How bad is Weed?

[ARikozuM]

36 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I can find and post links too

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/heart-disease/in-depth/red-wine/art-20048281

https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/wine-good-you

Same problem that affects any progress or research on cannabis affects alcohols (or anything really); people take a single substance and use it as the basis for the whole spectrum being denied. 

 

Also, WHY IS EVERYONE STILL TALKING ABOUT SMOKING?! YOU CAN EAT THE STUFF AS WELL!

[dizmo]

6 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Same problem that affects any progress or research on cannabis affects alcohols (or anything really); people take a single substance and use it as the basis for the whole spectrum being denied. 

 

Also, WHY IS EVERYONE STILL TALKING ABOUT SMOKING?! YOU CAN EAT THE STUFF AS WELL!

Aye. There was an interesting argument for the legalization of harder drugs as well.

Haha, yeahhhh but it's a totally different high. I'd say edibles make you less social.

[Ryujin2003]

 

Good luck!

 

(Sarcasm was implied)

[dizmo]

4 minutes ago, Jonnyswboy said:

The negative affects of alcohol WAY outweigh the positives.

 

This was contained in one of those links:

Uhhh...yeah, no shit Sherlock. If you drink water in excessive amounts it's bad for you. All that says is don't binge drink, which is kind of obvious.

[Egg-Roll]

22 hours ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

Can't smoke weed and drive period, legally speaking and nore should you.

The number of people who think this is false is borderline humanity is hopeless.

21 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

Just like smoking tobacco it can lead to an increase in cancer risk, but it's a lot safer than tobacco/vapes and even alcohol addiction. It should be legalised and regulated, I don't see why not. Just like any drug however it is an addictive substance, but its probably between alcohol and caffeine in terms of harm. Go ahead and roll up a fat one, It won't do you any harm. 

 

The highest causing cancer risk is actually not the tobacco itself but the shit they put into the cigarettes. Smoking raw tobacco is "healthier" (not safer) than buying the death sticks

 

So unless you can buy it legally (like soon in canada, in the raw make your own rolls form), I personally wouldn't try anything unless it's homegrown (you grow it, not someone else, which is illegal afaik in the states). Reason being is if they throw cheap shit in it to give a better buzz or anything else to make it cheaper the long term (possibly very short term) side effects could be devastating.

 

Over all I think the best answer is still @gabrielcarvfer's post a little up.

 

Note: I don't smoke anything nor any other recreational drug, I also can't be around people who are soaked in the smell either.

[Guest]

11 hours ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

I'm not wrong on this and I'm not inferring that the DNA is their phenotype. 

 

I said that different mutations on different genes on different DNAs may change the synthesis of some stuff, that may react differently. That was it.

 

I've read multiple articles and books exactly on this topic, and as I've said, I can send them (or at least the name) to you to check for yourself.

 

I do want the reading recommendation.

 

And my point is that people should be fully aware of what they're using and what it may cause in the short term and long term. 

You are not correct in that statement. 

 

Lets go through a few basics

- There are no different DNAs. You are thinking of the genome. 

- The phenotype is the representation of the environment and the genetics of an individual, essentially the genome and the epigenome. 

- This is what drugs directly affect. Its pretty hard for a drug, especially marijuana to directly affect your genome. You can inhibit or overexpress the transcription of a gene however. Drugs will affect your epigenome. 

- It's pretty hard to accumulate enough mutations to cause an effect. It's why cancer is such a chronic disease. Remember we have repair processes that regularly fix mutations. Cancers are usually a failure of these processes.

 

So you're thinking about it in the right way, just not with the right knowledge. Reading articles and books is a bit different to understanding them. I suspect you are trying to troll the forum a bit in this thread. 

[MadyTehWolfie]

32 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

The number of people who think this is false is borderline humanity is hopeless.

The highest causing cancer risk is actually not the tobacco itself but the shit they put into the cigarettes. Smoking raw tobacco is "healthier" (not safer) than buying the death sticks

 

So unless you can buy it legally (like soon in canada, in the raw make your own rolls form), I personally wouldn't try anything unless it's homegrown (you grow it, not someone else, which is illegal afaik in the states). Reason being is if they throw cheap shit in it to give a better buzz or anything else to make it cheaper the long term (possibly very short term) side effects could be devastating.

 

Over all I think the best answer is still @gabrielcarvfer's post a little up.

 

Note: I don't smoke anything nor any other recreational drug, I also can't be around people who are soaked in the smell either.

Don't need to get home grown weed. Though, least with the Ecigs that have THC in it. It's mostly lab made and or grown. As far as rolling one up idk. I never smoked it like that due to coughing too much from the little particles in it. That's why I stick to vaping it.

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, MadyTehWolfie said:

Don't need to get home grown weed. Though, least with the Ecigs that have THC in it. It's mostly lab made and or grown. As far as rolling one up idk. I never smoked it like that due to coughing too much from the little particles in it. That's why I stick to vaping it.

My main concern about ecigs are long term health risks of fogging your lungs, plus the chemicals they throw in for flavour, both of which are unknown due to it being too new in mass. The second biggest concern is when stupid people decide to use them in enclosed places like buses... Where I live it is seen as smoking by the transit systems, for good reasons too as they still expel tobacco/whatever when you exhale.

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/2569415/ontario-to-ban-vaping-medical-marijuana-in-spots-where-smoking-tobacco-is-prohibited/ Yet, no one enforces smoke free areas where I live, not even at the local hospital usually...

[suchamoneypit]

.

[SlipperyPete]

19 minutes ago, suchamoneypit said:

I found when actively smoking or right after smoking, short term memory was affected, less so the more "experienced" I got, but my long term memory has never been affected. I couldn't tell you how many cookies I ate while high, but I could tell you what my 6th birthday was like for example. Obviously doing something like studying while high is pointless is my point, but if I studied, then immediately went and got high, im gonna remember everything I studied. But I can always focus on one thing. I can be super high, and still throw together a quad core sever perfectly very quickly, and not mess any of the steps up. I can be super high, and still dominate on an intense real time strategy game like Halo Wars or wargame red dragon. This changes person to person. I know some people that become as dumb as a rock if they smoke.

I am talking from a medical perspective, that the portion of the brain that handles short term memory slows down over time making your short term memory become worse

[MadyTehWolfie]

1 hour ago, Egg-Roll said:

My main concern about ecigs are long term health risks of fogging your lungs, plus the chemicals they throw in for flavour, both of which are unknown due to it being too new in mass. The second biggest concern is when stupid people decide to use them in enclosed places like buses... Where I live it is seen as smoking by the transit systems, for good reasons too as they still expel tobacco/whatever when you exhale.

 

https://globalnews.ca/news/2569415/ontario-to-ban-vaping-medical-marijuana-in-spots-where-smoking-tobacco-is-prohibited/ Yet, no one enforces smoke free areas where I live, not even at the local hospital usually...

Idk I haven't had any issues with them so far. As for smoking inside I just don't do it and no one else should either. It's called common courtesy some people forget that. I especially don't smoke weed out in public unless I'm only with friends who are ok with it being around them. Only really smoke it then watch TV in my room before bed so yeah. Can't speak for other people's bad manners.

[MadyTehWolfie]

53 minutes ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

Yes. Yes. Not necessarily, just need to be irresponsible. For example: using drugs and then driving after few hours (1~2). Even low levels of THC can impact drivers ability and attention. 

 

"Drivers under the influence of cannabis multiply their risk of being responsible for causing a fatal accident by 1.65 (1.16–2.34), and the proportion of fatal accidents which would be prevented if no drivers ever drove under the influence of cannabis is estimated at 4.2% (3.7%-4.8%)." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5678710/

 

"In fact, the biggest increase of road accidents was observed when alcohol and drugs were simultaneously consumed. Furthermore, Dubois et al. (39) found that drivers who were positive for cannabis alone had a 16% increase in the odds of an unsafe driving action. However, these odds increased by approximately 8–10% when alcohol and cannabis were combined." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5451498/

 

We all know you shouldn't/legally can't drive under the influence. That being said cell phones and distracted driving also kills a lot of people too. It's just stupid people doing stupid things. We don't take away phones because a few idiots text and drive. We make texting and driving illegal to do. Also weed doesn't make people drive, they know full well they shouldn't be driving they choose to do it anyway. Some people lack common sense.

[Bhav]

IMO I'd rate it a 0/10 for how bad it is given that everything I've read and seen about people who take weed still aren't even 10% as bad as my various uncurable illnesses make me.

 

Fun fact - When I initially went to a GP to complain of excessive drowsiness / fatigue, I got accused of smoking weed right away. Around 10 years later and they still wouldnt allow me to have Modafilin because to get that prescribed in the UK you have literally be passing out / losing consciousness during the day.

 

And now I need to come off my SNRIs because I have a recently diagnosed heart condition. I have my next psych appointment in July and am going to do a major push for either or both Modafilin / Buproprion instead, if they dont afftect the heart rate that is which I'm guessing they probably do anyway.

 

[TopHatProductions115]

15 hours ago, gabrielcarvfer said:

I'm not wrong on this and I'm not inferring that the DNA is their phenotype. 

 

I said that different mutations on different genes on different DNAs may change the synthesis of some stuff, that may react differently. That was it.

 

I've read multiple articles and books exactly on this topic, and as I've said, I can send them (or at least the name) to you to check for yourself.

 

I do want the reading recommendation.

 

And my point is that people should be fully aware of what they're using and what it may cause in the short term and long term. 

Is this what you were referring to?

• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK20363/

Most mutations won't produce a significant change in protein expression. A quick excerpt:

"Almost all human genetic variation is relatively insignificant biologically; that is, it has no adaptive significance. Some variation (for example, a neutral mutation) alters the amino acid sequence of the resulting protein but produces no detectable change in its function. Other variation (for example, a silent mutation) does not even change the amino acid sequence. Furthermore, only a small percentage of the DNA sequences in the human genome are coding sequences (sequences that are ultimately translated into protein) or regulatory sequences (sequences that can influence the level, timing, and tissue specificity of gene expression). Differences that occur elsewhere in the DNA—in the vast majority of the DNA that has no known function—have no impact."

 

I think that you may have been aiming for something like pharmacogenetics, however:

• https://theconversation.com/how-your-genes-influence-what-medicines-are-right-for-you-46904

I will provide no conclusion on this matter. Do not ask for my opinion beyond this point...

[DildorTheDecent]

12 hours ago, Ryujin2003 said:

 

My favourite anit-weed meme is that it makes you gay.

 

Top keks all round.

[NMS]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

My favourite anit-weed meme is that it makes you gay.

 

Top keks all round.

And if you're already homosexual?

[DildorTheDecent]

Just now, NMS said:

And if you're already homosexual?

Well I imagine that the anti-weed crowd that consider drugs bad, they'll also consider homosexuality to be bad too. (Assuming they're super religious which lets be honest they probably are).

 

So, if weed makes you gay (we know it doesn't but lets roll with this), but you're already gay, would it make you straight?

 

I'm surprised the anti-weed crowd haven't looked into this. /jk

[NMS]

1 minute ago, DildorTheDecent said:

Well I imagine that the anti-weed crowd that consider drugs bad, they'll also consider homosexuality to be bad too. (Assuming they're super religious which lets be honest they probably are).

 

So, if weed makes you gay (we know it doesn't but lets roll with this), but you're already gay, would it make you straight?

 

I'm surprised the anti-weed crowd haven't looked into this. /jk

I can see that for them the decision is quite difficult. It's either the world with all stoned straight guys or the one with gays without drugs... Now that's a pickle:/

 

[captain_to_fire]

12 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

So, if weed makes you gay (we know it doesn't but lets roll with this), but you're already gay, would it make you straight?

“The deep state satanic globalists are coming to turn evey friggin’ frogs gay”  

 

[DildorTheDecent]

12 minutes ago, NMS said:

I can see that for them the decision is quite difficult. It's either the world with all stoned straight guys or the one with gays without drugs... Now that's a pickle:/

 

Somewhere...in a parallel universe...

[Ryujin2003]

25 minutes ago, DildorTheDecent said:

So, if weed makes you gay (we know it doesn't but lets roll with this), but you're already gay, would it make you straight
 

 if you were having and some weed, you'd either become Freddie Murcury or Elton John.

 

Though this one is new to me:

[captain_to_fire]

The title is clickbait but trust me it’s a good one. 

[samcool55]

Well, it's legal in the netherlands and they don't seem to have many problems.

I mean if it would be the cause of a bunch of issues they would just ban it, but they haven't.

[Trik'Stari]

On 6/8/2018 at 11:10 PM, Blebekblebek said:

It just bad as drinking beer, or breathing.

 

Government trying so hard to make propaganda about how bad weed is.

 

Alcohol is demonstrably worse.

 

 

That being said, too much of anything is a bad thing.

[Arika]

It is as bad as what ever the law is in your country/state of residence.

 

Is it illegal? It's very bad and you should not touch it

Is it regulated to be medical only? then it should only be used for medical purposes

Is it fully legal for recreational use? it's only as bad as your opinion of it.