[QUOTE="Hubadubalubahu"]

It was clearly spelled out in the 1964 Surgeon General's Report that cigarette smoking was not an addiction. In the report of the Surgeon General back in 1979 the Surgeon General was starting to say that maybe it was an addiction, but still had put the emphasis on the habit of smoking being the primary problem. In 1988 the Surgeon General finally issued a report stating once and for all that nicotine was an addictive substance. For 24 years if you said cigarettes were addictive you would of been wrong.-Sun_Tzu-

This is incredibly misleading. The 1964 Surgeon General's Report simply called it a "habit" instead of an addiction. It is only a semantic difference. But what that report is famous for is that it was the first official declaration made by the US government in relation to the negative health effects of tobacco smoking.

It is in no way misleading It insisted that the "tobacco habit should be characterized as an habituation rather than an addiction." They denied nicotine being an addictive substance. Its not misleading

[QUOTE="Hubadubalubahu"]

[QUOTE="Fightingfan"]

Marijuana use suppresses the production of hormones that help regulate the reproductive system. For men, this can cause decreased sperm counts and very heavy smokers can experience erectile dysfunction.

These problems would most likely result in a decreased ability to conceive but not lead overall complete infertility

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3186686.stm

*Same goes for people who smoke tobacco minus the THC effects.

Fightingfan

The problem is majority of research on mariujana, and anything not given enough time, is it's nothing more than speculation. (Like it "curing" AIDS. :lol: .) When numerous people have had no problems with having children and I personally have never had erectile disfunction, it makes it tough to take these types of studies as valid. I have experienced a drop in Libido on some nights but that is usually more affected by what kind of day ive had or mood im in, and is in no way permanent or is it erectile disfunction.

All im saying is dont believe everything you hear until its been given time to truly be fully researched. A prime example is tobacco.

It was clearly spelled out in the 1964 Surgeon General's Report that cigarette smoking was not an addiction. In the report of the Surgeon General back in 1979 the Surgeon General was starting to say that maybe it was an addiction, but still had put the emphasis on the habit of smoking being the primary problem. In 1988 the Surgeon General finally issued a report stating once and for all that nicotine was an addictive substance. For 24 years if you said cigarettes were addictive you would of been wrong.

Marijuana research is actually a very recent thing and is mostly comprised of hypothesis and theory. I just find it hard to agree with these types of studies without more research done, or people around me suffering the problems to prove it.

look at it like this. Lets say I see a published story come out that says a specific pill prevents colds in 100% of the cases in human trials. Then another study verifies it. In fact, every expert in the world comes out and says colds no longer exist -- the pill has eradicated them.

But most people I knew who took this miracle pill still got colds. Worse than that, I took the pill myself and all of my friends who were on the pill kept giving the cold to me. Pretty soon I would dismiss those studies and no matter how many times I see it I would not believe it. Sooner or later I would have to believe my own eyes and ears, basically my own instincts, more than expert opinion.

That's a really great point of view, and yeah, I agree with you. You till have the effects of absorbing carbon dioxide into the respiratory system/blood, I just can't think of any beneficial health reason one would smoke.

The only thing marijuana does that's 'unique' is offer more dopamine to the brain, but that can easily be obtain from sex, or even eating your favorite food.

*Also it doesn't "Cure aids" it shrinks it :P

Thats why you learn to cook ;) The most detrimental thing I can think of besides the obvious lung/respiratory damage while smoking it is the dopamine dependency. The whole "high" is caused by THC stimulating brain cells to release the chemical dopamine. While it's not physically addicting I find that when I quit smoking it I get very depressed. This happens because your body gets used to the increased amounts of dopamine being produced and actually slows down your natural production of dopamine. So when you quit smoking not only do you not have the high amounts you had while smoking it but your body actually produces less dopamine than it needs too.(Although I have a history with depression so that may be part of it.)

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="lightleggy"] never heard about that. i dont think its true.Fightingfan

It's not. It actually makes you capable of more secks for longer periods of time, while increasing sensitivity.

Marijuana use suppresses the production of hormones that help regulate the reproductive system. For men, this can cause decreased sperm counts and very heavy smokers can experience erectile dysfunction.

These problems would most likely result in a decreased ability to conceive but not lead overall complete infertility

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3186686.stm

*Same goes for people who smoke tobacco minus the THC effects.

The problem is majority of research on mariujana, and anything not given enough time, is it's nothing more than speculation. (Like it "curing" AIDS. :lol: .) When numerous people have had no problems with having children and I personally have never had erectile disfunction, it makes it tough to take these types of studies as valid. I have experienced a drop in Libido on some nights but that is usually more affected by what kind of day ive had or mood im in, and is in no way permanent or is it erectile disfunction.

All im saying is dont believe everything you hear until its been given time to truly be fully researched. A prime example is tobacco.

It was clearly spelled out in the 1964 Surgeon General's Report that cigarette smoking was not an addiction. In the report of the Surgeon General back in 1979 the Surgeon General was starting to say that maybe it was an addiction, but still had put the emphasis on the habit of smoking being the primary problem. In 1988 the Surgeon General finally issued a report stating once and for all that nicotine was an addictive substance. For 24 years if you said cigarettes were addictive you would of been wrong.

Marijuana research is actually a very recent thing and is mostly comprised of hypothesis and theory. I just find it hard to agree with these types of studies without more research done, or people around me suffering the problems to prove it.

look at it like this. Lets say I see a published story come out that says a specific pill prevents colds in 100% of the cases in human trials. Then another study verifies it. In fact, every expert in the world comes out and says colds no longer exist -- the pill has eradicated them.

But most people I knew who took this miracle pill still got colds. Worse than that, I took the pill myself and all of my friends who were on the pill kept giving the cold to me. Pretty soon I would dismiss those studies and no matter how many times I see it I would not believe it. Sooner or later I would have to believe my own eyes and ears, basically my own instincts, more than expert opinion.

This thread took on a mentally stimulating discussion....not.LJS9502_basic

Well considering the astounding amount of ignorance on both sides of the fence, the fact that 50% didnt read the article, and that people just want to bash or unwittingly support it i'd say yeah this is a doomed thread. To be honest though I tried to stimulate discussion last night but... I forgot no one actually likes to talk about subjects on hand.

[QUOTE="sonicare"]

That's not really a cure for AIDS.

Matthew-first

Actually it's just very misunderstood and not enough people are educated about why it's illegal in the first place. History time! (If your not interested dont read:D)

Under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, marijuana is a Schedule I drug on the basis that is has "a high potential for abuse." What does this mean? It means that the perception is that people get on marijuana, they get hooked and become "potheads," and it begins to dominate their lives. This unquestionably happens in some cases. But it also happens in the case of alcohol--and alcohol is perfectly legal.

The first piece of federal legislation to formally regulate marijuana was the Narcotics Act of 1914, which regulated heroin, cocaine, and marijuana. The only trouble is that cocaine and marijuana are not technically narcotics; the word "narcotic," when used in English, has historically referred to opium derivatives such as heroin and morphine.

But the association stuck, and there is a vast gulf in the American consciousness between "normal" recreational drugs, such as alcohol, caffeine, and nicotine, and "abnormal" recreational drugs, such as heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Marijuana is generally associated with the latter category, which is why it can be convincingly portrayed as a "gateway drug."

The intense anti-marijuana movement of the 1930s dovetailed nicely with the intense anti-Chicano movement of the 1930s. Marijuana was associated with Mexican Americans, and a ban on marijuana was seen as a way of discouraging Mexican-American subcultures from developing.

Today, thanks in large part to the very public popularity of marijuana among whites during the 1960s and 1970s, marijuana is no longer seen as what one might call an ethnic drug--but the groundwork for the anti-marijuana movement was laid down at a time when marijuana was seen as an encroachment on the U.S. majority-white culture. (The movie Reefer Madness ring any bells?)

Another reason was the paper industry.William Randolph Hearst (Citizen Kane) and the Hearst Paper Manufacturing Division of Kimberly Clark owned vast acreage of timberlands. The Hearst Company supplied most paper products. Patty Hearst's grandfather,stood to lose billions because of hemp.
In 1937, Dupont patented the processes to make plastics from oil and coal. Dupont's Annual Report urged stockholders to invest in its new petrochemical division. Synthetics such as plastics, cellophane, celluloid, methanol, nylon, rayon, Dacron, etc., could now be made from oil. Natural hemp industrialization would have ruined over 80% of Dupont's business.

In the 1930s, people were very naive; even to the point of ignorance. The masses were like sheep waiting to be led by the few in power. They did not challenge authority. If the news was in print or on the radio, they believed it had to be true. They told their children and their children grew up to be the parents of the baby-boomers.

A media blitz of 'yellow journalism' raged in the late 1920s and 1930s. Hearst's newspapers ran stories emphasizing the horrors of marihuana. The menace of marihuana made headlines. Readers learned that it was responsible for everything from car accidents to loose morality. Films like 'Reefer Madness' (1936), 'Marihuana: Assassin of Youth' (1935) and 'Marihuana: The Devil's Weed' (1936) were propaganda designed by these industrialists to create an enemy. Their purpose was to gain public support so that anti-marihuana laws could be passed.

Sorry about all the text but this is one of those things that people just need to be educated about.

Sucks to be you guys. I live in a Medical Marijuana State, (Colorado) the stuff is like f*cking candy around here, it's easy as **** to get and even if a cop catches you with it if it's under an ounce it's a 50$ fine, so long as you aren't driving. I have never had a bad experience with weed, except maybe paranoia, but that's only if you get a certain type of weed. There's two types of weed, Sativa and Indica. I think Sativa gives you an increased heart rate, paranoia, and racing thoughts. Where as Indicas make you tired, give you the munchies, and chill you the hell out. If you want a good body high go for Sativas, if you want a pain killing high go for Indica. I think I got that right, but don't quote me on it. 420 motherf*ckers! BTW the increased sexdrive thing is true..I know from self experience. ;)

ConkerAndBerri2

It's a petty offense and a$100 fine for possession 2 oz or less in Colorado. Of course that is if you show up in court, which is always wise. (You sure you live in Colorado?) As far as munchies and paranoia I haven't experienced that since my early years of indulgence.. (Ok, maybe I do get hungry sometimes.) As far as Indica and Sativa goes, as a rule of thumb Indica is a body high, Sativa is a head high. However there are many factors that go into the growing process which influences the final product and a large number of crossbreeds out there.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="Hubadubalubahu"]

Lol that may be subjective. Seems like one hell of a oxymoron. But I know that the erectile dysfunction is false.

needled24-7

For what it's worth, every post I've made ITT I haven't a clue about.

:lol: It really does do everything!

[QUOTE="Hubadubalubahu"]

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

It's not. It actually makes you capable of more secks for longer periods of time, while increasing sensitivity.

coolbeans90

Lol that may be subjective. Seems like one hell of a oxymoron. But I know that the erectile dysfunction is false.

For what it's worth, every post I've made ITT I haven't a clue about.

Wasnt paying attention to earlier posts so sarcasm went way over head

[QUOTE="lightleggy"][QUOTE="Fightingfan"] Actually is causes erectile dysfunction(fertility issues).coolbeans90

It's not. It actually makes you capable of more secks for longer periods of time, while increasing sensitivity.

Lol that may be subjective. Seems like one hell of a oxymoron. But I know that the erectile dysfunction is false.

[QUOTE="Hubadubalubahu"]

[QUOTE="fidosim"]You mean like an epiphany?lightleggy

YeahI don't think paradigm is the word you want.

Good point, though im still not familiar with paradigm being used like this. But im terrible with english/grammer.