Poll of the Day > People who are against medical marijuana, why?

(+) Yeah! (+)

So basically no good arguments on why it should remain illegal. I'll admit, most arguments for marijuana are anecdotal so they don't hold much weight so there aren't really any good arguments here
---

Nothing I posted was anecdotal.
---

Ignoring the slowed reaction times and dimished cognitive thought process and long-term paranoia, no there aren't any side effects *rolls eyes*
---

mastermix3000 posted...

So basically no good arguments on why it should remain illegal. I'll admit, most arguments for marijuana are anecdotal so they don't hold much weight so there aren't really any good arguments here

There's no simple way to support it with science when even researching the effects is illegal. So what else can anyone offer?
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

HappyDog posted...

Can I have a legitimate source for that.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18426493

Those receptors aren't for cannabis it's for the things cannabis affects. (Google) From what I understood your article is saying marijuana affects the brain, in those systems because THC reacts with them.(google) The system controls things like hunger which explains things like the munchies.
The names being similar does not mean it was meant for your brain.
---

TyVulpine posted...

Ignoring the slowed reaction times and dimished cognitive thought process and long-term paranoia, no there aren't any side effects *rolls eyes*

You get the same issues as alcohol but that's legal.
---

TyVulpine posted...

Ignoring the slowed reaction times and dimished cognitive thought process and long-term paranoia, no there aren't any side effects *rolls eyes*

Prescription medications cause these same issues.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/06/110624111929.htm

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/408593_5

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100713111724.htm

http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/can-heartburn-medication-cause-cognitive-problems-201603219369

http://www.webmd.com/brain/memory-loss#1

http://www.aarp.org/health/brain-health/info-05-2013/drugs-that-may-cause-memory-loss.html#quest1

Negative effects of cannabis are gone after discontinuation and after the chemicals have left the body.

Cannabis should NOT be considered safe for anyone with a developing brain. After 25, effects are temporary from what can be seen. More research is needed.

But many common prescriptions (and readily available over the counter pharmaceuticals) are not safe and cause those exact issues, permanently.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

There's no simple way to support it with science when even researching the effects is illegal. So what else can anyone offer?

that was kinda the whole point of the topic

why is researching it illegal?! It was already pointed out a few times by some educated guesses.
---

I hate marijuana personally, all drugs really (and smoking), but banning them only puts money into the wrong hands. You have two options: "legalize, control, and tax" or "be like Vlad Tepes" to make sure it's suppressed well. Only one of those is really feasible.

I think the only real reason I have such a huge beef with pot is that I fucking hate obnoxious stoners. The people who are obsessed with it and think a psychological addiction to a drug makes them super cool rather than of weak character.
---

mastermix3000 posted...

that was kinda the whole point of the topic

why is researching it illegal?! It was already pointed out a few times by some educated guesses.

Because of how the drug is classified and scheduled. Can't give people the drug to test it. Can give them synthetic THC analogues that can be made by pharmaceutical companies, which don't work the same way as they're not taken in conjunction with the rest of the chemicals present in the plant. Everything needs to be present together.
---

Erik_P posted...

TyVulpine posted...

Ignoring the slowed reaction times and dimished cognitive thought process and long-term paranoia, no there aren't any side effects *rolls eyes*

You get the same issues as alcohol but that's legal.

Alcohol has way more long term serious problems when used especially if that person uses it often and heavily.
---

"not bad for you" changes your voice so it sounds like your mumbling, makes you paranoid...
---

Monopoman posted...

Erik_P posted...

TyVulpine posted...

Ignoring the slowed reaction times and dimished cognitive thought process and long-term paranoia, no there aren't any side effects *rolls eyes*

You get the same issues as alcohol but that's legal.

Alcohol has way more long term serious problems when used especially if that person uses it often and heavily.

Same with marijuana, and pretty much any other drug
It's just that the ones with the more immediate effects are what people focus on when they say "weed won't hurt you as bad as x"
---

I'd also like to address another misconception. A lot of people assume all marijuana users just want to get super "baked" and completely ignore the vast number of people who are actually interested in responsible usage and microdosing. Not all users are "stoners", they are a small portion who over use.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

I'd also like to address another misconception. A lot of people assume all marijuana users just want to get super "baked" and completely ignore the vast number of people who are actually interested in responsible usage and microdosing. Not all users are "stoners", they are a small portion who over use.

Well there is that and also some strains of marijuana are designed to highly raise the CBD levels of the drug which impact the medical benefits and reduce the THC at the same time. So if you are say using it to deal with a major physical injury then you want high CBD content marijuana.
---

Monopoman posted...

Well there is that and also some strains of marijuana are designed to highly raise the CBD levels of the drug which impact the medical benefits and reduce the THC at the same time. So if you are say using it to deal with a major physical injury then you want high CBD content marijuana.

CBDs and THC both have anti-tumor properties.
---

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.
---

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.

No they don't. And they come with serious side effects.
---

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.

They're also cripplingly addicitve and have a real likelihood of killing you.
---

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all.

It has other health benefits beyond pain relief.
---

Having been on both sides of the argument...

On the one hand there is an insanely legitimate concern that people will do their best to get conditions just so that they can legally smoke marijuana as well as resell it for marked up profit. This is something that there really isn't much point in denying how possible it is because all it takes is one person willing to do this to justify the fear.

On the other hand it can help with certain conditions, notably epilepsy, that could have massive problems down the line.

But it doesn't matter. Wanna know why?

Because the whole thing stems from the war on drugs and most of the opposition comes from people who grew up watching stuff like 'Reefer madness' and believing that lighting up would send you on murderous rampages and the like. Now, I'm not gonna be stupid and go 'well beer/cigarettes are legal so why isn't pot' but I AM going to point out that one can drastically alter the mind and the other is addictive and pretty terrible for your health, yet it's POT that gets the flack, all because of that stupid and pointless WoD.
---

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.

You should meet someone that had or has an addiction to Oxycontin it becomes a huge fucking problem for a good number of those that use it for a long period of time.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Monopoman posted...

Well there is that and also some strains of marijuana are designed to highly raise the CBD levels of the drug which impact the medical benefits and reduce the THC at the same time. So if you are say using it to deal with a major physical injury then you want high CBD content marijuana.

CBDs and THC both have anti-tumor properties.

I realize that the high THC one has good properties my point is plenty of marijuana is designed for those to get better with not high with. When dealing with physical pain like say you have a massive injury to your wrist, high CBD content is exactly what you want if you are looking at the marijuana plant.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

darkknight109 posted...

Just FYI, posts like these really don't help your cause.

I should use lies like the US Government instead?

I didn't say you were wrong (and I'm also not saying you're right); I'm saying posts like that don't help you prove your point. When you start throwing around words like "propaganda" and "big pharma" and falling back on the "Well, ____ is worse for you and it's totally legal, so..." argument, everyone who doesn't already agree with you (and even some who do) has already stopped listening to you.

If you want people to take you seriously, make more posts like this one that you made later in the topic:

SunWuKung420 posted...

I'd also like to address another misconception. A lot of people assume all marijuana users just want to get super "baked" and completely ignore the vast number of people who are actually interested in responsible usage and microdosing. Not all users are "stoners", they are a small portion who over use.

That's a valid argument, and one devoid of buzzwords and "gotcha" arguments. This is good grounds for discussion. Dismissing those against legalization as sheep blinded by propaganda is not and will change precisely zero minds.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Monopoman posted...

Well there is that and also some strains of marijuana are designed to highly raise the CBD levels of the drug which impact the medical benefits and reduce the THC at the same time. So if you are say using it to deal with a major physical injury then you want high CBD content marijuana.

CBDs and THC both have anti-tumor properties.

You're not mentioning the huge asterisk that comes with this - namely that nearly all the studies that showed this relationship did so by injecting rats with THC. That's very different than testing the consumption methods used by humans on human test subjects.

There's also the fact that while THC inhibits growth in some tumours, it's been found to cause others to grow faster. And while research is still undecided on this, at least some studies show that marijuana is linked to cancer:

http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/31/2/280

...and that marijuana joints are up to 7x worse for your lungs than cigarettes:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2419713.stm

Painting marijuana as a miracle anti-cancer drug is disingenuous at best, particularly given the most common method of consumption may very well put the user at risk for *developing* cancer.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

darkknight109 posted...

Just FYI, posts like these really don't help your cause.

I should use lies like the US Government instead?

It's not illegal because people get high or because it's bad for you (since it's not). The brain contains cannabinoid receptors (this is medical science fact) so unlike other drugs that mimic serotonin or endorphins (and their continued use affects the body's ability to make them), our bodies are literally designed to have marijuana in our diets.

Given the NCI data I posted, it stands to reason that a safe and effective reactive medicinal compound also has proactive benefits, like vitamin C.

Pot is not a part of a healthy and nutritious diet, lol what a silly troll. Also smoking pot damages your lungs.

Monopoman posted...

darkknight109 posted...

I think both sides of this issue should be in full support of extensive research into the subject. If researchers could prove the full extent of marijuana's benefits while extensively documenting the short- and long-term consequences of chronic use, we'd be able to make a much more educated decision on whether or not legalization was a good idea. Under the current system, we're largely flying blind (which is why I tend to base my opinion on an abundance of caution)..

What's amusing about this is when a drug manufacturer makes a new drug while it obviously goes through testing, the FDA, and clinical trials. They sometimes miss something and/or the long term affects of that drug are not discovered. So basically the government wants to be "100% sure" about Marijuana but meanwhile if I own a drug company I can get my drug through faster assuming I have the resources to do so.

Drug companies spend hundreds of millions and years of research to get drugs through. Once again potheads have to resort to lies.
---

ColdOne666 posted...

Pot is not a part of a healthy and nutritious diet, lol what a silly troll. Also smoking pot damages your lungs.

Yes, smoking is bad. But consuming it via edibles does provide all the health benefits without damaging your lungs and yes, there are legitimate health benefits to consuming marijuana in moderate amounts.
---

ColdOne666 posted...

Drug companies spend hundreds of millions and years of research to get drugs through. Once again potheads have to resort to lies.

http://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005528#

Not every drug ends in disaster, but many drugs do get pulled years after release (and sometimes after thousands or tens of thousands of deaths or serious injuries).
---

There is no argument against it recreationally unless you are completely okay with the government banning all things that are harmful to people like alcohol, tobacco, fried foods, tanning, skateboards, whatever. Smoking weed is no more dangerous than so many things that are legal. That's not even including the medical benefits that pot has.

It's going to be federally legal as soon as the close minded old fucks die.

Doctor Foxx posted...

ColdOne666 posted...

Drug companies spend hundreds of millions and years of research to get drugs through. Once again potheads have to resort to lies.

http://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005528#

Not every drug ends in disaster, but many drugs do get pulled years after release (and sometimes after thousands or tens of thousands of deaths or serious injuries).

Literally a class action lawsuit commercial for so many medical things on my tv all the time

B-b-b-but my research!

Most of the people against it are the same people who are ok with alcohol which is way worse than weed.

MICHALCOLE posted...

Literally a class action lawsuit commercial for so many medical things on my tv all the time

B-b-b-but my research!

I remember the Vioxx scandal in the news too. Over 27000 linked heart attacks in just 4 years of the drug being used. That's only the confirmed ones.

Or what about thalidomide babies? That was extremely messed up and large scale.
---

Anybody who has a problem with MEDICAL MARIJUANA is absolutely being ignorant and just flat out refusing to see the benefits. I'm not sure why somebody would want to be that ignorant... maybe their parents are complete brainwashing stiffs or something? idk. But speaking medically, it has a place in medicine way above half the shit out there that does more bad than good.

And no, I don't smoke pot, etc... or believe it cures cancer. tho it does help victims with cancer.
---

Monopoman posted...

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.

You should meet someone that had or has an addiction to Oxycontin it becomes a huge fucking problem for a good number of those that use it for a long period of time.

thats their problem
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

Monopoman posted...

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.

You should meet someone that had or has an addiction to Oxycontin it becomes a huge fucking problem for a good number of those that use it for a long period of time.

thats their problem

When they end up addicted to opiates it becomes society's problem. When prescribed medication isn't enough they get prescription medication on the street or turn to heroin. In the process they stand to lose everything in their life.

It's a huge issue all over North America. People are dying in large numbers. Addiction is not a personal problem, it's a societal sickness.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/love-and-sex-in-the-digital-age/201509/the-opposite-addiction-is-connection
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

ColdOne666 posted...

Drug companies spend hundreds of millions and years of research to get drugs through. Once again potheads have to resort to lies.

http://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=005528#

Not every drug ends in disaster, but many drugs do get pulled years after release (and sometimes after thousands or tens of thousands of deaths or serious injuries).

And they rightfully get gigantic fines and lawsuits.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

Monopoman posted...

shadowSEXil posted...

Because it should only be recreational or not at all. Take hard narcotics if you want pain relief; they feel better.

You should meet someone that had or has an addiction to Oxycontin it becomes a huge fucking problem for a good number of those that use it for a long period of time.

thats their problem

When they end up addicted to opiates it becomes society's problem. When prescribed medication isn't enough they get prescription medication on the street or turn to heroin. In the process they stand to lose everything in their life.

It's a huge issue all over North America. People are dying in large numbers. Addiction is not a personal problem, it's a societal sickness.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/love-and-sex-in-the-digital-age/201509/the-opposite-addiction-is-connection

no, thats still their problem. just because they mess up their life with drugs doesnt mean its society's responsibility to take care of them. they are not a little child and society is not their parent
---

ColdOne666 posted...

And they rightfully get gigantic fines and lawsuits.

And that doesn't make people well again, or bring back the dead.
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

no, thats still their problem. just because they mess up their life with drugs doesnt mean its society's responsibility to take care of them. they are not a little child and society is not their parent

That is not how drug addiction works at all
---

MICHALCOLE posted...

There is no argument against it recreationally unless you are completely okay with the government banning all things that are harmful to people like alcohol, tobacco, fried foods, tanning, skateboards, whatever. Smoking weed is no more dangerous than so many things that are legal. That's not even including the medical benefits that pot has.

jeremy13 posted...

Most of the people against it are the same people who are ok with alcohol which is way worse than weed.

I have never understood this argument. Saying "Alcohol/tobacco/whatever is worse than weed" is a great argument if you're trying to say we should make those things illegal; it's a terrible argument for saying we should make weed legal.

Just because "X" is legal does not mean that we have to draw a line in the sand and say everything less dangerous than "X" should also be legal. The decision to keep alcohol and tobacco legal isn't because of their safety records, so I don't see why it's even considered a valid talking point (especially so in the case of tobacco, which seems to be inching closer and closer to illegality with every passing year *because* of its safety record).

Something to keep in mind: unless you are one of the truly deluded, you acknowledge that weed can lead to death (either directly through lung cancer or indirectly through things like impaired driving) and other deleterious effects (increased risk of schizophrenia, decreased productivity if workers come to work stoned, potential for addiction - behavioural, if not physical). Ergo, regardless of whether weed is less or more harmful than other legal substances, in arguing for legalization you are still arguing for things to become less safe than they are right now.

That's not in and of itself a dealbreaker; after all, there are plenty of unsafe substances and activities that are 100% legal and uncontroversially so. However, it should serve to illustrate that the "____ is legal and unsafe, therefore weed should be legal too" argument is not the airtight defence its proponents seem to think it is.
---

No, I'm not advocating for those things to be illegal, I'm proving that if you are okay with those things being legal then you're a hypocrite

MICHALCOLE posted...

No, I'm not advocating for those things to be illegal, I'm proving that if you are okay with those things being legal then you're a hypocrite

.....did you even read my post?
---

darkknight109 posted...

MICHALCOLE posted...

No, I'm not advocating for those things to be illegal, I'm proving that if you are okay with those things being legal then you're a hypocrite

.....did you even read my post?

Yes

darkknight109 posted...

either directly through lung cancer

THC has been shown to have anti-tumor affects for non-small lung cell cancer, the most common from of lung cancer.

From the FDA's report to the DEA in 2015:
"It doesn’t seem to cause cancer. A large study with 1,650 subjects found that “a positive association was not found between marijuana and lung cancer,” a finding that “remained true, regardless of the extent of marijuana use when controlling for tobacco use and other potential confounding variables.”

darkknight109 posted...

increased risk of schizophrenia

Also from the FDA:
"There’s no link to mental illness. In a section about the common suggestion that smoking weed can lead to schizophrenia and other types of mental illness, the FDA said “extensive research” shows no “causative link between marijuana use and the development of psychosis.”
---

If you breath in smoke its bad for your lungs. Doesnt matter if its cigarettes, car exhaust, a bushfire or pot.
---

ColdOne666 posted...

If you breath in smoke its bad for your lungs. Doesnt matter if its cigarettes, car exhaust, a bushfire or pot.

What if you open a cold one with the boys?

MICHALCOLE posted...

ColdOne666 posted...

If you breath in smoke its bad for your lungs. Doesnt matter if its cigarettes, car exhaust, a bushfire or pot.

What if you open a cold one with the boys?

Also bad?

mastermix3000 posted...

1) It will be legalized in the future, both federally and hopefully globally

lol

mastermix3000 posted...

2) It is not in the same league as psychedelic drugs

Since when are those prescribed medicinally? More importantly, I'm sure there's a lot of stuff that most things are less bad then.
---

Zeus posted...

Since when are those prescribed medicinally?

http://www.businessinsider.com/psychedelics-depression-anxiety-alcoholism-mental-illness-2017-1

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/psychedelic-therapy-tried-by-patients-for-mental-health-psychological-conditions/

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00088699

http://www.maps.org/news/multimedia-library/5321-using-psychedelic-drugs-to-treat-mental-disorders

They will be soon if they're not already
---

ColdOne666 posted...

If you breath in smoke its bad for your lungs. Doesnt matter if its cigarettes, car exhaust, a bushfire or pot.

Many legalization advocates would prefer less harmful and more controlled consumption. There are many people who would prefer high cbd/low thc strains who are forced to buy whatever is available illegally.
---