Raisin
Posted on 08/22/2018 8:15:57 AM PDT by EdnaMode
Ha-ha!
"Big whoop-de-doo! Got anything that can kill me ten years ago when I really started feeling like crap?"
False. I read the article - the term damage occurs nowhere in it.
Unfortunately, your lack of comprehension says mare about you than you probably realize.
I said that the terms damage and aging were interchangeable in the article. That means that if the author had used the term damage instead of aging it would have meant the same thing. When the researches were looking at brain scans... the brains of potheads looked similar to brains of people who were older. This is not a good thing, the brains of potheads have less blood circulating to vital areas of their brains. This can cause a lack of understanding when someone else is making even a very simple observation. I have seen this a lot over the years when responding to medical calls.
Circulatory issues are a known problem associated with heavy pot use in other vital organs and within the circulatory system itself. This is one of the first research projects that I have read about which that noted the association between decreased circulation in the brain and marijuana use. But it has long been noted that that most long term heavy pot users have obvious problems with their circulatory systems such as varicose veins.
The problem is amplified greatly among pot users who are diabetic and morbidly obese. And unfortunately because of their sedentary life style and craving for food while using marijuana... heavy pot users are far more likely to become both diabetic and morbidly obese. This often results in the amputation of toes and even feet.
So your claim is not about the article but about your opinion. Got it.
When the researches were looking at brain scans... the brains of potheads looked similar to brains of people who were older. This is not a good thing
"Not a good thing" does not equate to "damage". What the article actually says is that if I were a pot smoker my brain would be that of a 57-year-old rather than a 54-year-old ... well, big freaking deal - when I'm 57 I'm not going to consider myself "damaged".
You just proved Mariner's point: for T-Bone Texan to point out that marijuana has anti-cancer potential is NOT for him to say it's "good for you" or even "harmless" as you wer trying to claim about him.
most of the time the goal of those who argue for legalization is to confuse the issues.
The irony is priceless.
In a free society, the question is why a consensual adult vice is any business of the authorities.
You took my question out of context. Why?
I have had the same experience and agree with you completely. Marijuana users are typically much easier to get along with. I have many long term friends and family members who are pot smokers. They are for the most part easy to get along with. Unfortunately, at this point in their lives many are starting to have severe health and cognitive problems that I believe are associated with their marijuana use.
Alcoholics can be unpredictable and can be dangerous. When they give up alcohol they are typically even more difficult to get along with for months and sometimes years than when they were drinking. Along with organ failure, many also suffer from severe cognitive issues such as Korsakoff syndrome when they get older.
Both substances are bad for people; and in our society the use of both is encouraged by our media and society. But making marijuana more accessible causes many more problems than it solves. This is an observation made from real world experiences by someone who lives in a place where pot has been legal for years now. And previously it wasn't hard to get, just about any idiot could find a supplier in about 5 minutes. But usage and problems associated have gotten completely out of hand where we live since legalization.
Not at all - just broadening the discussion.
Would making alcohol less accessible cause many fewer problems than it solved?
That is not what the article is saying. The article is saying that pot decreases the circulation to vital areas of your brain enough that it can be be quantized in an MRI scan. And in fact it has a much larger effect on the brain's blood supply than any other external factor that they could find... nearly five times that of alcohol. Making light of this and ignoring this is irresponsible. Your arguments are juvenile to say the least and with this knowledge pushing for legislation to make marijuana more accessible is irresponsible.
Obviously yes! Along with marijuana being legalized here... hard liquor is now sold in just about every grocery store and convenience store. Our local Fred Meyers grocery store has over twice the space relegated to liquor than it does to bread. And don't even get me started on Costco. Shoplifting by underage persons is now rampant. The state regulated liquor stores had much tighter security and did not allow persons under 21 to even enter the premises. We are having much greater problems with underage drinkers and adults who might not have bothered to make a separate stop for hard liquor previously. So yes, yes and yes. Making alcohol more accessible is causing greater problems.
“Making alcohol more accessible is causing greater problems. “
So how about we just make alcohol illegal?
Would that not solve the problem completely?
So let's have state regulated marijuana stores, rather than enriching violent cartels with marijuana prohibition.
That is not what the article is saying.
Yes it is: "Smoking cannabis ages the brain by an average of 2.8 years". And so does the research paper: "A regression model in which brain SPECT regions of interest was used to predict chronological age (CA) was then utilized to derive brain estimated age (BEA). The difference between CA and BEA was calculated to determine increased brain aging" (https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-alzheimers-disease/jad180598)
Correlation does not prove causation; it could well be that pot smokers tend to more often engage in some other unhealthy activity that reduces circulation - or that some pre-existing condition predisposes one to both pot use and reduced circulation.
Prohibition of alcohol was tried 106 years ago on January 16, 1919. In a time before social safety nets alcoholism caused devastating problems in the United States. The idea of prohibitionists was popular enough that it was not just a legislation from Congress and signed into law by the president... it was a constitutional amendment. Unfortunately, organized crime combined with political corruption turned what was meant to end all sorts of horrible problems turned into a spectacular circus.
As you are aware the media and Madison Avenue have been encouraging and aggrandizing alcohol use since prohibition was ended 85 years ago. And the media has now been aggrandizing marijuana use for approximately the past 50 years. People now expect that when they completely screw their lives up through substance abuse that the government will step in to take care of them and their families. So there is no longer any urgency as there was when prohibition was enacted to save women and children who were suffering and dying when their providers were not taking care of them and abusing them.
So no, prohibition of alcohol would not be appropriate at this time. But neither is selling hard liquor in every retail outlet and flooding the airways and internet with movies and television shows and slick ads encouraging its use.
Marijuana usage is way up here. “Legalizing” has basically caused law enforcement to ignore marijuana use altogether. Once people get hooked at legal outlets they start looking for ways to make their new habit more affordable. So the violent cartels are selling more here than ever before because most users prefer to not pay high taxes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.