Posted on 05/27/2018 6:16:38 AM PDT by Steve Schulin
... The offspring of partying adolescents, specifically those who used THC, may be at increased risk for mental illness and addiction as a result of changes to the epigenome — even if those children are years away from being conceived. The epigenome is a record of molecular imprints of potent experiences, including cannabis exposure, that lead to persistent changes in gene expression and behavior, even across generations. Though the critical studies are only now beginning, many neuroscientists prophesize a social version of Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring,” in which we learn we’ve burdened our heirs only generations hence.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicsdiscussion.com ...
If those zillions are voluntarily donated to the cause, fine - if they're extorted from taxpayers, no way Jose.
We obligate ourselves by the legislators we vote for. We should stop, rather than using that violation of rights as an excuse for other violations of rights (i.e., marijuana criminalization).
You've long been correct.
This article emphasizes the long-term neurologic effects of marijuana on young people
Speaking of counterproductive: young people have for years, well before any state legalized, been reporting that they can get illegal-for-all pot more easily than legal-for-adults-only beer or cigarettes - which is to be expected, since dealers in legal substances typically card for age, whereas dealers in illegal substances never do. The available evidence indicates that the best way to keep pot from youths is to legalize it for adults.
Thanks for the ping. I’m still very grateful cannabis is effective medicine for me & some folks I care about.
That some people are determined to poo-poo reality, both good & bad to satisfy their need to be “right” is just added entertainment.
One day soon I expect to hear from “experts” (frauds) how just thinking about the cannabis plant & how it grows is a sign of addiction lol!
Criminalization limits supply. As well as demand
I never would have tried it if it had not been made available. Had the enforcement been stronger, then I might not had ever had the opportunity in the first place
At least it wasn’t legal so the 21 year olds could’nt have bought it for us minors.
I don’t think jailing people for pot is very helpful. I also don’t think legalizing pot is helpful either.
We are at the beginning of epigenetics as a study. Everything we do may potentially affect our genes. Here ya go Lanarck, you discredited old bastard, you were right all along, and Darwin took all the glory.
So to say that smoking marijuana will affect your genes and potentially your offspring is a total trick. All of your chemical exposure will potentially do the same. Your water. Your food. Your laundry products. Your time on gas fumes spewing highways. Your lotion. Your cigar. Your medications. Everything you do might potentially affect you genetically. And mostly there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it.
Personally, the epidemics of neurodegenerative conditions in old and young, the increase in sexual and identity brain dysfunction, all have me scared as to what we are doing wrong. We should live as clean a life as we can, but we don’t always know until it is too late what we have done wrong. I suspect both plastics and pesticides, as we have only recently begun to learn that these things outside us get right into our bloodstreams. Bisphenol A found in the unused uteri of young women?? That’s scary.
Wow, someone making actual sense here.
You want legal THC? How about a zero tolerance law for driving: no behind the wheel if under the toke - 24 hour ban?
It works for pilots and liquer. The liquer is still legal.
I do not want to be a statistic to the rising vehicular mayhem unleashed by ersatz libertarians and real libertines.
Driving is not a right.
Everything you said is true, except the phrase “our evolutionary ancestors”.
Adam was made from “slime”, and Eve was made from Adam. God put those words in Genesis because He knew some idiot by the name of Charles Darwin would come along and promote the silly idea that man is descended from primates.
Other than that, you are spot on. :)
It would be a drastic improvement over the status quo. (Needs to be a state by state decision under the Constitution, of course.)
Ban everything - it's for the children.
“...You disparage libertarian dogma. Do you disparage the 9th and 10th Amendments as childish too?” [Steve Schulin, post 36]
Libertarianism is fine in theory: if humans were 100 percent rational, unegotistic, uncovetous, never inclined to immaturity uninclined to angry outbursts, and never interacted with each other.
The drawback is that no human can be those ways 100 percent of the time, and hardly any of us can be any of those ways so much as half the time. Plus, we insist on crowding together, forcing our will on others, and on producing children. One person’s liberty bumps up against that of another. So libertarianism ends up being unworkable in the real world.
Stop cloaking yourself in amendments to the US Constitution. The Founders would have rejected libertarian dogma out of hand: they’d have heard your words but would have furrowed their brows in uncomprehending bafflement. Or they’d have clapped you in irons, as was done with mentally ill persons at the time; or they may have accused you of witchcraft and burned you at the stake.
Not my choice, not my problem.
Oh, piff.
Get your hand out of my pocket, then we'll talk.
Those who want the programs are generally not those paying for them..."We" don't elect them.
Exactly. There wouldn’t be a lifestyle or maybe even a job that couldn’t somehow have epigenetic implications. We don’t know enough yet.
“The nation will be overrun by a tsunami of pot around Thanksgiving time. And there’s not a lot that anyone can do about it.”
_________
“You’re gonna need a bigger turkey.”
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.