Music Banter

Go Back   Music Banter > Community Center > The Lounge > Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion
Register Blogging Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Welcome to Music Banter Forum! Make sure to register - it's free and very quick! You have to register before you can post and participate in our discussions with over 70,000 other registered members. After you create your free account, you will be able to customize many options, you will have the full access to over 1,100,000 posts.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2012, 03:34 AM   #571 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
blastingas10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,108
Default

What about the dangers of alcohol, which are also hard to foresee?

Asthma exacerbations may arise as a result from drinking alcohol. Among alcoholic beverages, wine is found to be the most common culprit in triggering asthma. Sulphur dioxide or sulphites is the main preservative in red and white wine. They work by inhibiting the growth of yeast that causes spoilage. However, a number of asthma sufferers reported wheezing and asthma exacerbations after or while drinking wine. This is mainly due to the presence of sulphites and not the alcohol itself. If left untreated, the allergy could lead to anaphylaxis (Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening type of allergic reaction).
blastingas10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 03:40 AM   #572 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
blastingas10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,108
Default

Just thought I'd throw this out here since you like to talk about the dangers of cannabis.

The American Association for Cancer Research has found the marijuana actually works to slow down tumor growth in the lungs, breasts, and brain considerably.


Marijuana is a muscle relaxant and has “antispasmodic” qualities which have proven to be a very effective treatment of seizures. There are actually countless cases of people suffering from seizures that have only been able to function better through the use of marijuana.

Since medicinal marijuana was legalized in California, doctors have reported that they have been able to treat more than 300,000 cases of migraines that conventional medicine couldn’t through marijuana.

Marijuana’s effects on multiple sclerosis patients became better documented when former talk-show host, Montel Williams began to use pot to treat his MS. Marijuana works to stop the neurological effects and muscle spasms that come from the fatal disease.

Despite what you may have heard about marijuana’s effects on the brain, the Scripps Institute, in 2006, proved that the THC found in marijuana works to prevent Alzheimer’s by blocking the deposits in the brain that cause the disease.
blastingas10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 03:46 AM   #573 (permalink)
Juicious Maximus III
 
tore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 5,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10 View Post
What about the dangers of alcohol, which are also hard to foresee?

Asthma exacerbations may arise as a result from drinking alcohol. Among alcoholic beverages, wine is found to be the most common culprit in triggering asthma. Sulphur dioxide or sulphites is the main preservative in red and white wine. They work by inhibiting the growth of yeast that causes spoilage. However, a number of asthma sufferers reported wheezing and asthma exacerbations after or while drinking wine. This is mainly due to the presence of sulphites and not the alcohol itself. If left untreated, the allergy could lead to anaphylaxis (Anaphylaxis is a life-threatening type of allergic reaction).
What's this? Do I see the argument that because one bad is allowed, that automatically justifies the legality of another? I've already argued multiple times why I think the legality of alcohol is not a good basis for decisions on cannabis legality.

I don't want to repeat it yet again, so instead I'll just say my reply to this can be found in previous posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10 View Post
Just thought I'd throw this out here since you like to talk about the dangers of cannabis.

The American Association for Cancer Research has found the marijuana actually works to slow down tumor growth in the lungs, breasts, and brain considerably.


Marijuana is a muscle relaxant and has “antispasmodic” qualities which have proven to be a very effective treatment of seizures. There are actually countless cases of people suffering from seizures that have only been able to function better through the use of marijuana.

Since medicinal marijuana was legalized in California, doctors have reported that they have been able to treat more than 300,000 cases of migraines that conventional medicine couldn’t through marijuana.

Marijuana’s effects on multiple sclerosis patients became better documented when former talk-show host, Montel Williams began to use pot to treat his MS. Marijuana works to stop the neurological effects and muscle spasms that come from the fatal disease.

Despite what you may have heard about marijuana’s effects on the brain, the Scripps Institute, in 2006, proved that the THC found in marijuana works to prevent Alzheimer’s by blocking the deposits in the brain that cause the disease.
I've no problems accepting medical usefulness of cannabis. It's fine that people with multiple sclerosis smoke, I've no problem with that. Chemotherapy also helps cancer patients, but it's not something the general populace should indulge in.

I'm arguing the cons of cannabis because I believe they are real and very few other people in this thread seem at all aware/concerned about them. I believe if you get a chance to help decide with your vote, you should have a clear idea of the pros and the cons when you make your decision and not base your decision on myths and false beliefs and arguments. As I'm not an american and agree that the way smokers have been treated in the US only hurts society, I may be less biased than you think I am.
__________________
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.
tore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 03:52 AM   #574 (permalink)
air quote
 
Engine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: pollen & mold
Posts: 3,050
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tore View Post
I could be wrong, but I don't believe cannabis use in the US and it'c cultural importance is anywhere close to alcohol use and its cultural importance at the time of prohibition. I'm no expert on US history with legality, but I would expect that pre-prohibition, alcohol had much the same role in society that it does today. That it was a pleasure the large majority of adults indulged in which a number of people had made a legal business out of pre-prohibition. It had been accepted and was part of food culture a long time before prohibition. People were used to it.
All true but none of it bears on the importance of cannabis use in the US today. Alcohol was/is more commonly recognized as part of the food culture because early US customs were adopted by European ones (the colonizers' customs). However, pot smoking has been very popular in the US and, I think, in the Western world for quite long time. The disparity between the two drugs' use is primarily because alcohol was more commonly known at an earlier point in human history. However, as soon as cannabis intoxication was discovered by the majority of western societies, it became very popular. At least that is the case in the US. Europe too, I think.

Quote:
I don't believe the same is true for cannabis users. While there certainly are many, it's mostly prevalent in certain social groups and can't be said to be something adults from just about all walks of life do.
I know from experience that this is not true. Alcohol use is more prevalent among society in general but weed-smoking is definitely not constrained to any social groups. Some of all tiers of US society use it.

Quote:
Out of the statistics of how many there are who have smoked, most probably just experimented during their teens. It has no real place in food culture beyond hash brownies, no one have legal cannabis jobs that their family have held through generations and I would think that unlike alcohol which is something many consumed weekly pre-prohibition (my guess), the percentage of the population who today use cannabis weekly is relatively much less.
I don't have the stats on-hand but I think this is wrong. It's not part of the food culture because it's been illegal for so long. But, again, having walked among many various groups of them, I know that a certain percentage of people in every part of US culture smokes pot.
There are people now making a legal living from it's production and distribution. It only takes a few centuries for a drug industry to become deeply ingrained in a culture. Perhaps now is the beginning of that for the pot industry, just like it was at one point for the alcohol industry.

Quote:
Alcohol came into illegality from a long period of social/cultural acceptance. It has a long societal history. Today, cannabis is not coming into illegality from a long period of legality. It is not becoming legal after centuries of use and acceptance on a grand scale. It is not the 1800s and the drugs are different. Hence, there's no reason the two scenarios will play out exactly the same.
They won't play out the same. They're different drugs that appeal to different people. But this would be the case no matter how long one or the other drug was socially acceptable. Again I say alcohol only has a longer history of use. It doesn't have more recognizable appeal because of this, it only has more usage.

Quote:
A few posts made recently in this thread :
None of those posts indicate schizophrenia or appreciable mental damage. People "freak out" a lot over all kinds of experiences but that doesn't necessarily make those people irreparably damaged or impaired.
A lot of sane people have sworn off alcohol because of how it makes them feel or act.

I admit that I didn't read that and I guess I should if I want to credibly oppose your arguments but I repeat: I know that A LOT of people in the US smoke pot and have no resulting mental damage. And I do mean a lot, I've seen it. Many Americans have also seen it. Many casual pot smokers don't even use alcohol. So pot makes a predictable amount of users insane while alcohol makes a predictable amount of people dead from accidents and disease. None of that justifies pot prohibition or alcohol prohibition.

The legalization of both are acceptable risks for US society.
__________________
Like an arrow,
I was only passing through.
Engine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 03:52 AM   #575 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
blastingas10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tore View Post
What's this? Do I see the argument that because one bad is allowed, that automatically justifies the legality of another? I've already argued multiple times why I think the legality of alcohol is not a good basis for decisions on cannabis legality.

I don't want to repeat it yet again, so instead I'll just say my reply to this can be found in previous posts.



.
I say this simply because you are saying some of the dangers of cannabis are hard to foresee. I'm just saying that the same thing can be said for alcohol, wine to be more specific.
blastingas10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 03:54 AM   #576 (permalink)
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,760
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10 View Post
That's a big yes. Our government is spending over 40 billion dollars a year on the war on pot, and today our debt is such a huge problem. It's very ****ing stupid to continue this pointless war that infringes on peoples rights.
Wow, how much money did it cost per year to keep ourselves situated in Iraq (out of curiosity)?
Farfisa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 04:09 AM   #577 (permalink)
Juicious Maximus III
 
tore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 5,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Engine View Post
All true but none of it bears on the importance of cannabis use in the US today. Alcohol was/is more commonly recognized as part of the food culture because early US customs were adopted by European ones (the colonizers' customs). However, pot smoking has been very popular in the US and, I think, in the Western world for quite long time. The disparity between the two drugs' use is primarily because alcohol was more commonly known at an earlier point in human history. However, as soon as cannabis intoxication was discovered by the majority of western societies, it became very popular. At least that is the case in the US. Europe too, I think.



I know from experience that this is not true. Alcohol use is more prevalent among society in general but weed-smoking is definitely not constrained to any social groups. Some of all tiers of US society use it.



I don't have the stats on-hand but I think this is wrong. It's not part of the food culture because it's been illegal for so long. But, again, having walked among many various groups of them, I know that a certain percentage of people in every part of US culture smokes pot.
There are people now making a legal living from it's production and distribution. It only takes a few centuries for a drug industry to become deeply ingrained in a culture. Perhaps now is the beginning of that for the pot industry, just like it was at one point for the alcohol industry.



They won't play out the same. They're different drugs that appeal to different people. But this would be the case no matter how long one or the other drug was socially acceptable. Again I say alcohol only has a longer history of use. It doesn't have more recognizable appeal because of this, it only has more usage.



None of those posts indicate schizophrenia or appreciable mental damage. People "freak out" a lot over all kinds of experiences but that doesn't necessarily make those people irreparably damaged or impaired.
A lot of sane people have sworn off alcohol because of how it makes them feel or act.



I admit that I didn't read that and I guess I should if I want to credibly oppose your arguments but I repeat: I know that A LOT of people in the US smoke pot and have no resulting mental damage. And I do mean a lot, I've seen it. Many Americans have also seen it. Many casual pot smokers don't even use alcohol. So pot makes a predictable amount of users insane while alcohol makes a predictable amount of people dead from accidents and disease. None of that justifies pot prohibition or alcohol prohibition.

The legalization of both are acceptable risks for US society.
Pot makes a predictable amount of people sick when the numbers of people are very large because you can then use it in statistics. You can then say something like 6 in every 100 people who use cannabis will become schizophrenic compared to 1 in 100 who don't use it. Still, that doesn't mean the effect of cannabis is predictable to every user. Getting high is generally pleasurable, but can be a deeply traumatic experience to some. That's not uncommon in psychoactive drugs like LSD and shrooms. The same is not true for alcohol, hence people have to take other things in consideration when looking at the different drugs.

As for the rest of your post, I see little in it that I feel justifies the argument that the same scenario will play/is playing out for cannabis prohibition as it did for alcohol prohibition. Sure, cannabis could become infused in american society to the extent alcohol is in the future, but then those points will be valid in the future - not now. For the record, I don't believe cannabis ever will become as socially embraced as alcohol as long as it's prohibited, so (imo) the difference between long history of legality and sudden illegality versus the cannabis legal situation today is quite significant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10 View Post
I say this simply because you are saying some of the dangers of cannabis are hard to foresee. I'm just saying that the same thing can be said for alcohol, wine to be more specific.
And I'm saying that doesn't matter. How is that a valid pro-legalization argument?
__________________
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.
tore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 04:10 AM   #578 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
blastingas10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farfisa View Post
Wow, how much money did it cost per year to keep ourselves situated in Iraq (out of curiosity)?
Approximately 100 billion each year. Its most likely more than that, though.

Last edited by blastingas10; 02-04-2012 at 04:17 AM.
blastingas10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 04:12 AM   #579 (permalink)
Music Addict
 
blastingas10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,108
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tore View Post
Pot makes a predictable amount of people sick when the numbers of people are very large because you can then use it in statistics. You can then say something like 6 in every 100 people who use cannabis will become schizophrenic compared to 1 in 100 who don't use it. Still, that doesn't mean the effect of cannabis is predictable to every user. Getting high is generally pleasurable, but can be a deeply traumatic experience to some. That's not uncommon in psychoactive drugs like LSD and shrooms. The same is not true for alcohol, hence people have to take other things in consideration when looking at the different drugs.

As for the rest of your post, I see little in it that I feel justifies the argument that the same scenario will play out for cannabis prohibition as it did for alcohol prohibition. Sure, cannabis could become infused in american society to the extent alcohol is in the future, but then those points will be valid in the future - not now. For the record, I don't believe cannabis ever will become as socially embraced as alcohol as long as it's prohibited, so (imo) the difference between long history of legality and sudden illegality versus the Cannabis situation today is quite significant.



And I'm saying that doesn't matter. How is that a valid pro-legalization argument?
How does it not matter? I'm not using it for a legalization argument. So you're saying that the dangers of cannabis are important but the dangers of alcohol are not?


So you are saying that alcohol doesn't play a role in traumatic experiences? The effects of alcohol cause people to do things that create traumatic experiences for others, and in turn can create trauma for themselves (guilt). For example, you're driving drunk and you get in a wreck with another car and you kill someone. That not only causes trauma for the loved ones of the people you killed, it should cause trauma for you, knowing that you've killed another person.

Last edited by blastingas10; 02-04-2012 at 04:26 AM.
blastingas10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2012, 04:23 AM   #580 (permalink)
Juicious Maximus III
 
tore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Scabb Island
Posts: 5,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10 View Post
How does it not matter?
When discussing cannabis legality, it doesn't matter. Alcohol is already embraced by society and even though you could argue that alcohol should be illegal for the same reason cannabis should, that doesn't mean that one would have to accept that illegality for alcohol would be best for society right now. As I mentioned, it's a lot easier to legalize a recreational drug than it is to make it illegal. Making alcohol illegal will put every pub and many breweries, distilleries and wineries out of business and will make a ****load of people very unhappy. Those are negative consequences on society. The continued illegality of cannabis has different consequences than a sudden illegality of alcohol, so why do you feel everyone who argues against legalization of cannabis has to be for illegality of alcohol and all related negative consequences like every pub going out of business?

edit :

Quote:
Originally Posted by blastingas10 View Post
So you are saying that alcohol doesn't play a role in traumatic experiences?
Are you taking this discussion seriously or are you just pulling my leg? Or is it a third alternative?
__________________
In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.
tore is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads



2003-2019 Advameg, Inc.

SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.