Anti / Pro Weed ?

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinformation/mentalhealthproblems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabisandmentalhealth.aspx

 

So what's the problem then?

I experience anxiety and paranoia if I've not smoked any for a long time, then I smoke some. But these negative effect subside if I keep smoking it.

Cannabis takes your mind to a different level, alters your perception. Some say it's a spiritual drug. I like to think so.

The thing people don't understand about the healing process is sometimes you get worse before you get better. Most medicine people take for illness in the west are by and large allopathic in that they make you feel better, but they don't get to the root of the problem so often the symptoms manifest themselves in another way, hence the general universal inffectiveness of modern psychaiatric medication, for example.

The term health is dervied from the same ancient greek word as holy, hence the term wholeness and well being. Some people who smoke cannabis for recreational, or spiritual reasons are expanding their consciousness, opening their mind, and a healthy or holy mind leads to a healthy body.

Cannabis relieves stress by opening channels in your body that are blocked, or chakras. But sometimes when you unblock a drain, there's a bit of a mess before things start to flow smoothly again.

Take it from anyone who has experimented with reiki and had a profound experience with it, and maybe also studied contemporary life science based on holism that this is all real.

People don't understand it though. Most psychiatrists are brainwashed by the education system which still teaches the classical, fragmentary paradigm of health and mind, and generally disregard ancient teachings more in line with holism and spiritualism as hocus pocus. it's old science, therefore it's wrong.

This link provided some illumination on the subject, but that statement is full of blatant negative proganda and baseless facts.

Long term use has always led to me being less depressed and more motivated. Some research also indicates that it promotes the development of new brain cells, and helps to protect against age related deterioration of every single organ and muscle in our bodies.

The establishment view of cannabis isn't worth taking notice off, the whole institute of psychiatry is corrupt and mismanaged to the detrminent of all patients who need treatment, and as professor Nutt rightly points out prohibition is severly restricting research into the effectiveness of cannabis, LSD, MDMT and psilocyben in treating a wide range of conditions.

 

This is very interesting

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2017-05/uob-cra050817.php

 

You actually say the royal society of Psychiatry have printed something with baseless facts? do you know how silly that sounds?
you saying that makes it impossible for me to have a further debate with you over this.. at least, you could have said why you think its wrong, but to refute them, is very very silly.

 

It comes down to science in the end. Any medical view can be over turned as new data emerges. The study I posted the link to is only one of many where major benefits of cannabis are emerging. And not only cannabis, but also the psychedelics. MDMA for instance is now being used to successfully treat treatment resistant PTSD in US veterans, police officers and fire fighters. MAPS, the organization doing some of this work, are now going to do FDA approved trials with cannabis for treating the same. (lot of acronyms there -sorry!)

So clearly there is some dissonance between what doctors say in different parts of the world regarding both cannabis and many other substances demonized due to the war on drugs.

http://www.maps.org/research/mmj

 

Yes, that is what I am saying. It's a form of cognitive dissonance, a mental block that the scientific discourse has been no stranger to over the centuries.

Why is it silly for me to refute them? Because I don't have a degree in psychiatry?

I have a degree in physics though if that counts, and some say physics is evolving into a branch of psychology. So maybe I'm just as qualified as anyone is to elucidate an opinion.

 

I'm quite passionate about drug reform and I have a tendency to monopolise threads like this (or even threads that are tangentially related...woops)

I'll try to keep it short: I am in favour of the legalization of weed and the decriminalization of so-called "hard" drugs (including things like cocaine and heroin) with these provided on prescription by psychiatrists, in safe injection rooms monitored by nurses, with clean needles and accompanied by psychiatric support and therapy. This is essentially the same system that currently operates in Portugal.

What a lot of people don't realise is that this is a system that has also worked in the past in the UK. The results were staggering- unprecedented drops in crime, an end of criminal drugs gangs, drops in infection rates, in deaths, in abscesses, in the numbers of new addicts, "junkies" who were part of the programme stabilising and lessening their doses, many becoming clean- all able to lead productive lives. To read more about it (it's an incredible story) check out this article: https://health.spectator.co.uk/the-case-for-prescription-heroin/

The article is an extract from the excellent book Chasing the Scream: The last Days of the War on Drugs by Johan Hari, which I heartily recommend, along with In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts by Gabor Mate, an excellent book that challenges notions and models of addiction.

In a wider cultural sense, Drug policy must cease to be a judicial issue and become a matter of public health. Our perceptions of what addiction is, how it forms and and how it operates must change through education and steps must be taken to prevent the demonisation of those suffering from addiction as "junkies", "scagheads" etc. These terms must be consigned to the historical dustbin along with "retard" and "mong".

The upshot of all of this is that pretty much all of the things that people think are bad about drugs are either exacerbated or created wholesale by their prohibition. Prohibition puts drugs into the hands of young and vulnerable people, it makes the quality and potency of drugs impossible to gauge for the user thereby leading to overdose, it allows billion dollar criminal empires to take over entire countries. The "iron law" of prohibition means that people with addictions to mild substances have no choice but to move onto more potent and dangerous ones (hence the creation of heroin addicts from people who are over-prescribed opiate painkillers) As for policing, drug enforcement is an area in which arrests do more harm than good- arrest the mid-level dealers and the best result is that nothing happens to change the flow of drugs, the worst result is that you create instability in gangland and violent crime rises, or you actually have an effect on the supply, in which case the street drugs have a new potency their users don't know about, so they'll either die from overdose or get abscesses and infections from shooting up brick dust.

Prohibition accomplishes nothing, and creates the problems it claims to solve. It has to end.

As for weed in particular: yes obviously I want weed to be legalised, but it's a fair way down my personal agenda, there are other drugs whose prohibition is a thousand times more harmful.

I used to put it this way:

"my belief is that drug prohibition will one day be remembered much as we now remember slavery (Conceived for explicitly racist reasons, exported around the world under threat of economic blackmail and used to create a permanent underclass of vilified "subhumans") and that, in this context, the legalization of weed is like an end to white slavery. Like, yeah, it's good, but it's hardly the most pressing issue, nor does it alleviate the suffering of those most afflicted."

I don't say that any more because although I still feel there is a truth to it, the message is often confused by the racial analogy. There is a very important conversation to be had around race and drug prohibition (racial segregation is basically what started the whole thing), and this statement draws the line in the wrong place.

 

Excellent post there.

I'm familiar with Gabor Mate's work, and I do highly recommend it to anyone with an interest in health in general and addiction in particular.

This is a Tedx talk he did on the subject

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66cYcSak6nE

 

it is a drug....where do you think most drugs come from?....plants that's where....opiates are a good exampleby your definition opium isn't a drug either......many cancer drugs are made from plants such as periwinkle.....the medicial route is the way to full legalization....keep saying its not a drug and it wont happen


comparing weed to onions and sage is a very bad correlation

imo

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yin0i3q46_Y

 

yabba daba doobs i was being ironic think most people guessed that :dizzy2: think i will take some perscribed drugs and go and have a lie down in a dark room

 

Weed is leeg. Rollingalong is a shll.

Here and now is all that matters.

 

we're going thru this Canada now...just waiting for legislation to pass


my view is indifferent...i dont really care either way as a non-smoker who doesnt care to get high

i will say that ill be glad to have easy access though to a known product if and when i decide to try it as a medication....by "known product" i mean the labels will be accurate and products tested for accuracy)..i dont mind paying extra taxes or whatever to be sure im getting the medicine i want



so in other words im for the legal aspects of allowing adults easy access to controlled "known products" as medication ....as for the recreational use i dont really care what others do as long as they do it safely and respect others by not driving high or smoking in peoples faces....just like alcohol or being naked.. i dont care if youre a drunk or a nudist just dont stumble around in public ,,,do it at home where it wont interfere with the rights of others

 

I'm pro legalisation but anti: 'Dude it's just freaking weed man...shit is harmless' nonsense.

If weed was much weaker & so many kids as young as 11-15 didn't start toking it on the regular....ok....my view would be a lil different.

 

He said

Let there be sound
There was sound
Let there be light
There was light
Let there be drums
There was drums
Let there be guitar
There was guitar
Oh, Let there be WEED!
:flyhigh: :drummer: unk: :bandana: :guitarist: