• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Is Marijuana Harmless?

Anybody knows why it was made illegal in the first place? And the other drugs as well?

I was told it was for several reasons
1. Give police something to do after Prohibition.
2. Lessen competition with Nylon
3. Blacks were the ones that used it so it was done to persecute blacks.
 
In my personal experience marijuana can have harmful effects. For many years I enjoyed the occasional joint/cone, with no harmful effects to speak of. Then after a period of prolonged use I wound up psychotic. So I stopped it for a year, then tried some more, just a little, but bam, psychosis again.

According to several doctors I've spoken with a small percentage of people get totally 8'd up by pot, the rest can use it with pretty much zero risk.

Then there's the question of whether pot-induced sloth is harmful or not... as a wise friend of mine put it, smoking pot daily is like pressing the pause button on your life story.

I kinda miss marijuana but just can't risk using it again.
 
Anybody knows why it was made illegal in the first place? And the other drugs as well?

I was told it was for several reasons
1. Give police something to do after Prohibition.
2. Lessen competition with Nylon
3. Blacks were the ones that used it so it was done to persecute blacks.

The one I'd heard was that cotton wasn't doing so well against hemp, ( which grows with the least provocation, and more of the plant is useful - e.g rope, fabric and paper), so the cotton farmers "arranged" to can cannabis banned, and oh, that hemp stuff, can't the difference between it and "the good stuff", so we'll ban it to, or at least make it so onoerous to get a license and manage the plantations that it was more expensive that cotton. No matter that cross pollenation of hemp and cannabis results in real bad weed, apparently.

I also recall vaguely that the oringinal Levi's Jeans may have been made with hemp fibre instead of cotton.

And on that note, I bothered with a Googel search, and, LO!, the Oracle Speaketh. -ath. whatever:
The History of Hemp by Derek Bielby

(looks like I was wrong about cotton, looks like the nylon-people had their hand in)

(Never seen the stuff, been offered it or seen anyone use it. This excepting the one time I was on a overnight forest hike with my older brother and dad when I was about 8, and when we bivouced for the night, dad sent me off to find some leafy stuff to put on top of the bivouc. I found a lot of what met the need a little ways off the track. I guess I must have walked into someone's plot...)
 
I have read (and Know from personal experience) that hemp does not itself cause brain damage BUT can (if used from adolescence in excess) deter the proper development of the brain, (its a mind altering substance and your using it before your brain has properly developed) and it can cause respiratory problems. ( the lungs are designed to process air not smoke.

any one with half a brain can tell you "anything to excess can be harmfully.

In addition the parts of the brain that seem to not develop properly in the case I was referring to are the parts responsible for figuring out long term consequences. IE they still have that "I am invincible" attitude, every case is different and there are many cases where people have become a functioning part of society using hemp on a regular basis, but psychologically it increases the chance of never being as well adapted to the environment and society as they could have been, if their brain was allowed to develop with out the invasion of the mind altering substance from a young age
 
Last edited:
I don't smoke it but my friends do, so when they do, I use the smoke to get room-stoned.

It works.
 
What I'm more concerned with about marijuana is whether it's addictive. I'm pretty skeptical of the whole "psychological addiction" fad.
 
What I'm more concerned with about marijuana is whether it's addictive. I'm pretty skeptical of the whole "psychological addiction" fad.

The main thing that concerns me about marijuana usage is that I hear it sometimes induces flashbacks.
 
What I'm more concerned with about marijuana is whether it's addictive. I'm pretty skeptical of the whole "psychological addiction" fad.

The main thing that concerns me about marijuana usage is that I hear it sometimes induces flashbacks...
 
What I'm more concerned with about marijuana is whether it's addictive. I'm pretty skeptical of the whole "psychological addiction" fad.

Depends what you mean by "addictive". I don't think there's any research which would confirm that marijuana is physically addictive. Most physical addictions (in my layman understanding) are the result of taking in large doses of a chemical which is very similar to naturally produced chemicals in our bodies. Our bodies see a regular source of these chemicals, and naturally shut down production of their own. When you take away the external source, the body doesn't react immediately to restore production, and you have withdrawal.

Apparently THC doesn't have a naturally occurring counterpart in our bodies like opiates or nicotine.

On the other hand, I think psychological addictions, or perhaps more accurately "dependencies", are a very real occurrence. The difference here is that the object of the dependency has nothing to do with the compulsive behavior to abuse it. The psychological reasons may be as simple as fear and poor self esteem which results in over eating, or heavy marijuana smoking, or compulsive gambling or any host of similar behaviors.

The idea is that marijuana use, and abuse, may be a choice, but the reasons for choosing may not be immediately conscious rational decisions.

If that makes any sense....
 
Yeah, I get that. Where I'm skeptical is whether it is the marijuana (or sex or gambling, etc.) that is causing you to make the impulsive decisions.
 
Yeah, I get that. Where I'm skeptical is whether it is the marijuana (or sex or gambling, etc.) that is causing you to make the impulsive decisions.

I think you maybe missed my point. It's not the substance being abused that has anything to do with the "addiction". The addictive behavior is based on psychologically pre-existing conditions, and the substance being abused is simply a tool for the self-abuse. Take away that substance, and they will find another. Deal with the psychological underpinnings of their addictive behaviour, and they might be able to lose the addiction.

It's my belief that much of overeating is the result of this phenomenon. There's no such thing as "food addiction". Marijuanna may be the same deal.
 
No, I got your point. My question was "what is the causal agent" and you seem to answer that it is likely the person. So to say that marijuana is psychologically addictive is false. People might become psychologically addicted if they are already have this illness. It has nothing to do with the object; unlike physically addictive substances.
 
No, I got your point. My question was "what is the causal agent" and you seem to answer that it is likely the person. So to say that marijuana is psychologically addictive is false. People might become psychologically addicted if they are already have this illness. It has nothing to do with the object; unlike physically addictive substances.

Yes, that would be my belief. Has it been claimed that marijuanna itself is the source of the addiction? If so, then I would agree with you that I would be very skeptical of this claim. I think once the use becomes habitual, the habit might be hard to break (I like to eat junk food while I watch TV, when it's not in the house I get a "craving"), but this is hardly the same as "addiction".

If it was, then I'm addicted to Doritos....and bacon....obviously...
 
Last edited:
What I'm more concerned with about marijuana is whether it's addictive. I'm pretty skeptical of the whole "psychological addiction" fad.

Dude... you must never have experienced it. Psychological addiction is incredibly strong. You don't want to stop, because... well... you don't want to stop! You can't see any good reason to stop. It's good! How can stopping be good?

Psychological addiction is incredibly strong. Physical addiction you can deal with, once you realise that it's doing you harm. Psychological addiction means you think it's doing you good.

I speak from experience.
 
The problem is that anti-marijuana fascists say stupid things about how marijuana causes cancer, and smoking a joint it the same as smoking a pack if cigarettes. People get confused when they're fed disinformation and it doesn't help anybody.
As I recall, the root-reason that marijuana is illegal was for political reasons. Pot came up from Mexico. The white boys had just killed off the Indians and taken their land, then suddenly more guys come up from Mexico that they can't completely kill off (long live the Alamo). So now there are all these undesirable Mexicans hanging about, and it seems they like smoking pot while the white cowboys stick to their toxic booze. So the gubmint passes laws against pot smoking as a way to kick those Mexican (pot-smoking) asses outta Texas. And so the law stands. It’s not much of a big deal for the next 50 years because the white guys that passed the law and kicked the Mexicans out were booze hounds and not into the marijuana thing. Dope then laid underground for some Mexicans, outlaws, and free blacks—especially jazz musicians.

Then in the 1950s, the beatniks “re-discovered” pot an alternative to the Eisenhower white-guy squares. The squares carried on the tradition of opposition to dope that carried from the exportation of Mexicans (although they didn’t even know that was what they were doing). The cultural division led to things like “Reefer Madness” (a very corny film) and total rejection of marijuana by the older white class and an acceptance of marijuana by the younger white class. As baby-boomers got older, the hippie generation turned to the yuppie generation with a focus on materialism and generally denouncing 1970s drug-addled coke-filled “Me Generation” that creeped up in the interim.

The Reagan administration revitalized nostalgic 1950s policies to reinstate the white-boy mentality that was based on policies from almost 100 years ago with Nancy’s “Just Say No” and the familiar “This is your brain on drugs”. Of course drugs became a major issue, because crack first came on the scene and gang crime (fueled by drug wars) were at an all time high. By the time Bill “I didn’t inhale” Clinton took office, the idea that “marijuana is bad” had had been built into gang wars and the Nancy Regan revitalization of the “Reefer Madness” view on pot.

In the 1990s, with an explosion of information (popularity of cable TV, the Internet) , the extensiveness of pot smoking, across wide groups of people, became apparent to the masses that had not realized that thousands upon thousands of people had been smoking it for the past 20 years with little problem, and even little notice.

Now we have crack and meth causing more problems than ever, and rehab is more popular than ever and alcohol and tobacco are well known to be much worse than pot. But the stigma created through the years continues.

If alcohol and tobacco are legal, there is no reason for marijuana to be illegal. For both physical and mental health, it is better than either alcohol and/or tobacco.

Full disclosure: I don’t smoke marijuana and don’t intend to. However I see no reason for it to be illegal. :)
 
Dude... you must never have experienced it. Psychological addiction is incredibly strong. You don't want to stop, because... well... you don't want to stop! You can't see any good reason to stop. It's good! How can stopping be good?

Psychological addiction is incredibly strong. Physical addiction you can deal with, once you realise that it's doing you harm. Psychological addiction means you think it's doing you good.

I speak from experience.

hah, well you're not the only person who spoked pot in college. I never experienced any psychological addiction to marijuana or alcohol. and i did both quite often. I quit not even consciously but just because i stopped being around it. So the anecdotes can both way.

My point though was that it's not the marijuana that caused you to become addicted. It was you. Now if we both started freebasing cocaine, we'd both be addicted rather quickly.
 
What I'm more concerned with about marijuana is whether it's addictive. I'm pretty skeptical of the whole "psychological addiction" fad.

"Addictive" seems to me a pretty useless word.

However, I do know people who become belligerant if, due to circumstances, they cannot suck on a jont for 30 minutes.
 
As I recall, the root-reason that marijuana is illegal was for political reasons. Pot came up from Mexico. The white boys had just killed off the Indians and taken their land, then suddenly more guys come up from Mexico that they can't completely kill off (long live the Alamo). So now there are all these undesirable Mexicans hanging about, and it seems they like smoking pot while the white cowboys stick to their toxic booze. So the gubmint passes laws against pot smoking as a way to kick those Mexican (pot-smoking) asses outta Texas. And so the law stands. It’s not much of a big deal for the next 50 years because the white guys that passed the law and kicked the Mexicans out were booze hounds and not into the marijuana thing. Dope then laid underground for some Mexicans, outlaws, and free blacks—especially jazz musicians.

Pidge said:
The one I'd heard was that cotton wasn't doing so well against hemp, ( which grows with the least provocation, and more of the plant is useful - e.g rope, fabric and paper), so the cotton farmers "arranged" to can cannabis banned, and oh, that hemp stuff, can't the difference between it and "the good stuff", so we'll ban it to, or at least make it so onoerous to get a license and manage the plantations that it was more expensive that cotton.

Also see this link:

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html

Anslinger had political reasons to make marijuana illegal. He was the head of a brand new agency, the Bureau of Narcotics, and he needed an "enemy" to make his agency powerful. Cocaine and opiates were not enough, so he vilified marijuana.

Also Hearst (a politician and head of a print media empire in the early 20th century) had a lot of timber interests and was interested in knocking out hemp (== marijuana, granted it is considered to have a lower source of THC) as a competitive source of paper.

I consider the illegality of marijuana as proof of the overwhelming political power of special interests groups. When one considers the long history of safe commercial hemp use (paper (including the paper that the USA Constitution was written on), clothing, canvas sails, ropes (esp. used on ships to defeat rot from salt water, etc.) it's amazing that even powerful lobbying groups were able to make it illegal. (During WWII, the USA govt. made it briefly legal again ("Hemp for Victory")).

Also, Bo's link (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Health+issues+and+the+effects+of+cannabis )
brings up the theory that mental illness may be a correlation but not a causuality of marijuana use. There is a theory that some people with mental illness may be attempting to self-medicate with marijuana. The web site won't allow me to do a cut and paste, but if interested you can do a search for the section heading "Co-occurrence of mental illness".

(In the interest of full disclosure I neither do drugs or alcohol.)
 

Back
Top Bottom