Smoking weed in group

[Theldios]

Originally Posted by Seaweedpimp [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

http://everything2.com/title/Does+Po...ain+Cells%253F

Periodically, you'll hear someone claim that pot kills brain cells. Besides the fact that that's a vague, un-scientific claim, it's dumb. Here's why. The only research scientist who ever claimed that pot damages brain structures was a guy named Dr. Gabriel Nahas, who used to work for the National Institutes of Health in the 70's. He did a study on rhesus monkeys with marijuana, and his results seemed to indicate that pot caused brain damage, so the drug warriors like to include that little tidbit in their speeches, pamphlets, and so forth.

The problem is that it isn't true. Dr. Nahas' research was astoundingly bad. After he published his study, dozens of scientists came forward to question his methods. He made pretty much every mistake someone can make - if this were a science project, he would have flunked. A few examples:

* the size of the research group was small - only 4 monkeys.
* there was no control group.
* the amount of pot smoke the monkeys ingested was several thousand times higher than anything a human could smoke - these poor monkeys basically spent 16 hours a day in a room full of pot smoke.
* Nahas misidentified normal monkey brain structures as "damaged."
* in his bibliography, he cited 31 sources. Of those 31, 4 were legitimate.
The rest were either quoted out of context in a misleading way, misquoted, or plain-old made up.
* He lied about his results. The "brain damage" that he observed in the monkeys brains disappeared as soon as the monkeys stopped receiving marijuana, and he chose to not mention it in his report.

So basically, this was like the world-class worst scientific study ever. It was so bad, he got shit-canned by the NIH, and he made a public speech disavowing the research, and admitting he messed it up.

Why am I going on at such length? My point is, people still say that pot causes brain damage. The drug warriors are intellectually dishonest - they quote people like Gabriel Nahas in pamphlets, because they know most people aren't going to bother to look it up and find out whether Nahas was a complete moron or not (which he was). Doing something like that is, in my eyes, just as bad as lying, so when the Drug Czar makes a claim on TV or in a newspaper that just isn't true, to me, it's just as bad as Clinton saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

If they came out and told the honest truth about marijuana, it would be legalized. They know this. They feel justified in lying because it's the only way to keep pot illegal. But if you like government sources, heres one for you:

In the late eighties, NORML (the pro-pot people) brought a lawsuit against the DEA, trying to get pot re-classified from a schedule I drug (along with cocaine and angel dust) to a class III drug (things like codeine). The DEA assigned a law judge named Francis Young to hear the case. It went on for two years. During the case, the judge heard thousands of hours of testimony from scientists, lawyers, doctors, policemen, and so forth, and he amassed something like 15 volumes of evidence.

Let me be clear - Francis Young was an employee of the DEA, so he wasn't exactly unbiased. After two years of hearing the best the pro-pot and anti-pot forces could muster, his recommendation was that pot be immediately decriminalized. How about some quotes? He called marijuana "the safest therapeutic drug known to man." Was he wrong? He also referred to marijuana as "safer than water." It sounds weird, but it's true. It's theoretically impossible to overdose on marijuana, and no one has ever died from it. Compare that to Aspirin, which kills a few dozen people every year, or to any other commonly used drug or medication. In fact, compare it to water - believe it or not, it's actually possible to die from drinking too much water, and every year, a few people die from it. Which is, of course, a few more than pot.

So how come pot wasn't decriminalized? Well, after Young presented his findings to the DEA, the DEA's response was: "um, we're not in charge of scheduling drugs, that's Health and Human Services' job." They passed the buck. Is this surprising? Not really. About every 20 years or so, the government appoints a task force to decide what to do about the "marijuana problem". Every time, they recommend decriminalization, and every time they are ignored. The first time I can find of this happening was with the British government in 1804. The most recent time was during the Reagan administration. He appointed a "Gold-ribbon task force" of lawyers, doctors, and cops, who also recommended that marijuana be decriminalized, and were also ignored.

Oh and BTW idiot learn to read were were debating Dr. Robert G. Heath's study not DR Nahas

good try though

[Henini]

what's with all the monkey smoking, I thought this was a pot smoking thread.

there is no thc in moneys, smoking them is useless.

you can not smoke studies either, that makes then uninteresting.

where's the ganja at?

[purist]

Originally Posted by purist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Theldios.

Please quote the part of the studies where it says THC kills brain cells.

If you read the studies at all, you'd know they found no evidence that it does.

I'll be waiting.

Originally Posted by purist

Just copy-paste the part of the research where you claim it says THC kills brain cells, please. Don't try to quote parts about anything else.

I want the part that says THC kills brain cells.

Quote me that part, if you can find it.

[Theldios]

Originally Posted by purist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Theldios.

Please quote the part of the studies where it says THC kills brain cells.

If you read the studies at all, you'd know they found no evidence that it does.

I'll be waiting.

"Heath reported that rhesus monkeys smoking an equivalent of 30 joints a day began to atrophy and die after just 90 days. Autopsies revealed that the monkeys who had been exposed to the marijuana smoke had more dead brain cells than the control monkeys, who had not been exposed.
"

The studies you cited did not even look at the brain so how could they claim anything

one of them looked at OVERALL HEALTH
the other looked at brainwave patterns (which were abnormal with pot involved)
they did nothign to disprove Dr. Heath's studies
Many have critisized his study and they ma be right I am no scientisit but I have not seen one stuidy published that has shown that Pot smoke Does not cause brain dmg or mess up your brain in someway on a permant basis.
Many people cite the 2 studies you linked and sent me the PDF for but neither of those studies actully looked at the brains of the monekys they were studying.
Here are published things that show that Pot is just not so good for you


"Glen Hanson, DDS, PhD, Associate Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), stated on July 10, 2003 during a marijuana briefing in Salt Lake City arranged by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, as reported in the Deseret News:
"Its [marijuana] effects on the brain function are compounded in adolescents because the behavior center at the frontal cortex is literally not developed... "
"To use [marijuana] is to take chemical shortcuts to the brain's pleasure center. It is not like riding a roller coaster or jumping out of an airplane. This is adding chemicals to your brain, not inducing a normal sensation. You are changing the way it normally functions and, in effect, creating a mental disorder. The brain bounces and bounces and finally stops bouncing back to normal.""

"The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) noted in its online article "NIDA InfoFacts: Marijuana" (revised Mar. 2004):
"When someone smokes marijuana, THC rapidly passes from the lungs into the bloodstream, which carries the chemical to organs throughout the body, including the brain.
In the brain, THC connects to specific sites called cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells. Some brain areas have many cannabinoid receptors; others have few or none. Many cannabinoid receptors are found in the parts of the brain that influence pleasure, memory, thought, concentration, sensory and time perception, and coordinated movement.

The short-term effects of marijuana can include problems with memory and learning; distorted perception; difficulty in thinking and problem solving; loss of coordination; and increased heart rate.

Research findings for long-term marijuana use indicate some changes in the brain similar to those seen after long-term use of other major drugs of abuse.""

For every source you can find that says it's good for you. I bet i can find 10 that say it's bad and i am syure for every source that finds it bad yuo can find 10 that say it's good.. I guess we will just have to agree to disagree but I am fairly certian from my 1st hand experince what smokeing pot can do and lead to in heavy usage.

[Messianic]

Regardless whether it actually can be proven to kill brain cells, I don't know people who weed has benefited (i.e. "I smoke weed because i'm smart and need to dumb myself down"); I only know people who wasted good years of productivity to smoke a bong.

Not that it should be federally enforced by a nanny state, though.

[Theldios]

Originally Posted by purist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What's wrong, can't find it?

LOL whats wrong can't wait more than 6 min for an answer?

[Messianic]

Oh, quick exception - some doctors say it may help as a pain treatment for glaucoma patients. If docs in good standing with the AMA want to prescribe this as treatment and experiment with them as treatment, I guess that would be a tangible benefit.

[HippoNipple]

Originally Posted by fishingme [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I saw that his argument stayed on track with your statement of calling stoners "dumb" by the mere fact that you said "being stoned dumbs you down" which in turn can conclude that said person is dumb. Unless I'm reading it wrong and you didn't call stoners dumb at all. Also, in many cases when you said "your mind wanders" doesn't really count as being retarded, probably just bored in the subject.

Yes but he only quoted a portion of my statement, jesus man, how many times can you dwell on something so small and be so wrong.

[Seaweedpimp]

Originally Posted by Theldios [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh and BTW idiot learn to read were were debating Dr. Robert G. Heath's study not DR Nahas

good try though

Actually brah, were talking about the brain losing cells. No shit were talking about two different experiments. Weeds not for you. Bleach is.

Too bad you dont listen.

[Seaweedpimp]

Originally Posted by Messianic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Oh, quick exception - some doctors say it may help as a pain treatment for glaucoma patients. If docs in good standing with the AMA want to prescribe this as treatment and experiment with them as treatment, I guess that would be a tangible benefit.

Guess that shows you're wide knowledge on THC and how it effects you!

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So sad.