Top 10 Cannabis Studies the Government Wished it Had Never Funded

a reply to: ChaoticOrder
a reply to: jrod

Then I've no disagreement with most of that. I stressed how it's a person's lack of responsibility and control that is the potential downside in using cannabis (as so with all addictive substances).

I ceased association with the hardcore stoner crowd to a great extent by 20 and then entirely by 23. The unfortunate souls who forged my view were teens-young adults who partook and became the aforementioned no-life cases, primarily because 1) they lived for it (yes, depression unfortunately can contribute to its overuse) and 2) marijuana has detrimental effects on the brain's development. In adolescent stoners, connectivity in the neural network associated with learning and memory can easily become stunted and IQ is lowered - permanently. Hence I think making MJ legal and easier to access, by offering it to parents of tens of millions of young people (when kids already get their hands on cigs and beer brought into the house like bandits), is a half-baked (pardon the pun) idea. Why wish that fate upon unsuspecting children? In a perfect society, if MJ were legal, only responsible adults would buy it and young people with developing brains would not partake. But you know that's not how our society operates and you know that's not what would happen.

ETA: as much as I want it legalized, I think it would be a grave error to do so without having a system that prevents it from falling into misuse. A system to check for things like:

1) Intended User's age (ensure neural development is complete).
2) User's children's (if any) ages.
3) User's intention (to make sure it's not being sold to minors etc.).
4) User's job (welfare recipients not applicable - you have to actually contribute to society).
5) User's substance addictions (if any, e.g. nicotine).
6) etc. etc.

Then and only then would I condone its legality, not that my opinion matters. The U.S. is too much of a war and big pharma machine to ever make it completely legal anyway as it would put a halt on both those fronts. And they don't need its benefit of making the next generation dumber through children usage - they already have fluoride and other angles of attack working on that aspect.

a reply to: TheLegend

marijuana has detrimental effects on the brain's development. In adolescent stoners, connectivity in the neural network associated with learning and memory can easily become stunted and IQ is lowered - permanently.

Nonsense. The studies I referred to on the first page of this thread contradict those claims. And I personally find those claims insulting because I have been smoking marijuana since I was a young teenager and I like to think I'm quite a smart fellow and a decent programmer. So don't make assumptions about things you don't know.

a reply to: TheLegend

ETA: as much as I want it legalized, I think it would be a grave error to do so without having a system that prevents it from falling into misuse. A system to check for things like:

1) Intended User's age (ensure neural development is complete).
2) User's children's (if any) ages.
3) User's intention (to make sure it's not being sold to minors etc.).
4) User's job (welfare recipients not applicable - you have to actually contribute to society).
5) User's substance addictions (if any, e.g. nicotine).
6) etc. etc.

Why not just a simple ID age check like alcohol? Why does it have to be so excessive when alcohol is clearly worse but doesn't require any of those measures?

originally posted by: Biigs
What about the psychological effects?

Getting high could be slowly ruining your life if they are right about that.


Now i wont put my own opinion in here since thats against the forum rules.

We've been dying since the day we were born - that going to ruin my life for sure. We've also been living and getting high can be fun.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Sorry if that offended you. I read the articles on page 1 a few days ago but neglected to comment since it would take a while. I'll do so now.

The first one in the OP (#9) was from 1997 so I looked for more current data. I read over the 2 studies you referenced in response to Biigs. I read the articles and the abstracts (articles oft tend to be too biased). One regarded working-memory functionality and was quite startling indeed. The study went on to say that marijuana, nicotine, alcohol, and psychotropic drugs all have no change on working-memory, but that, "moreover, baseline network functionality did not predict cannabis use and related problems three years later, warranting longitudinal studies in more chronic or dependent cannabis users." - Which are the type of self-destructive users I am referring to. So I added that one to my favorites to follow up on it.

The second study is more on point - the one regarding young users and cognitive ability. Unfortunately, the article neglected a great deal from the study and warped results. Here were the actual neurocognitive results:

Processing Speed: MJ users completed Letter Cancellation tests faster.
Verbal Fluency: Users had better verbal fluency.

That was it. Marijuana users were better at Letter Cancellation tests (a test where too much focus actually hinders you) and verbal fluency. However, the study explained a surprising explanation for this - alcohol. "However, within the domain of verbal learning (RAVLT), relatively higher levels of self-reported alcohol use in marijuana users were associated with better cognitive functioning. This pattern is consistent with recent reports of more normative patterns of structural brain integrity in marijuana users who use alcohol versus those who do not.".... So this suggests MJ users performed well on this test because alcohol helped maintain "normative" structural brain integrity (i.e. the same as those who do not use mj) when their brain was developing. It also suggests that developing mj users do not have normative brain structures.

As for the other tests, none of it went well for young mj users:
Verbal Learning and Memory: Mj users performed worse on List Learning Trial. Users performed worse on the interference trial list. Following interference, marijuana users demonstrated poorer immediate recall and poorer 30-minute delayed recall. Users had greater loss after consolidation.
Spatial Working Memory: Users had decreased accuracy on the 8000-ms delay condition. Users had significantly longer response latencies after both 500-ms and 8000-ms delays.
Planning: Users produced fewer perfect solutions on the Tower of London task, indicating that they made more moves than necessary to achieve accurate performance. Mj users made significantly more moves to complete three-move problems.
Motivated decision making: Mj users showed poorer performance. Users made more choices from disadvantageous options and less from advantageous ones.

In short, the article from "Leafscience" was about the most biased interpretation of data I've seen in months.
I studied psych for 6 years so of course I'd have to recommend... jn.sfn.org...
and www.psychologytoday.com... for good readings.

The most interesting part in the 2nd study you provided is how alcohol and cannabis seem to neutralize one another during brain development. Did you drink while also smoking? What kind of MJ did you smoke? How frequently and during what ages exactly? At any rate, regardless of studies, I wouldn't get offended by it. It might not be true and if it is then oh well, somethings we didn't know better or had no choice (like being circumcised or drinking fluoride for 20 years). Having different brain pathways may also make you better at more specific tasks, such as programming.

In response to your 2nd post, HAHAH! Give me the power and there would be far more requirements for alcohol. Show me an alcohol thread and I'll drop a deuce in it.

originally posted by: TheLegend
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If you don't care to read about people's personal experiences then you are missing out on a big part of the human story and are on the wrong website.

That's great and all, but anecdotal evidence is still useless during a public discussion, especially when REAL stats are available to get the right figures.

And what agenda am I "trying to further" here? This is the first time I have ever commented on this subject and I actually think it should be legalized. Marijuana in moderation is a great gift from nature with extraordinary benefits and utility. However, as devil's advocate, I also must mention how humans have a tendency of perverting or abusing good things and cannabis is no exception. You may be content with addicted users wasting their life away on a sofa, but plug a loved one into that equation. Imagine someone you once had hopes and dreams with never test their free will, abandon their's and your dreams, never face having challenges to learn and adapt from, never experience life outside of a stupor or outside of their house, and to simply be waiting for their menial labor job to, inevitably, oust them in favor of a machine. Infused with all the capability and potential in the universe upon a great and grand world yet they are enslaved by a weed and ignore all the aspects of being human. Trust me, you don't want that to happen to your child, girlfriend, or anybody meaningful to YOU.

I didn't use the words, "trying to further" once in my post so I'm not sure what you are talking about with that phrase in quotes. I'm not accusing you of an agenda, I was pointing out why your idea is highly flawed.

Well if you have a loved one that you care about who is wasting away on drugs then get him help with an intervention. It shouldn't be the government's responsibility to determine who can be a responsible drug user and who can't. You just create more useless bureaucracy that we don't need, and not to mention will just be side stepped if it is too unwieldy or too strict. I mean look at the VA hospital scandal, they are good example of how your idea will play out. Huge backlogs, and in this case the government officials have every reason to drag their feet since many people still have a sour opinion on drugs and some of those "many people" will be employed at that government office. We'll be sinking tax money into another useless government office. People need to police themselves.

So either you're a hypocrite or you sincerely wouldn't mind being married to a vegetable and having a vegetable child as long as they had a drug-induced "happiness". Maybe my judgement is misplaced, but I find that a sickening thought.

Get them help. You say you love them, yet you want the government to do something instead. That's asinine. Don't rely on the government, they wouldn't get it right anyways. Keep in mind, the government's answer to "helping" these people up until this point is to throw them in jail with violent criminals so they can learn how to be real criminals and ruin the rest of their lives since they have a record. We see how well THAT'S working out.

And if you never met hardcore no-life users and think I'm fabricating it (for w/e reason), then kudos to you. That means you weren't as much of a loser as I was and weren't ever exposed to that side of the coin.

I know hard-core drug users, but I also recognize personal responsibility. Like I said, if they want to waste their life away doing drugs and have the means to do it, its not my business to say otherwise. Like I said not everyone is meant to be successful or better themselves in life. The better question that I should ask is, why are you trying to force YOUR version of happiness on someone? I understand that this makes you upset to see people do this, but like I said, they are happy and content. Isn't that enough? Isn't America about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Not YOUR happiness, but THEIR happiness.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
a reply to: Skywatcher2011

The BBC is not a worthwhile source when it comes to these topics. Being British Ive seen countless hit pieces by the beeb about the evils of pot. We have a pretty backward attitude to drugs in this country. Bizarre considering the damage alcohol and gambling contribute to society, yet are promoted by both government and big business.

Completely agree.

For years the standard mantra of successive UK Governments was that "Cannabis had no theraputic qualities"..which is utter rubbish, since all serious studies and a pleothra of anecdotal, individual experiential evidence was to the complete contrary.

This so-called 'No medicinal value', which is unbelievably still parrotted from MPs now and then, hasn't stopped a major pharmacuitical corporation from designing a pharmacuitical which is derived solely from Cannabis compounds, and gaining a licence to flog it here in the UK...as a medicine.

So the 'No medicinal value in Cannabis' mantra really meant 'No financial value from Cannabis to medicinal corporations' obviously.

In its natural and most beneficial form, Cannabis cannot be patented, it can be grown by anyone who decided to, and is relatively easy to obtain privately...no patents can be granted on a natural plant, which means no massive profits but preventing open public access to medicinal Cannabis by legislation, meant a substantial growth in sales of very often damaging and highly addictive pharmacuitical drugs, like anti-anxiety drugs, sleeping pills, neurological support drugs (neurological degeniterive diseases like Parkinsons, MS etc), anti-depressants (HUGE markets) and a whole range of other very profitable pharmacuitical markets which could be exploited to the max, because the basically free of charge, safe, natural and effective Cannabis medicine was taken right out of the picture.

It's no surprise that during the 60's and 70's pharmacuitical companies were only making a modest living. They were viable and made healthy profits granted, but as soon as the screws were tightened on Cannabis, and policing it became concerted and aggressive, culminating with failed and costly 'war on drugs'..pharmacuitical profits leapt from healthy to astronomical, and the modest pharmacuitical companies became mega-corporations..and many, many thousands of people were sent to prison for wishing to self medicate with a safe and natural medicine, rather than with a synthetic, addictive and damaging pharmacuitical drugs that has killed many and could kill them.

Yeah, we've had a funny attitude to drugs in the UK. As soon as the Government (of any colour) saw how much corporate tax was flowing into the exchequer from sanctioned drug pushers, compared to what they'd get if people used alternatives they were laughing their heads off, but of course the joke was on us.

It has always been about money.

Bloody hypocrites.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TheLegend
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If you don't care to read about people's personal experiences then you are missing out on a big part of the human story and are on the wrong website.

That's great and all, but anecdotal evidence is still useless during a public discussion, especially when REAL stats are available to get the right figures.

And what agenda am I "trying to further" here? This is the first time I have ever commented on this subject and I actually think it should be legalized. Marijuana in moderation is a great gift from nature with extraordinary benefits and utility. However, as devil's advocate, I also must mention how humans have a tendency of perverting or abusing good things and cannabis is no exception. You may be content with addicted users wasting their life away on a sofa, but plug a loved one into that equation. Imagine someone you once had hopes and dreams with never test their free will, abandon their's and your dreams, never face having challenges to learn and adapt from, never experience life outside of a stupor or outside of their house, and to simply be waiting for their menial labor job to, inevitably, oust them in favor of a machine. Infused with all the capability and potential in the universe upon a great and grand world yet they are enslaved by a weed and ignore all the aspects of being human. Trust me, you don't want that to happen to your child, girlfriend, or anybody meaningful to YOU.

I didn't use the words, "trying to further" once in my post so I'm not sure what you are talking about with that phrase in quotes. I'm not accusing you of an agenda, I was pointing out why your idea is highly flawed.

Well if you have a loved one that you care about who is wasting away on drugs then get him help with an intervention. It shouldn't be the government's responsibility to determine who can be a responsible drug user and who can't. You just create more useless bureaucracy that we don't need, and not to mention will just be side stepped if it is too unwieldy or too strict. I mean look at the VA hospital scandal, they are good example of how your idea will play out. Huge backlogs, and in this case the government officials have every reason to drag their feet since many people still have a sour opinion on drugs and some of those "many people" will be employed at that government office. We'll be sinking tax money into another useless government office. People need to police themselves.

So either you're a hypocrite or you sincerely wouldn't mind being married to a vegetable and having a vegetable child as long as they had a drug-induced "happiness". Maybe my judgement is misplaced, but I find that a sickening thought.

Get them help. You say you love them, yet you want the government to do something instead. That's asinine. Don't rely on the government, they wouldn't get it right anyways. Keep in mind, the government's answer to "helping" these people up until this point is to throw them in jail with violent criminals so they can learn how to be real criminals and ruin the rest of their lives since they have a record. We see how well THAT'S working out.

And if you never met hardcore no-life users and think I'm fabricating it (for w/e reason), then kudos to you. That means you weren't as much of a loser as I was and weren't ever exposed to that side of the coin.

I know hard-core drug users, but I also recognize personal responsibility. Like I said, if they want to waste their life away doing drugs and have the means to do it, its not my business to say otherwise. Like I said not everyone is meant to be successful or better themselves in life. The better question that I should ask is, why are you trying to force YOUR version of happiness on someone? I understand that this makes you upset to see people do this, but like I said, they are happy and content. Isn't that enough? Isn't America about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Not YOUR happiness, but THEIR happiness.

Very well said.

:claps:

a reply to: Krazysh0t

1) For a breakdown of figures, as opposed to personal experience, read my last post above.

2) You did say "Making up statistics on the spot does nothing to further your cause." In your previous response.

3) What is there to "get help with"? You said you had no problem with people wasting their life away and getting high - yet you advise to get them "help" if it was someone meaningful. And offering help yourself and not professional therapists or rehab? Let's be realistic. If the average person could handle all aspects of life themselves (certainly not a hardcore addict) then there would be no government agencies (pro-anarchy or do you only ignore agencies when they're inconvenient?). What you're actually implying is to have taxpayers foot that bill at rehab centers for said vegetable loved one. In other words, the philosophy is everything is fine as long as it doesn't affect you personally in a negative way and someone else pays for it when it does.

4) Indeed, things never will be perfect, and that is why making mj universally legal without regulation is not as great an idea as you think, as reasons thoroughly addressed in my last posts. Make it legal without regulation and you're essentially changing the neural development of millions of children every generation (read my last 2 posts for more on that). That is the primary reason it's illegal across virtually every nation on the planet with growing exceptions for medical use (this way only the benefits are offered). Most professionals don't take studies warped and told by "leafscience" as an accurate picture. They regard the 2 links in my above post or the raw metadata of studies instead of their interpretations.

But legalization with regulation will be the inevitable conclusion anyway, along with all the issues and benefits attached. So idk why I'm even entertaining this discussion. So for my future rebuttals to any colorful rogues:
i1207.photobucket.com...
Peace out, crackers.

a reply to: TheLegend

Did you drink while also smoking?

Not very often.

What kind of MJ did you smoke?

What ever I could find.

How frequently and during what ages exactly?

From about 15 or 16 I have smoked it nearly every single day, all day.

You know what the difference between me any many other stoners is? I have an intense interest in technical and scientific subjects, I do a lot of research and spend a lot of time solving technical problems. I get bored if I'm not doing something which requires thinking and brain power. I keep my brain exercised and even in my free time I come on ATS and write threads such as these:

Existential Musings - Part 1: Determinism & Free Will
Modeling a Conscious Artificial Brain
Negative Energy & Negative Space - A New Theoretical Model
Quantized Space & Time
ATS 5.3 Tweaks (greasemonkey script)
Understanding Tesla's Inventions
True Money: Part I and Part II
Layman's Guide To Understanding Modern Cosmology (dark energy, dark matter, higgs field etc)

And that's only a small selection of threads I've made since 2013. Then there's also the novels I'm working on, such as Interconnection, Dark Contingent, and Cosmic Void. You say my brain is just wired better for programming, but so far I have demonstrated to you a fluency in cosmology, philosophy, economics, electronics, artificial intelligence, programming, and even creative writing. Everything you thought you knew about marijuana is proven wrong just by my existence.

originally posted by: TheLegend
a reply to: Krazysh0t

1) For a breakdown of figures, as opposed to personal experience, read my last post above.

So you've shown that marijuana isn't good for children, just like every other drug. What is your point? We have an age minimum for alcohol, we can have an age minimum for pot too. I'm not sure why you proving that it is bad for children is good reason to inhibit adults from using it. But also, here's an idea, how about parents actually BE parents and do some goddamn parenting over their children instead of leaving it up to the government telling them they can't have it? Why is the answer always, "Let's make the government responsible for this"? Where did personal responsibility go?

2) You did say "Making up statistics on the spot does nothing to further your cause." In your previous response.

I guess I did, must have missed it when I reskimmed the post. It's still true, don't make up statistics.

3) What is there to "get help with"? You said you had no problem with people wasting their life away and getting high - yet you advise to get them "help" if it was someone meaningful. And offering help yourself and not professional therapists or rehab? Let's be realistic. If the average person could handle all aspects of life themselves (certainly not a hardcore addict) then there would be no government agencies (pro-anarchy or do you only ignore agencies when they're inconvenient?). What you're actually implying is to have taxpayers foot that bill at rehab centers for said vegetable loved one. In other words, the philosophy is everything is fine as long as it doesn't affect you personally in a negative way and someone else pays for it when it does.

Wait, where did I say that the government has to pay for rehab centers or oversee them? All I said is that if you have someone who is an addict that you love and it hurts you deeply, seek out help for them. It isn't the government's responsibility to interdict into this process. That is between you and the loved one, so YOU need to seek out the help with YOUR money if you want to help them.

But even if the government WAS paying for rehab centers, it would be FAR cheaper than the war on drugs as well as your bureaucratic nightmare of an idea, and at least the intentions of these buildings would be to help people instead of inhibit them.

4) Indeed, things never will be perfect, and that is why making mj universally legal without regulation is not as great an idea as you think, as reasons thoroughly addressed in my last posts. Make it legal without regulation and you're essentially changing the neural development of millions of children every generation (read my last 2 posts for more on that). That is the primary reason it's illegal across virtually every nation on the planet with growing exceptions for medical use (this way only the benefits are offered). Most professionals don't take studies warped and told by "leafscience" as an accurate picture. They regard the 2 links in my above post or the raw metadata of studies instead of their interpretations.

First off, don't move the goal posts. YOUR idea was to have thorough background checks for any would be users to determine if they can be responsible users or not. You said nothing about just general regulation like QC tests, age minimums, or anything of the sort. You jumped STRAIGHT to bureaucracy and background checks. I never said that we can't regulate the plant. Regulation for marijuana, just like alcohol should be done. We need quality control so harmful pesticides aren't used, we need to make sure people aren't driving around while high, we need to make sure that things are on the up and up. Legalization opens that door.

That isn't the primary reason marijuana is illegal worldwide. Now you are just making stuff up. You post a study done LAST year then say that it is why it is illegal worldwide. The "what about the children?" defense is terrible and needs to go. Marijuana is illegal worldwide because of the United States pressuring other countries to sign treaties banning it and other drugs with the threat of not providing support for them if they don't sign it. Marijuana is illegal stateside because of this: Why is Marijuana Illegal?

You’ll also see that the history of marijuana’s criminalization is filled with:

Racism
Fear
Protection of Corporate Profits
Yellow Journalism
Ignorant, Incompetent, and/or Corrupt Legislators
Personal Career Advancement and Greed

Please study history and don't parrot known lies about the drug, as well as other drugs. They didn't just lie about and demonize marijuana unjustly even the hardcore ones have gotten somewhat of a bad rap. Not to say they aren't bad for you, but they certainly aren't as bad as the establishment claims.

But legalization with regulation will be the inevitable conclusion anyway, along with all the issues and benefits attached. So idk why I'm even entertaining this discussion. So for my future rebuttals to any colorful rogues:
i1207.photobucket.com...
Peace out, crackers.

Yes legalization with regulation WILL happen, but not your crazy idea.

Also the term cracker is racist.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Considering that Alcohol and Tobacco are both legal, and they both kill hundreds of thousands of people every year, it behooves one to try to understand the logic behind making weed illegal. If we made either one illegal and made pot legal, thousands of lives would be saved. I am not condoning abuse of any drug, but it would be nice to be able to enjoy a joint in the privacy of ones own home. The world gets more horrific every day, and we need things to make it BEARABLE. Not to mention the minute you legalize it you put a large swath of organized crime out of business. Control it the same way you control alcohol, make it illegal to minors, make driving under the influence a crime, and it won't have any worse impact than booze.

originally posted by: KnightLight


CAN make you lazy. In general yes it does. A more experienced person can use the the same plant in the opposite way and work out much harder than before, or destroy the dish pit. Any job that requires lots of repeated actions that are boring can be improved with cannabis. I know for me that when time slows down (cannabis) that I can get more work done in the same "amount" of time. Getting in the zone is where it's at.

It does take some maturity to use this to your advantage though. I know if I had to do more multitasking or use more of my thinking brain it would not be a wise choice of substance to get work done with.

Much experience, here.
At work, yes.
For those who are new it can induce sleepiness but for a regular it does do as you say, it can make work less like work and actually a bit more fun and creates energy. (we don't get paid to have fun though, right? )

What's really weird is, that if you are tired after a long day of work it can really be a pick me up.

I love working with potheads, never dull.

originally posted by: TheLegend
The issue with Cannabis is addiction to the psychological high (not the substance itself). I've never met a swift pothead or pothead with aspiring goals. They've all been subjugated by Cannabis and then pose as intellectuals online or play video games all day. Literally. All. Of. Them.

That's totally anecdotal, for I have met many more people that don't smoke weed that fits your definition of a loser.
Perhaps some people with a lack of inspiring goals smoke pot because it eases the mundaneness of their life.

What about people with ADD/ADHD?
These people are prone to drug use simply because living with an ADD/ADHD brain sucks much less when one feels different, like relief when the fog lifts.
Weed doesn't cause the ADD/ADHD.

So is it the goal misser like that because of the weed, or does that persons way of thinking preclude them to try these things?

Some people are very goal oriented and that makes them happy. (and a lot of these people indulge in the herb)
Some people are not so goal oriented, but other things make them happy, but the things that make them happy do not neccesarily create the person with lack of goals.

People are people, weed doesn't make the person, if you are goal oriented, weed ain't going to stop you, and it ain't going to make champs out of chumps.

a reply to: mclarenmp4

Great video! I really enjoyed it. I guess what I meant was some hyperactive people need the chill factor. Compared to something like Coke...it is a-motivational. I know it is a-motivational regardless of what Bill or the studies say. The proof is all around me, staring me in the face.

Pot is illegal because it is an easy way to put brown people (who tend to use it more) in jail until we find something more on them.