[QUOTE=Superginger;23123386]It's probably not a good idea for your unborn fetus to siphon up magic brownies.[/QUOTE]
How so?
Evidence is crucial here, cause right now there's more evidence to say ganja is good for the kids.
[QUOTE=bravehat;23123396]How so?
Evidence is crucial here, cause right now there's more evidence to say ganja is good for the kids.[/QUOTE]
I would feel irresponsible as a parent. I think it's just a culmination of all of my mother's stories about pregnancy nutrition.
Fair do's but at the end of the day nutrition for a baby would be fairly simple, just breast feed and problem solved.
You can't breast feed an unborn fetus, sir.
Well for a foetus it's even easier, eat healthily, don't drink alcohol or take anything that produces nasty metabolites in the body, and weed seems to fit nicely with all those.
Not saying you have to partaketh of weed but it's not gonna have any nasty effects.
It's just a taboo thing with me.
I'm still all for getting birthed babies high like my parents did me, though. :smile:
[editline]12:15PM[/editline]
On weed, for clarification.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;23089127]Apparently idiots that say it's bad to begin with will pull anything out their ass to defend that
[QUOTE]3:19 PM - The Reverend Tholomew Plague: [url]http://www.salem-news.com/articles/j...age=1#comments[/url]
3:20 PM - mKTank: mortality exists for a reason
3:20 PM - mKTank: population control
3:20 PM - mKTank: dont fuck with it
3:20 PM - The Reverend Tholomew Plague: so you're pretty much saying that weed is not bad not because it causes death, but prevents death
3:20 PM - The Reverend Tholomew Plague: gj
3:21 PM - mKTank: it modifies nature and thus it's harmful
3:21 PM - mKTank: and it's not necessary
3:21 PM - The Reverend Tholomew Plague: it isn't harmful
3:21 PM - The Reverend Tholomew Plague: it's the exact opposite
3:22 PM - mKTank: we're not getting into this shit again. you want to be cool and edgy, go ahead and smoke it, not gonna stop you[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
I fuckin' raged!
[QUOTE=bravehat;23111341]Actually, alcohol does drive people crazy, it's one of the few drugs to my knowledge that once addicted to, trying to rehabilitate can kill you through dementia.
And PCP legalisation would fuck shit up severely :v: but other stuff like LSD, DMT, Peyote, mescaline blah blah blah, no real reason to be illegal.
Most western countries just have retarded drug laws, (at least the US and the UK, seriously in the UK weed is apparently as dangerous as cocaine,[/QUOTE]
So when PCP would be legalised everyone would start doing it according to you?
[editline]12:37PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Scoooby;23123495]I fuckin' raged![/QUOTE]
It modifies nature becuase its part of nature.
What a shitty faggot
[QUOTE=Levakama;23123657][B]So when PCP would be legalised everyone would start doing it according to you?[/B]
[editline]12:37PM[/editline]
It modifies nature becuase its part of nature.
What a shitty faggot[/QUOTE]
No, I'm just saying I think it would be a bad idea considering there seems to be a lot of incidents involving the drug, and making it available to the public, or de criminalised [I]could[/I] be a bad idea, although this is just my opinion and I admit it's most likely wrong.
Give me one bad incident from the effects of PCP, and I'll give you five from Alcohol.
[QUOTE=Superginger;23123407]I would feel irresponsible as a parent. I think it's just a culmination of all of my mother's stories about pregnancy nutrition.[/QUOTE]
That's understandable.
[QUOTE=Superginger;23123767]Give me one bad incident from the effects of PCP, and I'll give you five from Alcohol.[/QUOTE]
And how many more people use alcohol as compared to PCP? I'm not really convinced about legalizing hard drugs, even though I know most people still wouldn't go near them though.
[QUOTE=Superginger;23123767]Give me one bad incident from the effects of PCP, and I'll give you five from Alcohol.[/QUOTE]
For fuck sake, I'm not saying it's the worst shit ever, and i know alcohol is a hundred million times worse for fuck sake, but when you're hammered and you get tasered you tend to go down like a sack of shit while on PCP you'll carry on.
AS I SAID, MY OPINION IS SIMPLY MY OPINION ITS JUST HOW I FEEL ABOUT THE DRUG
Did I hit a nerve?
Well considering twice I stated its merely my flawed opinion that i think PCP legalisation would be a bad idea and it seems you're taking it as fact yeah I'm pretty pissed.
Don't be so sensitive, I was merely saying PCP isn't nearly as dangerous as the media makes it out to be.
Someone said he doesn't like legalisations of hard drugs... well alcohol is already legal.
[QUOTE=kobilica;23124325]Someone said he doesn't like legalisations of hard drugs... well alcohol is already legal.[/QUOTE]
Been there, done that, saw the hissyfit.
This study only says babies whose mothers smoke weed are less likely to die. Not that weed is the cause. For example, these mothers could be a lot younger on average than the others. Only the explanation makes this plausible.
[QUOTE=Paravin;23107956]You know what, this drug shit ain't so bad after all. As long as they don't legalize the horrible shit like cocaine and heroin, but only and just weed, well, I guess there's no harm to that.[/QUOTE]
Yeah let's keep telling people what they can't do with their own body.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;23108205]You [b]do not make sometihng illegal because it is bad for you. You make it legal for that reason. That way it can be treated, regulated and helped without ruining lives and starting a prohibition costing lives and millions and billions of dollars to defeat.[/b] No one has authority to tell you what can, and can't go in your body and drugs are no exception to that rule. Drugs are not an excuse of responsibility, and are not extremely dangerous if handled properly. They have no ability to drive you to hurt others, and you have no excuse if someone does hurt someone whilst high, albeit a rare event. More people would not do them if legal, and ones that did would be more educated, and safer than before. Something, I can't even fathom a reason to complain against.[/QUOTE]
Amen.
0.89% is still massively high. In the UK it's about 0.48%
I know that really none of this is relevant to the morality rate, but seeing as how a pretty active debate is\was going on here, I thought I'd post some snippets from the Nixon report just to show how wrong all the people saying how horrible weed is are.
Gateway drug claim:
[QUOTE]BECOMING A MULTIDRUG USER
The more one smokes marihuana, the more involved his interpersonal relationships are likely to become with his peers who share the experience with him. As he spends more time with this group, he begins to sever his contacts with conventional individuals and conventional routines. He may eventually view himself as a drug user and be willing to experiment with other drugs which are approved by his peer group. Only ;a small portion of the marihuana users who reach this stage are likely to become persistent, frequent users of these other drugs. The majority appear to experiment only.[/QUOTE]
"Harmful" mental side effects:
[QUOTE]The Effects of Marihuana on the User
The previous section has attempted to paint a broad picture of the marihuana user. This section will deal with the, drug and its effects on these individuals.
The meaning of drug often varies with the context in which it is used. The physician would define a drug as any substance used as a medicine in the treatment of physical or mental disease. Today, due to the influence of many factors, the layman may focus on the negative connotations of drugs, such as the stupefying, poisoning, habit-forming misuse of the opiate drugs. The considerably wider and more scientific definition of a drug which will be used in this section is: any chemical substance which has an action on living tissues.
A psychoactive drug is any substance capable of modifying mental performance and individual behavior by inducing functional or pathological changes in the central nervous system.
is any substance capable of modifying mental performance and individual behavior by inducing functional or pathological changes in the central nervous system.
As defined, psychoactive drugs exert their major effect on the state of the mind including emotions, feelings, sensibility, consciousness and thinking. The definition implies neither positive nor negative meanings. [b]Chemical substances are not inherently good or bad.[/b] All substances, including medicines and foods, which man has chosen to consume have certain desired effects (whether therapeutically beneficial or pleasurable) and undesired effects (whether detrimental or unpleasant). For example, eating food is certainly a necessary and pleasurable activity. However, obesity plays an important role in many diseases, including diabetes, high blood pressure and heart attacks, and tends to limit physical activities.
The classification of any drug effect as either beneficial or harmful [b]often greatly depends on the values the classifier places on the expected effects.[/b] This is especially relevant with respect to the psychoactive drugs such as tranquilizers, stimulants, coffee, cigarettes, alcohol, marihuana and other licit or illicit drugs. For all of these drugs, the weights of benefit and harm are difficult to determine when viewed merely in terms of their stated effects.[/QUOTE]
Claims that weed makes you "angry" or "unpleasant":
[QUOTE]Subjective Effects
A description of an individual's feelings and state of consciousness as affected by low doses of marihuana is difficult; the condition is not similar to usual waking states and is the result of a highly individual experience. Perhaps the closest analogies are the experience of day dreaming or the moments just prior to falling asleep. The effect is not constant and a cyclical waxing and waning of the intensity of the intoxication occurs periodically.
At low, usual "social" doses, the intoxicated individual may experience an increased sense of well-being; initial restlessness and hilarity followed by a dreamy, carefree state of relaxation; alteration of sensory perceptions including expansion of space and time; and a more vivid sense of touch, sight, smell, taste, and sound; a feeling of hunger, especially a craving for sweets; and subtle changes in thought formation and expression. To an unknowing observer, an individual in this state of consciousness would not appear noticeably different from his normal state.
At higher, moderate doses, these same reactions are intensified but the changes in the individual would still be scarcely noticeable to an observer. The individual may experience rapidly changing emotions, changing sensory imagery, dulling of attention, more altered thought formation and expression such as fragmented thought, flight of ideas, impaired immediate memory, disturbed associations, altered sense of self-identity and, to some, a perceived feeling of enhanced insight.
At very high doses, psychotomimetic phenomena may be experienced. These, include distortions of body image, loss of personal identity, sensory and mental illusions, fantasies and hallucinations.
Nearly all persons who continue to use marihuana describe these usual effects in largely pleasurable terms. However, others might call some of these same effects unpleasant or undesirable.[/QUOTE]
This one is mainly in here just to show how skewed the test results were, and also shoots down anybody claiming that you become dependent:
[QUOTE]SHORT-TERM EFFECTS
The effect of an enormous daily oral dose of the drug ([b]up to about one hundred thousand times the minimal behaviorally effective human dose[/b]) was recently studied in rats and monkeys for three months. A severe, generalized nervous system depression was evident the first few days. Evidence of cumulative toxicity was observed at these doses. Severe central -nervous system depression produced fatalities in some rats in the first few days until tolerance developed. Later, extreme hyperactivity developed.
The monkeys experienced severe central nervous system depression and one group showed mild hyperactivity, but [b]all rapidly returned to normal behavior after the development of tolerance to these effects.[/b] Minimal dose-related toxic effects on bodily organs were noted at autopsy at the conclusion of the experiment. These non-specific findings of unknown meaning included bypocellularity of the bone marrow and spleen and hypertrophy of the adrenal cortex.
A 28-day study employing intravenous administration of from one to ten thousand times the minimal effective human dose to monkeys produced -similar findings clinically. In the high dose groups delayed deaths from acute hemorrhagic pneumonia were possibly caused by accumulation of clumps of THC in the lung producing irritation similar to that seen at the injection sites. No other organ pathology was noted. These animal studies illustrated that the margin of safety between active dose and toxic dose was enormous.
A few studies have recently been carried out to observe the effect of a few weeks of daily marihuana smoking in man. The amount smoked was a relatively large American dose. Frequency of use was once to several times daily.
During the 21-day Boston free-access study, no harmful effects were observed on general bodily functions, motor functions, mental functions, personal or social behavior or work performance. Total sleep time and periods of sleep were increased. Weight gain was uniformly noted.
[b]No evidence of physical dependence or signs of withdrawal were noted. In the heaviest smokers, -moderate psychological dependence was suggested by an increased negative mood after cessation of smoking.[/b][/QUOTE]
Claims that the smoke is deadly and will fuck up your lungs:
[QUOTE]LONG-TERM EFFECTS
Our knowledge about marihuana is incomplete, but certain behavior characteristics appear to be emerging in regard to long term American marihuana use which, for the most part, is significantly less than 10 years. These impressions were confirmed in the Boston free-access study. The group of American young adults studied averaged five years (range 2-17 years) of intermittent or daily use, of marihuana.
No significant physical, biochemical, or mental abnormalities could be attributed solely to their marihuana smoking. Some abnormality of pulmonary function was demonstrated in many of the subjects which could not be correlated-with quantity, frequency or duration of smoking marihuana and/or tobacco cigarettes. [b](One other investigation recently completed uncovered no abnormalities in lung or heart functioning of a group of non-cigarette smoking heavy marihuana users)[/b]. Many of the subjects were in fair to poor physical condition, as judged by exercise tolerance.[/QUOTE]
"It makes you stupid"
[QUOTE]Social Functioning
Similarly, the Jamaican and Greek subjects did not evidence any deterioration of mental or social functioning which could be attributed solely to heavy very long-term cannabis use.
These individuals appear to have used the drug without noticeable behavioral or mental deviation from their lower socioeconomic group norms, as detected by observation in their communities and by extensive sociological interviews, psychological tests and psychiatric examination.
[b]Overall life style was not different from non-users in their lower socioeconomic community. They were alert and realistic, with average intelligence based on their education. Most functioned normally in their communities with stable families, homes, jobs, and friends.[/b] These individuals seem to have survived heavy long-term cannabis use without major physical or behavioral defects.[/QUOTE]
These snippets are only from the first two chapters, and there's a total of five, amounting to a fairly long read which I have yet to finish. I would go on and just browse through and take snippets that I find relevant, but that isn't really necessary.
If anybody is interested in reading the report in full, it can be found here:
[url]http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm[/url]
Most marijuana smokers I know practically need to smoke the stuff, otherwise they are not happy.
i know i REALLY need it due to how my life is
[QUOTE=Vasili;23129498]Most marijuana smokers I know practically need to smoke the stuff, otherwise they are not happy.[/QUOTE]
I'm baked off my ass right now.
I didn't need to be baked to be happy, but it's just like a happiness enhancer.
Like pepper.
[QUOTE=Vasili;23129498]Most marijuana smokers I know practically need to smoke the stuff, otherwise they are not happy.[/QUOTE]
There's two types of dependencies, chemical and mental. Chemically, nothing in weed makes you become dependent on it, but yes, people do sometimes get a mental dependency to it, but that can be said for literally anything.
Most people I know are mentally addicted to it. Know one guy who is depressed as fuck and grumpy all the time, then once he's smoked a bit of 'Buddha' he's happy and giggly all day. The only way he can stay happy is by smoking it constantly and as far as I am aware - that's addiction. Though, both sides of the argument are horribly biased and skewed and made up to most extent. I think its a mind rotter personally. Couldn't care if people smoke it though, its your life and you can fuck it up all you want with any chemical(s) you like. Just as long it doesn't effect your abilities in something important like your job or something that involves safety of fellow man.
I also have a friend mentally addicted to weed, always complains and is pessimistic without it. It's really depressing. I can't do anything to make him happy, and I'm not giving him weed (nor do I have weed or care to risk my future trying to get it).
[QUOTE=Vasili;23130045]Most people I know are mentally addicted to it. Know one guy who is depressed as fuck and grumpy all the time, then once he's smoked a bit of 'Buddha' he's happy and giggly all day. The only way he can stay happy is by smoking it constantly and as far as I am aware - that's addiction. Though, both sides of the argument are horribly biased and skewed and made up to most extent. I think its a mind rotter personally. Couldn't care if people smoke it though, its your life and you can fuck it up all you want with any chemical(s) you like. Just as long it doesn't effect your abilities in something important like your job or something that involves safety of fellow man.[/QUOTE]
It's an addiction, yes, but the drug isn't at fault.
When I'm dry I'm a little grumpy the first couple days, and have some trouble sleeping, but after that I'm fine and I can go really as long as I want without smoking. I've been sober a little over a week now, and I've actually turned down weed because I'd rather just stay clean for a little.
[QUOTE=Lambadvanced;23130212]It's an addiction, yes, but the drug isn't at fault.
When I'm dry I'm a little grumpy the first couple days, and have some trouble sleeping, but after that I'm fine and I can go really as long as I want without smoking. I've been sober a little over a week now, and I've actually turned down weed because I'd rather just stay clean for a little.[/QUOTE]
see, i kind of can't do that...my life is stressful as it is and this is like my only vacation imo
[QUOTE=revrend_slapaho;23130315]see, i kind of can't do that...my life is stressful as it is and this is like my only vacation imo[/QUOTE]
still a mental addiction though. Not to say you're at fault, just saying that nothing in the plant itself caused you to be addicted in the same way that something like a cigarette causes you to be addicted because of all the chemically addictive things in them.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.