God gave you the right to break the law, deny lawful authority and sell dope?
Posted on 01/27/2008 5:32:48 AM PST by saganite
A new study finds that the development of bullous lung disease occurs in marijuana smokers approximately 20 years earlier than tobacco smokers.
A condition often caused by exposure to toxic chemicals or long-term exposure to tobacco smoke, bullous lung disease (also known as bullae) is a condition where air trapped in the lungs causes obstruction to breathing and eventual destruction of the lungs.
At present, about 10% of young adults and 1% of the adult population smoke marijuana regularly. Researchers find that the mean age of marijuana-smoking patients with lung problems was 41, as opposed to the average age of 65 years for tobacco-smoking patients.
The study "Bullous Lung Disease due to Marijuana" also finds that the bullous lung disease can easily go undetected as patients suffering from the disease may show normal chest X-rays and lung functions. High-resolution CT scans revealed severe asymmetrical, variably sized bullae in the patients studied. However, chest X-rays and lung functions were normal in half of them.
Lead author Dr. Matthew Naughton says, "What is outstanding about this study is the relatively young ages of the lung disease patients, as well as the lack of abnormality on chest X-rays and lung functions in nearly half of the patients we tested."
He added, "Marijuana is inhaled as extremely hot fumes to the peak inspiration and held for as long as possible before slow exhalation. This predisposes to greater damage to the lungs and makes marijuana smokers are more prone to bullous disease as compared to cigarette smokers."
Patients who smoke marijuana inhale more and hold their breath four times longer than cigarette smokers. It is the breathing manoeuvres of marijuana smokers that serve to increase the concentration and pulmonary deposition of inhaled particulate matter – resulting in greater and more rapid lung destruction.
This paper is published in the January 2008 issue of Respirology.
If you're on chemo and you want to smoke marijuana, that's up to you. My problem is with those who then want to legalize it for everyone, ignorant of the fact that patients on chemo have a compromised immune sytem and smoking marijuana could prove fatal.
"Hamadeh and associates. Chest, Vol. 94/2, pp.432-433, 1988. "Invasive aspergillosis has become a significant cause of death in immunosuppressed patients". Physicians should be aware of this potentially lethal complication of marijuana use in compromised hosts such as patients with AIDS or malignancies."
"Transplantation, Vol. 61, June 27, 1996. (Marijuana smoke transmits aspergillosis, a fungus having up to a 90% fatality rate if contracted by transplant patients. Researchers have strongly warned against the use of marijuana in immuno-compromised patients such as those with AIDS, chronic granulomatous disease, bone marrow transplants and those receiving chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer.)"
"Voth EA, Schwartz RH. Medicinal applications of delta 9 THC and marijuana: a perspective. Annals of Internal Medicine 1997: 126:791-8. (Marijuana is not a panacea. It is an impure weed that introduces immuno compromised patients to bacteria, fungi, and other toxic complications. We recommend sticking with predictable medical therapies and not deviating from FDA approved medicine in exchange for herbal remedies."
Showing your butt won't get you your entitlement.
Nicotine is legal, so pot has to be too. Whaaaa!
And still more entitlement demands!
“While helping you to inhale more bacteria with every puff!”
I’d be more worried about the pet dander you inhale every day.
No stats, natch.
Freedom!!!!
To the readers of Shotgun News:
...My columns concerning the “Drug War” in relation to gun control
have generated mountains of response from readers. The consensus is to
decriminalize drugs, let the chips fall where they may and obliterate the
drug dealer and crime in the process.
Mr. Populi’s letter on the subject follows and we feel each and
every point he makes is well taken. We thank him for his permission to
publish this fine treatise on the subject and look forward to your input on
this timely debate.
Nancy Snell Swickard
Publisher
Ms. Nancy Snell Swickard — Publisher
“Shotgun News”
P.O. Box 669, Hastings, Nebraska 68902
Dear Ms. Swickard,
I was very distressed to see the remark of one of your subscribers which
you quoted on page 8 of your October 1 issue. The support of the “Drug
War” by anyone who values the 2nd Amendment, and the rest of the Bill of
Rights, is the most dangerous error of thinking in the politics of the “gun
control” debate. This error is extremely widespread, although there have
been some recent signs that some Americans are seeing through the
propaganda of the Drug Warriors which affects all levels of our society.
Sadly, major players in the defense of the 2nd Amendment (like the NRA)
show no signs of awareness of the part played by the Drug War in our
present hysteria over violence. This is a serious error, because the
violence produced by the Drug War is one of the main reasons that a
majority of American citizens support gun control. Without the majority of
a citizenry frightened by endemic violence, Mr. Clinton and his allies in
the Congress would not enjoy the power they now posses to attack the Bill
of Rights.
To understand the effect of the Drug War, we must understand it for what it
is: the second Prohibition in America in this Century. I do not need to
remind anyone who knows our recent history what a disaster the first
Prohibition in America was. It is a classic example of the attempt to
control a vice — drunkeness — by police power. It made all use of
alcohol a case of abuse. It produced such an intense wave of violence that
it gave a name — The Roaring Twenties — to an entire decade. It lead to
the establishment of powerful criminal empires, to widespread corruption in
police and government, and to a surge of violence and gunfire all over the
land. And it produced a powerful attack on the Bill of Rights, including
the most successful campaign of gun control laws in America up to that
time. Before the first Prohibition criminalized the trade in alcohol,
liquor dealers were ordinary businessmen: after 1920 they were all violent
criminals fighting for their territories. We had gang wars, and drive-by
shootings and the use of machine guns by criminals. We now have the same
effects of the first Prohibition in the present Drug War, and Americans
appear to be sleepwalking through it with no apparent understanding of what
is happening. It is testimony to the truth of Santayana’s famous remark
that those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it. We must
understand that this has all happened before, and for the same reasons.
It is essential that defenders of the 2nd Amendment understand the whole
Bill of Rights is under attack by the Drug War, and that assaults on the
2nd Amendment are a natural part of that trend. What is the main premiss
of a gun-control law? It is that guns are implements which are too
dangerous to entrust to the citizenry. What is the main premiss of Drug
Prohibition? It is that drugs are substances which are too dangerous to
entrust to the citizenry. Both lines of reasoning say that because a few
people abuse something, all Americans must be treated like children or
irresponsibles. All use is abuse. This is an extremely dangerous idea for
a government, and it leads inevitably to tyranny. It is a natural
consequence that such thinking will lead to attacks on the Bill of Rights,
because that is the chief defense in the constitution against abuses of
government power.
Since the beginning of the Drug War, no article of the Bill of Rights has
been spared from attack. There has been an enoromous increase in police
power in America, with a steady erosion of protections against unreasonable
search and seizure, violations of privacy, confiscation of property, and
freedom of speech. We have encouraged children to inform on their parents
and we tolerate urine tests as a condition of employment for anyone. All
who question the wisdom of Drug Prohibition are immediately attacked and
silenced. These are all violations of the Bill of Rights. Are we
surprised when the 2nd Amendment is attacked along with the others? We
understand that opponents of the 2nd Amendment exaggerate the dangers of
firearms and extrapolate the actions of deranged persons and criminals to
all guns owners. That is their method of propaganda. Do we also know that
Drug Warriors exaggerate the hazards of drug use — “all use is abuse” — in
the same way formerly done with alcohol, and extrapolate the condition of
addicts to all users of drugs? That is their method of propaganda. Most
Americans are convinced by both arguments, and both arguments depend on
the public’s ignorance. That is why discussion and dissent is inhibited.
Most Americans are moving to the idea that drugs and guns are evil and
should be prohibited. Encouraging one way of thinking supports the other
because the logic of the arguments is the same.
Why not prohibit a dangerous evil? If every drinker is a potential
alcoholic, every drug-user a future addict, and every gun-owner a potential
killer, why not ban them all? There is no defense against this logic
except to challenge the lies that sit at the root of the arguments. Those
are the lies promoted by the prevailing propaganda in support of all
Prohibition. We cannot oppose one and support the other. To do so
undermines our efforts because all these movements walk on the same legs.
If we do not explain to people that the fusillade of gunfire in America,
the return of the drive-by shooting, and our bulging prisons, come from the
criminalizing of commerce in illegal drugs, we cannot expect them to listen
to a plea that we must tolerate some risk in defence of liberty.
Why should we tolerate, for the sake of liberty, the risk of a maniac
shooting a dozen people, when we cannot tolerate the risk that a drug-user
will become an addict? In fact, very few gun-owners are mass murderers and
a minority of drug users are addicts, but people are easily persuaded
otherwise and easily driven to hysteria by exaggerating dangers. What
addict would be a violent criminal if he could buy his drug from a pharmacy
for its real price instead of being driven to the inflated price of a
smuggler? How many cigarette smokers would become burglars or prostitutes
if their habits cost them $200 per day? How many criminal drug empires
could exist if addicts could buy a drug for its real cost? And without
Prohibition, what smuggler’s territory would be worth a gang war? And why
isn’t this obvious to all of us?
It is because both guns and drugs havve become fetishes to some people in
America. They blame guns and drugs for all the intractible ills of
society, and they never rest until they persuade the rest of us to share
their deranged view of the evil power in an inanimate object. They
succeed, mainly, by lies and deception. They succeed by inducing the
immediate experience of anxiety and horror by the mere mention of the
words: Guns! Drugs! Notice your reactions. Once that response is in
place, it is enough to make us accept any remedy they propose. An anxious
person is an easy mark. They even persuade us to diminsh the most precious
possession of Americans, the one marveled at by every visitor and cherished
by every immigrant, and the name of which is stamped on every coin we mint
— Liberty. They say that liberty is just too dangerous or too expensive.
They say we will have to do with less of it for our own good. That is the
price they charge for their promise of our security.
Sincerely
Amicus Populi
* One of the “justifications” given by the ATF in the Waco
raid on the Branch Davidians... was that they had a
radical-underground-right-wing-fringe-gun-nut-magazine on the premises!
That turned out to be “Shotgun News.” How very interesting.
* “These people, who do they think they are, saying that their government
has stamped out human freedom? We need to conduct a nation-wide search
for these right wing.... purveyors of hate.” - Bill Clinton
“It is an impure weed that introduces immuno compromised patients to bacteria, fungi, and other toxic complications. We recommend sticking with predictable medical therapies and not deviating from FDA approved medicine in exchange for herbal remedies.”
Obviously the marijuana should be irradiated. (heh)
Meanwhile, I sure hope those patients are staying the hell away from raw fruits and vegetables!
Entitlement demands gone wild.
Well, when the argument starts out, "X should be allowed because the person is going to die anyways", it's hard to imagine what is logically excluded.
Paraphrasing Rush, I'm demonstrating the absurdity of that argument by being absurd.
Are they smoking banana skins?
Uh huh.
More like God given natural rights.
You seem to think all rights come from your Godgovernment.
Your ignorance is appalling.
Their definition of freedom: An addict hooked on drugs.
If there are those who want to prescribe weed...God knows why-—let them do it in pill form...prescribed by a doctor not the neighborhood junkie.
God gave you the right to break the law, deny lawful authority and sell dope?
Weren't you the one denying that this ever happened?
No. Thanks for playing though.
____))__
____((((___
___OOOO__
___OOOO__
___OOOO__
___OOOO__
___OOOO____))
___OOOO ___(((
__OOOOO___(””)
_OOOOOOO / /
.OOOOOOO/ /
_OOOOOOO/
__OOOOOO
Ohhh, someone has been playing...
Ping to self
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.