I never heard so much nonsense as the reaction of dopers and weed users in response to the piece I put up with Peter Hitchens’ condemnation of the general surrender to marijuana in UK and now in the US.
I have a friend who is an expert, who has collected studies on the effects of THC/cannabis/weed and has been influential in the policy making at the highest levels in Texas, second in command for the narcotics division of the Texas Department of Public Safety.
He had worked undercover, overcover, big cover, low cover, street and leadership, knock down doors, deal with Mexican gangs–the whole enchilada, and now he is the Chief Deputy of the Brown County Sheriff’s Office, which is what I do as Medical Officer, the designation for me as the Jail Doc.
So after the first run through on the Maryjuanna discussion and the reactions, we had a conference, because I wanted to get his viewpoint and he pointed out a few things that deserve consideration.
1. There is a big portfolio of research on marijuana that is the result of projects that were undertaken in the 60s and 70s and the studies show that marijuana has bad long term effects on mental capabilities, and normal adult development for those who start early.
2. The physical effects or medical effects of marijuana are certainly as negative as cigarette smoking and there are no beneficial effects in spite of the laudatory efforts of weed proponents.
3. Although no one would argue that alcohol is without its risks for abuse, acute intoxication and chronic alcoholism problems of mental and physical dimensions, there are unique mental and emotional as well as behavioral disorders created by marijuana use that cannot be ignored and present significant risks for individuals and society.
4. There are undeniable impacts on individual behavior with regards to other drugs of abuse that can be linked to the initial use of marijuana, and attitudinal changes in marijuana users that create risks for a life of drug misuse and abuse. The risk is related to the undeniable tendency of marijuana users to think that mind altering drug experiences are a positive thing, not to be considered negative.
As a physician, I can say with certainty that inhaling cigarette or marijuana smoke can irritate airways and if that is the mechanism of chronic pulmonary problems marijuana and cigarette inhaling are similar in effect.
As a physician my experience is that the intended effect of marijuana use is a sedating and elating effect. The coexisting effect of that mind altering effect is a reduction in alertness, functionality and competence in complex activities. The result is that the effect of marijuana is intoxicating, and altering mental capacity that may impact safe control of machines like vehicles. The value of whatever emotional or mental sense of well being or comfort must be measured against those risks.
As for the assertion that cannabis has a positive effect on creativity and artistic performance, it is a well known fact that mind alerting and anxiety blunting substances can improve artistic performance in some individuals, particularly if the performance is not technically demanding. That should not argue persuasively for the general benefits of chronic or even acute use of a mind altering or intoxicating substance like cannabis.
My friend Bobby makes the point that marijuana has the effect of preventing maturation of the individual and a perpetual adolescent attitude and behavior.
That’s my conclusion too, which is why I draw the parallel between marijuana and the Soma of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World dystopia of societal infantilism and dependence.
In that book Huxley shows how a society can become dependent and enjoy the experience because of a mind altering substance—and I do believe marijuana offers that kind of escape for the vulnerable. He is prescient in his assessment of our vulnerability to such things. Look around you.
Marijuana is not medicinal except as a mind altering sedative substance.
weed is known to help creativity flow u just don’t care ha well I think weed slows people down if they overuse it as painkiller rather than opiates but alcohol numbs the spirit more than any plant u cant fool me
So people with no plan to “contribute” to your society belong in prison? My how the tone of this website has changed. I assume that by “deviant” you mean criminal rather than the actual definition “differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society”. I certainly hope you don’t advocate imprisoning people for that.
You may well believe that, on a personal level. I, personally, do not, considering that MJ is not merely benign but beneficial to the vast majority of adult users. Why should I not be able to act in accordance with my well supported opinions on this matter?
The only real negative I would recognise is the tendency for MJ smokers to develop “man boobs” – a fate I have avoided, by a combination of genetic good fortune and exercise – they’re pec’s, goddam it!!
Well they are legal aren’t they? And as I recall, the attempt to ban them was no more successful than the war on drugs, and led to the same sorts of problems.
Those who do not learn from history……
Solve problems? Who said anything about MJ solving your problems. If thats why you are using it (or any other drug, or alcohol) you are bound to be disappointed. The main reason for using MJ is for pleasure. Why should that be a problem?
So the source of a study is of more importance than it’s content? You sound like a warmist disparaging sceptical research because its published in E&E! If the research is sound, it is valid, regardless of where it is published.
Besides, my second link is to Time. Is that not neutral enough for you on this issue?
Not so, I merely point out that Peter Hitchens is happy to deny others a choice he feels competent to make for himself. I have no problem with him drinking alcohol, merely with him telling me I may not indulge in pleasures of my own choosing.
It’s that and more. who represents adult behavior?
my experience is that most people who are in prison or jail are deviants, or people with no plan for how to be a contributing adult.
Non?
how bout fast horses and faster women?
damn that was good.
The last few decades of The War on Drugs has taught us that the money is going to change hands either way. I’d rather the criminal organization be my own government than someone else’s. At least I can vote and write my congressmen and pretend I have a say in the process. For all my anti-government policy rants, I still feel safer walking past a military installation or police office than I do walking through the neighborhoods controlled by the dealers.
Casual lawlessness is a problem with excessive legislation of many stripes. If you’ve so much as driven 5 miles over the speed limit, then you have decided that your personal judgment is better than the law. The more laws there are, and the more personally invasive those laws become the more people will decide that the law is less important than their own personal judgment. Eventually, laws are completely exchanged for a private system of beliefs concerning what is right and wrong for the individual. The executive branch, cognizant of the lack of respect it now suffers, has little choice but to increase enforcement efforts. “Cracking down” is the only viable solution to a citizenry that disrespects the law, and who’s to argue? Complaining must mean you to, are a criminal. “What do you care if the NSA listens to your phone calls, you’re not talking about something you shouldn’t are you?” “Why do you object to searching people on the street? You’re not carrying any contraband are you?” “Why don’t you want a background check to purchase a handgun? Are you planning on murdering someone?”
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/319903-did-you-really-think-we-want-those-laws-observed-said
The progress of excessive legislation leading to disrespect for the law leading to overreach of the law can only truly be broken by removing the excessive legislation. If the argument is that marijuana use leads to real crimes like theft, assault, or murder, than prosecute the marijuana users for breaking the serious laws. We cannot protect ourselves by persecuting criminals in potential. We just distract officers and fill prisons with people who believed it was ok to do something that doesn’t hurt anybody.
SO you subscribe to the Red Ingle philosophy of social order; everything wrong in the world can be blamed on “Cigareets and Whiskey and Wild Wild Women:”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMgldWcXP1A
Basically, using MJ does not solve any of the user’s problems. It simply makes the user forget existing problems and introduces new ones which are difficult to notice due to anosognosia – a condition in which a person who suffers certain disability seems unaware of the existence of his or her disability.
Ad hominem
Legalizing drugs is like legalizing gambling and alcohol. The government is the new criminal organization. When it comes to collecting punitive payments like cigarette taxes, it doesn’t care much more for you than a loan shark that wants his money.
Politically, legalization of marijuana is a trade-off for an illusion of freedom. Don’t trust anyone on the Left or Right. All they want is your vote. To top it off, they can still – and eventually will – regulate and tax it to the point where it is both socially and practically (as in recent Illinois litter laws deeming a cigarette butt on the ground as a felony) as undesirable as smoking a cigarette. But such is the fate of government. It replaces the pusher.
Any thoughts on the duration of THC intoxication? It remains in the bloodstream a lot longer than alcohol and my own experience is that a complete feeling of normalcy takes about a month after intoxication (let’s not call it by it’s euphemism “use”).
I am in favor of legalizing drugs and stopping the carnage of the drug wars. That being said…
Second-hand smoke has resulted in banning cigarettes from many interior locations. I like that as I don’t smoke and don’t want to be forced to, in effect, smoke. Outdoors is a different story.
Hopefully, they will be as diligent about second-hand marijuana smoke indoors. I don’t want myself, my children and grandchildren to be forced to, in effect, take drugs because the “cool” people want to show off their new toy.
Something tells me that this won’t happen and that if I object to someone smoking marijuana around my family, i will be the one to get in trouble.
“Nonsense of dopers and weed users.” What would you expect? They are on two very powerful drugs, the drugs and their own egos. The later being much more powerful.
Ref ‘game set and match for your assertion’: Indeed, and the the word NO in ‘ there are no beneficial effects ‘ probably invalidates the statement by itself…absolute assertions are usually wrong, merely by being absolute…overenthusiasm, perhaps?
I have heard that that MJ can reduce the ill effects of chemo for some;
I am prepared to allow that MJ’s negatives may well outweigh the positives, though.
Peter, I’d hardly call those neutral sources.
My personal opinion is that the crime associated with the drug trade and the general disregard for the law encouraged by casual drug use and its direct effects on people is greater than the negatives associated with legal marijuiana.
I’m not going to go into the stories about the cartels. You know them well. Without the funds from substance trafficking, their incomes will be greatly diminished. Plus, the position that “everyone does it”, with lovely singles of “I’ll never Smoke Weed with Willy Again” (come on, I know you’re a Texan), where there is casual and public acceptance of lawbreaking that goes unpunished. This encourages a general disregard for the law.
In addition, much like prostitution, the drug trade enables other crimes to flourish because people won’t go to the cops. Rob a hot dog vendor, and they cops get called. Rob a drug dealer, and there’s no legal repercussions as neither dealer nor customers will call the police. This directly leads to greatly increased gang violence as “street justice” is the only rule of law.
No, it’s not good for you, but I’m still not getting how it is so much worse than alcohol that one is firmly ingrained in our culture and the other must be stomped out regardless of the consequences to society.
And what’s the difference between banning marijuana because it’s bad for the people that use it and banning large sodas because they’re bad for the people that drink them? How about the idea that there’s no safe dosage of marijuana? Your points 1, 2, and 3 are meaningless unless you also support the prohibition of tobacco, alcohol, and any other vice that has negative consequences. That’s without analyzing the robustness of anti-marijuana studies from the 60’s and 70’s as though they were uniquely free from political slant.
Point 4 is pure correlation confused with causation. If some other drug were the cheapest and most readily available, it would be the first drug of choice for people that are going to choose to take drugs. Marijuana has no unique property that makes its users desire stronger drugs. Rather those that want to completely eliminate reality from their lives quickly become dissatisfied with marijuana precisely because it does not accomplish that goal.
As for the immaturity of long term pot-smokers, mature adults make decisions about their lives based on risk/benefit of their choices. Because marijuana is illegal only immature people continue to take the risk into adulthood. This is an artificially imposed correlation exacerbated by observation bias. You don’t notice intelligent people that use marijuana because they know better than to draw attention to the fact that they occasionally do something illegal.
As for the violent drug dealing gangs mentioned in the article, where would they be without the money, power, and social influence given to them by the black market created by prohibition? When something is illegal but people still want it, they have to pay extra for the risk. The riskier the law enforcement makes it, the more they have to pay. More money means more motivation for violence. If marijuana is a gateway to anything, it is a gateway into a criminal underworld that many would never see if marijuana were legal.
The United States prohibition of alcohol is a prime case study for all of these points. I don’t do drugs, and I don’t advocate anyone else should, but making people do what you think is best for them by force isn’t the answer. It clearly hasn’t solved the problems so far.
Interesting you cite Texas. We have a massive incarceration problem here with many locked up for smoking weed and I am not talking about hard criminals or cartels. Here we have zero tolerance. A seed can and does land you in jail. Personally, I do not want my tax dollars being wasted on this. If someone wants to consume it like others do alcohol, I really dont care. Society would be much better off if we regulated it vs incarcerate over it.
To be fair, for every reason you cite to ban cannabis, the same can be said for alcohol. So using your logic, lets just ban it also.
Peter Hitchens. Christopher is dead.
I had to look up “imbroglio”. A better description of your post would be difficult. Congratulations
Nonsensical. whacko diatribe? Imbroglio
Ok, now I have read something nonsensical. What substance did you have to abuse to come up with that whacko diatribe?
Twice
Reblogged this on Liberalism is Trust Fucked with Prudence. Conservatism is Distrust Tainted with Fear and commented:
Great scoob though! Keep up with the good work. I am Paulite libertarian not liberal hippie. Heres..the deal.
Human brain deterioration begins once alcohol & nicotine hit his bloodstream even if he lives happy for 200 years ever after. Junkscientists daren’t to say it because booze & tobacco revenues are essential to stop anarchy on Planet Earth. Booze & Tobacco revenue lands in the BIG-BROTHER pocket alas ‘The Establishment’[also known as the drug cartel in Latin America]. Unlike Marijuana. Its revenue lands in little pockets that the BIG-BROTHER loathes. Marijuana is one of 365,000 dangerous narcotics that generate $17T per year and lands tax-free in little pockets. It’s painful [four billion Dollars above the total US Economy/GDP]. Allow me to offer Holland metaphor. Marijuana sold in the Netherlands as Booze & Tobacco simply because Holland economy ain’t survive selling flowers. They need cash crop that can grow banknotes even if it kills babies in wombs. Health can wait. The Big Bang question is: who’re you dancing for? Junkscience! ‘The Establishment’ or the little pockets.
Great scoob though! Keep up with the good work. I am Paulite libertarian not liberal hippie. Heres..the deal.
Human brain metaphor begins once alcohol & nicotine hit his bloodstream even if he lives happy for 200 years ever after. Junkscientists daren’t to say it because booze & tobacco revenues are essential to stop anarchy on Planet Earth. Booze & Tobacco revenue lands in the BIG-BROTHER pocket alas ‘The Establishment’[also known as the drug cartel in Latin America]. Unlike Marijuana. Its revenue lands in little pockets that the BIG-BROTHER loathes. Marijuana is one of 365,000 dangerous narcotics that generate $17T per year and lands tax-free in little pockets. It’s painful [four billion Dollars above the total US Economy/GDP]. Allow me to offer Holland metaphor. Marijuana sold in the Netherlands as Booze & Tobacco simply because Holland economy ain’t survive selling flowers. They need cash crop that can grow banknotes even if it kills babies in wombs. Health can wait. The Big Bang question is: who’re you dancing for? Junkscience! ‘The Establishment’ or the little pockets.
You are indeed correct that there is a substantial body of research on the health effects of MJ. For a good sampling, I recommend this:
http://boards.cannabis.com/medicinal-cannabis-health/161539-granny-storm-crows-list.html
You statement that “The physical effects or medical effects of marijuana are certainly as negative as cigarette smoking and there are no beneficial effects” is contradicted by numerous large scale peer reviewed studies, of which i can hardly believe you are unaware. The link form the previous thread provides a recent and very reputable example, so I’ll repeat it here:
http://healthland.time.com/2012/01/10/study-smoking-marijuana-not-linked-with-lung-damage/
Have you any specific criticisms to make of this study, because it does rather seem like game set and match for your assertion, particularly as regards pulmonary disease.
Having both read and contributed to the former thread, I seen nothing nonsensical in any of the comments – as per climate science, disagreeing with any authority does not constitute nonsense.
What does strike me as nonsense is taking Peter Hitchens ideas on this issue seriously. As you point out, the man is a notorious drinker, like his late brother, who would condemn the pleasures of others while insisting on the right to indulge his own vices. The hypocrisy is strong in this one…
Hopefully this “surrender” is more to prohibition than to a particular drug. Western society would laugh at the thought of making alcohol illegal (again), despite the freakish cost of the damage this drug causes. On the other hand, we continue on with this travesty that is the drug prohibition. I could be wrong, given the brain damage I’ve suffered from many years of pot use (ending in 1985), but I suspect the wealth and liberty loss to society in this endless “war on drugs” would be far more beneficial if returned to the people, than all the damage some increased use might bring.