New Study documents the brain damage caused by marijuana

It should be legal... But yeah. I know a few people that are heavy smokers. I know a couple that just have a joint before bed... they seem fine. But the heavy smokers, they seem to get a little more paranoid every time I see them.
 
Science trumps anecdote...isn't that how it works with critical thinking?
 
There are safer ways to ingest any smokeable than setting fire to it and inhaling the concentrated smoke.
 
1) Is there ANY activity that's free from risk?

2) Why should we make some things illegal simply because they're harmful? The principle isn't universally applied, but rather is applied only to things which were, ironically enough, made illegal thanks to specific moral (often religious) justifications.

This is interesting data for someone looking to get the benefits of pot while minimizing the risks, but that's about it. (Note: never smoked a joint in my life. Closest I came was giving a lighter to a guy who was at a party [I wasn't attending, I was walking back from a bar smoking a cigar] where aparently a girl he was chasing was smoking pot. I got no dog in this fight.)
 
I can't stand the stench.

But anyway- you can also see that alcohol damages people's brains, livers, and other parts. We don't ban that.
 
I see his point though, and it's probably off-topic to say people can just ingest it in some other way or bring up other things that haven't been banned; the study says it's the THC somehow that causes the damage.
 
Pot is not harmless. A lot of things are bad for you and yet perfectly legal: alcohol, tobacco, sugar, and gambling come to mind.

The argument I'd make instead is that marijuana prohibition laws are much more harmful to society than the drug itself.
 
Muldur said:
Science trumps anecdote...isn't that how it works with critical thinking?
Click to expand...

Yeah, but first check the source of the so-called science.

If you read the comments, three of four in there's some serious questions asked about the lab that has produced this report.
 
Muldur said:
Science trumps anecdote...isn't that how it works with critical thinking?
Click to expand...
Where does the study say it's harmful to adults, as opposed to those who start when they're very young?

And how does that supposed brain damage compare/contrast to the damage caused by the idiotic "war on drugs"?
 
Muldur said:
Science trumps anecdote...isn't that how it works with critical thinking?
Click to expand...

Uh huh, and where were the demographic controls in this sample?

"Scientists from MCRI, Melbourne University and Wollongong University compared MRI scans of the brain for 59 people who had been using marijuana for an average of 15 years to 33 healthy people who had never used the drug."


Read more at http://www.medicaldaily.com/article...-drug-habit-addiction.htm#LsDB1jz7iQQDM4sq.99

59 people?

How many smoke cigarettes?
How many drank a large amount every day?
How many used PCP?
How many used inhalants?
What disease processes are there in the demographic match?
What demographic mapping was there to the control group?
How was the control group constructed for comparison?

Do y9ou know anything about research protocols and smalls ample sizes not controlled for sample bias?
 
WildCat said:
Where does the study say it's harmful to adults, as opposed to those who start when they're very young?

And how does that supposed brain damage compare/contrast to the damage caused by the idiotic "war on drugs"?
Click to expand...

I think long term use of Marjuana probably does do damage to people,but no worse then long term use of Alcohol.
And a lot more damage is being done by the useless "War On Drugs".

No fan of Marijuana,but even less of a fan of our idiotic drugs laws.
Legalize and regulate.
 
Monketey Ghost said:
I see his point though, and it's probably off-topic to say people can just ingest it in some other way or bring up other things that haven't been banned; the study says it's the THC somehow that causes the damage.
Click to expand...

It's not off-topic at all. We're discussing toxicology, and my post raised a valid, if cliche, point in regards to that field: EVERYTHING can kill you. Or, to put it the way toxicologists do: The dose makes the poison. Simply demonstrating that harm can come from something under specific conditions is an interesting bit of trivia, right up there with the RBI stat of an unknown baseball player or how many jelly beans are in the jar at the end of the bar. We could assume, knowing nothing other than that the substance was consumed, that under the proper conditions harm would result, so finding those conditions isn't really telling us anything.

ravdin said:
The argument I'd make instead is that marijuana prohibition laws are much more harmful to society than the drug itself.
Click to expand...
As I told a cop two months ago, if Prohibition hadn't occurred Al Capone would have been the proud owner of a chain of drug stores at best.

http://civilliberty.about.com/od/drugpolicy/tp/Marijuana-History-Laws-United-States.htmHere's an interesting website on the topic. The first entry is particularly ironic. Marijuana can be derived from hemp--which was also used to make rope, a vital commodity in the age of sailing ships.
 
I'm just glad alcohol and caffeine are safe havens of health from this vile substance cannabis, with it's exotic oriental leaves and strange pungent scent. Not to mention sugar, another fine thing which would never cause immune systems to be damaged if abused, similar to the damage the dread weed cannabis inflicts upon the brains of our youth.

And I am happy we outlaw all guns and weapons on the off chance they too are abused.

It's good to be able to sleep in this nation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom