DOJ Policy Shift on Medical Marijuana

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Andrew on October 23, 2009 at 3:24pm

and no the NIH is not god enough because they are not an objective research institute and have a vested interest in producing research in support of prohibition, them being a federal agency and marijuana is still illegal and schedule 1 under federal law. Had it been a comprehensive literature review conducted by an objective health research institute or a major research university then it would hold some water. Again your lack of knowledge about accepted scientific process is obvious.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Antonelli on October 23, 2009 at 5:21pm

or more likely I just don't have time to write any lengthy rebuttals. If you refuse to accept my sources which in my mind are quite credible, like the NIH, I can't help you. Smoke yourself into happy bliss but don't be coming to me or health care reform to help you when you become ill. We all know smoking is bad. Dope smokers inhale it deeper and hold it in longer. Bottom line nad you can debate this all you like, but smoking pot does not lead to a healthy life style.

Andrew said:

What? John, not only did your response not make any sense in the context of the conversation but it did not even further your point. The link that was provided sent me to an article that offered a pretty good defense of medical marijuana and simply said that it may lead to addiction and if you notice any symptoms of addiction to seek help. There was nothing in there condemning the use of medical or recreational marijuana and it didn't even offer any scientific evidence that it is addictive. Yes a person can become addicted to anything. The 400 lb guy who eats McDonald's everyday is probably addicted to the high fat, processed, high sodium food there. I can legitimately say I am addicted to coffee does this mean I am a detriment to society? No it means I get a head ache for a few hours if I don't drink coffee then I drink some water and it goes away. The possibility of addiction is not a good reason for prohibition, otherwise the list of illegal substances would be too long to comprehend. You can be addicted to sex, attention, pain, foods, absence of food, sugar, pretty much anything.
"They are getting it from some jack leg grower with what potency level and with what pesticide?" What does that even refer to? Obviously nothing that came from this conversation. Who is They? You can't be referring to me because I told you where I get my marijuana, and there was nothing in the linked to article about any suppliers. Most people "soke it" i assume you meant smoke it but again poor argument because even though that is the most common way to use it, it is not necessary if that individual doesn't want to. So that is a personal choice. What about tobacco which has absolutely no therapeutic uses and is just plain bad for you and extremely addictive. From your previous posts elsewhere I would assume you want to out law that too and throw smokers in jail for their choice to smoke simply because it is bad for them. Your in the wrong country for that my friend. It's obvious that logic does not appeal to you, neither do personal freedoms or science. So unless you can provide actual science to support your view other than "smoking is bad for you" or at least some kind of anecdotal evidence I will consider this conversation over, a win for me and marijuana (both medical and recreational) and consider you stubborn and ignorant. You should do some research. Smoking is bad is a pretty thin veil to hide behind.

John Antonelli said:

Well there we go. It is addictive. They are getting it from some jack leg grower with what potency level and with what pesticide? Most soke it which leads to other problems like oh, lung cancer.

We really don't need another avenue to get high. There are other options for the sick which can guarantee potency and purity. So there you go I am sorry the National Institutes of Health is not good enough for you. It is fgor me.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Andrew on October 23, 2009 at 7:21pm

Well since I just can't resist getting in the last word, thanks for proving my point. I guess I will smoke to that, and don't worry I don't think I would ever consider coming to you for anything other than uninformed opinions.

John Antonelli said:

or more likely I just don't have time to write any lengthy rebuttals. If you refuse to accept my sources which in my mind are quite credible, like the NIH, I can't help you. Smoke yourself into happy bliss but don't be coming to me or health care reform to help you when you become ill. We all know smoking is bad. Dope smokers inhale it deeper and hold it in longer. Bottom line nad you can debate this all you like, but smoking pot does not lead to a healthy life style.

Andrew said:

What? John, not only did your response not make any sense in the context of the conversation but it did not even further your point. The link that was provided sent me to an article that offered a pretty good defense of medical marijuana and simply said that it may lead to addiction and if you notice any symptoms of addiction to seek help. There was nothing in there condemning the use of medical or recreational marijuana and it didn't even offer any scientific evidence that it is addictive. Yes a person can become addicted to anything. The 400 lb guy who eats McDonald's everyday is probably addicted to the high fat, processed, high sodium food there. I can legitimately say I am addicted to coffee does this mean I am a detriment to society? No it means I get a head ache for a few hours if I don't drink coffee then I drink some water and it goes away. The possibility of addiction is not a good reason for prohibition, otherwise the list of illegal substances would be too long to comprehend. You can be addicted to sex, attention, pain, foods, absence of food, sugar, pretty much anything.
"They are getting it from some jack leg grower with what potency level and with what pesticide?" What does that even refer to? Obviously nothing that came from this conversation. Who is They? You can't be referring to me because I told you where I get my marijuana, and there was nothing in the linked to article about any suppliers. Most people "soke it" i assume you meant smoke it but again poor argument because even though that is the most common way to use it, it is not necessary if that individual doesn't want to. So that is a personal choice. What about tobacco which has absolutely no therapeutic uses and is just plain bad for you and extremely addictive. From your previous posts elsewhere I would assume you want to out law that too and throw smokers in jail for their choice to smoke simply because it is bad for them. Your in the wrong country for that my friend. It's obvious that logic does not appeal to you, neither do personal freedoms or science. So unless you can provide actual science to support your view other than "smoking is bad for you" or at least some kind of anecdotal evidence I will consider this conversation over, a win for me and marijuana (both medical and recreational) and consider you stubborn and ignorant. You should do some research. Smoking is bad is a pretty thin veil to hide behind.

John Antonelli said:

Well there we go. It is addictive. They are getting it from some jack leg grower with what potency level and with what pesticide? Most soke it which leads to other problems like oh, lung cancer.

We really don't need another avenue to get high. There are other options for the sick which can guarantee potency and purity. So there you go I am sorry the National Institutes of Health is not good enough for you. It is fgor me.

▶ Reply to This

▶ Reply to This

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page