On the subject of Marijuana "addiction"...

[nota]

I disagree - the only Drivers selected were those who had accidents, so it was selective

You're keen on showing this study as The fairest and balanced of them all. Drink Driving is a problem, as is medicated driving or Drug Driving, but I'm surprised the figures came out that 53 % of accidents were caused by normal drivers. what were the parameters? did it take into account car condition, weather? road condition? location?

Too many variables IMHO.

For gods sake where do you get this from?

I never claimed it was "fairest and balanced of them all". But it IS scientific, and the results were accurate - respectably accurate enough to be presented and tabled in Parliament - which is damn lot more than the facile twaddle you present as fact via Mum

Here's a c&p of the actual transcript. If that's not good enough for you then I'm done (got better things to do) because as the saying goes:

You can lead a whore to water but you can't make her think

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"PARLIAMENT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
ENVIRONMENT, RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
THIRTIETH REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE
South Australian Rural Road Safety Strategy
Tabled in the House of Assembly and ordered to be printed 8 December 1998
Second Session, Forty–Ninth Parliament
__________________________________________________ ______________


Dr White (Transport SA) spoke of a recently completed research project on the prevalence and role of alcohol and other drugs in road crashes in South Australia. He said ‘I will now turn to the results. We replicated the results for alcohol. With alcohol in your blood, you are far more likely to have been responsible for a crash than an innocent victim.
There is a dose response relationship for alcohol: the higher your level of alcohol, the more likely you were to have been responsible for the crash. The surprising finding to many people comes with respect to marijuana, or cannabis. There was no relationship between responsibility for the crash and cannabis.

So, people who had cannabis in their blood were no more likely to be responsible for the crash than people who had no drugs or alcohol in their blood. Many people find this surprising, but it replicates other findings from Australia with fatally injured, or killed, drivers and some findings from overseas.

Our results are probably some of the most reliable in the world, for various reasons. We had larger sample than other studies have had: we had 2 500 crash drivers. And ours were non-selective: we did not just get blood from drivers who the police suspected of having done something wrong. We had a good, totally representative sample.

We used quantitative assays rather than just screening tests, whereas other studies had just used screening tests—‘yes’, ‘no’, for the drugs. We obtained the levels of drugs involved. And we used a more sophisticated level of responsibility analysis than other people have used: we did not just go on whether the police ticked the box for whether the driver was responsible or not. So, I believe that our results are pretty substantial, and our finding that cannabis was not a causal factor in the crashes in which it was present is a fairly strong finding.’
(Evidence, p72"

[Spastik_Roach]

Well...This is hardly reliable but I thought i'd add it anyway.

When I was reading the Jimi Hendrix biography, it would talk about how he would get very violent when drunk, and lash out at people (both male and female). However no such violence was recorded when he was stoned...

[eyebrows]

with pot its really hit and miss as to how it will react with your body, as it was said at the beginning of the thread that pot has perspective altering ability, but this is all based on a reaction between the THC and the different chemicals each person has that determine a sence ie touch etc (why most pot heads find tv so amusing when there high) with each person the balance of chemicals is different so the effect it has is different thats why people who use pot have such a different reaction to it. With cancer pot is usually associated with throat cancer because when they hold it its usually mainly in the throat not lungs (what i herd not sure if its right). Addiction from what ive seen it is, i only know one person who has only done it once everyone else does it all the time so i would say it is (whether its mental or physical does it matter its still an addictaion).

[RazaBlade]

One of my friends has done an essay on marijuana and toxicity, along with other stuff. Will try and eventually get a hold of his essay....

[d-quik]

I had a mate who went 'canadian' the whole time. he probably smoked 5-10grams a day.

Weed itself is almost as addictive and more harmful that tobacco. Research shows that although many drug prevention programs focus on the Tablets/Injection style drugs, in many Cases Marijuana, because of it's perspective altering ability, is more harmful in the long-term, because of the attitude of 'it's only cannabis, it's not going to do much damage'.

1. 5-10 grams is insane
2. weed has no chemicals that causes addiction. any type of "addiction"-like features are just mental. sorta like when a chubby kid says "im addicted to mcdonalds". not technically an addiction.
3. from what you have told us from other posts it seems like the weed that these people you know are probably dipped in windex or whatver. it is not normal. the side-effects are not very weedish. if anything it SUPPRESSES my anger and violence when I use it.
4. again, from what you have told us from other posts it seems like you just use logic that anything that affects you like weed has long-term effects. I agree with this. so does advil, tylenol, aspirin, and codene. in fact, all four of them are actually addictive. but those things don't get a bad rep

Apparenty smoking 3 joints a day would be the same as smoking 20 cigarettes because when you inhale off a joint you hold it longer, so then more chemicals, and tar enter your lungs.

1. a "joint" and a cigarette varies in size, so those stats can be skewed
2. "holding it in" has nothing to do with how bad marijuana is...

[drakkie]

Marijuana doesn't kill brain cells, but it affects their connections, so that when signals are trying to be sent to an area of the brain, it slows, or redirects them.

how noticiable for me I'd say i lost about 10% of my ability to think logically and about 10% of my memory as well

Egg-nog, you are completely true the nicotine addicts.My best friend and I discussed it recently as well
I am a now "trying-to-quit" smoker. After my exams are over i'll have to accept being a few weeks grumpy and bad-feeling
In holland we smoke pot usually with about 70-80% tobacco, simply cos you would be stoned after one inhalation and to last with the stuff longer.

I have tried this and other drugs as well. However my consumption of marihuana was up to almost half a kilo on one day !!! I have passed out various times that day and puked ( BLACK!!). My friends were about to call an ambulance when i became consious again... (not that they were really able to think ...)

Personally if i had known the effects would bear with me in this manner and for this long, i would/should have never started it. I can feel the effects every single day It certainly put me into a depression and i have had some VERY hard weeks/months. Two people out of our group of 6 have been to a drug clinic (not only for marihuana) and one killed himself high on hash.

The addiction to it might not be a completely physical one, but also a mental one. You might not realise it,but going on UCP every day,also is a mental addiction. You have plenty without realising they are addictions.
the bad thing with marihuana and other drugs is that they make you think,that other drugs are even better and you tries these potentially more dangerous ones out as well............

Glad i didnt smoke a single joint for a year now

[drakkie]

1. 5-10 grams is insane
2. weed has no chemicals that causes addiction. any type of "addiction"-like features are just mental. sorta like when a chubby kid says "im addicted to mcdonalds". not technically an addiction.
3. from what you have told us from other posts it seems like the weed that these people you know are probably dipped in windex or whatver. it is not normal. the side-effects are not very weedish. if anything it SUPPRESSES my anger and violence when I use it.
4. again, from what you have told us from other posts it seems like you just use logic that anything that affects you like weed has long-term effects. I agree with this. so does advil, tylenol, aspirin, and codene. in fact, all four of them are actually addictive. but those things don't get a bad rep
1. a "joint" and a cigarette varies in size, so those stats can be skewed
2. "holding it in" has nothing to do with how bad marijuana is...

1) only minor amoutns compared to my daily use at one time
2) its a mental addiction,not a physical one
3) effects vary, some people get super-aggresive and some are just staring into nothing,completely pacified. I used to be a pacified starer,but some friends weren't. This also depends on your starting mood,it makes your feeling s much stronger
4) because those have a positive effect as well

-1) a joint of our group tended to be much bigger as a cigarette. I can really imagine anything smaller as a cigarette to be honest. Once we made one that was almost 50 centimetres with almost 90 grams in it
-2) No, but it does have an effect on it. It depends on how you use it.

[R34GTR]

The fact that it has a link with scizophrenia , should be a good warning to everyone who is willing to try it. The short time that it brings you good feelings are in no comparison to the physical and mental harm that is caused afterwards (not only to ones self but other people aswell)

[IBrake4Rainbows]

1. 5-10 grams is insane
2. weed has no chemicals that causes addiction. any type of "addiction"-like features are just mental. sorta like when a chubby kid says "im addicted to mcdonalds". not technically an addiction.

We've gone through how this is more of a lifestyle addiction than an actual addiction.

3. from what you have told us from other posts it seems like the weed that these people you know are probably dipped in windex or whatver. it is not normal. the side-effects are not very weedish. if anything it SUPPRESSES my anger and violence when I use it.

Different people can react in different ways. considering he was serfectly pober and not a usually violent person, I can think of little else that brought on this.

4. again, from what you have told us from other posts it seems like you just use logic that anything that affects you like weed has long-term effects. I agree with this. so does advil, tylenol, aspirin, and codene. in fact, all four of them are actually addictive. but those things don't get a bad rep1. a "joint" and a cigarette varies in size, so those stats can be skewed

An excellent point, which is why much of Marijuana research is a little off.

And, if you'd check throughout this thread, Prescription drug abuse is getting more of a bad wrap than Weed abuse.

2. "holding it in" has nothing to do with how bad marijuana is...

I disagree here - 'holding it in' would cause more damage than just in-out because you're allowing it time to be absorbed.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

For gods sake where do you get this from?

I never claimed it was "fairest and balanced of them all". But it IS scientific, and the results were accurate - respectably accurate enough to be presented and tabled in Parliament - which is damn lot more than the facile twaddle you present as fact via Mum.

If you checked I never said mine was accurate or fact. thats what IMHO usually means.

I'm just saying that there are too many variables in such tests.

That and my First hand experience of a Violent stoner.

Here's a c&p of the actual transcript. If that's not good enough for you then I'm done (got better things to do) because as the saying goes:

You can lead a whore to water but you can't make her think

Who you calling a whore ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"PARLIAMENT OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA
ENVIRONMENT, RESOURCES AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
THIRTIETH REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE
South Australian Rural Road Safety Strategy
Tabled in the House of Assembly and ordered to be printed 8 December 1998
Second Session, Forty–Ninth Parliament
__________________________________________________ ______________


Dr White (Transport SA) spoke of a recently completed research project on the prevalence and role of alcohol and other drugs in road crashes in South Australia. He said ‘I will now turn to the results. We replicated the results for alcohol. With alcohol in your blood, you are far more likely to have been responsible for a crash than an innocent victim.
There is a dose response relationship for alcohol: the higher your level of alcohol, the more likely you were to have been responsible for the crash. The surprising finding to many people comes with respect to marijuana, or cannabis. There was no relationship between responsibility for the crash and cannabis.

So, people who had cannabis in their blood were no more likely to be responsible for the crash than people who had no drugs or alcohol in their blood. Many people find this surprising, but it replicates other findings from Australia with fatally injured, or killed, drivers and some findings from overseas.

Our results are probably some of the most reliable in the world, for various reasons. We had larger sample than other studies have had: we had 2 500 crash drivers. And ours were non-selective: we did not just get blood from drivers who the police suspected of having done something wrong. We had a good, totally representative sample.

According to them of course, their unlikely to bad mouth their own study, esp. when it suits their needs.

We used quantitative assays rather than just screening tests, whereas other studies had just used screening tests—‘yes’, ‘no’, for the drugs. We obtained the levels of drugs involved. And we used a more sophisticated level of responsibility analysis than other people have used: we did not just go on whether the police ticked the box for whether the driver was responsible or not. So, I believe that our results are pretty substantial, and our finding that cannabis was not a causal factor in the crashes in which it was present is a fairly strong finding.’
(Evidence, p72"

Even this is an IMHO interpreted by results. (Albeit by a qualified dude)

IMHO (You got that?) I wouldn't risk it. Cannabis is still illicit and even if those drivers presented as little danger as a regular driver, they would still be arrested and charged for driving while under the influence.

I'd be interested to see how they worked out the 'sophisticated level of responsibility analysis'. but of course you've got too much to do.

[my porsche]

I wouldn't exactly say that anyone addicted to tobacco is a pussy, but I'd definitely say that addiction is nearly always the result of a bad decision. The only exceptions would be somewhere along the lines of a byproduct morphine addiction after a massive surgery.

I often feel that people who try to quit smoking cigarettes don't try hard enough, but then again I don't know what they're going through because I've never felt anything like what they feel. Still, it always seems they should try harder. Everyone I've ever met who's quit smoking has told me it's one of the best decisions they've ever made

way i see it is, you made a bad choice, you abused and got addicted to a substance, get over it, don't bitch about it, go to rehab and do your best to quit. son't start it if you can't finish it

except of course like you said morphine after surgery

[crisis]

When I was travelling in Asia I heard a term I had never heard before...

Quite a few of the The Germans, Australians, British, etc, that we met along the way told us the marijuana term "Canadian Style" in reference to a joint filled entirely with pot, rather than mixed with tobacco. They said it was almost universal that joints are rolled with tobacco, with the only prominent exception being Canada, hence the term.

I am not a smoker but I know plenty and have never heard of it being cut with tobacco. South Oz is a bit of a production centre for Australia’s MJ as well.

I've never heard of anyone locally getting addicted to marijuana, despite Vancouver being a global "cannabis Mecca".

As I said I know plenty of people who smoke or have. One of the guys in our band actually smoked everyday for years and years and shows no adverse affects. He also stopped effectively overnight. Most of the other people I know were causal smokers and therefore showed no signs of addiction.

[my porsche]

Watching too much television can also lead to long-term side effects mentally

Pardon me for straight talking, but anyone who believes that the personal risks imposed by Tobacco Meth or Alchohol use is as 'right up there' as using Marijuana, is 'right out there' imo. That view is propaganda, not fact

are you seriously trying to say that marijuana is worse than meth...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

If you'd actually read the post properly it says that those who think the effects of Marijuana are on par with Meth are wrong.

Major Self Ownage, myporsche.

[my porsche]

shit i feel like an ass...

wait a tick, he said that anyone who thinks that meth/alc/tobacco is "as up there as mj" meaning he thinks mj is worse...?