- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Study: Marijuana Tied to Persistent Subclinical Psychotic Symptoms
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:24 pm to Dawgfanman
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:24 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
So Colorado style legalization.
I think they are having some problems that need worked out, but essentially yes.
2
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:26 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
I really wish he had posted this on the OT so more people could witness how stupid this guy is. I think I am going to post about the 300 deaths from marijuana poisoning there so more people can laugh at him.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:27 pm to skrayper
quote:
So, ban everything that has a negative side effect?
This isn't just a "negative side effect" in that it only affects one person. This isn't like smoking cigs where you get lung cancer and only hurt yourself
This is a dangerous drug that makes people have persistently psychopathic thoughts. People smoke this drug and turn into paranoid schizophrenics and the voices could tell them to do a terrorist attack. I bet if you did a drug test you'd find out that Dylan roof and the sandy hook guy had both smoked weed before
Is this something that we can risk being legal?
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:29 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
So Colorado style legalization
Colorado legalized it and then a young previously peaceful kid shoots up a movie theatre (probably under the influence of marijuana)
You can't say the two aren't related
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:30 pm to beerJeep
quote:
80,000 deaths a year to your still unlinked 300 (lol again) deaths from Mary Jane. The mother fricking CDC
First, as I have i has been explained, you have to go to the cdc wonder, agree to their terms, set the parameters, and run a search. I can not link to that because YOU have to agree to the terms and that resets the form.
Now to your link...
quote:
Smoking causes cancer, heart disease, stroke, lung diseases, diabetes, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), which includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis.
Weed is being linked to the same things.
quote:
How the frick are you saying they're comparable?
You are not being honest with the data. In order to compare apples to apples, we would have to wait another 30 years and have a pack a day or more weed smokers.
We will not know the answer to some of what you are using until then.
What we do know is that some of the same things are now being seen because we are now looking.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:31 pm to el Gaucho
One troll is enough gaucho... No matter how hard you try you won't be able to top butterfags "mental gymnastics". Not in this thread at least 
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:31 pm to dawgfan24348
quote:
It's not the DEA's job to know about drugs? Are you truly that stupid?
It's not their job. That's correct. Like it or not.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:31 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
lol damn you sound pretty angry and dare I say, psychotic
Right, the ability to do simple math is crazy... and sorry i don't tolerate bullshite like you, cowboy.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:34 pm to el Gaucho
quote:
This isn't just a "negative side effect" in that it only affects one person. This isn't like smoking cigs where you get lung cancer and only hurt yourself
I was thinking more or less in the realm of alcohol, less tobacco.
Or Ambien. Stuff is scary as frick.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:36 pm to MButterfly
The Drug Enforcement Agency's job is not to know about pot? Dear God
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:36 pm to skrayper
In this day and age only total losers smoke their marijuana anyway. So that shouldn't even really be a part of the discussion.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:37 pm to MButterfly
quote:
First, as I have i has been explained, you have to go to the cdc wonder, agree to their terms, set the parameters, and run a search. I can not link to that because YOU have to agree to the terms and that resets the form.
Simple. Screenshot it. Post to imgur. Post the Screenshot here. Simple work around bub. I've provided you with all my numbers and sources. The least you can do is provide yours.
Also, how can you say
quote:
Weed is being linked to the same things.
But then follow up with
quote:
In order to compare apples to apples, we would have to wait another 30 years and have a pack a day or more weed smokers.
So you admit to talking out of your arse? After all, we need to wait another 30 years and see how a "pack a day of MJ" affects the human body compared to cigarettes?
OK so let's crunch these numbers a bit. Say a Pack of cigarettes has 20 of them at a gram each. The equivalent would be 20 grams of weed "joints" a day.
So to go tit for tat, you'd need to smoke almost an Oz a DAY.
Go ahead. Find one person who smokes 20 grams a day every day.
I'll be waiting.
This post was edited on 4/14/17 at 12:39 pm
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:37 pm to MButterfly
quote:
have yet to find a study that says teen use is healthy. None have disagreed with the brain issues pot causes.
I don't know anyone who believes teen use of pot is healthy and pot will always be illegal to minors.
To be illegal for adults, there oughta be a better reason than health effects since sugar, alcohol, trans fats, and tobacco are known killers.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:38 pm to MButterfly
quote:
Others simply want their high and are willing to over look everything to have it.
I see a lot of this, unfortunately. In some cases, it is simply pot heads wanting permission to get high. In others, it is libertarian types that are responding to the "marijuana is terrible" crowd. These folks are just as absurd as the fear mongering types in my opinion.
There is plenty of solid evidence that THC is harmful and that it is in fact addictive. Are the risk factors less than other substances? Sure they are. I don't understand the need to try and minimize the actual risks to try and prove that point, however.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:43 pm to MButterfly
Can someone please explain why, whether marijuana use is medically harmful, helpful, or neutral, it should be illegal in a free society? You can't point to any health benefits of Mountain Dew, or cheese puffs, or vodka, or cigarettes, or mineral spirits, etc., yet all those are perfectly legal for individual purchase, ownership, and consumption. This whole thread is picking nits over something that shouldn't even matter.
The whole concept of an armed government force raiding a citizen's residence, putting that citizen in a metal cell, and then seizing their assets for simply growing or possessing a plant would have the founders rolling in their graves.
The whole concept of an armed government force raiding a citizen's residence, putting that citizen in a metal cell, and then seizing their assets for simply growing or possessing a plant would have the founders rolling in their graves.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:44 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
You realize they'd have to reschedule it to accomplish this goal right?
We are doing study's now with it. For all of the fight within this thread, only those who want it legalized don't want that.
We need to know more. Why repeat the mistakes of the past?
1- Our healthcare is suffering due to those who were lied to about tobacco. They are addicted now and they know the chances are they will die. We hid that from them. We knew.
2- We will create a whole new problem within healthcare. We will have to expand the welfare state to handle the fallout. And we will not know the full extent until 60 years from now.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:44 pm to biglego
quote:
To be illegal for adults, there oughta be a better reason than health effects since sugar, alcohol, trans fats, and tobacco are known killers.
Check out the studies on the affects of THC on attention and task performance. It should be treated in a similar way as alcohol is. It should be illegal to drive while under the influence of it, and employers should be able to deny users employment and/or fire them. It is a workplace hazard. The problem is testing for it. Unlike alcohol,, there is currently no way to know if someone is currently high or used it 2 weeks ago.
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:47 pm to LSU Patrick
See. I got downvoted for posting facts. My post did not even address the legality of it. I did this in a subsequent post. I simply posted that there is evidence that it is harmful and addictive. I guess that was too threatening to the burnouts and reckless libertarians 
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:48 pm to skrayper
quote:
So, ban everything that has a negative side effect?
LOL, who said that?
Posted on 4/14/17 at 12:50 pm to mouton
Well, since its my field. I like his side way more than yours.
He is at least posting the truth. I personally dont care if you smoke, chew, snort yourself to death.
He is at least posting the truth. I personally dont care if you smoke, chew, snort yourself to death.
Page 15 of 25
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News