/sci/ - Science & Math

>>3368487

What is there to discuss?

oh god that image

> breathing smoke is bad for you
laughinggirls.png

>>3368493

Yes.

I saw an article a few months back in a scientific journal, it was about research conducted by a team at Harvard and it showed that lung cancer patients who smoke pot have a tumor growth reduction of 50%+. Going with that, I would like to say that it can medically help people but only under the correct circumstances.

>>3368493
I believe it's discussable on the terms of undeniable scientific results that have proven medicinal cannabis to be useful in aspects.

>no medical purpose
Well then, let's also put tobacco and alcohol where they belong.

But we use medical heroin, it's called morphine.

>>3368527

>I believe it's discussable on the terms of undeniable scientific results that have proven medicinal cannabis to be useful in aspects.

Explain me the difference between medicinal and non medicinal cannabis.
How exactly is it useful?
What are its harmful effects?
What are its helpful effects?
Is there any other narcotic that is also useful?
Is there any medicine that can already provide in larger measure what is believed that cannabis can provide?
Finally provide this "undeniable scientific proof" that cannabis is useful.

You might assume that this is the last leg of defense their on but it's not. These people that desperately want to keep cannabis illegal have nothing against the mind altering affect but rather the industrial challenge HEMP poses to their synthetic materials market. Look into the history of Dow and cannabis for the inside scope about the OBVIOUS ulterior motives at work against it. Be forewarned though, knowing about this history will not help you in any direct fight against policy, it will only help to raise awareness which does not directly help to get a change in policy no matter how big of a majority/mob you get. Also be aware that learning more about this history will make you more cynical towards the United States, you might take that for granted but trust me it does make a permanent difference towards your willingness to want to make a change.

>>3368578
>Explain me the difference between medicinal and non medicinal cannabis.
Well, you see, medicinal cannabis is being used for medicinal purposes whereas recreational purposes are for entertainment if you wish.

>How exactly is it useful?
Hypothetically, I've been diagnosed with terminal brain cancer.
I don't have any appetite and life sucks knowing you've got 2 months to live.
More than likely I'll see some improvement in mood after smoking a bowl and being able to keep some ramen down.

>What are its harmful effects?
Smoke's bad for me and I might not fair well on a standardized test.
If I was in excruciating pain from injury I'd rather take my mind off of it with a joint than score well on a test.

>What are its helpful effects?
Is it just me or are these questions a little inane?

>Is there any other narcotic that is also useful?
Dimethyltryptamine helps people off heroin and also makes you dream at night.

>Is there any medicine that can already provide in larger measure what is believed that cannabis can
provide?
Sure. Ibuprofen can take the pain off slightly or some melatonin might help me sleep.
But in large measures, are either of the two very helpful at all?

>Finally provide this "undeniable scientific proof" that cannabis is useful.
http://mendonews.wordpress.com/2011/02/23/more-scientific-proof-marijuana-helps-cancer-patients-eat-
and-sleep-and-then-some/

Of course, I'm still doing it for recreational purposes.

>>3368627

>More than likely I'll see some improvement in mood after smoking a bowl and being able to keep some ramen down.

So you are claiming that there are no medicines/activities that can improve "mood" and appetite?

>If I was in excruciating pain from injury I'd rather take my mind off of it with a joint than score well on a test.

Youd rather use narcotic then seek medical assistance?
You cannot tolerate pain until medical assistance is provided to you?
You cannot have use of medicines (approved by your doctor) that are used to alleviate such pain?

>But in large measures, are either of the two very helpful at all?

Is cannabis is large measures helpful at all?

>Of course, I'm still doing it for recreational purposes.

(Assuming this is intended to support your cause for cannabis)

Pedophiles molest children for recreation, but that doesnt compel us to allow them to do it.

>>3368660
>So you are claiming that there are no medicines/activities that can improve "mood" and appetite?

Any "medicine" claiming to improve mood that's currently available on the market is going to have a much higher probability of dependence than marijuana will ever have. Not to mention all the side effects that go along with them. On the other hand, marijuana side-effects are: drowsiness, hunger, and absent-mindedness.

>Is cannabis is large measures helpful at all?

Don't really know what happens if you smoke almost non-stop aside from the obvious problems related to smoking excessively, but isn't it physically impossible to smoke to much marijuana (i.e. an overdose)?

>>3368700
I heard it's theoretically possible to overdose using an IV, but I don't think anyone's ever been stupid enough to try that just to find out.

>>3368660
>Pedophiles molest children for recreation, but that doesnt compel us to allow them to do it.

confirmed for troll

>>3368709
Actually, I take that back. It seems that some people WERE stupid enough to try it...and it didn't work...they are recovered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intravenous_Marijuana_Syndrome

>>3368681

>Any "medicine" claiming to improve mood that's currently available on the market is going to have a much higher probability of dependence than marijuana will ever have.

Provide evidence.

>Not to mention all the side effects that go along with them.

What "side effects"?

>On the other hand, marijuana side-effects are: drowsiness, hunger, and absent-mindedness.

Are those the only "side effects" it has?

You also havent answered other questions.
Also you havent covered the "appetite" and "activities" aspect of my question that you have addressed.

>>3368719
>Intravenous_Marijuana_Syndrome
god fucking dammit, I was curious about that unit I saw this. Apparently Marijuana is now the operative code word for THC?

>>3368715

Ad Hominem.

Either provide information of use, or leave this thread.
Its not that difficult to understand that, child.

>>3368736
Was I the one who compared recreational use of Marijuana to pedophilia?

>>3368724
>Provide evidence.

http://www.drugscience.org/dl/dl_comparison.html

>What "side effects"?

Here's a list of side-effects of the top 5 most prescribed anti-depressants

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoxetine#Adverse_effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bupropion#Adverse_effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paroxetine#Side_effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escitalopram#Adverse_effects
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sertraline#Adverse_effects

>Are those the only "side effects" it has?

Paranoia in some cases. I had moderate paranoia when I first began smoking, but no longer have it. I've also talked to many others who have never had paranoia, so it really depends on the person.

>You also havent answered other questions.
Also you havent covered the "appetite" and "activities" aspect of my question that you have addressed.

I wasn't the guy you originally quoted, I was just replying to that specific portion of your response.

>>3368761

Red Herring

Arent you just hillarious.
You know if you continue this, you may just cover all of the logical fallacies.

>>3368786
good job, that'll keep those sandbaggers quiet for a while.

Vegetarians molest vegetables for recreation, but that doesnt compel us to allow them to do it.

well there are obviously some medical uses for cannabinoids but that doesn't have any effect on their recreational uses; that is simply defined by cultural practice

DoJ are an excellent trolling operation. This is very much in line with the British government's decision to reclassify Cannabis as a more dangerous substance after a report from their advisory board recommending the exact opposite. I've never done pot, I don't feel any compulsion to, but this is absolutely insane.

>>3368789
Sorry if I haven't obeyed your arbitrary rules of internet debate. I'll just say your comparison of marijuana use to a criminal act was quite a fallacious appeal to authority.

>>3368808
You can't molest a banana

>>3368715
I don't think he's a troll. I think he's just idiot.

>>3368786

>http://www.drugscience.org/dl/dl_comparison.html

Thank you for this information.
I will attempt to read it when i have time.
However what i could perceive while skimming over that info is that all of the references are 8 to 17 years old.
A large risk and amount of misinformation is involved.
Do you have any newer info than this?

>I wasn't the guy you originally quoted, I was just replying to that specific portion of your response.

I apologize.

>>3368660
>>Pedophiles molest children for recreation, but that doesnt compel us to allow them to do it.

Why do people keep pretending there's nothing wrong with marijuana?

http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/common/addictions/drugs/485.html

http://www.aafp.org/afp/991201ap/2583.html

http://www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/marijuana/marijuana3.html

>>3368845
In the way he'd interpreted it, that was a valid counter-example. The fact it's used recreationally does not lend it any credibility.

Why don't you just let us do what we want? If it's not harming anyone but yourself then it should be allowed. It's the basis of a truly free society.

>>3368660

there are different medicines that treat the same or similar symptoms. why must cannabis be the only medicine to treat some symptoms in order to be recognized medicinally. Patients use drugs to deal with pain all the time, why would the medical world restrict its use of drugs to treat people. no where in this thread does it talk about cannabis being the only useful medical drug, it only mentions that cannabis can be used medically.

you are a scared human being my friend.

>>3368856
>familydoctor.org
>aafp.org
>nida.nih.gov
found your problem

also, you're just (selectively) ignoring
>>3368786
and their citations, points and previous comments

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2011/04/modifying-the-cannabinoid-thc-gives-pain-relief-without-
the-fun.ars

>Modified cannabinoid THC offers pain relief without the buzz
>In the process of characterizing this new receptor, the authors find a chemical that blocks pain, but has no apparent psychoactive effects.

Problem solved!
Time to see if the potheads really want it for its medical benefit, or just want to get high.

>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
>>3368627
The pill is called Dronabinol, it does everything Marijuana does and its legal in the US. Hope that shut you stoner faggots up for a while.

/thread

>>3368857
alright, fine. if we have to spell it out for the idiots:
>marijuana is recreational and does not harm other people with proper use
>paedophilia is recreational and severely harms other people by its very nature

>>3368828

>Sorry if I haven't obeyed your arbitrary rules of internet debate.

I forgive you.

>I'll just say your comparison of marijuana use to a criminal act was quite a fallacious appeal to authority.

>An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:
>Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
>Person A makes claim C about subject S.
>Therefore, C is true.

Wow you may even invent new fallacies with your stubbornness.

>>3368873
>Time to see if the potheads really want it for its medical benefit, or just want to get high.

well we know the answer.
I smoke marijuana but anyone who think's it's good for them is a fucking retard

>>3368857
It didn't seem to me like a strict counterexample, but rather a nod to the status quo. I agree that widespread recreational use does not lend marijuana any credibility, but that isn't what I disputed in particular.

>>3368858
>not harming anyone

Do you really want to see more stoned drivers on the road?

>>3368879
dude, shut the fuck up with your fallacies. no one gives a shit, especially if all you're going to do is discuss the other person's incorrect use of terms rather than provide any arguments of actual weight.

>>3368889
he said used properly;
you know, like booze?

I don't know how anyone can honestly believe that selling marijuana commercially would not boost the economy.

>>3368869

>found your problem

How is that a "problem"?
Have you actually read it?

>also, you're just (selectively) ignoring>>3368786
and their citations, points and previous comments

Although i am not the one you replied to, isnt it hypocritical that you do exactly that by avoiding their evidence/remark provision?

>>3368889
mobile phones cause much more road accidents than drivers under the influence of marijuana.

>>3368889
If you hurt or kill someone under the influence of alcohol while driving it's a crime, it doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed to have a beer at home or in a bar or at the beach with my friends. The same thing applies to anything, if it harms no one but yourself it should be perfectly legal.

>>3368903
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-pro-marijuana-arguments-that-arent-helping/

>>3368907
Mugabe causes many more killings than John Wayne Gacy.

>>3368907

>mobile phones cause much more road accidents than drivers under the influence of marijuana

So what?
Are you claiming that we should illegalize "mobile phones" because of that?

>>3368903
even if it did it would be such a pitiful amount
The only argument for legalization is freedom of chioce

>>3368907
And yet, mobile phones + marijuana users will cause more road accidents than just mobile phones.

Unless you're talking about criminalizing cellphones, that shit doesn't fly.

What the fuck is this medical marijuana bullshit? Why are people coming it from that angle? There is no reason why marijuana should be illegal in the first place, regardless of how you intend to use it.

>>3368892

>dude, shut the fuck up with your fallacies. no one gives a shit, especially if all you're going to do is discuss the other person's incorrect use of terms rather than provide any arguments of actual weight

If you were actually rational and literate, you would have read and understood what caused that mini-quarrel over fallacies.
Also Ad Hominem.

>>3368919
>>3368923
you two are retards.
How about making it illegal to drive whilst on a mobile telephone?
OH just like it is in the UK.

>>3368926
This. Portugal has the right idea.

>>3368919
It's already illegal

>>3368919
my point was that you can't use the fact that stoned drivers cause accidents as an argument towards illegalizing marijuana, when mobile phones and alcohol - both perfectly legal - cause a significantly greater amount of accidents.

>>3368928
And most of Canada. And every other civilized country in the world. Once again, America is the last to figure this out.

>>3368937
but not proportionally. Also, the illegality of driving high is significantly more severe than that of driving while on the phone/drunk.

>>3368928
Most states in America do.

>>3368937
Okay, but I disagree with your conclusion. You've convinced me that mobile phones are dangerous, and I think they should just be illegal.

>>3368937

>my point was that you can't use the fact that stoned drivers cause accidents as an argument towards illegalizing marijuana, when mobile phones and alcohol - both perfectly legal - cause a significantly greater amount of accidents.

No one stated that "traffic accidents" remark is the only and ultimate incentive for having cannabis illegalized, but it is certainly a useful one.

Marijuana is proven to help patients with glaucoma and decresase intraocular pressure.

>>3368952
What is the incentive to have cannabis illegal?

Tobbaco has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

Alchohol has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

Fast food has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

love has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

>>3368487
God, not this shit again.
Cannabis costs us so much more than it should, billions are thrown away in tax dollars on prisons, preventing marijuana trafficking, etc. Not only that, but in terms of medicine, it's no worse than Vicodin or whatever your painkiller poison is. And I could go on and on about clothing and paper, tobacco, alky, etc. But the simple fact remains that legal pot is the lesser of two evils. And I use the term 'evils' loosely.

>>3368956
>love

Why do you soil a decent post with that bullshit?

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-pro-marijuana-arguments-that-arent-helping/

>>3368960
>he has never loved

>>3368954
Risk of injury. EG: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21718541

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21704501

>>3368959
It's safe to say people like this don't do the legalization/decriminalisation lobby any good

>>3368965
I meant, why would he soil it by putting it in the same class as alcohol, tobacco, or fast food.

>>3368956

>Tobbaco has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

You can overdose on Tobacco?
Also its Tobacco not "Tobbaco".

>Alchohol has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

You can contract HIV from Alcohol?
Also its Alcohol not "Alchohol".

>Fast food has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

See above.

>love has no medical purpose and should remain in the same class as heroin.

What?

>>3368972
Ah ok. Although I guess love, or the losing of, could be equally as destructive. But then love is an emotion and not a vice. Fuck knows.
None of those things are destructive if used in moderation though.

>>3368907
>strawman
use of mobile phones while driving is already illegal.

>>3368981
Can you understand sarcasm?

>>3368989
You were clearly trying to make an analogy, which sucked on multiple levels. Stop trying to pass it off as sarcasm.

>>3368960

ha yes I guess I jumped the gun for that last one but to me, love is a fucking drug. nobody needs it really.

>>3368986
>implying that driving while high would be legal if marijuana was legal

>>3368966

Prove that eventual societal damages caused by legalisation of cannabis would be worse than the positives: no more harsh sentences and ruined lives of productive people and teenagers caught when they dare to smoke a joint once a week, millions saved which are spent on enforcing criminalisation of pot, organized crime loses big source of income, increased tax revenue, hemp industry etc...

Yes marihuana is harmful, noone is saying it is healthy (maybe except in some cases like terminal cancer or glaucoma it may be).
The question is, is it harmful enough to justify the great expenses (direct and indirect) of criminalisation?

>>3368993
I didn't write it, but you clearly missed a point.

>>3368981

>You can overdose on Tobacco?

Paracetemol has a medical use, but can be overdosed on.

BAN PARACETEMOL!!!!!

hey moron, heroin is VERY medicinal too

one of the strongest pain killers and was originally a brand by BAYER

>>3368981


1) yeah you can overdose from tobacco. people do it literally all the time, although it is mostly confined to chewing tobacco

Nicotine is a virulent poison on par (in terms of its strength) with cyanide and arsenic

10s of milligrams kill an adult human with no tolerance to it.

the only reason why cigarrettes are labeled as having "xx mg" of nicotine is because smoking them destroys about 99% of the nicotine.

2) you cannot get HIV from heroin. just like you cannot get HIV from shooting Oxycontin (a prescribed drug) or fentanyl (also a prescribed drug), even though people DO end up with HIV after shooting those NON-schedule 1 (schedule 2) drugs.

you can only get HIV because it is impossible or extremely difficult for the average IV user to get their hands on new needles/syringes and they are forced to reuse them

yes. FORCED. because an IV addiction literally pushes you to the brink of suicide if you quit. you wont die from the withdrawals (known fact, look it up), but it will MAKE YOU WANT TO DIE.

>>3368989

There are narcotic users here that will take you seriously.
This is not intended for you, but for them.
To prevent the "circle-jerking" of "Yeah dewd dats so true man blabla etc."

I don't believe so, marijuana is what got me into science, it made me think differently about everything. When i got high it was like all the important questions of reality came rushing into my mind. It's not like this for most people but it definitely has it's purpose for people like me.

>>3369018


it was used in the UK at least until the 1980s as a prescribed painkiller.
though admittedly, there is very little difference between Heroin, Morphine, and Oxycodone, or even fentanyl.


as far as your brain's biochemistry is concerned, opiods are opiods.


only the perceived minor changes in the binding efficacy are translated through as "difference in high"

>>3368569

No we don't... :-/ Morphine and heroine are two different compounds. Both Opiates, buth still not the same, especially when it comes to side-effects.

>>3369023
I smoke weed and have never talked/acted like that. Some of the funniest and most intellectual conversations I've ever had have been while sitting around with friends smoking a joint and having a beer. I'd prefer that than going to a club, drinking yourself stupid then throwing up on the pavement after eating a kebab at 4am while trying to stop a mate punching an officer.

>>3368627


the diff between medicinal and non medicinal cannabis are:

1) ability to control dosage. this requires careful attention to detail at every step of the process, from growth to processing to distribution

2) ability to ensure quality control in terms of the medicine's efficacy and safety (existince of mold for example)

3) ability to provide a safe method for administration of the drug.
in reality, there is very little "medical marijuana" available in the world.


the closest thing is the Sativex developed in the UK. Marinol does not count because that is pure THC, not cannabis, nor does it represent the "effects" of cannabis (no cannabinoids other than THC)

>>3369040


you are a major idiot.


Morphine and heroin have literally identical side effects. fucking IDENTICAL.


Morphine is the diacetylated form of heroin.


heroin itself DOES NOTHING in your body.


the diacetylation makes it go into your brain quicker, where it is metabolized into morphine.

THEN it affects your brain (as morphine)


heroin is just slightly stronger than morphine.

>>3369061

*deacetylated

or alternatively

switch "morphine" and "heroin" in that same line

>>3369019

"1) yeah you can overdose from tobacco. people do it literally all the time, although it is mostly confined to chewing tobacco

Nicotine is a virulent poison on par (in terms of its strength) with cyanide and arsenic

10s of milligrams kill an adult human with no tolerance to it.

the only reason why cigarrettes are labeled as having "xx mg" of nicotine is because smoking them destroys about 99% of the nicotine."

That is interesting to know, however i assumed that it was the "smoking" kind of tobacco involved in that example.

As for "2) you cannot get HIV from heroin. just like you cannot get HIV from shooting Oxycontin (a prescribed drug) or fentanyl (also a prescribed drug), even though people DO end up with HIV after shooting those NON-schedule 1 (schedule 2) drugs.

you can only get HIV because it is impossible or extremely difficult for the average IV user to get their hands on new needles/syringes and they are forced to reuse them

yes. FORCED. because an IV addiction literally pushes you to the brink of suicide if you quit. you wont die from the withdrawals (known fact, look it up), but it will MAKE YOU WANT TO DIE."

I understand that it is the manner of use that causes acquisition of HIV.
However since needles are not involved in conventional alcohol consumption, my "comparison/contrast" still stands.

>>3368904
'it's called first come first serve' and 'getting a taste of your own medicine': you ignore somebody else's citations then you get your citations ignored.

>>3368627

>How exactly is it useful?


neglecting more modern research into the potential effects of THC and/or cannabis in general

the known (known for decades, medically verified countless times, and the reason why Marinol exists as a real, prescribed drug) benefits are:

1)opiod potentiation. THC makes opiod/opiate painkillers stronger and last longer.

it is often prescribed alongside drugs like oxycontin or fentanyl in patients with particular types of diseases or maladies causing severe pain

2) it has a beneficial effect on the appetite of chemotherapy and AIDS patients. this is one of its most well known uses

3) it has anticonvulsant effects on epileptics. this is also a LONG well known use and it has been used for at least 25 years in this regard

4) it has powerful anti-migraine effects. Typically, prescription of marinol would be reserved for the most severe migraine symptoms (which typically go along with things like TMJ or other jaw/joint related issues)

5) it has the ability to reduce occular pressure (a side effect of its affect on overall system blood pressure) and is used in this regard to help Glaucoma patients


adding on the "modern" stuff:

6) its effects on the blood flow (it is a vasodilator) mean that people who have recently been afflicted with a stroke can benefit from THC (or cannabis) as it will increase bloodflow to all parts of the body/brain by dilating blood vessels.

well known empirical evidence suggests that administration of THC immediately following a stroke increases the rate of complete regeneration/healing by as much as 60%

7) some relatively low level clinical research evidence suggests that it may have DIRECT anti-cancer effects, though this is pure "give it to mice with cancer" study at this point

>>3369047

>I smoke weed and have never talked/acted like that. Some of the funniest and most intellectual conversations I've ever had have been while sitting around with friends smoking a joint and having a beer. I'd prefer that than going to a club, drinking yourself stupid then throwing up on the pavement after eating a kebab at 4am while trying to stop a mate punching an officer.

False Dillemma.

>weed
>beer

I didnt advocate the use of either, and assuming that you must use only one of those two is a fallacy.

>drinking yourself stupid then throwing up

(Assuming this is how you refer to binge)
I also never stated that you must use any kind of narcotic excessively.

>>3368940
that's because America is filled with political idiots and their policy on marijuana just further proves it.

>>3369106
Your comment has no point. You have failed to provide an argument of why consenting adults shouldn't be allowed to intake any substance that they choose.

>>3369094

>'it's called first come first serve' and 'getting a taste of your own medicine': you ignore somebody else's citations then you get your citations ignored

Now compare/contrast your ridiculous statement with this:
>"Although i am not the one you replied to, isnt it hypocritical that you do exactly that by avoiding their evidence/remark provision?"

However that is not all.
I can also use such quotes "Two wrongs dont make a right"
And its also called a fallacy.

>>3368627

>What are its harmful effects?


the most harmful effect of "medical marijuana" is smoking.

the 2nd most harmful effect would probably be accidental ingestion of mold or fungus, though this is extremely rare (most of the molds that DO grow on cannabis are not capable of infecting human tissue, or else their evidence is extremely obvious and they are not sold).


the biggest PROBLEM is that Cannabis is not a real drug. this is because there is no ability to control the overall dosage strength, and duration of dosage.

those are 2 extremely important DEFINITIONS of what makes a medicine/drug.


the solution is to actually create real medicines using CANNABIS (no just THC).


as I have mentioned before, Sativex is a sublingual spray developed by GW Pharmaceuticals in the UK. Their goal was to develop a CANNABIS (not just THC) based drug for use with a wide range of afflictions.

they do this by extremely careful agricultural methods that ensure maximum regularity in terms of the cannabinoid profile of each batch of cannabis plants that are grown.

then they extract the cannabinoids, purify them, and dissolve them in a safe solvent that can be used with a sublingual spray.

the result is a REAL PRESCRIBED MEDICINE that has a KNOWN, STABLE, REPEATABLE dosage quantity of cannabinoids (THC and cannabidiol, at the very least)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sativex

>>3369121

>Your comment has no point.
>You have failed to provide an argument of why consenting adults shouldn't be allowed to intake any substance that they choose.

Straw-Man

Why dont you actually read the entire conversation?

>>3369130
you're just trying to justify your IGNORance that in itself proves your arguments can't be trusted. Respond to the first citations and all is forgotten.

>>3368627

>Is there any other narcotic that is also useful?

this guy said that DMT helps people off heroin.

no. just NO. I am currently comming off a long term opiate addiction. DMT is absolutely a terrible idea. It would merely cause an unpleasant, depressing 20 minute long trip, full of nasty visuals.

no long term or even short term change in my overall physical and mental state.


opiate addiction severely affects your brain's biochemistry by changing the amount of the most basic neurotransmitters that are released.

you are basically a walking semi-emotionless husk for about 1 month, before the serotonin, dopamine, oxytocin, and melatonin (sleep) levels even partially stabilize.


its one of the reasons why relapse is so common. even a month (or more) after quitting.... long after the main withdrawal symptoms have stopped....


you still feel depressed, shitty, etc. you feel like your life is fucked up and is not normal, but you KNOW that opiates will bring you back to normal.

the unfortunate truth is that this assumption is actually CORRECT. The REASON it is is correct is that the user chose, long ago, to maintain their addiction beyond a certain "threshold" (maybe a month or 2 of continuous daily usage) timeframe.

>>3369164

Straw Man, Ad Hominem and False Dilemma.
Bravo!

>ATHEISM-THEISM THREAD ERRYDAY
>EK THREAD ERRYDAY
>WEED THREAD ERRYDAY
>SINGULARITY POSTHUMANISM BULLSHIT THREAD ERRYDAY
>SILLY HIGH SCHOOLERS WITH LAME OPINIONS AND VIEWS ABOUT THE WORLD ERRYDAY

fuck this board

>>3369180
patience newfriend, you'll find a board you like eventually.

I cant stand this fucking plant anymore

>>3369179
yes it is an ad hominem, and nothing more because you're acting like an entitled, belligerent attention-whore. You're using fallacies as red herrings to avoid providing evidence/argument as to why your sources deserve more attention then the first one's presented.

keep it coming bro, I will destroy you.

>>3369192
Even /b/ is better, they at least, sometimes show something original.

To marijuana advocates: how many people will have to die from marijuana before you'll support a ban against it?

>>3369206
this place is here to destroy curiosity, not cater to it. Creativity is only reserved to keep spoiled idiots entertained.

>>3369212
inb4 one.
One.

>>3369212
three, three is a nice round number also reacting to deaths makes for poor policy.

>>3369197

I can remove my "name" instantly but you cannot alleviate your lack of knowledge instantly as well .

>You're using fallacies as red herrings to avoid providing evidence/argument as to why your sources deserve more attention then the first one's presented.
>as to why your sources deserve more attention

Never provided any source.

And you are still using Ad Hominem and Straw-Man.
And with that comment of yours, you are a confirmed "Troll".

>>3369223
>reacting to deaths makes for poor policy

It's good policy because safety always comes first. For example, a few deaths/injuries of fans at baseball stadiums is enough for people to propose changes to safety protocols and infrastructure. If there's a way to prevent needless injury or death, why avoid it?

>>3369212
at least as many as have been killed by alcohol and cigarettes.

>>3369268

And a lot more are killed by vehicles, foods and animals.
So what?
Why do you still resort to that comparison/contrast when its invalid?

>>3369240
I'm obviously talking about
>>3368786
which no, I did not provide nor did I claim to.
I can actually substantiate my original argument: you're deliberately ignoring the primary sources. You on the other hand are only interested in hypocritically slinging shit so I'll just keep pointing that out until you realize that all your accusations are as hollow as your arguments.

You can't troll somebody who isn't even being serious in the first place nor can you invalidate an argument by just claiming fallacy.

>>3368709
>>3368709
>>3368709
>>3368709


actually, you COULD easily overdose by eating concentrated cannabis (Hash oil or Hash).


it would require ingesting large quantities of the material, dissolved in an oil like canola oil or butter....


but even then, it is an excercise in ridiculousness because you would need POUNDS of marijuana to create the amount of concentrates necessary to kill a person this way.


also you would basically need to force feed them gallons of this shit.
you can kill someone with distilled water in exactly the same manner.

>>3369265
No you're misinterpreting what I'm implying and going at it all wrong. We make the policy before anybody dies and obviously when it comes to marijuana as a scheduled substance that philosophy has proven effective because nobody has died yet.

>>3369286
that was a poor comparison on your part.

alcohol and cigarettes are enjoyed in much the same fashion that marijuana would be, were it to be legalized. all three can be hazardous to one's health and alter state of mind to a degree, but only marijuana is kept illegal as a result. in what sense is this invalid?

>>3369294

Did you read this?

http://familydoctor.org/online/famdocen/home/common/addictions/drugs/485.html

http://www.aafp.org/afp/991201ap/2583.html

http://www.nida.nih.gov/researchreports/marijuana/marijuana3.html

Of course you didnt, because this is your reaction to it:

>>3368869

Why do you keep embarrassing yourself?

>>3369338
Nope and I'm not going to because you're being a selfish hypocrite. The difference between us is I'll actually admit to what I'm deliberately doing while you continue to divert attention away from your own grievances.

I can only imagine by now you're the only one taking yourself seriously despite not treating the issue with seriousness.

>make blank statement
>provide sources without an argument
>continue making blanket accusations.
this is you.

>>3369334

>alcohol and cigarettes are enjoyed in much the same fashion that marijuana would be, were it to be legalized. all three can be hazardous to one's health and alter state of mind to a degree, but only marijuana is kept illegal as a result. in what sense is this invalid?

Explain how much "cigarettes" affect your mind.
Provide evidence and statistic for it.
Explain adverse effects of cigarettes on the mind.
Also provide evidence and statistics for it.

Food, also when used excessively can be hazardous.
And it is used by those who are food addicts.
And it alters their mind by alleviating their craving.

>in what sense is this invalid?

It is invalid as i perceive it now.
But that could be because of lack of information that you provided.

>>3369370

You are in denial and have actually deluded yourself.
And you still cannot accept that you are a hypocrite.
This is my initial confrontation of you (>>3368904) and in every instance so far you have only affirmed it.

What effects would this have on a successful referendum to legalize Marijuana, like they tried in California (and want to try again I think)?

>>3369377
>Explain how much "cigarettes" affect your mind.
Provide evidence and statistic for it.
>Explain adverse effects of cigarettes on the mind.
>Also provide evidence and statistics for it.
nobody should do any of this because you'll just selectively ignore any effective arguments and evidence. Besides that it's absurd to think anything meaningful will come from scrutinizing health affects of cigarettes and it's an obvious waste of time acting as though your demands need to be acknowledged in order to provide persuasive reasoning as to why marijuana should be ignored.

>>3369418

>i order you not to conform

>>3369398
You never addressed my original argument just like you never addressed the original citations. You just sling shit in order to avoid the ORIGINAL issues, plain and simple. I sling shit because I'm practicing how to wrestle down flamboyant reprobates for when it comes to more serious issues.

>>3369465

Prove it.

>>3369440
It's already been proven in this thread, people defending the official policy and attacking cannabis use aren't capable of holding reasonable discourse because they're continuously trying to start the next controversy after losing the prior one.

>>3369478

>i havent given any proof, i will just say its already proven, so that must be true!

>>3368487
It's fake. Its mox news
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLELPYh1owE&feature=channel_video_title
there is another video by them

>>3368487
>>3368493
>>3368527
>>3368578
>>3368627
>>3368660
>>3368681
>>3368724
this was the original line of discussion which you willfully chose to ignore

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368786 07/10/11(Sun)13:22
these are the original sources you still are acting oblivious to like a dirty rat.

>>3368800 07/10/11(Sun)13:25
>>3368839 07/10/11(Sun)13:32
here are the only posts which choose to acknowledge the only valid argument with evidence provided.

>>3368856 07/10/11(Sun)13:35
here is your post which has no position and makes no arguments, assertions, points or statements. Something any high-school drop-out can and would do.

>>3368869
>>3368904
>>3369094
>>3369130
>>3369164
>>3369179
>>3369197
>>3369240
>>3369294
>>3369338
>>3369370
>>3369398
>>3369465
>>3369477
here, presumably, is the back and forth banter where you continually act like an entitled, belligerent, self-serving, shit-slinging hypocrite while I repeatedly point it out for the sake of making this case which I now rest.

I doubt you'll be able to recognize how much of a favor I'm doing you by calling out your shit.

>>3369504
refer to
>>3369644
for a complete example.
comeback if you would like more.