Dubstepforum.com

I like an occasional smoke like most people. But after years of being around people that blaze ALOT, three stereotypes that really seem to ring true.

It really can act as a 'gateway drug'..as cheesy and after school special as that sounds it's absolutely true for some people.

It really does make you forget stuff when you smoke ll day, of course this effect varies from person to person

It really does make some people lazy fucking slobs. I've lived with plenty people and it seems the ones that smoke tons are always more apt to leaving a mess and having less motivation.

apparently last scientific studies prove despite the momentary short memory lapses you may have, weed inhances long term memory and ability to connect things (aka intelligence) and it prevents alzheimer

how many people read actual full unreinterpreted scientific reports made by organisations not funded by the state or by tobacco/alcohol companies ?

See, I view that gateway drug crap as bullshit... if you didn't have to go to the gateway to get weed, there would be no more gateway drug. Likewise, if kids are never lied to like "oh weed will really fuck you up" and then they find out through trial and error that in fact it's generally the opposite, they feel lied to and less inclined to believe the hype about other, harder drugs.

Much in the same way you have those who drink or smoke cigarettes who will tell you flat out what a piece of shit you are for smoking weed and breaking the law, contributing to terrorism, whatever the latest thing is... if there is legal weed, there will be potheads who are saying the same things about whatever other drug, from an elitist standpoint.

Regardless of our positions on weed, we should push for liberty in the area of personal choice.

I think that as a gateway drug it may be true but it definitely depends on the person. If a person is likely to take drugs then they probably will and smoking weed will probably increase their want to do them, however the same can be reversed. people who don't want to do drugs, may smoke a bit of weed socially but that doesn't make them want to take class A's.
depends on the person.

or much like the situation with the reclasification of weed in uk

that crooked official told everybody: "we can't have softer punishments for weed, people will believe is more acceptable than the other drugs"

and as of my knowledge so far, not one brit stood up saying:

"or maybe everybody knows already how acceptable is weed and when you rank it as high as other fucked up chemicals people may think they all are as acceptable as weed"

ok then

I suggest you all watch Horizons: Cannabis - The evil weed? - BBC 2 on the iPlayer.

It's up for a week.

==================================================================

If you cannot watch it - the basics of the programme show that weed is most dangerous in pubescence and will have a severe impact on memory functions in the brain from the age of 10-16 (smoking 2 spliffs a day).
In adults there IS also an impact on memory functions - But, these impacts are less damaging (and from what I gathered, quasi-permanent).

In regards to Psychosis (Schizophrenia) it does not CAUSE the problems. It has an effect on the brain which accelerates and enhances the problems.

As far as being a gateway drug - the results of testing goes to show that cannabis use leads to NEEDING MORE of other drugs to achieve the same high as felt by those without exposure to cannabis. When it comes to the actual addiction, the studies showed that there was no significant difference in how hard it’s worked to obtain the drug.
In simple terms - it means you're not likely to get hooked on other drugs any more with smoking cannabis, just that you’ll need more of it to achieve the same hit.
The experiments go to show that there are other factors at work when someone decides to go from cannabis to cocaine or heroin.

Personal opinion:
It was a cool show. They showed the progress being made to understand fully the research being carried out in order to utilize the THC and CBD drugs found in Mary Jane.

They also showed the obligatory waste man that drilled home the fact that cannabis has a dark side (Come on, it's the Beeb - they glorify nothing,) but lets be honest - if ALL you do is smoke 10 joints a day and drink coffee while watching Jezza Kyle - your life is pretty meaningless, and you need to man the fuck up and gain some perspective.
That guys problem wasn't down to smoking weed, it was down to the fact he does fuck all else - if you exercise some control and smoke socially instead of using it to ponder your worthless existence and cry about past relationships, you'll find it does far less damage to your life in a public capacity - that, I feel underlines a lot of personal issues that are masked by substance abuse in the person - it seemed like he has little motivation to do much else.
If I were to compare it to the Phelps issue - the man is a seasoned athlete - he's trained and perfected his craft, (as well as being genetically gifted - look at his body proportions - he's built to swim like a fish,) he's earned money and he's literally the pinnacle of his profession.

In my humble undergraduate psychologist opinion - if you strip away the drug use, you still have the same issues underneath - one is geared for success - the other, geared for failure. The drugs don't come into the equation.

A much more interesting study would be how would people like the waste man be affected if a mental healthcare professional/ life-coach helped them manipulate their own success... would they still be able to architect some desirable future for themselves WITH cannabis in their lives?

I would say - Ben and Jerry did it, the High Times inventors did it and so on and so forth... It's plausable to be an erb smoker, keep your wits about you and still be successful in life.

so,

if you already suck, don't smoke weed.

if you don't suck, light up your spliffs.

Jazzamataz wrote:I suggest you all watch Horizons: Cannabis - The evil weed? - BBC 2

alien pimp wrote: how many people read actual full unreinterpreted scientific reports made by organisations not funded by the state or by tobacco/alcohol companies ?

forgot to add the pharmaceuticals, top act on the list of anti-drug war supporters

and when the powers that be in uk harden laws against weed you would expect bbc to show them wrong?

ok then

alien pimp wrote:and when the powers that be in uk harden laws against weed you would expect bbc to show them wrong?

ok then

The Beeb is Govt. funded - thats what TV license is.
To be quite honest i think they were as impartial as they're going to be allowed to be. Like i said, they HAVE to show the downside to drugs in a factual program - personally i don't think it was needed - and you never hear of a success story when cannabis is concerned. It would have been nice to show the other side of the arguement.

Also, a point raised earlier in the thread noted that pharm. companies are paid to "find out," and report certain things - they're only ever looking out for their own interests. It's true. When you read reports from drug companies, you should also read some background literature on the companies themselves - find out their standings on issues and who they're funded by - when it comes to corporate science, it's never about what's actually beneficial - it comes down to who's paying for the funding.

The experiments shown in the documentary were developed and carried out at an independant psychiatry institution, and notably - big suprise - all the mass media hysteria over cannabis is widely inaccurate.




P.S. I'm trying to read more of the journals and articles based around the subject as i am actually highly interested in brain development and neuron construction/deconstruction/re-assembly. Drugs play a HUGE role in that particular field.
If anyone has any - send me the links.

Jazzamataz wrote:

alien pimp wrote:and when the powers that be in uk harden laws against weed you would expect bbc to show them wrong?

ok then

The Beeb is Govt. funded - thats what TV license is.
To be quite honest i think they were as impartial as they're going to be allowed to be. Like i said, they HAVE to show the downside to drugs in a factual program - personally i don't think it was needed - and you never hear of a success story when cannabis is concerned. It would have been nice to show the other side of the arguement.

Also, a point raised earlier in the thread noted that pharm. companies are paid to "find out," and report certain things - they're only ever looking out for their own interests. It's true. When you read reports from drug companies, you should also read some background literature on the companies themselves - find out their standings on issues and who they're funded by - when it comes to corporate science, it's never about what's actually beneficial - it comes down to who's paying for the funding.

The experiments shown in the documentary were developed and carried out at an independant psychiatry institution, and notably - big suprise - all the mass media hysteria over cannabis is widely inaccurate.




P.S. I'm trying to read more of the journals and articles based around the subject as i am actually highly interested in brain development and neuron construction/deconstruction/re-assembly. Drugs play a HUGE role in that particular field.
If anyone has any - send me the links.

now i hear a discerning mind, boss

alien pimp wrote: now i hear a discerning mind, boss

Haha. I try.

Pot-heads of the world have to unite somehow. Otherwise the ones charged with keeping law and order are unjustafiably taking away civil liberties, and personal beliefs dictate that if it grows naturally - it should be legal - it should be a civil liberty to have some homegrown.
We have dopamine, cannabanoid, histamine and a whole host of other neurotransmitters and receptors in our brains for a reason - if we didnt have these - those drugs wouldn't affect us. There's a reason this plant effects us - and generally, the effects are pleasant.

Katt williams said it best - you light it on fire and there just happen to be some side effects - hungry, happy, sleepy.

In regard to cannabis - Keep it natural, keep it clean (free of glass and other weight-gain substances,) keep it somewhat moderated and bingo - you'll have a happy world. I honestly believe that.
Legalisation would not only help medicinally - and there are benefits of medicated cannabis - it'd kill off a proportion of the criminal underworld within weeks.
Why would people go to shitty dealers and pay for less weight with cut substance when they could go to a "drug," store and pick up £20 of some bubble(afghan)-kush legit?

What I do have a distaste for is man-made drugs. They're not needed. As fun as they seem - THEY have some really fucked up side-effects and can cause some of the damage that cannabis is charged with.

alien pimp wrote:

D+ wrote:

Diablo wrote:

D+ wrote:weed fucks up your brain

fucked thing is you don't even realise it when you're smoking

Bullshit!!!!!!

Educate yourself or STFU

See how you overreacted.

You don't even know it yourself.

Your abuse of the drug has decimated your ability to control your emotions, this is evident in your inability to articulate yourself in a civil way once you lose your temper. Evidently you are deeply immersed in your addiction, the representation of your own personality on the internet is a homage to the drug. The inane pictures spattered all over your profile lead me to believe that you are infact a slave to the drug. This, coupled with the childish pictures of cartoon characters using banned substances is clear evidence that your mind has been completely ravaged by this foul substance.

And the worst part is that you can't see it yourself and you never will because by the time you reach your mid 40's the extended habit will have taken its toll. You wont remember where your penis is located let alone the reason why you can't recall its location. Then you will die.. red eyed and alone.

for a while i thought you talk about television

i know im a little late here....
yes television is waay worse. two legal drugs (booze and smokes) kill more people than all other drugs. no one in recorded human history has ever died from smoking pot. not. one. person. in ALL of human history.

there are wars, economic downturns, water shortages and human rights abuses (and more) happening all over the planet, but wait THAT OLYMPIC ATHLETE SMOKED WEED!!! PERFORMANCE ENHANC-ER WAIT PERFORMANCE REDUCING DRUGS!

and it seems the sponsors mostly called it a nonissue.

fbom wrote: THAT OLYMPIC ATHLETE SMOKED WEED!!! PERFORMANCE ENHANC-ER WAIT PERFORMANCE REDUCING DRUGS!

and it seems the sponsors mostly called it a nonissue.

Haha...

if i had to eat 12000+ calories a day i'm sure some green would come in handy...
I can't even comprehend that amount of food in a day.


Truesay on all the other issues in the world - there seem to be a truckload more important ones than a sports star taking recreational drugs on his down-time.

the best link i could ever share on this matter seems to be this
Why Condemn Phelps, When We Ought to Condemn the Laws That Brand Him A Criminal

dig around it too

yeah, I like that the sponsors called it a 'non issue'

winners!

alien pimp wrote:apparently last scientific studies prove despite the momentary short memory lapses you may have, weed inhances long term memory and ability to connect things (aka intelligence) and it prevents alzheimers.

Id like to see some of your findings sir, not that i dont believe you however.

Jazzamataz wrote:

alien pimp wrote:and when the powers that be in uk harden laws against weed you would expect bbc to show them wrong?

ok then

The Beeb is Govt. funded - thats what TV license is.
To be quite honest i think they were as impartial as they're going to be allowed to be. Like i said, they HAVE to show the downside to drugs in a factual program

Just to clear up a popular misconception the BBC is NOT government funded. It's funded by a mandatory TV license enforced by the Government, but it's charter was very carefully created to make sure that it never turns into "Government TV". They have a commitment to impartiality, which means they try to show at least some of both sides of the story - not because the Gov't wants them to show "the official line".

The stuff about Dr David Kelly the other year surely proves they're not a government agency?

The BBC are one of the most respected broadcasters in the world thanks to their impartiality (although not perfect by any means, far better than almost all commercial stations)... it amazes me that people think the license fee isn't worth it.... it's very short sighted.

Surface_Tension wrote:
Sorry that my sarcasm cannot break through your firewall.

haha jokes

Ben Freeman wrote:My other buddy, when he smokes turns into the BIGGEST idiot after hitting it up. One time after smoking he was driving and I had to pull him over and drive cause he almost killed us like 3 times running over curbs and shit like that. He didn't even realize it he was so out of it.

That really is just your mate being a dick! Driving on public roads on any sort of psychoactive (including alcohol) is madness!