StarGateWars Forums

Exactly my point.

ToToRo wrote:I JUST SAID THAT!!!!

BUT

if marijuana is legalized all it would do was bring on more addiction in this world...

the reason everyone wants it legalized is because it is such a minor drug but if it becomes legalized wats next??

I think that one of the reasons people say or think "whats next?" when on the subject of marijuana legalization is because it's clumped together with harder drugs, weather it is being portrayed as a gateway drug or just as bad as some of the harder drugs. If there was more knowledge out there about it then maybe people would see the difference more and there would be no need to worry about "what is next".

Apophis The Great wrote:You seem to forget that marijuana isn't used mostly for this, all those chavs & lazy bums don't smoke it because they have pain problems...but because they are lazy, drugged, doing nothing etc...in other words, junkies.

Well, thats just kind of a generalization and personally I think it's pretty far fetched to claim that all marijuana users are lazy drugged up bums, or as you call them "junkies". While there are those that do fit this description and may project this image of being a bum or being lazy it doesn't mean that all are that way. It's like claiming that anybody that drinks automatically just goes out and beats their family.


@ Lone Dragon,

As far as I've heard from studies, marijuana only "causes" schizophrenia in cases in which the person has a family history. Marijuana however can also help people with multiple sclerosis, can also help prevent certain types of cancer, as well as other uses that are beneficial to ones health.

You already did.

Alex wrote:

ToToRo wrote:I JUST SAID THAT!!!!
@ Lone Dragon,

As far as I've heard from studies, marijuana only "causes" schizophrenia in cases in which the person has a family history. Marijuana however can also help people with multiple sclerosis, can also help prevent certain types of cancer, as well as other uses that are beneficial to ones health.

Actually it doesn't always have a genetic component I am not so sure about multiple sclerosis it may I have not see the studies but I could find out. While "causes" or anticeedance cause and affect are hard to justify in any science there are so many variables but they know one of the most common links to this "illness" is pot and I say that will distaste its not an illness per say in my opinion. This and especially other drugs in combination have cause many people with no family linage.

Alex anytime you wanna know the areas to look, send me a PM I would be glad to steer ya in some good spots to check..

Actually it doesn't always have a genetic component I am not so sure about multiple sclerosis it may I have not see the studies but I could find out. While "causes" or anticeedance cause and affect are hard to justify in any science there are so many variables but they know one of the most common links to this "illness" is pot and I say that will distaste its not an illness per say in my opinion. This and especially other drugs in combination have cause many people with no family linage.

Other drugs in combination is not part of this debate.

Poppler King wrote:

Actually it doesn't always have a genetic component I am not so sure about multiple sclerosis it may I have not see the studies but I could find out. While "causes" or anticeedance cause and affect are hard to justify in any science there are so many variables but they know one of the most common links to this "illness" is pot and I say that will distaste its not an illness per say in my opinion. This and especially other drugs in combination have cause many people with no family linage.

Other drugs in combination is not part of this debate.

that maybe true but the main catalyst is Marijuana...also it is believed to cause other illnesses and also in addition to this did you know it also can contribute to cancer the same as cigarettes... Its less advertised because cigarettes are legal but Marijuana is not..

Could you please direct me to some credible studies that come up with these conclusions, mainly because i think they're absolutely false.

I have just sent you a PM cool will talk if ok..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01729.html

Very interesting article there. It seems we're both right about cancer and marijuana. People will have to read the article to fully understand how but quite interesting and just goes to show how amazing THC is and how little we truly know about it.

Poppler King wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html

Very interesting article there. It seems we're both right about cancer and marijuana. People will have to read the article to fully understand how but quite interesting and just goes to show how amazing THC is and how little we truly know about it.

I cannot get it. It states an error. While articles are good my opinion is that resent articles are better at the forefront of the debate. Best look at psyc articles and bio articles on the matter they are more descriptive and I believe more accurate..

lone dragon wrote:that maybe true but the main catalyst is Marijuana...also it is believed to cause other illnesses and also in addition to this did you know it also can contribute to cancer the same as cigarettes... Its less advertised because cigarettes are legal but Marijuana is not..

So I did some of the research on what you were talking about in regards to people with no genetic predisposition of schizophrenia and you were correct, people with no family history (or at least no recorded family history) can develop early stages of schizophrenia which is believed to be linked to heavy marijuana use. However based on the studies done the numbers project that only around 500 or less of the 3 million + regular smokers will develop any symptoms of the disease. Is it possible to argue that 500 is a lot of people and that it just proves your point? Possibly. However, when you look at other commonly accepted habits that have a risk factor whether it be driving, drinking alcohol, smoking cigs, the percentage of people that die or suffer an illness from those is much larger then that of any schizophrenia caused by marijuana. Which also leads me to question that marijuana is the sole contributer to this. You yourself said that a combination of substances could cause ailments. When you take into account any other experimenting they may have done in terms of drug use. A persons mental stability and health before even trying marijuana may contribute to this as well, suggesting that marijuana is not in itself causing schizophrenia, merely contributing (at most).

Marijuana does not cause lung cancer?

Harvard University researchers have found that, in both laboratory and mouse studies, delta-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) cuts tumor growth in half in common lung cancer while impeding the cancer's ability to spread.

Researchers investigating the role of cannabinoids - chemical substances contained within cannabis – in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (MS), have found they could significantly enhance therapy, not only by reducing nerve damage and erratic nerve impulses, but perhaps even by hindering development of the condition.

These are valid resources?? I see no p-values or t-values especially no great creditable data and seems like a psyc source I am not familiar with try psyc Med data base, oh and in science you will never find more than having a major contributing factor..

Alex
So I did some of the research on what you were talking about in regards to people with no genetic predisposition of schizophrenia and you were correct, people with no family history (or at least no recorded family history) can develop early stages of schizophrenia which is believed to be linked to heavy marijuana use.

proves my point..

But the second part of what you are saying is in sink with the Vulnerability model..

Alex
You yourself said that a combination of substances could cause ailments. When you take into account any other experimenting they may have done in terms of drug use. A persons mental stability and health before even trying marijuana may contribute to this as well, suggesting that marijuana is not in itself causing schizophrenia, merely contributing (at most).

lone dragon wrote:These are valid resources?? I see no p-values or t-values especially no great creditable data and seems like a psyc source I am not familiar with try psyc Med data base, oh and in science you will never find more than having a major contributing factor..

Just because a source disagrees or offers statements or views different from that of your own does not automatically mean that they aren't a credible resource. Not sure as to what you mean by "p-values" and "t-values".

Statistics show that around 2.5 million people in the U.S. have schizophrenia, of that around 500 people "got it from smoking large amounts of marijuana."

This leaves around 2,499,500 people give or take.

This suggests that rather then marijuana being the the "major contributing factor" that instead, it is caused by their sociological surroundings and things that may happen in their life time.

Edit: I googled psych med data base and the number 1 result was a website that was a branch off of webMD, a site that I referenced in my above post.

Alex wrote:

lone dragon wrote:These are valid resources?? I see no p-values or t-values especially no great creditable data and seems like a psyc source I am not familiar with try psyc Med data base, oh and in science you will never find more than having a major contributing factor..

Just because a source disagrees or offers statements or views different from that of your own does not automatically mean that they aren't a credible resource. Not sure as to what you mean by "p-values" and "t-values".

Statistics show that around 2.5 million people in the U.S. have schizophrenia, of that around 500 people "got it from smoking large amounts of marijuana."

This leaves around 2,499,500 people give or take.

This suggests that rather then marijuana being the the "major contributing factor" that instead, it is caused by their sociological surroundings and things that may happen in their life time.

Edit: I googled psych med data base and the number 1 result was a website that was a branch off of webMD, a site that I referenced in my above post.

I am not attacking you only the validity of the source p-values are the validity of the resource there are a lot of bad research done and they try to confound the reader with statistics, as for

Just because a source disagrees or offers statements or views different from that of your own does not automatically mean that they aren't a credible resource. Not sure as to what you mean by "p-values" and "t-values".

the t-test and p-test confirm validity this is why I disagreed with it.
In addition meta analysis's are a good resource.
There is good and bad research out there if there is research out there that contradicts you would be amazed the research that agrees with me. You can always find conflicting data even I can find it, but you will have to make your mind up all I ask is that you research heavily and with out bias, but good luck...

p-value with less than .05 good above bad..
t-test well don't worry about that one..

I say it should be legalized.I would rather see people smoking weed then doing all that other stuff that is horrible bad for you and even smoking cigarettes is worse for you then smoking weed. Its also a herb so its all natural.Im an atheist but for all those believers out there... Scenes its a natural plant god would of have to create it for it to be here.


Thats just a litte of what i think about the topic but im tired and want to go to bed i might elaborate of the subject later.