UCSD Study/ Pot Smoking Causes No Permanent Damage

I do think decriminalization is coming in the next few decades, but I think it's got very little to do with scientific studies and a great deal to do with changing social attitudes. (This whole prohibition thing is a pretty recent proposition, anyway...)

Ha! I knew patiodog would be the first to reply! I knew it! I almost posted about 20 minutes ago saying, "Hmm, I'm suprised patiodog hasn't said anything. Maybe he's not at work yet."

Coulda shoulda woulda. He already owes me a coke.

Anyway, I agree.

And I thought about not posting b/c of how predictable that would be, so there you go.

As to the study in question, the results don't particularly surprise me. And they may -- may -- be used effectively as part of a push toward the legitimacy of medical marijuana, but my sights are well beyond that.

um I am pretty sure i left a brownie here somewhere, i just can't remember where..

Sozobe

Did you say that Patiodog owed you some coke?

Jeez, you people are very open about this stuff.

The decriminalization is coming -- but it will take a while longer.

The deBusherization, I hope, will not take that long.

Oh, dude, was that your brownie? Sorry, man.

Hee hee hee! I SO walked into that, Frank.

With my dad as a test case, I'd thought it (pot) did cause some permanent damage. But he's also an alcoholic, who has been sober for about 5 years now. So it's not like pot was the only possible contributing factor.

Interesting. But it didn't say anything about the weed building up in fatty tissue. Hmmm.

It seems the study was aimed at vindicating pot for medicinal use and not for heavy recreational use. From extensive personal experience I have found that its well known impairment of short-term memory affects long-term memory as well for heavy users (mainly because if you impair enough short term memory, over the long haul there is less in way of unweedified short-term memory to work with

Um, highly unscientifically, it's always seemed to me that the short long term effects (? next morning, next week, after a month of heavy use) of alcohol on both brain and body have been much harsher than of pot -- but, of course, all the potheads say that and all the squares say they're lying.

('cept for the lungs, of course.)

I agree. Must do more research.


Did you ever hear about the guys who determined that weed gives the munchies? I'd like to know who OKed that grant!

The government's obvious response:

Phth! What are they stoned or something?
Man, what were *these* guys smokin?
We have no specific recollection of any motion to legalize ... uh ... yeah.

Oh man, how about some warning when one of those are coming. Do you know what orange soda feels like when when laughed through one's nose?

Is it substantially different than clear soda?

(Notice, Phoenix, that this topic attracts people who have trouble staying on topic!)

Goddam glad I decided not to drink anymore until after I read new postings to this thread.

Besides which I am doing reslerch...resealch...recherch...

...checking something out.

Interesting ... the pressure is on to have pot-smoking legalized, while cigarette-smoking is becoming so frowned upon and blamed for so many health issues. Isn't the public/government complaining about the carcinogens and substances in cigarettes being harmful, causing cancer, long-term breathing problems because of overuse or long-term use? What makes you think that pot won't be smoked several times a day, everyday, by people and then in 10-20 years they will be the ones bitching and moaning that they have emphysema or something else due to the inhalation of not only marijuana but also the particles that make up the blunt?

Heeven,

A slight, but important, difference is that in the case of weed there is no large industry covering up the research while increasing addictive potential.

Either way I think those who choose to smoke anything should grin and bear it. If I get lung cancer I'll not blame anyone but myself.

And I'd go medicinal...