USA - Pot is not harmless, should not be legal

[chillinwill]

I am writing regarding two issues in the news lately, the requirement for the motorcycle riders to wear helmets and the NORML group to legalize marijuana. Both have statistics that should leave the laws as they are. The injury and fatal deaths in the helmet argument don't need further discussion. The marijuana situation is another issue. I have worked nearly 50 years in drug and substance abuse.

1. Marijuana is not harmless. In order to get the most effect, it has to be inhaled deeply. In a study of Army soldiers, they discovered that the person that smoked marijuana three times a week had as much lung damage as a three-pack-a-day cigarette smoker. My experience with over 10,000 drug addicts the steps were: First, regular cigarettes and alcohol, second, marijuana and third, harder drugs such as heroin, LSD and other legal and illegal opiates.

In regard to the medical use, let marijuana go through the same process of the FDA that other pharmaceuticals go through before being approved for use.

In symposiums that I participated in, both advocates and those opposed in the medical field stated that the problem was determining dosage because of trying to measure effectiveness.

In fact, from many years of research as well as my experience, the use makes learning much more difficult. And because the active ingredient is not water soluble, the THC is absorbed in the brain as well as the reproductive organs and will take months to finally get taken out of the system.

Interesting enough that the advocates are targeting college towns for their ballot petitions. Of course, the politicians see another tax source.

Frank M. Reynolds
News-Leader
June 14, 2009
http://www.news-leader.com/article/2...d+not+be+legal

I am not Frank M. Reynolds nor do I agree with his opinion.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Good find, Sad that it can be found so easily...so often...

[Euthanatos93420]

Lung damage, Gateway Drug, Brain damage, and the lowest of them all...

DICK SHRINKAGE! Well...testicular....but it's the same threat to manhood.

Every one of these myths has been disproven and yet its rhetoric is still repeated.

Lets not skip the the insuation that people get high and ride motorcycles in big badass gangs that rape plunder and pillage you women children and oh-so-virtuous lifestyle.

[Valseedian]

Originally Posted by chillinwill

I am writing regarding two issues in the news lately, the requirement for the motorcycle riders to wear helmets and the NORML group to legalize marijuana. Both have statistics that should leave the laws as they are. The injury and fatal deaths in the helmet argument don't need further discussion. The marijuana situation is another issue. I have worked nearly 50 years in drug and substance abuse.

1. Marijuana is not harmless. In order to get the most effect, it has to be inhaled deeply. In a study of Army soldiers, they discovered that the person that smoked marijuana three times a week had as much lung damage as a three-pack-a-day cigarette smoker. My experience with over 10,000 drug addicts the steps were: First, regular cigarettes and alcohol, second, marijuana and third, harder drugs such as heroin, LSD and other legal and illegal opiates.

-- valseedian wrote:
the first sentence is atleast 1/2 correct, pot (the plant) is harmless. THC(the drug) is 99.99999% harmless.. STOP blaming the problem on the drugs when the problem is with those who can't use those drugs responcibly. people hurt people.... people hurt THEMSELVES by administering drugs... Why can't we have a licensing system for drugs? why can't we have doctors and testing and and a registration system... you do something dumb under the influence, you lose your license to use!!.. simple as that.

'discovered that the person'... so, not only was this an isolated incident, but it doesn't even discuss the fact that you don't have to smoke pot... there's pills, vaporizers, lotions, trans-dermal patches, tinctures... and even then, when does the line get crossed when we become a nanny state?? why is tobacco soooo much more important (other than the tobacco lobby...)




In regard to the medical use, let marijuana go through the same process of the FDA that other pharmaceuticals go through before being approved for use.
-- ok, I agree with this.. but the thing about it is, we have too many police officers/rehab facilitators thinking that they know something about policy creating... lets say we lived in a country where there's 1 guy who not only collects taxes, but also decides how much to charge, and by the way.. he gets to keep a %....

do we ask the school janitor what lunches should be allowed just because it's his job to clean up the mess? no...

without the docile stoner to bother law enforcement will actually have to get off it's ass and EARN that $20/hour... po-po might actually have to deal with some violent criminals, or some REAL drug dealers.... maybe take down some of the street gangs who rob people... and marijuana detoxification is a fucking breeze for the 'handlers', as well as really raking in the dough because of manditory rehab for marijuana users.


In symposiums that I participated in, both advocates and those opposed in the medical field stated that the problem was determining dosage because of trying to measure effectiveness.


-- valseedian wrote:
this dosage issue arrose because of ORAL INGESTION: part of the d9-thc is destroyed before absorption, and with oral ingestion it's a 1 shot thing. With inhalation (vaporization or combustion) you can judge more on a minute-to-minute basis whether or not you've had enough.



In fact, from many years of research as well as my experience, the use makes learning much more difficult. And because the active ingredient is not water soluble, the THC is absorbed in the brain as well as the reproductive organs and will take months to finally get taken out of the system.

--valseedian wrote:
OMG!!! you mean there are chemicals corsing through my veins this very second!!! what are we going to do now? there are 1000's if not 10000000's of chemicals present in the human body without any outside influence... at birth... and somehow we manage to live over 100 years in some cases ( I know atleast 3 people over the age of 100 who used marijuana for more than 20 years of their lives.. one who's been using for nearly 70... he's one of the most independant elderly I know... still active, still very lucid.. 102 years old. it seems that there are cannabinoid receptors in cartilidge and extended use can counter arthritis, but the anti-inflamitory action of d9-thc has found multiple life saving uses.
and I know this may come as a shock to some of the drug-nazi's out there, but you are high right now. every single one of us has endogenous cannabinoids that activate the same brain receptors and cause the same sensations.
I'd like to ask you to name every single lipid-soluable chemical that can be ingested legally... poisons, pharmas, OTC, alchohol cause how many 'regulated' injuries (let alone deaths) per year? Peanut butter has killed more people than marijuana. and again, where do you get off telling me I can't hurt myself? I could smoke tobacco untill I died of cancer, or drink my liver belly-up, but god forbid I want a joint.

Interesting enough that the advocates are targeting college towns for their ballot petitions. Of course, the politicians see another tax source.

-- valseedian wrote:
interesting enough: the opponents of marijuana legalization are those who've never tried it... those who are (were) in charge of policy creation had
1) massive vested interests ( google harry anslinger)
2) didn't know anything about marijuana (let along what it was)
3) cited exactly 0 facts supporting that the drug met scheduling criteria
4) a complete dis-regard for scientific evidence, or the opinions of medical professionals, or the facts
5) LIED, during a congressional hearing stating that 'the medical community backs the propsal 100%' despite the testimony of doctors that marijuana doesn't cause psychosis, death, lycanism( yup... it actualy had to be stated in a congressional hearing, harry anslinger himself testifying UNDER OATH that he 'inhaled 2 breathes from a marijuana cigarette and was turned into a vampire bat, after which I spent 15 minutes flying around the room'... the guy in charge of making policy actually said that during a murder trial in which the defendant claimed that 'after smoking marijuana my incisors grew 6 inches and began dripping blood'... she'd murdere'd her whole family, she walked on the 'marijuana insantiy' defence...... more than a handful of people sucessfully used this defence before harry anslinger himself spoke out against the blatant lieing, noting that the general public doesn't like being lied to.






Frank M. Reynolds
News-Leader
June 14, 2009
http://www.news-leader.com/article/2...d+not+be+legal

i ADDED some rebutle to the quote above, sorry if it's disorganized, I'm somewhat scatterbrained.


I hate people who can't just leave others alone...

I've been kind enough to highlight the only part of this ENTIRE article that should be paid attention to.

this country/world has allowed too many vested interests to be fully in-charge of policy modification...


the words we need to start yelling at these people is 'conflict of interest'.. we need to show these people for the greedy bastards they are. the prison industrial complex is almost fully in controll of us now.. of course the owner of a private prison, who makes money for every inmate, wants to see more strict laws and penelties.... it's good for buisness. we need to stop thinking about what's good for buisness and ask ourself really and truely, what's fair?

and I know life isn't fair, but why should we work to that end? if we aren't willing to attempt a change, we'll be stuck in antiquity forever.

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Good point. Sadly far too true.
	nice and valid comments

[motorhead]

Frank Reynolds says he has worked 50 years in the field of Drug and Substance abuse. How old is this guy lol. He probably knew Hearst, Anslinger, and the other Anti-Marijuana cronies personally hahahha. He probably watched all his peers hanging out, going to festivals, protesting the Vietnam War, muttering to himself 'damn hippies'.

If he is working as a counselor I can't see him having a high success rate in helping addicts as he obviously harbours antiquated notions of tough love and conservative ideals of the evils of drugs stemming from early 20th prohibitionist concepts.

Either way his letter has little in the way of documented facts to back up his theory, and although he will probably never read these responses he is getting a lashing from readers of his letter on News-Leader.com. lolololol

Reputation Comments on this post:

Excellent point that would have escaped me had you not pointed it out.

[Euthanatos93420]

Peanut butter has killed more people than marijuana.

Word...

[Waffa]

well everyone has already commented marijuana part ... i specially also liked the FIRST tobacco and alcohol (yeah these 2 are SO harmless...).. "and third, harder drugs such as heroin, LSD and other legal and illegal opiates."

Yeah, that's what i would do, place Heroin & LSD in one group... i wonder WHAT this guy did this 50 years if he has NO understanding of drugs at all? How is it possible?

[Euthanatos93420]

...Heroin and LSD in one group...

LOL you're a riot Waffa.

[Hollow Hippie]

Originally Posted by Euthanatos93420

LOL you're a riot Waffa.

LSD is a relatively soft drug

Also the article is gone

[Waffa]

but seriously, cant people get fired for obvious ignorance and stupidity?
Most of the anti drug people i have heard just make stuff up and does no way relate to facts or science.

If i work in car driving school, i am color blind alcoholic who like's to drink& race and do not know basic traffic laws - THEN i shouldn't be able to give official driving course's right ? Gov also would not let pedophiles to work in kindergarten so HOW the hell is things like that (lying or stupid people giving education) allowed?

arrh

[Valseedian]

Originally Posted by Waffa

but seriously, cant people get fired for obvious ignorance and stupidity?
Most of the anti drug people i have heard just make stuff up and does no way relate to facts or science.

If i work in car driving school, i am color blind alcoholic who like's to drink& race and do not know basic traffic laws - THEN i shouldn't be able to give official driving course's right ? Gov also would not let pedophiles to work in kindergarten so HOW the hell is things like that (lying or stupid people giving education) allowed?

arrh

old topic, qfe

we need to make a grass-roots movement TODAY, tell the world that we want our lives governed by science and fact, not the opinions of a group of popularity contest winners... congress and our government et t al. has corrupted it's purpose, becoming a tool of the wealthy and no longer a voice of the people.

case in point: our archaic system gave the presidency TWICE to a man who did not win the popular vote. didn't even come close... that's not the mandate of the people, that's government buearacracy bullshit!

sure, if you legalize, use will go up... but MAYBE alchohol use will plummet... maybe people will stop smoking soo many ciggarettes.. maybe hard drug addicts will find a reprieve in the newly-legalized herb of choice.

ending cannabis american discrimination can only result in good...

[Nature Boy]

Ergh! Drug counsellors. So often do you see one flaring off some disgruntled attack on progressive drug policy. I don't know if it's a thing that drug counsellors in general think, maybe they're all pissed off at being substandard psychologists but you do see them shoot their mouths off very often. They always spout out the same useless arguments about tar levels and how having a couple of joints is like smoking sixty cigarettes a day. Peculiar then that we don't have marijuana-induced lung cancer patients all over the world's hospitals. Bit of a problem with that argument isn't there?

"Don't debate to me about drugs. I've seen the damage!" Strange that. No-one else has seen this damage. They're the equivalent of some crazy old preacher blurting out something about having talked to the Jebus in a dream.

[Euthanatos93420]

big surprise there.

Yeah we know. that was our source of amusment: the ignorant propaganda of the writer

[ninjaned]

In regard to the medical use, let marijuana go through the same process of the FDA that other pharmaceuticals go through before being approved for use.

yes let it! it'll get approved before you can say legalize it... assuming that they gave it a fair process. cause it really does help a lot of people, without a lot of side effects(not saying that theres not side effects just sayin that there few and mild).

[Euthanatos93420]

Won't happen. FDA standards apply to a singular chemical and it's measurable varying quantities.

Pot, by such defenition, does not meet criteria to be subjected to those studies.

In fact, no plant/herb ever can.

IF the FDA reviews marijuana it will have to devise and peer-review new study methods. that will have less than precise data because of the varying constituants of a plant. Even the same plant (cloned) grown enough under conditions of replicable exactutitude that produce a GCMS verifiably (near enough) identical product....ONLY that strain (under exactly replicated production methods) would be approved.

It would be prohibitively expensive to study/approve marijuana as a complete plant according to 'FDA standards'. Moreover each of these tests must be done for each application (insomnia, depression, anxiety. MS, glaucoma, cancer, nausea, epilepsy, etc. etc.)


This is meaningless propagandastic drivel by an ignorant fuckwad who knows jack shit about drugs and nueropharmacology. Not to mention jack shit about the pharmacuetical process.

[Valseedian]

I assume they will classify it the same way that they do cigarettes.. not exactly sure how they plan on classifying cigs, but it's law that they have to now.


or skip the whole FDA bullshit, tell people the truth: mj isn't all laughs and good times, and let them decide for themselves like cigs and booz.