16 replies to this topic

[A trophy guy]

http://www.mlive.com..._use_doesn.html

This article details a 20-year study which concluded that moderate marijuana smoking (joint/day) did not hurt the lungs of the smoker. I consider this yet another positive sign that marijuana can be used as a safe, natural alternative to many potent prescription drugs.

[brockit79]

A fairly important point in this article is that low use of marijuana has low impact on the lungs but increased usage is harmful to them. The link above is a newspaper interpretation and not the actual research journal publication. Tobacco is an addictive substance which can lead to addiction and/or dependency. The low doses/amounts states (one a day or once or twice a month) would that be enough to offset the pain and/or spasm? IDK, I wish to get in to competitive sports so it is a no no for me.

Just sayin ATG, I personally can't be in the same area as a smoker for to long because I have asthma and it flares up too much. I have nothing against marijuana and have had the odd muffin/cake in my younger days but the effects put me off for life lol.

Brock

[wheeliebear75]

Marijuana doesn't stay in the system for very long, so whether you ate it or smoked it, the answer to the amount needed AND frequency would depend on how bad + how constant are the symptoms for which you're using pot.

Smoking isn't "the best way" at least for the lungs....buuut it's not as harsh as cigarette smoke is. And although it can be harsh on the lungs...I find it somewhat ironic (I won't say hypocrisy)that the study sites JOINTS as the method of consumption of the marijuana since the easiest way on the lungs (I've got asthma) is in a water pipe with some ice-cubes floating around in the water & the smoke is filtered through the water so the ash stays in the bong NOT your lungs & the ice cools the smoke so it's not so harsh on the throat. And the BEE-U-TAY of THAT....is that even if your stomach does go Chernobyl on you (mine often does) unlike pills AND/OR "edibles" (marijuana brownies etc.) you may still loose your lunch but at least you won't loose the effects from what you just smoked. But if you do smoke & still puke....it's a good sign ya need to smoke some more. LOL

A trophy guy, on 12 January 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

http://www.mlive.com..._use_doesn.html

This article details a 20-year study which concluded that moderate marijuana smoking (joint/day) did not hurt the lungs of the smoker. I consider this yet another positive sign that marijuana can be used as a safe, natural alternative to many potent prescription drugs.

Nice finding an article that doesn't vilify pot!

[nomis]

This is not the only medical research reaching these conclusions. Earlier credible research is mentioned in the video documentary Medicinal Cannabis and Its Impact on Human Health put out by a medical group in the USA. If you've got 50min it's worth a look.

It goes further in saying research indicates that, unlike tobacco, cannabis does not cause emphysema and there are indications it may reduce some cancers. References in this documentary are listed at the end.

[N Chapman]

A trophy guy, on 12 January 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

http://www.mlive.com..._use_doesn.html

This article details a 20-year study which concluded that moderate marijuana smoking (joint/day) did not hurt the lungs of the smoker. I consider this yet another positive sign that marijuana can be used as a safe, natural alternative to many potent prescription drugs.

Only for, people with M.S otherwise smoking puff can make yr injury very complicated....

[airart1]

what complications would it make?, if you don't have MS, what's the fact to that statement, it still beats any kind of prescription drug/poison they throw at you...........30 days is pretty much a givin' as far as it staying in your system and showing on a pee test........

Edited by airart1, 12 January 2012 - 02:48 PM.

[Tetracyclone]

airart1, on 12 January 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

what complications would it make?, if you don't have MS, what's the fact to that statement, it still beats any kind of prescription drug/poison they throw at you...........30 days is pretty much a givin' as far as it staying in your system and showing on a pee test........

poster meant benefits of symptom relief only lasts a short time.

[A trophy guy]

N Chapman, on 12 January 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

A trophy guy, on 12 January 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

http://www.mlive.com..._use_doesn.html

This article details a 20-year study which concluded that moderate marijuana smoking (joint/day) did not hurt the lungs of the smoker. I consider this yet another positive sign that marijuana can be used as a safe, natural alternative to many potent prescription drugs.

Only for, people with M.S otherwise smoking puff can make yr injury very complicated....

Huh? Cite? What are you talking about?

[tsh3406]

They can do all the studies they want, we ALL know (except for those who are brainwashed) the only reason it's illegal is because the US Government can't tax it and take their cut. It will also take a huge chunk out of the pharm co.'s proffits. It certainly has nothing to do with being addictive or dangerous, there are far worse (but much more expensive and regulated) drugs and other substances on the market....

[airart1]

prescription drugs only last so long also.......my experience all drugs are about that way, more you take the more you need to get the same results.......

[edlee]

Tsh has a point. If pot were to be made legal,,, to use,, therefore, to grow for your own use,,, there would be no way to tax a crop that will grow almost anywhere,, in most any soil,, and that doesn't need any care at all, to produce amounts adequate for an individual.

The fact that one can easily become impared enough to be a possible danger to themselves and others,, if they decide to get behind the wheel of a car,,, and that breathalyzers aren't effective to evidence it's use,, all present problems for public safety. Whether these problems are serious enough to warrent a complete ban,, is a separate question.

There are those who have found it's use beneficial for relief of pain, nausia,, inner eye pressure,, stress. If euphoria were somehow taken out of the mix,, do you suppose there would be as many claiming the right to it's use?

I have tried it recently,,, after a ,, perhaps,, 35 year abstinence,,, and must admit to finding no relief whatsoever,, after the immediate euphoria and disassociation were over. I suppose,, if I managed to stay high all afternoon,, I would have been pain free that long,,, but,,,, I have other things to do. Much the same reason for the 35 years of non use.

I have the same view of mariquana use as I do for ALL drug use. Make it ALL legal,, and do not allow impairment to be an excuse in any court,, then let it all sort itself out. Those who can't control themselves in their uses,,, will learn,, or they will die. The rest of use will get on fine without them.

I think I'm getting off track, here,, so I better stop.
ed

[wheeliebear75]

tsh3406, on 12 January 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

They can do all the studies they want, we ALL know (except for those who are brainwashed) the only reason it's illegal is because the US Government can't tax it and take their cut. It will also take a huge chunk out of the pharm co.'s proffits. It certainly has nothing to do with being addictive or dangerous, there are far worse (but much more expensive and regulated) drugs and other substances on the market....

Actually Oakland California HAS managed to make pot taxable AND the city makes quite a bit of $ off of it.

The hurt in the wallet of the big pharma companies however is something different. The FDA already has been semi-run BY the big pharma companies so THAT is I think the majority of why it has not been "legalized". I DO however find it ironic of big pharma to downplay the medicinal use of a plant (pot) as not being "valuable" yet they have no such qualms with OTHER plants like say...the POPPY flower which makes everything from heroin on the streets to our opiate based pain pills.

True neither pills nor pot last as long as the PAIN...but at least for ME the difference is that the side-effects of pot are actually "desired" such as appetite stimulation & that the benefits are almost instantaneous, the pills on the other hand just have drowsy & loopy as side-effects & those tend to outlast the pain alleviation I get from taking them. I think however both are as ed describes "disassociative" ways of dealing with the pain....pot makes me just not give a that I'm hurting, & Rx makes me so groggy I'm too woozy/sleepy to care & tend to just nap through my days & sleep my nights away.

Not trying to sway anyone one way or the other....only reporting on my own experiences with pot vs. pills & giving my "2 bits".

[tsh3406]

wheeliebear75, on 13 January 2012 - 02:13 AM, said:

tsh3406, on 12 January 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

They can do all the studies they want, we ALL know (except for those who are brainwashed) the only reason it's illegal is because the US Government can't tax it and take their cut. It will also take a huge chunk out of the pharm co.'s proffits. It certainly has nothing to do with being addictive or dangerous, there are far worse (but much more expensive and regulated) drugs and other substances on the market....

Actually Oakland California HAS managed to make pot taxable AND the city makes quite a bit of $ off of it.

The hurt in the wallet of the big pharma companies however is something different. The FDA already has been semi-run BY the big pharma companies so THAT is I think the majority of why it has not been "legalized". I DO however find it ironic of big pharma to downplay the medicinal use of a plant (pot) as not being "valuable" yet they have no such qualms with OTHER plants like say...the POPPY flower which makes everything from heroin on the streets to our opiate based pain pills.

True neither pills nor pot last as long as the PAIN...but at least for ME the difference is that the side-effects of pot are actually "desired" such as appetite stimulation & that the benefits are almost instantaneous, the pills on the other hand just have drowsy & loopy as side-effects & those tend to outlast the pain alleviation I get from taking them. I think however both are as ed describes "disassociative" ways of dealing with the pain....pot makes me just not give a that I'm hurting, & Rx makes me so groggy I'm too woozy/sleepy to care & tend to just nap through my days & sleep my nights away.

Not trying to sway anyone one way or the other....only reporting on my own experiences with pot vs. pills & giving my "2 bits".

I'm sure it can be regulated to an extent, however, much like moonshiners, there will always be those who make their own rules.

[wheeliebear75]

Of course there will be that small percentage who will want to write their OWN rules.

But look at the "dry counties" & the problems THEY have with "moonshine", & now take a look at the cities that have legal drinking for 21+yrs.....hey what do ya know.....MOST people are more than happy to get some good tasting SMOOTH whiskey at their local bar than to have a mason jar full of "fire-water".

I think prohibition showed us what NOT to do & "dry counties" show us how to MAKE "criminals".

I think I'm for the most part with ed....most of us can moderate ourselves & behave in a congenial manner....hopefully everyone else will just die of their own stupidity hopefully taking their genes with them....we don't need THEIR genes messing up OUR gene-pool. ;)

[edlee]

Quote

we don't need THEIR genes messing up OUR gene-pool.

Agreed.
ed

[richo]

airart1, on 12 January 2012 - 09:13 PM, said:

prescription drugs only last so long also.......my experience all drugs are about that way, more you take the more you need to get the same results.......

I would rather trust the plantNOT the guy in the white coat that makes those littel pills

[airart1]

i will agree, natural is always the better option..............