Great article about successful weed smokers

[PH]

http://coedmagazine.com/2009/02/06/t...h-to-admit-it/


Included in the list ... Barack Obama

oH GOD HE REALLY IS THE OMEGA PRESIDENT!!!!!!!!

[TagMor]

Seriously? Seriously?

Without a doubt.
Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome (Wet Brain) is the most common neurological condition suffered by alcoholics, and is only apparent in extreme cases, where people have been intoxicated for years on end (24/7). Liver damage is comparible to the Lung damage of pot smokers.
For many people, even moderate use of cannabis over a long period of time can cause serious neurological/psychological conditions. As I said, I suspect this is to do with the unnatural processes of modern, commercial weed production. But sadly, this is what the majority of stoners smoke.

[MetalHeadz]

Wrong. No study has ever shown marijuana (more specifically 'THC') to be a causal agent in psychological problems - only an 'accelerator'. Such neurological/psychological issues are only found in heavy smokers who have a cognitive disposition to such complications.

That said, I'm reluctant to grant much to the assertion that great people have smoked weed. It seems this is always the last argument of a desperate cause, '...how could that possibly be the case - [person A] is/does [something b]'. For me that says nothing about it's aggregated social costs or viability at the level of the individual.

Fuck it, you've made me wanna smoke now.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Liver damage is comparible to the Lung damage of pot smokers.

Pot users can ingest cannabis. It doesn't have to be smoked. People who use alcohol have no other alternative.

Look, it doesn't matter. This article isn't saying "look at these abusers," it's saying "look at these people who openly say they like pot." As I've said, abusers of ANY substance (be it pot, alcohol, chocolate, cheese, coffee, Reeses Pieces, etc etc etc) have health and socio-political effects. What the original article is hinting at is that we, as Americans (notably because it centers on mainly US figures), have a misinformed notion of the archetype of someone who smokes pot. It's saying that lots of people do it (NOT ABUSE IT), have no problems, and have the same possibility of becoming someone great.

and they prove that all existing pothead stereotypes are nothing more than myths.

It's certainly NOT saying that pot smokers are somehow better-geared for life or business. At least, that's how I read it.

[Galleleo]

I am just gonna say that I agree with conc, arguing with tagmor is useless anyway.

[Noah]

I am just gonna say that I agree with conc, arguing with tagmor is useless anyway.

Yup, I think everyone can agree on both counts. How the fuck can you be in STONERZ and still have a negative stereotype of stoners anyway?

[Exalt]

i just think it was a good article, and I agree with conc

[TagMor]

This article isn't saying "look at these abusers,"

Well it does actually. In the very first paragraph.

It's saying that lots of people do it (NOT ABUSE IT), have no problems, and have the same possibility of becoming someone great.

Yet in the entire article it doesnt distinguish use from abuse.
All it does is claim the above mentioned stereotypes "couldnt be further from the truth", whilst glorifying people who have tried weed and had successful lives.
This is quite irresponsible as alot of cannabis abusers will read it as "oh I can keep sinking an oz/week, and still have my dream of being President"..

[royCE]

first of all tagmor, your garbage opinion on something you never tried shouldnt be expressed anywhere, so plz stfu.

your side effect of weed is laziness? dude kill your self you god dam idiot. you have no fucking clue about anything concerning weed other then the shit you read on wikipedia and other garbage resources written by more idiots like you.

all of a sudden, you read a canibus article by some doctor and your pretending your e-smart, trying to get some forum cred or some shit. god dam your such a loser dude, its scary.

weed, like anything else is dangerous if u abuse it. ANYTHING in this world, if you have too much of ANYTHING, its certainly bad for you, and its the same case with weed.

however, get a grip on life and stop being a wanker, try the dam thing, smoke it, get high, get in touch with the brain you never knew was functioning, and stop listening to the dumb ass media made up from dumbasses like you

/ end rant

[gran guerrero]

Just to further on one point tagmor brought up

I am saying the negative effects of heavy weed use are alot more apparent than alcohol abuse.

All I got to say is how many people have died from alcohol (in short term and long term), and ask yourself how many people have died from marijuana (short term and long term)? Don't guess (even though someone with a bright mind can make a good assumption), the results are pretty much...well "Off-Balanced"

oh and also if you want to see the effects/damage it causes between the two, check out:
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/conte...ugs/mouse.html

Actually make it two points

Liver damage is comparible to the Lung damage of pot smokers.

First of all, what?

Second, whereas alcohol is pretty much a poison and your liver is your only defense against it, marijuana is not the cause of lung damage, but the carcinogens from using your lighters on the papers (joints)/tobacco leafs (blunts) when you roll your bud. It is nothing compared to smoking ciggarettes (those are very bad for your lungs and smoking from a joint just doesn't compare)
Also bongs were created to reduce those carcinogen effects, cooling it down for your lungs to be able to partake.
Oh and there's this new invention that's been real popular as of late, it's called a vaporizer. It super heats your marijuana, which gives you 99% of the THC, 0% of the carcinogens (solution to the doctor's worries? I think so)

oh and if you want to argue that THC might be bad, then check back to mouse party link I gave ya. There are THC receptors in our brains that produces dopamine and serotonnin, so it's actually good for us to have. The only reason why we don't get the perpetual high like we do from tokin it up, is because it is broken down VERY slowly naturally, weed just speeds the process (so does having sex, riding a roller coaster, winning a high stakes poker game, eating your favorite chocolate desert, get my point?)

[TagMor]

Wow gran, you sound just like me a couple of years ago.

All I got to say is how many people have died from alcohol (in short term and long term), and ask yourself how many people have died from marijuana

Depends on your definition of "death".

but the carcinogens from using your lighters on the papers (joints)/tobacco leafs (blunts) when you roll your bud. It is nothing compared to smoking ciggarettes

True, if marijuana was still grown in dirt. Sadly most of it is grown hydroponically, by people who are only interested in making money.
The chemical fertilisers, growth hormones and "weight gainers" used in this industry contain ALOT of carcinogens. Wouldnt be so bad if the growers bothered to properly "flush" the plants before harvest, however that results in slightly reduced growth of bud, which means less money for these assholes.
Not only are these left-over chemicals carcinogenic, they also have significant effects on the brain. Hence the explosion of cannabis related mental problems that coincided with the rise of hydroponic cannabis.
The industry is completely unregulated and controlled by criminals who dont give a fuck how dangerous their product is. To give a comparison, if you grew hydroponic tomatoes, and pumped them full of the same crap as weed. They would be quite harmful to you aswell.
So.. that is the reason for cannabis induced psychosis, and other neurological illness'.
I also just want to say that as a result of this situation, prohibition is feeding itself. It gives the responsibility of growing cannabis to the criminals, who create a product which is quite distructive, which in turn reinforces the need for prohibition.

Apart from the above mentioned effects of hydroponic cannabis, there is also negative effects from "clean" cannabis. As you mentioned THC plugs into specially designed receptors (btw it isnt just THC, there are 2 or more other psychoactive substances in cannabis). So yes they have their own parking space in our brains, but they also tend to park elsewhere. This can lead to neuron misfire, which causes symptoms such as short-term memory loss, slow cognitive functions, reduced motivation, etc.
Also of note, opiates also have their own receptors in the brain. Do you think it is "good for us" to take Heroin/Morphine everyday?

Lastly, the health benefits of most vaporizers is questionable. Most of them cause you to inhale alot of particles from the bud. Unless you spend $1000+ for one similair to the Volcano.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

This article isn't saying "look at these abusers,"

Well it does actually. In the very first paragraph.

An unemployed porno addict, sitting in his parents’ basement, playing video games, eating Lucky Charms out of the box with one hand while he lazily scratches his balls with the other. A dread-lock having, patchouli oil smelling, tie-die wearing, Phish listening, hula-hoop twirling space cadet. A burger flipping, acne having, socially inept, friendless loser… These are the common stereotypes associated with the term ‘pothead’. In a recent piece we published on pot farms, a debate erupted in the comments section, with some arguing that if you smoke pot, you’ll be poor, gay, and “washing dishes until you’re dead.”

Where in the above does it say "abuse" or "abuser" or even "more than casual user"? Where? Am I missing some subtext? Let's break it down, sentence by sentence, because I'm really lost as to how you got to where you are:

Sentence 1-3: Pot-smoker stereotypes.
Sentence 4: Talking about pot SMOKERS. Not pot ABUSERS, just pot SMOKERS.

Would you agree that there are drinkers, then there are alcoholics? Of course you would--not everyone that drinks does so to excess. To say anything different is, well, retarded.

Yet in the entire article it doesnt distinguish use from abuse.

This is assuming everyone reads it with the biased subtext that you've applied to it. NOWHERE does it say ANYTHING about abuse. Not ONCE. Until you can reconcile the fact that there are people who are able to smoke without going into excess, you're not looking at it logically. You're saying that anyone who smokes the occasional joint is an abuser, which is horribly, horribly simplistic.

This is quite irresponsible as alot of cannabis abusers will read it as "oh I can keep sinking an oz/week, and still have my dream of being President"..

Or, apparently, the other half of teatotalers will read it as "OMG pot smokers ruining everyones lives!" Again, YOU'RE the one assigning the subtext.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Depends on your definition of "death".

Quoted for teh funnee.

[Xog]

Quoted for teh funnee.

needs more shrooms.

[gran guerrero]

Depends on your definition of "death".

What are you, a spin doctor? The fuck do you think I mean? How many reports do you get from people who died from alcohol poisoning, drunk driving, suffocating on their own vomit, liver cancer, and brain damage (btw it's not just the receptors thats getting worn out from alcohol, you are doing serious damage to your frontol lobe and shit.

Now how many reports do you get of people dying from smoking too much weed? None, there isn't a single case where a person was reported for dying to marijuana. And those who died of lung cancer all smoked ciggarretes. So to say lung cancer can happen from just smoking weed alone, is a farce. In fact scientists are arguing that it might even be the link to curing cancer, if only it was legal for them to do some research on it (but that would suck for all those pharmaceutical companies with their synthetic drugs, to think all of em would be worthless because weed is the solution to all our aches, pains and illnesses)

Also

Are you like buying your weed from like the mafia or something? because not everyone is fucking adding toxic crap to their hydroponic plants. The only story I know of where this happened was in Germany, where some dudes were adding Lead to their weed to make the weight seem more, so when they sold and eigth, it was really like a half eigth. But people who bought it got lead poisoning, and there was an investigation and that shit got under control. To also say it's not regulated is kind of bullshit in the sense, that governments do have a control of marijuana especially America with their DEA. They confiscate it and resell it back to the people. It's a lucrative business, weed is the number 1 cash crop here in the united states (if it was legalized, it would surpass alcohol, tobacco, and even oil).

When I was in orlando, the dealers that me and my friends bought from grew their own (hydroponically too), and they were legit (I don't have to prove myself to you, if you were me or my friends you would know)

Not everyone just buys from some random crap stranger or go to the hood and pick up some coke/pcp laced weed from the local crack head.

People that I bought weed from are friends or friends of friends, anyone out of the loop isn't to be trusted because of shitty weed/connection with cops.

I know conspiracies are everywhere, but I didn't know you were so avidly set that all weed suppliers are criminals. Maybe it's just in Aussie land, stop buying from the aboriginees (they want you dead).

oh and I do vape out of a volcano, and my friend bought for 500 bucks, I hear it's cheaper nowadays (granted he bought it a while ago)