Top 10 Pot Studies Government Wished it Had Never Funded

Social Forums Non-Philosophical Chat
1

  1. MARIJUANA USE HAS NO EFFECT ON MORTALITY: A massive study of California HMO members funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) found marijuana use caused no significant increase in mortality. Tobacco use was associated with increased risk of death. (Sidney, S et al. Marijuana Use and Mortality. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 87 No. 4, April 1997. p. 585-590. Sept. 2002.)

  2. HEAVY MARIJUANA USE AS A YOUNG ADULT WONT RUIN YOUR LIFE: Veterans Affairs scientists looked at whether heavy marijuana use as a young adult caused long-term problems later, studying identical twins in which one twin had been a heavy marijuana user for a year or longer but had stopped at least one month before the study, while the second twin had used marijuana no more than five times ever. Marijuana use had no significant impact on physical or mental health care utilization, health-related quality of life, or current socio-demographic characteristics. (Eisen SE et al. Does Marijuana Use Have Residual Adverse Effects on Self-Reported Health Measures, Socio-Demographics or Quality of Life? A Monozygotic Co-Twin Control Study in Men. Addiction. Vol. 97 No. 9. p.1083-1086. Sept. 1997)

8 ) THE GATEWAY EFFECT MAY BE A MIRAGE: Marijuana is often called a gateway drug by supporters of prohibition, who point to statistical associations indicating that persons who use marijuana are more likely to eventually try hard drugs than those who never use marijuana, implying that marijuana use somehow causes hard drug use. But a model developed by RAND Corp. researcher Andrew Morral demonstrates that these associations can be explained without requiring a gateway effect. More likely, this federally funded study suggests, some people simply have an underlying propensity to try drugs, and start with what’s most readily available. (Morral AR, McCaffrey D and Paddock S. Reassessing the Marijuana Gateway Effect. Addiction. December 2002. p. 1493-1504.)

  1. PROHIBITION DOESNT WORK (PART I): The White House had the National Research Council examine the data being gathered about drug use and the effects of U.S. drug policies. NRC concluded the nation possesses little information about the effectiveness of current drug policy, especially of drug law enforcement. And what data exist show little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions prescribed for drug use and prevalence or frequency of use. In other words, there is no proof that prohibition, the cornerstone of U.S. drug policy for a century, reduces drug use. (National Research Council. Informing Americas Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Dont Know Keeps Hurting Us. National Academy Press, 2001. p. 193.)

  2. PROHIBITION DOESNT WORK (PART II: DOES PROHIBITION CAUSE THE GATEWAY EFFECT?): U.S. and Dutch researchers, supported in part by NIDA, compared marijuana users in San Francisco, where non-medical use remains illegal, to Amsterdam, where adults may possess and purchase small amounts of marijuana from regulated businesses. Looking at such parameters as frequency and quantity of use and age at onset of use, they found no differences except one: Lifetime use of hard drugs was significantly lower in Amsterdam, with its tolerant marijuana policies. For example, lifetime crack cocaine use was 4.5 times higher in San Francisco than Amsterdam. (Reinarman, C, Cohen, PDA, and Kaal, HL. The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and San Francisco. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 94, No. 5. May 2004. p. 836-842.)

  3. OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART I): Federal researchers implanted several types of cancer, including leukemia and lung cancers, in mice, then treated them with cannabinoids (unique, active components found in marijuana). THC and other cannabinoids shrank tumors and increased the lifespans of the mice. (Munson, AE et al. Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602.)

  4. OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER, (PART II): In a 1994 study the government tried to suppress, federal researchers gave mice and rats massive doses of THC, looking for cancers or other signs of toxicity. The rodents given THC lived longer and had fewer cancers, in a dose-dependent manner (i.e. the more THC they got, the fewer tumors). (NTP Technical Report On The Toxicology And Carcinogenesis Studies Of 1-Trans- Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, CAS No. 1972-08-3, In F344/N Rats And B6C3F Mice, Gavage Studies. See also, Medical Marijuana: Unpublished Federal Study Found THC-Treated Rats Lived Longer, Had Less Cancer, AIDS Treatment News no. 263, Jan. 17, 1997.)

  5. OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART III): Researchers at the Kaiser-Permanente HMO, funded by NIDA, followed 65,000 patients for nearly a decade, comparing cancer rates among non-smokers, tobacco smokers, and marijuana smokers. Tobacco smokers had massively higher rates of lung cancer and other cancers. Marijuana smokers who didnt also use tobacco had no increase in risk of tobacco-related cancers or of cancer risk overall. In fact their rates of lung and most other cancers were slightly lower than non-smokers, though the difference did not reach statistical significance. (Sidney, S. et al. Marijuana Use and Cancer Incidence (California, United States). Cancer Causes and Control. Vol. 8. Sept. 1997, p. 722-728.)

  6. OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART IV): Donald Tashkin, a UCLA researcher whose work is funded by NIDA, did a case-control study comparing 1,200 patients with lung, head and neck cancers to a matched group with no cancer. Even the heaviest marijuana smokers had no increased risk of cancer, and had somewhat lower cancer risk than non-smokers (tobacco smokers had a 20-fold increased lung cancer risk). (Tashkin D. Marijuana Use and Lung Cancer: Results of a Case-Control Study. American Thoracic Society International Conference. May 23, 2006.)

  7. MARIJUANA DOES HAVE MEDICAL VALUE: In response to passage of Californias medical marijuana law, the White House had the Institute of Medicine (IOM) review the data on marijuanas medical benefits and risks. The IOM concluded that nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana. While noting potential risks of smoking, the report acknowledged there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting. The government’s refusal to acknowledge this finding caused co-author John A. Benson to tell the New York Times that “the government loves to ignore our report; they would rather it never happened”. (Joy, JE, Watson, SJ, and Benson, JA. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy Press. 1999. p. 159. See also, Harris, G. FDA Dismisses Medical Benefit From Marijuana. New York Times. Apr. 21, 2006)

I also read a study a couple days ago I can’t find now which stated that women who smoked marijuana during pregnancy not only showed no detriment to their babies but in a small margin – an improvement in standard things (motor co-ordination/Audio/Spatial/etc)

2

The psychology here is always interesting. Acquisition is the most highly approved mechanism of attaining pleasure in our system. For the preservation and sanctification of our system every other method must be demonized. Not just discouraged or warned again like high cholesterol but turned into something almost supernaturally wicked. We might laugh at or pity the fat man who harms himself with his poor diet, but smoking has an altogether different kind of judgment against it. The one who smokes is not merely harming himself but somehow is harming everything. Eating poorly is bad, but smoking is tainted and tainting. It is felt as a altogether dangerous source of encompasing contamination.

Even our supposed collective belief in science breaks down before this mythological fear.

3

Trans fats are supernaturally wicked.

4

While by intuition I tend to agree with you xanderman, I don’t see how its relevant to this post. Marijuana, and its active constituent THC, can be consumed many ways without smoking. Eating (ie. brownies), vaporizing, and sublingual oils also allow a potent application of THC.

What we’re talking about here is not simply a recreational product, its a medicine that has been used for thousands of years and continues to amaze scientists with its broad-spectrum application.

As a side note: recent studies have started to demonstrate that those who chronically smoke marijuana, that is without tobacco, actually have cancer rates equal to or lower than the population who doesn’t smoke at all. I could post some links to a couple respected medical journals if anyone would like.

5

I’m a bit confused on this. If marajuana is a medicine, why should people take it when they are well? Should we drink cough syrup just to get high on it too? Isn’t that abuse of a good thing?

6

That’s a good question MRN.

My answer is that we all do it. And by ‘it’ I mean we’re all addicts in some or many ways. Take my parents for example: They are both cops, they are all about order. ‘This is the way a house should look, these are the rules, this is the law of the land, etc, etc’. They always striving for this state which is impossible to achieve, but all the fun is in trying to get there. So they’ll never see me as being against the system they work for (in a couple of respects), they’ll never see the house as…‘perfect’. That’s their addiction though.

Love/Being Loved, Fame, Material Objects, Being the centre of attention, Being funny, Being good at something, Being alone, Having sex, Meditating, Being… that fucking weird guy downtown’.

Our lives are dictated by the chemicals in our brain – we are completely slaves to that small amount of liquid. It’s a matter of whether or not you’re addicted, it’s a matter of whether or not you’re aware of which ones you’ve picked. As I said, often without the person even realizing it.

7

I think addiction is different from enjoyment. Some of these pleasures aim at good things, and some lead to frustration.

8

Some aim at good things and some lead to confusion? Yes, some.

I, on the other hand do not think addiction is causually unrelated from pleasure.

What is enjoyment?. You do things and some things give rise for enjoyment – you do things and enjoy the pleasure. The Pleasure/Enjoyment is an end, not a means.

Addiction is the means; it is desire.

It’s the reason we do anything we do. It’s not so simplistic as ‘hey you tried heroin? haha you’re automatically addicted for life’. Addictions are learned -they are created- and the truly dangerous ones are the ones which remain hidden; the shadowy symbiont which gives rise to actions such as:

The close talker, the know-it-all, the cock-block, the loud one, the ultra silent one, the eccentric one, the… whatever – all of these simply the outlet to achieve a certain state of mind.

The point is we live to be addicted, to feel the need to do things. To go to the table for supper with mommy and daddy. If homesickness isn’t withdrawal then… well, I dunno.

9

Here in Calgary, Alberta, Canada (oil capital of the country) - we’re clinging to tobbacco, dragging behind the rest of the country. It’ll be interesting if the smoking ban finally quashes the last smoker’s resistance, only to reopen smoking marijuana in every bar, theater, and bus- starting with Vancouver BC.

Megalomania in politics and increasing crime suggest to me that human beings depend on pot until a better system is engineered.

On the other hand, in my personal experience I felt paranoid both times I tried it and felt like I had no control over what was happening. I hated it. Not my cup of tea I guess.

10

The question that should alway’s be asked when considering the governments war on drugs is “what are the limits of state power ?”

We could argue the merits and disadvantages to many substances people consume: alcohol, caffeine, sugar, etc.

But what about the “abuse” of government power ? How about suspicionless drug testing ? Or, harrassing pain patients and their doctors ?

What about hypocrisy ? I made a post on old-gobbos pot thread, “save us from the day that some mind altering substance like cannabis would ever be found right next to the everclear pure grain alcohol in our liquor stores”.

I have no great interest in using marijuana, at least not on a regular basis. But I object strongly to the “abuse” of power by the government that is a natural outcome of it’s prohibition on drugs.