Cannabis and psychosis

[Queso]

The best thing about weed is that nobody ever got mugged by a pot-head. Unless they were carrying a bag of Fritos.

 

TFS

 

HAHAHAHA!

 

Of course this made me laugh;)

[TheFaithfulStone]

I don't know... I was watching an episode of COPS once, and this guy was able to slap this girl and run off with her purse while the police were chasing him.

He was on pot.

 

Heh. I agree with orb, he was probably on something else too. A real stoner would have raised his hand, and then realized it wasn't worth the effort.

 

But speaking of COPS, the best episode of cops I ever saw, had this crazy hillbilly who the police had handcuffed, and he was sitting Indian style in this little hole in the ground screaming.

 

And then guy starts talking about Plato and the Platonic concept of justice, and how "This ain't justice!"

 

Weirdest thing I've ever seen on television. Save HR Puffinstuff.

 

TFS

[Queso]

Heh. I agree with orb, he was probably on something else too. A real stoner would have raised his hand, and then realized it wasn't worth the effort.

 

But speaking of COPS, the best episode of cops I ever saw, had this crazy hillbilly who the police had handcuffed, and he was sitting Indian style in this little hole in the ground screaming.

 

And then guy starts talking about Plato and the Platonic concept of justice, and how "This ain't justice!"

 

Weirdest thing I've ever seen on television. Save HR Puffinstuff.

 

TFS

 

:cup: Now, see . .

 

That sounds a bit like someone who wouldn't smoke crack, who would definitely smoke marijuana, and definitely has a colorado river toad out back who he licks,

to seep DMT into his tongue

 

Hah, I know,

This is all just an assumption, and educated guess, you could also say.

 

Must have been an abstract sight to see humming off the TV.

 

(I never watch that show, every time I see it I just get pissed off)

[HydrogenBond]

I agree, Infinitenow, that both sides of the brain work together, but in a complementary fashion. The left is more analytical and logical and the right more intuitive and emotional as was pointed out by Kissassclown. A scientist, like Infinitenow, who is trying to remove all subjectivity with logical and tangible proof, is trying to shut off the subjective affects of the right side of the brain. That goal shows that it is possible to separate hemisphere functions or else it would not be requested.

 

Irronically, I am answering in a way where both hemispheres are working together, i.e., blend of logic and intuitive esoteric, which is exactly your thesis, yet I am being asked to separate the right side contribution and using only the left, which is what I say is possible.

[HydrogenBond]

Although both sides work together. Typically one side is more dominant or more conscious or more under conscious control. The less dominant side is complementary but less under the control of consciousness. It is possible to switch between hemispheres but only one can be dominant at a time, with the other becoming complementary. Acting together will superfisically look like function is uniformly distributed. Internal data says that there is two separate things going on.

 

For example, when I come up with my endless novel ideas, I often start with a right hemisphere intutition. At first it has little form, but as I focus on the gut feeling, ideas appear as a complementary secondary affect in the left hemisphere. I then switch to the left and use these ideas and try to put together a logic line. As the logic process unfolds, I will have reactive right hemisphere feelings of whether this correct or not. If not, I will shift back to the right to wait for the correct intuition. This will output new left ideas. I then return back to the left, etc.

 

The two hemispheres always work together but one can focus attention on one at a time with the other creating reactionary but complementary output. This is a skill that took years to develop. Part of the development required separating what appears to be constant overlap of affects. It is sort of like bending the arm. All the muscle work together. But if one practices, one can begin to feel distant muscles groups and will eventually realize the arm is made of may distinct parts that can be pertubated separatedly. This can make the arm work funny. Integration is probally better for mental health but disjointed teaches me more about the reality of what goes on in the mind. External data is not enough for that purpose.

[themartuigan]

again i am jumping from the first page to the last.

 

coming from somebody that smokes marijuana. i would have to say that marijuana is both good and bad.

 

marijuana can be used both for recreation and for medication. im not saying that recreation is a bad thing because i also use it for recreation. but it is better used for medication (and/or recreation) in the sense that (like everything else) you use it in moderation.

 

marijuana can be used to relieve stress, pain, eating dissorders, sleep dissorder, depression, anxiety and much much more

but marijuana can also be used to lets just say waste your life away.

it all depends on how you are using it and what you are using it for.

 

the people that do NEED it and/or use it for medicinal purposes understand this and use it the way it should be used. but others just use it because it is a "drug" (which i never call it) and use it to get 'high'.

I hate to say it the way I just said it because some people use it for non-medicinal purposes and still understand its affect and treat it properly.

 

I guess better off stated...marijuana is both good and bad, depending on nothing but the person using it. the affects of the marijuana are solely based on the person using it.

 

i personally believe that drinking is worse then smoking. and in my opinion if you have a problem with marijuana but not alcohol, you definetly really really need to recheck yourself.

if somebody has a problem with both marijuana and alcohol i will listen to there thoughts and opinions because thats cool. But if they have a problem with marijuana and not alcohol i wouldnt give them the time of day, because in 'reality' they dont know what there talking about.

 

(if alcohol is not worse, then it is just as bad)

so with all that being said i stray off and say thank you.

and thanks again

theMaRTuiGaN

[themartuigan]

i did not mention the use of marijuana religously in my post at all so i thought i would mention it here.

[Chacmool]

i personally believe that drinking is worse then smoking. and in my opinion if you have a problem with marijuana but not alcohol, you definetly really really need to recheck yourself.

if somebody has a problem with both marijuana and alcohol i will listen to there thoughts and opinions because thats cool. But if they have a problem with marijuana and not alcohol i wouldnt give them the time of day, because in 'reality' they dont know what there talking about.

What? :) It's cool with you to have a problem with both marijuana and alcohol, but not marijuana alone? How do you rationalise this?

[TheFaithfulStone]

I think he's saying he doesn't understand how someone could be against marijuana and not alcohol since alcohol is just as destructive.

 

TFS

[themartuigan]

alcohol is no better then marijuana.

 

so if you say i am bad because i smoke weed while you are drinking a beer, you are a hipocrate because the weed does the same thing to me that the beer does to you; and that is that it alters your perception.

 

now if you say that i am bad because i smoke weed and he is bad because he drinks beer you are not a hipocrate because you are just plainly against the stuff that alters your perception.

 

so in my opinion is that if you are against one mind altering substance you should be against the other.

is it right to be against one mind altering substance and for the other mind altering substance? i dont think so.

i think that if you dont have a problem with one you shouldnt have a problem with the other and if you do have a problem with one you should have a problem with the other.

 

now i ask you a question, how many people died this year from drunken accidents? or even this week?

and then i ask you how many people have died period because of marijuana?

that there is a good enough question for me.

[Chacmool]

I think he's saying he doesn't understand how someone could be against marijuana and not alcohol since alcohol is just as destructive.

 

TFS

Oh, I see. I understood "problem" as "dependency". It makes more sense now, thanks.

now i ask you a question, how many people died this year from drunken accidents? or even this week?

and then i ask you how many people have died period because of marijuana?

that there is a good enough question for me.

Yes, far too many people die because of drunken driving. I absolutely deplore it. However, one should also not even consider driving while stoned. You make a valid point in that alcohol is also harmful, but that doesn't make the irresponsible use of marijuana more acceptable.

[InfiniteNow]

For example, when I come up with my endless novel ideas, I often start with a right hemisphere intutition. At first it has little form, but as I focus on the gut feeling, ideas appear as a complementary secondary affect in the left hemisphere. I then switch to the left and use these ideas and try to put together a logic line. As the logic process unfolds, I will have reactive right hemisphere feelings of whether this correct or not. If not, I will shift back to the right to wait for the correct intuition. This will output new left ideas. I then return back to the left, etc.

Humble too... :)

 

I am glad you have finally responded to one of my requests HB, however, you have only responded with opinion and anecdote, replicating the issue I describe with the original post, and you still have provided no support of your claims. Please address this.

[themartuigan]

yes i know and understand the dangers of driving while stoned the same as driving while drunk. BUT my question was not is it un-safe, we all know driving while intoxicated, on anything, even a prescribed medication is un-safe. my question was how many deaths are caused from alcohol vs. marijuana.

 

the Journal of the American Medical Association said that for the year of 2000 there were 85,000 alcohol related deaths and only 0 (yes zero) marijuana related deaths.

 

here is a list of all the deaths and there association:

Tobacco 435,000

Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,000

Alcohol 85,000

Microbial Agents 75,000

Toxic Agents 55,000

Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,347

Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,000

Suicide 30,6223

Incidents Involving Firearms 29,000

Homicide 20,308

Sexual Behaviors 20,000

All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,000

Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,600

Marijuana 0

 

and this is the link that i used to get this information:

http://www.drugwarfacts.org/causes.htm

 

You make a valid point in that alcohol is also harmful, but that doesn't make the irresponsible use of marijuana more acceptable.

 

i know this and....

i am not trying to be disrespectful, i just wanted to let you know that i do not think that marijuana is harmful anymore then anything else is, but that alcohol is worse then marijuana.

as a matter of fact, according to the link above, marijana is the least harmful thing there is out there, compared to peoples health, doctor prescribed medication, and even aspirin.

[TheFaithfulStone]

How does "All Illicit Druge Use, Direct and Indirect" not cover marijuana.

 

Besides, I know a couple of people who died from dope. Not from smoking it mind, but from having either too much or too little of it when interested parties conducted inventory.

 

TFS

[HydrogenBond]

If one goes back to the 60's and 70's almost everyone under 30 smoked MJ at least once, with the majority smoking often. Today, these same people are among the leaders of government, industry, etc. But as leaders they now need to take a conservative view, trying to protect the young people from both the pit-falls and fun that they had. That was also a time of free sex, before all the big STD's. They are also trying to save the children from all the pitfalls and fun they had in that category. The baby boomers think they are the only generation capable of doing both while still ending up standing on two feet later in life. This is called being a hippie-crate.

 

In response to Infinitenow, I do not have much external data. But in my behalf, most studies don't have much internal data. That is why there are so many orientations.

 

Let me give one further example. Picture if we were conducting a psychology study associated with those that go to amusement parks. We can interview people at the gate, in line and after rides. We can hook people up to measure heart rates, blood pressure, brain waves, neural activity, etc.. The results will be a spectrum. There are those who will be afraid, bored, excited, having fun, nauseated, etc, no matter what the ride or their position in line.

 

The one chapter of the science study that is usually left out, is the one where the researchers go on the rides, themselves, to observe the rides from the inside of their heads. If one can maintain objectivity, they will notice that the animal body is responding apart from the ego. In other words, an objective person will notice two points of reference within, the observer and the reaction of the animal body. One wouldn't see this data with an external approach and would lump the ego personality with the reaction. This is only the tip of the iceberg. There is further diversity which can account for the variety of reactions.

 

This one chapter would allow all the riders to understand what is going on within during rides. The rest of the chapters are for the scientists so they can detach themselves and speculate about the unity and diversity of amusement park patrons. But the detachment is never complete, with the merged secondary reference influencing their interpretation.

[InfiniteNow]

In response to Infinitenow, I do not have much external data. But in my behalf, most studies don't have much internal data.

Please provide me with a few examples of studies which don't have much internal data.

 

Thanks.

[IDMclean]

How does "All Illicit Druge Use, Direct and Indirect" not cover marijuana.

 

Besides, I know a couple of people who died from dope. Not from smoking it mind, but from having either too much or too little of it when interested parties conducted inventory.

 

TFS

 

Point taken, concidered and sent for return play.

 

I would see that as a strong indicator not of the damage of cannabis, but of the drug war against cannabis. Laws of Supply and Demand, and the priniciple of illict dealings.

 

If for instance Cannabis was made legal, taxed and otherwise regulated, then the likeliness of that occurance would most likely decrease dramatically. Why deal with people who might shoot you when you can pick it up from the local super-market?

 

The fact of this remains to be seen. However if other countries are any indication, it would seem that this would be the case. It's like bootlegging liquor, it was dangerous and illegal. Now it's not. Imagine that, eh?