Slashdot Mirror

From http://www.ukcia.org/research/...:

Alcohol impaired performance relative to placebo but subjects did not perceive it. THC did not impair driving performance yet the subjects thought it had.

Alcohol makes you more aggressively confident, pot makes you more careful of your driving.

It is called tobacco.

http://www.ukcia.org/research/cancer2.php

Dude, the DEA was founded on a shark jump.

It all came out of alcohol prohibition and the FBN having precious little bit of jack shit to do after it ended. So they started drumming up support for giving themselves more work, and...it worked. The path to making marijiana illegal was a farce so comical that nobody would believe it were it fiction.

You have Harry Anslinger, a name everyone should read up on.... first he tells congress marijiana makes people violent and how just one joint could make a person kill their own brother... then later on, changes up his story to how it makes people lazy and apathetic.

During all this, the AMA came out against making it illegal, and their doctor was asked to "go home if you don't have anything good to say" in the Senate... followed up by the house of reps debate on the measure.... which consisted of two questions:
"What is marijuana?" and "What does the AMA have to say about it?"...which amusingly was answered that their doctor was up on the hill a few days ago, and they support it.

After this, Anslinger himself spent years sending letters to police chiefs around the country, asking them to keep tabs on jazz musicians because they smoke pot, and one day, there is going to be a big event, where they are going to round up all the pot smoking jazz musicians. Seriously.... you can't make this shit up: http://www.ukcia.org/potculture/48/anslinger.html

"Please prepare all cases in your jurisdiction involving musicians in violation of the marijuana laws. We will have a great National round-up arrest of all such persons on a single day. I will let you know what day."

That was 1947. Shark well past jumped.

Of course it is. There isn't even a question about it.

Actually, there has been a debate over the last couple of decades. It has been traditionally agreed that substance dependence requires signs of withdrawal. However, with cannabis, signs of withdrawal only occur in some users. Compare that to 100% of heroin addicts who would show signs of withdrawal. What percentage of cannabis users would show signs of withdrawal? I don't know the figure, but the fact that the majority would show no signs at all means that, under the traditional classification, it would not be considered as a physiologically addictive substance. Quote:

"When human subjects were administered daily oral doses of 180-210 mg of THC - the equivalent of 15-20 joints per day - abrupt cessation produced adverse symptoms, including disturbed sleep, restlessness, nausea, decreased appetite, and sweating. The authors interpreted these symptoms as evidence of physical dependence. However, they noted the syndrome's relatively mild nature and remained skeptical of its occurrence when marijuana is consumed in usual doses and situations. Indeed, when humans are allowed to control consumption, even high doses are not followed by adverse withdrawal symptoms. "

- Lynn Zimmer, Associate Professor of Sociology Queens College and John P. Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology, City University Medical School

Well that hardly makes you an expert then.

Excuse me? Because I'm unaltered I'm somehow unqualified to make observations regarding people who are? Sorry, that argument's rubbish and it always has been. Same as the one saying that non-parents can't possibly have valid observations on how child-rearing should be done because "you can't possibly know".

It's even more obvious that you haven't a clue what you're talking about when you try to group alcohol in with cannabis as if it has a similar effect on the mind. They have completely different effects.

Completely? No. Not even almost completely. The original assertion was that people are dumbed down and stupid when smoking pot. Guess what. Alcohol makes you stupid (while under it's influence). Same effect. Sure, one's also a sedative. One's a mild hallucinogen. Sure. But completely different? No.

A term often used when talking about creativity is "thinking outside the box". That's exactly what cannabis helps one to do. That's not the same as random. What it does is to suppress the more obvious, everyday links between concepts, and makes you more likely to come up with less obvious links. This is stuff that makes for creativity.

Ran. Dom. Outside the box? No, man. More of the so-called "thinking" is total nonsense that you're admitting (or remembering, since evidently you're a user [else you can't possibly be any more an expert than I, remember?]) Objectively speaking, fact is that a large quantity of the non-obvious concepts that come up are non-obvious because they're nonsensical. Seriously, bring up something like physics with someone who's stoned on pot. Or politics. Or anything that requires the ability to process facts. Kiss any shadow of the conversation making sense goodbye.

Alcohol isn't like that. I think, through lack of experience, only observing it from the outside, you think that being stoned must be something like being drunk. It's not.

Again, in the sense that in both cases you tend to act, talk, and think like half of your brain was transplanted from a Rhesus monkey yes, it is.

The anecdotes of particular creatives is pointless as will just end with me matching your Douglas Adams with my John Lennon. However it is interesting that you pick that particular one, and assume he didn't smoke cannabis. I don't know if he did or he didn't, and neither do you, but either way I suspect he knew more about it's effects than you. In 1992, he put his name to a campaign for the legalisation of it.
http://www.ukcia.org/politicsandlaw/times92a.html

Friend, I'd argue for its legalization and I've literally never once partaken. My politics aren't germane any more than his were. As for Lennon, that's a complicated example. You've got a self-fulfilling situation. To a certain degree while an artist is "hot", they can do no wrong. I'm of the age where most of my peers appreciate the Beatles and his solo catalogue, so you're not dealing with a youngun who Just Doesn't Get It. My personal favourite band is Pink Floyd. This is useful information for one simple reason. Their earliest works (ie. the spaced-out clearly stoned albums) suck. Dark Side and WYWH are roughly when they started to pull their crap together and make music though a lot of the individual elements in there suck too. Newer albums than those just got increasingly musical. There's strong evidence in their history and biographies that by then they were seriously cranking back on drug use.

What I'm saying here is that frankly a lot of Lennon's library is junk. Not a popular view, but it's simply not done to criticize him. His work must be genius because it's his. And he's genius because of his work. Um? No. Some was great, some was mediocre and some was plain old stoner ramblings that should have stayed on the cutting room floo

I don't use mind-altering substances but I have observed several people close to me do so.

Well that hardly makes you an expert then. It's even more obvious that you haven't a clue what you're talking about when you try to group alcohol in with cannabis as if it has a similar effect on the mind. They have completely different effects.

Recreational drugs and alcohol serve to suppress coherent cognitive awareness. Users have diminished reasoning skills and what's left is random, less-coherent thought patterns.

A term often used when talking about creativity is "thinking outside the box". That's exactly what cannabis helps one to do. That's not the same as random. What it does is to suppress the more obvious, everyday links between concepts, and makes you more likely to come up with less obvious links. This is stuff that makes for creativity.

Alcohol isn't like that. I think, through lack of experience, only observing it from the outside, you think that being stoned must be something like being drunk. It's not.

The anecdotes of particular creatives is pointless as will just end with me matching your Douglas Adams with my John Lennon. However it is interesting that you pick that particular one, and assume he didn't smoke cannabis. I don't know if he did or he didn't, and neither do you, but either way I suspect he knew more about it's effects than you. In 1992, he put his name to a campaign for the legalisation of it.
http://www.ukcia.org/politicsandlaw/times92a.html

Are you kidding?

You need to do NONE of those things to produce and consume alcohol.

Can you give me any decent research that shows that pot is so much more dangerous than alcohol that it should have those restrictions? It's a pretty facetious question, because you can't. You can't OD on pot. You'd need to smoke like 3000 joints to do that. Or you'd need to eat like 30kg. When researchers looked at pot, they found that it would "moderately impair driving performance alone, but with alcohol, it would "significantly impair driving performance". You know, like alcohol does.

Hang around with an addict? Really? Because "About one in ten of those who ever use cannabis become dependent on it at some time during their 4 or 5 years of heaviest use. This risk is more like the equivalent risk for alcohol (15%) than for nicotine (32%) or opioids (23%)." Yea, it's 1/3 less addicting than alcohol, and 3x less addicting than cigarettes.

You are either very, very naive, or nicely brainwashed in the best Puritanic traditions. Before you post paranoid stuff about drugs, at least learn about them. If not try some. It might help you a great deal.

And crazily enough, I smoked pot 2-3 times in the late 90s. Haven't touched an illegal drug since. What I have done is learn about stuff, before rambling off like a Puritan who's been in deep-freeze for 400 years.

Hrmm... you are correct I seemed to have cited misleading data.

The actual number seems to be 22,073 deaths from alcohol consumption in 2006 vs 0 for marijuana, ever.

Nor any evidence that it impairs driving. There was a great study done that concluded that all of the previous studies they could find were seriously flawed in that they either looked at crash statistics that didn't separate stoned drivers from drunk drivers, or they did functional impairment studies on people who don't smoke. Yes, great science.

Anyway, long study short, they found no significant impairment. Slightly decreased reaction times, but the test subjects adequetly adjusted by driving more cautiously. But...don't take my word for it, Actually... there have been a couple:

http://www.cannabisconsumers.org/rpt_view.php?rec_num=17

Or maybe you don't want to trust Cannabisconsumers.org...

http://www.ukcia.org/research/driving2.htm

Or the actual study I read from: (I found it on the actual UK government site a few months back, can't find it now, I welcome the new link if its out there)

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_driving6.pdf

So really, the main argument against pot legalization was another misconception.

But who would have expected what some of the other things studies have found. Damned sciend!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis

-Steve

It has already happened. Cleenfeed was designed to block access to child porn, the UK government seems happy to use the technology which can apply filters to selected IP addresses to block access to articles that are an embarrassment to them. Such as one covering the smoking habbits of Labour party MPs. Cleenfeed is implemented by all the large UK ISPs, over 90% of UK residential access is covered. http://www.ukcia.org/news/shownewsarticle.php?articleid=13189

Other researchers identified a genetic pattern, which is carried by a quarter of the population, which combined with cannabis use gives the carrier a five-times higher likelihood of developing psychosis. So in essence it might make you crazy.

Long story short: a study involving repeated IQ tests of nearly 1400 participants over a time period of 12 years showed absolutely no statistical correlation between marijuana use and cognitive ability.

Mod parent up, the same was done with Lazy Mexicans being used to illegalize marijuana.

There is little evidence that pot has any negative effects...

Uh, wrong. There is good and mounting evidence.

Mental Illness

Cannabis link to mental illness strenghtened

The link between regular cannabis use and later depression and schizophrenia has been significantly strengthened by three new studies.

Marijuana Use Increases Risk of psychiatric illness Cannabis link to depression

This study suggests that girls who use cannabis as teenagers are more likely to develop anxiety or depressive disorders.

Psychotic symptoms more likely with cannabis

Marijuana in adolescence and early adulthood increases the likelihood of psychotic symptoms in later life.

Study suggests marijuana abuse increses risk of depression

Subjects diagnosed with cannabis abuse at the start of the study were four times more likely to experience depressive symptoms.

Marijuana makes blood rush to the head

Smoking marijuana can affect blood flow in the brain so much that it takes over a month to return to normal. And for heavy smokers, the effects could last much longer, a new study suggests.

Child Development

Marijuana use in pregnancy damages kids learning

Children born to mothers who use marijuana during pregnancy may suffer a host of lasting mental defects.

Dope-smoking dads double risk of cot death (SIDS)

Dope-smoking dads double the risk of cot death, a survey in California has revealed.

Maternal marijuana use during lactation and infant development at ...

THC concentrates in the mother's milk and is absorbed and metabolized by the nursing infant.

Reproductive effects

The Effects of Marijuana on the Endocrine System

Marijuana directly effects the endocrine system causing:

reduced sperm counts, sperm deformations, shrunken testes size, degenerates the seminiferous tubules, halves testosterone levels, decreases libido, causes the accumulation of breast tissue in men, causes anovulation, causes an acute reduction in prolactin, reduces adrenocortical reserve causing reduced ability to respond to stress, inhibits growth hormone, and depresses thyroid activity.

Cannabis, cannabinoids and reproduction

Marijuana inhibits implantation and increases miscarriage rates. Marijuana use during or after birth may impair reproductive behavior of children when they reach adulthood.

Study finds marijuana use in rats stops reporduction Research Survey: Common Ancestors

Marijuana suppresses the production of luteinizing hormone in rats by stimulating the production of stress hormones. "It turns out that marijuana is a stressor, which might explain a lot of its effects on the brain and on people"

Marijuana firmly linked to infertility

Scientific American Tue, 12 Dec 2000

General Heal

The redeeming quality of weed is that its users feel less capable of things like driving than they actually are. Drivers that are only mildly stoned are usually overly defensive in traffic and drive too slow.

The effect of alcohol is the opposite, and the effect of alcohol and weed combined is apparently even worse. No sane person combines alcohol with any other drug or psychoactive medicin anyway. Alcohol very seriously impairs judgment, while weed impairs performance.

High doses (> 300 ng/kg) of THC cause performance problems similar to those of 0.08 > BAC > 0.05 (common legal limits for blood alcohol of drivers). These doses are however higher than most regular recreational users prefer to use (in the Netherlands; not in combination with alcohol).

As someone from the netherlands all you say is a complete and utter lie.

Wtf is that supposed to mean?

Did you know that Dutch traffic is among the safest of the world (3rd)?

Have you ever used weed?

Regularly. Have you tried finding out what the right dose is for you? Have you used it while being sober?

Do you drive while tired or under the influence of painkillers? Do you use the phone while driving? Do you talk to passengers while driving?

Study concludes A.

MS decides B.
MS distributes B across the globe, everyone repeats. End of story.

Funny, that's the same thing governments have been doing with marijuana for years.
Scary how effective it is.

You do not need to mix marijuana with tobacco to make it burn properly. I live in the UK where mixing them is a common practice, but I never do it myself. Smoke in a pipe or bong instead of joints if you have problems burning it.

http://www.ukcia.org/activism/tokepure.htm

Take a look at the real statistics (especially the murder rate) before you post next time.

"And the same can be done for drivers stoned, high or otherwise doped-up. And for drivers who are putting on their makeup, chatting on their cellphone or otherwise abusing their driving privileges."

Here is a well done study on driving under the influence of pot. I think we need to pull drivers over when they drive out of control. Not just because they are under the influence of some substance. At least not pot. It's been shown to actually make drivers drive more cautiously.

"Caught selling drugs on the street? Mandatory jail-time and a massive fine. Caught growing your own? Mandatory jail-time and fine."

I agree that if you are caught selling on the street there should at least be a fine. On the other hand if you are growing for your own personal use and consumption, or just to give to friends then you should be ok. People make their own beer all the time. We should be able to grow a plant that is naturally here on earth!

I think you've touched on some major points concering legalization or decriminalization, but I think it needs to be refined in a few places as I have pointed out above. Cheers.