cannabis

[markus.dnd]

Now as i had really close encounter with "weed" i wonder. what you people think about it?

(by close i mean someone close to me is using it)

 

I think that only problem with it is that it is illegal (in many countries) so using it is basically paying to the underworld. it is not proven that it is less or more harmful than alcohol and tobacco. To be honest it looks like problem with drugs is staying somewhat far from people so everyone thinks it is something that does not concern me. just like with aids and so on.

[insane_alien]

well, it depends on how much the person is taking. if its a joint or two on occasion(not regularly) then chances are they'll be fine with no long term effects.

 

if they spend all day bumming on the couch stoned out their skull then there will probably be long term effects.

 

so, it acts pretty much like everything, in moderation its fine but in large doses its bad for you.

[markus.dnd]

thats the worst part. i can not say is is totaly bad. because it isn't

[John Cuthber]

There are problems caused by drug use.

There are also problems caused by the illegallity of drug use.

We can't prevent the former (any number of attempts in the past have patently failed since the drugs are still used).

We can do something about the latter.

It's possible that the reduction in damage done to society (however you may chose to measure that) by removing the latter set of problems outweighs any increase in damage done by any increase in the former set of problems.

[Realitycheck]

You have to factor in the change that it makes in your opinion of it once you try it.

 

It won't hurt me.

I can handle it.

It can't be that bad.

 

I found about 10,000 hits for it on pubmed. The last one I heard was that it was 20 times more carcinogenic than cigarettes.

[ParanoiA]

Yeah I've smoked cannabis for most of my 36 years of life and haven't noticed any side effects. I have no problems getting up in the morning to go get our food stamps, or check in with the unemployment office (that's my chore I do to live in my mom's basement). I would share more but "they" are tracking me...I'll report back when it's safe.

[Taq_is_hot]

I know a few people who smoke weed illegally. I was always afraid of it because health classes and things made it seem worse than alcohol and tobacco. Now, I will never use tobacco because I know it is addicting. I was nieve lol I thought that weed was addicting too. But then I found out it wasn't. So now I don't see how it can be worse than alcohol. I think that if it would be legal, it wouldn't cause any more problems than alcohol would. Plus, you would have less crime and less things to worry about. It is like prohibition...did't really work. SO many people smoke weed when they aren't supposd to! If they are allowed to, then they won't have to worry about anything. But of course there would need to be restrictions just like there are with alcohol and tobacco.

[iNow]

Now, I will never use tobacco because I know it is addicting. I was nieve lol I thought that weed was addicting too. But then I found out it wasn't.

This is a very often repeated, though seriously inaccurate statement, but much of the issue is with the fact that people don't understand the concept of addiction.

 

We can be addicted to pizza.

We can be addicted to flirting.

We can be addicted to Wild Cherry Pepsi.

and...yes,

We can be addicted to marajuana.

 

It's all about the baseline psychological state and what your body will do to satisfy that baseline need. Marajuana may not fit snugly into little nicotinic acetocholine receptors like cigarettes do, but that does not mean one can accurately state it is not addictive.

[Taq_is_hot]

I get your point, but what I meant was that it does not have a chemical in it like nicotine... That's all I mean. Sure, I know that you can get addicted to anything. You get addicted to the high, just like you do with alcohol. So, in a sense weed would not be as habit forming as nicotine...meaning that it would be easier to not do it all the time. Just like I would assume it is easier to make nicotine a habit than alcohol. Of course alcohol can be habit forming too...just not as much. That is what I was talking about with weed.

[markus.dnd]

oh well. it is sad. i quit alcohol and tobacco (waterpipe) so i can say i dont do shit. thanks ppl it has been rather helpfull topic. i got little ease for my soul

[insane_alien]

if it does turn into a problem for this person(starts affecting his/her work/social life) it would be a good idea to help him/her seek some help.

[markus.dnd]

yes. thats for sure. i just wondered if someone knows anything about cannabis that really is worse than tobacco.

anyways i will keep close look on people who use weed.

[insane_alien]

well, cannabis and riving wouldn't work where tobacco and driving isn't really dangerous(unless it's those nutters on the motorway more interested in trying to light a fag than the road.)

[markus.dnd]

well. actually getting high on nicotine is rather easy. and it does slow down reaction speed. i know because i was heavy smoker for a year. but it is said to fade for long term smokers. they usually stay on the brain reward system (dont know what its called in english) so that bigger concentration of brain released opiates due to the nicotine (like endorfin etc) makes them feel good and relaxed. i hope i did not miss anything here...

 

EDIT: i wonder why people dont use physical training. those amounts of endorfin gathered from there are huge. and feeling after the training is quite close to feeling after sex. weed high can not be close compared to that.

[DrP]

My 2p: - (figures are rough quotes from memory until I look the article up and give you the facts).

 

Alcohol - seriously reduces reation time by a mile (cant remember exact figure - half to x3 or more if really drunk?) - INCREASES confidence and risk taking by miles. THUS - you drive more dangerously, taking more risks and are nowhere near as capable as you think you are!

 

THC - reduces reaction times SLIGHTLY by about a tenth (Obviosly not good - but NOWHERE near as bad) - DECREASES confidence so you drive more carfully. THUS - you drive well within your abilities, stick to the speed limit and are alot more curteous to other drivers. -- SAFER!

 

The case against dope driving is that it reduces your confidence and slows reaction times - seems valid. However, in comparison, if you are driving more carefully due to reduced confidence / increased parinoia, but are only alittle slower (10%) then you are LOT safer than the drinker (or in fact a tired/ill person or someone using a mobile phone). An experienced driver/doper is alot safer in my book than a completley sober person just out of their test who thinks they are invincible. Most accidents happen in the first year or so of driving.

 

 

 

 

2ndly! Football hoolagans! They drink 10 pints and start fights and riots! Give them 10 splifs and see how many fights they start then! Notice that when the Brit footie hoolagans went to Holand there was absolutly NO violence at all.. I wonder why??

[iNow]

THC - reduces reaction times SLIGHTLY by about a tenth (Obviosly not good - but NOWHERE near as bad) - DECREASES confidence so you drive more carfully. THUS - you drive well within your abilities, stick to the speed limit and are alot more curteous to other drivers. -- SAFER!

Not sure why, but your statement (likely not very accurate) reminded me of this from a Michio Kaku presentation:

 

[insane_alien]

THC - reduces reaction times SLIGHTLY by about a tenth (Obviosly not good - but NOWHERE near as bad) - DECREASES confidence so you drive more carfully. THUS - you drive well within your abilities, stick to the speed limit and are alot more curteous to other drivers. -- SAFER!

 

last time i was high(don't worry wasn't driving unless you count need for speed on the PS2) my reaction rates sucked ass. driving for real would be both stupid and dangerous as hell.

[DrP]

last time i was high(don't worry wasn't driving unless you count need for speed on the PS2) my reaction rates sucked ass.

 

You thought they did! They probably wern't as bad as you percieved them to be. That is the whole point of my argument.

 

 

 

INOW "Not sure why, but your statement (likely not very accurate) reminded me of this from a Michio Kaku presentation:"

 

I will watch it with sound when I get home tonight. Why wouldn't it be accurate - I read it about 3 years ago in the New Scientist. They were doing an article as to why you shouldn't drive when stoned. I thought they missinterpreted their results. I'll look it up for you when I get home.

[Royston]

There's too many factors to give definite figures i.e it depends on the individual, the potency et.c et.c

 

Some people can handle their alcohol, some people can't, the same with any other illicit substance. The laws concerning illegal drugs clearly havn't worked, but I've already discussed that to death in the politics section.

[iNow]

Why wouldn't it be accurate

Reaction time relates to:

 

1) Stimulus is presented

2) Recognition of stimulus

3) Decision making on proper reaction to stimulus

4) Reaction (or implementation of the decision)

5) Effect of reaction

 

 

Steps 2-4 are all impacted when under the influence.

[DrP]

There's too many factors to give definite figures i.e it depends on the individual, the potency et.c et.c

 

Some people can handle their alcohol, some people can't, the same with any other illicit substance. QUOTE]

 

Yes but in general it does affect reaction times - I do agree though that some people can drive under OH influence (usually old guys who have done it for years and are used to it) BUT most people's abilities are seriously affected by drink but they think they are fine - Thats the problem, nearly all that drink and drive actually think they are fine to do so when they are not. People who smoke and drive actually think they shouldn't be on the road but are often fine! (agrred that it may vary for some)

 

Here is an independent test on driving ability vs THC levels in blood.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/driving_6.htm

 

Reaction time relates to:

 

1) Stimulus is presented

2) Recognition of stimulus

3) Decision making on proper reaction to stimulus

4) Reaction (or implementation of the decision)

5) Effect of reaction

 

 

Steps 2-4 are all impacted when under the influence.

 

Agreed - but NOWHERE near as much as when under the influence of alcohol - it really is just a fraction where with alcohol you are talking multiples. (as I said before it sometimes seems that way due to the increased parinoia).

 

 

(PS - I am not condoning dope driving at all - I am just saying that compared to drinking and driving it is nothing like as bad.)

[insane_alien]

You thought they did! They probably wern't as bad as you percieved them to be. That is the whole point of my argument.

 

no, they were worse than i perceived them to be. i sucked at a game i was quite good at and took me a full 5 seconds to realise i had been hit by a boot in a related incident later on.

 

the only thing i can say in my defence was that i realised that i was too monged to do anything requiring more than miniscule concentration.

[DrP]

no, they were worse than i perceived them to be. i sucked at a game i was quite good at and took me a full 5 seconds to realise i had been hit by a boot in a related incident later on.

 

the only thing i can say in my defence was that i realised that i was too monged to do anything requiring more than miniscule concentration.

 

Yea - OK, if you were THAT monged out then maybe, BUT () - just to play advocate here - I rekon that if driving a real car your subconsious might sharpen you up a bit due to the real dangers of being killed if you make an error. You knew that you could crash your playstation car and not hurt anyone so so your subconsious, stoned brain placed a lower priority on being able to drive as well as normal. If going at a measly 30 mph arround normal roads instead of a race track, you may have been alright. ( I still don't suggest you try it though)

 

 

 

QUOTE - from link I posted:

"Results :-All subjects were able to complete the series without suffering any untoward reaction while driving. Data from one female subject were excluded from the results because no drug was found in her plasma after smoking. "

[insane_alien]

yeah, see i don't think that would have happened.

 

anyway, if i'm driving i avoid everything, even painkillers. i don't think it would be safe to drive even if you were only slightly high.

[DrP]

Not sure why, but your statement (likely not very accurate) reminded me of this from a Michio Kaku presentation:

 

 

That was quite a cool video - thanks.

 

QUOTE IA

"i don't think it would be safe to drive even if you were only slightly high."

 

.... or tired, or ill etc......