133 replies to this topic

[Dohregard]

snip

all this tells me is that you were proven wrong and now you're reaching out to try and find something to continue the argument.


Smoking in all your articles reffers to tobacco. When you see a "no smoking" sign, is it ever referring to Marijuana? Contrary to what you may have heard from whatever voodoo conservative school of thought you subscribe to, there are many different ways to inject Canabinoids and some of which, when taken in a small dose, will over time sease to get you high, but still give you the same health benefits.

I'm not planning on getting a stroke, I don't have MS (or a history of it), but if I can add smoking pot through a water filtration system (or a vaporizer, or extracting the canabinoids through butter and or oil to cook it) and it give me a pleasurable experience while doing less harm to me than alcohol, why should that be a problem? You have yet to discredit that fundamental argument. The reason I posted both of those was because you asked me to find some benefits to smoking pot... and I did...

Now please, tell me why getting high is worse for you than getting drunk or smoking cigarettes?

Here's my evidence. This fact has also been documented by other credible sources (BBC being one of them). Yes, there is a causal link between heavy marijuana use and testicular cancer. It is, however, nothing to freak out about since the chances of getting testicular cancer even if you were a heavy marijuana user is low. 8000 men get testicular cancer every year in the U.S. The survival rate of testicular cancer is very high. Compare that with the 37,000 who die every year in car accidents. But the causal link IS there. You can't deny it.

This is just spin of some pretty iffy science

Same study

You've got to take some of these findings and realize that for the number of people who have testicular cancer, there are X amount of people who smoke pot. But, what about the hundreds of millions of people who have smoked pot in the world who DON'T get testicular cancer?

Edited by Dohregard, 23 November 2009 - 12:25 AM.

[ArKonIte]

Marijuana is illegal. You can complain all you want, but it still won't change that fact.

[Dohregard]

Marijuana is illegal. You can complain all you want, but it still won't change that fact.

Marijuana... illegal? Geez, I had no idea!

That's a great answer, I sure am glad you came to that conclusion! I would have never guessed!

Now that you've made such a valid point on why pot is so harmful, I guess there isn't anything to do but laugh!


*chuckles whole heartedly*

Edited by Dohregard, 23 November 2009 - 01:20 AM.

[Emotive]

Marijuana is illegal. You can complain all you want, but it still won't change that fact.

just get the fuck out of here.

[The Colonel]

Split this from other thread, remember, all debates apply now. - The Colonel

[xan21]

People are allowed to smoke tobacco and drink as much alcohol as they want and yet millions die each year. You can’t find any marijuana deaths and yet this great plant remains illegal. It helps the sick and it’s a great recreational drug when its used in moderation. Anyone in this day and age that thinks it should still remain illegal is just plain retarded.

2 million alcohol-related deaths worldwide each year
Tobacco currently kills 5.4 million people per year
Marijuana deaths 0

Leaglize weed

Edited by xan21, 23 November 2009 - 04:12 AM.

[TheBase]

You've got to take some of these findings and realize that for the number of people who have testicular cancer, there are X amount of people who smoke pot. But, what about the hundreds of millions of people who have smoked pot in the world who DON'T get testicular cancer?

I can say the same thing about many other causal links. For example: what about the millions of people who did eat a lot of bacon but didn't get colon cancer? What about the millions of women who did drink liquor moderately but didn't get breast cancer? It's just an increase in risk. I did emphasize in a previous post of mine that the likelihood of getting testicular cancer even if you did use marijuana heavily is very small. The risk of getting testicular cancer is increased by 70% according to the Fred Hutchinson center if you use marijuana heavily and used it heavily as a young ass teenager. But a 70% increased chance ain't shit seeing that only 8000 men get testicular cancer in the U.S. every year. On top of that, testicular cancer has a high survival rate. BUT THE CAUSAL LINK IS THERE!

Let me give you an extreme and silly example to prove my point. Let's say every year in this world, 1 person gets the magical unicorn disease. If you drink at least 2 cups of black coffee everyday, your chances of getting the magical unicorn disease is increased by 10,000%! Wow! What a big number! I must stop drinking black coffee immediately! But this shouldn't be the case. If you really love black coffee (like me), the chances of getting the magical unicorn disease would be astronomically small even if you did drink a shit ton of black coffee everyday. The 10,000% increase in risk means that: if every single person in the world drank a lot of black coffee everyday, instead of just 1 person getting the disease, 101 people would get the disease. So in this crazy hypothetical situation, you literally have billions of people drinking black coffee without getting the magical unicorn disease. But the causal link is still there!

Look man. I am an angry bastard who is a strong advocate for the legalization of marijuana. And I have never used it. But we can't be denying the facts just to make marijuana look like it's 100% risk free. Nothing is 100% risk free.

[Emotive]

But we can't be denying the facts just to make marijuana look like it's 100% risk free. Nothing is 100% risk free.

i don't deny facts nor have i have said that marijuana is harmless. there are plenty of risks associated with it. however...

marijuana does not increase your risk for getting testicular cancer

i read half of the article you posted, which is nothing more than speculation, not science. i stopped when they went on to bring up that marijuana causes impotency in males and kills your sperm.

it's nothing but regurgitated myths that have been debunked over and over again.

Edited by Emotive, 23 November 2009 - 10:53 AM.

[rugmonkey]

that chart isn't correct.

you're still right though, MDMA and cannabis are about just as harmful as one another. LSD is safer than both of them.

What is your evidence that the chart is incorrect? The guy who drew the chart was the UK's chief drug advisor until he got sacked for telling the truth about the harm that drugs do. (see article I linked earlier)

[Dohregard]

I can say the same thing about many other causal links. For example: what about the millions of people who did eat a lot of bacon but didn't get colon cancer? What about the millions of women who did drink liquor moderately but didn't get breast cancer? It's just an increase in risk. I did emphasize in a previous post of mine that the likelihood of getting testicular cancer even if you did use marijuana heavily is very small. The risk of getting testicular cancer is increased by 70% according to the Fred Hutchinson center if you use marijuana heavily and used it heavily as a young ass teenager. But a 70% increased chance ain't shit seeing that only 8000 men get testicular cancer in the U.S. every year. On top of that, testicular cancer has a high survival rate. BUT THE CAUSAL LINK IS THERE!

The biggest thing you're missing is that there is scientific proof that bacon contains high amounts of cholesterol and that cholesterol can lead to colon cancer / heart disease / etc in people with genetic dispositions to such diseases.

Once an actual published study has been put out, I'll take it into consideration.

What is your evidence that the chart is incorrect? The guy who drew the chart was the UK's chief drug advisor until he got sacked for telling the truth about the harm that drugs do. (see article I linked earlier)

The title perhaps?

Alternative list of most harmful drugs, as drawn up by sacked government adviser

1) he is a government adviser
2) it is Alternative
3) what exactly is this saying? "the effect of drug use on families, communities and society." How exactly is this measured? How WOULD you measure this?

Edited by Dohregard, 23 November 2009 - 01:15 PM.

[Emotive]

What is your evidence that the chart is incorrect? The guy who drew the chart was the UK's chief drug advisor until he got sacked for telling the truth about the harm that drugs do. (see article I linked earlier)

that chart has been posted to shit and is widely regarded as bullshit. for starters, anabolic steroids do much more harm than either cannabis or LSD, physically LSD is virtually harmless and shouldn't even appear on this list, let alone placed where it is. Cannabis regarded as the 11th most harmful drug out of the 20? rated higher than solvents no doubt?

i read through the article and most of what i saw was policy and political bullshit that tells me nothing about the actual study. he lists the nine parameters they used in making up their ranks (many of which bare no relevance to actual physical harm, thus shouldn't even be included. you don't make a chart describing physical harm and having your deciding factors be health-care costs), but what i'd like to see are the actual assessments made to each drug they included. showing me the method without showing me the results doesn't do much.

[richmeister]

that chart has been posted to shit and is widely regarded as bullshit.

by who? You? Yeah... that's widely regarded.

Proffessor Nutt was the chief advisor of drugs to the UK government, i think he knows wtf he's talking about tbh.

I think marijuanna should be downgraded to Class C without question, legalisation is still a long way away though. I believe it would have to be heavily restricted if it was to be legalised, to keep conservatives happy and allow further studies into the social impacts etc.

[Emotive]

by who? You? Yeah... that's widely regarded.

i go to a lot more websites than pure pwnage buddy.

i have seen this chart numerous times.

Proffessor Nutt was the chief advisor of drugs to the UK government, i think he knows wtf he's talking about tbh.

yeah, let's all blindly follow 'advisers' like sheep.

you've got a great case so far man.

[Dohregard]

by who? You? Yeah... that's widely regarded.

Proffessor Nutt was the chief advisor of drugs to the UK government, i think he knows wtf he's talking about tbh.

I think marijuanna should be downgraded to Class C without question, legalisation is still a long way away though. I believe it would have to be heavily restricted if it was to be legalised, to keep conservatives happy and allow further studies into the social impacts etc.

uhh.... by everyone posting on the article, every actual scientific study prooving that half of the drugs on that list are far more deadly than LSD / MDMA / Marijuana.


I'm going to continue bringing this up, HOW do you measure the effect of drug use on families, communities and society? Everyone is different, it would seem that criminal legislation of these drugs does more harm to users / families than the drugs themselves.

[Kilghas]

The harm that is caused would actually be lessened by legalisation. By making the drug accessible to the public you remove the "black market" aspects. No more coating and dealing with people who also sell harder drugs. It would be harder to obtain for young teens and proper restrictions could be imposed. From information I have read, I recall something about the use of harder drugs in NL reducing due to the availability of weed. I believe that reported weed usage also went down. There is also the economical benefits to consider. I believe that with legalisation of cannabis, alcohol consumption would be reduced, a very beneficial by-product. This would in theory reduce anti-social behaviour by teenagers. It would also mean that policing funds and time could be spent on more worthy people. It would also reduce the population of Western prisons, something which is currently a massive problem. Legalisation would hopefully bring with it proper education. This means that from when we first learn about drugs (inc. alcohol, nicotine etc.) people will learn not to fear it and the social stigma will be removed. If people are truthfully educated on drugs, they won't learn that some is bullshit and think that it all is which would theoretically increase the chances of them trying "hard" drugs.

Mass production of hemp can be used for a large number of manufactured products i.e. clothes, rope, paper (1 acre of hemp can make as much paper as 4 acres of wood). Hempseed oil is a very healthy supplement. The book by Jack Herer entitled "The Emperor Wears No Clothes" has many more benefits to hemp. Far more than I could list or remember.

EDIT: Also, as Dohre said above me: removing the stigma associated with this substance being illegal would reduce the damage done to families and communities by those who smoke it recreationally and medicinally.

Edited by Kilghas, 23 November 2009 - 01:55 PM.

[Dylantendo]

Screw legalizing marijuana. Decriminalizing it is where it's at. If it is legalized it's going to be regulated and taxed to shit by the gov't. If it's decriminalized, then the market controls the price.

[Emotive]

Screw legalizing marijuana. Decriminalizing it is where it's at. If it is legalized it's going to be regulated and taxed to shit by the gov't. If it's decriminalized, then the market controls the price.

decriminalization is the ultimate cop-out.

cannabis should be legalized.

[Dohregard]

Screw legalizing marijuana. Decriminalizing it is where it's at. If it is legalized it's going to be regulated and taxed to shit by the gov't. If it's decriminalized, then the market controls the price.

Decriminalization would go nowhere. It would inevitably be illegal after a while because the same black market tactics would still be the main source of distribution, thus the whole mystery / misinformation would be around.

If we legalize pot anyone could do scientific research on it, and all the benefits / determents to ingesting cannabis would be revealed finally.

[Dylantendo]

Decriminalization would go nowhere. It would inevitably be illegal after a while because the same black market tactics would still be the main source of distribution, thus the whole mystery / misinformation would be around.

If we legalize pot anyone could do scientific research on it, and all the benefits / determents to ingesting cannabis would be revealed finally.

Why would decriminalizing marijuana not allow there to be scientific research done on marijuana?