[Devious21]

Originally Posted by bmw325i

If you watch the documentary Run from the Cure you will clearly see he cured his own cancer as well as thousands of others using cannabis oil."

I'm talking about science, not a politically motivated documentary. Science is much more dull, much more boring and infinitely more important.

There's documentaries for conspiracy theories for 9/11, Illuminati, etc. Are any of these compelling scientific evidence for you? If the answer is yes, we have a fundamental difference in the understanding of the world around us, how to determine fact from fiction and we are just not going to agree.

Originally Posted by bmw325i

Btw there are many natural cures for cancer. Baking soda, vitamin b17, omega 3 and 6, antioxidants such as cannabis and blueberries, dandelions, and many more.

You and I have a VERY different definition for "cure". Approach any oncologist and say "I heard baking soda is a cure for cancer". Note his reaction.

When you use the word cure like that, you've just given anyone who takes science seriously, a pass to dismiss you. As I said before, if your ultimate goal is to make marijuana legal, you aren't doing yourself favors portraying it in that way.

[bmw325i]

Originally Posted by Devious21

So you've done homework that made you believe that the benefits of being able to hold your breath longer somehow outweighed the fact that there are known carcinogens and tar in marijuana smoke?

You've done your homework but you've "never seen anything saying it can cause cancer"?

You haven't done your homework. I'm not saying you're a stoner. I said if you want to promote marijuana, you aren't doing any favors coming off as a science illiterate stoner, which you are.

I personally don't think Marijuana should be illegal. Or I think alcohol should be illegal (although we've seen how that works out). Either way, we need to be logically consistent. But I don't think marijuana is some miracle cure all or some magic substance with no harmful side effects. That's taking a step into the absurd.

The only study I've seen that showed it had carcinogens was an old study done with Mexican schwag. I'm sure the results would be different with organically grown cannabis compared to low quality stuff grown with a bunch of chemicals and inorganic fertilizers. This is also something we should be worried about with our food supply as well since very little is organic.

[bmw325i]

Originally Posted by Devious21

I'm talking about science, not a politically motivated documentary. Science is much more dull, much more boring and infinitely more important.

There's documentaries for conspiracy theories for 9/11, Illuminati, etc. Are any of these compelling scientific evidence for you? If the answer is yes, we have a fundamental difference in the understanding of the world around us, how to determine fact from fiction and we are just not going to agree.



You and I have a VERY different definition for "cure". Approach any oncologist and say "I heard baking soda is a cure for cancer". Note his reaction.

When you use the word cure like that, you've just given anyone who takes science seriously, a pass to dismiss you. As I said before, if your ultimate goal is to make marijuana legal, you aren't doing yourself favors portraying it in that way.

So real life evidence doesn't count as proof. There have been studies done by many universities that say cannabis cures cancer.I feel like cancer is caused by unnatural products we use daily and nature already has natural medicines for us to use. Science will tell you the rate of health conditions occurring has been rising. Why is that? Where is the evidence that chemotherapy is effective? Nature has a lot to teach us.

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by bmw325i

The only study I've seen that showed it had carcinogens was an old study done with Mexican schwag. I'm sure the results would be different with organically grown cannabis compared to low quality stuff grown with a bunch of chemicals and inorganic fertilizers. This is also something we should be worried about with our food supply as well since very little is organic.

I'm sure I haven't spent anywhere NEAR as much time looking into this as you have. But I thought stuff like this was fairly straight forward.

From http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/canc...-cause-cancer:

Cannabis smoke contains many of the same cancer causing substances (carcinogens) as tobacco - at least 50 of them. In addition, cannabis is often mixed with tobacco when smoked.

List of known carcinogens:
http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/prop65_li...ngle072012.pdf

Break down of the contents of marijuana smoke which lists known carcinogens and summary of various case studies:
http://oehha.ca.gov/prop65/hazard_id...MJsmokeHID.pdf


Ask yourself, why is it important to you that marijuana be portrayed as some wonder-drug-cure-all AND as something with no negative effects? That's not needed. Thou dost protest too much.

In my opinion, attempting to be as objective as possible, I think marijuana should be legal. But I don't share your other views on it, nor do I currently smoke it.

[Lute__]

Good for your health???

I have a feeling only people who smoke think that

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by bmw325i

So real life evidence doesn't count as proof. There have been studies done by many universities that say cannabis cures cancer.

We don't share the same usage for the term "evidence" or "proof". Under your usage, people have "real life evidence" that Psychics have real powers.

So no, I don't accept that "real life evidence" as proof. I don't choose to use the words evidence, proof or cure as loosely as you do.

Originally Posted by bmw325i

I feel like cancer is caused by unnatural products we use daily and nature already has natural medicines for us to use.

Again, what "you feel" is irrelevant. That type of language immediately makes me not want to take you seriously. "Unnatural products" is another one. Look up the naturalistic fallacy.

The bottom line is cancer is caused by those things that cause cancer, regardless of what you feel or any bias you have. Science is the best method we have of making a determination of what those substances are.

Originally Posted by bmw325i

Science will tell you the rate of health conditions occurring has been rising. Why is that?

Which science told you that? There's most likely no real answer to a blanket statement like that. What are you qualifying as "health conditions"? What data did you use to determine they have been rising? Over what period of time? You are just saying "People are getting worse. Why could that be? Probably because Bias X".

If you are referring to a scientific study that certain conditions are rising, then that study probably has some guesses as to why they found what they did. I'm pretty sure it wasn't "nature has a lot to teach us". Science has a lot to teach us.

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by bmw325i

In a way companies that make pharmaceuticals don't want diseases such as cancer to be cured especially not through natural means. They wouldn't make any money off it, and that is what you should be offended by.

If a scientist today were to publish a paper proving a cure for cancer, what do you think would happen? Do you think he would make money off of it? Gain notoriety, money, grants to do any further research he wanted, go down in history as saving millions if not billions of lives?

Are pharmaceutical companies somehow discouraging him from doing that? Maybe they have representatives make visits to every competent scientist who they think are capable of such research and threatening them? A threat great enough to dissuade being rich and immortalized in human history?

These are the kinds of ideas I can ONLY have when I've smoked pot. And even then, they are just "dude.. what if.. blah blah blah", but I fully come back to reality afterwards.

[FogCityM3]

From Mayo Clinic:

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/dru...CTION=symptoms

Most drug addictions start with casual or social use of a drug. For some people, using the drug becomes a habit, and its use becomes more and more frequent. As time passes, you may need larger doses of the drug to get high. Soon you may need the drug just to feel good. As your drug use increases, you may find that it becomes increasingly difficult to go without the drug. Stopping may cause intense cravings and make you feel physically ill (withdrawal symptoms).

Drug addiction symptoms or behaviors include:

Feeling that you have to use the drug regularly — this can be daily or even several times a day
Failing in your attempts to stop using the drug
Making certain that you maintain a supply of the drug
Spending money on the drug, even though you can't afford it
Doing things to obtain the drug that you normally wouldn't do, such as stealing
Feeling that you need the drug to deal with your problems
Driving or doing other risky activities when you're under the influence of the drug
Focusing more and more time and energy on getting and using the drug

Marijuana and hashish
It's possible to develop a psychological addiction to cannabis compounds including tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) found in marijuana and hashish. People who have a marijuana addiction generally use the drug on a daily basis. They don't actually have a chemical dependence on the drug but rather feel the need to regularly use the drug.

Originally Posted by bmw325i

Why can one not use cannabis excessively without being "addicted". Sugar is a drug that many consume in very large amounts and children get "addicted" to it at a young age yet nobody cares about it. How much is too much? That is very subjective but is it even possible to have too much? I mean there has never been any overdoses on cannabis.

[Darth One]

Dude.

[Bx Tpr]

Most dangerous thing about marijuana is that it's illegal/prohibited. Acquiring it can be dangerous and not knowing if the dealer mixed it with something would keep me from ever trying it. I've never had an issue with a person high on pot alone. It's pretty ridiculous how it is still illegal in certain places.

[lastMleft]

"Tetrahydrocannabinol".

[Haywood]

Originally Posted by Bx Tpr

Most dangerous thing about marijuana is that it's illegal/prohibited. Acquiring it can be dangerous and not knowing if the dealer mixed it with something would keep me from ever trying it. I've never had an issue with a person high on pot alone. It's pretty ridiculous how it is still illegal in certain places.

It also takes the criminal element out of it. Look at all the Mexican cartels and how many people they have murdered over pot. Take that away, it there goes many of them. We tried prohibition and look what happen there. Dumbest thing this country has ever done. At least some states are getting smart and legalizing it. That way you get a better quality and I can bet a lot less crime. I still say that smoking it does causes issues because of carcinogens and lung issues. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that as anything that is smoked into your body and tissues will definitely cause problems.

[Bx Tpr]

Originally Posted by Haywood

It also takes the criminal element out of it. Look at all the Mexican cartels and how many people they have murdered over pot. Take that away, it there goes many of them. We tried prohibition and look what happen there. Dumbest thing this country has ever done. At least some states are getting smart and legalizing it. That way you get a better quality and I can bet a lot less crime. I still say that smoking it does causes issues because of carcinogens and lung issues. I'm not sure how anyone can argue that as anything that is smoked into your body and tissues will definitely cause problems.

[bmw325i]

Originally Posted by Devious21

We don't share the same usage for the term "evidence" or "proof". Under your usage, people have "real life evidence" that Psychics have real powers.

So no, I don't accept that "real life evidence" as proof. I don't choose to use the words evidence, proof or cure as loosely as you do.



Again, what "you feel" is irrelevant. That type of language immediately makes me not want to take you seriously. "Unnatural products" is another one. Look up the naturalistic fallacy.

The bottom line is cancer is caused by those things that cause cancer, regardless of what you feel or any bias you have. Science is the best method we have of making a determination of what those substances are.



Which science told you that? There's most likely no real answer to a blanket statement like that. What are you qualifying as "health conditions"? What data did you use to determine they have been rising? Over what period of time? You are just saying "People are getting worse. Why could that be? Probably because Bias X".

If you are referring to a scientific study that certain conditions are rising, then that study probably has some guesses as to why they found what they did. I'm pretty sure it wasn't "nature has a lot to teach us". Science has a lot to teach us.

Here is some more evidence.
http://www.trueactivist.com/20-medic...n-cure-cancer/

http://www.cureyourowncancer.org/dr-...acle-baby.html

http://patients4medicalmarijuana.wor...-cannabis-oil/

http://www.cureyourowncancer.org/testimonials.html

Now show me evidence that chemotherapy or radiation are effective in treating cancer.

Cancer rates have been increasing for years, and the most likely cause is diet. 90% of the stuff you'll find at a grocery store is harmful for you in some way. You can look up other diseases like Alzheimer's or luekemia.
http://www.ourstolenfuture.org/NEWSC...rincidence.htm

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Devious21

You also want to be careful with this wording.

"It has already been proven to be a very effective cure for cancer in large doses."

If it had been proven as an effective cure, we would be out curing cancer. It had been shown to reduce tumor sizes in mice in a lab. That's not the same as having an effective cure. We have an effective cure for malaria. We have an effective cure in the prevention of polio. We cannot prevent or cure most terminal cancer currently.

That logic is irrefutable. I agree with you.

I can only think this thread was created to create discussion for it's own sake. I doubt few would claim that most folks see weed as far less harmful than alcohol and other drugs. The fact that one can buy and use it in its natural form rather than exclusively as a controlled and mass produced pill makes that much clear. I heard just yesterday that in even recreational purchase and use of weed is going to be largely overlooked by the Justice Department. I cannot help but imagine that in the next decade weed will land in about the same spot that alcohol landed after prohibition was ended, and for much the same set of reasons.

All the best.

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by bmw325i

Here is some more evidence.
trueactivist.com/20-medical-studies-that-prove-cannabis-can-cure-cancer/
cureyourowncancer.org/dr-william-courtney-calls-child-a-miracle-baby.html
patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/24-yr-old-rejects-chemo-curing-brain-cancer-with-cannabis-oil/
cureyourowncancer.org/testimonials.html
ourstolenfuture.org/NEWSCIENCE/human/cancer/cancerincidence.htm

You need to check your biases. You are too invested in this to be objective.

[Nkc]

I've been a long time friend of MJ and have switched from smoking to vaporizing for couple years. I wouldn't go as far as saying its healthy but I really don't think it causes any negative health issues. All I know is that too much of anything can be unhealthy or even kill you ie. junk food, aspirin, cola, energy drinks, and even vitamin pills but hey guess what these are all perfectly legal to purchase even by a minor.

After many years of advocating my friend MJ, I have given up. There are too many stubborn people in this world that only cares what the law/government says and never smells the bullshit. Especially the ones that drink alcohol regularly and chain smokes but says MJ is the DEVIL when they haven't even tried it once. As long as a I can still get my stuff at a reasonable price and at a reasonable quality then I'm Mr. Happy.

For those who feel that MJ is an addictive drug, look at a regular cigarette smoker and tell me that's not 100x worse. Sometimes I go months without hittin MJ and say hey, man I've been so busy lately I forgot to light one up, but I've never seen or heard a regular smoker forget to have their regular cigarette. Now that's addiction.

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by Nkc

I've been a long time friend of MJ and have switched from smoking to vaporizing for couple years. I wouldn't go as far as saying its healthy but I really don't think it causes any negative health issues. All I know is that too much of anything can be unhealthy or even kill you ie. junk food, aspirin, cola, energy drinks, and even vitamin pills but hey guess what these are all perfectly legal to purchase even by a minor.

I agree. I'm of the opinion that to a certain extent, people should be allowed to harm themselves. It should be their decision and not the government's. I don't see marijuana as being a bigger harm than say alcohol.

Originally Posted by Nkc

For those who feel that MJ is an addictive drug, look at a regular cigarette smoker and tell me that's not 100x worse. Sometimes I go months without hittin MJ and say hey, man I've been so busy lately I forgot to light one up, but I've never seen or heard a regular smoker forget to have their regular cigarette. Now that's addiction.

You've brought up two points. That cigarettes are more addictive and the fact that you can casually smoke and not be addicted. Neither of these is an argument that people cannot be addicted to Marijuana. They are arguments that there are MORE addictive substances and that not everyone gets addicted.

Other than that, I pretty much agree with what you're saying.

[Nkc]

Originally Posted by Devious21

You've brought up two points. That cigarettes are more addictive and the fact that you can casually smoke and not be addicted. Neither of these is an argument that people cannot be addicted to Marijuana. They are arguments that there are MORE addictive substances and that not everyone gets addicted.

Other than that, I pretty much agree with what you're saying.

You're only agreeing with me because we drive similar cars lol jk.

I'm not saying that's its not addictive and "studies" show that the addiction rate is around 10% which I have no problem agreeing with or supporting. The problem is how we define addiction with MJ and how it compares to other substances that have very uncontrollable physical addiction symptoms. Of my many years of usage (especially in BC) I have yet to meet someone that was addicted to mj and mj alone. If we want to classify all addictions being equal then I would put coffee, McDonald's, or even coca cola in this equation and see what % comes up. I personally am addicted to tea, I MUST and I repeat MUST have a good cup of Chinese tea every morning.

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by Nkc

Of my many years of usage (especially in BC) I have yet to meet someone that was addicted to mj and mj alone.

Well I've had two of my closest friends go through periods when they were addicted. By addicted I mean they went from just smoking on the weekends with friends to smoking by themselves multiple times a day.

Their social circles changed, they had money problems, trouble at work etc. It became hard to hang out with them because every conversation and every activity revolves around it.

They eventually both overcame it. One friend now has a family and no longer smokes. The other still smokes just much MUCH less.

Those are just two of my friends. I know half a dozen people that I went to high school with that just became burn outs and still live like that. Some move on to bigger drugs, some just do nothing all day and spend their lives trying to get high.

Originally Posted by Nkc

If we want to classify all addictions being equal then I would put coffee, McDonald's, or even coca cola in this equation and see what % comes up. I personally am addicted to tea, I MUST and I repeat MUST have a good cup of Chinese tea every morning.

We don't want to classify all addictions as being equal. Caffeine is a stimulant. Marijuana is a hallucinogenic that affects perception. Alcohol is a depressant that affects judgement. There's a reason you can drive on the effects of coffee but you shouldn't on the effects of weed or alcohol.

Someone else had mentioned that they didn't think smoking twice a day was addicted. Ask yourself if someone needed to get drunk twice a day, would we consider them to have a problem.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by Devious21

Ask yourself if someone needed to get drunk twice a day, would we consider them to have a problem.

no thats normal, i can quit anytime i want, i just dont want to! get out of my head.

[Devious21]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

no thats normal, i can quit anytime i want, i just dont want to! get out of my head.