Cannabis and psychosis

[themartuigan]

i did not mention the use of marijuana religously in my post at all so i thought i would mention it here.

[Chacmool]

Originally Posted by themartuigan

i personally believe that drinking is worse then smoking. and in my opinion if you have a problem with marijuana but not alcohol, you definetly really really need to recheck yourself.
if somebody has a problem with both marijuana and alcohol i will listen to there thoughts and opinions because thats cool. But if they have a problem with marijuana and not alcohol i wouldnt give them the time of day, because in 'reality' they dont know what there talking about.

What? It's cool with you to have a problem with both marijuana and alcohol, but not marijuana alone? How do you rationalise this?

[TheFaithfulStone]

I think he's saying he doesn't understand how someone could be against marijuana and not alcohol since alcohol is just as destructive.

TFS

[themartuigan]

alcohol is no better then marijuana.

so if you say i am bad because i smoke weed while you are drinking a beer, you are a hipocrate because the weed does the same thing to me that the beer does to you; and that is that it alters your perception.

now if you say that i am bad because i smoke weed and he is bad because he drinks beer you are not a hipocrate because you are just plainly against the stuff that alters your perception.

so in my opinion is that if you are against one mind altering substance you should be against the other.
is it right to be against one mind altering substance and for the other mind altering substance? i dont think so.
i think that if you dont have a problem with one you shouldnt have a problem with the other and if you do have a problem with one you should have a problem with the other.

now i ask you a question, how many people died this year from drunken accidents? or even this week?
and then i ask you how many people have died period because of marijuana?
that there is a good enough question for me.

[Chacmool]

Originally Posted by TheFaithfulStone

I think he's saying he doesn't understand how someone could be against marijuana and not alcohol since alcohol is just as destructive.

TFS

Oh, I see. I understood "problem" as "dependency". It makes more sense now, thanks.

Originally Posted by themartuigan

now i ask you a question, how many people died this year from drunken accidents? or even this week?
and then i ask you how many people have died period because of marijuana?
that there is a good enough question for me.

Yes, far too many people die because of drunken driving. I absolutely deplore it. However, one should also not even consider driving while stoned. You make a valid point in that alcohol is also harmful, but that doesn't make the irresponsible use of marijuana more acceptable.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

For example, when I come up with my endless novel ideas, I often start with a right hemisphere intutition. At first it has little form, but as I focus on the gut feeling, ideas appear as a complementary secondary affect in the left hemisphere. I then switch to the left and use these ideas and try to put together a logic line. As the logic process unfolds, I will have reactive right hemisphere feelings of whether this correct or not. If not, I will shift back to the right to wait for the correct intuition. This will output new left ideas. I then return back to the left, etc.

Humble too...

I am glad you have finally responded to one of my requests HB, however, you have only responded with opinion and anecdote, replicating the issue I describe with the original post, and you still have provided no support of your claims. Please address this.

[themartuigan]

yes i know and understand the dangers of driving while stoned the same as driving while drunk. BUT my question was not is it un-safe, we all know driving while intoxicated, on anything, even a prescribed medication is un-safe. my question was how many deaths are caused from alcohol vs. marijuana.

the Journal of the American Medical Association said that for the year of 2000 there were 85,000 alcohol related deaths and only 0 (yes zero) marijuana related deaths.

here is a list of all the deaths and there association:
Tobacco 435,000
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,000
Alcohol 85,000
Microbial Agents 75,000
Toxic Agents 55,000
Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,347
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,000
Suicide 30,6223
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000
Homicide 20,308
Sexual Behaviors 20,000
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,000
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,600
Marijuana 0

and this is the link that i used to get this information:
http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm

Originally Posted by Chacmool

You make a valid point in that alcohol is also harmful, but that doesn't make the irresponsible use of marijuana more acceptable.

i know this and....
i am not trying to be disrespectful, i just wanted to let you know that i do not think that marijuana is harmful anymore then anything else is, but that alcohol is worse then marijuana.
as a matter of fact, according to the link above, marijana is the least harmful thing there is out there, compared to peoples health, doctor prescribed medication, and even aspirin.

[TheFaithfulStone]

How does "All Illicit Druge Use, Direct and Indirect" not cover marijuana.

Besides, I know a couple of people who died from dope. Not from smoking it mind, but from having either too much or too little of it when interested parties conducted inventory.

TFS

[HydrogenBond]

If one goes back to the 60's and 70's almost everyone under 30 smoked MJ at least once, with the majority smoking often. Today, these same people are among the leaders of government, industry, etc. But as leaders they now need to take a conservative view, trying to protect the young people from both the pit-falls and fun that they had. That was also a time of free sex, before all the big STD's. They are also trying to save the children from all the pitfalls and fun they had in that category. The baby boomers think they are the only generation capable of doing both while still ending up standing on two feet later in life. This is called being a hippie-crate.

In response to Infinitenow, I do not have much external data. But in my behalf, most studies don't have much internal data. That is why there are so many orientations.

Let me give one further example. Picture if we were conducting a psychology study associated with those that go to amusement parks. We can interview people at the gate, in line and after rides. We can hook people up to measure heart rates, blood pressure, brain waves, neural activity, etc.. The results will be a spectrum. There are those who will be afraid, bored, excited, having fun, nauseated, etc, no matter what the ride or their position in line.

The one chapter of the science study that is usually left out, is the one where the researchers go on the rides, themselves, to observe the rides from the inside of their heads. If one can maintain objectivity, they will notice that the animal body is responding apart from the ego. In other words, an objective person will notice two points of reference within, the observer and the reaction of the animal body. One wouldn't see this data with an external approach and would lump the ego personality with the reaction. This is only the tip of the iceberg. There is further diversity which can account for the variety of reactions.

This one chapter would allow all the riders to understand what is going on within during rides. The rest of the chapters are for the scientists so they can detach themselves and speculate about the unity and diversity of amusement park patrons. But the detachment is never complete, with the merged secondary reference influencing their interpretation.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

In response to Infinitenow, I do not have much external data. But in my behalf, most studies don't have much internal data.

Please provide me with a few examples of studies which don't have much internal data.

Thanks.