The terrible truth about cannabis: British expert's devastating 20-year study

dailymail ^ | 7 October 2014 | Ben Spencer

[Berlin_Freeper]

20-year study into the effects of long-term cannabis use has demolished the argument that the drug is safe.

Cannabis is highly addictive, causes mental health problems and opens the door to hard drugs, the study found.

[nathanbedford]

I take your points. There is no guarantee that eliminating the prohibition against drugs will not result in widespread increased drug use. I think that eliminating the profit motive will eliminate much of the incentive to push. However, there is no doubt that there is always social peer pressure and we see much of that in providing alcohol to underage kids.

I rest my case as well on ceasing the collateral damage the war on drugs is undeniably causing. Most people will recognize the domestic symptoms which are so obvious like corruption, disrespect of all law, innumerable incarcerations, funding of lethal gangs and drive-by shootings to name only a few. But there are also international consequences meaning the frustration of our foreign policy. We are actually in the position of chasing down terrorists bank accounts to confiscate money which we have put in those accounts by buying heroin grown in Afghanistan. We are liable to infiltration of our southern border by terrorists who pay off coyotes and drug smugglers. The list can go on and on.

On a theoretical level I would say that, you are absolutely right, our society has lost its way and blunders on without moral compass. I don't think eliminating drug prohibition will improve that very much and might even accelerate the decline, we would have to see. Clearly, what we are doing now is not working and the moral decline is proceeding very nicely under the circumstances which presently obtain. But, and I take this very seriously, because a society is unworthy of liberty does not justify withholding liberty. That comes close to an Orwellian, elitist view of the nature of government which presumes to intrude on the private affairs of citizens to correct real or imagined harms when there is no direct victim. So we have laws against prostitution which do not exist here in Germany-at least in the same way. We have laws against gambling-but not in Las Vegas. But we are killing about 50 million babies since Roe vs. Wade and I count that as 50 million victims. We do not intervene where we should and we intervene where we should not.Let us not forget that the constitutional underpinning for allowing abortion grew out of a misplaced "Christian" moral decision to ban contraceptives.

My point, in so-called victimless crimes the intercession of the government to uphold morals is a very treacherous path which can lead to real tyranny.

[nathanbedford]

You have chosen to double down. My only response to you is to read the reply of jjsheridan5 (#137).

[Berlin_Freeper]

Really wasn’t impressed the first time I read it.

[nathanbedford]

Pardon, but your solipsism showing.

If you persist in simply insulting people or proclaiming your vision as the final statement on a subject you cannot expect to persuade anyone about anything. Sadly, when you hear something you do not like you resort to these disreputable tactics. No one cares whether you were "impressed" they might care about why you were not impressed if you can bring yourself to articulate that.

All of this churlishness is quite unnecessary, state your case and let the reader draw his conclusion from the quality of your argument and the facts you marshal, get off your high horse, abandon your self-righteousness, and do the hard work of actually thinking.

Now, I freely admit that I have committed the sin of ad hominem attack which I accused you of, however, I plead provocation.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Didn't really expect a further long whinny reply to:

Really wasn’t impressed the first time I read it.

Looks like you ran out of skirts to hide behind...

[nathanbedford]

Looks like you ran out of skirts to hide behind...

You really are a very unattractive individual. Your replies are not a function of laziness or of ignorance as I had suspected but of a very real and unappealing meanness of character.

I don't see any reason to continue this conversation.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Don’t go breaking my heart.

[Vision Thing]

“Dope Fiends are an angry bunch.”

Step aside Islam: The Religion of Pot is the new Religion of Peace.

[ConservingFreedom]

From http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3195093/posts:

It’s a Gateway Drug

This may be the biggest farce cooked up by marijuana opponents, but it makes sense. People who have tried marijuana may eventually go on to try harder drugs in search of a stronger high, and their experimentation leads them down a dangerous path toward addiction. But the science behind whether or not this is true overwhelmingly shows that it’s not.

“Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter,” a report from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) said. “In the sense that marijuana use typically precedes rather than follows initiation of other illicit drug use, it is indeed a ‘gateway’ drug. But because underage smoking and alcohol use typically precede marijuana use, marijuana is not the most common and is rarely the first ‘gateway’ to illicit drug use. There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.”

So what is the cause of other illicit drug use? As the IOM report suggested, other studies have also implicated alcohol and tobacco use as gateway drugs. But an alternative gateway may just be the trials and tribulations some kids face while growing up. “Whether marijuana smokers go on to use other illicit drugs depends more on social factors like being exposed to stress and being unemployed — not so much whether they smoked a joint in the eighth grade,” Dr. Karen Van Gundy, an associate professor of sociology at the University of New Hampshire, told CBS News.  

[Berlin_Freeper]

One in ten adults who regularly smoke the drug become dependent on it and those who use it are more likely to go on to use harder drugs,

[Berlin_Freeper]

From your pro drugs blog link:

Marijuana Demystified: 5 Health Myths Debunked
Like it or not, marijuana use has increased exponentially since President Nixon declared a war no drugs in 1971.

War no drugs?
But anyway, like it or not...

Teen drug and alcohol use continues to fall, new federal data show

[ConservingFreedom]

“Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter [...] because underage smoking and alcohol use typically precede marijuana use, marijuana is not the most common and is rarely the first ‘gateway’ to illicit drug use. There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.” [...] an alternative gateway may just be the trials and tribulations some kids face while growing up. “Whether marijuana smokers go on to use other illicit drugs depends more on social factors like being exposed to stress and being unemployed — not so much whether they smoked a joint in the eighth grade,”

One in ten adults who regularly smoke the drug become dependent on it

Irrelevant to whether it's a gateway - and the proportion is higher for alcohol, btw.

and those who use it are more likely to go on to use harder drugs,

Still doesn't contradict what I posted above nor add up to a 'gateway' - most who use pot do not go on to use hard drugs.

[Berlin_Freeper]

Your Retread Troll opinion versus 20 years studies.

[ConservingFreedom]

War no drugs?

Typo flames - very impressive.

But anyway, like it or not...

Teen drug and alcohol use continues to fall, new federal data show

Why would I not like that? Kids shouldn't use legal (alcohol, tobacco) or illegal drugs - but the drop isn't due to the laws: "Among all Americans, the survey finds that drug use trends are essentially flat."

[ConservingFreedom]

20 years studies.

As I've already explained to you, there was no "20 year study" - just a review of studies conducted at one time or another during the last 20 years.

[Berlin_Freeper]

A person with a pro drugs blog, that you find so vitally important, can't be bothered to get his/her first sentence correct? And simply noting such a poor error is a flame?

btw - National Study Shows "Gateway" Drugs Lead to Cocaine Use

[Berlin_Freeper]

Right - "20 years studies" (what I said) is not "20 year study" (what you say I said).

Are you sober? (I mean completely.)

[ConservingFreedom]

National Study Shows "Gateway" Drugs Lead to Cocaine Use

From your link: "children (12 to 17 years old) who use gateway drugs--tobacco, alcohol and marijuana--are up to 266 times--and adults who use such drugs are up to 323 times--more likely to use cocaine than those who don't use any gateway drugs."

Do you support banning for adults and children the gateway drugs alcohol and tobacco?

[ConservingFreedom]

"20 years studies" (what I said) is not

I had to try to translate it into grammatical English.

[Berlin_Freeper]

The question in this thread about marijuana is:
Do you support throwing gasoline on fire by legalizing marijuana?