You should be glad you don't know anyone who does that. (They would be stealing from you to help pay for their habit)
I smoke around 200 cigarettes a week, and I roll my own. 350 isn't so far fetched, as far as the mechanics of it. I have no idea what the effects, would be though, I've never smoked even one.
Tobacco and marijuana are not equivalent. Sure there are smokers who consume 2 packs a day. I have yet to meet any pothead who smokes an equivalent. THC does not affect the brain in the same way as nicotine--sure, potheads can get cranky if they go off their regular schedule, but they do not launch into a version of a nicotine fit.
(They would be stealing from you to help pay for their habit)
Nah. Crack addicts and heroin addicts steal to feed their addictions. Potheads just mooch off their friends until they can afford their own.
Oh, the effects? Generally if you take in too much THC, the body keeps you from doing yourself harm. You'll go to sleep (I'd say "pass out," but that could be confused with blacking out).
They certainly weren't stealing to support their habit; but they were super-stoned pretty much constantly, and useless to themselves.
I think that "keeping you from doing yourself harm" is an oddly biased way to look at things; I don't consider passing out on alcohol to be the body keeping itself from doing itself harm, just a pharmacological effect of the drug.
So it is for marijuana. Yes, it's far more benign than the PowersThatBe would have you believe, but it's still a drug, not some WonderHerb of Benevolence, as others would have you believe.
Blacking out from alcohol and passing out from marijuana are not the same.
it's still a drug
We live in an era of drugs. *shrug* Many things qualify as drugs, yet they are not as reviled in the mainstream culture. (We call those drugs medicine. And we wonder why the establishment doesn't want marijuana classified as such.)
No, we don't wonder, the nasty story is quite clear. But we must still be careful that we don't exchange one set of propoganda for another. Yes, the drug companies' advertising and political lobbying efforts have been successful in encouraging entirely illogical attitudes towards "medicine". But that really doesn't answer the question as to the study of ganja'spharmacological effects, and trying to be logical about those.
This is obviously research to show just how "bad" marijuana is, the same kind that keeps failing miserably at finding any lasting physiological effects.
That's what this research is supposedly showing, that marijuana does indeed have lasting effects. Apparently, up to a month constitutes "lasting."
And now that I think about it, what good would it have done to test the subjects to see if they were abstaining from marijuana? It would show up on tests for several weeks afterward, if they stopped or even if they didn't. I wish I could read the actual study--you learn a lot by going to the source.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
novapsyche![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-10 10:51 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-10 11:03 pm (UTC)and how do they determine a standard size/quality joint anyway for this scientific testing?
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-10 11:16 pm (UTC)I smoke around 200 cigarettes a week, and I roll my own.
350 isn't so far fetched, as far as the mechanics of it.
I have no idea what the effects, would be though, I've never smoked even one.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-10 11:44 pm (UTC)(They would be stealing from you to help pay for their habit)
Nah. Crack addicts and heroin addicts steal to feed their addictions. Potheads just mooch off their friends until they can afford their own.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-10 11:51 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 12:38 am (UTC)They certainly weren't stealing to support their habit; but they were super-stoned pretty much constantly, and useless to themselves.
I think that "keeping you from doing yourself harm" is an oddly biased way to look at things; I don't consider passing out on alcohol to be the body keeping itself from doing itself harm, just a pharmacological effect of the drug.
So it is for marijuana. Yes, it's far more benign than the PowersThatBe would have you believe, but it's still a drug, not some WonderHerb of Benevolence, as others would have you believe.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 01:43 pm (UTC)it's still a drug
We live in an era of drugs. *shrug* Many things qualify as drugs, yet they are not as reviled in the mainstream culture. (We call those drugs medicine. And we wonder why the establishment doesn't want marijuana classified as such.)
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 06:54 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 11:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-10 11:46 pm (UTC)crazy reseach trying to make the plants look bad,
give the government more propaganda and excuses to hassle the peaceniks...
(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 01:14 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 07:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-02-11 08:21 pm (UTC)And now that I think about it, what good would it have done to test the subjects to see if they were abstaining from marijuana? It would show up on tests for several weeks afterward, if they stopped or even if they didn't. I wish I could read the actual study--you learn a lot by going to the source.
I would if i could
Date: 2005-02-12 04:55 pm (UTC)