Recreational Use of MJ Causes Brain Damage

[CaptainCourtesy]

Safer than water. No need for the ER.

Here's NUMBER FOUR. Marijuana's lack of lethality does NOT equate it to being safe. No matter what you post, you cannot get away from that simple fact, demonstrating that your position has no logic.

 

[Ikari]

Casual Marijuana Use Linked to Brain Abnormalities: Northwestern University News

Ya think ? But hey, its not only a " safe "alternative to alcohol, its q healthy alternative alcohol

It's a drug, it's not really "safe", and likely has some negative long term side effects. That being said, it is "safer" than tobacco and alcohol, both of which are legal. So if we're going to have those as legal, we might as well have weed. Since when do conservatives endorse nanny-state government?

 

[beefheart]

Here's NUMBER FOUR. Marijuana's lack of lethality does NOT equate it to being safe. No matter what you post, you cannot get away from that simple fact, demonstrating that your position has no logic.

Here is number 5, there is no toxicity level, I have tried to get dear Fenton to actually man up and admit that fact, but he won't, I'm focusing on this area of the argument. I have to keep asking Fenton the question, because he lacks the intellectual honesty to admit that you can't overdose on marijuana. Talk about all the other stuff you want, I'm talking about this part of the argument. capiche?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Here is number 5, there is no toxicity level, I have tried to get dear Fenton to actually man up and admit that fact, but he won't, I'm focusing on this area of the argument. I have to keep asking Fenton the question, because he lacks the intellectual honesty to admit that you can't overdose on marijuana. Talk about all the other stuff you want, I'm talking about this part of the argument. capiche?

Your argument is POOR. If you want to make a decent one, there are many other ways to do it.

 

[Thoreau72]

Here's NUMBER FOUR. Marijuana's lack of lethality does NOT equate it to being safe. No matter what you post, you cannot get away from that simple fact, demonstrating that your position has no logic.

When you get right down to it, life is not safe. For me, it's the sun. A certain amount is good for me and necessary, but it doesn't take much and I've been damaged by solar radiation.

All things in moderation, and Utopia is not an option.

 

[beefheart]

Your argument is POOR. If you want to make a decent one, there are many other ways to do it.

Just stating the fact that no one has ever died from an overdose.

Do you disagree with that?

 

[Mr Person]

Here's NUMBER FOUR. Marijuana's lack of lethality does NOT equate it to being safe. No matter what you post, you cannot get away from that simple fact, demonstrating that your position has no logic.

Well, he's not saying "absolutely safe in every way possible"; he's taking the position that potential fatality is a strong measure of safety.


He says "safe than water". I disagree because there is some evidence (though the studies are faulty for a number of reasons) that chronic use by minors leads to long-term lower IQs. There is evidence that inexperienced stoners are impaired - but not as impaired as drunks - on the road.

 

[Risky Thicket]

Casual Marijuana Use Linked to Brain Abnormalities: Northwestern University News

Ya think ? But hey, its not only a " safe "alternative to alcohol, its q healthy alternative alcohol

How valid is the "retrospective" research you are accepting? We can't tell much at all from the article you posted. You obviously have more information about the research you reference. Please share it.

Also, you use the research article to compare to consumers of alcohol. Please share that comparative research as well. I can find nothing in the article about the research that suggests any comparison of the research regarding marijuana use to similar research regarding alcohol use.

One last thing from the article. From the article: “Further work, including longitudinal studies, is needed to determine if these findings can be linked to animal studies showing marijuana can be a gateway drug for stronger substances." Are you buying into that? A gateway drug compared to what? Legal pharmaceuticals? OTC drugs? Beer? Cigarettes?

I do not honestly know and I've never cared enough to look into it, but how difficult do you think it might be to find Americans who have never used any of the above before they started smoking pot? And how many of those people 18 to 25 became frequent users of illegal drugs or abusers of pharmaceuticals? Without that eliminating other possible drugs how in the world can anyone determine marijuana to be a gateway drug?

Seems to me, Fenton, that unless you have supportive information regarding the research referenced in the OP article that you are making massive assumptions. We really don't know much about the research in the article. You appear to know more about it than you have shared. Please give us the benefit of having the same information you have.

 

[CLAX1911]

'Skunk' cannabis can cause 'significant' brain damage | Health News | Lifestyle | The Independent

Yes, someone disagrees with your position on Marijuana legalization so its " this **** again ".

So you support anarchy ?

The problem with " leaving individuals to be in charge of what they do to themselves " is that their self destructive decisions can and do impact those around them and society in general.

They're not making those choices in a vacuum and surprise, there's two sides to the legalization issue whether you like it or not

Their " right " to pickle their brains should stop at my right of wanting to raise my family in a Society not inundated with people under the influence of powerful psychoactive chemicals.

Do I or anyone who's against legalization get a say in what kind of Community I get to raise my family in or does the addicts poor choices supersede everything ?

People get addicted to cigarettes and alcohol a lot more than marijuana.

You don't get a say in who drinks or smokes tobacco. Why should you get a say in who smokes marijuana?

Keeping people in jail for this is getting really expensive.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Just stating the fact that no one has ever died from an overdose.

Do you disagree with that?

If you are using it, as you seem to be, to prove that marijuana is not harmful, it's a poor and illogical argument.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Well, he's not saying "absolutely safe in every way possible"; he's taking the position that potential fatality is a strong measure of safety.


He says "safe than water". I disagree because there is some evidence (though the studies are faulty for a number of reasons) that chronic use by minors leads to long-term lower IQs. There is evidence that inexperienced stoners are impaired - but not as impaired as drunks - on the road.

He's making a lazy argument. He can do better.

 

[Thoreau72]

If you are using it, as you seem to be, to prove that marijuana is not harmful, it's a poor and illogical argument.

What he is effectively saying is that there is no known fatal dosage of marijuana, a fact known for a very long time.

In contrast, there are known fatal dosages for aspirin, alcohol and a long list of other legal drugs.

I think his point is a very good argument as to the benign nature of the substance.

 

[beefheart]

If you are using it, as you seem to be, to prove that marijuana is not harmful, it's a poor and illogical argument.

Its not harmful in its use. You can't ingest or smoke enough of it at any one sitting to cause yourself any harm, nor is it fatal. Compare and contrast to alcohol, or water. It is non toxic.

 

[yankintx]

Its not harmful in its use. You can't ingest or smoke enough of it at any one sitting to cause yourself any harm, nor is it fatal. Compare and contrast to alcohol, or water. It is non toxic.

As time passes, those with prehistoric notions on cannabis will pass as well. The horse is out of the stable, and there is no going back, poll after poll indicates the majority of Americans want an end to Federal prohibition on cannabis.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

What he is effectively saying is that there is no known fatal dosage of marijuana, a fact known for a very long time.

In contrast, there are known fatal dosages for aspirin, alcohol and a long list of other legal drugs.

I think his point is a very good argument as to the benign nature of the substance.

Actually, it isn't. just because something is not fatal does not mean it is benign.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Its not harmful in its use. You can't ingest or smoke enough of it at any one sitting to cause yourself any harm, nor is it fatal. Compare and contrast to alcohol, or water. It is non toxic.

Again, what you are saying does NOT define it as non-harmful.

 

[beefheart]

Again, what you are saying does NOT define it as non-harmful.

Non toxic.....read my post.

There is no level of toxicity. You will not die from using it, you will not OD. That is what I have been saying.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Non toxic.....read my post.

There is no level of toxicity. You will not die from using it, you will not OD. That is what I have been saying.

Read your own post:

Its not harmful in its use.

 

[Texmex]

Again, what you are saying does NOT define it as non-harmful.

You have an odd way of deflecting threads, just repeat your initial posting over and over.

 

[beefheart]

Read your own post:

No, it is not harmful when you use it. You won't overdose, there is no toxic level.

As for down the road? Smoke anything and it can hurt your lungs...but causing brain damage? I don't think there is any good science to that. But the benefits of medical marijuana are well known.

Of course, the most dangerous thing about marijuana is getting arrested.

 

[Thoreau72]

Actually, it isn't. just because something is not fatal does not mean it is benign.

Well if there is no known fatal dose of a substance, what might you infer from using very small amounts of that substance?

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

You have an odd way of deflecting threads, just repeat your initial posting over and over.

If someone is wrong, I'll keep repeating it. That's not deflecting.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

Well if there is no known fatal dose of a substance, what might you infer from using very small amounts of that substance?

That it's not fatal in small doses. That's about it.

 

[CaptainCourtesy]

No, it is not harmful when you use it. You won't overdose, there is no toxic level.

As for down the road? Smoke anything and it can hurt your lungs...but causing brain damage? I don't think there is any good science to that. But the benefits of medical marijuana are well known.

Of course, the most dangerous thing about marijuana is getting arrested.

Your comments are inconsistent. It's not harmful... you won't overdose and there is no toxic level. Telling people that there is no harm when using marijuana is just as invalid as telling people that if you use marijuana you will become a lazy, insane, non-productive member of society. Neither of these extreme positions are true.

 

[Thoreau72]

That it's not fatal in small doses. That's about it.

Benign: Exhibiting gentleness and mildness. Tending to promote well-being: BENEFICIAL. Not malignant.

That, from Webster.

From Francis Young, DEA Administrative Law Judge after days of hearings on the subject, way back in about 1981: marijuana is the safest therapeutic substance known to man.

It seems the DEA Administrative Law Judge had a more open mind, and better skills at inference than yourself?