Welcome to Gaia! ::

I hate alcohol and cigarettes because you can addicted to both and companys charge addicts more, it's for the money. Weed is more healthy, and can be eaten and does next to no damage, it's sad really.

What negative side effects have been proven? I've seen studies disproving a lot of what I've read (non-biased studies, I might add) for negative side effects.
Bottom line, people don't know, and as you said, there are lots of factors to consider. There's not enough good research out there.

But, the study done in Jamaica on pregnant women using marijuana as medicine showed little to no effect, and what effect there was, wasn't negative. I'd say a baby in the womb has to be a lot more susceptible than a mature adult. It was a study that studied women who did and did not use marijuana in pregnancy and then studied how those children were effected not just after birth, but after years until those children were 15, if I remember correctly, but it may have been older, not positive on that.

In Jamaica marijuana is a medicine used by Rastafarian religion, so that's why it was so easy for the scientist to do that study (she was American, and well-respected, I should add).

It's just, I'm sorry, but I see very little definitive evidence that marijuana is "bad for you" unless you're an immature being smoking it yourself, or someone with pre-existing or hidden (like schizophrenia) mental disorders.
Oh, we do know SMOKING anything causes some lung damage, but as the OP said, there are edibles, and I will add that there are vaporizers as well.

But even then, studies recently have shown that people who smoke marijuana and cigarettes have significantly less lung damage than people who only smoke cigarettes, and likewise people who only smoke marijuana have even less damage. The scientist even thinks that marijuana may heal smoke damage from cigarettes.

Thank you. I took an Addictions course as part of my degree, and have done lots of research on the topic in addition to what I learned from my professor. Much research is still needed, but there is still plenty of research showing that marijuana has plenty of side effects for some people. To say one or the other (that it either does or does) is too much of a generalization without more research.

I have access to my alumni database, so like Eruresto, I can link research if you'd like to read more.

Addiction side effects of marijuana aren't nearly as bad as ANY other drug (caffeine included), but I can't say it isn't there, as I have seen it. Though, it's not intolerable at all, and pretty easy to get through. So it's not like people are going to go robbing pharmacies for marijuana or something. razz

A lot of what I know about marijuana is through experience and the experience of others (considering we are a part of the medical community). I say the benefits far outweigh the potential risks.

Yeah, I agree there are definitely some people who can't handle it, and if it were legalized I think it should have an age minimum of 18 or 21.

3nodding Yeah I live in the states, and I think some states have different ages for thing like consent to have sex, but I think that the age for smoking and drinking alcohol is the same throughout the country here.

Valgex, I wouldn't disagree with you that Marijuana is less harmful that many other substances, but that does not make it safe, per se. I personally would not vote for Ron Paul, not because of his drug policies, but mostly because of his opinions on the church's role in governing the USA.

Also, the key thing about drugs is that they often don't have the same effects on everyone, as you mentioned. That's why anecdotal stories are not valid as scientific evidence. For instance, I have a certain medical condition which responds positively to a certain prescription drug. This drug has the opposite effect on the vast majority of the general populace. I cannot use myself or my experiences as evidence that this drug is proper or safe without noting all the extenuating circumstances. That is why I noted that most research that has been done up to this point on marijuana use has been done on heavy users.

I agree, by the way, that marijuana should be regulated and not outright prohibited. I personally do not wish to use it, as it interacts very badly with my medical condition, but responsible, moderated use (assuming that future research shows no ill effects) should be fine. The one thing holding me back from outright supporting de-prohibition at this time is that there is a distinct lack of research regarding light-to-medium usage.

You mean Rick Perry, right? Cause Rick Perry is the religious psycho. If Ron Paul is true to his "Constitutionalism" belief, then he believes in "Separation of Church and State" just like our founding fathers were. Its his Foreign policy which people are concerned about, but basically he just doesn't like the idea of wasting billions of dollars on other countries when we have our own issues we could fix by using that money on ourselves.

Personal experiences does have a say. Why have feedback on a product if experiences is ill-relevant? Basically the same exact concept. Just because some people "Think" they are having a bad reaction to it, like "Freaking out" doesn't mean they are going to drop dead. The mind is more powerful than the body. If you think your getting a bad reaction, then you will.. Placebo effect actually does effect the experience while high on Cannabis, the key is to calm down!

What do you think will do more harm to me.. A pound of Oreos a month or a pound of Pot a month? I think Oreos and all other junk food should be illegal cause it makes people fat and lazy. How much research has gone into what the Oreo does to the body? Or how about the infamous twinkie that can last 100 years in its wrapper?