Comments on: The Truth About Pot http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/ Yesterday's tomorrow, today. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:15:36 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Jon8678 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-482426 Jon8678 Sat, 08 Sep 2007 04:21:41 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-482426 I'm going to post a link to this on a pot forum I go to. I’m going to post a link to this on a pot forum I go to.

]]> By: MedTempus » Cannabis: Cuando los debates médicos duran toda una vida… o puede que más… http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-30397 MedTempus » Cannabis: Cuando los debates médicos duran toda una vida… o puede que más… Mon, 04 Dec 2006 23:38:14 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-30397 [...] El resto del artículo se encuentra en Modern Mechanic [...] [...] El resto del artículo se encuentra en Modern Mechanic [...]

]]> By: Andrew http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-131 Andrew Mon, 16 Jan 2006 00:25:50 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-131 I have read a couple reports lately that state that while Marijuana has components that, when burned, can cause cancer there are actually elements of THC that prevent it from causing the same damage. Here is some research that you might find interesting: http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/21 I am of two minds when it comes to research like this. There is good plausable research on both sides of this issue, but I feel that research like I linked to above is likely both valid and under-reported. I have read a couple reports lately that state that while Marijuana has components that, when burned, can cause cancer there are actually elements of THC that prevent it from causing the same damage.

Here is some research that you might find interesting:
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/2/1/21

I am of two minds when it comes to research like this. There is good plausable research on both sides of this issue, but I feel that research like I linked to above is likely both valid and under-reported.

]]> By: Administrator http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-125 Administrator Thu, 12 Jan 2006 22:00:46 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-125 As far as I know, Marijuana is a carcinogen just like Tobacco. However, I think that people who smoke cigarettes consume a signifigantly larger amount so the risk is much higher. If you smoked the eqivelent of a pack of day, you would be really freaking stoned, all the time. As far as I know, Marijuana is a carcinogen just like Tobacco. However, I think that people who smoke cigarettes consume a signifigantly larger amount so the risk is much higher. If you smoked the eqivelent of a pack of day, you would be really freaking stoned, all the time.

]]> By: Quin Ryan http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-124 Quin Ryan Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:33:22 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-124 I concur. For what it's worth, I consider myself a "John Wayne Republican". However, as far as I can see, THC is no more problematic than beer or wine, and probably much less so than "harder" drinks. My father died of alcoholism, and despite going to High School in the '80's and college in the '90s, I know of no one who died from smiking marijuana (other than some serious lapses in judgement). The law already holds driving under the influence of any awareness- altering substance, regardless of its type. Essentially alcohol and other drugs are the same very bad idea when driving. One question: does smoking marijuana have the same detrimental effects that smoking tobacco does? Given that it apparently isn't addictive, is intentionaly breathing smoke harmful? If so, who cares? So long as the only person suffering, if you will, from smoking pot is the smoker, then it's their problem. Per the "second-hand smoke" argument viz tobacco, is there a similar problem? I have experienced a second-hand high (didn't care for it), but is it likely to injure me as tobacco fumes can? Anybody know the answers here? I concur. For what it’s worth, I consider myself a “John Wayne Republican”. However, as far as I can see, THC is no more problematic than beer or wine, and probably much less so than “harder” drinks. My father died of alcoholism, and despite going to High School in the ’80’s and college in the ’90s, I know of no one who died from smiking marijuana (other than some serious lapses in judgement).

The law already holds driving under the influence of any awareness- altering substance, regardless of its type. Essentially alcohol and other drugs are the same very bad idea when driving.

One question: does smoking marijuana have the same detrimental effects that smoking tobacco does? Given that it apparently isn’t addictive, is intentionaly breathing smoke harmful? If so, who cares? So long as the only person suffering, if you will, from smoking pot is the smoker, then it’s their problem.

Per the “second-hand smoke” argument viz tobacco, is there a similar problem? I have experienced a second-hand high (didn’t care for it), but is it likely to injure me as tobacco fumes can?

Anybody know the answers here?

]]> By: CyberStrike http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-106 CyberStrike Wed, 11 Jan 2006 14:31:54 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-106 Ditto Ditto

]]> By: Blair Anderson http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/01/10/the-truth-about-pot/comment-page-1/#comment-103 Blair Anderson Wed, 11 Jan 2006 01:02:32 +0000 http://blog.modernmechanix.com/?p=76#comment-103 An exemplar document deserving of a wider audience. Staggering that we have not been able to progress beyond the stigmatisation and the appalling prohibitory policy's aversion to cost benefit analysis these past 30 years. An exemplar document deserving of a wider audience. Staggering that we have not been able to progress beyond the stigmatisation and the appalling prohibitory policy’s aversion to cost benefit analysis these past 30 years.

]]>