Why we should legalize pot?

[ABikerSailor]

The legalization of Marijuana could serve as a quick fix to the nation's reeling economy. The state of Calfornia takes in millions of dollars each year largely in part to the taxation of Marijuana. If other states would adopt similiar measures the benfits from taxation would help create jobs and help stimlute the local economy. Most offenders who are arrested for simple possession of Marijuana place a heavy burden on taxpayers, the legal system and law enforcement. Today, many of our prisons are filled with those serving 5 years or more who were arrested for charges relating to Marijuana while those spaces should be reserved for the more hardened and violent criminals. I believe that by decriminalizing Marijuana you will also make a substantial difference in the war on drugs by crippling the drug cartels. I liken it to prohibition and alcohol, once alcohol became legal crime was reduced and it took away a huge monetary resource for the mafia.

Every pro-legalization argument has been beaten into horse mush for years. The logic and stats are in its favor. But not much is going to happen at the Fed level as long as the incarceration industry has as much influence as it does now. A lot of jobs and funding would be lost if all weights of weed became completely legal.

This is actually a pretty good theory for its continued illegality, but doesn't really even scratch the surface in reality.

This ignores the pharmaceutical industry's potential for losses, not to mention all the industries that would suffer from hemp industrialization.

See? That's the problem...........too many companies are happy just staying doing what they've always been doing without looking for newer and better solutions.

Re-tool a fiberglass company to use hemp fiber? Already been done.......Corvette makes their fiberglass bodies outta HEMP FIBER that is grown in Canada. One of the reasons that North Dakota is looking to grow hemp. Incidentally, the fiberglass made from hemp fiber has been proven to be stronger than conventional fiberglass.

As far as the pharma companies? Fuck 'em.......they've already gotten enough money by driving up the costs of health care.

If everyone would smoke 1 or 2 joints a week, the world would be a MUCH happier place. The day they legalize cannabis, you can bet my beer consumption would go WAYYYY down, as well as I'd quit smoking cigarettes.

 

[Paulie]

Every pro-legalization argument has been beaten into horse mush for years. The logic and stats are in its favor. But not much is going to happen at the Fed level as long as the incarceration industry has as much influence as it does now. A lot of jobs and funding would be lost if all weights of weed became completely legal.

This is actually a pretty good theory for its continued illegality, but doesn't really even scratch the surface in reality.

This ignores the pharmaceutical industry's potential for losses, not to mention all the industries that would suffer from hemp industrialization.

I doubt the pharmaceuticals would suffer much. There isn't a lot of good evidenced based medicine for MJ as a medical remedy for much else than an appetite stimulant for HIV or Chemo patients.

It does a phenomenal job for that indication, the rest of the things it is being used for (i.e. anxiety and fibromyalgia) are just bullshit excuses for people to get weed.

No wonder there wasn't a sense of urgency in California. If you are Doctor, you can also be someone's pot dealer if you just lose your sense of medical ethics.

I don't really see any medical indication for meth, yet they packaged that up into a pill and gave it to our children for "behavioral disorders".

I'd argue that the right quality of weed can add serenity to an otherwise miserable life for many people with many different diseases. If it happens to be the only thing that keeps a smile on a sick person's face, then so be it.

It also has pain relief indications as well. Trust me. My father died of terminal cancer, and I watched weed add time on to his life. He'd be in agony, and then burn a joint to start the day and he'd be relaxed and comfortable.

I'd rather burn a j-bird than pop opiate pills and become a dope addict by proxy.

 

[geauxtohell]

This is actually a pretty good theory for its continued illegality, but doesn't really even scratch the surface in reality.

This ignores the pharmaceutical industry's potential for losses, not to mention all the industries that would suffer from hemp industrialization.

I doubt the pharmaceuticals would suffer much. There isn't a lot of good evidenced based medicine for MJ as a medical remedy for much else than an appetite stimulant for HIV or Chemo patients.

It does a phenomenal job for that indication, the rest of the things it is being used for (i.e. anxiety and fibromyalgia) are just bullshit excuses for people to get weed.

No wonder there wasn't a sense of urgency in California. If you are Doctor, you can also be someone's pot dealer if you just lose your sense of medical ethics.

I don't really see any medical indication for meth, yet they packaged that up into a pill and gave it to our children for "behavioral disorders".

I'd argue that the right quality of weed can add serenity to an otherwise miserable life for many people with many different diseases. If it happens to be the only thing that keeps a smile on a sick person's face, then so be it.

It also has pain relief indications as well. Trust me. My father died of terminal cancer, and I watched weed add time on to his life. He'd be in agony, and then burn a joint to start the day and he'd be relaxed and comfortable.

I'd rather burn a j-bird than pop opiate pills and become a dope addict by proxy.

Meth and methylphenidate aren't the same thing by a long shot.

Don't misunderstand me. I have no problem with people smoking pot. Lord knows, I've smoked my share. I just would rather it be fully legal so people can self medicate with it as they see fit, as opposed to trying to co-opt medical science which knows that most of the claims of "medical marijuana" are complete bullshit.

As I said before, with the status quo, I'd have no problem writing a MJ script for any terminal patient or person with HIV.

What I would not do, is start using it to treat "anxiety".

That's just fucking bullshit. Hell, Benzos work the best for anxiety, and that's not even considered the standard of care. SSRI's are first line. You know what else works well for anxiety? A bottle of Jack Daniels. But you don't see people screaming about Jimmy Daniels being used to treat anxiety, do you?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Cannabis has been proven to help slow down the onset of Alzheimer's disease.

It's also been proven pretty effective for those with PTSD.


Check Harvard Medical and the Royal British Medical Society for that.

 

[Paulie]

I doubt the pharmaceuticals would suffer much. There isn't a lot of good evidenced based medicine for MJ as a medical remedy for much else than an appetite stimulant for HIV or Chemo patients.

It does a phenomenal job for that indication, the rest of the things it is being used for (i.e. anxiety and fibromyalgia) are just bullshit excuses for people to get weed.

No wonder there wasn't a sense of urgency in California. If you are Doctor, you can also be someone's pot dealer if you just lose your sense of medical ethics.

I don't really see any medical indication for meth, yet they packaged that up into a pill and gave it to our children for "behavioral disorders".

I'd argue that the right quality of weed can add serenity to an otherwise miserable life for many people with many different diseases. If it happens to be the only thing that keeps a smile on a sick person's face, then so be it.

It also has pain relief indications as well. Trust me. My father died of terminal cancer, and I watched weed add time on to his life. He'd be in agony, and then burn a joint to start the day and he'd be relaxed and comfortable.

I'd rather burn a j-bird than pop opiate pills and become a dope addict by proxy.

Meth and methylphenidate aren't the same thing by a long shot.

Don't misunderstand me. I have no problem with people smoking pot. Lord knows, I've smoked my share. I just would rather it be fully legal so people can self medicate with it as they see fit, as opposed to trying to co-opt medical science which knows that most of the claims of "medical marijuana" are complete bullshit.

As I said before, with the status quo, I'd have no problem writing a MJ script for any terminal patient or person with HIV.

What I would not do, is start using it to treat "anxiety".

That's just fucking bullshit. Hell, Benzos work the best for anxiety, and that's not even considered the standard of care. SSRI's are first line. You know what else works well for anxiety? A bottle of Jack Daniels. But you don't see people screaming about Jimmy Daniels being used to treat anxiety, do you?

Having used both crystal meth, and Ritalin...as well as Adderall...I can tell you first hand that they most certainly ARE the same thing.

They may not have the same chemical composition, but you pop an Adderall 30mg and it's the same mother fucking thing as sniffing a bump of meth. The same damn feeling, the same damn effects.

I also disagree about anxiety and weed. The RIGHT weed removes anxiety and calms the nerves.

I don't like SSRI's. It's a personal opinion of course, but I happen to think they're no different than a heroin addiction. It's foreign chemical that your body physically needs to function, without which it would go into shock and withdraw...sometimes violently, and FATALLY.

I like weed for that indication simply because the physical side affects and dependency are much more nominal and manageable.

I agree that certain weed qualities are no good for anxiety, because some strains actually increase paranoia, which would increase anxiety. But the right kind of weed can fucking make a sad person's day, my man.

 

[geauxtohell]

Cannabis has been proven to help slow down the onset of Alzheimer's disease.

It's also been proven pretty effective for those with PTSD.


Check Harvard Medical and the Royal British Medical Society for that.

Do you have the peer-reviewed works?

My problem with using MJ for psych issues is this: if you alter someone you aren't treating the problem. You are masking it. Why do you think so many veterans are raging alcoholics? They are suffering from PTSD and are self medicating. However, with the self medication, the are creating another problem, and, despite what the Medical Marijuana crowd tells you, smoking MJ isn't a health activity. I'll buy the fact that you can use it in brownies or vaporizers, but that doesn't seem to be as popular. Why did marinol never catch on for chemo patients? I've seen Marinol used once on an AIDS (not HIV but AIDS) patient as an appetite stimulant. And Medicaid wouldn't fucking cover it. It was a giant pain in the ass and I couldn't help but think: "Why not just buy it on the street?".

For an overt pathology (though we don't know the pathology behind Alzheimers), if it stands up to peer review, then I am all for it.

In fact, I am all for it being used for any organic pathology if it's "evidenced based" and not "Uncle Joe's Homegrown Cure All".

That's not how medicine really works.

 

[mudwhistle]

Cannabis has been proven to help slow down the onset of Alzheimer's disease.

It's also been proven pretty effective for those with PTSD.


Check Harvard Medical and the Royal British Medical Society for that.

You need to start toking Gaybiker cuz I think the symptoms have set in long ago.

 

[Sheldon]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

 

[mudwhistle]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

My understanding was it was deemed illegal because Dow Corning didn't like hemp as a competitor.

 

[geauxtohell]

Having used both crystal meth, and Ritalin...as well as Adderall...I can tell you first hand that they most certainly ARE the same thing.

They may not have the same chemical composition, but you pop an Adderall 30mg and it's the same mother fucking thing as sniffing a bump of meth. The same damn feeling, the same damn effects.

I won't argue with your anecdotal experience, but chemically, they aren't the same thing and they don't appear to have the same effects. You don't see kids with ADHD staying up for three straight days. Then again, no one has seriously suggested using methamphetamine to treat ADHD.

I also disagree about anxiety and weed. The RIGHT weed removes anxiety and calms the nerves.

I am sure it does. The problem is that the user is altered and can't fully function in society while treating their underlying issues.

I don't like SSRI's. It's a personal opinion of course, but I happen to think they're no different than a heroin addiction. It's foreign chemical that your body physically needs to function, without which it would go into shock and withdraw...sometimes violently, and FATALLY.

I think SSRIs are over-hyped too. When you look at the real data, they barely beat placebo. I am also fully aware of serotonin syndrome. However, withdrawel from SSRIs is a fraction as dangerous as it is from alcohol or benzos. The bottom line is this: ever foreign object you stick into your metabolism has consequences.

Or as it is elequently stated in the beginning of Robbins and Coltran's Pathologic Basis of Disese

"Everything good in life is either illegal, immoral, fattening, or oncogenic".

I like weed for that indication simply because the physical side affects and dependency are much more nominal and manageable.

I agree that certain weed qualities are no good for anxiety, because some strains actually increase paranoia, which would increase anxiety. But the right kind of weed can fucking make a sad person's day, my man.

I think this highlights a larger problem. It's hard to scientifically study a product that is so unregulated that one bag causes massively different effects than another.

Again, I am no puritan. I've smoked my share and I am a much better citizen as a stoner than a drunk. I just don't want the scientific method to be perverted by anecdotes from Uncle Jesse.

 

[Paulie]

I realize that you're involved in medicine, perhaps a doctor even.

But I don't personally care about peer reviews, and educational text books, and whatever the AMA thinks about something.

I think that unless someone is suffering from something immediately life threatening, then ALL options must be considered.

I also don't buy that SSRI's are "fixing" anything. They're creating an addiction.

If I self medicate with marijuana to combat depression, I might be masking the problem, but at least I'm not establishing a serious physical dependence on some complex chemical compound.

The people I know that take depakote, or lexapro, or what have you...are basically expected to be taking them for their entire lives. That's not "fixing" anything.

That's lining the pockets of the shareholders of Abbots and Forest.

 

[geauxtohell]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

My point exactly. Thank you.

Just legalize it. Don't put medical science in the middle of it.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

Sorry to say, but processed THC via Marinol has been proven to me LESS EFFECTIVE than cannabis that is smoked, vaporized or orally ingested via brownies.

Why? Some have speculated that it's not just the THC in the plant, but also the other substances contained in the plant that makes it have a more profound effect.

 

[Paulie]

Having used both crystal meth, and Ritalin...as well as Adderall...I can tell you first hand that they most certainly ARE the same thing.

They may not have the same chemical composition, but you pop an Adderall 30mg and it's the same mother fucking thing as sniffing a bump of meth. The same damn feeling, the same damn effects.

I won't argue with your anecdotal experience, but chemically, they aren't the same thing and they don't appear to have the same effects. You don't see kids with ADHD staying up for three straight days. Then again, no one has seriously suggested using methamphetamine to treat ADHD.

Actually, a friend of mine's girlfriend has a son that was taking Adderall for ADHD when he was as young as 7.

I remember the kid barely sleeping, and barely eating.

I remember me barely sleeping, and barely eating when I did meth.

I don't know if the kid was up for "3 days", but I know that I wasn't. 3 days with no sleep requires more than a line or two of meth. You need to be a habitual meth user to be going 3 days straight with no sleep.

 

[geauxtohell]

I realize that you're involved in medicine, perhaps a doctor even.

But I don't personally care about peer reviews, and educational text books, and whatever the AMA thinks about something.

I think that unless someone is suffering from something immediately life threatening, then ALL options must be considered.

I also don't buy that SSRI's are "fixing" anything. They're creating an addiction.

If I self medicate with marijuana to combat depression, I might be masking the problem, but at least I'm not establishing a serious physical dependence on some complex chemical compound.

The people I know that take depakote, or lexapro, or what have you...are basically expected to be taking them for their entire lives. That's not "fixing" anything.

That's lining the pockets of the shareholders of Abbots and Forest.

Mediocre medical student.

I realize you don't care about peer review. That's fine. I do. It is the standard of the profession. Again, I don't care if people want to get high. I just don't want MJ sold as a cure all, when it has not been proven to be so.

As far as I know, SSRI's aren't addictive. Benzos (valium, Xanax, Klonipin) and alcohol certainly are. My problem with SSRI's is that their efficacy sucks.

Valproic Acid/Depakote is really best as an anti-seizure medication. It's great for that, as it has been since it was introduced in the '50s. I know people use tegretol/carbamazipine for psych issues. I wasn't aware that they used Depakote for it. If they are, I would assume it's off label. "Off label" = caveat emptor.

If MJ works for you, then great. I won't dispute it. Let's just legalize it and not put the medical community in the middle of what you think works for you.

It's your health and your prerogative. From this end, it's bad enough with the junkies and their percocet fix. I'd rather avoid adding another drug to the "annoying patient" equation.

 

[Sheldon]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

Sorry to say, but processed THC via Marinol has been proven to me LESS EFFECTIVE than cannabis that is smoked, vaporized or orally ingested via brownies.

Why? Some have speculated that it's not just the THC in the plant, but also the other substances contained in the plant that makes it have a more profound effect.

I'd like to try one... but I wasn't talking about them.

What I meant was a licensed doctor looking at a list of symptoms and saying that a few bong hits would be a better way to address those symptoms than some established medical practice.

 

[Paulie]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

My point exactly. Thank you.

Just legalize it. Don't put medical science in the middle of it.

So if weed was completely legalized, you would prefer that a doctor still not be allowed to recommend weed to a patient on the record?

 

[geauxtohell]

Having used both crystal meth, and Ritalin...as well as Adderall...I can tell you first hand that they most certainly ARE the same thing.

They may not have the same chemical composition, but you pop an Adderall 30mg and it's the same mother fucking thing as sniffing a bump of meth. The same damn feeling, the same damn effects.

I won't argue with your anecdotal experience, but chemically, they aren't the same thing and they don't appear to have the same effects. You don't see kids with ADHD staying up for three straight days. Then again, no one has seriously suggested using methamphetamine to treat ADHD.

Actually, a friend of mine's girlfriend has a son that was taking Adderall for ADHD when he was as young as 7.

I remember the kid barely sleeping, and barely eating.

I remember me barely sleeping, and barely eating when I did meth.

I don't know if the kid was up for "3 days", but I know that I wasn't. 3 days with no sleep requires more than a line or two of meth. You need to be a habitual meth user to be going 3 days straight with no sleep.

Again, it's anecdotal. I'd never argue that methylphenidate or concierta is over-prescribed. More than likely, it was doing more harm than good and I find it appealing that a physician would write a script for a stimulant for a 7 year old.

Many kids do benefit from it, though. Can't really say the same thing about Methamphetamine.

 

[geauxtohell]

Pro legalization shouldn't be about the medical value, if any, of weed. That's a non-starter, because basically anything weed can do pills and treatment can do better--from a medical standpoint.

It's a cost/benefit analysis, about the disparity between what we put into the War on Some Drugs and what we get out of it... and how it's negative effects on society--institutionalized violence, prisons being drug universities--outweigh whatever the over-paid for positive effects are... which I can't think of any aside from increased employment via more cops and prison guards.

My point exactly. Thank you.

Just legalize it. Don't put medical science in the middle of it.

So if weed was completely legalized, you would prefer that a doctor still not be allowed to recommend weed to a patient on the record?

If weed were legalized, then why would a Doctor even need to be involved? People have been using alcohol for centuries for "stage freight" or "social anxiety". You get it at a bar, no the doctors office.

But to answer your question: yes.

 

[Paulie]

I realize that you're involved in medicine, perhaps a doctor even.

But I don't personally care about peer reviews, and educational text books, and whatever the AMA thinks about something.

I think that unless someone is suffering from something immediately life threatening, then ALL options must be considered.

I also don't buy that SSRI's are "fixing" anything. They're creating an addiction.

If I self medicate with marijuana to combat depression, I might be masking the problem, but at least I'm not establishing a serious physical dependence on some complex chemical compound.

The people I know that take depakote, or lexapro, or what have you...are basically expected to be taking them for their entire lives. That's not "fixing" anything.

That's lining the pockets of the shareholders of Abbots and Forest.

Mediocre medical student.

I realize you don't care about peer review. That's fine. I do. It is the standard of the profession. Again, I don't care if people want to get high. I just don't want MJ sold as a cure all, when it has not been proven to be so.

As far as I know, SSRI's aren't addictive. Benzos (valium, Xanax, Klonipin) and alcohol certainly are. My problem with SSRI's is that their efficacy sucks.

Valproic Acid/Depakote is really best as an anti-seizure medication. It's great for that, as it has been since it was introduced in the '50s. I know people use tegretol/carbamazipine for psych issues. I wasn't aware that they used Depakote for it. If they are, I would assume it's off label. "Off label" = caveat emptor.

If MJ works for you, then great. I won't dispute it. Let's just legalize it and not put the medical community in the middle of what you think works for you.

It's your health and your prerogative. From this end, it's bad enough with the junkies and their percocet fix. I'd rather avoid adding another drug to the "annoying patient" equation.

I'm pretty sure depakote is prescribed for bi-polar. I've known it to be stacked with lexapro for that indication in a friend of mine, but maybe it was an anti-seizure for another of her medications.

And therein lies another problem. You get the drug for the initial symptom, and then you get a host of other drugs to combat all the side effects of all the drugs.

At a certain point it just becomes ridiculous, face palm style.