Do you support marijuana legalization?

https://luxury.rehabs.com/marijuana-rehab/addiction-statistics/
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/resear...icted-to-marijuana-and-the-problem-is-growing
https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/faqs/marijuana-addiction.html

3 more links that all say pretty much the same thing. about 9% become addicted.

Even that 30% you brought up even says that those are people that show signs, not that they are actually addicted to it, but could lead into it with more severe cases (Again just the 9%).

It is 4 times greater, but there have been numerous studies that have have shown it to not be a greater risk at lung cancer or other diseases that cigarettes cause to the lungs.

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2012/01/98519/marijuana-shown-be-less-damaging-lungs-tobacco
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cigarettes-marijuana-tar/
https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/health/ct-cb-smoking-pot-vs-tobacco-20190408-story.html

That still being said, I would rather edibles still be sold than people smoking and still think that it should be legal regardless because the good outweighs the harm in this instance. I won't pull up my own personal anecdotes of how I have seen it do positively in my group of friends and acquaintances because that is not hard science or facts.

You're free to disagree however, and I hope you have a pleasant day.

 

My sources, which I'll list again (see below) have an overview from two different countries top authorities on health matters. They beg to differ with the assumptions from your sources. It's too bad you don't have any real experience with it to put forth your personal knowledge, but I'm not wrong as I'm just trying to educate others. I was involved in the marijuana industry for a very long time and have seen first hand the effects it has on people.

You can be addicted to a substance, but not to the point where you're completely dependent on it. Your link showed that 30% of people get addicted with 9% completely dependent on the drug. I'm not going to debate you about this because your own original link clearly outlines this, but it's also wrong as the percentage of people in the real world who smoke marijuana and become addicted to it is much greater than 30%.

From your link ...

"Recent data suggest that 30% of those who use marijuana may have some degree of marijuana use disorder"

So what's "marijuana use disorder"? (Remember, marijuana is synonyms with cannabis.

"Cannabis use disorder, also known as cannabis addiction or marijuana addiction, is defined in the fifth revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and ICD-10 as the continued use of cannabis despite clinically significant impairment.

Cannabis use disorder is recognized in the fifth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), which also added cannabis withdrawal as a new condition.

In the 2013 revision for the DSM-5, DSM-IV abuse and dependence were combined into cannabis use disorder. The legal problems criterion (from cannabis abuse) has been removed, and the craving criterion was newly added, resulting in a total of 11 criteria. These are: hazardous use, social/interpersonal problems, neglected major roles, withdrawal, tolerance, used larger amounts/longer, repeated attempts to quit/control use, much time spent using, physical/psychological problems related to use, activities given up and craving. For a diagnosis of DSM-5 cannabis use disorder, at least 2 of these criteria need to be present in the last 12-month period. Additionally, three severity levels have been defined: mild (2-3 criteria), moderate (4-5 criteria) and severe (six or more criteria) cannabis use disorder."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_use_disorder

It then goes on to describe the addictions and effects, including withdrawal. I also beg to differ on the addiction part, because I saw first hand how most people who smoke it on a regular basis become psychologically addicted. Luckily, unlike alcohol addiction it won't kill you if you quit or it's not physically addicting like nicotine is either.

Though, you do realize that most people who drink alcohol don't get addicted to it either, right? If your numbers were correct and only 9% get addicted that's still 9% of people whose lives are most likely going to get ruined as that's what addiction does it destroys lives.

Well that's nice, so it's probably just as bad as tobacco. Wait .... isn't there some big thing about tobacco .... So it's just about as dangerous, that's a good thing?

I gain nothing for sharing my experiences and advice as I'm not part of any groups that are distributing the drug or any groups trying to stop it from being distributed. I've just been around the block too many times to know your studies you listed are way off. I don't think it should be legalized for recreational purposes or should be smoked, but only legal for people suffering from illness who have a prescription. I think it should be treated just like any other prescription drug.

https://www.canada.ca/en/health-can...dication/cannabis/health-effects/effects.html

https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health-effects.html

You'll notice their studies have produced much more information related to the harm it does to the brain and lungs and how it effects children and teenagers. It'll take about 45 minutes to read the main articles and the links contained in them. This information is up to date and not the fear mongering crap from the 1960's. This information comes from recent studies from two countries. It would point out that it's legal in Canada to smoke marijuana and legal in many states so that's given scientists the ability to legally study the drug and its effects on the human body. So I'd implore you to spend about an hour to get educated on recent information from these two de-facto health sources.

 

First off, from your very own source from CDC "About 1 in 10 marijuana users will become addicted. For people who begin using before the age of 18, that number rises to 1 in 6."

That is just users actually not the entirety of people in the population which I falsely believed and more with younger people. I will admit I was mistaken and reading the info wrong, so it is possible that 30% of users could show symptoms of the addictions. I will at least thank you for making me see that mistake for myself.

The most I can say here, without sounding cold and heartless because I know it will sound like I don't care when I actually do, is I hope that no one ever actually gets this bad off. I have seen what addictions can do to people and it is fortunate that this is just a fraction of a fraction of the people at whole and there do seem to be good programs world-wide that are built with helping people recover from issues that marijuana/cannabis creates and even advisories that if people experience any of the negative symptoms that they quit immediately and agree that it is a good thing that people can quit cold turkey on it without any of the side-effects that you would see in any other drug/substance.

As for "life experience" I have seen plenty of people that use it just fine with no impairments to their health or cognitive abilities, I know people that run their own dispensary right here in my state as well. While I have seen some people who the effects have effected negatively, I have seen much more positive than negative unlike alcohol and cigarettes where I have seen 0 positive used recreationally.

Also, noted that I know what the negative effects can be for marijuana/cannabis myself as I have an intolerance to it and it affects me personally in a bad way (with some of the symptoms listed in fact, I still think that it should be fully legalized, because not everything is about me or the few that may have issues with it. This isn't saying that I think harder drugs/substances should be legalized however as they have no health benefits whatsoever.

What I meant to say is that the studies I posted found that, yes, while cannabis/marijuana does have more tar in it than cigarettes, those studies show that people have less health issues (not saying none at all just to clarify) in their lungs than with smoking cigarettes and less of a chance to develop cancer, however there is still that risk and I would much rather people didn't smoke it at all just to prevent any possible further health risk.

Finally, I just want to say I am sorry that you took it as me wishing that people's lives would be ruined or have some negative/adverse effects happen to them or that I think it is 100% ok because I am not, but I also believe that sometimes the good does outweigh the bad in this situation and that I have made that clear in my post.

I thank you further for the information that you did provide however as it did give some clarity to things.

 

No way, keepit illegal we dont need stoners in my state than you very much i already deal with potheads when i go get my lunch from subway on my break

 

Sure, why not? As long as you smoke that shit at home, and don't drive while high.

 

In what way are you a victim from them existing in your vicinity?

— Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

That's false. Cannabis indica and sativa can both be found as active ingredients on many old medicine bottles. It is by no means a new thing, and was legal all the way up until 50 years ago.

 

The biggest problem with weed is people that pretend it's 100% harmless. Everything has side effects, even table salt. Marijuana's negative effects on the brain are far more subtle than people doing things like smoking crack, but there's still lots of negatives.

Alcohol makes your brain more dysfunctional and your decision making process concerning things like morality and whatever else will be impaired while on it, but the alcohol quickly leaves the body, so it's not a huge issue for people functioning in society and going to work.

The problem with weed is that it stays in your system practically forever. Even if it only degrades your decision making process and affects things like morality issues 1/8th as much, you're dealing with people who are permanently impaired just by using it once or twice a month (although most people who use it use it practically every day).

There's a difference between de-criminalizing weed and legalizing it. If something keeps people virtually permanently impaired, it's probably not a good idea to stock it on shelves at Wal Mart. Weed would be a good candidate for genetic engineering to remove it's long lasting effect and make it leave the body faster. Staying in your body (it's definitely noticeable) for days or even weeks is absurd.

 

Stoners are nothing but trouble! So keeping it illegal and having it for cancer paitents i support it, but not for annoying little upstarts that think they are black because they listen to rap music and think if they smoke cannabis,weed (etc) they will be black but in reality they make complete idiots of themselves.

 

I do not support the legalization of marijuana, as it represents a hidden potential danger for those citizens who live a healthy lifestyle. I equate myself with such people. Although I take kratom red vein for severe headaches and insomnia, I still consider my lifestyle to be correct. In addition, kratom red vein does not represent anything harmful, but rather it heals and fills me with power. In any case, marijuana can't be safe. So I would like a lot of people to think about this and speak out against marijuana

 

Marijuana is great, but you have to separate the recreational use from the medicinal use. Smoking is bad yes, but there are healthy alternatives that can help a lot of people as a valid medicine. Recreation ally, it's just another thing like alcohol, just do it in moderation and preferably healthier ways like eating

 

Fortunately there was this great experiment called the same period in history that corresponds to modern medicine wherein millions of people, both sexes and of all ethnicities, variously engaged in its use, did not engage in its use, did not use but were around those that did, and those that did also used in various amounts and timeframes, all of which have had some considerable study.
It has also been about 8 years since the first US state legalised things, far longer since many were all "don't blow it in a policeman's face and we don't care", and the 1970s since the Netherlands went in for it, to say nothing of it only becoming illegal not so many decades before.

If negative effects were going to show they surely would have by now, or are so mild or so rare as to be lost in the noise and at that point does it really matter?