Author Topic: marijuana (Read 3008 times)

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #120 on:** March 08, 2005, 11:16:58 PM »

Since we are slowly outlawing tobacco, perhaps we should keep this in mind:

Quote

Marijuana use also has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and other parts of the respiratory tract because it contains irritants and carcinogens. In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke. It also produces high levels of an enzyme that converts certain hydrocarbons into their carcinogenic form—levels that may accelerate the changes that ultimately produce malignant cells. Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which increases the lungs’ exposure to carcinogenic smoke. These facts suggest that, puff for puff, smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cancer more than smoking tobacco.

nih

JB88 · « **Reply #121 on:** March 09, 2005, 02:35:41 AM »

holden are you for it or against it?

banning things.

mora · « **Reply #122 on:** March 09, 2005, 03:00:55 AM »

Who on earth smokes 20 joints a day? Even if the smoke would be 10 times as harmful it wouldn't really be as bad as smoking tobacco. Besides, MJ can be ingested by eating or by vaporizing without the dangers of smoking. The comparison to tobacco is invalid.

The danger of MJ smoke is true and people should be made aware of alternative ways on ingestion.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #123 on:** March 09, 2005, 03:05:35 AM »

Mostly I'm for consistancy.

Banning tobacco and holding RJ Reynolds at fault because Aunt Sue hacked up a lung after smoking 3 packs a day for 30 years while also talking of decriminalizing or legalizing marijuana is at best inconsistant.

I am for a libertine viewpoint as long as those who choose to smoke, drink, or walk down RR tracks naked take responsibility for their own actions.

and Mora, you should read all the NIH web... a lot more than smoke happens. You dont have to light up tobacco either. Want some chew?

mora · « **Reply #124 on:** March 09, 2005, 07:40:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
and Mora, you should read all the NIH web... a lot more than smoke happens. You dont have to light up tobacco either. Want some chew?

There absolutely no research showing that marijuana itself is carsinogenic. The idea of vaporizing is to heat it MJ to a temperature where only the THC and other cannabinoids are released, it's a widely researched subject and that's also what the doctors recommend.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #125 on:** March 09, 2005, 07:50:22 AM »

Was I specific on cancer or did I say that other stuff is of concern? It's on the site I linked.

lazs2 · « **Reply #126 on:** March 09, 2005, 07:58:15 AM »

I know guys that started smoking pot more than 30 years ago and don't smoke anything else... they have terrible smokers hack... cough all the time. At 50-70 times the carcenigen rate they would only have to smoke like half a joint a day to get their couple pack a day camel smoker dose.

I don't really care thos so long as they are aware of the risk.

vudak.. I don't want to work or drive with drunks either. I am in the DOT program as are the people I am around. If they test dirty for either pot or booze they are gone and that is fine for me. I am around heavy equipment. I don't want pot heads to be running it.

mechanic... Your little secret? are you kidding? Most people have tried pot and don't get what you get out of it. It is a really wimpy drug to me. Easiest drug I ever took for me to quit.

lazs

Engine · « **Reply #127 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:13:09 AM »

Lazs, I don't think anyone's arguing that someone high on weed should be legally permitted to operate steamrollers.

mora · « **Reply #128 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:20:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Was I specific on cancer or did I say that other stuff is of concern? It's on the site I linked.

I'm well aware of other possible harmful effects. Cancer is not one of them unless you smoke alot of it on daily basis.

mora · « **Reply #129 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:29:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
vudak.. I don't want to work or drive with drunks either. I am in the DOT program as are the people I am around. If they test dirty for either pot or booze they are gone and that is fine for me. I am around heavy equipment. I don't want pot heads to be running it.

Those tests have nothing to do whether the person is high on the moment he's operating the machinery. It's equally unfair to fire a person who occasionally get's drunk on his freetime than one who occasionally get's high. Both activies don't affect your ability to operate machinery, except if you go to work the next day after heavy drinking.

Do you really think the persons you work with shouldn't be allowed to have a beer on their own time?

lazs2 · « **Reply #130 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:31:03 AM »

Like I said... I think the drug makes people wimpy and stupid and I don't like being around the self involved little wussy tools but... They should be able to buy or grow and smoke all of the crap they want...

so long as they don't share the road with me or work around me.

If you test positive for pot your boss should have the right to fire you or the cops aresset you for DUI if you were driving.

but... smoke all you want. There should be no law against doing something stupid or harming yourself.

lazs

lazs2 · « **Reply #131 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:37:47 AM »

No.... mora.. those tests do have everything to do with a person being high. Booze wears off. none in your system... you aren't drunk or affected. Pot... who knows? I am not gonna take a chance. If the pot head kills someone and tests positive are you gonna tell me that it wasn't the post fault?

Every pot head I knew was a zombie no matter if he had just smoked it or was about to. I don't want to share the road with any of em...

If you test positive for meth... you get a DUI... what is the difference? meth stays in the system a long time. I don't want someone testing positive for pot or meth or whatever mind altering substance... on the road with me or on the job with me.

It would be up to the employer... if you were a valuable employee... an "artist" say... he wouldn't fire you anyway so what's the problem?

lazs

mora · « **Reply #132 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:44:24 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
Like I said... I think the drug makes people wimpy and stupid and I don't like being around the self involved little wussy tools

Generalizing a bit eh? Don't you think it really depends on the person and the the amounts consumed and the frequency of use. I know people who get drunk every day and people who get high every day. Some of them can function like any other persons at work, but majority doesn't.

Majority of people of using both substances do it much less frequently and in most cases it's not reflected in their job performance at all.

I however agree with of your "pot head" assesment, but I also realize that it's just a minority.

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
so long as they don't share the road with me or work around me.

If you test positive for pot your boss should have the right to fire you or the cops aresset you for DUI if you were driving.

Are you saying that people who use MJ shouldn't be allowed to drive? How about people who use alcohol?

Should you employer be allowed to have access to your bank accounts? Should the cops be allowed to put a speed recorder in your car? If you agree with those, then I have no problem with understanding your stance on drug and alcohol testing.

lazs2 · « **Reply #133 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:51:39 AM »

mora... like I said... if you test positive for any drug including booze you will be arrested for DUI. That is the way it is and that is the way it should be. Some drugs stay in your system longer than others... that just means you are high longer.

employers have the right to fire anyone who tests positive for any drug... they also can fire you for extreme finacial irresponsibility in some cases.. If you are worth a lot to them tho... they overlook these things... if you are a total loser they most likely jump at the chance to get rid of your dope smoking, bankrupt, disruptive butt.

If you smoke pot then no... you shouldn't drive. You are most likely the worst judge on the planet of your abilities.

lazs

mora · « **Reply #134 on:** March 09, 2005, 09:00:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
No.... mora.. those tests do have everything to do with a person being high. Booze wears off. none in your system... you aren't drunk or affected. Pot... who knows? I am not gonna take a chance. If the pot head kills someone and tests positive are you gonna tell me that it wasn't the post fault?

Pot does wear off and it does so much faster than alcohol. The urine test measure the metabolites(sp?) of THC, they are not psychoactive at all. Once the active ingredients are off your blood stream you are no longer high.

Quote

Every pot head I knew was a zombie no matter if he had just smoked it or was about to. I don't want to share the road with any of em...

I believe about half of the US population have used MJ. Is every other person a "zombie" over there?