Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
12 Oct 15
21:36
Joined:
Date Joined:
05 Apr 06
...
Show More
I've never smoked anything in my life ever! too busy playing football as a kid, so know diddly squat about the attraction of weed. what I do know is 2 of my great mates have literally lost their marbles smoking (over many years) the wrong stuff. Would legalisation be helpful, to health or would users still want the heavy duty stuff.
Criminalising people for personal use seems a very expensive, blunt, instrument.
Criminalising people for personal use seems a very expensive, blunt, instrument.
Legalising it would take the profits away from criminals, save the Police £200m per year.
I gave it up 20 years ago....started getting problems with paranoia.
I gave it up 20 years ago....started getting problems with paranoia.
David Fishwick Minibus Sales 12 Oct 15 22:38
dulux would be proud
It is a lot of paint!
dulux would be proud
It is a lot of paint!
They should not let the working class use cannabis, a high percentage are unstable and irrational and can become paranoid and violent.
Legalise cannabis = mental health epidemic which we already have.
The stoners don't have a case.
The stoners don't have a case.
More ignorant hearsay-inspired nonsense.
Do some proper research into the subject.
Google GW Pharmaceuticals, and read.
Do some proper research into the subject.
Google GW Pharmaceuticals, and read.
jed.davidson = typical head in the sand stoner.
Don't suffer from scziciponeria, paranoia or anxiety? Try a joint you can then have one of those mental illnesses for life.
Don't suffer from scziciponeria, paranoia or anxiety? Try a joint you can then have one of those mental illnesses for life.
I also stopped smoking it when i started getting paranoid on it
I found that it helped me to realise that the whole world was against me.
Do you have any empirical - not hearsay - evidence that cannabis causes schizophrenia Hamsterdam?
I'll answer that question for you, no you don't. And do you know why? Because in all the studies that have been done on the subject, and there have been several, no causal link has ever been established.
I don't suppose you took my advice and actually studied any of the data produced by the masses of research done by GW Pharmaceuticals did you? If you had you would have noted that far from causing schizophrenia, certain cannabinoids - I won't bore you with the details since you are obviously a broad-brush kind of guy - actually help to treat that affliction.
You should try to accept that as with any other intoxicant, it does not agree with everybody. I know loads of people, as I'm sure we all do, who shouldn't drink because of the beast within them that is unleashed when they do. For every one of those, there are a hundred more who just have a drink, enjoy their evening, and go to bed without any issues. Same with the weed, I'm not sure how much I trust the figures quoted above, but if there are 2.2m users in the UK and it was as pernicious as you suggest, you wouldn't leave your house in case some random paranoid mentalist attacked you.
Weed does not kill people, it does not - whatever the Daily Mail might tell you - cause schizophrenia, and it is less of a gateway drug than alcohol.
And lastly, people want to get high. You may not like that fact, but it is true and it's never going to change. It would benefit society greatly if people who like to smoke a bit of weed were left alone and resources were diverted into dealing with the problems caused by addiction to narcotics and alcohol.
I'll answer that question for you, no you don't. And do you know why? Because in all the studies that have been done on the subject, and there have been several, no causal link has ever been established.
I don't suppose you took my advice and actually studied any of the data produced by the masses of research done by GW Pharmaceuticals did you? If you had you would have noted that far from causing schizophrenia, certain cannabinoids - I won't bore you with the details since you are obviously a broad-brush kind of guy - actually help to treat that affliction.
You should try to accept that as with any other intoxicant, it does not agree with everybody. I know loads of people, as I'm sure we all do, who shouldn't drink because of the beast within them that is unleashed when they do. For every one of those, there are a hundred more who just have a drink, enjoy their evening, and go to bed without any issues. Same with the weed, I'm not sure how much I trust the figures quoted above, but if there are 2.2m users in the UK and it was as pernicious as you suggest, you wouldn't leave your house in case some random paranoid mentalist attacked you.
Weed does not kill people, it does not - whatever the Daily Mail might tell you - cause schizophrenia, and it is less of a gateway drug than alcohol.
And lastly, people want to get high. You may not like that fact, but it is true and it's never going to change. It would benefit society greatly if people who like to smoke a bit of weed were left alone and resources were diverted into dealing with the problems caused by addiction to narcotics and alcohol.
An excellent post, Jed.
Particularly: "And lastly, people want to get high. You may not like that fact, but it is true and it's never going to change."
It's a fact of life - and it ain't ever going to change.
The sheer unremitting drudgery of life at times makes people seek out 'escapes' away from it.
It has always been so - and will always remain so.
Particularly: "And lastly, people want to get high. You may not like that fact, but it is true and it's never going to change."
It's a fact of life - and it ain't ever going to change.
The sheer unremitting drudgery of life at times makes people seek out 'escapes' away from it.
It has always been so - and will always remain so.
By the way, I don't smoke - but I do like a glass of wine or rum (a recent delight) or several.
If it hadn't have been for my particular 'escape', particularly between the years 1996 - 2010, I'd have been dead from the sheer, unmitigated, horrors of life.
If it hadn't have been for my particular 'escape', particularly between the years 1996 - 2010, I'd have been dead from the sheer, unmitigated, horrors of life.
A bit of background about GW - they started looking into the potential medicinal benefits of cannabis in the early years of the millennium I think. Their first product, from which all their subsequent discoveries stem, was an under-the-tongue spray called Sativex.
One of the first places at which Sativex was trialled was the National Orthopaedic Hospital in Stanmore, where my brother had spent six months after breaking his back in a car crash and worked after regaining some of his fucntions as a computer-trainer for people who had been in the Spinal Injuries Unit and were now forced to seek a new career as a result of their injuries.
The under-the-tongue spray was a bit of a blunt instrument to be fair, the research was in its infancy and the psychoactive properties had not been separated from the medicinal. They were interested in easing pain in chronic bone conditions, the kind of thing which normally affects the elderly, so most of their first guinea-pigs were old people with osteoporosis and similar degenerative conditions and some people with similar injuries to my brother. Obviously, the old people were unused to getting high on skunk, so found that a bit weird, but reported extreme relief of their pain and suffering.
We called the product "The headmist." It was truly sensational stuff, and of course harmless because of the lack of need to smoke it.
I actually own several thousand shares in the firm, bought at the time for peanuts - they were worth £7 in July, but have suffered a bit of a hit in the last couple of months, and trade at about 480p now.
Their products - all cannabinoids - have shown efficacy in the treatment of childhood epilepsy, autism and various other otherwise intractable ailments, and they recently concluded a study into the treatment of schizophrenia which gave very positive indications.
It is a shame that hysteria whipped-up by ignoramuses has denied mankind the benefit of one of God's greatest gifts, but mercifully that attitude appears to be changing, even in previously backward jurisdictions like America. Along with pioneering treatments for addictions to opiates now being trialled in some parts of Europe - Portugal has led the way here, and again was until very recently quite draconian in its approach to drugs - there really does appear to be some hope for the world, if people would just desist from blowing each other the **** up all the time.
One of the first places at which Sativex was trialled was the National Orthopaedic Hospital in Stanmore, where my brother had spent six months after breaking his back in a car crash and worked after regaining some of his fucntions as a computer-trainer for people who had been in the Spinal Injuries Unit and were now forced to seek a new career as a result of their injuries.
The under-the-tongue spray was a bit of a blunt instrument to be fair, the research was in its infancy and the psychoactive properties had not been separated from the medicinal. They were interested in easing pain in chronic bone conditions, the kind of thing which normally affects the elderly, so most of their first guinea-pigs were old people with osteoporosis and similar degenerative conditions and some people with similar injuries to my brother. Obviously, the old people were unused to getting high on skunk, so found that a bit weird, but reported extreme relief of their pain and suffering.
We called the product "The headmist." It was truly sensational stuff, and of course harmless because of the lack of need to smoke it.
I actually own several thousand shares in the firm, bought at the time for peanuts - they were worth £7 in July, but have suffered a bit of a hit in the last couple of months, and trade at about 480p now.
Their products - all cannabinoids - have shown efficacy in the treatment of childhood epilepsy, autism and various other otherwise intractable ailments, and they recently concluded a study into the treatment of schizophrenia which gave very positive indications.
It is a shame that hysteria whipped-up by ignoramuses has denied mankind the benefit of one of God's greatest gifts, but mercifully that attitude appears to be changing, even in previously backward jurisdictions like America. Along with pioneering treatments for addictions to opiates now being trialled in some parts of Europe - Portugal has led the way here, and again was until very recently quite draconian in its approach to drugs - there really does appear to be some hope for the world, if people would just desist from blowing each other the **** up all the time.
How you getting on anyway TT, still regularly harming yourself in improbable domestic incidents?
I started a new job recently and when I was having to fill in my contract details I said "I don' know who to put down as my next of kin as everyone is dead now."
"Well, we just need it in case you don't turn up or something and we don't know where you are" Came the reply.
"Oh, you mean if I electrocute myself or something then?" I enquired.
"Yes"
I saw my neighbour last week and said "Scott, I've put you down as my next of kin in case I run over the lawnmower cable again"!
"Well, we just need it in case you don't turn up or something and we don't know where you are" Came the reply.
"Oh, you mean if I electrocute myself or something then?" I enquired.
"Yes"
I saw my neighbour last week and said "Scott, I've put you down as my next of kin in case I run over the lawnmower cable again"!
a high percentage are unstable and irrational and can become paranoid and violent
I know far too many people that smoke the weed and I can count on one hand the amount that could be considered a 'little' paranoid and/or violent. To say it is a high percentage is far wide of the mark. I don't smoke it anymore but that was down to personal choice; I'd had enough of not remembering little facts.
If I had no other choice I'd rather be with a group of smokers than a group of drinkers any day. If anything, smokers are calmer than their usual everyday selves.
I know far too many people that smoke the weed and I can count on one hand the amount that could be considered a 'little' paranoid and/or violent. To say it is a high percentage is far wide of the mark. I don't smoke it anymore but that was down to personal choice; I'd had enough of not remembering little facts.
If I had no other choice I'd rather be with a group of smokers than a group of drinkers any day. If anything, smokers are calmer than their usual everyday selves.
I loved the solid but the skunk that's about nowadays proved too strong for me so I stopped about 14 yrs ago. I'm glad I did made me very lethargic looking back.
No Aspro, i meant a high percentage of people are unstable and irrational in the normal course and that is why it is so dangerous to add drugs to the equation.
You can do all the studies and trials but the problem is not going to become evident under clinical conditions. It is when it is used under the conditions of everyday life that dangers arise. The simple problem is that there is an epidemic of madness and genetic abnormalities already sweeping the world.
You can do all the studies and trials but the problem is not going to become evident under clinical conditions. It is when it is used under the conditions of everyday life that dangers arise. The simple problem is that there is an epidemic of madness and genetic abnormalities already sweeping the world.
gave up 20 years ago.
most people i knew who smoked at some point always said they needed a break from it because it did their heads in.
seen a few lose the "point of life completely"
most people i knew who smoked at some point always said they needed a break from it because it did their heads in.
seen a few lose the "point of life completely"
Central to all of this is what we consider to be a crime. By and large our classification of something being criminal is when someone does something that causes harm or loss to someone else. It's extremely hard to shoehorn consumption of narcotics into this category, because quite simply the only harm they can potentially cause is to the user. The best we can manage is that by being permissive we may end exposing vulnerable people to harmful substances which may have a negative impact on their life, but we already permit this with other substances and treat these problems as health issues rather than criminal ones.
Regarding mental health concerns, there seems to be a growing body of evidence that would suggest that the selective breeding of hemp to maximise THC levels at the expense of Cannabidiol may, in part, be to blame, with the former having psychotic properties balanced by the latter's anti-psychotic properties. As others have said, Skunk and stronger varities are very different drugs to gentle "cooking" weed and soap.
Moreover, on the only subject he knows anything about and is qualified to talk about, Russell Brand makes the excellent point that a drug's legal status rarely has any bearing on whether people choose to take it or not. Portugal, Washington and California all suggest that a change in legal status has next to no impact on consumption. Massive amounts of money are being channeled into crime along with the cost of policing. It is an absolutely almighty waste of money, and if people really are concerned about the mental health side effects, would it not be better to tax and regulate the product so we can afford to treat associated medical issues.
You know, like **** and booze.
Regarding mental health concerns, there seems to be a growing body of evidence that would suggest that the selective breeding of hemp to maximise THC levels at the expense of Cannabidiol may, in part, be to blame, with the former having psychotic properties balanced by the latter's anti-psychotic properties. As others have said, Skunk and stronger varities are very different drugs to gentle "cooking" weed and soap.
Moreover, on the only subject he knows anything about and is qualified to talk about, Russell Brand makes the excellent point that a drug's legal status rarely has any bearing on whether people choose to take it or not. Portugal, Washington and California all suggest that a change in legal status has next to no impact on consumption. Massive amounts of money are being channeled into crime along with the cost of policing. It is an absolutely almighty waste of money, and if people really are concerned about the mental health side effects, would it not be better to tax and regulate the product so we can afford to treat associated medical issues.
You know, like **** and booze.
if people went to pubs to smoke a spliff there would be a lot less trouble in towns at weekends. alcohol and tobacco are the two biggest killers. what good did prohibition of alcohol do? none.
all drugs should be legal. people only started being killed in large numbers by drugs after the politicians declared a war on drugs. long term clinical studies show that heroin doesnt ruin you, what ruins heroin addicts is the fact thats its illegal means it gets cut up with all sorts of nasty ingredients by the gangsters who sell it. im not talking about selling it outside schools obviously, but if i was in charge registered heroin addicts would get heroin in a controlled environment not the substitute methodon which in some respects is worse. someone on heroin is not dangerous when they have it, its when they are clucking and need to feed their habit they are dangerous. at the start of the 20th century they use to sell opium in harrods or selfridges, i icant remember which.
all drugs should be legal. people only started being killed in large numbers by drugs after the politicians declared a war on drugs. long term clinical studies show that heroin doesnt ruin you, what ruins heroin addicts is the fact thats its illegal means it gets cut up with all sorts of nasty ingredients by the gangsters who sell it. im not talking about selling it outside schools obviously, but if i was in charge registered heroin addicts would get heroin in a controlled environment not the substitute methodon which in some respects is worse. someone on heroin is not dangerous when they have it, its when they are clucking and need to feed their habit they are dangerous. at the start of the 20th century they use to sell opium in harrods or selfridges, i icant remember which.
Methadone is infinitely worse JSM. Have known several people who have OD'd on it.
It used to be common - and would be again - for lots of people to carry on living perfectly productive lives while hooked on opiates.
It used to be common - and would be again - for lots of people to carry on living perfectly productive lives while hooked on opiates.
agreed jd. i, like you, have known the realities of drug use and abuse.
in the late 80s when i first heard an economist call for legalisation i thought it was right wing madness now i realise it is just commonsense. sadly, commonsense isnt vey common and whilst many of the cabinet will have indulged in their youth the chances of them ending the futile and counter productive war on drugs are very low.
its even possible to write classic literature that becomes very popular while on opiates, who would have thought it?
in the late 80s when i first heard an economist call for legalisation i thought it was right wing madness now i realise it is just commonsense. sadly, commonsense isnt vey common and whilst many of the cabinet will have indulged in their youth the chances of them ending the futile and counter productive war on drugs are very low.
its even possible to write classic literature that becomes very popular while on opiates, who would have thought it?
One of my pet subjects is the hidden talents that people are not even aware of having until under the influence of drugs. I had one friend, generally a useless and indolent character, who now earns a very decent living as a caricaturist - a skill he only uncovered the first time he bombed a load of speed.
There are so many applications for drugs which most people would instinctively foreswear - for instance there is a body of research recently concluded that found that the intense self-examination provided by a session on salvia divinorum can be of major benefit for people struggling with various mental afflictions - personally I will never touch that sh*t again, but each to his own I guess.
It's the same old story with drugs as it is with penal reform and all kinds of kneejerk-provoking subjects - accepted wisdom can never be challenged, normally because even broaching them is deemed suicidal for politicians.
Fortunately, it appears that Michael Gove will soon trial some penal reforms which promise to transform the landscape here as they have done in some supposedly unenlightened backwaters of America. He will no doubt suffer the same slings and arrows as when he tried to reform our disastrous education system, but one should wish him Godspeed anyway imo.
There are so many applications for drugs which most people would instinctively foreswear - for instance there is a body of research recently concluded that found that the intense self-examination provided by a session on salvia divinorum can be of major benefit for people struggling with various mental afflictions - personally I will never touch that sh*t again, but each to his own I guess.
It's the same old story with drugs as it is with penal reform and all kinds of kneejerk-provoking subjects - accepted wisdom can never be challenged, normally because even broaching them is deemed suicidal for politicians.
Fortunately, it appears that Michael Gove will soon trial some penal reforms which promise to transform the landscape here as they have done in some supposedly unenlightened backwaters of America. He will no doubt suffer the same slings and arrows as when he tried to reform our disastrous education system, but one should wish him Godspeed anyway imo.
as well as medicinal properties hemp has a whole host of practical applications. still, as you say, kneejerk reactions rule.
There is a rather large field near where I live given over to hemp cultivation, they have a special license for it I think, every now and again they lose a percentage of their crop when someone finds about it and thinks they're going to get a free supply. Hardly any THC content though as you know, surprising how people can be so thick.
imagine their embarassment if they ended up in court for stealing it!
in some of the states in america that have decriminalised production seems to have become a cottage industry.
in some of the states in america that have decriminalised production seems to have become a cottage industry.
Those places have noticed one trend though - now the old bill don't have to worry about chasing potheads, they can devote much more time to shooting unarmed black people
jd, im laughing but shouldnt be. i read overnight that someone dialed 911 for a paramedic because one of their children had cut themselves on some glass. a police officer arrived and fired at their dog which had charged at him. he missedthe dog but shot a four year old child in the leg. he left offering no apology. there was no mention if the child was armed or not!
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539