• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Miracle Marijuana

Should Medical Marijuana Be Legal?

  • Yes

    Votes: 40 78.4%

  • No

    Votes: 5 9.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 6 11.8%
  • Total voters
    51
5 reasons to legalize Marijuana in order of relevance to me.
  1. Proven medical value
  2. Personal freedom
  3. Industrial Hemp
  4. Incarceration of nonviolent users/growers/sellers
  5. Financial gain
 
digsbe said:
I honestly have mixed feelings about medical marijuana and legalizing marijuana. I guess I'm neither for or against it so I voted "other." Anyone want to persuade me either which way?
Click to expand...

So, digsbe, were you convinced one way or another?
 
LiberalAvenger said:
I have read them. I have also presented some good issues of why pot should be legalized otheer than so I could legally get high on it.

My major argument for legalization is that it would take it off the street so kids could not get it as easily as they do now, not to mention that it would bankrupt a lot of drug dealers.

My other point is that how can I believe anything that the war on drugs cottage industry says after claiming that pot is addictive on the dea website. This is simply not true, but no real government study will ever be done to present it in a non biased way. Too many people rely on pot being illegal to pay their country club dues.
Click to expand...

If you present your argument like this, you will HELP your position. Well thought out and on target. Cease the anecdotal evidence and the presentation of inaccuracies and comparisons, and you present a good case. :)


OTC cough syrup is more dangerous than pot.
Click to expand...

THIS is the kind of stuff that does not help. It is a skewed comment that is not entirely accurate.
 
Binary_Digit said:
Actually, no you didn't. Your words were: "what you put in your body CAN affect me and others around you." and that makes no mention of behavior while intoxicated. The way it reads, it sounds like your claim was that it can affect you if someone else smokes a joint and does nothing else but watch MTV. That's what I disagreed with. If you didn't mean that, or if you no longer believe it, then I think we are probably in agreement on what kind of regulations there should be after all.
Click to expand...

CAN. That's the word that I used as a qualifier. It CAN affect me and others around you. In a sense we do agree.


Yes you can. People use drugs and don't cause other people any problems all the time. Drug use alone can't affect you. Drug use and subsequent irresponsible behavior can.
Click to expand...

Drug use CAN lead to problematic behavior.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
You should be happy to know that I have a perfect driving record with no infractions in my entire life. My father drove for a living and I learned very young about "defensive driving.".

Pot also helps to control road rage, believe it or don't believe it, Cap'n.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you have a perfect driving record, but you're doing it again. Driving under the influence of pot is dangerous. It alters your perceptions and reaction times. Giving credence to an opposing view without presenting the realities of this creates misrepresentation and hurts your credibility.
 
NoJingoLingo said:
Free clue: No it's not, not for anyone. It may be habit forming for some people but Marijuana contains no addictive substance.
Click to expand...

Free clue: It certainly does contain addictive substances. It attaches and excites cannabiod receptors in the brain, similar to what opiates do to opioid receptors. This can cause an addictive reaction in some folks. You are providing incorrect information.
 
LiberalAvenger said:
The latest lies about pot.

Anti-Pot Propaganda As Stupid As Ever -- Yet Our Alarmist Media Continues to Hype It | | AlterNet
Click to expand...

You're doing it again. This article is so methodologically unsound that I don't know where to start. Here are the facts of marijuana and mental illness.

Marijuana as in the cases of other substances can trigger a psychotic episode, a depressive episode, or a significant mental illness, if there are already genetic precursors there. This could occur, anyway, but marijuana use can hasten this developement. If one already has the symptoms of a mental illness, marijuana (as with most substances like this) can worsen these symptoms. On some rare occasions, marijuana might create some of these mental illness issues, but this is very rare, far more rare than that of other substances.

Your article misrepresents facts.
 
NoJingoLingo said:
Please link those studies.
Click to expand...

I've already said that the studies are copyrighted and I cannot link to them. I am trying to locate some excerpts that I can post. I will try to locate them tonight.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I'm glad you have a perfect driving record, but you're doing it again. Driving under the influence of pot is dangerous.
Click to expand...

Not very, it appears:

"THC's effects on road-tracking after doses up to 300 g/kg never exceeded alcohol's at bacs of 0.08 g%; and, were in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs' (Robbe, 1994; Robbe and O'Hanlon, 1995; O'Hanlon et al., 1995). Yet, THC's effects differ qualitatively from many other drugs, especially alcohol. Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is that the former's users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects while driving under the influence."

Marijuana And Actual Driving Performance

I tried to find a link to this on the NHTSA's website, but they seem to have deleted it (which is one reason that I don't consider the US government to be a reliable source about drugs, they have a history of ignoring and trying to cover up anything that doesn't support "Drugs are bad, M'Kay").
 
MrFungus420 said:
Not very, it appears:

"THC's effects on road-tracking after doses up to 300 g/kg never exceeded alcohol's at bacs of 0.08 g%; and, were in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs' (Robbe, 1994; Robbe and O'Hanlon, 1995; O'Hanlon et al., 1995). Yet, THC's effects differ qualitatively from many other drugs, especially alcohol. Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments. Another way THC seems to differ qualitatively from many other drugs is that the former's users seem better able to compensate for its adverse effects while driving under the influence."

Marijuana And Actual Driving Performance

I tried to find a link to this on the NHTSA's website, but they seem to have deleted it (which is one reason that I don't consider the US government to be a reliable source about drugs, they have a history of ignoring and trying to cover up anything that doesn't support "Drugs are bad, M'Kay").
Click to expand...

More from your study:

"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The results of the studies corroborate those of previous driving simulator and closed-course tests by indicating that THC in inhaled doses up to 300 g/kg has significant, yet not dramatic, dose-related impairing effects on driving performance (cf. Smiley, 1986)."[/FONT]

Significant, in research methods, means statistically significant. There was enough of a deviation and impairment for the researchers to mention this.

Also, from your quote: "Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments."

This is evidence that the drivers ARE impaired. They KNOW that because of the drug, their driving ability has been diminished, an therefore attempt to exercise more caution.

Also: "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Although THC's adverse effects on driving performance appeared relatively small in the tests employed in this program, one can still easily imagine situations where the influence of marijuana smoking might have a dangerous effect; i.e., emergency situations which put high demands on the driver's information processing capacity, prolonged monotonous driving, and after THC has been taken with other drugs, especially alcohol.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"[/FONT]

Slippery road, quick stops, night driving in bad weather. All of these situations, any kind of impairment, including that from THC can be significantly more dangerous.
 
I don't buy that cannabis is physically addictive. Habit forming, sure.
 
I found the study that I remember citing. As I said, because of copyright limitations, I cannot link to the actual study. Here is my post from oh so long ago:

A physical addiction is termed by having physical withdrawal symptoms when the substance in question is stopped. Since not everyone who uses marijuana will become physically addicted, not everyone will suffer withdrawal symptoms when stopping. However, research shows that some do suffer from withdrawal symptoms when they stop smoking, which is the identification of an addiction, showing that marijuana can be physically addictive.

Some substantiated information on this:

Long-term marijuana abuse can lead to addiction for some people; that is, they abuse the drug compulsively even though it interferes with family, school, work, and recreational activities. Drug craving and withdrawal symptoms can make it hard for long-term marijuana smokers to stop abusing the drug. People trying to quit report irritability, sleeplessness, and anxiety(31). They also display increased aggression on psychological tests, peaking approximately one week after the last use of the drug(32).

Sources:
31 Kouri EM, Pope HG, Lukas SE. Changes in aggressive behavior during withdrawal from long-term marijuana use. Psychopharmacology 143(3):302-308, 1999.

32 Haney M, Ward AS, Comer SD, et al. Abstinence symptoms following smoked marijuana in humans. Psychopharmacology 141(4):395-404, 1999.

InfoFacts - Marijuana
Click to expand...

Along with craving, withdrawal symptoms can make it hard for long-term marijuana smokers to stop using the drug.[SIZE=-1]49[/SIZE]

Source:
spacer.gif
spacer.gif



[SIZE=-1]49[/SIZE]Budney, A.J.; Moore, B.A.; Vandrey, R.G.; and Hughes, J.R. The time course and significance of cannabis withdrawal. J Abnorm Psychol 112(3):393-402, 2003.



Abstract for above source:


Withdrawal symptoms following cessation of heavy cannabis (marijuana) use have been reported, yet their time course and clinical importance have not been established. A 50-day outpatient study assessed 18 marijuana users during a 5-day smoking-as-usual phase followed by a 45-day abstinence phase. Parallel assessment of 12 ex-users was obtained. A withdrawal pattern was observed for aggression, anger, anxiety, decreased appetite, decreased body weight, irritability, restlessness, shakiness, sleep problems, and stomach pain. Onset typically occurred between Days 1-3, peak effects between Days 2-6, and most effects lasted 4-14 days. The magnitude and time course of these effects appeared comparable to tobacco and other withdrawal syndromes. These effects likely contribute to the development of dependence and difficulty stopping use. Criteria for cannabis withdrawal are proposed.

NIDA - Research Report Series - Marijuana Abuse
Click to expand...

Lastly, several researchers review literature and numerous studies in order to examine the physical addictive issue around marijuana. This report takes a look at many studies and reaches conclusions based on the comparisons of all of the results. After this research, the authors conclude that stopping the use of marijuana can create withdrawal symptoms, giving validity to the the concept of both cannabis withdrawal and cannabis dependence.

Here is there concluding statement:

We propose that the cannabis withdrawal syndrome is reliable,
valid, and clinically important and should be included
in the next revision of DSM. Appendix 1 lists symptoms
we propose as criteria for a cannabis withdrawal
disorder (41). The common symptoms reflect those observed
consistently across studies of cannabis withdrawal
and reported by a substantial proportion of participants
studied (Table 1). The less common or equivocal symptoms
have been observed across some studies, are experienced
by a minority of study participants, or are of lesser magnitude.
Other symptoms appear in more than one study but
not in the majority of studies. We believe endorsement of at
least four of these symptoms and evidence that these symptoms
produced clinically significant distress or dysfunction
should lead to a diagnosis of cannabis withdrawal. Furthermore,
adoption of a diagnosis of cannabis withdrawal
would eliminate one of the discrepancies in substance use
disorders between DSM and ICD nosologies.

Link: http://www.uams.edu/psych/car/pdf files/budney_pubs/AJPreview04.pdf
Click to expand...

Some become physically dependent on marijuana.
Click to expand...

And here:

In 1988 the discovery of the cannabinoid receptor in the brain opened research into dependance, abuse, and withdrawal of the drug, similar to what has been done in the research of opiates. After the triggering of these receptors, withdrawal symptoms can occur similar to that of an opiate. Because there is a primary cause (THC) rather than a secondary (biochemical changes caused by mood), the physical response is consistent with definitions for physical withdrawal.
Click to expand...

And here:

The research is in a subscription-based journal that, because of copyright restrictions, I cannot link to. The article is Cannabinoids: reward, dependence, and underlying neurochemical
mechanisms—a review of recent preclinical data; Journal of Psychopharmacology. If you'd like, I will check the restrictions and, if I can, PM you the entire article.
Click to expand...

There's more spread throughout a few threads and post due to the inability of direct quoting or linking to the study.
 
Oh, long term use, sure. Long term use of any chemical alters brain chemistry towards reliance, I would imagine. Coffee is that way. Not all people get the withdrawl symptoms but I've met people who have caffeine withdrawl if they deviate from their level of daily intake.

If there is an addictive nature to cannabis I would define it as low risk, while placing tobacco, alcohol, and even caffeine above it.

The difference between habit forming and addictive... I'll describe it in my own words. Addiction is more physiological. The physical body becomes dependent upon the substance for sustaining stable function.

Habit forming... is just you being used to having it around. Some people come home from work and have a beer or two, others take a couple of pot hits. They may even look forward to it at the end of the day. But if for some reason it's not there one night, they don't start going crazy about it.

Actually, a good way to look at it would be the colloquial use of 'addiction' (i.e. she's so addicted to using facebook) vs. the medical definition of 'addiction' (i.e. the patient has a prolonged addiction and dependence on heroin.)
 
Still searching my files. :mrgreen:

Here's another one with many links:

Sorry, but you are both wrong. New research has identified cannabis withdrawal syndrome, symptoms similar to those when one withdraws from tobacco, and other drugs. Most of the research into this is fairly new...post 1998. This is well documented in many studies, both observed behaviorally, and recorded, clinically, with brain receptor reactions, as well as limbic system reactions, all similar to the reactions to withdrawal from other drugs.

There being no cannabis withdrawal, hence no physical addiction is a position that has, recently, been proven false. Further, the canaboid receptor antagonist, having been identified as the facilitator for the withdrawal, has also been associated with connecting to the opioid receptors, having some impact on modulating those, too. This is the first biological evidence that there may exist a "gateway' effect of marijuana. This research is very new, and needs more study before it can be identified as fact.

In heavy users, marijuana, when use is stopped, causes withdrawal, indicating physical dependence.

Here are some links to some of the research. The third link discusses the canaboid receptors in biological terms:

Cannabis withdrawal in adolescent treatment seekers
Review of the validity and significance of cannabi...[Am J Psychiatry. 2004] - PubMed Result
Marijuana withdrawal syndrome in the animal model. [J Clin Pharmacol. 2002] - PubMed Result
Activation of corticotropin-releasing factor in th...[Science. 1997] - PubMed Result
Marijuana abstinence effects in marijuana smokers ...[Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001] - PubMed Result
The time course and significance of cannabis withd...[J Abnorm Psychol. 2003] - PubMed Result
Abstinence symptoms following smoked marijuana in ...[Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1999] - PubMed Result
Abstinence symptoms during withdrawal from chronic...[Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2000] - PubMed Result
Psychiatric Times - Does Marijuana Withdrawal Syndrome Exist?
Log In Problems
Log In Problems


Though there are some full articles, many of these are only abstracts. I have access to many of the full articles (not all), but because they are "pay access" I cannot post them.
Click to expand...
 
Orion said:
I don't buy that cannabis is physically addictive. Habit forming, sure.
Click to expand...
Everything has a physical addiction, the symptoms are what differ. Pot does manifest itself in physical addiction, sure it isn't DT's or the very dramatic symptoms of heroine or nicotine withdrawal, but things like paranoia, recurrent nightmares, and sleep distrubances have been shown as present among the symptoms present in marijuana addicts. Personally I don't make a judgement, but there is a case to be made objectively.
 
From what I see of all the research, there is no doubt that marijuana is physically addictive in some people. Is it as addictive as many other substances? No, but that does not change that it IS, at times. The issue with this is that this does not alter whether or not marijuana should be legalized. It should. If we were to make illegal any substance that were physically addictive, alcohol, cigarettes, and coffee is gone... which makes no sense. However, for pro-legalizers, denying the physically addictive quality of marijuana weakens your argument... because you are misrepresenting reality. It's exactly like anti-legalizers saying that if you smoke marijuana, you WILL become lazy or WILL go insane. This too, is a gross misrepresentation and weakens the anti-legalizers argument.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
From what I see of all the research, there is no doubt that marijuana is physically addictive in some people. Is it as addictive as many other substances? No, but that does not change that it IS, at times. The issue with this is that this does not alter whether or not marijuana should be legalized. It should. If we were to make illegal any substance that were physically addictive, alcohol, cigarettes, and coffee is gone... which makes no sense. However, for pro-legalizers, denying the physically addictive quality of marijuana weakens your argument... because you are misrepresenting reality. It's exactly like anti-legalizers saying that if you smoke marijuana, you WILL become lazy or WILL go insane. This too, is a gross misrepresentation and weakens the anti-legalizers argument.
Click to expand...
I will say though that the "gateway drug" thing is the most overused and pathetic cliche out there. Pot does not necesarilly lead to hard drug usage, but .......it does lead to southern rock consumption I find.:mrgreen:
 
LaMidRighter said:
I will say though that the "gateway drug" thing is the most overused and pathetic cliche out there. Pot does not necesarilly lead to hard drug usage, but .......it does lead to southern rock consumption I find.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

I have backed off on the "gateway drug" position since I posted those links. Though in my experience, I have seen this to be absolutely true, the research that I have read is either inconclusive, correlation but not causation, or completely refutes it. Though my anecdotal evidence supports this, that doesn't mean too much when research opposes my position.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
More from your study:

"[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The results of the studies corroborate those of previous driving simulator and closed-course tests by indicating that THC in inhaled doses up to 300 g/kg has significant, yet not dramatic, dose-related impairing effects on driving performance (cf. Smiley, 1986)."[/FONT]

Significant, in research methods, means statistically significant. There was enough of a deviation and impairment for the researchers to mention this.
Click to expand...

Yes, statistically significant. In other words, any amount greater than the margin of error.

CaptainCourtesy said:
Also, from your quote: "Evidence from the present and previous studies strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments."

This is evidence that the drivers ARE impaired. They KNOW that because of the drug, their driving ability has been diminished, an therefore attempt to exercise more caution.

Also: "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Although THC's adverse effects on driving performance appeared relatively small in the tests employed in this program, one can still easily imagine situations where the influence of marijuana smoking might have a dangerous effect; i.e., emergency situations which put high demands on the driver's information processing capacity, prolonged monotonous driving, and after THC has been taken with other drugs, especially alcohol.[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"[/FONT]

Slippery road, quick stops, night driving in bad weather. All of these situations, any kind of impairment, including that from THC can be significantly more dangerous.
Click to expand...

I'm not denying any of that. But the impairment was never greater than that which is considered an acceptable level with alcohol.

I'm sorry, but I think that your blanket statement that it is dangerous is bordering on dishonest.
 
MrFungus420 said:
Yes, statistically significant. In other words, any amount greater than the margin of error.
Click to expand...

No, statistically significant, in research methods, means that it proves the hypothesis.



I'm not denying any of that. But the impairment was never greater than that which is considered an acceptable level with alcohol.
Click to expand...

It showed impairment on the level of alcohol impairment, especially when it came to the tasks that operate outside the conscious control.

I'm sorry, but I think that your blanket statement that it is dangerous is bordering on dishonest.
Click to expand...

Making a blanket statement that it is NOT dangerous IS dishonest. Of course it is dangerous. So is alcohol. Each in different ways and with different effects.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
From what I see of all the research, there is no doubt that marijuana is physically addictive in some people. Is it as addictive as many other substances? No, but that does not change that it IS, at times. The issue with this is that this does not alter whether or not marijuana should be legalized. It should. If we were to make illegal any substance that were physically addictive, alcohol, cigarettes, and coffee is gone... which makes no sense. However, for pro-legalizers, denying the physically addictive quality of marijuana weakens your argument... because you are misrepresenting reality. It's exactly like anti-legalizers saying that if you smoke marijuana, you WILL become lazy or WILL go insane. This too, is a gross misrepresentation and weakens the anti-legalizers argument.
Click to expand...

I appreciate you posting all that info, it was insightful. But the things stated go contrary to previous research and stated effects, such as: cannabis is not a gateway drug; cannabis is not physically addictive; cannabis is habit forming, etc.

I'm not saying you're wrong or there's some conspiracy. I just want to see greater institutions, like maybe the AMA, pour over the data and confirm these results. The studies have been very back and forth over the past decade. A good example is whether or not cannabis causes cancer. The British Medical Association said no, definitely not, about two years ago. The AMA says maybe. The Canadian Medical Association said yes, then no, then maybe.

If the research you post is very new, then yes, it's a possibility that what it claims is true, but you have to look at the context of the whole history of the research, especially the past 5-10 years. I guess, in short, when you say that "yes cannabis is addictive", I am wary of that claim because the reports have been so inconsistent. I would rather just settle on maybe, but it's inconclusive.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
CAN. That's the word that I used as a qualifier. It CAN affect me and others around you. In a sense we do agree.




Drug use CAN lead to problematic behavior.
Click to expand...
Why are you trying to make an argument against something by using the word CAN associated with the thing you are arguing? You know what that is, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom