Home > Is Marijuana Safe? > Is Marijuana Safe?

Is Marijuana Safe?

MARIJUANAFacts About Marijuana (Cannabis and Hashish)

The Truth About Joints dispels the false propaganda that cannabis is “not as bad” as other drugs and provides accurate information about the real dangers of marijuana and hashish.

Street names for Marijuana & Hashish:

MARIJUANA:
Astro turf

Bhang

Blunt

Boom

Chronic

Dagga

Dope

Gangster

Ganja

Grass

Hemp

Herb

Home grown

J

Kiff

Mary Jane

Nederweed

Pot

Purple Haze

Reefer

Roach

Smoke

Skunk

Super Skunk

Texas tea

Weed

White

Widow

HASHISH:

Chocolate

Hash

Sh


View On-Line:
Click here to Read The Truth About Joints Booklet

Cannabis is usually rolled up in a cigarette called a joint or a nail. It can also be brewed as a tea or mixed with food, or smoked through a water pipe called a bong.

Sixty percent of teenagers in drug treatment programs are there because of marijuana. According to a National Household Survey on Drug Abuse, kids who frequently use marijuana are almost four times more likely to act violently or damage property. They are five times more likely to steal than those who do not use the drug.

Marijuana is often more potent today than it used to be. Growing techniques and selective use of seeds have produced a more powerful drug. Correspondingly, there has been a sharp increase in the number of marijuana-related emergency room visits by young pot smokers.

Because a tolerance builds up, marijuana can lead users to consume stronger drugs to achieve the same “high.” When the effects start to wear off, the person may turn to more potent drugs to rid himself of the unwanted conditions that prompted him to take marijuana in the first place.

Marijuana itself does not lead the person to the other drugs: people take drugs to get rid of unwanted situations or feelings. The drug (marijuana) masks the problem for a time (while the user is “high.”). When the “high” fades, the problem, unwanted condition or situation returns more intensely than before. The user may then turn to stronger drugs since marijuana no longer “works.”

Short-term Effects:

Users suffer loss of coordination and distortions in their sense of time, vision and hearing. Other effects are sleepiness, reddening of the eyes, increased appetite and relaxed muscles. Heart rate can speed up. In fact, in the first hour of smoking marijuana, a user’s risk of a heart attack increases at least five-fold. School performance is reduced through impaired memory and lessened ability to solve problems.

Long-term Effects:

Long-term use can cause psychotic symptoms. It can also damage the lungs and the heart, worsen the symptoms of bronchitis and cause coughing and wheezing. It may reduce the body’s ability to fight lung infections and illness.

Read free booklet on-line

Download The Truth About Marijuana booklet

Advertisements
  1. You're dumb
    February 7, 2008 at 6:31 am

    I’m not sure how this site came up so high on google’s ranking system after my inquiry for “marijuana safety” but I have to say I completly disagree. Not once in this article is there a single cited source. If I turned in an english paper arguing against anything but did not cite a source I’d get an F.

    • jay
      May 21, 2009 at 3:08 am

      I totally agree with the “Youre dumb” comment.

      This article is nothing but ridiculous..

    • no u idiot
      November 20, 2009 at 8:25 pm

      how can u come up with such a cut and dry statistic like 4 times more likley for activities or situations are so complicated and specialized to manifest if you look at the real picture… what kind of person are we talking about first of all, second what type of environment and how can doing one thing(weed) make you have the same likelihood to do three completly different activities that require three completly different settings. even if those stats are correct it doesnt mean anything, for example, If i love my Mom and i would never hurt her if i took something that made me 4 times as likely to kill her it doesnt matter because it is a simple equation of 0 x 4= 0. also how could it be such a convenient easy function as 4 times for everyone. if theres a vey violent person that trys weed is he really going to be perfectly 4 times more violent. and if theres a peacful monk is he really going to be exactly 4 times as violent.

    • scholar
      November 20, 2009 at 8:49 pm

      this article is right. my friend went to rehab after his first time trying marijuana and got caught in the act and had to complete the same rehab course as heroin addicts and when he said he doesnt have an addiction problem they made him start over again. I dont even think he even had a chance to be addicted because he got caught in the act. So atleast one statistic is right in this article because if you go to a public school if u get caught with any drug you go to rehab. so 60 percent sounds right. As for everything else in this article completely fabricated. Lets say these “statistics” were about something else and not weed, it wouldnt make any sense because what they are implying is impossible.

  2. February 8, 2008 at 12:44 am

    Understood on including appropriate references. Do you have any problem with any SPECIFIC information I’ve included on the site or is your comment just a general statement?

    Check out one of my favorite sites for more information (http://www.drugfreeworld.org), to download free drug booklets (http://www.drugfreeworld.org/downloads/index.html) and check out as many references as you like.

  3. OpenYourMind
    February 12, 2008 at 12:00 am

    This is just rhetoric written by people who’ve never tried it or are afraid to. The fact is marijuana is a wonderful aid to help all sorts of disorders and is great for recreational use. If anyone is against it, I would advise to try it yourself and form your own opinion. I have ADHD and it helps me to relax and think rationally, in addition, it is uplifting, makes music sound great and is a fun experience everytime. It will give you a different perspective on life or situations and its very spiritual. Lastly, is as safe as coffee, and less harmful than alcohol or tobacco.

  4. February 12, 2008 at 4:58 am

    Yea, great lets all drug ourselves into oblivion. Ignorance is bliss, right…

    • no u idiot
      November 20, 2009 at 7:51 pm

      no u idiot ur being ignorant because you think not using marijuana will save you… you fool these people are less ignorant than you because they r using there brain and thinking for themselves. you r ignorant because u stay in your bubble and blindly believe that using marijuana is drugging yourself just because you heard it u r so incapable of critical thinking that you accept these propaganda stories like its religion

  5. OpenYourMind
    February 12, 2008 at 1:39 pm

    I take it your saying that it was put on this earth as a mistake? Why is it here and what’s its purpose? If you tried it, you would probably have a different perspective. Just try it.

  6. February 12, 2008 at 8:24 pm

    By that logic, why don’t you just take anything you find on earth, throw it in a pipe and smoke it. It must be safe, right…

    • no u idiot
      November 20, 2009 at 7:59 pm

      ur ignorant too.. so ud rather take tylenol or asprin right, because they are safe? they r dangerous u can overdose on those and it damages ur liver worse than alcohol! i am not proving these points because i support weed, im just irritated when all u idiots are speaking blindly like you know anything about it or yourself for that matter. think for yourself unless its too much work for u.. you ppl r worse than heroin addicts because u abandoned ur mind. try using your brain and trust ur mind it might not be funn at first for you low lifes but after u use ur brain for a even a couple of days you see how powerful u r.

    • no u idiot
      November 20, 2009 at 8:27 pm

      find one instince where someone overdosed from weed.

  7. OpenYourMind
    February 12, 2008 at 10:16 pm

    All I can say is that its one of the most earthly and spiritual experiences and is much less of a drug than alcohol which is addictive and makes people do crazy things. The fact that a flower that provides so much benefit without side effects is illegal shows you that the FDA is totally corrupt. Im with you when it comes to the FDA drugs, its overboard and driven by money. Everyone is on meds and its a shame, when most of them would do fine with an alternate solution. I was on Strattera but got off it right away and stopped feeding the drug machine. Weed is good when i really need to calm down and I dont care if its illegal or not, George Bush is corrupt and so is the whole system.

  8. THE TRUTH
    March 4, 2008 at 1:14 am

    Kids are in those treatment facilitys because they have been lied to. all of my life i’ve heard that drugs are bad, and they are, but marijuana is not as bad as drugs that are legal today. The stitistic that kids who smoke weed are 4 more times likely to act violently or vandolize is a complete lie. Anyone who has tryed it knows for a fact that it CALMS you not makes you crazy like alcohol. Im pretty sure there is no reason to steal when your high as well….because you dont care. Why would you steal something when you could just sit and be stoned, and not care. The thing about potency is that a plant can only produce so much of it. It’s not like the dealer adds some to it every time. MARIJUANA IS NOT A GATEWAY DRUG. you choose whether or not you want to do what you do. If thats the case then i smoked a cig before i smoked weed because i didnt know how to inhale. Then i learned with cigs and now i smoke weed because i know how to, or because the buzz wasnt good enough. I got tired of having to drink and throw up just to get messed up so i think i will just smoke weed. If thats the case legal drugs are gateways to illegal drugs. I dont know what utopia you are living in but im pretty sure just about every single person who does hard drugs went to church, smoked weed, drank, smoked cigs, ate, drank coffie, and everything else under the sun but none of that leeds them to drugs? i mean make some sence people. I am also positive that you can control your schooling on marijuana. Yes, it does make you not want to do anything, but if you just push through it you will come out on top. Im pretty sure I make straight A’s and smoke weed everyday,sometimes before i go to school. If you dont believe me i will send you report cards. As far as marijuana hurts your lungs goes, cigs hurt them worst because your average marijuana smoke isn’t going to smoke as much as your average cigarette smoker. There was a test done back in the day (as all tests about marijuana are) that said 1 marijuana joint is equal to 4 cigs. This was found not true not only because it was done during the reefer madness days, but because they did the test on tar, not radio activity. They also did the test on the leaves of the plant whitch is rarely smoked, the buds are what is smoked. The buds contained 33% less tar then the leaves and there was almost no radiation found in marijuana. Let’s face it how many ppl die of pot? Around, lets see here, 0? How many ppl die of alcohol or cigs? A LOT. I mean if your going to take the time to post things on the internet make SURE that they a factional. Also make sure you put some references like that guy said bnecause i think you just pulled this straight out of anslingers ass. If you want me to i could or will send you links to every single bit of this information i have just told you. Not coming from 1934. Present day FACTS.
    Dont just trust this guy or me for that matter, get out there look it up, and find REAL facts. Im also not saying go try it because it is illegal still but that will change.

    • no u idiot
      November 20, 2009 at 8:13 pm

      this school boy id right but for all u idiots out there. since when is this so called research and citing sources better than ur own interpretation of the experience and its affects. theses facts come from someone they dont just come outta the sky. Why not trust yourself more than any facts on the internet and make ur own facts and conclusions. u dumbasses r basically telling us that u hate urselves and u think u are worthless so u have to rely on reading facts off a machine to know how to operate. u know the answers! u r the real thing! also anyone else that is good hearted and smart will know that anything good out there will easily come to ppl and pppl will know forethemselves if its good so they know they dont have to tell people about it. they can subtly tell them i tried it and i like itbut they dont have to tell them any facts about it. the only reaon anyone would want to try and sell u on an idea its because u would never come to that conclusion on ur own and they have a corrupt motive. this article obviously is trying too hard to sell us on the idea that weed is bad. (4 times more likely to steal?) what kind of statistic is that. what setting what kind of person and what r the conditions of the experiment that concluded this “fact” bolony

  9. marxpace
    March 10, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    As a smoker of twenty-five years or more, I cannot endorse this report; it is misleading and inaccurate. M.

  10. March 11, 2008 at 2:10 am

    What’s inaccurate about it?

    • no u idiot
      November 20, 2009 at 8:43 pm

      its not only innacurate but the statistics are null and void and because what the statistics the article provided are implying something that is mathimatically impossible ans earthly impossible. jst think about what u are saying: A person (there are so many diferent types of ppl out there) who smokes weed(there are so many different types of weed and ways to smoke it) will be do some act 4 times as much than he normally would. the act of violence requires u to find something to harm but u even said in the article that ur muscles are relaxed so u wouldnt even want to fight! Vandalism requires you to find something like spray paint or a bat or your hands, then find something to vandalize.) but the user would be to incapacitated to do any of those things he would be too lazy and afraid to do it!

  11. R
    April 11, 2008 at 2:39 am

    Please back up your “facts” with proof. Thanks.

    I mean, really, what do you mean by “psychotic symptoms”? Couldn’t you be a bit more specific, or do you even know? How does a drug that makes you calm play an affect in violent children? Sort of a contradicting statement, don’t you think? Sixty percent are in rehab because of pot? How do you know that? Did you survey every rehab clinic in the country to get your stats, or did you just ignorantly take that from some unreliable Internet source like everyone else does (because it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to say the eighty-three percent of people who don’t eat spinach are more likely to get cancer than those who do, and it only takes a really special idiot to believe the liar with no prior information backing-up their claim)?

    My point is: this article was not persuading nor was it well informed. If you had actually taken the time to go in depth and do more research, giving genuine reasons as to why marijuana smoking is so horrible (though I do agree it’s bad, so many people overexaggerate and throw it completely out of proportion), maybe I wouldn’t be insulting your views. Alas, you did no such thing, and instead threw together a bunch of random “facts” – I’m using that term loosely – that we can’t even be sure are actually true. I myself use pot occasionally, and I don’t seem to have any of these “psychotic symptoms” you’re shoving down our throats.

    Now that you know this fact legitimately, however, your biased mind will probably decide not to take my comment seriously (that I’m some “stupid stoner”), thus I should end here. Let me add this, though: in the future, be sure to cite your work with trusty sources, something that any grade-schooler knows to do. Like another person said: If this were a real essay, you wouldn’t be getting a very promising grade in return for it.

    Oh, two more questions that I’m actually really curious about: Why can’t we as people start caring about more terrible, important things, like rape, murder and pedophilia? Who actually cares about a damn plant that makes you mellow? Seriously…

  12. Yo bro
    May 3, 2008 at 2:13 pm

    Dude I have smoked for 6 years, go to university with good grades, have a part-time job and pay taxes. By the way i beat 96% of the population in my final high school exams.

    Propaganda will never silence the truth forever.

  13. May 3, 2008 at 8:46 pm

    cool duuuude.

  14. Atreyu108
    May 27, 2008 at 6:08 am

    Wow Ignorance is bliss right websk8ter. Lawl get a life geek… wheres the facts all people are asking. Smoked herb for probably more years than yer age HAHA.

  15. stillness_within
    June 7, 2008 at 1:17 pm

    This article is nothing but parroted fear-based propaganda written by someone who is completely ignorant of the Truth.

    Cannabis has been used since the times of ancient humanity for spiritual purposes. The god Shiva of Hindu mythology is also known as the “lord of bhang” (bhang is the Indian term for Cannabis). Ancient and modern yogis alike are known to imbibe cannabis for the spiritual effects it produces. In particular, it strongly stimulates the movement of Kundalini Shakti (divine sexual energy) in the human nervous system, creating purification and opening of the chakras (spiritual centres of the body which correlate with specific neurobiology and the endocrine gland system).

    Yes, it can be misused. So too can a kitchen knife be turned upon oneself, but in the hands of a skilled chef it is used to create a delicious meal. This does not change the fact that cannabis is a sacred spiritual tool placed upon this precious planet by the Creator (Yahweh — Brahman). It is a part of this infinite universe, and you have taken up arms against it, presumably without ever having tried it yourself. The result is that you are spreading disinformation which was planted by a corporate entity (the US government) almost a century ago to protect its interests and to keep the general population from exploring their own consciousness. This is why alcohol is legal, as it does not expand consciousness. It instead lowers one’s vibration and ties one more strongly to the illusion of the material world.

    Free your mind, brother human. Cast off the shackles which your cult has put upon your spirit. Think for yourself. Do not believe without reason, seek to know.

    May God bless you and raise your consciousness so you may experience the Truth.

    OM Namaste

  16. J
    July 23, 2008 at 7:13 pm

    @websk8er:
    I love your comments, your factual prowess astounds me…

    @Everyone Else:
    Keep tokin’!

  17. Kuandio
    September 6, 2008 at 10:12 pm

    I have become greatly confused about this subject. I used to smoke weed everyday for quite a few years, and back then would have disagreed with anyone who was against weed. I thought maybe it was the solution for all humanity. Eventually it started to make me feel weird, less alive, more indifferent, while at the same time I thought I was expanding my mind to great new insights and realities. In the end it lead to tremendous amount of fear from massive panic attacks in which the shit finally hit the fan, paranoia, fears of all kinds that really, really, fucked up my life. …. Now, I am not saying that it is only marijuana that is responsible, in great part it is my own life experiences that my mind accumulated that lead to those very dark times, my beliefs about life, and the beliefs of others, etc. But, I have thought about this issue long and hard because of how it affected me. I have noticed that generally all the pot heads I know don’t really have such great lives, they certainly think they do, but far more often than not they are unstable and depressed people and do not really achieve the full potential of their lives. Also, I have noted how many other people who were long time users of marijuana ended up having to quit because they ended up feeling they were having panic attacks and losing their minds. Why else would anyone quit if it is supposed to be so great? If it wasn’t for the psychosis that this lead to, I would still be a big time smoker and advocating it to everyone. I could go on and on, but I won’t. One of the worse things that has just happened is that my cousin, who comes from a family of potheads, and was a pothead himself, has just committed suicide. So, I think pot can lead you to certain insights, pleasures, but that in the end it is very misleading, takes to a place that you are unaware you are even going.

  18. Jesus
    October 16, 2008 at 11:42 pm

    “The Lord said unto me, ‘I will take my rest and I will consider in my dwelling place like a clear heat upon herbs.’ ” — Isaiah 18:4-5

  19. Jesus
    October 16, 2008 at 11:44 pm

    AND
    “Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed which is upon the face of all the earth.…To you it will be for meat.” … And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. (Genesis 1:29-31)

  20. marymejane
    January 2, 2009 at 10:22 am

    THIS HAS NOTHING BUT HYPOCRITICAL COMMENTS. IF TEENS GO TO THE HOSPITAL FOR MARIJUANA RELATED THINGS DEN IT SHUD HAVE TO DO WITH MARIJUANA AND ITS NOT. DER HAS NEVER BEEN A CASE OF SOMEONE WHO O.D ON MARIJUANA. DON’T U FIND IT FUNNY THAT IF U SMOKE 10 JOINTS OF MARIJUANA DA WORSE TO HAPPEN IS U PASS OUT BUT IF U TAKE 10 ASPRINS LETS SEE IF U WAKE TO TELL THE TALE

  21. redraven
    February 18, 2009 at 10:48 pm

    It’s interesting to watch this discussion evolve from the original statement.

  22. redraven
    February 18, 2009 at 10:59 pm

    My experience in life is that if someone does not have a convincing arguement, they will exaggerate, skew or outright deny the truth in order to support there pet propoganda. Taking information from many different sources about the topic, this seems reminiscent of the the entire anti-cannabis campaign. From the beginning they skewed the facts. It seems, to this day, that many people are still running around with this false information. Cigarretes kill people. Alcohol kills people. Pot. Not one person.

  23. redraven
    February 18, 2009 at 11:06 pm

    If you want to see someone get stupid and violent, give them alcohol. some will start a fight w/ anyone they can find, vomit, pass out on the cold hard concrete and then piss themselves. But this is legal!

    • scholar
      November 20, 2009 at 8:55 pm

      hahaha

  24. redraven
    February 18, 2009 at 11:14 pm

    The tobacco industy is infamous for getting rich off of a product that kills people that still smoke, even though they are well aware that it is killing them. This is the definition of addiction. This is the definition of harmful. But it is completely legal, and we are completely aware. This is willful ignorance and hypocrisy of staggering proportions.

  25. redraven
    February 18, 2009 at 11:55 pm

    Has anyone seen the comments I posted? they seem to have been misplaced. (Seriously. They can’t just vanish, can they? Were here a minute ago.)

  26. redraven
    February 18, 2009 at 11:57 pm

    Ahahaha! found em. was wierd

    • scholar
      November 20, 2009 at 8:57 pm

      pothead haha keep tokin

  27. anonymous
    February 20, 2009 at 8:15 pm

    I find many of these statements to be questionable, seeing how there is not one cited source, no official statistics or anything. Sounds like an opinion to me. Or at least exaggerations. Since I began using marijuana, my grades and school performance have increased. I am in no way saying that the drug helped this, but it obviously didn’t make anything go down. My sister who has been a marijuana user for 2 years, smoking often, currently has a 4.2 GPA and has, in no way, shown any psychological decline since using. I’m not gonna say “c’mon just try it then you’ll understand,” in my opinion that’s not how it works. But I will say that it has opened my mind in so many ways, I find it to be beautiful. I, and I think i can speak for many when I say this, don’t use it to “get fucked up” or to cover up emotional issues. I was watching a movie the other day and a woman was interviewed for the use of marijuana who had cancer. She claimed she had been enduring chronic pain and when she tried smoking, she could not believe how much appreciation she developed for it. It took away all of her pain, and helped her depression. How can you see this as something “dangerous” or “horrible”? It’s a plant. Not a synthetic drug created in a lab. You mentioned that the use of this makes teens more likely to steal? Please, please inform me where you are getting this information, because honestly I see a great amount of ignorance in your writing. When people drink or take drugs such as meth or cocaine, they seem moody, sometimes angered, violent, have horrible come downs, and often take it out on others. I’ve seen it firsthand.

    Do you notice how marijuana is the only drug anyone ever argues for? No one is sitting here trying to defend meth, or defend heroine saying that it’s not that bad. Because we are all aware that it is. I was reading a pamphlet for parents the other day about drugs, and when i flipped the marijuana section, i couldn’t help but laugh. It said, “effects of marijuana” 1. Your children may have increased laughter
    2) Your child may suddenly start to have an increased appetite
    and so on.

    To me, this sounds like innocence.

    All in all, marijuana has opened up my mind, and let me discover new things about myself. There are no depressing come-downs, no headaches or pain when suddenly stopping the use, and on a less formal note:

    I laugh more,
    I eat more,
    I relax more,
    I write and draw more,
    I think about situations in a whole new light,

    How dangerous is that?

    Now maybe my insight differs because I use it responsibly, so it doesn’t effect my career or my school work. I just think people who are against it exaggerate the dangers of it. Maybe one day i’ll come to the conclusion that it’s slowing me down, like others have. But since I haven’t seen one sign of this, i’ll continue to hold my appreciation for it, it’s beautiful.

  28. steven
    February 21, 2009 at 8:36 am

    This whole article is nothing but false accusations.. weed helps with so much, my dad had severe back problems wich left him almost always in a wheel chair and was on prescription morphine. he always said to me “man as much morphine as i have to take a day it would just be easier to smoke a couple joints a day” and he did. he said the weed helped just as much or more then his prescriptions did. and this past june 8th i watched my dad die from a 12 guage gun shot wound in his chest. i have very bad post-truamtic strees and weed really helps. its not like alcohol were it makes you depreesed and creates bigger and more problems. it helps me to calm and relax myself so i can function normally ( its does not make me violent or i would not smoke weed cause it would just make my situation worse). i now am 16 and do my schooling online, carry a job, support my son, and always manage to make my girlfriend happy. so this whole article should be erased

  29. educated
    February 24, 2009 at 2:03 am

    This article is based purely on your emotion and how you feel. This argument is horrible. You don’t have to like smoking weed, you don’t have to do it but what you should not do is jump on the senior citizen republican band wagon simply because you are ignorant. Do your research, and really do it. Don’t go online to a couple anti-marijuana sites and then write your own article claiming your finds as facts. Marijuana is a gateway drug, along with soda(caffeine) , coffee, cigs, ritalin, adderall etc.
    What is funny is people like you support pharmaceuticals that are way more harmful and addicting. Children being put on speed (adderall-amphetamines) is ok but an adult smoking marijuana is not. amphetamines are the main ingredient in adderall, speed and METH. So as we force feed these drugs to our elementary level children we could only hope that they spend their days smoking weed rather than smoking meth.
    Teenagers and antidepressants. Mom and dad think their teen needs help… bring them to the doctor, give them prozac. Everything’s all better now. And don’t worry it’s safe the FDA approved it (more like they were paid for it). People spend years in a happy and harmful bliss while their brain loses the ability to make its own serotonin.

    I may not be a doctor, but i’ve spent the better part of the last five years researching drugs of all kinds interviewing with doctors, biologists and chemists all of which have truly detrimental to say about marijuana. I would challenge you to spend as much time as i have researching the subject, You really are a moron. I don’t even do the drug! But I refuse to be ignorant.

    Think about it… how many homes do you know of that were torn apart because of marijuana, and how many from alcohol?

  30. kuandio
    March 1, 2009 at 8:49 pm

    I posted this a few months ago, but no one seems to want to come up with any opinion on what I said. I’ll post it again because I think it would be good, if everyone wants to open, expand their mind so much, that we tried to see things from more perspectives than just the ones we want to, or the ones we’ve experienced,)….

    I have become greatly confused about this subject. I used to smoke weed everyday for quite a few years, and back then would have disagreed with anyone who was against weed. I thought maybe it was the solution for all humanity. Eventually it started to make me feel weird, less alive, more indifferent, while at the same time I thought I was expanding my mind to great new insights and realities. In the end it lead to tremendous amount of fear from massive panic attacks in which the shit finally hit the fan, paranoia, fears of all kinds that really, really, fucked up my life. …. Now, I am not saying that it is only marijuana that is responsible, in great part it is my own life experiences that my mind accumulated that lead to those very dark times, my beliefs about life, and the beliefs of others, etc. But, I have thought about this issue long and hard because of how it affected me. I have noticed that generally all the pot heads I know don’t really have such great lives, they certainly think they do, but far more often than not they are unstable and depressed people and do not really achieve the full potential of their lives. Also, I have noted how many other people who were long time users of marijuana ended up having to quit because they ended up feeling they were having panic attacks and losing their minds. Why else would anyone quit if it is supposed to be so great? If it wasn’t for the psychosis that this lead to, I would still be a big time smoker and advocating it to everyone. I could go on and on, but I won’t. One of the worse things that has just happened is that my cousin, who comes from a family of potheads, and was a pothead himself, has just committed suicide. So, I think pot can lead you to certain insights, pleasures, but that in the end it is very misleading, takes to a place that you are unaware you are even going.

  31. John Patrick
    March 10, 2009 at 3:52 am

    My Sincere condolences to you. Although there is still no evidence that pot can lead to psychosis. The real truth is that Marijuana has been stereotyped, and because of this; no proper research has been able to be completed. There is absolutely no conclusive evidence supporting or opposing the use of marijuana. The only real numbers in any marijuana study are the number of incarcerations
    In 2000, police made 1,579,566 total arrests for drug abuse violations. 81%—or 1,279,448—of these total drug arrests were for possession. 46.5%—or 734,497 of all drug arrests—were for marijuana offenses. And of the total marijuana arrests, 646,042 (88%) were for possession alone.
    Taxpayers annually spend between $7.5 billion and $10 billion arresting and prosecuting individuals for marijuana violations. Almost 90 percent of these arrests are for marijuana possession only. Sources: Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports for the United States 2000 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2001), pp. 215-216, Tables 29 and 4.1.
    An as a time that this country is in fiscal crisis maybe it is the potheads that can help. Here are some more statistics and numbers for ya.The state of California saved nearly $1 billion dollars from 1976 to 1985 by decriminalizing the personal possession of one ounce of marijuana, according to a study of the state justice department budget.
    REFERENCE: M. Aldrich and T. Mikuriya. 1988. Savings in California marijuana law enforcement costs attributable to the Moscone Act of 1976. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 20: 75-81.
    California NORML estimates that a legal market for marijuana could yield the state $1.5 – $2.5 billion. A basic $1 per joint excise tax would yield about $1 billion to the state, while the state would save over $150 million in enforcement costs for arrests, prosecutions and prison. Additional benefits would accrue from sales taxes and spinoff industries. Total retail sales of marijuana would be on the order of $3-$5 billion, with total economic impact of $8-$13 billion including spinoff industries such as coffeehouses, tourism, and industrial hemp.

  32. JediTheOne
    March 15, 2009 at 9:44 am

    I sorry to say this but websk8er…you are an idiot. Your information is dumb and a waste of time. You really want the truth you moron. Well here it is. And yes…every statement has source(s) and scientific information to back it.

    The Young Decision: DEA Administrative Law Judge Findings
    While DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis Young’s monumental decision that cannabis (marijuana) should rightfully be placed in Schedule II or lower of the Controlled Substances Act to make it available by prescription has been held hostage by the DEA’s discretion in doing so. Nonetheless, the factual findings of his decision remain permanently on the record, and serve as a testimonial to his honest pursuit of the medical issues surrounding cannabis.

    Excerpt from U.S. Federal Court Decision in the Case of

    Alliance for Cannabis Therapeutics, et al., vs. US Drug Enforcement Administration (IRS):

    Marijuana
    “Marijuana appears to be readily available to almost all 12th graders; in 2005 86% reported that they think it would be ‘very easy’ or ‘fairly easy’ for them to get it — almost twice the number who reported ever having used it (45%).
    “After marijuana, 12th-grade students indicated that amphetamines are among the easiest drugs to obtain (51%).”

    Source: Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E., Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2005: Volume I, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 06-5883) (Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse), August 2006, p. 401.

    Although people may think that the Drug War targets drug smugglers and ‘King Pins,’ in 2007, 47.4 percent of the 1,841,182 total arrests for drug abuse violations were for marijuana — a total of 872,720. Of those, 775,137 people were arrested for marijuana possession alone. By contrast in 2000 a total of 734,497 Americans were arrested for marijuana offenses, of which 646,042 were for possession alone.

    US Arrests
    Year Total Arrests Total Drug Arrests Total Marijuana Arrests Marijuana Trafficking/Sale Arrests Marijuana Possession Arrests Total Violent Crime Arrests Total Property Crime Arrests
    2007 14,209,365 1,841,182 872,720 97,583 775,137 597,447 1,610,088
    2006 14,380,370 1,889,810 829,627 90,711 738,916 611,523 1,540,297
    2005 14,094,186 1,846,351 786,545 90,471 696,074 603,503 1,609,327
    2004 14,004,327 1,745,712 771,605 87,286 684,319 590,258 1,649,825
    2003 13,639,479 1,678,192 755,186 92,300 662,886 597,026 1,605,127
    2002 13,741,438 1,538,813 697,082 83,096 613,986 620,510 1,613,954
    2001 13,699,254 1,586,902 723,628 82,519 641,109 627,132 1,618,465
    2000 13,980,297 1,579,566 734,497 88,455 646,042 625,132 1,620,928
    1999 14,355,600 1,532,200 704,812 84,271 620,541 644,770 1,676,100
    1998 14,528,300 1,559,100 682,885 84,191 598,694 675,900 1,805,600
    1997 15,284,300 1,583,600 695,201 88,682 606,519 717,750 2,015,600
    1996 15,168,100 1,506,200 641,642 94,891 546,751 729,900 2,045,600
    1995 15,119,800 1,476,100 588,964 85,614 503,350 796,250 2,128,600
    1990 14,195,100 1,089,500 326,850 66,460 260,390 705,500 2,217,800
    1980 10,441,000 580,900 401,982 63,318 338,664 475,160 1,863,300

    Source: Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2007 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2008), Table 29, from the web at http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_29.html and Arrest Table: Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/arrests/index.html last accessed Sept. 18, 2008; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2006 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2007), Table 29, from the web at http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_29.html and Arrest Table: Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/arrests/index.html last accessed Sept. 24, 2007; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2005 (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2006), Table 29, from the web at http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_29.html and Arrest Table: Arrests for Drug Abuse Violations, from the web http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/arrests/index.html last accessed Sept. 20, 2006; Crime in the United States: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2004 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2005), p. 278, Table 4.1 & p. 280, Table 29; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2003 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2004), p. 269, Table 4.1 & and p. 270, Table 29; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2002 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2003), p. 234, Table 4.1 & and p. 234, Table 29; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2001 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2002), p. 232, Table 4.1 & and p. 233, Table 29; Uniform Crime Reports for the United States 2000 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2001), pp. 215-216, Tables 29 and 4.1; Uniform Crime Reports for the United States 1999 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 2000), pp. 211-212; Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports for the United States 1998 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 1999), pp. 209-210; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 1997 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1998), p. 221, Table 4.1 & p. 222, Table 29; Crime in America: FBI Uniform Crime Reports 1996 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1997), p. 213, Table 4.1 & p. 214, Table 29; FBI, UCR for the US 1995 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1996), pp. 207-208; FBI, UCR for the US 1990 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1991), pp. 173-174; FBI, UCR for the US 1980 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1981), pp. 189-191; Bureau of Justice Statistics, Chart of arrests by age group, number and rates for total offenses, violent offenses, and property offenses, 1970-2003, Dec. 2004.

    “Cannabis remains by far the most commonly used drug in the world. An estimated 162 million people used cannabis in 2004, equivalent to some 4 per cent of the global population age 15-64. In relative terms, cannabis use is most prevalent in Oceania, followed by North America and Africa. While Asia has the lowest prevalence expressed as part of the population, in absolute terms it is the region that is home to some 52 million cannabis users, more than a third of the estimated total. The next largest markets, in absolute terms, are Africa and North America.”

    Source: United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, “World Drug Report 2006, Volume 1: Analysis” (United Nations: Vienna, Austria, 2006), p. 23.

    Marijuana was first federally prohibited in 1937. Today, more than 97 million Americans admit to having tried it.

    Source: Marihuana Tax Act of 1937; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, US Department of Health and Human Services, Results from the 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: National Findings (Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Studies, Sept. 2006), p. 224, Table G.1.

    “Tetrahydrocannabinol is a very safe drug. Laboratory animals (rats, mice, dogs, monkeys) can tolerate doses of up to 1,000 mg/kg (milligrams per kilogram). This would be equivalent to a 70 kg person swallowing 70 grams of the drug — about 5,000 times more than is required to produce a high. Despite the widespread illicit use of cannabis there are very few if any instances of people dying from an overdose. In Britain, official government statistics listed five deaths from cannabis in the period 1993-1995 but on closer examination these proved to have been deaths due to inhalation of vomit that could not be directly attributed to cannabis (House of Lords Report, 1998). By comparison with other commonly used recreational drugs these statistics are impressive.”

    Source: Iversen, Leslie L., PhD, FRS, “The Science of Marijuana” (London, England: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. 178, citing House of Lords, Select Committee on Science and Technology, “Cannabis — The Scientific and Medical Evidence” (London, England: The Stationery Office, Parliament, 1998).

    “A review of the literature suggests that the majority of cannabis users, who use the drug occasionally rather than on a daily basis, will not suffer any lasting physical or mental harm. Conversely, as with other ‘recreational’ drugs, there will be some who suffer adverse consequences from their use of cannabis. Some individuals who have psychotic thought tendencies might risk precipitating psychotic illness. Those who consume large doses of the drug on a regular basis are likely to have lower educational achievement and lower income, and may suffer physical damage to the airways. They also run a significant risk of becoming dependent upon continuing use of the drug. There is little evidence, however, that these adverse effects persist after drug use stops or that any direct cause and effect relationships are involved.”

    Source: Iversen, Leslie L., PhD, FRS, “Long-Term Effects of Exposure to Cannabis,” Current Opinion in Pharmacology, Feb. 2005, Vol. 5, No. 1, p. 71.

    According to research published in the journal Addiction, “First, the use of cannabis and rates of psychotic symptoms were related to each other, independently of observed/non-observed fixed covariates and observed time dynamic factors (Table 2). Secondly, the results of structural equation modelling suggest that the direction of causation is that the use of cannabis leads to increases in levels of psychotic symptoms rather than psychotic symptoms increasing the use of cannabis. Indeed, there is a suggestion from the model results that increases in psychotic symptoms may inhibit the use of cannabis.”

    Source: Fergusson, David M., John Horwood & Elizabeth M. Ridder, “Tests of Causal Linkages Between Cannabis Use and Psychotic Symptoms,” Addiction, Vol. 100, No. 3, March 2005, p. 363.

    The Christchurch Press reported on March 22, 2005, that “The lead researcher in the Christchurch study, Professor David Fergusson, said the role of cannabis in psychosis was not sufficient on its own to guide legislation. ‘The result suggests heavy use can result in adverse side-effects,’ he said. ‘That can occur with ( heavy use of ) any substance. It can occur with milk.’ Fergusson’s research, released this month, concluded that heavy cannabis smokers were 1.5 times more likely to suffer symptoms of psychosis that non-users. The study was the latest in several reports based on a cohort of about 1000 people born in Christchurch over a four-month period in 1977. An effective way to deal with cannabis use would be to incrementally reduce penalties and carefully evaluate its impact, Fergusson said. ‘Reduce the penalty, like a parking fine. You could then monitor ( the impact ) after five or six years. If it did not change, you might want to take another step.’

    Source: Bleakley, Louise, “NZ Study Used in UK Drug Review,” The Press (Christchurch, New Zealand: March 22, 2005), from the web at http://www.mapinc.org/newscsdp/v05/n490/a08.html, last accessed March 28, 2005.

    “The results of our meta-analytic study failed to reveal a substantial, systematic effect of long-term, regular cannabis consumption on the neurocognitive functioning of users who were not acutely intoxicated. For six of the eight neurocognitive ability areas that were surveyed. the confidence intervals for the average effect sizes across studies overlapped zero in each instance, indicating that the effect size could not be distinguished from zero. The two exceptions were in the domains of learning and forgetting.”

    Source: Grant, Igor, et al., “Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study,” Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 685.

    “These results can be interpreted in several ways. A statistically reliable negative effect was observed in the domain of learning and forgetting, suggesting that chronic long-term cannabis use results in a selective memory defect. While the results are compatible with this conclusion, the effect size for both domains was of a very small magnitude. The “real life” impact of such a small and selective effect is questionable. In addition, it is important to note that most users across studies had histories of heavy longterm cannabis consumption. Therefore, these findings are not likely to generalize to more limited administration of cannabis compounds, as would be seen in a medical setting.”

    Source: Grant, Igor, et al., “Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study,” Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 686.

    “In conclusion, our meta-analysis of studies that have attempted to address the question of longer term neurocognitive disturbance in moderate and heavy cannabis users has failed to demonstrate a substantial, systematic, and detrimental effect of cannabis use on neuropsychological performance. It was surprising to find such few and small effects given that most of the potential biases inherent in our analyses actually increased the likelihood of finding a cannabis effect.”

    Source: Grant, Igor, et al., “Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study,” Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, p. 687.

    “Current marijuana use had a negative effect on global IQ score only in subjects who smoked 5 or more joints per week. A negative effect was not observed among subjects who had previously been heavy users but were no longer using the substance. We conclude that marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence. Whether the absence of a residual marijuana effect would also be evident in more specific cognitive domains such as memory and attention remains to be ascertained.”

    Source: Fried, Peter, Barbara Watkinson, Deborah James, and Robert Gray, “Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal study of effects on IQ in young adults,” Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2, 2002, 166(7), p. 887.

    “Although the heavy current users experienced a decrease in IQ score, their scores were still above average at the young adult assessment (mean 105.1). If we had not assessed preteen IQ, these subjects would have appeared to be functioning normally. Only with knowledge of the change in IQ score does the negative impact of current heavy use become apparent.”

    Source: Fried, Peter, Barbara Watkinson, Deborah James, and Robert Gray, “Current and former marijuana use: preliminary findings of a longitudinal study of effects on IQ in young adults,” Canadian Medical Association Journal, April 2, 2002, 166(7), p. 890.

    “Most 12th graders felt that they would be little affected personally by the legalization of either the sale or the use of marijuana. Three fifths (60%) of the respondents said that they would not use the drug even if it were legal to buy and use, and another 17% indicated they would use it about as often as they do now or less often. Only 6.1% said they would use it more often than they do at present while another 8.9% thought they would try it. (Eight percent said they did not know how their behavior would be affected if marijuana were legalized.) Still, this amounts to 15% who state that their use would increase if marijuana were legalized.”

    Source: Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E., Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2005: Volume I, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 06-5883) (Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse), August 2006, p. 354.

    “A study of the effects of decriminalization by several states during the late 1970s found no evidence of any impact on the use of marijuana among young people, nor on attitudes and beliefs concerning its use. However, it should be noted that decriminalization falls well short of the full legalization posited in the questions here. Moreover, the situation today is very different than it was in the late 1970s, with much more peer disapproval and more rigorous enforcement of drug laws. More recent studies suggest that there may be an impact of decriminalization, such that ‘youths living in decriminalized states are significantly more likely to report currently using marijuana.'”

    Source: Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & Schulenberg, J. E., Monitoring the Future national survey results on drug use, 1975-2005: Volume I, Secondary school students (NIH Publication No. 06-5883) (Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse), August 2006, pp. 354-5.

    The World Health Organization noted that, while some studies indicate that adolescents who use marijuana might be more likely to drop out of high school and experience job instability in young adulthood, “the apparent strength of these cross-sectional studies … has been exaggerated because those adolescents who are most likely to use cannabis have lower academic aspirations and poorer high school performance prior to using cannabis, than their peers who do not.”

    Source: Hall, W., Room, R., & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use August 28, 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 1998).

    According to a literature review of the effects of alcohol on driving, “As with cannabis, alcohol use increased variability in lane position and headway (Casswell, 1979; Ramaekers et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein et al., 1983) but caused faster speeds (Casswell, 1977; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck et al., 1986; Smiley et al., 1987; Stein et al., 1983). Some studies also showed that alcohol use alone and in combination with cannabis affected visual search behavior (Lamers & Ramaekers, 2001; Moskowitz, Ziedman, & Sharma, 1976). Alcohol consumption combined with cannabis use also worsened driver performance relative to use of either substance alone. Lane position and headway variability were more exaggerated (Attwood et al., 1981; Ramaekers et al., 2000; Robbe, 1998) and speeds were faster (Peck et al., 1986).
    “Both simulator and road studies showed that relative to alcohol use alone, participants who used cannabis alone or in combination with alcohol were more aware of their intoxication. Robbe (1998) found that participants who consumed 100 g/kg of cannabis rated their performance worse and the amount of effort required greater compared to those who consumed alcohol (0.05 BAC). Ramaekers et al. (2000) showed that cannabis use alone and in combination with alcohol consumption increased self-ratings of intoxication and decreased self-ratings of performance. Lamers and Ramaekers (2001) found that cannabis use alone (100 g/kg) and in combination with alcohol consumption resulted in lower ratings of alertness, greater perceptions of effort, and worse ratings of performance.”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 978.

    “When compared to alcohol, cannabis is detected far less often in accident-involved drivers. Drummer et al. (2003) cited several studies and found that alcohol was detected in 12.5% to 79% of drivers involved in accidents. With regard to crash risk, a large study conducted by Borkenstein, Crowther, Shumate, Zeil and Zylman (1964) compared BAC in approximately 6,000 accident-involved drivers and 7,600 nonaccident controls. They determined the crash risk for each BAC by comparing the number of accident-involved drivers with detected levels of alcohol at each BAC to the number of nonaccident control drivers with the same BAC. They found that crash risk increased sharply as BAC increased. More specifically, at a BAC of 0.10, drivers were approximately five times more likely to be involved in an accident.
    “Similar crash risk results were obtained when data for culpable drivers were evaluated. Drummer (1995) found that drivers with detected levels of alcohol were 7.6 times more likely to be culpable. Longo et al. (2000) showed that drivers who tested positive for alcohol were 8.0 times more culpable, and alcohol consumption in combination with cannabis use produced an odds ratio of 5.4. Similar results were also noted by Swann (2000) and Drummer et al. (2003).”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 981.

    Researchers examining the effectiveness of ONDCP’s anti-drug media campaign reported in late 2003 that, “The NSPY [National Survey of Parents and Youth] did not find significant reductions in marijuana use either leading up to or after the Marijuana campaign for youth 12 to 18 years old between 2002 and 2003. Indeed there was evidence for an increase in past month and past year use among the target audience of 14- to 16-year-olds, although it appears that the increase was already in place in the last half of 2002, before the launch of the Marijuana Initiative. It will be worthwhile to track whether the nonsignificant decline from the second half of 2002 through the first half of 2003 is the beginning of a true trend. There was a significant decrease in lifetime marijuana use among youth 16 to 18 years of age from 2002 to 2003; however, since this significant decrease was not replicated in either the directly relevant past year or past month time periods, it is difficult to ascribe the change to the campaign.”

    Source: Hornik, Robert, David Maklan, Diane Cadell, Carlin Henry Barmada, Lela Jacobsohn, Vani R. Henderson, Anca Romantan, Jeffrey Niederdeppe, Robert Orwin, Sanjeev Sridharan, Adam Chu, Carol Morin, Kristie Taylor, Diane Steele, “Evaluation of the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign: 2003 Report of Findings,” Delivered to National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services By Westat & the Annenberg School for Communication, Contract No. N01DA-8-5063, December 22, 2003, p. 4-15.

    “Nevertheless, when considering all 15 studies (i.e., those that met both strict and more relaxed criteria) we only noted that regular cannabis users performed worse on memory tests, but that the magnitude of the effect was very small. The small magnitude of effect sizes from observations of chronic users of cannabis suggests that cannabis compounds, if found to have therapeutic value, should have a good margin of safety from a neurocognitive standpoint under the more limited conditions of exposure that would likely obtain in a medical setting.”

    Source: Grant, Igor, et al., “Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study,” Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society (Cambridge University Press: July 2003), 9, pp. 687-8.

    A Johns Hopkins study published in May 1999, examined marijuana’s effects on cognition on 1,318 participants over a 15 year period. Researchers reported “no significant differences in cognitive decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis.” They also found “no male-female differences in cognitive decline in relation to cannabis use.” “These results … seem to provide strong evidence of the absence of a long-term residual effect of cannabis use on cognition,” they concluded.

    Source: Constantine G. Lyketsos, Elizabeth Garrett, Kung-Yee Liang, and James C. Anthony. (1999). “Cannabis Use and Cognitive Decline in Persons under 65 Years of Age,” American Journal of Epidemiology, Vol. 149, No. 9.

    In March 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a report on various aspects of marijuana, including the so-called Gateway Theory (the theory that using marijuana leads people to use harder drugs like cocaine and heroin). The IOM stated: “There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.”

    Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., “Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base,” Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).

    The Institute of Medicine’s 1999 report on marijuana explained that marijuana has been mistaken for a gateway drug in the past because “Patterns in progression of drug use from adolescence to adulthood are strikingly regular. Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs have used marijuana first. In fact, most drug users begin with alcohol and nicotine before marijuana, usually before they are of legal age.”

    Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., “Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base,” Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).

    A 1999 federal report conducted by the Institute of Medicine found that, “For most people, the primary adverse effect of acute marijuana use is diminished psychomotor performance. It is, therefore, inadvisable to operate any vehicle or potentially dangerous equipment while under the influence of marijuana, THC, or any cannabinoid drug with comparable effects.”

    Source: Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, Jr., “Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base,” Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, Institute of Medicine (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999).

    The DEA’s Administrative Law Judge, Francis Young concluded: “In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within the supervised routine of medical care.:

    Source: US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency, “In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition,” [Docket #86-22], (September 6, 1988), p. 57.

    Commissioned by President Nixon in 1972, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded that “Marihuana’s relative potential for harm to the vast majority of individual users and its actual impact on society does not justify a social policy designed to seek out and firmly punish those who use it. This judgment is based on prevalent use patterns, on behavior exhibited by the vast majority of users and on our interpretations of existing medical and scientific data. This position also is consistent with the estimate by law enforcement personnel that the elimination of use is unattainable.”

    Source: Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Ch. V, (Washington DC: National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1972).

    When examining the relationship between marijuana use and violent crime, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded, “Rather than inducing violent or aggressive behavior through its purported effects of lowering inhibitions, weakening impulse control and heightening aggressive tendencies, marihuana was usually found to inhibit the expression of aggressive impulses by pacifying the user, interfering with muscular coordination, reducing psychomotor activities and generally producing states of drowsiness lethargy, timidity and passivity.”

    Source: Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Ch. III, (Washington DC: National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1972).

    When examining the health affects of marijuana use, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded, “A careful search of the literature and testimony of the nation’s health officials has not revealed a single human fatality in the United States proven to have resulted solely from ingestion of marihuana. Experiments with the drug in monkeys demonstrated that the dose required for overdose death was enormous and for all practical purposes unachievable by humans smoking marihuana. This is in marked contrast to other substances in common use, most notably alcohol and barbiturate sleeping pills. The WHO reached the same conclusion in 1995.

    Source: Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, Ch. III, (Washington DC: National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1972); Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995, (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).

    The World Health Organization released a study in March 1998 that states: “there are good reasons for saying that [the risks from cannabis] would be unlikely to seriously [compare to] the public health risks of alcohol and tobacco even if as many people used cannabis as now drink alcohol or smoke tobacco.”

    Source: Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995, (contained in original version, but deleted from official version) (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).

    The authors of a 1998 World Health Organization report comparing marijuana, alcohol, nicotine and opiates quote the Institute of Medicine’s 1982 report stating that there is no evidence that smoking marijuana “exerts a permanently deleterious effect on the normal cardiovascular system.”

    Source: Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).

    Some claim that cannabis use leads to “adult amotivation.” The World Health Organization report addresses the issue and states, “it is doubtful that cannabis use produces a well defined amotivational syndrome.” The report also notes that the value of studies which support the “adult amotivation” theory are “limited by their small sample sizes” and lack of representative social/cultural groups.

    Source: Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, August 28, 1995 (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, March 1998).

    Australian researchers found that regions giving on-the-spot fines to marijuana users rather than harsher criminal penalties did not cause marijuana use to increase.

    Source: Ali, Robert, et al., The Social Impacts of the Cannabis Expiation Notice Scheme in South Australia: Summary Report (Canberra, Australia: Department of Health and Aged Care, 1999), p. 44.

    “Cannabis is only considered a risk factor for traffic accidents if drivers operate vehicles after consuming the drug. Robbe (1994) found that 30% to 90% of his participants were willing to drive after consuming a typical dose of cannabis. This is consistent with a recent Australian survey in which more than 50% of users drove after consuming cannabis (Lenne, Fry, Dietze, & Rumbold, 2000). A self administered questionnaire given to 508 students in grades 10 to 13 in Ontario, Canada, found that 19.7% reported driving within an hour after using cannabis (Adlaf, Mann, & Paglia, 2003).”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 974-5.

    According to a literature review on the effects of cannabis on driving, “Most of the research on cannabis use has been conducted under laboratory conditions. The literature reviews by Robbe (1994), Hall, Solowij, and Lemon (1994), Border and Norton (1996), and Solowij (1998) agreed that the most extensive effect of cannabis is to impair memory and attention. Additional deficits include problems with temporal processing, (complex) reaction times, and dynamic tracking. These conclusions are generally consistent with the psychopharmacological effects of cannabis mentioned above, including problems with attention, memory, motor coordination, and alertness.
    “A meta-analysis by Krüger and Berghaus (1995) profiled the effects of cannabis and alcohol. They reviewed 197 published studies of alcohol and 60 studies of cannabis. Their analysis showed that 50% of the reported effects were significant at a BAC of 0.073 g/dl and a THC level of 11 ng/ml. This implies that if the legal BAC threshold for alcohol is 0.08 g/dl, the corresponding level of THC that would impair the same percentage of tests would be approximately 11 ng/ml.”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 975-6.

    “Several studies have examined cannabis use in driving simulator and on-road situations. The most comprehensive review was done by Smiley in 1986 and then again in 1999. Several trends are evident and can be described by three general performance characteristics:
    “1. Cannabis increased variability of speed and headway as well as lane position (Attwood, Williams, McBurney, & Frecker, 1981; Ramaekers, Robbe, & O’Hanlon, 2000; Robbe, 1998; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley, Moskowitz, & Zeidman, 1981; Smiley, Noy, & Tostowaryk, 1987). This was more pronounced under high workload and unexpected conditions, such as curves and wind gusts.
    “2. Cannabis increased the time needed to overtake another vehicle (Dott, 1972 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]) and delayed responses to both secondary and tracking tasks (Casswell, 1977; Moskowitz, Hulbert, & McGlothlin, 1976; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981).
    “3. Cannabis resulted in fewer attempts to overtake another vehicle(Dott, 1972) and larger distances required to pass (Ellingstad et al., 1973 [as cited in Smiley, 1986]). Evidence of increased caution also included slower speeds (Casswell, 1977; Hansteen, Miller, Lonero, Reid, & Jones, 1976; Krueger & Vollrath, 2000; Peck, Biasotti, Boland, Mallory, & Reeve, 1986; Sexton et al., 2000; Smiley et al., 1981; Stein, Allen, Cook, & Karl, 1983) and larger headways (Robbe, 1998; Smiley et al., 1987).”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 977-8.

    “Both simulator and road studies showed that relative to alcohol use alone, participants who used cannabis alone or in combination with alcohol were more aware of their intoxication. Robbe (1998) found that participants who consumed 100 g/kg of cannabis rated their performance worse and the amount of effort required greater compared to those who consumed alcohol (0.05 BAC). Ramaekers et al. (2000) showed that cannabis use alone and in combination with alcohol consumption increased self-ratings of intoxication and decreased self-ratings of performance. Lamers and Ramaekers (2001) found that cannabis use alone (100 g/kg) and in combination with alcohol consumption resulted in lower ratings of alertness, greater perceptions of effort, and worse ratings of performance.”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 978.

    “Both Australian studies suggest cannabis may actually reduce the responsibility rate and lower crash risk. Put another way, cannabis consumption either increases driving ability or, more likely, drivers who use cannabis make adjustments in driving style to compensate for any loss of skill (Drummer, 1995). This is consistent with simulator and road studies that show drivers who consumed cannabis slowed down and drove more cautiously (see Ward & Dye, 1999; Smiley, 1999. This compensation could help reduce the probability of being at fault in a motor vehicle accident since drivers have more time to respond and avoid a collision. However, it must be noted that any behavioral compensation may not be sufficient to cope with the reduced safety margin resulting from the impairment of driver functioning and capacity.”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 980.

    A literature review of the effects of cannabis on driving found, “Another paradigm used to assess crash risk is to use cross-sectional surveys of reported nonfatal accidents that can be related to the presence of risk factors, such as alcohol and cannabis consumption. Such a methodology was employed in a provocative dissertation by Laixuthai (1994). This study used data from two large surveys that were nationally representative of high school students in the United States during 1982 and 1989. Results showed that cannabis use was negatively correlated with nonfatal accidents, but these results can be attributed to changes in the amount of alcohol consumed. More specifically, the decriminalization of cannabis and the subsequent reduction in penalty cost, as well as a reduced purchase price of cannabis, made cannabis more appealing and affordable for young consumers. This resulted in more cannabis use, which substituted for alcohol consumption, leading to less frequent and less heavy drinking. The reduction in the amount of alcohol consumed resulted in fewer nonfatal accidents.”

    Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, “Research Note: Cannabis and Driving — Research Needs and Issues for Transportation Policy,” Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 980-1.

    Since 1969, government-appointed commissions in the United States, Canada, England, Australia, and the Netherlands concluded, after reviewing the scientific evidence, that marijuana’s dangers had previously been greatly exaggerated, and urged lawmakers to drastically reduce or eliminate penalties for marijuana possession.

    Source: Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence, Cannabis (London, England: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1969); Canadian Government Commission of Inquiry, The Non-Medical Use of Drugs (Ottawa, Canada: Information Canada, 1970); The National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, (Nixon-Shafer Report) (Washington, DC: USGPO, 1972); Werkgroep Verdovende Middelen, Background and Risks of Drug Use (The Hague, The Netherlands: Staatsuigeverij, 1972); Senate Standing Committee on Social Welfare, Drug Problems in Australia-An Intoxicated Society (Canberra, Australia: Australian Government Publishing Service, 1977); Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, “The classification of cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971” (London, England, UK: Home Office, March 2002), available on the web from http://drugs.homeoffice.gov.uk/publication-search/acmd/cannabis-class-mi… ; House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Third Report, “The Government’s Drugs Policy: Is It Working?” (London, England, UK: Parliament, May 9, 2002), from the web at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmhaff/318/31… and “Cannabis: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy,” report of the Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs (Ottawa, Canada: Senate of Canada, September 2002).

    The Canadian Senate’s Special Committee on Illegal Drugs recommended in its 2002 final report on cannabis policy that “the Government of Canada amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act to create a criminal exemption scheme. This legislation should stipulate the conditions for obtaining licenses as well as for producing and selling cannabis; criminal penalties for illegal trafficking and export; and the preservation of criminal penalties for all activities falling outside the scope of the exemption scheme.”

    Source: “Cannabis: Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy,” report of the Canadian Senate Special Committee on Illegal Drugs (Ottawa, Canada: Senate of Canada, September 2002), p. 46.

    In May of 1998, the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, National Working Group on Addictions Policy released policy a discussion document which recommended, “The severity of punishment for a cannabis possession charge should be reduced. Specifically, cannabis possession should be converted to a civil violation under the Contraventions Act.” The paper further noted that, “The available evidence indicates that removal of jail as a sentencing option would lead to considerable cost savings without leading to increases in rates of cannabis use.”

    Source: Single, Eric, Cannabis Control in Canada: Options Regarding Possession (Ottawa, Canada: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, May 1998).

    “Our conclusion is that the present law on cannabis produces more harm than it prevents. It is very expensive of the time and resources of the criminal justice system and especially of the police. It inevitably bears more heavily on young people in the streets of inner cities, who are also more likely to be from minority ethnic communities, and as such is inimical to police-community relations. It criminalizes large numbers of otherwise law-abiding, mainly young, people to the detriment of their futures. It has become a proxy for the control of public order; and it inhibits accurate education about the relative risks of different drugs including the risks of cannabis itself.”

    Source: Police Foundation of the United Kingdom, “Drugs and the Law: Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Misuse of Drugs Act of 1971”, April 4, 2000. The Police Foundation, based in London, England, is a nonprofit organization presided over by Charles, Crown Prince of Wales, which promotes research, debate and publication to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of policing in the UK.

    “Statements in the popular media that the potency of cannabis has increased by ten times or more in recent decades are not support by the data from either the USA or Europe. As discussed in the body of this report, systematic data are not available in Europe on long-term trends and analytical and methodological issues complicate the interpretation of the information that is available. Data are stronger for medium and short-term trends where no major differences are apparent in Europe, although some modest increases are found in some countries. The greatest long-term changes in potency appear to have occurred in the USA. It should be noted here that before 1980 herbal cannabis potency in the USA was, according to the available data, very low by European standards.”

    Source: European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, “EMCDDA Insights – An Overview of Cannabis Potency in Europe (Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2004), p. 59.

    “Although marijuana grown in the United States was once considered inferior because of a low concentration of THC, advancements in plant selection and cultivation have resulted in higher THC-containing domestic marijuana. In 1974, the average THC content of illicit marijuana was less than one percent. Today most commercial grade marijuana from Mexico/Columbia and domestic outdoor cultivated marijuana has an average THC content of about 4 to 6 percent. Between 1998 and 2002, NIDA-sponsored Marijuana Potency Monitoring System (MPMP) analyzed 4,603 domestic samples. Of those samples, 379 tested over 15 percent THC, 69 samples tested between 20 and 25 percent THC and four samples tested over 25 percent THC.”

    Source: US Drug Enforcement Administration, “Drugs of Abuse” (Washington, DC: US Dept. of Justice, 2005), from the web at http://www.dea.gov/pubs/abuse/7-pot.htm last accessed Jan. 27, 2005.

    The U.S. Penal Code states that any person can be imprisoned for up to one year for possession of one marijuana cigarette and imprisoned for up to five years for growing a single marijuana plant.

    Source: The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801 et seq.

    According to the federal Potency Monitoring Project, the average potency of marijuana has increased very little since the 1980s. The Project reports that in 1985, the average THC content of commercial-grade marijuana was 2.84%, and the average for high-grade sinsemilla in 1985 was 7.17%. In 1995, the potency of commercial-grade marijuana averaged 3.73%, while the potency of sinsemilla in 1995 averaged 7.51%. In 2001, commercial-grade marijuana averaged 4.72% THC, and the potency of sinsemilla in 2001 averaged 9.03%. In the period Dec. 16, 2007 through March 15, 2008, the potency of commercial-grade marijuana varied from 2.14% THC for “loose leaf,” 6.4% for “kilobricks,” and 7.16% THC for “buds.” The potency of sinsemilla in that period averaged about 10.7% THC.

    Source: Quarterly Report #100, Dec. 16, 2007 – March 15, 2008, University of Mississippi Potency Monitoring Project (Oxford, MS: National Center for Natural Products Research, a Division of the Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2008), Mahmoud A. ElSohly, PhD, Director, NIDA Marijuana Project (NIDA Contract #N01DA-5-7746), p. 6; Quarterly Report #76, Nov. 9, 2001-Feb. 8, 2002, University of Mississippi Potency Monitoring Project (Oxford, MS: National Center for the Development of Natural Products, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 2002), Mahmoud A. ElSohly, PhD, Director, NIDA Marijuana Project (NIDA Contract #N01DA-0-7707), Table 3, p. 8.

    NUFF SAID!

  33. December 1, 2009 at 5:37 am

    Politicians are 10 years behind the times when it comes to hemp use. People have been fighting for a long time against marijuana and pot prohibition with some movement going on now. Still too slow for those caught up in the jail system for possessing a little weed. Our freedoms have been trampled on by folks who know nothing about how beautiful cannabis can be for someones life, if one learns how to grow cannabis. Keep up the good work.

  34. June 30, 2010 at 6:18 am

    Of course marijuana is safe, as long as responsible people are using it in a responsible way, just like with anything else in the world. http://stonerdiary.wordpress.com

  35. time.tested
    July 26, 2010 at 6:45 pm

    i used to inhalent abuse and excessive drinking(a bottle @ time) at young age.then i smoked weed nd stopped drinking n inhalent.only drink lager oncein blue moon but smoke as often as possible

  36. Bill
    July 31, 2010 at 9:23 pm

    I tried it but I didn’t inhale

  37. thenigga
    August 7, 2010 at 9:04 pm

    this is so crazy
    the bush wont make you have a heart attack unless your 60+
    i have played bball and hockey high, with fantastic results!

  38. scott
    August 12, 2010 at 6:41 pm

    The U.S. government feeds us toxic chemicals like aspartame,fluoride, and now they want lithium in our water. THC is like an ant bite in a pit of snakes. The THC will not Have any effect on people other than when their high Because all the other juck the government approves and feeds us will just kill us softly anyway. Do your own research. Pot is just another vitamin compared to the drugs The FDA approves.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: