Pot

1. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   I wonder if the kids who are rioting and not making any sense are pretty much on it. Could it be that Pot, which contains more THC than ever before, is making them crazy? https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-protest- … ndon-tatum
    
   I also wonder if people are avoiding smoking pot due to health concerns over CV19. Vaping has diminished due to lung issues and more awareness of the risks of vaping.
   https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing … ing-update
   
   So, how about smoking pot?
   ... unless they are ingesting it as edibles these days.
   
   They say Marijuana is a natural plant, so how could it be bad.
   Well, so is Hemlock.
   A poison is a poison.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I don't smoke. But just to put some thought into the conversation. More people die on alcohol than pot.
      I've seen more people acting aggressively, abusing other people, killing people by alcohol then by pot.
      So why is nobody talking about alcohol as a huge negative and destructive drug?

      replyreport
   2. 85

      Kyler J Falkposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      As a former pot user, I can tell you that it is not the pot that causes someone to be violent. However, it would be accurate to say that many pot users do have their inhibitions lowered by pot, and then end up doing things they otherwise would not do while sober.
      
      Take my friends who I used to smoke with, for example; we'd go hang out and smoke a few bowls, and then one of them would get a little rowdy. His behavior would inspire us all to get a little over the top, and sometimes that would escalate into us fighting people, or otherwise breaking laws we wouldn't usually break.
      
      All in all, you can't really blame the weed for someone's crappy personality and poor life choices. If they weren't smoking weed, they'd be doing something else to drown their sorrows and relax.
      
      As for the amount of chemicals in the stuff, who cares? If people wanna pollute their bodies, let them. Hopefully they do it away from other people who don't want the secondhand exposure, but if not, it isn't like we aren't all breathing in big businesses' doings all day every day.

      replyreport
      1. 89

         wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I'm not following your train of thought.  You (and friends) smoke pot, which lowers your inhibitions, which then gives rise to being rowdy, fighting people (violence) and breaking laws that you wouldn't have broken if you didn't have the lower inhibitions that pot brought about.
         
         How is pot not the cause of your poor behavior after smoking it?  It's like saying that alcohol is not the reason drunk drivers have so many accidents.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            Kyler J Falkposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Smoked, past tense, weed is for degenerates. Get it right.
            
            The cause of my poor behavior was actually the abuse I suffered from my parents, and the weed simply helped in pushing me over the edge of delinquency. Alcohol makes you dizzy, it increases cortisol levels, and generally turns people into scum.
            
            The only thing weed influenced in me was acting upon feelings that were already there. Weed didn't chemically alter me to the point I became violent due to the weed, but it did make it easier to act on violent and delinquent impulses.
            
            Correlation does not imply causation, essentially.

            replyreport
            1. 89

               wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               That's what I said (did not mean to indicate you smoke it now) - the weed permitted/encouraged/produced activity (fighting, rowdiness, etc.) that would not have happened without smoking it.
               
               In my mind, saying the activity was always possible (but would not have happened without the loss of inhibitions weed produced) is not a reason to shift blame from weed to history.  The weed produced the conditions (loss of inhibitions) that made the activity possible; without it you were in better control of yourself.  We ALL have desires for unacceptable activities, but control them...until that control is disrupted by something else; in this case, weed.
               
               The weed is thus to blame, for it would not have happened without it.

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  Kyler J Falkposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  The weed is to blame for the loss of inhibitions, but it is not the causation of the violent and deviant behavior. There are more people who smoke weed and are seemingly-incapable of violence, than there are those who smoke weed and are violent.
                  
                  Let me explain from a more scientific perspective:
                  
                  In order to blame the weed for the violence we would need to identify the mechanism (measurable chemical trigger) for the violence. In my case, you never would have been able to prove, scientifically, it was due to the weed. You'd be able to find it in correlation with my forced-abuse of prescription medications, the medications my mom had convinced a doctor to prescribe to me, and that substance abuse led to a rise in cortisol levels. Those raised cortisol levels then lead to an increase in delinquent, and erratic behavior.
                  
                  You're making assumptions that can't be made accurately, but, luckily, this issue has been studied in my own individual life by those who take the time to collect proper data. I, at one point, would've blamed the weed for my behavior, but once I actually studied how the brain works and sought professional study, it was concluded that the weed could've been replaced by just about any other substance or influence and produce the same results.
                  
                  So, at the end of the day, correlation does not imply causation. Sure, you can perform some mental gymnastics and convince most people it was the weed, but as a matter of science and fact it was other stimuli.

                  replyreport
                  1. 81

                     Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     You seem rather authoritative in dismissing wilderness and his intelligent and logical reply.

                     replyreport
                     1. 85

                        Kyler J Falkposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        Intelligent and logical does not mean factual and scientifically correct. Logically we can blame weed, scientifically that would be absolutely incorrect.

                        replyreport
                  2. 89

                     wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     *shrug*  No loss of inhibition, no misbehavior.  That seems pretty straightforward to me, and pretty causal.  You state that that loss of inhibition was from smoking weed, and although you didn't say so I'm assuming there was no misbehavior without that loss.  That plainly puts the cause on weed, at least in my eyes.
                     
                     Absolutely weed could have been replaced with other drugs, particularly alcohol.  Anything that removes the ability to control our actions would suffice.  The term "mean drunk" came about for a reason.
                     
                     Bottom line is still that without the use of weed (or other chemical) the behavior would not happen - to blame it on anything else seems wrong.

                     replyreport
                     1. 85

                        Kyler J Falkposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                        That's actually incorrect, as the behavior can happen if I am pressed to violence by someone acting violent themselves. The influence on the behavior isn't just dependent on chemicals, it can be anything that triggers the chemical mechanisms for violence. Basically, if you were a scientist and you settled on your stance as fact, outlawed weed and other chemical agents completely, you'd still be stuck wondering why the violence hasn't stopped.
                        
                        Sometimes you have to think deeper than what is logical to get to the real answers.

                        replyreport
                        1. 89

                           wildernessposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                           Stopped without weed?  Impossible, for we will always have violence.  But slowed or reduced?  From your testimony it would be inevitable, at least judging from your experience and testimony.
                           
                           About as far as I could go is that weed is a contributing factor, along with others.  But isn't that the case in nearly every action we take - that there is more than one factor involved?  And if we remove any of them the action is less likely, or even near a zero probability, of happening?

                           replyreport
                           1. 85

                              Kyler J Falkposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                              Not necessarily, because it always comes down to attacking the causation and not just the branches/symptoms/correlating circumstances. In my case you could take away every intoxicant you want, I'd still be just as likely to be violent in most situations I face throughout my life. Despite having removed most intoxicants from my life, I still end up in violent situations.
                              
                              The reason I end up in these situations isn't due to weed, either, at least not as a measurable mechanism in most of the violent interactions. It'd be more accurate to say that weed is one of the least important factors in considering why it is I am drawn to violent behavior.
                              
                              You're wrong, scientifically speaking, and there is no argument to the contrary on that one. If your ideas were inherited by the majority, we would all suffer for your inability to grasp the concept that correlation does not imply causation.
                              
                              Think of it this way: When you have a bacterial infection that makes you cough and wheeze, you don't just do breathing treatments. If you just did breathing treatments, that infection would continue to grow and the sickness would worsen.
                              
                              Much in the same way with weed in society, if you criminalize it to decrease violence, you'll only be making the issue of an overabundance of weed less of a problem, but violence will continue to get worse.
                              
                              You treat the cause, not the symptoms, otherwise you're putting a band-aid on a wound that needs stitches.

                              replyreport
   3. 73

      Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Pot, marijona, hemp, call it what you like are drugs or poison. Those involve loss both their head and senses!

      replyreport
      1. 81

         Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Poisons are poisonous because they are either too acidic or too alkaline. Pot is acidic. You can loose your teeth. Very bad for the gums / blood circulation.

         replyreport
2. 90

   louiseelcrossposted 4 years ago

   It is not just kids that are rioting around the world as this time. It is people from all different age groups ad backgrounds, young and old.
   I have never seen a pot smoker being aggressive and wanting to riot. Seen way too many people using alcohol being violent and abusive, dying, destroying their own lives before they die, destroying the lives of people that love them too but, I have never seen people behaving destructively on pot. I have lost many of my own family and friends through alcohol abuse. Pot is natural and can be used in many ways. I have a friend who has Parkinson and is in her 80's and it helps her. I have friends in pain because of disabilities and they use pot to deal with their pain. Pot is natural and alcohol is not. So in my mind its more likely to be alcohol fuel riots rather than Marijuana use .

   replyreport
3. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   The reality is we knew the stuff was deleterious before we legalized it.
   
   For instance, it has been found that smoking one joint gives as much exposure to cancer-producing chemicals as smoking four to five cigarettes.

   replyreport
4. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   Recent studies show brain abnormalities in areas of the brain involving emotion, motivation and decision making.

   replyreport
5. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   Alcohol is ethanol while pot is made up of 400 known chemicals. Alcohol passes out of the body in a few hours, but THC and the substances found in marijuana take weeks or months, depending on how much is taken. "Medical marijuana," which refers to the whole plant and it's basic extracts, is not recognized by the Food and Drug Administration. In fact, instead of providing health benefits, THC damages the immune system.

   replyreport
6. 81

   Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years ago

   Look at the faces of the kids in the first link. In my mind, they reveal long-term use and personality changes. Their joy of life lost.
   Pot. Not alcohol.
   https://www.foxnews.com/us/nyc-protest- … ndon-tatum
   Logical deduction and surmises, I know, but they are based on my knowledge of human nature and life experiences.

   replyreport
7. 91

   techygranposted 4 years ago

   My experience with clients connected with violent weed-users was that the violence did not occur during using but when the addicted person could not get hold of weed.  Weed it self is generally not stimulating in the way you find with cocaine, alcohol or coffee.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Marijuana use can bring about anger. It can make a person agitated. It can make a person not his usual happy self. Changes in personality occur with long term use. Who hasn't witnessed this phenomenon first hand in friends of your children, your children, your friends or yourself? ( ... in any order.)

      replyreport
      1. 82

         peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Now Kathryn, tell me how many car accidents are due to pot and how many due to alcohol.
         How many murders are due to pot and how many due to alcohol
         How many rape cases are due to pot and how many due to alcohol.
         This whole Forum thread is based upon your bias to pot.
         More people are killed by guns then pot. Why not put a strong restriction on guns. Guns are far more dangerous then pot. Guns kill with a single shot. Pot seldom kills directly with one puff...
         Do you think guns should be banned? Or do you think pot should be banned?

         replyreport
         1. 81

            Kathryn L Hillposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Pot should not be smoked by young adults. They are in a formative stage and their development could be arrested or deranged. Their direction in life could become downward instead of upward. The frontal lobe contains the sense of time. Marijuana affects the frontal lobe of the brain.
            And more:
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6036125/

            replyreport
            1. 82

               peterstreepposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I do agree, just like young adults should avoid smoking or drinking alcohol. A presume young adults is -18.
               Eating fast food is not good for your health either and should be avoided by young adults and kids too. Obesity is dangerous, especially today now during  Covid. More people with obesity die of Covid then pot smokers.

               replyreport
8. 40

   anav12posted 4 years ago

   POT: smoking at a rate of one joint a day for as long as seven years doesn't seem to affect lung function adversely.Chronic bronchitis and emphysema, the two disorders that constitute COPD, often occur in longtime tobacco smokers. Symptoms — mainly coughing and shortness of breath — don't usually develop till people are in their 50s or 60s. In chronic bronchitis, inflammation damages the bronchi, or air passages, over time. In emphysema, the damage occurs in the walls of the alveoli (tiny sacs in which gases are exchanged), reducing the lung's capacity to exchange oxygen and carbon dioxide.
   
   Because the smoke from POT and tobacco contains many of the same substances, including toxic gases and tar, health experts have suspected that the risk of developing COPD from smoking marijuana might be similar to that of smoking tobacco. Yet the results of earlier studies on pot smoking had yielded puzzling results. Many short-term studies demonstrated that while inhaling pot led to coughing and phlegm production, there was no evidence that it decreased lung function.

   replyreport