Posts by Joseph Kern11

One 'Joint' can be as damaging as five cigarettes

According to experts from the National Institutes of Health, smoking just one marijuana joint can be just as hard on your lungs as smoking five cigarettes in a row. Their findings were recently published in the journal Thorax.

The study monitored 339 participants, ranging from regular cigarette smokers and marijuana users to those who used both, as well as non-smokers.

While emphysema was specifically observed in the cigarette smokers, cannabis users also showed significant issues regarding lung function.

"The extent of lung damage was directly linked to how many joints were smoked... The impact of a single joint on the lungs was equivalent to smoking between 2.5 and 5 cigarettes all at once," noted one of the study's authors.

The researchers emphasized that people often underestimate the actual harm marijuana can cause to the respiratory system.

(Associated Press)

Jerry Wood21 said:James Turner80 claims THC marijuana isn't addictive. That just doesn't hold water.

🙂 I’ve heard that exact same line applied to almost every other drug out there. If you want a reality check, go visit a psychiatric hospital and ask a doctor to show you the people who "aren't addicted"—the ones who smoke every single day simply because they enjoy it, claiming they can quit whenever they want, yet they choose not to. At a certain point, the distinction becomes meaningless.

Sam Green73 said:That’s not quite how it works. You tackle the black market through tighter regulation and/or tax cuts. Most people I know who use MDMA are college graduates or even PhD holders. They aren't doing it every single day or even every week. Honestly, if we were talking about minors smoking regular cigarettes on the street, I’d advocate for mandatory rehabilitation programs, but you seem to be struggling to grasp that not everyone is a minor.
It’s good that you’ve finally come to your senses; if you can't manage consumption responsibly, it's better to just stay away from it altogether.

But how many people actually fall into that category? How many people are going to start using daily just because cannabis becomes available and is socially and legally accepted? You only need to look at the example of the Netherlands to see the potential impact.

http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/demand/speakout/09so.htm
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/govpubs/solom2.htm

Sam Green73 said:The people I know who use it do so occasionally; they are educated and highly productive.
In reality, the people consuming legal substances like alcohol, tobacco, and fast food are far more problematic.
Why aren't you fighting to criminalize those instead?
Do you have any idea how many lives are lost to diseases linked to alcohol, nicotine, and obesity?

That’s beside the point, but if you ask me, cigarettes should be banned. As for alcohol and obesity, there should definitely be specific measures introduced to address those issues as well.

Sam Green73 said:Some people might see this as an argument regarding fundamental human liberties😉

It’s the exact same logic applied to pedophilia.

Kyle Ross56 said:Maybe serious arguments and documentaries don't work on you, but perhaps something like this will. The core message remains the same.

Sakoman is just a charlatan, whereas those pamphlets about drug cartels present much more substantial arguments. Go to any hospital with a psychiatric ward and ask a doctor to show you a single patient for whom marijuana was actually harmless.

Sam Green73 said:What we really need is education. We should be explaining to people just how destructive this stuff is through personal experiences. Hopefully, that might steer some of those on the fence away from using such an evil substance.

However, the core issue here is political rather than medical.
The real debate centers on the pros and cons of marijuana prohibition.

As it stands, the entire marijuana market is a monopoly controlled by criminals. (I hope that point is clear enough)

Basic economics tells us that monopolies are inherently bad.
And are we really suggesting that criminals are the right people to hand a monopoly over to?

If you follow that logic, then every single black market could be solved simply through legalization. I know that wasn't your intention, but that’s essentially where the argument leads. From a purely economic standpoint, if more people are using marijuana, we end up with a less productive and less skilled workforce.

Kyle Ross56 said:....

Blah, blah, blah... honestly, I don't care anymore. Go ahead and ruin your life with that weed if you want; it doesn't affect me. I tried my best to walk you through the reality of the situation, but you’re still just being stubborn. I know exactly how your thought process works because I've been in those same shoes, which means there isn't much anyone can do for you at this point.

But please, do me a favor and stop poisoning everyone else with this drug cartel propaganda. You might run into some kid who stumbles upon your post, reads all this nonsense, and decides to start smoking because you've "scientifically proven" to them how harmless it actually is.

Kyle Ross56 said:There is a massive difference between recreational, spiritual, or cognitive use and actual substance abuse. If I had been smoking every single day and my entire life revolved around it, I’d probably be standing here right now lecturing everyone on how dangerous and toxic it all is. Those kinds of views aren't based on science; they're just distorted perspectives born out of one's own mistakes. Eat a bag of chips twice a week and you'll be fine. But if you're polishing off two family-sized bags a day and eventually become unhealthy, you can't act like you've suddenly gained some profound wisdom about the "dangers" of snacks—you're really just proving that you lack self-control and responsibility.

"Spiritual or cognitive use"!!!! So now we've wandered into religious territory, have we? It seems to me that you've strayed quite far down the wrong path. If it's true that you use this plant for those specific purposes, then you likely have some very serious issues on your hands. But let's save that for another discussion—religion.

slypuma17 said:I’d like to ask Joseph Kern11 if he actually agrees with these points—and more importantly, would he ever hand over his own right to make decisions to someone else?

Would you recommend giving someone the freedom to decide if they were planning to take their own life? It's the exact same principle. When someone is making an unconscious decision that results in self-harm, my opposition to legalization stems from a genuine concern for your well-being.

slypuma17 said:You didn't actually answer my question; instead, you just retreated behind the issue of minors again. Throughout this entire debate, you've been using them as a shield, almost like a crutch. My question was specifically about an adult who is mentally sound, yet you immediately pivot back to children... It’s classic demagoguery. Every demagogue I know uses the plight of minors, the impoverished, or the disenfranchised to dodge the point.

Why don't you try it yourself then? Who here started smoking weed at twenty?

Kyle Ross56 said:And while we're on the subject, I honestly think Coca-Cola should be banned too:
http://www.healthbolt.net/2006/12/08...oke-right-now/

I can certainly agree with you there.

Furthermore, how do you account for the fact that none of the active users ever claim it's harmful, yet everyone who has decided to quit insists it was nothing but trouble and strictly damaging? At least personally, I haven't met anyone like that, and I know quite a few people.

Kyle Ross56 said:It’s truly wonderful to have a conversation with a crowd whose entire understanding of drugs is built on nothing but propaganda, myths, and pure misinformation....

I actually know quite a bit about drugs myself. It seems to me that you're the one whose "knowledge" is being shaped by the propaganda, myths, and disinformation pushed by drug cartel lobbyists.

Kyle Ross56 said:Regarding all that schizophrenia nonsense:

Exactly! Psychiatrists and their research are just total bullshit, right? You're clearly the smartest one here. Who cares if they've dedicated their entire lives to this field when they're such idiots? You're the one who actually knows what's going on.

slypuma17 said:So what happens now? Because of a few unstable individuals who might fall into the trap of using marijuana, should someone like Joe Biden—who maybe only uses it on a Sunday afternoon or once in a blue moon after an exhausting workday—be forced "out of the law"?
Does that seem reasonable to you?

The real issue is that we aren't just talking about a handful of unstable people; most people end up getting hooked. You claim to be part of that group that doesn't get addicted, and I believe you—I truly do, because I know it's possible—but if you look at the big picture, more people are going to be ruined by it than will actually enjoy it. As for minors, cigarettes are legally restricted to adults, yet look at how many kids smoke them. Why would you assume things would be any different with weed?

James Turner80 said:First off, they’re demonizing the symbol by turning the cross upside down, even though we all know exactly who was crucified on it.
Secondly, why would this actually matter in any serious theological study?
As far as I understand, soteriology is the study of the concept of the Resurrection.
What on earth does that have to do with cannabis oil?
Christology focuses on Jesus as a person.
The best we can do is speculate whether Jesus might have used marijuana, which could theoretically explain his unconventional personality.
So, perhaps Jesus was nothing more than—to put it in plain terms—a "stoned addict."🙏

A cross doesn't mean much on its own; it’s what it represents that matters. For Satanists, an inverted cross signifies the antithesis of Christ, not St. Peter. Furthermore, as the text points out, Jesus was anointed with oil, not high on smoke. Calling him a "stoned addict" is incredibly disrespectful and frankly disgusting.

Samuel Brown6 said:Alright, then why don't you read my post and give me your honest opinion on decriminalization? Tell me exactly why you think it shouldn't happen—or maybe you actually think it should?

I believe the current legal approach to marijuana is poorly handled and needs much stricter enforcement. From what I can see, we agree that someone caught with a joint shouldn't face criminal prosecution, but my view is that such an individual should be required to complete an educational course on the harmful effects of marijuana and undergo mandatory testing for a set period. If they test positive, they still wouldn't face criminal charges, but medical intervention would be implemented. As for those dealing drugs—any drugs—penalties should be toughened and increased exponentially. For example, if you deal drugs, you get two years in prison; if you're caught again, it’s four; then eight, and so on. Furthermore, if a minor is caught with marijuana, their parents must be notified, and this requirement should remain in place until that person reaches age 21.
What am I basing my belief that marijuana is harmful on? For starters, my own experience. When I was smoking, my GPA hovered around a 3.7; once I quit, it climbed to a 5.0. Based on my personal history with consumption, I have concluded that the harmful consequences are as follows: First, a loss of willpower and motivation. I could have maintained a 5.0 while I was smoking, but I simply couldn't bring myself to care. It felt like everything was just "whatever." You lose touch with reality. Then, there is the addiction. I couldn't imagine going out without a joint. Having weed on hand became the primary focus of my life. In the search for marijuana, you meet dangerous people and often end up in bad crowds. And you know how it goes—you are who you hang out with. That path inevitably leads you toward other narcotics, whose harm is unquestionable. Today, half the kids in eighth grade are smoking cigarettes; if legalization happens, that will shift to marijuana. That is my conclusion based on firsthand experience. Additionally, doctors claim that marijuana increases the probability of mental illness, which is especially dangerous for those with a genetic predisposition.
There is also a subculture tied to marijuana. In my experience meeting different people, most of those who smoke weed are just troublemakers.

Can someone please point me toward a person who actually quit weed for good and genuinely believes life is better without it? It’s just like people at a party claiming they’re having the time of their lives. Every addict insists their habit is perfectly fine right up until they hit rock bottom and finally have to face the consequences.

Samuel Brown6 said:you don't necessarily have to smoke marijuana with tobacco😉

It's like saying you don't have to mix wine with water.

Samuel Brown6 said:let me ask you something: are you an addict?

About what?

Jerry Wood21 said:Cannabis originated in the Old World before being brought over to the Western Hemisphere during the 16th century. It stands as one of the most ancient cultivated plants in history. Because it has been spread through farming to nearly every corner of the globe, you could truly call it a cosmopolitan plant. It thrives in almost any climate or ecological setting, appearing both as a common weed and as a carefully cultivated crop.

Just like opium. So what's your point?

Jerry Wood21 said:Joseph Kern11, I've got a little theory for you... whether you want to admit it or not, there isn't a single scientifically proven harmful effect.

Are we just going to ignore schizophrenia, permanent psycho-social disorders, addiction, and an increased openness to other substances? Are those not considered harmful effects?

By that logic, since there hasn't been a recorded fatal overdose from LSD, should we just legalize that too?

Look, why don't you go find a specialist who has dedicated their entire life to the fight against drug abuse and ask them if it's actually harmless.