Reply #244: I'd have to agree with Donald here [View All]

Low risk and no risk aren't the same thing. For example the following.

"A review of the literature suggests that the majority of cannabis users, who use the drug occasionally rather than on a daily basis, will not suffer any lasting physical or mental harm. Conversely, as with other ‘recreational’ drugs, there will be some who suffer adverse consequences from their use of cannabis. Some individuals who have psychotic thought tendencies might risk precipitating psychotic illness. Those who consume large doses of the drug on a regular basis are likely to have lower educational achievement and lower income, and may suffer physical damage to the airways. They also run a significant risk of becoming dependent upon continuing use of the drug. There is little evidence, however, that these adverse effects persist after drug use stops or that any direct cause and effect relationships are involved."

Source: Iversen, Leslie L., PhD, FRS, "Long-Term Effects of Exposure to Cannabis," Current Opinion in Pharmacology, Feb. 2005, Vol. 5, No. 1, p. 71.

They aren't even sure if one leads to the other or the other way around and it's a limited number of people it effects to start with. We've got prescription drugs on the market that show worse risks and last I heard some video games can cause seizures or epileptic fits because of the flashing patterns. Problem is that people like Ida take a line and draw it to an extreme that reality doesn't justify. In reality the measure should be more like the following. Step by step trial and study to see what really works rather than just assuming like we tend to do.

The Christchurch Press reported on March 22, 2005, that "The lead researcher in the Christchurch study, Professor David Fergusson, said the role of cannabis in psychosis was not sufficient on its own to guide legislation. 'The result suggests heavy use can result in adverse side-effects,' he said. 'That can occur with ( heavy use of ) any substance. It can occur with milk.' Fergusson's research, released this month, concluded that heavy cannabis smokers were 1.5 times more likely to suffer symptoms of psychosis that non-users. The study was the latest in several reports based on a cohort of about 1000 people born in Christchurch over a four-month period in 1977. An effective way to deal with cannabis use would be to incrementally reduce penalties and carefully evaluate its impact, Fergusson said. 'Reduce the penalty, like a parking fine. You could then monitor ( the impact ) after five or six years. If it did not change, you might want to take another step.'

Source: Bleakley, Louise, "NZ Study Used in UK Drug Review," The Press (Christchurch, New Zealand: March 22, 2005), from the web at http://www.mapinc.org/newscsdp/v05/n490/a08.html, last accessed March 28, 2005.

Problem isn't that it's safe or that it's unsafe, it's that some people with limited imagination assume they can simply make things go away when decades of trying to do exactly that has done nothing but to increase the death and the damage. But let's keep doing it, maybe it'll work this decade :eyes: In a futile attempt to get even with an inanimate object and our governments failed policies they back those policies so punish more innocent people and destroy more lives.

The fact is that most pot users, and most drug users of other types, quit all on their own. They might try it a time or few or they might use for a few years but most do move on and lead a perfectly normal life, unless they get arrested. The drugs aren't nearly as dangerous to them as our laws are, we know education works better and it's been proved but there's no money in that for a for profit prison system. That is mostly what this is about. Drug testing, prison, control, money. That's the side everyone with a vested interest and profit motive is on.

Here's a quick look at lifetime use vs regular us in a range of drugs. If we spent a few billion less on locking people up and shifted it to making treatment available for those who needed it maybe we could save more lives and destroy less through our own efforts. We've been doing this for nothing and it causes more harm than it stops, some in their self righteous rage just refuse to admit it so cost other families the lives of their loved ones too. I just wish they could see what it is they do.

Lifetime use
http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/ever-used.htm

Past month use, daily would be considerably lower.
http://www.briancbennett.com/charts/nsduh/past-month.htm