What Marijuana Does to Your Metabolism
Replies
-
Alyssa_Is_LosingIt wrote: »Yay! A judgement thread on MFP!
I'll play along. Does anybody justify their drinking because of the reported health benefits?
They say a glass of wine with dinner is healthy for your heart.
I just save up all of my glasses and drink a bottle on the weekends. Totally the same thing.
A whole bottle of wine fits into a Trenta cup from Starbucks...You're Welcome
You're buying the wrong size wine bottles!
0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »kmajor2015 wrote: »
Then perhaps starting this thread wasn't such a good idea.
I remember a long time ago when I used to smoke weed, I thought I came up with all sorts of absolutely brilliant ideas when I was high. I even wrote some of them down, so I'd be sure to remember them in the morning.
The next day? They weren't so brilliant. LMAO.
Yep. Remember the days too. I didn't smoke it long because I didn't like how it made me feel, but I thought I was really awesome.0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
There are lots of factors, including the strain being used and the user him/herself. Some people do not experience any loss of reaction time, while others behave like the stereotype you described.
0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »kmajor2015 wrote: »
Then perhaps starting this thread wasn't such a good idea.
I remember a long time ago when I used to smoke weed, I thought I came up with all sorts of absolutely brilliant ideas when I was high. I even wrote some of them down, so I'd be sure to remember them in the morning.
The next day? They weren't so brilliant. LMAO.
Yep. Remember the days too. I didn't smoke it long because I didn't like how it made me feel, but I thought I was really awesome.
ha, i remember sooooo much bad poetry (another societal harm). (or i remember THAT i wrote it, obviously i don't actually remember it.)0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MarziPanda95 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »
I think it is indeed sad. It should just be legal because it is a personal decision. Having to justify it for other reasons is sad to me. Cupcakes are both delicious, can be enjoyed, and in excess can have health consequences, but no one needs to tell people that cupcakes might cure cancer or treat Alzheimer's to justify having a cupcake. It seems sad that people have to do that for marijuana.RaeBeeBaby wrote: »I find it funny that people still go on about medical marijuana for glaucoma when it does nothing for glaucoma last I saw any medical review.
I'm perfectly fine with adults doing it because they want to. I find it kind of sad that people have to invent medical properties for it as a means to justify legalizing it to a bunch of people.
It's not sad that people are "inventing medical properties" for it to justify legalization. There are clinical studies going on all over the world on the health benefits of cannabis for everything from cancer treatment to epilepsy to Alzheimers to treatment of PTSD. Of course, people do consume it for pleasure and recreation, but the medical use benefits are well documented or there would not be medical marijuana programs in many states in the U.S.
I'm very happy it is now legal for recreational use in my state. We can certainly use the tax revenue!
It does not impair driving like alcohol does.
I'm all for legalisation... but this is only half true. It doesn't impair driving in the same way as alcohol, but it absolutely does impair driving. People have crashed their cars and killed people when driving after smoking - because the effects mean they don't pay as much attention as they should.
I've seen arguments that most of these cases involve multiple intoxicating agents being in a system i.e. someone was drunk and stoned or stoned and on meth, which confounds things somewhat. Is there any research showing that marijuana-using drivers become distracted at a higher rate than sober drivers?
Yes. There have been several studies that show it slows down reaction time.
I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
You cannot react fast enough to not kill someone.
There are many times that sober drivers can't react fast enough to not kill someone. How does this statement contribute to the conversation in any meaningful way?0 -
all drugs should be legalized0
-
tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MarziPanda95 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »
I think it is indeed sad. It should just be legal because it is a personal decision. Having to justify it for other reasons is sad to me. Cupcakes are both delicious, can be enjoyed, and in excess can have health consequences, but no one needs to tell people that cupcakes might cure cancer or treat Alzheimer's to justify having a cupcake. It seems sad that people have to do that for marijuana.RaeBeeBaby wrote: »I find it funny that people still go on about medical marijuana for glaucoma when it does nothing for glaucoma last I saw any medical review.
I'm perfectly fine with adults doing it because they want to. I find it kind of sad that people have to invent medical properties for it as a means to justify legalizing it to a bunch of people.
It's not sad that people are "inventing medical properties" for it to justify legalization. There are clinical studies going on all over the world on the health benefits of cannabis for everything from cancer treatment to epilepsy to Alzheimers to treatment of PTSD. Of course, people do consume it for pleasure and recreation, but the medical use benefits are well documented or there would not be medical marijuana programs in many states in the U.S.
I'm very happy it is now legal for recreational use in my state. We can certainly use the tax revenue!
It does not impair driving like alcohol does.
I'm all for legalisation... but this is only half true. It doesn't impair driving in the same way as alcohol, but it absolutely does impair driving. People have crashed their cars and killed people when driving after smoking - because the effects mean they don't pay as much attention as they should.
I've seen arguments that most of these cases involve multiple intoxicating agents being in a system i.e. someone was drunk and stoned or stoned and on meth, which confounds things somewhat. Is there any research showing that marijuana-using drivers become distracted at a higher rate than sober drivers?
Yes. There have been several studies that show it slows down reaction time.
I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
You are kidding right? You don't see how slowed reaction time negatively impacts driving?0 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »kmajor2015 wrote: »
Then perhaps starting this thread wasn't such a good idea.
I remember a long time ago when I used to smoke weed, I thought I came up with all sorts of absolutely brilliant ideas when I was high. I even wrote some of them down, so I'd be sure to remember them in the morning.
The next day? They weren't so brilliant. LMAO.
Yep. Remember the days too. I didn't smoke it long because I didn't like how it made me feel, but I thought I was really awesome.
ha, i remember sooooo much bad poetry (another societal harm)
Not as bad as the poetry written by Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings of Essex, right?0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MarziPanda95 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »
I think it is indeed sad. It should just be legal because it is a personal decision. Having to justify it for other reasons is sad to me. Cupcakes are both delicious, can be enjoyed, and in excess can have health consequences, but no one needs to tell people that cupcakes might cure cancer or treat Alzheimer's to justify having a cupcake. It seems sad that people have to do that for marijuana.RaeBeeBaby wrote: »I find it funny that people still go on about medical marijuana for glaucoma when it does nothing for glaucoma last I saw any medical review.
I'm perfectly fine with adults doing it because they want to. I find it kind of sad that people have to invent medical properties for it as a means to justify legalizing it to a bunch of people.
It's not sad that people are "inventing medical properties" for it to justify legalization. There are clinical studies going on all over the world on the health benefits of cannabis for everything from cancer treatment to epilepsy to Alzheimers to treatment of PTSD. Of course, people do consume it for pleasure and recreation, but the medical use benefits are well documented or there would not be medical marijuana programs in many states in the U.S.
I'm very happy it is now legal for recreational use in my state. We can certainly use the tax revenue!
It does not impair driving like alcohol does.
I'm all for legalisation... but this is only half true. It doesn't impair driving in the same way as alcohol, but it absolutely does impair driving. People have crashed their cars and killed people when driving after smoking - because the effects mean they don't pay as much attention as they should.
I've seen arguments that most of these cases involve multiple intoxicating agents being in a system i.e. someone was drunk and stoned or stoned and on meth, which confounds things somewhat. Is there any research showing that marijuana-using drivers become distracted at a higher rate than sober drivers?
Yes. There have been several studies that show it slows down reaction time.
I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
You are kidding right? You don't see how slowed reaction time negatively impacts driving?
I can see how it would negatively impact driving if the delay was appreciable. You didn't link me with anything to reference, so I'm asking follow-up questions.0 -
old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
does this take into account that alcohol is legal and readily available and used more frequently by a lot more people than any of those other things? I really have a difficult time believing that alcohol is more dangerous than heroine.0 -
hell yeah mushrooms and LSD!!0
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »
does this take into account that alcohol is legal and readily available and used more frequently by a lot more people than any of those other things? I really have a difficult time believing that alcohol is more dangerous than heroine.
While there's definitely some merit to the idea that because alcohol is legal it has an "edge" over the other substances on the list, things like Marijuana are nearly as prevalent and available as alcohol despite being illegal. Further, alcohol and heroin do have some things in common - namely that they both cause physical withdrawal symptoms which can be fatal.
0 -
a dug being legal should be counted as something that makes it safer and less dangerous. not mroe dangerous
jsut ask the cartels and people involved on the bs "war on drugs"0 -
Not sure if serious regarding the piloting of multi-thousand pound projectiles at scores of feet per second and poor reaction times.tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MarziPanda95 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »
I think it is indeed sad. It should just be legal because it is a personal decision. Having to justify it for other reasons is sad to me. Cupcakes are both delicious, can be enjoyed, and in excess can have health consequences, but no one needs to tell people that cupcakes might cure cancer or treat Alzheimer's to justify having a cupcake. It seems sad that people have to do that for marijuana.RaeBeeBaby wrote: »I find it funny that people still go on about medical marijuana for glaucoma when it does nothing for glaucoma last I saw any medical review.
I'm perfectly fine with adults doing it because they want to. I find it kind of sad that people have to invent medical properties for it as a means to justify legalizing it to a bunch of people.
It's not sad that people are "inventing medical properties" for it to justify legalization. There are clinical studies going on all over the world on the health benefits of cannabis for everything from cancer treatment to epilepsy to Alzheimers to treatment of PTSD. Of course, people do consume it for pleasure and recreation, but the medical use benefits are well documented or there would not be medical marijuana programs in many states in the U.S.
I'm very happy it is now legal for recreational use in my state. We can certainly use the tax revenue!
It does not impair driving like alcohol does.
I'm all for legalisation... but this is only half true. It doesn't impair driving in the same way as alcohol, but it absolutely does impair driving. People have crashed their cars and killed people when driving after smoking - because the effects mean they don't pay as much attention as they should.
I've seen arguments that most of these cases involve multiple intoxicating agents being in a system i.e. someone was drunk and stoned or stoned and on meth, which confounds things somewhat. Is there any research showing that marijuana-using drivers become distracted at a higher rate than sober drivers?
Yes. There have been several studies that show it slows down reaction time.
I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
0 -
Surely this must be at current uses which weights alcohol up because of how common and accessible it is?old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
Right. From Nutt in the article: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used."
The problem with arguments based on the harm of alcohol being greater is that if heroin or meth were legal they also would be more commonly used.
I think marijuana would be too, but unlike various other drugs I think it would still be not that harmful.0 -
lemurcat12 wrote: »
Surely this must be at current uses which weights alcohol up because of how common and accessible it is?old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
Right: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used."
The problem with arguments based on the harm of alcohol being greater is that if heroin or meth were legal they also would be more commonly used.
I think marijuana would be too, but unlike various other drugs I think it would still be not that harmful.
I disagree. Most people I know wouldn't go use meth today if it became legal suddenly. Conversely, most people I've met who use meth don't seem to worried about the fact that it's illegal. My point is that I don't think the law is that much of a factor - the type of person who is going to use meth regularly isn't likely to care that it's against the law.
0 -
tincanonastring wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »kmajor2015 wrote: »
Then perhaps starting this thread wasn't such a good idea.
I remember a long time ago when I used to smoke weed, I thought I came up with all sorts of absolutely brilliant ideas when I was high. I even wrote some of them down, so I'd be sure to remember them in the morning.
The next day? They weren't so brilliant. LMAO.
Yep. Remember the days too. I didn't smoke it long because I didn't like how it made me feel, but I thought I was really awesome.
ha, i remember sooooo much bad poetry (another societal harm)
Not as bad as the poetry written by Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings of Essex, right?
Worse, so much worse. No worst, there is none.0 -
Rage_Phish wrote: »hell yeah mushrooms and LSD!!
Calm down rage phish0 -
When it's worse than poetry read AT someone rather than TO someone, it's pretty bad. Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz concurs, I'm sure.tincanonastring wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »kmajor2015 wrote: »
Then perhaps starting this thread wasn't such a good idea.
I remember a long time ago when I used to smoke weed, I thought I came up with all sorts of absolutely brilliant ideas when I was high. I even wrote some of them down, so I'd be sure to remember them in the morning.
The next day? They weren't so brilliant. LMAO.
Yep. Remember the days too. I didn't smoke it long because I didn't like how it made me feel, but I thought I was really awesome.
ha, i remember sooooo much bad poetry (another societal harm)
Not as bad as the poetry written by Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings of Essex, right?
0 -
You asked how being high might affect your driving, so it was answered.tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MarziPanda95 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »
I think it is indeed sad. It should just be legal because it is a personal decision. Having to justify it for other reasons is sad to me. Cupcakes are both delicious, can be enjoyed, and in excess can have health consequences, but no one needs to tell people that cupcakes might cure cancer or treat Alzheimer's to justify having a cupcake. It seems sad that people have to do that for marijuana.RaeBeeBaby wrote: »I find it funny that people still go on about medical marijuana for glaucoma when it does nothing for glaucoma last I saw any medical review.
I'm perfectly fine with adults doing it because they want to. I find it kind of sad that people have to invent medical properties for it as a means to justify legalizing it to a bunch of people.
It's not sad that people are "inventing medical properties" for it to justify legalization. There are clinical studies going on all over the world on the health benefits of cannabis for everything from cancer treatment to epilepsy to Alzheimers to treatment of PTSD. Of course, people do consume it for pleasure and recreation, but the medical use benefits are well documented or there would not be medical marijuana programs in many states in the U.S.
I'm very happy it is now legal for recreational use in my state. We can certainly use the tax revenue!
It does not impair driving like alcohol does.
I'm all for legalisation... but this is only half true. It doesn't impair driving in the same way as alcohol, but it absolutely does impair driving. People have crashed their cars and killed people when driving after smoking - because the effects mean they don't pay as much attention as they should.
I've seen arguments that most of these cases involve multiple intoxicating agents being in a system i.e. someone was drunk and stoned or stoned and on meth, which confounds things somewhat. Is there any research showing that marijuana-using drivers become distracted at a higher rate than sober drivers?
Yes. There have been several studies that show it slows down reaction time.
I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
You cannot react fast enough to not kill someone.
There are many times that sober drivers can't react fast enough to not kill someone. How does this statement contribute to the conversation in any meaningful way?
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
does this take into account that alcohol is legal and readily available and used more frequently by a lot more people than any of those other things? I really have a difficult time believing that alcohol is more dangerous than heroine.
yes - includes accessibility and the bar fights, vehicular manslaughter, spousal abuse, and hooliganism that go along with it0 -
I'd use the hell out of cocaine if it were legal and I could fit it into my macros.OneHundredToLose wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Surely this must be at current uses which weights alcohol up because of how common and accessible it is?old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
Right: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used."
The problem with arguments based on the harm of alcohol being greater is that if heroin or meth were legal they also would be more commonly used.
I think marijuana would be too, but unlike various other drugs I think it would still be not that harmful.
I disagree. Most people I know wouldn't go use meth today if it became legal suddenly. Conversely, most people I've met who use meth don't seem to worried about the fact that it's illegal. My point is that I don't think the law is that much of a factor - the type of person who is going to use meth regularly isn't likely to care that it's against the law.
0 -
OneHundredToLose wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Surely this must be at current uses which weights alcohol up because of how common and accessible it is?old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
Right: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used."
The problem with arguments based on the harm of alcohol being greater is that if heroin or meth were legal they also would be more commonly used.
I think marijuana would be too, but unlike various other drugs I think it would still be not that harmful.
I disagree. Most people I know wouldn't go use meth today if it became legal suddenly. Conversely, most people I've met who use meth don't seem to worried about the fact that it's illegal. My point is that I don't think the law is that much of a factor - the type of person who is going to use meth regularly isn't likely to care that it's against the law.
There's a grey zone of people who would use drugs if they seemed appealing and were more socially acceptable. Probably people you and I know wouldn't use hard drugs (I suspect I know people who would do coke, though), but they aren't in the grey zone. I know lots of people who don't smoke pot now, but probably would, or would consider doing it recreationally, if it were legal. Similarly, alcohol use did go down during prohibition.
The legality of something is a big deal in terms of how many people think of things, the ease of trying them, and the social stigma.0 -
0
-
lemurcat12 wrote: »OneHundredToLose wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Surely this must be at current uses which weights alcohol up because of how common and accessible it is?old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
Right: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used."
The problem with arguments based on the harm of alcohol being greater is that if heroin or meth were legal they also would be more commonly used.
I think marijuana would be too, but unlike various other drugs I think it would still be not that harmful.
I disagree. Most people I know wouldn't go use meth today if it became legal suddenly. Conversely, most people I've met who use meth don't seem to worried about the fact that it's illegal. My point is that I don't think the law is that much of a factor - the type of person who is going to use meth regularly isn't likely to care that it's against the law.
There's a grey zone of people who would use drugs if they seemed appealing and were more socially acceptable. Probably people you and I know wouldn't use hard drugs (I suspect I know people who would do coke, though), but they aren't in the grey zone. I know lots of people who don't smoke pot now, but probably would, or would consider doing it recreationally, if it were legal. Similarly, alcohol use did go down during prohibition.
The legality of something is a big deal in terms of how many people think of things, the ease of trying them, and the social stigma.
That's true enough. I think my point "if it was legalized today" stands, but after a few years it would be normalized, and you're right, there wouldn't be a stigma attached to it so it's likely more people would use it.
0 -
im here because marijuana
where is it0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
I'd use the hell out of cocaine if it were legal and I could fit it into my macros.OneHundredToLose wrote: »lemurcat12 wrote: »
Surely this must be at current uses which weights alcohol up because of how common and accessible it is?old news now but Alcohol 'more harmful than heroin' says Prof David Nutt
weed is 8th on this list
The study involved 16 criteria, including a drug's affects on users' physical and mental health, social harms including crime, "family adversities" and environmental damage, economic costs and "international damage".
Right: "Overall, alcohol is the most harmful drug because it's so widely used."
The problem with arguments based on the harm of alcohol being greater is that if heroin or meth were legal they also would be more commonly used.
I think marijuana would be too, but unlike various other drugs I think it would still be not that harmful.
I disagree. Most people I know wouldn't go use meth today if it became legal suddenly. Conversely, most people I've met who use meth don't seem to worried about the fact that it's illegal. My point is that I don't think the law is that much of a factor - the type of person who is going to use meth regularly isn't likely to care that it's against the law.
you gonna struggle to reach your macros on blow, not stay below them0 -
DeguelloTex wrote: »
Not sure if serious regarding the piloting of multi-thousand pound projectiles at scores of feet per second and poor reaction times.tincanonastring wrote: »tincanonastring wrote: »MarziPanda95 wrote: »GuitarJerry wrote: »
I think it is indeed sad. It should just be legal because it is a personal decision. Having to justify it for other reasons is sad to me. Cupcakes are both delicious, can be enjoyed, and in excess can have health consequences, but no one needs to tell people that cupcakes might cure cancer or treat Alzheimer's to justify having a cupcake. It seems sad that people have to do that for marijuana.RaeBeeBaby wrote: »I find it funny that people still go on about medical marijuana for glaucoma when it does nothing for glaucoma last I saw any medical review.
I'm perfectly fine with adults doing it because they want to. I find it kind of sad that people have to invent medical properties for it as a means to justify legalizing it to a bunch of people.
It's not sad that people are "inventing medical properties" for it to justify legalization. There are clinical studies going on all over the world on the health benefits of cannabis for everything from cancer treatment to epilepsy to Alzheimers to treatment of PTSD. Of course, people do consume it for pleasure and recreation, but the medical use benefits are well documented or there would not be medical marijuana programs in many states in the U.S.
I'm very happy it is now legal for recreational use in my state. We can certainly use the tax revenue!
It does not impair driving like alcohol does.
I'm all for legalisation... but this is only half true. It doesn't impair driving in the same way as alcohol, but it absolutely does impair driving. People have crashed their cars and killed people when driving after smoking - because the effects mean they don't pay as much attention as they should.
I've seen arguments that most of these cases involve multiple intoxicating agents being in a system i.e. someone was drunk and stoned or stoned and on meth, which confounds things somewhat. Is there any research showing that marijuana-using drivers become distracted at a higher rate than sober drivers?
Yes. There have been several studies that show it slows down reaction time.
I've no doubt that pot slows reaction time (I'm not even sure we needed studies for that - just pretend to hit a stoner and wait the 5 minutes for them to flinch), but how does that correspond to driving ability?
It's mostly just curiosity. I'm wondering how much slower reaction times are and if that lag would fall into the natural variability in reaction times from one person to the next. If sober Person A reacts to a stimulus in 1 nanosecond (and I'm pulling these out of my behind) and sober Person B reacts to a stimulus in 3 nanoseconds, what danger does pot use present for Person A if it slows reactions by 1 nanosecond? Stoned Person A would still be reacting faster than sober Person B.
Furthermore, did any of those studies check reaction times in a driving situation? I would think the specific stimuli and setting used for the tests would be a factor, no?
ETA: Please don't think I'm advocating for stoned driving being okay. I'm just wondering about the extent of our actual knowledge on the subject.0 -
OneHundredToLose wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »
does this take into account that alcohol is legal and readily available and used more frequently by a lot more people than any of those other things? I really have a difficult time believing that alcohol is more dangerous than heroine.
While there's definitely some merit to the idea that because alcohol is legal it has an "edge" over the other substances on the list, things like Marijuana are nearly as prevalent and available as alcohol despite being illegal. Further, alcohol and heroin do have some things in common - namely that they both cause physical withdrawal symptoms which can be fatal.
I have 1 pub, a package liquor store, 3 convenience stores, two grocery stores, a Wal-Mart, a Costco, and two pharmacies within a 3 mile radius of my house...all of those places sell beer, wine, and booze...and while I could certainly get some MJ if I so desired, it's not nearly as available or easy to get...like tonight, I'm just going to pop in and get myself a bottle of Scotch...no biggie...I'd have a much more difficult time popping in somewhere and picking up an 1/8th or something.
I have nothing against weed at all and it should be legalized IMO...but I'm not buying that it's as readily available as alcohol unless you live somewhere like Colorado where you can just walk into a shop and purchase.0 -
science'd0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions