What good is legalizing weed if you can't use it?

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by john70t

So Fint:
Older glaucoma patients. Never smoked cigarettes or drank in their lives.
They try MJ find it works and choose it for their medicine.
Their choice alone.

Are these people instant drug addicts from injecting the dangerous marijuannas?
Or are they reliable statistics and witnesses to be considered during drug efficacy testing trials?

Most Ophthalmologists would tell you that MJ is not an appropriate treatment.

https://www.aao.org/eye-health/tips-prevention/medical-marijuana-glaucoma-treament

https://www.glaucoma.org/treatment/should-you-be-smoking-marijuana-to-treat-your-glaucoma-1.php

[john70t]

I read it. Thank you. Actually that first study concluded that patients should smoke a lot of it if needed.

"The research found that when marijuana is smoked or when a form of its active ingredient is taken as a pill or by injection, it does lower IOP. However, it only lowers IOP for a short period of time—about three or four hours.

This short period of time is a major drawback for the use of marijuana as a glaucoma treatment. Because glaucoma needs to be treated 24 hours a day, you would need to smoke marijuana six to eight times a day around the clock to receive the benefit of a consistently lowered IOP."

[fastfredracing]

Fint, why are you so against mj? Just curious.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by fastfredracing

Fint, why are you so against mj? Just curious.

Because most folks who use it are mislead about the effects from a vey young age...and now, massive amounts of money are being sent to blanket the media, internet, etc. with advocacy (essentially commercials for the drug) so they can profit on the young, poor, and stupid. Most folks have enough trouble navigating life sober. More recreational drugs are the last thing this country needs.

[fastfredracing]

Got it. I have to agree with you to some extent.

[Sooner or later]

Most people.

Does that mean everyone but you?

[john70t]

If you're talking about kids, you first tell them not to do something benine, popular, proven and without any obvious consequence.
Use hyperbole and hysteria. Amp it up. Yer gonna burn in hades kid!
Remind them all again and again.

Then the first time you are gone they will do it .

[jwasbury]

^yet alcohol is the biggest recreational drug of all, and also the most problematic, but somehow gets a pass? Are we not misleading people about just how ugly alcohol abuse can be? I recall getting an earful about illegal drugs growing up, but the only thing we heard about booze was don't drink and drive. There is zero common sense and consistency in the approach to alcohol vs. other psychoactive drugs. You're ok with that?

[jwasbury]

Originally Posted by fintstone

and now, massive amounts of money are being sent to blanket the media, internet, etc. with advocacy (essentially commercials for the drug) so they can profit on the young, poor, and stupid. Most folks have enough trouble navigating life sober.

^so Anheuser -Busch paying $1.4Billion to the NFL to make Bud Light the official beer of NFL through 2022 must also really piss you off --->Bud Light: Beer of the NFL Through 2022, For $1.4 Billion | Fortune

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by Sooner or later

Most people.

Does that mean everyone but you?

I was mislead on the effects when young as well...but largely innocently because the effects were not really well known. I was long an advocate for legalization.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by john70t

If you're talking about kids, you first tell them not to do something benine, popular, proven and without any obvious consequence.
Use hyperbole and hysteria. Amp it up. Yer gonna burn in hades kid!
Remind them all again and again.

Then the first time you are gone they will do it .

Better to tell them the truth and hope they listen..even though a massive industry and many, many users will try to tell them otherwise. It is little different than the cigarette industry in the 60's.

[aigel]

Great thread!

One aspect not discussed here is driving. While other states with legal MJ appear to have a blood limit level, CA does not and leaves it to law enforcement to determine if they think you are under the influence. Well?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Some-states-put-a-THC-limit-on-pot-smoking-12465013.php

A DUI will mess you up good, but worse, what if you drive sober but have some THC left in your blood from the day before and cause a bad accident, say with a fatality? Can of worms!

I find the whole thing way too risky if you have a job, assets and a family to raise. This is also why you don't see the number of users suddenly spike after the drug is "legalized". Everyone who didn't care still doesn't care and anyone that was turned off by the drug being illegal still is turned off by its iffy status.

G

[Craig T]

Whoa Dudes. Everybody needs to come over my house and take a chill pill. Legal, illegal, who cares man.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by jwasbury

^yet alcohol is the biggest recreational drug of all, and also the most problematic, but somehow gets a pass? Are we not misleading people about just how ugly alcohol abuse can be? I recall getting an earful about illegal drugs growing up, but the only thing we heard about booze was don't drink and drive. There is zero common sense and consistency in the approach to alcohol vs. other psychoactive drugs. You're ok with that?

The dangers of alcohol have long been known. Drunks were prominent in early movies, plays, books, etc. Everyone knew who the town drunk was. Many, many families never allowed alcohol in their home. My entire county was "dry". If you really think alcohol is so bad, why advocate another recreational drug?

No one is trying to legalize alcohol.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by jwasbury

^so Anheuser -Busch paying $1.4Billion to the NFL to make Bud Light the official beer of NFL through 2022 must also really piss you off --->Bud Light: Beer of the NFL Through 2022, For $1.4 Billion | Fortune

I am pretty sure they are advertising legal product to an audience of legal age...but at least they are not touting it as medicinal and harmless.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by aigel

Great thread!

One aspect not discussed here is driving. While other states with legal MJ appear to have a blood limit level, CA does not and leaves it to law enforcement to determine if they think you are under the influence. Well?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Some-states-put-a-THC-limit-on-pot-smoking-12465013.php

A DUI will mess you up good, but worse, what if you drive sober but have some THC left in your blood from the day before and cause a bad accident, say with a fatality? Can of worms!

I find the whole thing way too risky if you have a job, assets and a family to raise. This is also why you don't see the number of users suddenly spike after the drug is "legalized". Everyone who didn't care still doesn't care and anyone that was turned off by the drug being illegal still is turned off by its iffy status.

G

Agreed. As long as most use are sold on the opinion that it does not affect their driving...we will have serious problems. Especially since we have great difficulty identifying those under the influence...until the autopsy.

[jwasbury]

Originally Posted by fintstone

If you really think alcohol is so bad, why advocate another recreational drug?

No one is trying to legalize alcohol.

I don't think alcohol is bad, in and of itself. I think alcohol abuse is bad and alcoholism is bad. I don't think MJ is bad in and of itself, but it can also be abused and that is bad.

Recreational (occasional) use of either isn't a big deal in my opinion. There is a difference between use and abuse. You don't see any hypocrisy in your view of MJ vs. alcohol (and the legal status of MJ vs. legal status of alcohol), I do.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by jwasbury

I don't think alcohol is bad, in and of itself. I think alcohol abuse is bad and alcoholism is bad. I don't think MJ is bad in and of itself, but it can also be abused and that is bad.

Recreational (occasional) use of either isn't a big deal in my opinion. There is a difference between use and abuse. You don't see any hypocrisy in your view of MJ vs. alcohol (and the legal status of MJ vs. legal status of alcohol), I do.

No. I see no hypocrisy whatsoever. In a discussion about whether or not any new drug should be legalized...any other legal drug (and the problems with it) at best is irrelevant and at worst is an argument against legalizing another. There is no real argument MJ vs alcohol. It is a distraction/misdirection.

There is no way to to regulate occasional use vice abuse. Why make abuse more likely/easier? Do we really need more folks that are not sober in our society?

[john70t]

Originally Posted by fintstone

N There is no relsrgument MJ vs alcohol. It is a distraction/misdirection.

That pertains to current Schedule 1 classification, and whether the real life drug attributes fulfill all the categories required to remain mis-classified as such.
The government is supposed to treat all drugs equally and from a purely scientific perspective.

That pertains to whether it should be legalized/prescribed in some instances.
Only one legitimate scenario is required to prove its efficacy.

[billybek]

Originally Posted by Craig T

Whoa Dudes. Everybody needs to come over my house and take a chill pill. Legal, illegal, who cares man.

Nice Christmas decoration with the dusting of snow on the tree!

This has been a very entertaining thread.

I can understand why governments would like to legalize MJ. It appears to make many people happy with their station in life and removes motivation to make change. Personally or politically.

OTOH, I know many successful professional people that are regular pot smokers. I guess if you are only handling someones legal affairs, health care needs, banking and financial or in managerial position, it doesn't matter if you have a bit of weed in your system.

I bet if you tested our Prime Minister you would find he has been a regular user...

Roadside testing has always been a factor against legalization and I don't think that this has been resolved to an accurate enough test to justify making it legal. It is probable that currently the attitude to smoking and driving now is very similar to the view on drinking and driving in the 70s. That needs to change.

The most disturbing thing is the effect that MJ has on the developing brain of the young people who are the most likely to use it. Will legalizing it make it more available to youth? Maybe, maybe not.

Will legalizing it make the quality of the product more consistent and reduce the potential of getting crappy dirt weed that has been exposed to hazardous fertilizers or touched with other more potent drugs and/or synthetics? Legalization will make the product safer for the people that use it.

This is a very complicated topic and we will see the results of the decisions being made today in 20 years or so. By then I will probably be hitting the bong for pain relief and won't give a crap anyway...