(04-16-2014 07:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:17 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:15 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:12 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:11 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  Please, I can cite source after source after source. Anyone who has ever gotten too high understands this connection. Edibles are substantially stronger than smoking and are now more available than ever. This doesn't surprise me in the least and it will happen again.

Post something that actually has external validity.

What I posted is indeed valid. Controlled studies are extremely accurate. This is not new and I am baffled that you didn't already know this.

Background

People who use cannabis have an increased risk of psychosis, an effect attributed to the active ingredient Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). There has recently been concern over an increase in the concentration of Δ9-THC in the cannabis available in many countries.

Aims

To investigate whether people with a first episode of psychosis were particularly likely to use high-potency cannabis.

Method

We collected information on cannabis use from 280 cases presenting with a first episode of psychosis to the South London & Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, and from 174 healthy controls recruited from the local population.

Results

There was no significant difference between cases and controls in whether they had ever taken cannabis, or age at first use. However, those in the cases group were more likely to be current daily users (OR = 6.4) and to have smoked cannabis for more than 5 years (OR = 2.1). Among those who used cannabis, 78% of the cases group used high-potency cannabis (sinsemilla, ‘ skunk’) compared with 37% of the control group (OR 6.8).

Conclusions

The finding that people with a first episode of psychosis had smoked higher-potency cannabis, for longer and with greater frequency, than a healthy control group is consistent with the hypothesis that Δ9-THC is the active ingredient increasing risk of psychosis. This has important public health implications, given the increased availability and use of high-potency cannabis.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/195/6/488.full

Let me ask you a question? Do you have much experience with THC?

Maybe once or twice a semester when I was in college.

Here's a question for you: Do you think this paper establishes causality?

You don't need a neurological scan to understand that taking too much acid causes adverse effects. The same is true to THC. However, this "paper" which is actually a study is now back up by the latest medical study....which has stirred this debate once again in the last couple days.

POT IS NOT SAFE. Accept it. Not only is it not safe, the way it is administered is also not safe.
http://www.livescience.com/17707-marijua...hosis.html

I think it's funny that you had to specify that. No sh!t Sherlock.

(04-16-2014 10:36 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  They now have pot vending machines. I haven't seen a cigarette vending machine in decades and I've never seen one for booze. I believe the intent was to keep kids from buying the stuff.

Could you give us more information on these? My quick research reveals that these are currently only available for medical use and require a finger print scan matching a patient in their database to dispense the product. It seems that the ones that are set to come out soon for recreational use will also have some type of identity verification.

Like I said, I don't know much about these and just did a quick Google search but it seems it would be much easier for children just to go find an illegal drug dealer than to try to get pot out of these machines.

So, the elephant in the room wants to know - If marijuana "causes" murders in the same fashion as guns, why don't we outlaw guns like marijuana?

Moron.

(04-16-2014 09:28 PM)Hitch Wrote:  I don't think okie wants to look into the stats on how many deaths are connected with drinking.

Give me a break. People die all the time from the consequences of smoking pot or being impaired from pot. What does this thread have to do with alcohol. If you want to discuss the dangers of alcohol, then start a thread about it.

The point is that pot is not this peaceful harmless substance that turns people into peace loving gentle creatures like the left wants everyone to think.

(04-17-2014 03:03 AM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:17 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:15 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:12 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Post something that actually has external validity.

What I posted is indeed valid. Controlled studies are extremely accurate. This is not new and I am baffled that you didn't already know this.

Background

People who use cannabis have an increased risk of psychosis, an effect attributed to the active ingredient Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). There has recently been concern over an increase in the concentration of Δ9-THC in the cannabis available in many countries.

Aims

To investigate whether people with a first episode of psychosis were particularly likely to use high-potency cannabis.

Method

We collected information on cannabis use from 280 cases presenting with a first episode of psychosis to the South London & Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, and from 174 healthy controls recruited from the local population.

Results

There was no significant difference between cases and controls in whether they had ever taken cannabis, or age at first use. However, those in the cases group were more likely to be current daily users (OR = 6.4) and to have smoked cannabis for more than 5 years (OR = 2.1). Among those who used cannabis, 78% of the cases group used high-potency cannabis (sinsemilla, ‘ skunk’) compared with 37% of the control group (OR 6.8).

Conclusions

The finding that people with a first episode of psychosis had smoked higher-potency cannabis, for longer and with greater frequency, than a healthy control group is consistent with the hypothesis that Δ9-THC is the active ingredient increasing risk of psychosis. This has important public health implications, given the increased availability and use of high-potency cannabis.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/195/6/488.full

Let me ask you a question? Do you have much experience with THC?

Maybe once or twice a semester when I was in college.

Here's a question for you: Do you think this paper establishes causality?

You don't need a neurological scan to understand that taking too much acid causes adverse effects. The same is true to THC. However, this "paper" which is actually a study is now back up by the latest medical study....which has stirred this debate once again in the last couple days.

POT IS NOT SAFE. Accept it. Not only is it not safe, the way it is administered is also not safe.
http://www.livescience.com/17707-marijua...hosis.html

I think it's funny that you had to specify that. No sh!t Sherlock.

A paper, is not necessarily a "study." I think it's funny you called it a paper. Keep dumbing down the debate with silly semantics.

(04-17-2014 08:47 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 03:03 AM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:17 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:15 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  What I posted is indeed valid. Controlled studies are extremely accurate. This is not new and I am baffled that you didn't already know this.

Background

People who use cannabis have an increased risk of psychosis, an effect attributed to the active ingredient Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC). There has recently been concern over an increase in the concentration of Δ9-THC in the cannabis available in many countries.

Aims

To investigate whether people with a first episode of psychosis were particularly likely to use high-potency cannabis.

Method

We collected information on cannabis use from 280 cases presenting with a first episode of psychosis to the South London & Maudsley National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust, and from 174 healthy controls recruited from the local population.

Results

There was no significant difference between cases and controls in whether they had ever taken cannabis, or age at first use. However, those in the cases group were more likely to be current daily users (OR = 6.4) and to have smoked cannabis for more than 5 years (OR = 2.1). Among those who used cannabis, 78% of the cases group used high-potency cannabis (sinsemilla, ‘ skunk’) compared with 37% of the control group (OR 6.8).

Conclusions

The finding that people with a first episode of psychosis had smoked higher-potency cannabis, for longer and with greater frequency, than a healthy control group is consistent with the hypothesis that Δ9-THC is the active ingredient increasing risk of psychosis. This has important public health implications, given the increased availability and use of high-potency cannabis.
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/195/6/488.full

Let me ask you a question? Do you have much experience with THC?

Maybe once or twice a semester when I was in college.

Here's a question for you: Do you think this paper establishes causality?

You don't need a neurological scan to understand that taking too much acid causes adverse effects. The same is true to THC. However, this "paper" which is actually a study is now back up by the latest medical study....which has stirred this debate once again in the last couple days.

POT IS NOT SAFE. Accept it. Not only is it not safe, the way it is administered is also not safe.
http://www.livescience.com/17707-marijua...hosis.html

I think it's funny that you had to specify that. No sh!t Sherlock.

A paper, is not necessarily a "study." I think it's funny you called it a paper. Keep dumbing down the debate with silly semantics.

This is the most hypocritical statement you've made so far. You're the one who brought it up.

People use the word paper interchangeably with the word study without batting an eye. It's assumed that the reader already understands what is and isn't a study.

Extremely high levels of cannabinoid intake can lead to hallucinations. For this to cause someone to kill another is incredibly rare and an outlier. To say otherwise wiuld be malarky. !

(04-17-2014 06:13 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  Extremely high levels of cannabinoid intake can lead to hallucinations. For this to cause someone to kill another is incredibly rare and an outlier. To say otherwise wiuld be malarky. !

We have also not had products with these levels of THC so readily available before in history.

BTW it leads to more than "hallucinations" In some people it can create manic and psychotic episodes. That is not a new revelation.

(04-17-2014 05:21 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:47 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 03:03 AM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:31 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-16-2014 07:17 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  Maybe once or twice a semester when I was in college.

Here's a question for you: Do you think this paper establishes causality?

You don't need a neurological scan to understand that taking too much acid causes adverse effects. The same is true to THC. However, this "paper" which is actually a study is now back up by the latest medical study....which has stirred this debate once again in the last couple days.

POT IS NOT SAFE. Accept it. Not only is it not safe, the way it is administered is also not safe.
http://www.livescience.com/17707-marijua...hosis.html

I think it's funny that you had to specify that. No sh!t Sherlock.

A paper, is not necessarily a "study." I think it's funny you called it a paper. Keep dumbing down the debate with silly semantics.

This is the most hypocritical statement you've made so far. You're the one who brought it up.

People use the word paper interchangeably with the word study without batting an eye. It's assumed that the reader already understands what is and isn't a study.

IT's NOT A PAPER

Anyone who has spent considerable time around heavy dope smokers won't try to disclaim it's effects. Unless, of course, they are the heavy users themselves.

Compounding the ills of other easily available intoxicants with yet another is no answer to the ills of the former. Silly argument. Serious repercussions.

(04-17-2014 06:30 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Anyone who has spent considerable time around heavy dope smokers won't try to disclaim it's effects. Unless, of course, they are the heavy users themselves.

Compounding the ills of other easily available intoxicants with yet another is no answer to the ills of the former. Silly argument. Serious repercussions.

This sounds like pot plus to me. Marijuana does not usually make people hallucinate unless it's mixed with something else. I wouldn't jump to conclusions about where the edibles came from, either, just because it's in Colorado. Unless I missed it the article doesn't say. It's possible he was high on something else at the time this happened that did cause him to hallucinate.

They also don't sound like they're sure he did eat marijuana edibles:

"Authorities are now investigating whether Richard Kirk had indeed consumed some kind of drug, such as marijuana, prior to Monday night's shooting. They are also reportedly reviewing the length of time it took to respond to her 911 call."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...z2zBng0fC5

(04-17-2014 06:37 PM)ndlutz Wrote:  

Quote:This sounds like pot plus to me. Marijuana does not usually make people hallucinate unless it's mixed with something else. I wouldn't jump to conclusions about where the edibles came from, either, just because it's in Colorado. Unless I missed it the article doesn't say. It's possible he was high on something else at the time this happened that did cause him to hallucinate.

false statement

Quote:"Authorities are now investigating whether Richard Kirk had indeed consumed some kind of drug, such as marijuana, prior to Monday night's shooting. They are also reportedly reviewing the length of time it took to respond to her 911 call."

Sure they are going to investigate that. Not because high levels of THC can't create that effect

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national...z2zBng0fC5

Illegal or not, when I leave the service, I'm going to have a plant in the house.

(04-17-2014 07:47 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Illegal or not, when I leave the service, I'm going to have a plant in the house.

LOL a plant. You are a newb and have no idea what you are doing.

(04-17-2014 07:53 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:47 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Illegal or not, when I leave the service, I'm going to have a plant in the house.

LOL a plant. You are a newb and have no idea what you are doing.

I admitting to being new to it, but my cousins can catch me up on it. They've been selling for decades now.

(04-17-2014 08:11 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:53 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:47 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Illegal or not, when I leave the service, I'm going to have a plant in the house.

LOL a plant. You are a newb and have no idea what you are doing.

I admitting to being new to it, but my cousins can catch me up on it. They've been selling for decades now.

Pff ha ha ha

(04-17-2014 08:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:11 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:53 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:47 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Illegal or not, when I leave the service, I'm going to have a plant in the house.

LOL a plant. You are a newb and have no idea what you are doing.

I admitting to being new to it, but my cousins can catch me up on it. They've been selling for decades now.

Pff ha ha ha

You'd be surprised what people who live in the woods do for a little easy money. The corn liquor market has dried up.

Edit: I wouldn't sell though. Just personal use. Seattle, Wa style.

(04-17-2014 08:15 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:11 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:53 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:47 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  Illegal or not, when I leave the service, I'm going to have a plant in the house.

LOL a plant. You are a newb and have no idea what you are doing.

I admitting to being new to it, but my cousins can catch me up on it. They've been selling for decades now.

Pff ha ha ha

You'd be surprised what people who live in the woods do for a little easy money. The corn liquor market has dried up.

Edit: I wouldn't sell though. Just personal use. Seattle, Wa style.

You can't grow what they sell. You have no idea what you think you are in for.

(04-17-2014 08:20 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:15 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:14 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 08:11 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-17-2014 07:53 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  LOL a plant. You are a newb and have no idea what you are doing.

I admitting to being new to it, but my cousins can catch me up on it. They've been selling for decades now.

Pff ha ha ha

You'd be surprised what people who live in the woods do for a little easy money. The corn liquor market has dried up.

Edit: I wouldn't sell though. Just personal use. Seattle, Wa style.

You can't grow what they sell. You have no idea what you think you are in for.

Life's an adventure.