MARIJUANA!

[libby]

The following is from today's Washington Post. I agree with every word. I've never tried pot, even though I've been told it helps relieve eye pressure, a major cause of glaucoma (which I have).  Someone I used to know suggested I try it, offered to get some for me, but I asked a trusted friend if I should, and after a quiet pause he said, "Not unless you want to get high." I didn't, but do remember writing on the old 4S that I thought it should be legalized for adults. I still do, but how do you keep it out of the hands of children and teenagers?

Not long after that I became personally involved with a young person who was a user, and have since completely reversed my way of thinking. People -- adults -- who want to use it recreationally or for medicinal purposes (prescribed by doctors) fine with me. But stop legalizing it.  Keep it away from children and teenagers.  The human brain does not fully mature until about age 25. Trying to convert, keep up with or even have a normal conversation with a young person who is using pot and whose goal is to stay high as much and as long as possible is almost impossible.   

A SCIENTIST'S VIEW OF POT MYTHS

Ruth Marcus is a columnist and editorial writer for The Post, specializing in American politics and domestic policy.

June 24, 2014, at 8:37 PM

From her perch as head of the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Nora Volkow watches anxiously as the country embarks on what she sees as a risky social experiment in legalizing marijuana.

For those who argue that marijuana is no more dangerous than tobacco and alcohol, Volkow has two main answers: We don't entirely know , and, simultaneously, that is precisely the point .

"Look at the evidence," Volkow said in an interview on the National Institutes of Health campus, pointing to the harms already inflicted by tobacco and alcohol. "It's not subtle — it's huge. Legal drugs are the main problem that we have in our country as it relates to morbidity and mortality. By far. Many more people die of tobacco than all of the drugs together. Many more people die of alcohol than all of the illicit drugs together.

"And it's not because they are more dangerous or addictive. Not at all — they are less dangerous. It's because they are legal. . . . The legalization process generates a much greater exposure of people and hence of negative consequences that will emerge. And that's why I always say, 'Can we as a country afford to have a third legal drug? Can we?' We know the costs already on health care, we know the costs on accidents, on lost productivity. I let the numbers speak for themselves."

Volkow speaks rapidly, even urgently, in an accent that lingers from her childhood in Mexico. The great-granddaughter of Soviet communist Leon Trotsky, Volkow grew up in the Mexico City home where Trotsky was fatally attacked. It is easy to imagine, in her passionate determination, some of her ancestor's revolutionary fervor, melded with a scientist's evidentiary rigor.

In this June 19, 2014 photo, freshly packaged cannabis-infused peanut butter cookies are prepared for casing, inside Sweet Grass Kitchen, a well-established gourmet marijuana edibles bakery which sells its confections to retail outlets, in Denver.
(Brennan Linsley/AP)

As Colorado and Washington state approve the sale of marijuana for recreational use and other states consider following suit, Volkow says, the notion that legalization represents a modest, cost-free move is dangerously overblown. The evidence on the supposed safety of marijuana — particularly marijuana in its modern, far more potent form — is far from clear enough to take this leap.

"I think that what we are seeing is a little bit of wishful thinking in the sense that we want to have a drug that will make us all feel good and believe that there are no harmful consequences," she said. "When you are intoxicated, your memory and learning are going to go down. When you are intoxicated, your motor coordination is going to go down. When you are repeatedly using marijuana, there is an increased risk for addiction. And if you are an adolescent and you are taking marijuana, there is a higher increased risk for addiction and there is also a higher risk for long-lasting decreases in cognitive capacity — that is, lowering of IQ."

Adolescents are a chief focus of Volkow's worry, to the extent that when I observe that tobacco use is clearly worse for teens, she challenges that easy assumption.
"Wait a second. . . . Nicotine does not interfere with cognitive ability. So if you are an adolescent and you are smoking marijuana and going to school, it's going to interfere with your capacity to learn. So what is worse, as an adolescent right now? To have basically something that is jeopardizing your development educationally or to smoke a cigarette that, when you are 60 years of age, is going to lead to impaired pulmonary function and perhaps cancer? . . . I would argue that you do not want to mess with your cognitive capacity, that that is a very large price to pay."

Legalization advocates counter with two contradictory arguments: that marijuana is already readily available to teenagers who want it, and that the new laws impose strict controls on sales to minors. Volkow is unconvinced, arguing that the evidence from alcohol suggests that the already large number of teenagers who have tried marijuana by the time they graduate from high school — nearly half, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — will only increase, along with the already rising number of those who use it on a daily basis.

"Our kids are sensitive to norms, so if they feel that marijuana is harmful, their consumption goes down," Volkow said. Legalization sends the opposite message.
Volkow herself has never smoked pot — or, as she tends to say, "taken marijuana" — and she isn't tempted now that it is legally available in some places. "I'm not going to negate that I am curious," she said. "But I am terrified about doing anything that would interfere with my cognitive capacity. . . . I don't like to contaminate my perception of the world. I have too much respect for my brain."

Read more from Ruth Marcus's archive, follow her on Twitter or subscribe to her updates on Facebook.

www.washingtonpost.com

[Bo D]

I totally disagree.

Ms. Volkow says this about nicotine and alcohol ...

"And it's not because they are more dangerous or addictive. Not at all — they are less dangerous. It's because they are legal."

Nicotine is most definitely addictive. And it does kill. The same for alcohol. And although alcohol may not be addictive for most people, it most certainly can kill you.

I have NEVER seen any evidence that marijuana is addictive, and I have never seen any evidence that it can kill.

Unlike tobacco, marijuana does not kill the user. Unlike alcohol, marijuana does not destroy the liver and brain. There is anecdotal evidence of people using marijuana relationally for decades and remaining healthy, active citizens.

Myself included!

[Exterminator]

I agree with Bo D; this article is absolute bullshit.

[The Troll]

I agree with Bo D; this article is absolute bullshit.

  You can talk about Nicotine and Marijuana all you want, but there is one thing that has destroyed more men's lives than anything else.   

                                                           WOMEN  

                                                                        

[Y]

OK, let's say Volkow is correct - and I am with others that say that Volkow is wrong and simply cherry picking and engaging in anti 'drug' propaganda - and let's go farther and say good ole' Mary Jane is the worst thing ever to come down the pike.

What authority does the government, or anyone, have to proscribe what another person what s/he can or cannot ingest?

In case you're having trouble coming up with an answer, I'll help you out.  The answer is none.

Now what I'd like to know, is how many folks agree with that answer, know that it's correct, and what its basis is?

[Henry Hawk]

I know for a fact that our government has better things to do than tell us what we can and cannot put into our bodies.

[Anne]

I agree with the article, if for no other reason that legalizing Marijuana makes it more easily available to teens and children. I think that marijuana is a gateway drug and only helps push some people along the way to addiction. I don't think it cures cancer as I have been told by some users of marijuana. Dealing with someone using marijuana is as bad as dealing with a non-combative drunk. They don't realize how stupid the look and act, at least in my experience. As far as the government having the right to tell us what we can and cannot put into our bodies, that is bs. Every single thing we put into our bodies is regulated by the government and heaven help them if they get it wrong.

[Y]

Ah!  The old "it's for the children!" defense along side the 'Gateway' defense.

First, the 'children' defense is one of those things like sex etc. I call 'you can't fool Mother Nature' issues.  Laws haven't stopped 'children' from ingesting Mary Jane and won't.  You can't stop human nature.

Second, if it's a 'gateway' so what?  By what authority do you, government, or anyone else, have the right to proscribe that someone can't harm or destroy him/herself?

[libby]

Y, I am so glad to see you back here posting. 

[Y]

I know for a fact that our government has better things to do than tell us what we can and cannot put into our bodies.

But hardly as profitable - from local all the way to national.

Of course, I suspect your unspoken areas which you comment takes in.  I'll address them when I get back.  I have things to do and I'll try and get back here later today.

[Bo D]

I agree with the article, if for no other reason that legalizing Marijuana makes it more easily available to teens and children. I think that marijuana is a gateway drug and only helps push some people along the way to addiction. I don't think it cures cancer as I have been told by some users of marijuana. Dealing with someone using marijuana is as bad as dealing with a non-combative drunk. They don't realize how stupid the look and act, at least in my experience. As far as the government having the right to tell us what we can and cannot put into our bodies, that is bs. Every single thing we put into our bodies is regulated by the government and heaven help them if they get it wrong.

I have NEVER heard event the staunchest supporter/user of marijuana claim that it "cures cancer."

What it does do is relieve pain and stimulates the appetite when nothing else works for cancer sufferers undergoing chemo.

[Anne]

Oh, really, well I have and they were entirely convinced of it. I have read the reports of its pain relief and if it is prescribed by a doctor for that ok. If they want to legalize, then the rest of us have to be prepared to deal with the consequences. I hope everyone is prepared for that. I"m sure there are people like BoD who never used marijuana when he was responsible for anyone but himself, never drove, never did anything that might endanger anyone when he was indulging, but the majority of people are not like that.

As for the children, as Y puts it, yes, if it is in the house it is accessable to children. If you think it is ok for a 10 year old, great, I don't. And the idea of putting it in food is horrible.

[Bo D]

Oh, really, well I have and they were entirely convinced of it. I have read the reports of its pain relief and if it is prescribed by a doctor for that ok. If they want to legalize, then the rest of us have to be prepared to deal with the consequences. I hope everyone is prepared for that. I"m sure there are people like BoD who never used marijuana when he was responsible for anyone but himself, never drove, never did anything that might endanger anyone when he was indulging, but the majority of people are not like that.

As for the children, as Y puts it, yes, if it is in the house it is accessable to children. If you think it is ok for a 10 year old, great, I don't. And the idea of putting it in food is horrible.

What do you think about the most dangerous drug of all - alcohol?

It's in the home, accessible to children, and we put it in food -  even candy.

At some point you have to be responsible for your own actions.

[Henry Hawk]

What do you think about the most dangerous drug of all - alcohol?

It's in the home, accessible to children, and we put it in food -  even candy.

At some point you have to be responsible for your own actions.

Anne, I gotta side with Bo on this....and his last line is the real kicker for all of this.  Parents need to be parents, and set examples for their kids.  We would probably not have HALF the problems we have today if we all stuck to that idea.

[The Troll]

Oh, really, well I have and they were entirely convinced of it. I have read the reports of its pain relief and if it is prescribed by a doctor for that ok. If they want to legalize, then the rest of us have to be prepared to deal with the consequences. I hope everyone is prepared for that. I"m sure there are people like BoD who never used marijuana when he was responsible for anyone but himself, never drove, never did anything that might endanger anyone when he was indulging, but the majority of people are not like that.

As for the children, as Y puts it, yes, if it is in the house it is accessable to children. If you think it is ok for a 10 year old, great, I don't. And the idea of putting it in food is horrible.

  Yes Anne, you're one of them old pinch faced, nose up in the air old woman.  Who would stop drinking all Alcohol, smoking everything, all kinds of gambling and to have people to pray and give their 10% of the gross of their income to the church and put your nose in all of the bedrooms and in a woman's reproductive life.