what the winner rating means.[/QUOTE]
...how?
[QUOTE=Conscript;37701849]...how?[/QUOTE]
Because finally the idiots who go around saying weed isn't bad for you can be silenced with proper facts.
[editline]17th September 2012[/editline]
Not that this is any news to me though.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37701748]
Look. I don't like weed, I don't like 'stoners', and I don't particularly like you. But [b]if you show me that I'm wrong in believing that weed is harmful enough to justify its status as illegal[/b], then you win. Seriously. It's that easy. Show me your haymaker, your holy grail, what makes you KNOW that weed isn't a bad thing. Because all I'm getting is "b-b-b-but me and all my friends smoke it..." and "dude this study is all propaganda".[/QUOTE]
It's not nearly as bad as anything we have right now.
how about that ?
Everything has negative side effects, I don't see why the demonization of pot is so much more important than a lot of the other shit that is legal.
For example, Brominated Vegetable oil is a controversial additive banned in most European countries, yet the US allows for it to be used. BVO has been known to cause Breast, Ovary, and other forms of cancer, yet the FDA has flip-flopped the regulation on it.
This is just one of the many things we may ingest daily; all of those preservatives, additives, and other chemicals in processed foods go unaccounted for while politicians attack Marijuana. I'm not claiming ignorance and saying smoking Marijuana doesn't have harmful effects, because that would be stupid; but I just think it's stupid to focus on something that is relatively less harmful than a lot of the shit out there that is pumped into our food supply.
[QUOTE=Uberpro;37701883]Because finally the idiots who go around saying weed isn't bad for you can be silenced with proper facts.[/QUOTE]
That doesn't answer my question, you're just proving my point. It's pretty sad people are happy there's a bad side to pot, just goes to show it's not about truth, it's just about shitting on a culture they're prejudiced against.
Nobody said pot was harmless. People said theres a state funded propaganda campaign against it and other drugs.
People have said it is less harmful than legal drugs (including those prescribed as medicine), which is true. So yes, it is relatively harmless especially considering the scale of its use.
You guys are still quite a bit away from getting close to a 'reefer madness' kind of stigma.
-snip-
Everything causes cancer and psychoactive drugs can bring out latent mental disorders such as schizophrenia [b]in people who are predisposed to it[/b]
Nothing new here, though smoking marijuana isn't harmless, it's far less harmful than most things we consume daily.
[QUOTE=FuzzyPoop;37702039]It's not nearly as bad as anything we have right now.
how about that ?[/QUOTE]
Seriously? I can just as easily say that "cannabis is literally the worst thing in the universe, smoking it or taking it in any way will make you rape a donkey" and have the same credibility as you with this post.
Show me EVIDENCE.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37702753]Seriously? I can just as easily say that "cannabis is literally the worst thing in the universe, smoking it or taking it in any way will make you rape a donkey" and have the same credibility as you with this post.
Show me EVIDENCE.[/QUOTE]
Where's your evidence for outlawing it other than your own god damn opinion ?
There's no holy grail of drug legalization, there are pros and cons. Weed won't cure cancer but it's harmless enough to be sold along with tobacco and alcohol.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37702753]Seriously? I can just as easily say that "cannabis is literally the worst thing in the universe, smoking it or taking it in any way will make you rape a donkey" and have the same credibility as you with this post.
Show me EVIDENCE.[/QUOTE]
If you don't know this by now you are hopelessly ignorant. You should at least be aware of pot as a medicine vs medicines uses to treat similar conditions, where it is indeed 'not nearly as bad as what we have now'. No amount of evidence-gathering is going to substitute living under a rock.
[QUOTE=Uberpro;37701883]Because finally the idiots who go around saying weed isn't bad for you can be silenced with proper facts.
[editline]17th September 2012[/editline]
Not that this is any news to me though.[/QUOTE]
Except for the part where most folk who smoke weed don't do it for the health benefits, so they won't give any fucks.
[QUOTE=FuzzyPoop;37703106]Where's your evidence for outlawing it other than your own god damn opinion ?
There's no holy grail of drug legalization, there are pros and cons. Weed won't cure cancer but it's harmless enough to be sold along with tobacco and alcohol.[/QUOTE]
Again, where's the evidence that it's harmless? I'm seeing scientific studies that say it can cause cancer and schizophrenia. That sure as hell isn't harmless.
[QUOTE=Conscript;37703123]If you don't know this by now you are hopelessly ignorant. You should at least be aware of pot as a medicine vs medicines uses to treat similar conditions, where it is indeed 'not nearly as bad as what we have now'. No amount of evidence-gathering is going to substitute living under a rock.[/QUOTE]
I've heard of medicinal weed, but I've never seen any evidence to suggest its effective beyond anecdotal, you want to show me that?
I'm arguing for the sake of it at this point, this debate has gotten to the point where I'm arguing against things that I don't actually disagree with, but that doesn't change the fact you haven't produced a single shred of evidence that I can accept. As I said, the two links I've seen were one from a right wing nutcase of a newspaper and the other was from 1974.
You can end this, all you need to do to claim total victory is show me an article that extols the virtues of weed in either a medical way, or in a simply "not harmful really, these toher guys got it wrong" way.
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37703473]Again, where's the evidence that it's harmless? I'm seeing scientific studies that say it can cause cancer and schizophrenia. That sure as hell isn't harmless.
I've heard of medicinal weed, but I've never seen any evidence to suggest its effective beyond anecdotal, you want to show me that?
I'm arguing for the sake of it at this point, this debate has gotten to the point where I'm arguing against things that I don't actually disagree with, but that doesn't change the fact you haven't produced a single shred of evidence that I can accept. As I said, the two links I've seen were one from a right wing nutcase of a newspaper and the other was from 1974.
You can end this, all you need to do to claim total victory is show me an article that extols the virtues of weed in either a medical way, or in a simply "not harmful really, these toher guys got it wrong" way.[/QUOTE]
this debate is making me cringe a bit and my mouse is fucked up so i cant click the back button
so heres an article (yeah yeah i know the website name and that, but it cites serious scientific studies in the footnotes)
[quote=Institute of Medicine (NAS)]More recently, in 1980, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences, at the request of the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and the director of the National Institutes of Health, agreed to conduct a review and analysis of health-related effects of marijuana. IOM's findings recognized marijuana's therapeutic potential in [b]decreasing the intraocular pressure for glaucoma patients, controlling the severe nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy, acting as an anticonvulsant, relaxing muscles and thus counteracting spasticity problems,[/b] and other uses. The IOM investigators highly recommended further research to determine the full therapeutic potential of this drug. This study also noted that marijuana seems to work differently than other conventional medicines (Institute of Medicine, 1982). [/quote]
[url]http://www.ukcia.org/medical/medicinaluseofmarijuana.php[/url]
[QUOTE=Bobie;37703591]this debate is making me cringe a bit and my mouse is fucked up so i cant click the back button
so heres an article (yeah yeah i know the website name and that, but it cites serious scientific studies in the footnotes)
[url]http://www.ukcia.org/medical/medicinaluseofmarijuana.php[/url][/QUOTE]
Ding, ding, we have a winner.
I shan't pretend that this has revolutionised my views on weed, but now I know that it [I]does [/I]have some medicinal value. My world-view will adapt to that.
/thread.
smoking a joint with nausea would suck though in all fairness
though i'm now intrigued
[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;37703473]Again, where's the evidence that it's harmless? I'm seeing scientific studies that say it can cause cancer and schizophrenia. That sure as hell isn't harmless.
[/QUOTE]
It's probably not harmless ? Way to miss the point entirely, is alcohol harmless ? is tobacco harmless ? is caffeine harmless ? they're not, but they can be consumed safely. Same for weed, and i don't think there's a documented case of anyone dying from it, safe enough for legalization if you ask me.
Ah, a shift from "it'll fuck you shit up" to "it'll fuck your shit up if you're a teenager". Alright, now the anti-weed arguments are starting to be sensible.
I have a couple of questions though:
- Are we sure the weed the subjects were using was 100% weed? My old health teacher knew a kid who became a vegetable because he smoked, but the shit he was smoking was covered in lighter fluid.
- Are we sure the subjects didn't just come to the test stoned?
If they can answer "yes" to both of those questions I'll shut up.
[QUOTE=lavacano;37703997]Ah, a shift from "it'll fuck you shit up" to "it'll fuck your shit up if you're a teenager". Alright, now the anti-weed arguments are starting to be sensible.
I have a couple of questions though:
- Are we sure the weed the subjects were using was 100% weed? My old health teacher knew a kid who became a vegetable because he smoked, but the shit he was smoking was covered in lighter fluid.
- Are we sure the subjects didn't just come to the test stoned?
If they can answer "yes" to both of those questions I'll shut up.[/QUOTE]
99 percent sure it would be 100 percent weed because its extremely unlikely for people to lace weed.
99 percent sure the subjects wouldn't have come to the test stoned because then all the results would have been similar and not steadily declined like it did and im pretty sure it would have been a priority to make sure people did not come to the tests stoned.
Pot has long lasting health effects?? And here I thought inhaling burning plants would be entirely good for my body.
[QUOTE=Pat4ever;37700349]Most likely your great uncle was not only smoking pot, but also mixed it in with tobacco. It's a common practice and leads to misconceptions that damage caused is due to the weed, even though in most cases it's due to the act of smoking the rolling paper or whatever else is mixed in with it. A pipe is better, although not by much as it still contains tar, while an instrument that either uses water filtration or vaporization almost entirely removes harmful substances.[/QUOTE]
I didn't know the man too well but I do know he was very anti tobacco
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=FuzzyPoop;37702039]It's not nearly as bad as anything we have right now.
how about that ?[/QUOTE]
Because something else is worse doesn't make the original thing good
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
Its like a republican compared to a libertarian
libertarians being completely fucking evil doesn't make republicans good
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=TehWhale;37702646]Everything causes cancer and psychoactive drugs can bring out latent mental disorders such as schizophrenia [b]in people who are predisposed to it[/b]
Nothing new here, though smoking marijuana isn't harmless, it's far less harmful than most things we consume daily.[/QUOTE]
Did you read the OP at all
its almost like the proved it had other effects
Id just like to point out that they used more than IQ in the study although thats what the media chose to run with because IQ is pretty commonly known
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Bobie;37703591]this debate is making me cringe a bit and my mouse is fucked up so i cant click the back button
so heres an article (yeah yeah i know the website name and that, but it cites serious scientific studies in the footnotes)
[url]http://www.ukcia.org/medical/medicinaluseofmarijuana.php[/url][/QUOTE]
Heroin is a derivative of morphine and has similar pain killing effects to morphine. A lot of drugs do
[QUOTE=Jakobi;37684083]I'm developing psychosis. I've smoked weed. Coincidence? According to this, probably not.[/QUOTE]
It's been a well-known (in the science community, at least. People tend to gloss it over) theory that weed can activate psychosises in those with a predisposition towards it.
Happened to my uncle, he used it regularly and became a paranoid schizophrenic.
This fairy-tale that Weed is completely harmless is bullshit. Sure, it's got less direct effects than tobacco or alcohol, but it's long-term effects are more poorly understood and potentially more far-reaching.
[QUOTE=McGii;37709179]Heroin is a derivative of morphine and has similar pain killing effects to morphine. A lot of drugs do[/QUOTE]
ban morphine
[QUOTE=McGii;37709179]I didn't know the man too well but I do know he was very anti tobacco
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
Because something else is worse doesn't make the original thing good
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
Its like a republican compared to a libertarian
libertarians being completely fucking evil doesn't make republicans good
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
Did you read the OP at all
its almost like the proved it had other effects
Id just like to point out that they used more than IQ in the study although thats what the media chose to run with because IQ is pretty commonly known
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
Heroin is a derivative of morphine and has similar pain killing effects to morphine. A lot of drugs do[/QUOTE]
Its actually just a faster acting version of morphine that has better efficacy when injected, like its basically the same thing, if you eat heroin its the same as eating morphine in terms of effects.
[editline]18th September 2012[/editline]
Its official name is diamorphine/diacetylmorphine and is still used in hospitals, it gets converted into morphine in your brain
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.