Alcohol or Marijunana. Which is worst when overused?

[greenpeace]

I ALREADY DID.
(several pages back)

But just for kicks, here's a little something to make you nervous.
...

Is this what you are talking about?

 

[holy king]

People need to stop smoking dirt regs in paper and start vaping crips.

there are times when i still want to use my brain under marijuana influence. no thanks!

 

[nonconformist]

Are you seriously not getting that USAGE of weed is very rare BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL?

You better tell the 4 million Americans who smoke it regularly, since apparently they didn't get the memo.

 

[Elta]

You better tell the 4 million Americans who smoke it regularly, since apparently they didn't get the memo.

what is regularly? it has to be at least 50 million who smoke like 5-10 times a year average. ........ if where I am from is any indication.

 

[nonconformist]

what is regularly? it has to be at least 50 million who smoke like 5-10 times a year average. ........ if where I am from is any indication.

Regularly is every day I think

 

[Ecofarm]

1) A SINGLE case of mysterious death due to "disease", of a SINGLE individual hardly disproves decades of carefully conducted scientific study and the resulting evidence.

Do you believe in UFOs because you see ONE thing in the sky that you cannot explain?!

2) I think everyone could do with another listen:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QnurT1Ikcbk&feature=related

 

[nonconformist]

Basketcase, when an ex-marine is arguing vehemently pro-marijuana, you're pretty much . .. .. .. .ed as far as your argument goes

 

[warpus]

I think BasketCase was molested by Marijuana as a child.

 

[OttoManD]

OOh, a chance to quote my Canadian Ministry of Health/ Sante Canada prescription guidelines for medical marijuana!!

unlike alcohol, cannabis users are aware of their level of intoxication and compensate to become hyper-cautious, resulting in decrease of speed, decreased frequency of overtaking as well as an increase in following distance

 

[BasketCase]

Basketcase, when an ex-marine is arguing vehemently pro-marijuana, you're pretty much

And when a pro-legalization wingnut makes the same claims I've already been making in this thread, it's you who's <BLEEP>ed. I've got several points on you here--several of my sources were in fact PRO-legalization.

Turns out philippe is one such person. I'm now going to out him. In a PM to me, he conceded a point I've been arguing for many pages now:

Yes, there are risks involved with long term use, such as lung cancer, the same as with tobacco

Philippe was one of my most insistent opponents, and even he conceded the above.

Side note: if you don't have something complimentary to say, then stay the hell out of my mailbox.

unlike alcohol, cannabis users are aware of their level of intoxication and compensate to become hyper-cautious, resulting in decrease of speed, decreased frequency of overtaking as well as an increase in following distance

This is the case with almost all sedatives--most of them don't mess up the reasoning centers, they just slow you down. This is just as dangerous as falling asleep behind the wheel. You know you're sleepy. Well, here's a news flash: most people do not have the common sense the above quote claims they do. They keep driving until they hit a telephone pole. And that's aside from weed's psychoactive effects, which DO mess up the reasoning centers.


Here's the Big Picture: Inhaling the smoke from burning ANYTHING produces carcinogens. Burning paper causes cancer. Burning wood causes cancer. The smoke from your burning carpet causes cancer--though if anything in your house is on fire, the fumes are poisonous enough to kill you long before you actually get cancer. Weed causes cancer when smoked--and 90 to 95 percent of all users smoke it. Tobacco users could avoid cancer by using a patch--well, they don't. Most of them smoke it. Weed also has sedative effects and messes up other neurons, making the user a hazard to others, AND it's psychologically addictive, AND its proponents keep making a wide range of too-good-to-be-true claims about it. (And I have posted many links, proving all of the above again and again, as nearly as such things can be proven)

Any one of these things is bad enough by itself, but weed is ALL of those things, COMBINED. The stuff needs to stay illegal.

 

[greenpeace]

This is the case with almost all sedatives--most of them don't mess up the reasoning centers, they just slow you down. This is just as dangerous as falling asleep behind the wheel. You know you're sleepy. Well, here's a news flash: most people do not have the common sense the above quote claims they do. They keep driving until they hit a telephone pole. And that's aside from weed's psychoactive effects, which DO mess up the reasoning centers.

Could you please provide us evidence (just as I provided evidence for you) that there is a significant coorelation between marijuana use and lets say, fatal car accidents.

Here's the Big Picture: Inhaling the smoke from burning ANYTHING produces carcinogens. Burning paper causes cancer. Burning wood causes cancer. The smoke from your burning carpet causes cancer--though if anything in your house is on fire, the fumes are poisonous enough to kill you long before you actually get cancer. Weed causes cancer when smoked--and 90 to 95 percent of all users smoke it. Tobacco users could avoid cancer by using a patch--well, they don't. Most of them smoke it. Weed also has sedative effects and messes up other neurons, making the user a hazard to others, AND it's psychologically addictive, AND its proponents keep making a wide range of too-good-to-be-true claims about it. (And I have posted many links, proving all of the above again and again, as nearly as such things can be proven)

Then how come there is no correlation between marijuana use and cancer?

The stuff needs to stay illegal.

That is an entirely different matter altogether. For example, lets say weed was extremely bad for you, so what? A person should be allowed to decide what they wish to do to themselves so long as they don't harm others (provided they realize the consequences of the action).

And why no response to my last post, am I on your ignore list ( )

 

[nonconformist]

Here's the Big Picture: Inhaling the smoke from burning ANYTHING produces carcinogens. Burning paper causes cancer. Burning wood causes cancer. The smoke from your burning carpet causes cancer--though if anything in your house is on fire, the fumes are poisonous enough to kill you long before you actually get cancer.

Better ban that whole independence day, someone might get cancer!

It's not like people can make a *gasp* informed, rational choice about what they want to do in life?

Weed causes cancer when smoked--and 90 to 95 percent of all users smoke it.

Yeah, but Tetrahydracannabinol hyas been found to reduce tumours in mice.

Weed also has sedative effects....making the use a hazard to others

Frikking stoners, being a hazard by passing out on the couch or finishing off all the tortillas

and messes up other neurons,

No long term peer-reviewed study

making the user a hazard to others,

Yeah, we all know the huge cannabis-related rape and murderstats

AND it's psychologically addictive,

Anything is psychologically addictive. The internet is.

AND its proponents keep making a wide range of too-good-to-be-true claims about it. (And I have posted many links, proving all of the above again and again, as nearly as such things can be proven)

No, its "proponents" (not all of which whom smoke, but they share one quality: they are rational) argue that :
a)It's the choice of the individual involved
b)Pretty much everyhting you've said has been refuted and shown as complete crap.

Essentially, you're playing the bad scientist: you start with your conclusion, and then find the evidence to support it.

 

[bhsup]

Mary Jane should be outlawed simply because its overuse gives one the munchies (or so I've been told) and we already have enough of an obesity problem here in the States. You heard it from me first, MJ leads to obesity which leads to heart attacks and diabetes.

 

[nonconformist]

Mary Jane should be outlawed simply because its overuse gives one the munchies (or so I've been told) and we already have enough of an obesity problem here in the States. You heard it from me first, MJ leads to obesity which leads to heart attacks and diabetes.

Actually, I beleive THC actually speeds up the metabolism, which would prevent obesity

 

[bhsup]

Actually, I beleive THC actually speeds up the metabolism, which would prevent obesity

You know, upon thinking on this further, I have to admit I've not known too many fat bodies that partake of the whacky weed. You might just be right.

 

[philippe]

Turns out philippe is one such person. I'm now going to out him. In a PM to me, he conceded a point I've been arguing for many pages now:


Philippe was one of my most insistent opponents, and even he conceded the above.

Side note: if you don't have something complimentary to say, then stay the hell out of my mailbox.

But, why aren't you adding my additional comment? I said the hazards come from when you roll a joint, you also add tobacco.

Follow your own advice and get the hell out of CFC. Dear God, you are such an idiot.

If I don't know that nobody ever smokes a whole ounce of weed in ten days, THEN I DON'T KNOW THAT I SHOULDN'T COMMENT ON IT.

Now shut your goddamn mouth.

You mean, nobody smokes an ounce in ten days?

New flash for you: I've never used weed. Why the hell would I know how much most people smoke???

Christ.

Yes, Basketcase, keep arguing about things you don't know anything about. /shrug

 

[Luckymoose]

Weed isn't that big of a deal, everytime I have done it I mostly think more clearly. I say it should be legal.

 

[BasketCase]

But, why aren't you adding my additional comment? I said the hazards come from when you roll a joint, you also add tobacco

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_%28cannabis%29

The North American joint is typically rolled with only cannabis and no tobacco or cardboard

Next contestant?

 

[BasketCase]

Essentially, you're playing the bad scientist: you start with your conclusion, and then find the evidence to support it.

You're hopeless.

When I posted that link from some guy's blog about some guy who managed to kill himself by smoking 23,000 joints in 11 years? What did I say in that post? THAT I HAD NO IDEA WHETHER IT WAS TRUE.

I have always been pointing out statistical problems with my own links and pointing out problems with my own theories and posting links from PRO-legalization activists. I am a much better scientist than you are. In fact, if you ever do decide to pursue science as a career: pretty please with sugar on top, get a job in Iran--you'll single-handedly destroy their nuclear weapons program and get paid for it at the same time.

 

[BasketCase]

Hat trick!

Yeah, but Tetrahydracannabinol hyas been found to reduce tumours in mice.

Lemme ask ya something: did the mice smoke it?

Probably not.

Smokers could reduce their risk of cancer by chewing instead of smoking--or reduce the risk a LOT with a patch. Guess what, Sherlock--they don't. They smoke it. Same with weed. Yes, you could reduce your risk with a bong or vaporizer, but most users don't. They light up.


On the side: go back and read that link from my 2nd-previous post again. In North America, a joint is usually rolled with just the weed--in Europe, they prefer to roll a mix of weed and tobacco. So, if weed is safer than tobacco, that means what.....? That weed users will die more often in Europe (or, if weed is more dangerous than tobacco, then European users will die less often).

See? Different cultures can have a lot of impact on the results.