It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cannabis Use Is Quantitatively Associated with Nucleus Accumbens and Amygdala Abnormalities in Young

page: 4
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Any further mention of personal drug use will result in 72 hour posting bans!



Terms and Conditions of Use--Please Review


16e.) Illicit Activity: Discussion of illicit activities, specifically the use of mind-altering drugs & substances, engaging in computer hacking, promoting criminal hate, discussing sexual relations with minors, and furtherance of financial schemes and scams are strictly forbidden. You will also not link to sites or online content that contains discussion or advocacy of such material. Any Post mentioning or advocating personal use of illicit mind-altering drugs will result in immediate account termination.

i) Narcotics and illicit mind-altering substances, legal or otherwise: discussing personal use or personal experiences as the result of such substances is not allowed in any form.




posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

Yes, under the age of 18 a developing brain can be negatively impacted by Marijuana smoking.

However, after the brain has finished it development, there are no further impacts on the physical brain due to marijuana exposure. This study was required before Colorado placed the legalization amendment on the ballots. That is why you must be 21 or older to partake in Colorado (after the brain has finished developing).

Just like Alcohol, exposure while the brain is in the developmental stage can be far worse long term then exposure after 21; thus the legal age is set.

In every study ever done, alcohol in adults is far worse then marijuana in adults; and in every study ever done, neither is safe for children.

God Bless,



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
Why marijuana is so dangerous during growing up is because it affects the growing hormone. And unbalanced hormone means possible problems.

Don`t know how excatly works on estrogen but it lowers testosterone which is the key for boys becoming men.

peaktestosterone.com...
anabolicmen.com...

The only thing positive here is if a guy wants to supress balding, this would be an answer


Though the real problem is mixing using and abusing marijuana. Using marijuana once and a while
##SNIPPED## Abusing on the other hand
It will only lead to problems...physical or mental. People fear the most about getting addicted to it. Well if you have boundries in your life, I`m certain you can control this without any problems. But if you can`t control yourself at every day`s temptations, then you won`t be able here as well.

Still I think this plant is less dangerous than any of the chemicals most people eat on prescription each day. Don`t even mention alcohol...

Oh and if you are going to use it, drink extra loads of water cause it dries your system. Sometimes people get so stoned they forget their mouth is completely dry and that they`re in fact thirsty

edit on 9-9-2014 by Op3nM1nd3d because: (no reason given)

edit on Tue Sep 9 2014 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d

Not true.

If this were true Michael Phelps and Ryan Locte would not be the great swimmers they are. I have some good intel from someone who went to high school with one of them about their cannabis use.

If cannabis has a feminizing affect on developing males then there is no way they could be the great athletes they are.
edit on 9-9-2014 by jrod because: b



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Op3nM1nd3d

Not true.

If this were true Michael Phelps and Ryan Locte would not be the great swimmers they are. I have some good intel from someone who went to high school with one of them about their cannabis use.

If cannabis has a feminizing affect on developing males then there is no way they could be the great athletes they are.


Find the exceptions and cry out that they are the norm. Proponents of addictive and harmful substances love that approach.

Everyone knows people who smoked then died of old age never getting cancer, do you want to let Marlboro and company push that as the norm?



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Gary Hall Jr. Another gold winning swimmer. That is just one small sport.

That study is more than flawed. It is nothing but propaganda to make young men fear the plant.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Gary Hall Jr. Another gold winning swimmer. That is just one small sport.

That study is more than flawed. It is nothing but propaganda to make young men fear the plant.


Imagine what those few exceptions could have attained had they never used a brain debilitating substance. Too bad we will never get to see.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Oh please. Enough is enough. Tired of being told what I can do with my body. It's medicinally beneficial to many people and for these wolves to tell us what we can consume is disgraceful.

If it can kill you, cause permanent damage to you and those around you, it's legal.

If it's a medicine with a long use in countless cultures for medicinal and recreational purposes with little side effects....it's illegal.

Prohibition does not work. Enough with locking people up and destroying lives. Enough with these lobbyists, corrupt people who enjoy their medication in peace.

When will the average marijuana user stand up instead of whispering their wishes for legalization. Why aren't more people standing up and protesting about this?

And I have to say people like Cheech & Chong held marijuana legalization back for years. They made it look like a party drug, portrayed users with absolutely no responsibilities and no concern for those around them and themselves. These two among hundreds of others helped skew the public opinion on cannabis instead of showing the public that users are mostly responsible, quiet, safe and rational individuals.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
Oh please. Enough is enough. Tired of being told what I can do with my body. It's medicinally beneficial to many people and for these wolves to tell us what we can consume is disgraceful.

If it can kill you, cause permanent damage to you and those around you, it's legal.

If it's a medicine with a long use in countless cultures for medicinal and recreational purposes with little side effects....it's illegal.

Prohibition does not work. Enough with locking people up and destroying lives. Enough with these lobbyists, corrupt people who enjoy their medication in peace.

When will the average marijuana user stand up instead of whispering their wishes for legalization. Why aren't more people standing up and protesting about this?

And I have to say people like Cheech & Chong held marijuana legalization back for years. They made it look like a party drug, portrayed users with absolutely no responsibilities and no concern for those around them and themselves. These two among hundreds of others helped skew the public opinion on cannabis instead of showing the public that users are mostly responsible, quiet, safe and rational individuals.


So you are going with, ignore the scientific studies.
Gotcha
Cheech and Chong didn't make their characters up out of thin air, they are over exaggerations of reality. Subtle changes to brain makup you will never get to physically see but Cheech and Chong nailed their characters through observation.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Ignoring scientific studies is exactly what the DEA and FDA continues to do.

The arrest stats tell a disturbing tale.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Ignoring scientific studies is exactly what the DEA and FDA continues to do.

The arrest stats tell a disturbing tale.


That's funny, this thread is about a scientific study, and that is being ignored while doing handstands, cartwheels, and barely legal yoga moves to defer from the evidence presented.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Yeahkeepwatchingme
Oh please. Enough is enough. Tired of being told what I can do with my body. It's medicinally beneficial to many people and for these wolves to tell us what we can consume is disgraceful.

If it can kill you, cause permanent damage to you and those around you, it's legal.

If it's a medicine with a long use in countless cultures for medicinal and recreational purposes with little side effects....it's illegal.

Prohibition does not work. Enough with locking people up and destroying lives. Enough with these lobbyists, corrupt people who enjoy their medication in peace.

When will the average marijuana user stand up instead of whispering their wishes for legalization. Why aren't more people standing up and protesting about this?

And I have to say people like Cheech & Chong held marijuana legalization back for years. They made it look like a party drug, portrayed users with absolutely no responsibilities and no concern for those around them and themselves. These two among hundreds of others helped skew the public opinion on cannabis instead of showing the public that users are mostly responsible, quiet, safe and rational individuals.


So you are going with, ignore the scientific studies.
Gotcha
Cheech and Chong didn't make their characters up out of thin air, they are over exaggerations of reality. Subtle changes to brain makup you will never get to physically see but Cheech and Chong nailed their characters through observation.


Pot calling the kettle black? Have you really looked into the matter? The scientific community is pretty split on the matter.
105 Peer-Reviewed Studies on Marijuana Medical Studies Involving Cannabis and Cannabis Extracts (1990 - 2012)
Procon.org Marijuana

I'm still waiting on those stats ...

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Nice generalization based on no facts. That almost sounds like a propaganda pitch to me.



Did you read all those big words in the study that is the topic of this thread and come to the conclusion no fact finding was attempted?


Insulting and demeaning someone is a turn-off you know. To you, your profile, and anything you have to say. .


Ooooh this must be a brave member of the majority putting the minority view in their place, I better be careful hey or nobody will like me. Never mind that a study here is showing evidence of brain changes that are detrimental, don't speak of it, allude to it, try to connect the findings to everyday observations. Don't go against the current trend just because some study suggests you should, think of ones reputation instead.

Logic is prevailing.


Please refer to my first post in this thread for a better understanding of my take. I support legalization, but do not support youth use below the age of 18.
..


That position is facetious.
The vast majority begin use before 18, the only reason they would buy after the age of 18 is because they already have a lifestyle that revolves around its use. The exceptions are the pain sufferer who never used and has started off from a medical prescription or a really sheltered youth who goes away to college and finds happiness in all the wrong places, befriending those who partook and got hooked before the age of 18. That pre 18 stuff is powerful mojo, there it is again.


originally posted by: AllSourceIntel

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: AllSourceIntel

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Nice generalization based on no facts. That almost sounds like a propaganda pitch to me.



Did you read all those big words in the study that is the topic of this thread and come to the conclusion no fact finding was attempted?


Insulting and demeaning someone is a turn-off you know. To you, your profile, and anything you have to say. .


Ooooh this must be a brave member of the majority putting the minority view in their place, I better be careful hey or nobody will like me. Never mind that a study here is showing evidence of brain changes that are detrimental, don't speak of it, allude to it, try to connect the findings to everyday observations. Don't go against the current trend just because some study suggests you should, think of ones reputation instead.

Logic is prevailing.


Please refer to my first post in this thread for a better understanding of my take. I support legalization, but do not support youth use below the age of 18.
..


That position is facetious.
The vast majority begin use before 18, the only reason they would buy after the age of 18 is because they already have a lifestyle that revolves around its use. The exceptions are the pain sufferer who never used and has started off from a medical prescription or a really sheltered youth who goes away to college and finds happiness in all the wrong places, befriending those who partook and got hooked before the age of 18. That pre 18 stuff is powerful mojo, there it is again.


What is facetious is this argument is applied to Cannabis when alcohol applies to it as well but that is never brought into question from your side, nor its dangers.
ETA: How many adults start drinking before 21, 18 even? Does this mean that prohibition should be brought back?

As far as "the vast majority begin use before 18" I suggest you look into the National Household and Monitoring the Future surveys and back up your claim.

ETA: This thread also isn't geared toward legalization, it was geared toward potential dangers to brain development in youth. There have been side discussions on legality, however, that is the only thing you seem to be discussing aside from insulting everyone that they don't understand the study. Also, I pointed you to my first post in this thread to direct you to my take on the threads focus as you challenged my position on that matter. Yet, you did not address that, you ignored that fact and attempt to direct the conversation to legality.

edit on 9/9/2014 by AllSourceIntel because: Added quoted material



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: AllSourceIntel

I support this study and encourage many more like it.
Therefore I can indulge in observations which support this studies findings, that the brain is effected in a detrimental way. Whether that be Cheech and Chong or any other instance of societal portrayal of what turns out to be accurate, even if exaggerated in the case of comedians, measurable and observable brain damage.

I am not diverging off topic I am melding the topic with societal observations which turn out to be supported by this scientific study. Those who are diverting to off topic are doing the opposite, discussing anything but this study to avoic its hard truths many don't wish to face.

Ball back to ya



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP
You have to account for more than just this one study to hold a firm stance on one side. This at least is my issue, for every study con, there is one pro (slightly more pro than con).



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:37 PM
link   
ALL these tests, studies with pot use on the brain to my understanding use hydroponically grown weed. Anyone ever heard of a reliable study done on the impacts of naturally grown chemical free pot?



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 07:42 PM
link   
a reply to: lestweforget

For this study, they utilized a very tiny percentage of the cannabis-using population.

Who's to say they're truly representative of every user?



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

If you had a valid point, you would not need to resort to the Cheech and Chong reference. That was a comedy skit that dealt with A LOT more than simply cannabis.

Also Cheech Marin is not exactly a pothead and Tommy Chong is in better shape than most men his age.



posted on Sep, 9 2014 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: TinfoilTP

If you had a valid point, you would not need to resort to the Cheech and Chong reference. That was a comedy skit that dealt with A LOT more than simply cannabis.

Also Cheech Marin is not exactly a pothead and Tommy Chong is in better shape than most men his age.


Another poster first brought up Cheech and Chong not me, but hey it supports my position so why wouldn't I go with it once it was introduced? It has everything to do with the onstage characters they developed and nothing to do with their real personas.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join