Don't tell the pro-marijuana activists this, but pot ruins your brain

Tagged:  

The Guardian covers new research which finds that pot damages your brain. Don't tell this to those who want to legalize it, because that would ruin their argument on making it legal.

============

Smoking high-strength cannabis may damage nerve fibres in brain

High-strength cannabis may damage nerve fibres that handle the flow of messages across the two halves of the brain, scientists claim. Brain scans of people who regularly smoked strong skunk-like cannabis revealed subtle differences in the white matter that connects the left and right hemispheres and carries signals from one side of the brain to the other.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/nov/27/smoking-high-strength-can...

No votes yet

Your headline is a gross exaggeration of the facts, even as you state them in your explanatory information! The headline of the article you cite states clearly that, "Smoking HIGH STRENGTH [my emphasis] cannabis MAY [my emphasis] damage nerve fibres in brain." This is clearly NOT solid evidence that, as your headline states -- unequivocally -- "POT RUINS YOUR BRAIN."

Let me reiterate that I voted against the marijuana referendum that was on the 2015 Ohio ballot, AND that I have consistently been OPPOSED to legalizing marijuana for recreational uses. IMHO...posting stories like this, with misleading headlines, damages the position taken by those of us who oppose the recreational use of marijuana, because those in favor of legalizing pot can point out the misleading nature of such a posted story and its headline.

I do believe that it makes perfect sense to allow health care professionals to write prescriptions for marijuana, and/or the active ingredients in marijuana, for those patients they believe would benefit medically from using it. How can we, in good conscience, allow medical practitioners to write scripts for narcotics, but not for marijuana? I have known people who have had to undergo chemotherapy. For many, marijuana eases the nausea that often accompanies such treatments. In addition, marijuana has been proved to relieve symptoms of glaucoma and other diseases for many people.

What I'm trying to say is that I believe we agree that the legalization of marijuana for recreational use is a bad idea, Chris. But, when making the argument, my advice is to stick with the facts and don't exaggerate! And don't try to "rub the noses" of marijuana protagonists with a study that is inconclusive and only suggestive at best.

There is no definitive research saying it is good. But let's also not tell anyone that too. http://time.com/3931863/medical-marijuana-benefits/

opposition to ANY use of marijuana. If you read the entire article, you discover that the main problem with trying to do a scientific study of medical uses of marijuana stems from pot being illegal. Because pot is still illegal by federal law, there are no laws regulating pot, and there is no standardization of the delivery systems for the effective chemicals in pot. Therefore, no scientific studies can be done properly.

In real life, I have known real people who DID get relief from the side effects of chemotherapy treatments by using marijuana. I have known real people who HAVE HAD real doctors see positive results from their patients with glaucoma using marijuana.

Chris, answer this, please. If health care professionals can be trusted with dispensing narcotics and issuing prescriptions for narcotic drugs, why would you ever wish to not allow health care professionals to use their professional judgment and issue marijuana, and/or write scripts for marijuana, too? It seems crystal clear that the problems associated with the non-standardization of marijuana would dissipate greatly once pot is legalized for medical purposes.

I reiterate...I oppose legalizing marijuana for recreational use. But I find it unconscionable, inhumane, indeed, un-American, to tell those who are suffering, who may be helped by using marijuana for legitimate medical reasons, that it is illegal. Oh yeah! They can take some morphine instead! That's legal...as long as they have the approval of a health care professional!

BTW -- none of this negates the fact that your headline on this thread seems to be purposely misleading!

From DalePertcheck: ...posting stories like this, with misleading headlines, damages the position taken by those of us who oppose the recreational use of marijuana, because those in favor of legalizing pot can point out the misleading nature of such a posted story and its headline.

I really don't think so, Dale. Anyone who is capable of that kind of analytical thought will have already read the article and come to their own conclusion - there are a lot of 'ifs' in the article and a very, very small sampling of the populace. In fact, this study is closer to qualitative data rather than quantitative.

My vote has always been to legalize recreational use of marijuana for any number of reasons, not the least of which is that when I was going through chemo I was too sick to find any pot to try and alleviate my nausea and pain. Worse, I didn't have anyone I could send in my place - I considered asking McCaskey, but I was too sick to sit at the keyboard and type. Legalizing pot would mean a trip to the corner pot store, much like going to the liquor store.

Then there's the entire enforcement system, which is very costly and is not working. If some law abiding adult wants to sit in the confines of his own home and smoke pot, watch TV and binge on pizza and other munchies, why should that be a crime? It shouldn't, but until the sanctimonious, Pecksniffian, white-right moral majority gets their collective heads out of their anuses, it ain't a happenin' thing.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

I also believe in the general decriminalization of marijuana, because enforcement is so expensive. Make marijuana use a minor misdemeanor punishable with a simple fine, much like a parking ticket and, thereby, empty the jails of those who are incarcerated just for using pot. We would spend less money on incarceration, and, concurrently, have more room for those who are convicted of violent crimes and other more serious crimes! It's a win-win!

I know what I'm going to state now is VERY controversial, but PROHIBITION WORKED! Not everyone who wanted to drink adult beverages broke the laws! Between 1919 and 1933, police calls for domestic violence were down significantly. They went up again after 1933. After prohibition, the number of people dying because of people driving drunk soared! (Before prohibition, there were very few drivers. The 1920s saw the first huge surge in Americans owning cars.) Also, by the late 1930s, doctors were getting significantly higher numbers of patients suffering from cirrhosis of the liver.
Ending prohibition was done for three major reasons. One, the libertarian argument was made that government should stay out of this issue, which is primarily a personal adult decision. Two, enforcement was both extremely difficult and expensive in both time and money spent by law enforcement and the courts. Finally, FDR wanted something -- anything -- to spur the economy. Heck, one of my grandfathers opened a beer joint/pool hall on Canton Avenue when prohibition ended. Ending prohibition certainly helped his personal economic situation!
However, what we don't need, and what some statistics from Colorado have shown, is that we will have more people driving impaired. Just as happened when liquor was legalized in the nation, legalizing marijuana for recreational use will mean more innocent people die when impaired drivers cause more fatal accidents. Personally, I will admit that I have no problem with those who drink in moderation and/or have designated drivers. And, as you describe, MJ, I have no problem with anyone who wants to smoke pot and munch away in the privacy of his/her own home.

"Between 1919 and 1933, police calls for domestic violence were down significantly. They went up again after 1933. After prohibition, the number of people dying because of people driving drunk soared! (Before prohibition, there were very few drivers. The 1920s saw the first huge surge in Americans owning cars.) Also, by the late 1930s, doctors were getting significantly higher numbers of patients suffering from cirrhosis of the liver."

Dale, aren't comparing apples to oranges? Alcohol is a lot worse than Marywanna. They should legalize it quit telling people what they can or cannot do as long as its not encroaching in anyone else personal space. I've never hears of anyone beating their wife or killing someone with a car from smoking too many joints. Just my 2 cents.

Hope I didn't offend anyone!

I used that statistical information as further evidence that prohibition worked.

I do know people who drive while high. They are impaired drivers. There is evidence that where recreational marijuana use is legal, more people drive while impaired. We don't need more impaired drivers on the roads. I hope no one close to you is ever a victim of the actions of an impaired driver, Donna. Unfortunately, I have had people close to me who are dead now because of the actions of impaired drivers.

So sorry about your loss Dale. Seems like now a days everything is gray, not black or white.

Hope I didn't offend anyone!

Thank you, Donna.

Donnahoney, looks like you never had any exposure to the writings of one Charlie Z. He may have grey hair, but not any grey areas, just like me.

Why shouldn't people be allowed to damage their brains if they want to?

a line. Now, their impairment could cause injury and/or death to others. That's my main concern BN.

Damaging you brain in and of itself is not a problem for the rest of us. Driving impaired, no matter how it got that way, is a problem.

BN -- On this, we agree.

Hey dude--like marijuana hasn't ruined my brain. I still know all of the words to the Grateful Dead songs, and I remember to pick-up my disability check every month. Wow--did you just see that dinosaur run across the screen? Cool.

and are much more dysfunctional than are regular marijuana users. And many more alcoholics are violent than are marijuana users! And I know regular marijuana users who are very productive, too. When was the last time police got a domestic violence call because a marijuana user had too much to smoke and went wild?

Please keep in mind I oppose making pot legal for recreational use. I do believe that if health care professionals may use their professional judgment and issue narcotics and/or prescriptions for narcotics, they should be able to use their professional judgment to issue marijuana and/or prescriptions for marijuana. What do you think, aka Galt?

I might reconsider if in pill form. Who in their right mind would consider coating the inside of their lungs with gummy black tar, and other residual elements of the smoke?

Point well taken, G-MAN!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.