Dobbed in weed-growing parents

[Madness]

Read the first few words again.

I've met plenty of people who do the same as you mention. They're not dumb fucks are they?
Dumb fucks, and there are plenty of them, don't deny it, will smoke it and stare at walls. This is not an efficient use of a substance that many claim to be medicinal, good for mentality, environmentally friendly, great as a renewable resource (like anything else that gorw, tobacco is a renewable resource)
Yes I worked in the mental health area, yes you do see some bad cases in there. No these are not the ones I was referring to.


Maybe I attract idiots? Maybe you ignore the idiots out there? Maybe you don't live in socioeconomically poor area? Maybe you haven't grown up in one? Maybe you just love to attack people personally? Maybe this is all pointless speculation on the interwebs? Maybe I'm a sexy female with giant breasts? Maybe I'm a chronic pot-smoker in denial? Maybe I'm a T-rex?

Your post came across that you considered people who smoke Cannabis as dumb fucks, thanks for the clarification. Yes, I try to ignore the idiots out there, it's a lot easier to do than to ignore the idiots in here, who can actually be entertaining at times. Where I live and where I grew up has little to do with dumb fucks as dumb fucks are everywhere, born into affluence as easily as born into poverty. I wouldn't say I love to attack people personally, I just don't suffer fools lightly and see the internet as a medium for open & frank discussion and sharing of opinions. This site has an ignore function, it costs nothing and is easy to use, even for a dumb fuck. I don't think it's all pointless speculation on the interwebs, I believe that discussion on subjects where people hold opposing views is vital if we as a society are going to move forward, rather than sitting in the dark continuing to do dumb shit like persecute people for using a naturally occuring substance for their betterment & enjoyment. You're not a sexy female with giant breasts, you're a gangly ginga with a bad haircut, sideburns and a flat chest.

As you were.

[Madness]

It seems to be a KB thing. Notable and oft overlooked is that those most vocal in their defense of smoking weed and who rant on about all the benefits in their defense, are simply those who want to smoke it to get stoned without legal consequence. they are not the slightest bit interested in doing anything to change the status by research and support of alternative uses or even in having it medically processed as a painkiller as that doesn't get them the buzz they want.

If Cannabis was commercially viable in all these other uses it would be used.

I don't have a need to use Cannabis for medicinal purposes and I don't agree that to use it recreationally is misuse of the substance. It also seems a KB thing to spout on about subects that one has no personal experience with. You can research the arse off a subject all you like Ed but you won't really "get it" until you've tried it. Have you tried Cannabis Ed or are you just spouting off?

[ducatilover]

Your post came across that you considered people who smoke Cannabis as dumb fucks, thanks for the clarification. Yes, I try to ignore the idiots out there, it's a lot easier to do than to ignore the idiots in here, who can actually be entertaining at times. Where I live and where I grew up has little to do with dumb fucks as dumb fucks are everywhere, born into affluence as easily as born into poverty. I wouldn't say I love to attack people personally, I just don't suffer fools lightly and see the internet as a medium for open & frank discussion and sharing of opinions. This site has an ignore function, it costs nothing and is easy to use, even for a dumb fuck. I don't think it's all pointless speculation on the interwebs, I believe that discussion on subjects where people hold opposing views is vital if we as a society are going to move forward, rather than sitting in the dark continuing to do dumb shit like persecute people for using a naturally occuring substance for their betterment & enjoyment.

Well, I gave my opinion on some things there, so I did gud.
I'm off to go see how useful cannabis is as a commercial product, not as a recreational drug.

You're not a sexy female with giant breasts, you're a gangly ginga with a bad haircut, sideburns and a flat chest.

As you were.

Ruin my moment

[mashman]

And you cannot ethically test it, unless you make some secret clones

Technically incorrect? Monitor an individual for a year, diet, full blood work, brain activity, environment etc... but without cannabis/alcohol, essentially benchmark their "natural" state for a year. After that year give them "lots" of alcohol and monitor them for another year. Get clean for a year after, or at least find out how clean they can get, along with "long term" affects. Then do the same with cannabis. Then do the same thing with a much larger group of people for trends analysis. Might do the trick? albeit seriously fuckin expensive to do.

That link Mashy posted is brilliant though

Someone posted it on here a year or so ago and it was most definitely worth bookmarking.

[Edbear]

It's a little bit of a common trend eh?
I think, without researching though, that cannabis as a commercial product could be ideal, IF it is as wonderful and green (pun intended) as said.

That link Mashy posted is brilliant though

Yup!

I don't have a need to use Cannabis for medicinal purposes and I don't agree that to use it recreationally is misuse of the substance. It also seems a KB thing to spout on about subects that one has no personal experience with. You can research the arse off a subject all you like Ed but you won't really "get it" until you've tried it. Have you tried Cannabis Ed or are you just spouting off?

The old, " Don't knock it until you've tried it!" argument. Crap. I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you. The only times I have heard that lame excuse is for illicit drugs and promiscuous sex. Apply your argument to everything and you can see how lame it is.

[ducatilover]

Technically incorrect? Monitor an individual for a year, diet, full blood work, brain activity, environment etc... but without cannabis/alcohol, essentially benchmark their "natural" state for a year. After that year give them "lots" of alcohol and monitor them for another year. Get clean for a year after, or at least find out how clean they can get, along with "long term" affects. Then do the same with cannabis. Then do the same thing with a much larger group of people for trends analysis. Might do the trick? albeit seriously fuckin expensive to do.

Not ethical to make someone drink/smoke a fuck load. I suggested it as a laugh in one of my first year lab classes at Massey and got told off
There are many other factors, you cannot essentially draw results unless all other variables are the same, you need three identical subjects in three identical environments, with the only difference being one sucks bottle, one sucks bong and the other drives a Prius

Then, if you get significant findings, do the test but with a shit load more subjects.

So essentially, we need a giant institution, full of people who are exactly the same.
Up for a trip to congress?

Someone posted it on here a year or so ago and it was most definitely worth bookmarking.

Gives me something interesting to watch/read while dying of some stupid fever

[mashman]

It seems to be a KB thing. Notable and oft overlooked is that those most vocal in their defense of smoking weed and who rant on about all the benefits in their defense, are simply those who want to smoke it to get stoned without legal consequence. they are not the slightest bit interested in doing anything to change the status by research and support of alternative uses or even in having it medically processed as a painkiller as that doesn't get them the buzz they want.

If Cannabis was commercially viable in all these other uses it would be used.

What's wrong with a little high every now and then? Or even every evening where it's "damage" is unquantifiable by science given that individuals react differently? As I've mentioned before, it relaxes me, it helps me maintain my weight, it allows me a peaceful nights sleep and it gives me drive to do things. Now I can take man-made alternatives to achieve all of those goals, including taking sleeping pills and not sleeping to get that buzz you're talking about. Would you rather I took multiple legal medications to achieve the affects (wonder what the side affects of those medications taken together would be) or would you rather I didn't become a walking pill box and relied on a natural herb? Yes I want it legal so that I can use my preferred method of achieving those goals. What's wrong with that?

trollymoley that's some naive shit you've been fed. You may wanna look over the reasons for Cannabis prohibition. It wasn't banned for health purposes.

[Madness]

The old, " Don't knock it until you've tried it!" argument. Crap. I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you. The only times I have heard that lame excuse is for illicit drugs and promiscuous sex. Apply your argument to everything and you can see how lame it is.

Just as I thought, spouting off again. You do know that you don't have to smoke Cannabis to enjoy it's many benefits, eh Ed? Did the books mention that, assuming you've read many books on the subject as part of your usual exhaustive research on any given subject?

I actually pity you sometimes Ed, living life as a spectator rather than a participant. It's a bit late to change now I suppose, being pretty old & fucked.

[Katman]

I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you.

There's plenty of things that are bad for you Ed.

Do you use salt in your food?

Do you drink any soft drinks?

There's nothing to show that light cannabis use is any more harmful than a myriad of other products.

Hell, you don't even have to smoke it.

[mashman]

Not ethical to make someone drink/smoke a fuck load. I suggested it as a laugh in one of my first year lab classes at Massey and got told off
There are many other factors, you cannot essentially draw results unless all other variables are the same, you need three identical subjects in three identical environments, with the only difference being one sucks bottle, one sucks bong and the other drives a Prius

Then, if you get significant findings, do the test but with a shit load more subjects.

So essentially, we need a giant institution, full of people who are exactly the same.
Up for a trip to congress?



Gives me something interesting to watch/read while dying of some stupid fever

I can imagine there'd be a volunteer or two to take part in such research. Hell, maybe Ed will put his money where his mouth is and pay for that research .
Is that what you're told? Essentially you'd be proving that you could use the same identical person (me, myself and I, heh) for the testing instead of 3 identical people.

Shirley finding out if the methodology was "sound" before denying that it could be would be more of a scientific approach than writing it off before paying a visit to the too hard basket?

You don't need exactly the same person do ya? After all we're all different, we all have different reactions to what we ingest etc... kinda pointless trying a one cap fits all without knowing if one cap fits all is the solution?
Fuck yeah!

Awwwww what's wrong petal? Oh, and something to read... may be a tad tinfoil hat, but I dunno

[ducatilover]

I can imagine there'd be a volunteer or two to take part in such research. Hell, maybe Ed will put his money where his mouth is and pay for that research .
Is that what you're told? Essentially you'd be proving that you could use the same identical person (me, myself and I, heh) for the testing instead of 3 identical people.

Shirley finding out if the methodology was "sound" before denying that it could be would be more of a scientific approach than writing it off before paying a visit to the too hard basket?

You don't need exactly the same person do ya? After all we're all different, we all have different reactions to what we ingest etc... kinda pointless trying a one cap fits all without knowing if one cap fits all is the solution?
Fuck yeah!

Well, to get results showing that it does indeed have positive, or ill effects on a person, you will need to have the one without the drugs, alcohol etc. And one with, to compare how the same person ends up in whichever scenario.
Then, to come to a reasonable conclusion, you would need to test massive amounts of these clones, but with many different groups with different genetic make ups etc.
It's a bit of a hard basket thing isn't it?
Because, if you think about it:

Jimmy; Jimmy has started smoking pot, we know how he was in the first few years before hand, but we can only speculate on how he will be later in life, IF, he continues the same lifestyle.
Now we can look at him and how his habits, attitude etc change when he smokes pot at whatever frequency/dosage he chooses. Then we can speculate on how he will be later in life IF he chooses to continue the same lifestyle.

It's really no that testable (is that even a word?) and just like many other conclusions, it will need to be interpretation of correlation, which is why in any article released on marijuana/drug/tobacco/etc usage and effects, nowhere will it say "proves".

Awwwww what's wrong petal?

Some virus or flu, or pure weakness thing. It has cut down my ciggarette consumption over the last few days though, an undeniably good thing eh?

I'm going to say it's because I'm 450km away from my bikes, it makes sense, I wasn't sick when I was at home with my bikes.

Oh, and something to read... may be a tad tinfoil hat, but I dunno

At first glance that does look very tinfoil hat, but I'll look through it



Sent from my armadillo hat using RADIO WAVES!!!!!!!

[blue rider]

+1 and add why not just pull up the two, yes only two, plants and 'discuss' with your parents? Why do you have to go running to the popo who have more important stuff to do like check bike regos?

I laid a complaint with the IPCA the other day.....well weeks ago actually, and the copper i spoke to yesterday assured me that popo is not only looking at regos of bikies, and no they don't single us out, and they don't try to collect revenue ....and even that the thing with the donuts is a myth......

but i am off topic here...

lets remember.....alcohol and all its assorted goodness it brings is a ok, cause legal
cigarettes with all its assorted goodness is a ok, cause legal

weed.......evil, cause illegal....
and some fucking hate drugs, but only the ones they don't use.

We are so fucked!

[Dogboy900]

Somewhat off topic but interesting none the less, a work mate of mine took part in an experiment on the effect of alcohol and drugs on driving back in the 60's
I don't know all the details but over a period of a few weeks they were required to drive through an obstacle course and then take which ever substance, repeat the test, take more, repeat the test etc.
I don't know exactly what they tried, but I do know they tried alcohol, marijuana, and lsd!
From memory when they tested marijuana they did not fail the driving test by going off line but they did take a looong time to finish it towards the end.

He has fond memories of being a test subject!

[BoristheBiter]

I wouldn't say I love to attack people personally, I just don't suffer fools lightly and see the internet as a medium for open & frank discussion and sharing of opinions. This site has an ignore function, it costs nothing and is easy to use, even for a dumb fuck.

As you were.

You wouldn't know an open and frank discussion if it slapped you in the face. You get off on abusing anyone that doesn't agree with you.
You can't go for more than one post without and outburst of swearing.

Take what this thread was about. You called the girl a stupid cunt, Now you think that is fine but when I called you one you just couldn't handle the jandle, spat the dummy and went on a crusade to abuse me.
Frank and open discussion don't make me laugh.

[MSTRS:Me]

The old, " Don't knock it until you've tried it!" argument. Crap. I don't need to smoke anything to know it is bad for you. The only times I have heard that lame excuse is for illicit drugs and promiscuous sex. Apply your argument to everything and you can see how lame it is.

I'm guessing that you researched the fuck out of motorbikes and the riding thereof before you actually bought/rode one? Your research would have told you of all the risks around riding bikes, yet you still went ahead and did it. Risk/reward benefit at work. How dare you sit in judgement of those who apply that in other areas.