cannabisnews.com: Don't Underestimate The Danger of Marijuana Use










  Don't Underestimate The Danger of Marijuana Use

Posted by CN Staff on May 26, 2005 at 11:23:10 PT
By Larissa Lytwyn 
Source: Easton Courier  

Connecticut -- The cable channel Showtime recently released a 2001 musical remake of the 1936 anti-marijuana film "Reefer Madness." The original "Madness" became a "cult classic," gleefully mocked for its blatant, often false propaganda.In the decades since, Hollywood has released several films, from 1980's "Cheech & Chong" to 1993's Dazed and Confused," depicting marijuana use as "cool."
The films' target audiences were the teen and collegiate crowds. The pot-smoking protagonists were always portrayed as lovable, bumbling slackers. Not surprisingly, in our Hollywood-seeped America, many people are unaware of the dangers of marijuana.Worse, when presented with the facts on pot's destructiveness, many people disregard it as "exaggerated," the "exception" rather than the norm.Further, many people praise activist efforts to legalize marijuana in the U.S., purportedly for medical use.The truth is that marijuana is far from harmless. Marijuana is addictive.I first learned about marijuana, along with heroin, cocaine and alcohol, in fifth grade, when a DARE officer visited our health class to discuss how drugs would hurt our brains.While we were all horrified by the anecdotes involving lethal heroin overdoses and alcohol poisoning, stories about the effects of marijuana did not end in sobering tales of deadly indulgence. One of my friends said her parents smoked marijuana when they were young. "I guess it's not as bad as that other stuff, like heroin," she said. My own parents, both Baby Boomers, were open about virtually everything. Their communication with me as a child was always honest, straightforward and direct. So, I believed them when they told me how much drugs, including marijuana, could hurt me. The following year, in sixth grade, rumors began to spread about a group of peers, kids in the "cool" clique, who smoked marijuana on weekends.From then on, there was always a certain mystique about marijuana use.In high school and even college, talking about heroin or crack use was always revealed in a worried whisper.Marijuana use, however, was practically celebrated as a way to "relax" and socialize.I'm proud to say that I've never been drunk and I've never smoked a joint or a cigarette. I feel especially good about avoiding marijuana, now that scientists know much more about the physical and psychological effect of pot on the brain than they did even 10 years ago. The effects of marijuana use on the brain are very similar to the effects of heroin, alcohol or cocaine. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), withdrawal from THC, pot's active ingredient, inhibits the activity of the body's natural anti-stress hormone, dopamine. Damage to the dopamine neuron can result in the onset of deep depression, anxiety and personality disturbances. Due to the regeneration of THC over the past few decades, marijuana is far more potent today than it was in the 1960s and 1970s. Thomas Pasquarella of the Drug Enforcement Agency discussed this recently at the Family University at Joel Barlow High School, sponsored by the Easton-Redding Community Coalition (ERCC), in conjunction with the Redding and Easton schools' PTAs.Pasquarella made clear that in addition to being highly potent, marijuana today is frequently laced with potentially instantly lethal substances, including rat poison and the "club drug" ecstasy. (Note that ecstasy and similarly manufactured "club drugs," are derived from horse tranquilizers). Usage carries severe short- and long-term health consequences. When someone smokes pot, THC passes rapidly through the lungs into the bloodstream, where it travels to the body's organs, including the brain.Short-term effects of marijuana use include problems with memory and learning, difficulty in thinking and problem-solving, loss of coordination and increased heart rate. Research findings for long-term use are similar to those of so-called "harder" drugs. According to the NIDA, a user's risk of heart attack more than quadruples in the first hour after smoking marijuana. Further, a study of 450 individuals who smoked marijuana frequently but did not smoke tobacco reported significantly more health problems and missed more days of work than nonsmokers. Even infrequent use can cause burning and stinging of the mouth and throat, often accompanied by a heavy cough. Someone who smokes marijuana frequently has many of the same respiratory problems as cigarette smokers, including lung cancerThe NIDA cites many studies reporting that students who smoke pot frequently get lower grades and are less likely to graduate from high school compared to their non-using peers.A study of 129 college students found that those who used marijuana heavily (27 out of 30 days) had far inferior cognitive skills related to attention, memory and learning. As a result, stated the NIDA, heavy users may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level all of the time. Marijuana is the top drug of choice among Americans; according to the NIDA, and 60 percent of youth under 21 use marijuana more than any other illicit drug.Marijuana is often mistaken as a more "socially acceptable" alternative to "harder" substances like heroin and cocaine - but as we know, the effects on the body are alarmingly alike. Remember, even experimen­tation can lead to addiction. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, more teens are in treatment with a primary diagnosis of marijuana dependence than all other illicit drugs combined. So, be clear that today's marijuana is not the pot smoked by earlier generations. It is addictive and horribly damaging to one's physical and mental health and intellectual capacity. Don't be fooled by the exploits of fun-loving celluloid "stoners." And don't think just because your parents may have smoked marijuana, that it's okay for you. It's not - the price is just too high.This column reflects the opinion of Editor Larissa Lytwyn and does not necessarily represent the views of Hometown Publications. Source: Easton Courier (CT)Author: Larissa LytwynPublished: May 26, 2005 Copyright: 2005 Easton Courier Contact: eastoncourier add-inc.comWebsite: http://www.eastoncourier.com/Related Articles:War on Drugs Gone To Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20691.shtmlThe War on Pot: Wrong Drug, Wrong Warhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20674.shtmlMarijuana Becomes Focus of Drug Warhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread20619.shtml 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #67 posted by Dan B on May 29, 2005 at 11:21:47 PT
Hope and Kap
Hope: I usually take any chance I can get to pick on those I like/appreciate. It has always been my family's way of showing that one accepts and appreciates a person, and of course I would do my best to take the same kind of ribbing toward me in that spirit. I appreciate all of your insights and your enthusiasm. I knew what you meant; I was just letting you know that I read and enjoyed what you wrote in a way that (I felt) was funny. No harm intended. I have been known to truly offend those who are not accustomed to being picked on, so please let me know if you really do become offended. In the mean time, I'll try to slow things down in the good-natured (I hope!) ribbing department. :)Kaptinemo - It's good to be back, but I am not sure how often I will get to post here. I'm quite busy with attempting to get a job. I may go back to school for a Master of Library Information Systems degree. We'll have to see if financial aid will work for me. Anyway, thanks for the congrats. He's a wonderful kid.Take care, everyone. (This does not mean goodbye)Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #66 posted by jose melendez on May 28, 2005 at 05:52:10 PT
Don't underestimate the power of money in politics
http://www.gainesville.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050528/LOCAL/205280319/1078/news TALLAHASSEE - Gov. Jeb Bush vetoed a bill designed to make it harder for schools to require students undergo psychological evaluations and take mood-altering drugs to treat mental disorders.But the governor signed a different bill that tightens rules for when children in foster care can be put on psychotropic drugs.The legislation Bush vetoed would have barred schools from refusing to enroll students who refuse to take mood-altering drugs to treat mental disorders.And before referring students for psychological evaluations, schools would have had to inform parents behavior problems can result from physical conditions.The foster care legislation (SB 1090), which will take effect July 1, requires the Department of Children & Families to get consent from the parents of any child in its care before giving the child psychotropic drugs. - - -"Marihuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm"Marihuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death." - more detailshttp://www.druglibrary.org/olsen/dpf/whitebread07.html “After two puffs on a marijuana cigarette my incisor teeth grew six inches long and dripped with blood.”http://www.sdcitybeat.com/article.php?id=373Just say knowhttp://www.ablechild.org/gloria%20wright.htmAn addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death:http://www.happinessonline.org/BeTemperate/indexdrugs.htm An addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death:http://www.cchr.org/issues/school/page01.htm
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #65 posted by jose melendez on May 28, 2005 at 05:19:27 PT
Anti-drugs officials push pills on kids
Names are named, collussions between government "anti-drugs" officials and drug companies exposed!http://www.sierratimes.com/05/04/26/pringle.htm http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Politics/Leg/03PoliticsHEAL03LEG051605.htm http://www.psychsearch.net/teenscreen.html http://www.opednews.com/pringle_042005_crusader_against_mass_drugging.htm http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/041805Pringle/041805pringle.html 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #64 posted by kaptinemo on May 27, 2005 at 20:23:31 PT:
My pleasure Hope, and good to see you, Dan B!
I've missed your insightful commentaries; always very deep. And congrats on your new 'addition'!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #63 posted by Hope on May 27, 2005 at 18:37:29 PT
Baby Elephant
Thank you, Kap. That is so cool. It's such a cute commercial. I rarely turn the TV on and what I see, I see over my shoulder while my husband is watching...but I had been hoping to see it, I'd heard so much about it.Dan B, it is good to see you and congratulations to you and your new family. About that “one plant” business and my “mother’s milk” comment. I didn't make my thought clear. Although, I was having a relatively clear thought. I was sooo sleepy when I posted that. I thought about it, even at the time, but I assumed that I would be understood. Obviously not. I got that they were saying "It's in just one plant! Imagine that! It must be soooo evil, wicked, and dangerous because it's in just one plant! Can you imagine how evil it is? Just one plant!" and I thought I remembered reading somewhere that cannabinoids were in the first few days lactation of a new mother and that it was important for a baby to thrive. I believe that was true of mice, men, and all mammals. Understand...I don't mean men like “male”...but like “humans”. I really was trying to say, "Yeah, it's so evil, it's in mother's milk, the best food for a newborn infant." I realized that since I was cutting it short and imagining that you guys could understand or figure out what I meant…even if I didn’t explain what I was saying…yeah…I was sleepy. I thought even last night it might be perceived that I sounded like I was denying it was in just one plant...I meant...like, "So what...look it's naturally in mother's milk...for newborns. It's not like it doesn't exist anywhere else in creation, for heaven's sake and of all places….mother’s milk."Anyway...I ran through a stop sign and should have put a few more sentences in there to explain myself.BGreen, I had to look up "Blue" comic to see what it was. “When a comic is "blue," it means that he/she is using dirty language and/or talking about sexual (or otherwise adult) situations in an explicit way.”
Aaaarrghhh!!! One stupid Whizzenater episode and I'll never be able to live it down! I don't mean to be a "blue" comic. It may happen naturally without my realizing it...horrors, I must stay out of public...I fear I may be stupider than I realized even. I can occasionally find myself being very naive and witless. I actually prefer being naive about lots of stuff, and I often find myself not knowing when to be quiet. I can get carried away and not have a clue as to how inane I may be acting until it's too late. *sigh* Unless...and this occurred to me, heaven forbid!...that I do it often and I'm so naive and unsophisticated I don't even realize it. Like going around with my skirt tucked in my underwear without realizing it. AAARRGGHH! I so hope not...but nothing surprises me much anymore.BGreen and Dan...I know you don't mean it unkindly.I think.*smile*But then again I may be like the lady at church that the preacher does really preach to, (she’s sort of a trouble making sister) and she will say later, "Boy, he really told them, didn't he?"(I'm just assuming you're picking on me because you love me.)Anyway...I'm going to fall back on the tired and true... I'm just a simple country girl who spends too much time working in the hot sun.Also, YUCK!!! about Larissa...not only is she an irritating perky, spunky, puppet for the tyrants, and proud of her bi-sexual boyfriend, forget about being PC when it's your boyfriend...yuck. Now I learn she espouses pedophilia! Yuck! Can she get any worse? After we write her, let's forget her. I so agree with Pete...she makes me want to brush my teeth.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #62 posted by kaptinemo on May 27, 2005 at 14:07:59 PT:
Hope, The Baby Elephant In The Rain commercial
Go here: http://www.roadode.com/classicindex.shtml#special0Scroll down to the bottom and look for the image of the parrot. You'll find links for various players to run the commercial under the image.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #61 posted by jose melendez on May 27, 2005 at 13:48:21 PT
ONDCP pays for cigarette promotion ads!
These ads ought to be fodder for quite a few lawsuits, and maybe an FTC legal action:http://www.mediacampaign.org/mg/print/ad_ashtray.html here's a precedent:http://www.associatedcontent.com/content.cfm?content_type=article&content_type_id=1498http://xroads.virginia.edu/~UG00/3on1/tobaccoads/polimage.htm http://www.ftc.gov/opa/1997/05/joecamel.htm Here's where to blow the whistle on their false advertising and deceptive trade practices: https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/wsolcq$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU01"Use this form to submit a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Bureau of Consumer Protection about a particular company or organization. This form also may be used to submit a complaint to the FTC concerning media violence. The information you provide is up to you. However, if you do not provide your name or other information, it may be impossible for us to refer, respond to, or investigate your complaint or request. "Here's a UK case ripe for appeal, and worth watching:http://tinyurl.com/bd2zcMore on cannabis extracts approved as medications:http://www.msneighborhood.com/content/in_the_news/archive_2237.aspx 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #60 posted by warhater on May 27, 2005 at 12:29:06 PT:
Regenerate THC, It's just like Heroin
You folks have covered many of the technical failures of this "journalist" well. The regeneration of THC thing is an enigma. I can't even speculate on what she was trying to say."The effects of marijuana use on the brain are very similar to the effects of heroin, alcohol, or cocaine."This is a truly ignorant statement. When we consider vastly different cognitive effects it is obvious that they must have vastly different effects on the brain. I think she is referring to some animal research that suggests similarity in withdrawal symptoms. In my opinion the research is suspect, because it was done with a synthetic THC analog. This research in no way suggested that the effects of these drugs on the brain were similar. Lytwyn does not know how to read.This is a good trick: “According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), withdrawal from THC, pot's active ingredient, inhibits the activity of the body's natural anti-stress hormone, dopamine. Damage to the dopamine neuron can result in the onset of deep depression, anxiety and personality disturbances.”It is reasonable to assume that neural damage can result in the onset of depression. Perhaps THC withdrawal inhibits dopamine activity. But there is no evidence that THC causes neural damage. Sticking these conclusions together suggests something that is not true.“Pasquarella made clear that in addition to being highly potent, marijuana today is frequently laced with potentially instantly lethal substances, including rat poison and the "club drug" ecstasy.”Oh yeah, it is FREQUENTLY laced. It is hard to score a bag that isn't laced with rat poison. The truth: Only an idiot would lace “highly potent” pot with anything. PCP is sometimes smoked on bad pot, or even on mint leaves, but nobody tries to pass it off as weed. The reek of the chemical would give it away immediately, and the supplier would have some angry customers on his hands. Many people who smoke pot avoid synthetics. Pasquarella is way confused here, or he is LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH.When I first read this piece I thought it was written by a child. It is ironic that semi-literate Lytwyn is lecturing on the dangers of cognitive damage from recreational drugs. She never did drugs and she seems pretty damaged. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #59 posted by goneposthole on May 27, 2005 at 11:06:34 PT
Those who...
claim to be 'expert' in food or sex are to be considered crackpot.From the book, 'Gluttons and Libertines' by Marston Bateshttp://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/ow/c20ca6b106943593.htmlLarissa is one for the books.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #58 posted by Dan B on May 27, 2005 at 10:48:04 PT
Thanks, Rev. Bud!
I appreciate the kind words.Sincerely,Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #57 posted by Dan B on May 27, 2005 at 10:45:00 PT
Response and More About Larissa Lytwyn
First, a jab at my own writing: "who would have known that getting a full time job with a Ph.D. in creative writing would be so difficult" should read "who would have known that with a Ph.D. in creative writing getting a job would be so difficult." So much for the Ph.D.Anyway, I too wish I had a magic wand to fix everything for everyone, but such is not reality, so I have to stick with doing my best and hoping for a good outcome.Now, about this Larissa Lytwyn: if you go to her blog (there's a link to it here: http://www.english.ccsu.edu/eng418/staffmain.htm ), you will find that she will become instantly assailable if she ever manages to make a name for herself in journalism or politics. Her boyfriend is bisexual (I don't have a problem with that, but her ultra-conservative pals would agonize over it), she's a self-procalimed feminist (also have no problem there, but her ultra-conservative pals . . .), and at one point she appears to advocate pedophilia:"Levine suggests that adolescents and even children instinctively know the difference between coercion and consent; thus the idea that they “don’t know any better” is vague and often unsupportable. Like Levine, I am frustrated by America’s treatment of sex as either primal (pornography, most music videos) or oppressive (proposals for abstinence-only sex education programs, etc). Is it any wonder that Europeans, typically viewed as less sexually inhibited, are found to more frequently engage in safe sex than Americans? I consider America’s love/hate relationship with sex akin to its relationship with body image and diet: despite high levels of health-oriented diets, fitness programs and publications, Americans are the most obese nation in the world. Like food and flesh, I believe that if the idea of sexuality was simply accepted and embraced---free from constraints of what circumstances—age and otherwise—sex should be practiced in--than [sic] I believe that books like Levine’s would no longer warrant publishing."So, it appears that Lytwyn advocates removing all constraints, including age, from the "idea of sexuality." Okay--this last one is disturbing to me. When the person arguing for drug prohibition also argues in favor of having sex with kids who "consent," one has an instant recognition that said person's writings are not worthy of serious consideration. Feel free to call me crazy if you believe otherwise.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #56 posted by BGreen on May 27, 2005 at 10:42:18 PT
Dan B
I'm sure you could get a job with Larissa Lytwyn at the Easton Courier, but only if you're willing to write fiction. LOLI'm happy about your son. I'm sure your life has changed for the better in many ways.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #55 posted by FoM on May 27, 2005 at 10:15:23 PT
Dan B 
You adopted a baby boy! How absolutely wonderful! All is well here and thanks for asking. The job market is really bad all over for everyone. I wish you good luck finding a quality job. I wish I could wave a magic wand and solve all the problems we have but I just can't.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #54 posted by Dan B on May 27, 2005 at 10:10:27 PT
All is Fantastic!
Except for the job market (who would have known that getting a full time job with a Ph.D. in creative writing would be so difficult), everything is great. We adopted a baby boy last year, by the way. He's a great kid, and we love him beyond measure. I hope all is also well for you.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #53 posted by Dan B on May 27, 2005 at 10:07:01 PT
Response to Hope
"Above, it says, "No other plant contains cannabinoids." Haven't I read, though, that mother's milk contains cannabinoids?"Perhaps, but remember that mother's milk is not a plant.Anyway, here's a link:http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/6/thread6304.shtml(Sorry for the sarcasm. I don't mean it maliciously, just humorously, and I hope you find it funny too. I've made the same kinds of mistakes at times.)Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #52 posted by FoM on May 27, 2005 at 10:04:15 PT
Dan B
It's good to see you! I hope all is well!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #51 posted by Dan B on May 27, 2005 at 09:59:09 PT
Thanks Seige
"I'm proud to say that I've never been drunk and I've never smoked a joint or a cigarette. I feel especially good about avoiding marijuana, now that scientists know much more about the physical and psychological effect of pot on the brain than they did even 10 years ago."Compare to the following:"Researchers at the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH) reported that the co-administration of CBD with ethanol reduced alcohol-induced cell death in the hippocampus and etorhinal cortex of the brain in a dose-dependent manner by up to 60 percent. "This study provides the first demonstration of CBD as an in vivo neuroprotectant ... in preventing binge ethanol-induced brain injury," authors wrote.Researchers hypothesized that CBD is neuroprotective because it possesses anti-oxidant properties. Anti-oxidants, such as vitamin C and vitamin E, are believed to help the body protect against the deleterious effects of free radicals (unstable atoms that can damage cells and may accelerate the progression of cancer and age-related diseases).Previous research performed by NIMH researchers demonstrated that both THC and CBD protect rat brain cells against glutamate toxicity (a neurochemical that is released at toxic levels during a stroke or severe head trauma). An Italian research team has also demonstrated CBD to protect against the brain damage caused by ischemia (a reduction of blood flow to the brain that can cause cell death).Researchers have also noted that CBD and THC can induce tumor regression, including brain cancer, in rodents and human cells."Conclusion:Maybe Larissa Lytwyn believes this garbage because her brain is fried due to an inadequate supply of THC and CBD. Somebody, please help the poor girl!Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #50 posted by FoM on May 27, 2005 at 09:25:19 PT
Hope
When you see the dancing elephant commercial you will just love it! Whoever created it did an excellent job. Sedating horses is something we both have done and it does make it seem really funny. I had a big plastic bottle of horse tranquilizers. It didn't take much to get a horse woozie. When the horses left the farm I dumped it down the drain. I find it hard to believe that people tried to use that stuff. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #49 posted by Hope on May 27, 2005 at 09:17:57 PT
FoM
I've tried to catch that dancing elephant commercial but so far, I haven't. I've heard about it from others, too. I'm anxious to see it.The dancing horse...thank you so much. Since I've had to see my horses tranquilized before, I could imagine what you were talking about all too clearly. I laughed so much, I cried.I could imagine it turning them into vertitable Lipizzaners!That article from Virginia Tech was excellent. From his tone you'd almost think he'd just read Larissa's column.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #48 posted by FoM on May 27, 2005 at 08:35:54 PT

Collegiate Times Article
I have looked and just can't find the article on the web site. I could be missing it. Maybe it is titled differently. I do want to comment on the article. I am very sad about how we might see problems between the natural plant and a pharmaceutical. I shun drugs as you all know and it gets me down when I think we could have trouble because of the war between natural products and a pharmaceutical. I don't invest in anything so I am speaking from my heart.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #47 posted by FoM on May 27, 2005 at 08:00:50 PT

Hope 
I'm glad my dancing horse comment made you laugh! PS: I absolutely like the dancing elephant commercial they are showing to TV from GE. I stop what I'm doing and watch it everytime it's on.It's a shame it's a GE's commercial though.

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #46 posted by Hope on May 27, 2005 at 05:03:34 PT

O'Reilly?
It's obvious he's severely afflicted with a bad case of schadenfreude...right down to the wicked glimmer in his eye, one of the tell tale symptoms.In fact, I'd say O'Reilly could be the poster boy for the schadenfreude psychosis.

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #45 posted by Hope on May 27, 2005 at 04:59:24 PT

Schadenfreude? OT here? 
Surely not, since the prohibs are afflicted with it and we're afflicted with them.Check out
http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n851/a09.html?397A very good article and a great rebuttal to Larissa's piece of work.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #44 posted by jose melendez on May 27, 2005 at 04:32:48 PT

schadenfreude - OT?
I did not see the O'Reilly show, but two things to add to known prohibitionists tactics led me to realize we are on to something about our opponent's motives:1. They avoid admitting prison causes far more harm2. They use circular logic, "It's dangerous because you can get arrested"Why? Perhaps it's because:3. They like seeing others suffer:from: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=51377 1.41pm - She's found guilty. Shouts ring out. Cheers from the anti-drugs campaigners. - - - http://www.onderzoekinformatie.nl/en/oi/nod/onderzoek/OND1295575/ Titel 	'Wanneer mensen uit de gunst raken': wanneer en waarom is er sprake van leedvermaakAbstract 	The aim of this project is to study two main questions. First, when do people experience Schadenfreude (pleasure in the misfortune of others)? Second, why do people experience Schadenfreude? To answer the first question, two survey studies are conducted. With help of the autobiographical narratives collected in these studies, taxonomy is made of the situations in which Schadenfreude is experienced. Also, in these studies, factors of influence on the experience of Schadenfreude (when, how, how much) are investigated. The second question is answered by conducting four experimental studies. The point of departure in these studies is that someone else s misfortune gives pleasure because of the advantage it provides us with. Someone else s misfortune may be gain for us, as it enhances our position. Schadenfreude can be an expression of the need to improve our self-esteem over other people s sufferings. Because this need to improve our self-esteem will be strongest in situations where self-esteem is under threat, we expect that people will experience Schadenfreude in mainly these situations. - - -Brain Rewards For Carrying Out Altruistic Punishment http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/cat_biological_mind.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/08/27/wrev27.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/08/27/ixworld.html The Swiss brain imaging study reveals how we draw satisfaction from teaching strangers a lesson when they have behaved badly, part of a rapidly-emerging field of neuroeconomics.As the journal Science puts it, the study reveals what goes on in Dirty Harry's head when "he succinctly informs a norm violator that he anticipates deriving satisfaction from inflicting altruistic punishment".For the study, Dominique de Quervain, Urs Fischbacher and Prof Ernst Fehr from the University of Zurich scanned the brain activity of male volunteers participating in a game of exchanging money back and forth.If one player made a selfish choice instead of a mutually beneficial one, the other could penalise him. The majority of the players chose to impose the penalty even when it cost some of their own money.The researchers determined that deciding to impose this penalty, an altruistic punishment, activated a brain region, the dorsal striatum, involved in experiencing enjoyment or satisfaction.The dorsal striatum and its most important part, the caudate nucleus, form part of a "reward circuit".The team also found that those who experienced greater activation of this area, measured by increased blood flow, meted out greater punishment."Our results indicate that punishment of unfair behaviour is driven by the anticipated satisfaction from punishing (or getting even)," said Prof Fehr.see also: http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=26598 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #43 posted by Hope on May 27, 2005 at 04:26:30 PT

A vitamin? 66 cannabinoids? Interesting.
Who knew? Andrea did. I got this from her site, http://www.illinoismarijuanalectures.org/materials.htmConstituents of Cannabis Sativa L. (Marijuana)In a document entitled "Constituents of Cannabis Sativa L. (Marijuana)” published by the University of Mississippi, Research Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Department of Pharmaceutics" (Ross SA, Elsohly MA. Constituents of Cannabis Sativa L. XXVIII A review of the natural constituents: 1980-1994. J. Pharm Science. 1995;4:1-10, it states that marijuana contains 483 substances, 66 of which are cannabinoids. No other plant contains cannabinoids.As of January 2001, over 15,000 scientific papers have been published on cannabis and its constituents and many reviews have been written on cannabis constituents and cannabinoid chemistry. A total of 483 natural constituents have been isolated and/or identified in Cannabis sativa L., and they have been delineated as follows:  * Cannabinoids, 66
  * Nitrogenous Compounds, 27
  * Amino acids, 18
  * Proteins, Glycoproteins, Enzymes, 11
  * Sugars & related compounds, 34
  * Hydrocarbons, 50
  * Simple Alcohols, 7
  * Simple Aldehydes, 12
  * Simple Keytones, 13
  * Simple Acids, 21
  * Fatty Acids, 22
  * Simple Esters & Lactones, 13
  * Steroids, 11
  * Terpenes, 120
  * Non-Cannabinoids Phenols, 25
  * Flavonoids, 21
  * Vitamins, 1
  * Pigments, 2
  * Elements, 9From Sahmir A. Ross and Mahmoud A. ElSohly (niet “Elsohly”). “Constituents of Cannabis Sativa L. XXVIII: A Review of the Natural Constituents: 1980-1994.” Journal for Pharmaceutical Sciences 4 (1995): 1-10. (Above, it says, "No other plant contains cannabinoids."
Haven't I read, though, that mother's milk contains cannabinoids?Her site shows no lectures scheduled after February 2005. Also in the "News" section of The Illinois Marijuana Lectures, the news that she's now a consultant for GW Pharmaceuticals, maker of liquid cannabis, is no where to be found. It seems to me that it would have been informative to have mentioned that. )

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #42 posted by Hope on May 27, 2005 at 00:05:18 PT

CNews people...This thread.
You amaze me. You are truly brilliant, in my humble opinion.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #41 posted by Hope on May 26, 2005 at 23:03:50 PT

Tears in my eyes from laughter...
Comment 11 FoM"I never had a horse get up and start dancing after I gave them a horse tranquilizer."

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #40 posted by runderwo on May 26, 2005 at 22:30:14 PT

Getting off-topic
I watched the O'Reilly show. It occurred to me that, like the list of drug warrior propaganda that observer frequently refers to, there are also several common tactics used to steer a debate away from the subject of legalizing cannabis for adult use and onto irrelevant issues and points, in an attempt to mire the legalization proponent in unfamiliar territory and maybe lead him into a damning statement, or to simply promote false associations and stereotypes about cannabis and cannabis users.Examples:- Mentioning methamphetamine, crack, heroin, or any drug that is known to cause aggression or have severe withdrawal symptoms, when unadultered cannabis does neither. Mentioning the scourge of meth labs scores bonus points here. The reformer will either ignore this as irrelevant (because it is irrelevant) or become mired in distinguishing cannabis from hard drugs. Bonus points if you have a Bible-thumping audience who has no experience with any intoxicants.- Mentioning children. What message does this send to the children? Deduct points if the reformer has children and none of them are drug addicts. Bonus points if the reformer is single - "as a concerned parent, I want to keep the scourge of drugs away from my children" - as if that's not what we all want, but we simply disagree on the methodology.- Mentioning the Hollywood/liberal media/stoner conspiracy to brainwash the public. The insinuation being that if you support cannabis legalization you are just a lemming following into line due to your brainwashing. Bonus points if the opponent looks the part of a "liberal", as unfortunately Ethan did in the O'Reilly segment.- I can't believe you think marijuana is HARMLESS! Why, look at this innocent young girl who tried marijuana and ended up dropping out of school... Bonus points if it is the child of the speaker and the delivery is exceptionally emotional. Of course, nobody thinks cannabis is harmless to everyone. For many individuals it is harmless, and for others it is not harmless. Whether continuing to use cannabis is rational or not is up to the user to decide. When referring to cannabis policy, "harmless" is used in conjunction with "relatively", as in "relatively harmless" compared to all other illegal drugs or to currently legal medical and recreational intoxicants. This is a horrible hairline distinction to have to make in front of a hostile audience.- As we all know, marijuana is a gateway drug, so... This is only one example of a class of statements which beg the question. Prohibition propanganda is assumed by the prohibitionist to be true as a starting point, so the reformer will be mired in deconstructing that statement if he is not careful to simply disagree.- I assume you have inhaled? Why should we trust your judgement? Well, nobody is supposed to be trusting anyone's judgement implicitly, rather making their own decisions on the matter. Unfortunately, the reformer will be in trouble here no matter what he says.Anyone else have any "debate traps" to add? I think being prepared for all of these is important, if for no other reason to stay on topic. We want cannabis legalized for adult medical and recreational use. Any points that are not on this topic will probably just serve to derail the debate, and that's what the prohibs want. If the debate is derailed, the status quo prevails.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #39 posted by Pete Guither on May 26, 2005 at 22:04:31 PT:

Larissa's Writing
I decided to check out some of Larissa's other writing. She may not be on drugs, but she sure is high.Check out the ... chirpy ... writing style of her Mother's Day article:Mother's Day and Father's Day, in fact, could rightly be called "family day" at my parents' house. ...Over the course of our meal, my spunky, nature-loving mother will often call my attention to the perky sounds of a wren or chickadee singing in the trees. ...One day, observing a doe frolicking in the backyard, she sighed with a palpable earnestness, "I always wish I could hug a deer." I burst out laughing at the intensity of her tone. Only my mother could express such a sentiment with such genuine solemnity!Ah, I finished that sentence with an exclamation point, which reminds me of another classic Mom-ism. My mother, an antiques dealer and soon-to-be-published author specializing in 19th-century glass and porcelain, sells her wares through e-bay. I love her site, Diantiques. Virtually every sentence she writes describing her items ends with an exclamation point. Every sentence. My mother is as exuberant as her writing. She sparkles as much as the silvered mercury goblets and carnival glass bowls that are a staple of her vast collection. And if she could be any grammatical symbol, my mother no doubt would be-you guessed it-an exclamation point.  I think I need to go brush my teeth.
Drug WarRant
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #38 posted by goneposthole on May 26, 2005 at 20:24:05 PT

It is obvious...
Larissa has never been drunk or stoned. I don't know if that is something to build your pride upon. "Yep, I've never been drunk or stoned."It is very obvious that Larissa needs to get stoned in the worst way.What she writes is enough to drive anybody to drink.It is almost an advertisement to go on out and score some heroin.'Marijuana' is the number one natural substance for mind altering because people desire it more than any other substance. People like it. They want to buy it and smoke it.It's number one because it works to help you get through the grind of everyday living without doing too much harm. Larissa doesn't know what she is missing.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #37 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 19:51:16 PT

legalizeit 
 It's good to see you again. I am really tense about the upcoming Raich decision. We could know right after the holiday weekend. We've waited so long and it's so close now. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #36 posted by legalizeit on May 26, 2005 at 19:34:57 PT

You're very welcome, FoM!
Glad you enjoyed the letter. It's good to be back!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #35 posted by Treeanna on May 26, 2005 at 18:31:29 PT

observer :)
Hey! That analysis was very cool! Thanks for doing it :)Going to link it in some emails :)
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #34 posted by mayan on May 26, 2005 at 17:49:07 PT

Pathetic
I first learned about marijuana, along with heroin, cocaine and alcohol, in fifth grade, when a DARE officer visited our health class to discuss how drugs would hurt our brains.And then...I'm proud to say that I've never been drunk and I've never smoked a joint or a cigarette.She then goes on to cite stats from NIDA!!!This girl needs to smoke a joint and learn to think for herself! She's just another lemming that believes everything the government says. How pathetic.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #33 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 17:43:30 PT

Comment on O'Reilly
It gave me a headache. Lock em up and throw away the key! That solves the problem of a young college student going to jail for not telling on his room mate who might smoke a little pot. What's this world coming to? Maybe Neil Young was right.Don't feel like Satan but I am to them. So I try to forget it anyway I can.Keep on rockin' in the free (HA) world.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #32 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 17:07:22 PT

O'Reilly Factor
Drug Policy Alliance executive director Ethan Nadelmann will be on the O'Reilly Show tonight debating a former DEA agent about new legislation that would require people to spy on neighbors and turn in family members. 
O'Reilly airs on the East Coast at 8 pm and 11pm (EST) and on the West Coast at 5 pm and 8 pm (PST).

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #31 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 16:56:50 PT

Heads Up: O'Reilly Factor
Something is coming on about marijuana. I don't know what. 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #30 posted by kaptinemo on May 26, 2005 at 16:50:37 PT:

Proof of 'dumbing down's effectiveness.
Obviously, they are not teaching rhetoric in public schools, anymore...and certainly not critical thinking. At least, not in poor, sweet deluded Larissa's case. Her parents should be pounding desks and demanding why she did not receive a quality education, only rote propaganda.The problem poor little Larissa will experience in the future is one of cognitive dissonance: when she meets a successful business person who goes to church, helps out in his or her food bank, is a veritable 'pillar of the community', yada, yada, yada - who tokes every night - her 'programming' will come into conflict with reality. That conflict is liable to cause some severe brainfarts and mental gear jamming. Welcome to the real world, dear. Decent folks toke all the time...and they see your jejune self as pitiably foolish.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #29 posted by observer on May 26, 2005 at 16:28:11 PT

propaganda analysis
[1]
Don't Underestimate The Danger of Marijuana Use   By Larissa Lytwyn   Connecticut -- The cable channel Showtime recently released a 2001 musical remake of the 1936 anti-marijuana film "Reefer Madness."

(Sentence 1) re: "Danger", "Reefer Madness" - Prohibitionist propaganda claims that horrible dangers are caused by "drugs." (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) re: "Marijuana Use" - The rhetoric of prohibition will assume that "use" and "abuse" are identical. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "anti-marijuana" - Anyone who disagrees with prohibition is attacked as part of the problem. No dissent is permitted. (Dissent Attacked (propaganda theme 8) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme8.htm#8 ) 
 
 
[3]
In the decades since, Hollywood has released several films, from 1980's "Cheech & Chong" to 1993's Dazed and Confused," depicting marijuana use as "cool."

(Sentence 3) re: "marijuana use" - Prohibition propaganda claims that all use of any "drug" is abuse. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[4]
The films' target audiences were the teen and collegiate crowds.

(Sentence 4) re: "teen" - "Since the Harrison Act of 1914, the user and the seller of illicit drugs have both been characterized as evil, criminal, insane, and always in search of new victims, the victims are characterized as young children." [W.White,1979] (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[6]
Not surprisingly, in our Hollywood-seeped America, many people are unaware of the dangers of marijuana.

(Sentence 6) re: "America" - Prohibitionists assert that the survival of the community, society, the nation, the world, etc. are at stake. Only continued and increased punishments for drug users can be contemplated, because, say prohibitionists, society will otherwise fall apart. (Survival of Society (propaganda theme 3) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme3.htm#3 ) 
 
 
[8]
Further, many people praise activist efforts to legalize marijuana in the U.S., purportedly for medical use.

(Sentence 8) re: "legalize" - With God on Their Side (prohibitionists assure us), only the continued rooting out of the sinful drug users (total prohibition) will do. All else is portrayed as the slippery slope to total legalization of all drugs for toddlers. (Total Prohibition or Access (propaganda theme 7) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme7.htm#7 ) 
 
 
[11]
I first learned about marijuana, along with heroin, cocaine and alcohol, in fifth grade, when a DARE officer visited our health class to discuss how drugs would hurt our brains.

(Sentence 11) re: "hurt" - Drugs, the prohibitionist explains, are a wicked bane on modern man. Why if not for the noble drug war (i.e. jailing drug users), exclaims the propagandist, then people will run amok, and violence, death, psychosis, and plague shall cover the land. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[16]
Their communication with me as a child was always honest, straightforward and direct.

(Sentence 16) re: "child" - Prohibitionist propaganda continually whips up parental fear, invoking lurid images of children corrupted by drugs. (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[17]
So, I believed them when they told me how much drugs, including marijuana, could hurt me.

(Sentence 17) re: "hurt" - Drugs, scream prohibitionists, cause all bad things in life: crime, violence, insanity, etc. If not for prohibition (i.e., jailing drug users), then criminality, violence and psychotic behavior would explode upon the land, the prohibitionist assures us. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[18]
The following year, in sixth grade, rumors began to spread about a group of peers, kids in the "cool" clique, who smoked marijuana on weekends.

(Sentence 18) re: "kids" - Prohibitionists are champions of "the child", "kids", "children", etc. Only continued or increased punishments of all adults caught using "drugs" will send the correct "message" to children. (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[21]
Marijuana use, however, was practically celebrated as a way to "relax" and socialize.

(Sentence 21) re: "Marijuana use" - Prohibitionists try to hammer in the idea that 'all use is abuse.' The rhetoric of prohibition needs to deny that many people can use currently illegal drugs without abusing them. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[24]
The effects of marijuana use on the brain are very similar to the effects of heroin, alcohol or cocaine.

(Sentence 24) re: "marijuana use" - "This strategy equates the use and abuse of drugs and implies that it is impossible to use the particular drug or drugs in question without physical, mental, and moral deterioration." [W.White,1979] (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[25]
According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), withdrawal from THC, pot's active ingredient, inhibits the activity of the body's natural anti-stress hormone, dopamine.

(Sentence 25) re: "Drug Abuse" - Prohibitionist propagandists repeatedly assert that "use is abuse." Details about "using" as opposed to "abusing" drugs are ignored. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[26]
Damage to the dopamine neuron can result in the onset of deep depression, anxiety and personality disturbances.

(Sentence 26) re: "Damage", "depression", "disturbances" - Drugs, claim the prohibitionist, cause insanity, violence, and terrible sickness. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[28]
Thomas Pasquarella of the Drug Enforcement Agency discussed this recently at the Family University at Joel Barlow High School, sponsored by the Easton-Redding Community Coalition (ERCC), in conjunction with the Redding and Easton schools' PTAs.

(Sentence 28) re: "Community" - The survival of society is assured, -- says the propaganda of prohibition -- as long as drug users are punished (jailed). (Survival of Society (propaganda theme 3) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme3.htm#3 ) 
 
 
[33]
Short-term effects of marijuana use include problems with memory and learning, difficulty in thinking and problem-solving, loss of coordination and increased heart rate.

(Sentence 33) re: "marijuana use" - "This strategy equates the use and abuse of drugs and implies that it is impossible to use the particular drug or drugs in question without physical, mental, and moral deterioration." [W.White,1979] (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) 
 
 
[38]
Someone who smokes marijuana frequently has many of the same respiratory problems as cigarette smokers, including lung cancer  The NIDA cites many studies reporting that students who smoke pot frequently get lower grades and are less likely to graduate from high school compared to their non-using peers.

(Sentence 38) re: "cancer", "problems", "respiratory problems" - The rhetoric of prohibition asserts that insanity, crime, and violence are caused by drugs, or are controlled by prohibition. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[40]
As a result, stated the NIDA, heavy users may be functioning at a reduced intellectual level all of the time.

(Sentence 40) re: "heavy users", "users" - Drug users are "those people" -- they are linked with groups that everyone agrees are bad. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) 
 
 
[41]
Marijuana is the top drug of choice among Americans; according to the NIDA, and 60 percent of youth under 21 use marijuana more than any other illicit drug.

(Sentence 41) re: "Americans" - Because of prohibition (prohibitionists assure us), society is protected: the community is safe, and the nation is saved. (Survival of Society (propaganda theme 3) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme3.htm#3 ) re: "use marijuana" - The rhetoric of prohibition will assume that "use" and "abuse" are identical. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "youth" - "Chemicals have long been inextricably linked in prohibitionist literature with the ... corruption of young people." [W.White,1979] (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[43]
Remember, even experimen tation can lead to addiction.

(Sentence 43) re: "can lead to", "lead" - Prohibitionists often claim that a targeted drug is a "gateway" to abuse of more dangerous drugs. (Use is Abuse, Gateway (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#4 ) 
 
 
[44]
According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, more teens are in treatment with a primary diagnosis of marijuana dependence than all other illicit drugs combined.

(Sentence 44) re: "Substance Abuse" - Prohibition propaganda claims that all use of any "drug" is abuse. (Use is Abuse (propaganda theme 4) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme4.htm#alluseisabuse ) re: "teens" - Prohibitionists forever claim that children are corrupted by drugs, and this is why adult users must be punished harshly. (Children Corrupted (propaganda theme 5) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme5.htm#5 ) 
 
 
[46]
It is addictive and horribly damaging to one's physical and mental health and intellectual capacity.

(Sentence 46) re: "damaging", "addictive" - Prohibition propaganda rarely misses an opportunity to link crime, violence, and insanity with "drugs". The propagandist insinuates that prohibited drugs cause evil, and if it weren't for "drugs" bad things would not exist. (Madness,Crime,Violence,Illness (propaganda theme 2) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme2.htm#2 ) 
 
 
[47]
Don't be fooled by the exploits of fun-loving celluloid "stoners."

(Sentence 47) re: "stoners" - Drugs are linked with groups of people who are already seen as deviant or shameful. (Hated Groups (propaganda theme 1) http://drugpolicycentral.com/bot/pg/propaganda/theme1.htm#1 ) 
 
 summary: drugwar_propaganda = 100%

prohibition propaganda analysis, 24/7
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #28 posted by GreenJoy on May 26, 2005 at 16:24:48 PT

HaHaHaHaHaHa>>>
HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa
Thanks Rev! 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #27 posted by BGreen on May 26, 2005 at 15:41:25 PT

Take a look at a picture of Larissa Lytwyn
Notice her email address mediasprite yahoo.comSprite n. 1. A small or elusive supernatural being; an elf or a pixy. 2. An elflike person. 3. A specter or ghost. 4. Archaic. A soul.
Larissa Lytwyn
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #26 posted by stoner spirit on May 26, 2005 at 15:41:08 PT:

Follow the herd
Larissa is following the herd, the herd of prohibs. Her head is filled with this crap, and she's delusional just like the others. They've filled her gullable little mind with old things and lies. Oh, poor, poor, girl, someday hopefully she'll see the lies. But that ain't gonna happen at all.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #25 posted by runderwo on May 26, 2005 at 15:37:56 PT

propaganda
"The truth is that marijuana is far from harmless. Marijuana is addictive."Are those two separate statements, or is the latter supposed to be proof of the first?"I'm proud to say that I've never been drunk and I've never smoked a joint or a cigarette."Wow, good for you. Want a cookie?"The effects of marijuana use on the brain are very similar to the effects of heroin, alcohol or cocaine."WRONG! The body has BUILT IN cannabinoid receptors. Does it have built in alcohol, heroin, or cocaine receptors? All of the latter affect the dopamine system directly, producing the illusion of something pleasurable by directly stimulating dopamine release. Cannabis affects the dopamine system only indirectly. When a cannabinoid attaches to the CB1 or CB2 receptor and the effects are pleasurable, the body responds by releasing dopamine just as with any other thing that is pleasurable."...inhibits the activity of the body's natural anti-stress hormone, dopamine. Damage to the dopamine neuron..."What the hell are they talking about? Is it a hormone or a neuron? Make up your mind before trying to pass off speculation as fact."Due to the regeneration of THC over the past few decades, marijuana is far more potent today than it was in the 1960s and 1970s."Okay, how about since the 80's then? After all, since this is an epidemic problem, surely the potency has continued to increase? And we certainly wouldn't want to accidentally cite tests done in the 80's on stale cannabis from decades prior as authoritative."marijuana today is frequently laced with potentially instantly lethal substances, including rat poison and the "club drug" ecstasy."An argument for a legalized, regulated market like none other, eh? I could say that some people lace alcohol with these same things, but alcohol isn't an illegal demon weed."(Note that ecstasy and similarly manufactured "club drugs," are derived from horse tranquilizers)."Uh, I believe you are referring to PCP. Ecstacy, like methamphetamine, is derived from pseudoephredene as in over the counter syrups."Short-term effects of marijuana use include problems with memory and learning, difficulty in thinking and problem-solving, loss of coordination and increased heart rate."... which cease once the user is no longer under the influence. I dispute the "memory and learning" portion too because it is not quantified. I know of several people who use cannabis as a "study drug" because its sedative and hypnotic effect allows them to calm down enough to concentrate on what they are studying. (For me, it doesn't work that way.)"According to the NIDA, a user's risk of heart attack more than quadruples in the first hour after smoking marijuana."I bet your risk of heart attack quadruples if you breathe anything with carbon monoxide in it. So vaporize or eat it! I hope this person wants tobacco users thrown in jail too, because their risk of heart attack goes up quite a bit too."Further, a study of 450 individuals who smoked marijuana frequently but did not smoke tobacco reported significantly more health problems and missed more days of work than nonsmokers."What's "frequently"? Every week? Every day? Every few hours? What health problems? Excessive yawning? Note the lack of citation."Someone who smokes marijuana frequently has many of the same respiratory problems as cigarette smokers, including lung cancer"Prove it. Where are the bodies? You're just spouting bullshit here. Lung cancer, emphysema, and COPD do not occur in marijuana-only smokers. Not causing lung cancer might seem counterintuitive because the popular notion is that anything that burns causes cancer. Cigarettes contain radioactive polonium that the tobacco plant leaches from soil as well as nitrosamines that are produced by improper curing processes, both carcinogens that are not present in cannabis. The carcinogens that are produced by smoking cannabis are short-lived aromatic hydrocarbons. Compare that to filling your lungs with a sludge of alpha particle emitters that have a half life of 22 years."The NIDA cites many studies reporting that students who smoke pot"... HIGH SCHOOL students - does anyone here think that cannabis use by teenagers without parental supervision is acceptable?"A study of 129 college students found that those who used marijuana heavily (27 out of 30 days) had far inferior cognitive skills related to attention, memory and learning."Hmm, I guess I'm just stupid then. Maybe that's why I don't step in line with articles that do nothing but parrot misconceptions."Marijuana is the top drug of choice among Americans; according to the NIDA, and 60 percent of youth under 21 use marijuana more than any other illicit drug."Would the author prefer that they were using some other illicit drug instead?"Marijuana is often mistaken as a more "socially acceptable"
alternative to "harder" substances like heroin and cocaine - but as we know, the effects on the body are alarmingly alike."Tofu is often mistaken as a more "nutritionally acceptable" alternative to "fattier" foods like McDonalds - but as we know, the effects on the body are alarmingly alike. (Huh?)"Remember, even experimentation can lead to addiction."... so please support our efforts to put you in jail if you are ever tempted to try drugs."According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, more teens are in treatment with a primary diagnosis of marijuana dependence than all other illicit drugs combined."Nothing to do with drug court referrals, or the statistic from above that teens use marijuana more than all other illicit drugs combined? I'm sure the word "dependence" is used to promote an association with alcohol or opiate dependence. What are the symptoms of marijuana withdrawal? Oh, as stated above - anxiety, depression, personality disorder? Sounds "alarmingly" similar to missing one's morning cup of joe."So, be clear that today's marijuana is not the pot smoked by
earlier generations."Well duh, because they didn't leave any for us!"It is addictive and horribly damaging to one's physical and mental health and intellectual capacity."Yawn. Where are all the permanently crippled or debilitated ex-stoners?Blah, blah, blah.
http://www.webspawner.com/users/radioactivethreat/
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #24 posted by Toker00 on May 26, 2005 at 15:31:10 PT

I have a few things to say here.
"I first learned about marijuana, along with heroin, cocaine and alcohol, in fifth grade, when a DARE officer visited our health class to discuss how drugs would hurt our brains."The word DARE and the fact she has never had any illicit drugs became my first clue to stop reading. What about prescription drugs for you? Any mental or physical problems there 'mam? "When someone smokes pot, THC passes rapidly through the lungs into the bloodstream, where it travels to the body's organs, including the brain."And deposits into receptacles Devinely Created for them. And the problem is? Your receptacles are empty."Short-term effects of marijuana use include problems with memory and learning, difficulty in thinking and problem-solving, loss of coordination and increased heart rate."Wow. Good thing it's only short term, because some people I know have been able to Medicate Daily, while safely operating heavy machinery, power tools, making precise measurements and calculations, creating massive structures with intricate creative design, solving problems daily, at work and at home, and have no evidence of hardening of the arteries, so far, after quitting smoking, after smoking cigarettes off and on for thirty-five years along with cannabis for thirty four years. 'Splain that.She referrenced NIDA five times. DARE child all growed up?"Even infrequent use can cause burning and stinging of the mouth and throat, often accompanied by a heavy cough."Well, "Dr. Larissa" how do you explain long term use with no cough, burning or stinging?That's all and thank you for "listening".Peace. Legalize, then Revolutionize!(medicine)(energy)(nutrition) 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #23 posted by global_warming on May 26, 2005 at 15:24:41 PT

re:children of the dare project
This has to be either some further effort of the those that prosper well from prohibition or some young and foolish child who has been brainwashed into believing that this "war on drugs" which is actually a war on sick people, people who are only victims, in the "war for power", may God have mercy on our wretched souls.gw
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #22 posted by 420toker on May 26, 2005 at 14:16:37 PT

but more importantly
Why would anyone put something on pot that costs several times more than pot. They would have been very poor buissiness men.People dont sell drugs, drugs sell themselves
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #21 posted by 420toker on May 26, 2005 at 14:13:54 PT

xtc and pot
extacy is an amphetamine compound related to other psychedelic amphetamines (MDA and Mescalin) it is generally created by a modified meth process or from a hydrobromic acid treatment of isosafrole (compound in sasafras oil). Meth is made either from an industrial compound called P2P or the new method using pseudoepedrine or ephedrine. I know PCP can be created from a close compound like ketamine or something close to it but I dont think a tranquilizer (benzodiazapenes or barbituate) can be used to make anything. PCP and Ketamin are considered more of a surgical dissociative anesthetic for veternary purposes than anything 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #20 posted by siege on May 26, 2005 at 13:40:02 PT

Pot Compound Protects Against Alcohol-Induced Brai
NORML E-ZinePot Compound Protects Against Alcohol-Induced Brain Damage
  Bethesda, MD: Administration of the non-psychoactive cannabinoid
cannabidiol (CBD) protects against ethanol-induced neurotoxicity in rats,
according to clinical trial data published in the current issue of the
journal Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.
  Researchers at the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH)
reported that the co-administration of CBD with ethanol reduced
alcohol-induced cell death in the hippocampus and etorhinal cortex of the
brain in a dose-dependent manner by up to 60 percent. "This study
provides the first demonstration of CBD as an in vivo neuroprotectant ...
in preventing binge ethanol-induced brain injury," authors wrote.
  Researchers hypothesized that CBD is neuroprotective because it
possesses anti-oxidant properties. Anti-oxidants, such as vitamin C and
vitamin E, are believed to help the body protect against the deleterious
effects of free radicals (unstable atoms that can damage cells and may
accelerate the progression of cancer and age-related diseases).
  Previous research performed by NIMH researchers demonstrated that both
THC and CBD protect rat brain cells against glutamate toxicity (a
neurochemical that is released at toxic levels during a stroke or severe
head trauma). An Italian research team has also demonstrated CBD to
protect against the brain damage caused by ischemia (a reduction of blood
flow to the brain that can cause cell death).
  Researchers have also noted that CBD and THC can induce tumor
regression, including brain cancer, in rodents and human cells.
  US federal law prohibits the medical use of cannabinoids except for
synthetic THC.
  For more information, please contact Paul Armentano, NORML Senior
Policy Analyst, at (202) 483-5500. Full text of the study, "Comparison of
cannabidiol, antioxidants and diuretics in reversing binge ethanol-induced
neurotoxicity," appears in the May issue of the journal Pharmacology and
Experimental Therapeutics.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #19 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 13:40:00 PT

BGreen
I believe laughter is one of the best medicines. Nothing can make a person feel better then a good laugh! 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #18 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 13:38:24 PT

legalizeit
Thanks for sharing your very good letter! 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #17 posted by BGreen on May 26, 2005 at 13:38:00 PT

I laugh a lot, FoM
If it's not your horse or tractor stories then it's one of Hope's "blue" comic routines. LOLI love to laugh and to make other people laugh. It makes everybody feel better.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #16 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 13:33:23 PT

BGreen 
You could be right! I'm glad I made you laugh! 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #15 posted by BGreen on May 26, 2005 at 13:31:54 PT

FoM
"I never had a horse get up and start dancing after I gave them a horse tranquilizer."Maybe you didn't play the right music. LOLThe Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #14 posted by legalizeit on May 26, 2005 at 13:28:30 PT

Letter to the Editor
Dear Editor:I find it amusing that you mention "blatant, false propaganda" in the first sentence of your op-ed, then write a piece that is completely stoked with "facts" from government bureaucracies whose very existence and funding depends on the demonization of certain substances. Because of this, one should be wary of the results of "studies" carried out by these organizations. The Office of National Drug Control Policy recently admitted to distorting the truth about drugs to maximize shock potential -- and it continues to receive our tax dollars! If ONDCP can get away with it, who can trust what the NIDA, DEA, SAMHSA, DARE or any other government-funded anti-drug organization says? Suspiciously absent from your piece is any quote from NORML, DrugSense, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, or any other organization that doesn't beat the government's anti-marijuana drum.The truth is, the vast majority of the millions of Americans who have used marijuana -- by some estimates, a third of the adult population -- have suffered no ill effects and are productive members of society. Time and again, it has been proven that the legal consequences of being caught using marijuana far outweigh the health consequences. You even unwittingly underscore this by quoting the tired old phrase about the number of teens in treatment for "marijuana dependence." Dependence is not a prerequisite for treatment -- most of these "pot addicts" were ordered into treatment as an alternative to being jailed after an arrest for simple possession. This is hardly a valid way to prove your hypothesis about the "addictiveness" of marijuana.I am in agreement with the prohibitionists on one thing - chronic heavy use can lead to problems eventually. But that is the case with just about anything, including the two most heavily abused drugs in society -- tobacco and alcohol. These substances, while legal, are heavily regulated and kept out of the reach of children. However, because marijuana is illegal, its sale is limited to the black market, which has no minimum age limits. Furthermore, unregulated substances have no guarantee of purity, though I find the "rat poison" allegation very hard to believe and suspect it to be yet another Reefer Madness style invention of the anti-drug propaganda factory.In 1988, Francis Young, an administrative law judge with the Drug Enforcement Adminstration, realizing the powerful healing capabilites of this herb, recommended the rescheduling of marijuana to allow for medicinal use. However, to this day it remains in Schedule I, reserved for drugs that have "no accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse" -- a category which perfectly describes alcohol and tobacco.Health effects aside, no one should be jailed for using or possessing a plant. With legalization, billions of dollars that are squandered every year chasing and locking up marijuana users would be better spent dealing with real criminals. And there would be no more widespread pot use among teenagers -- they would have to wait until a legal use age just like they do now for cigarettes and booze.I'm sure that your piece will receive accolades from your friends in the government whose livelihood depends on marijuana's illegal status. However, today's youth have tuned out and turned away from the gloom-and-doom propaganda started by "Reefer Madness" so many years ago and continued by drug warriors today. It is time to shelve the mistruths, establish sensible policies and move out of the Dark Ages of the 20th Century.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #13 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 13:26:28 PT

dongenero
Thanks for the explanation. I don't know what Ketamine is either. I come from the time when designer drugs weren't around. Marijuana was about the most common substance used and a little LSD.A drug is a drug isn't true. It's better to say nothing then to say something and not know if it is right and possibly mislead someone. It seems that anti-drug people don't think it thru at all.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #12 posted by dongenero on May 26, 2005 at 13:16:01 PT

I think I found what she's talking about
I think it is ketamine she is referring to. Special K it's called. It's a "club drug " I guess. Whatever the heck that really means. Buzzword for "it's popular with the younger people".As for her mistake about ecstasy vs. ketamine she basically says they're all the same anyway,including cannabis, so....what's the difference.Typical for her idealogical position...everything is black or white, good or evil, conservative or liberal. No fine distinctions. It makes life simple doesn't it?It also makes intolerance easy.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #11 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 12:57:17 PT

Horse Tranquilizers and Ecstasy
Ecstasy I am not at all familiar with except I know it's a stimulant. I have had horse tranquilizers since I had an active horse farm years ago and I know what they do to a 1200 lb. horse. I never had a horse get up and start dancing after I gave them a horse tranquilizer.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #10 posted by dongenero on May 26, 2005 at 12:37:30 PT

runruff
Great comment. Much more measured than mine.By the way she mentions that ecstasy is potentially "instantly" fatal? She also says it is derived from horse tranquilizers?
I have'nt taken ecstasy but, I do not believe there is any record of instantaneous death.
I also believe that it is MDA or MMDA which is an amphetamine/psychedelic substance, not an animal tranquilizer.Is she thinking of PCP? Who knows, yet she can get this stuff published? This article goes far beyond saying it is her opinion that....blah, blah, blah.It purports to be fact.

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #9 posted by BGreen on May 26, 2005 at 12:37:03 PT

If Cannabis Is Highly Potent, Why Then Is It
"frequently laced with potentially instantly lethal substances, including rat poison and the "club drug" ecstasy"?It's not and nobody except the retarded would believe it was, but let's get cannabis out of the black market so we can stop this horrible practice if there's a chance it might happen.The Reverend Bud Green
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #8 posted by Hope on May 26, 2005 at 12:34:56 PT

Larissa...Nice Little Fishy.
She bought the prohibitionist's propaganda, "hook, line, and sinker".Don't be fooled by little fishies, like Larissa.

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #7 posted by dongenero on May 26, 2005 at 12:22:29 PT

yes.....
This is your mind.......This is your mind on propaganda........
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #6 posted by GreenJoy on May 26, 2005 at 12:20:45 PT

Drain Bammage
The poor dear. I pity those that are so narrow. Never even a little tiny walk on the wild side. The only buzz she's ever had is when her root beer goes up her nose. Its just not normal to be so rigid and uptight. Memories of the cheerleader from Fast Times At Ridgemont High. She has a horrible condition where one's construct of the world becomes fixed. True creativity, spontaneity, and energy flow are obstructed by a clog of preconceptions and fatigued diatribe. She needs... Drain Bammage! Normally I wouldn't condone slipping someone a mickey. But she is in really bad shape!
 
And what is "the regeneration of THC"?An F+GJ 
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #5 posted by dongenero on May 26, 2005 at 12:20:38 PT

laughable
Ruuuunnnn for yourr Liiiiveeess!!!! Reeeeferrr Maaadnessss!
I suppose there are a few gullible and unknowledgeable people who will buy in to this load of crap OpEd but really, it's laughable. Oh, like a good little conservative she takes her dig at Hollywood-seeped America. You just have to laugh at this kind of BS.
I'm kinda surprised she didn't blame the whole thing on Clinton.Otherwise, she has pulled out every tired and debunked peice of propaganda in the book. I imagine in her deluded state of reality she believes it all. That is how propoganda works.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #4 posted by runruff on May 26, 2005 at 12:20:18 PT:

The yen&yang of pot prohibition
It always amazes me to read an artical like this one.
I'm 58 years old. I've pretty much smoked pot since I
was 18 and I can't seem to agree with this neophite anywhere.
I don't use any pot any more. I simply moved away from it
due to lifestyle changes. I was never addicted, never had to [give it up] and had any health problems or social problems due to my use of it. The same is so in my social circle of friends.
 The thing about prohibitionist is when writting in opposition to cannabis they know everything about it.
When it comes to the bennefits of cannabis, medical or otherwise, there hasn't been enough studies.This lady is just another uptight controll freak thinking she somehow holds answers most of humanity are not privy to.Namaste
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #3 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 12:18:46 PT

MPP: Anti-Marijuana Ads Still Boomerang
  MAY 26, 2005 Research To Be Presented at American Psychological Society Convention in Los Angeles May 28
 
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA -- A new study of the government's anti- marijuana commercials shows that the ads create as many negative thoughts and impressions as positive ones, casting doubt on White House claims that the ads have reduced teen drug use. The new research will be presented by Dr. Harvey Ginsburg of Texas State University, San Marcos, as a "hot topics" talk at the American Psychological Society's annual convention in Los Angeles on May 28. Groups of students, ages 18-23, were shown either four anti- tobacco TV commercials produced by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or four anti-marijuana ads produced by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). Volunteers wrote down their reactions to each, and responses were then coded by independent reviewers (who did not know which ads had been viewed) as favorable to the ads' intent (e.g. characters giving warnings were viewed positively; themes were seen as realistic), unfavorable, or other. The combined responses to the anti-tobacco ads were strongly favorable, with overwhelmingly favorable responses to three out of four commercials. In contrast, the marijuana ads produced as many unfavorable responses as favorable ones. Only one of the four anti- marijuana commercials produced significantly more responses that were desirable (from the producers' point of view) than undesirable. "These findings are roughly consistent with independent evaluations showing that the anti-marijuana ads failed to produce positive impacts and may actually boomerang," Dr. Ginsburg said. "Any White House conclusions that their ads have caused a national reduction in marijuana use are not warranted." The final independent evaluation of the ONDCP ads, conducted by the University of Pennsylvania and originally scheduled for release in January, has been delayed without explanation. Ginsburg's presentation is at 11:45 a.m. on Saturday, May 28, at the Westin Century Plaza Hotel, Malibu Room, 2025 Avenue of the Stars, in Los Angeles. For information, see http://www.psychologicalscience.org. With more than 17,000 members and 120,000 e-mail subscribers nationwide, the Marijuana Policy Project is the largest marijuana policy reform organization in the United States. For more information, please visit: http://www.MarijuanaPolicy.org/ Contact: Marijuana Policy Project
Bruce Mirken, MPP director of communications, 202-543-7972 or 415-668-6403 Harvey Ginsburg, 512-392-9927, 512-787-9772 (cell) or 310-396-6000 (after 4 p.m. May 27) 
 
 
 http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0526-24.htm
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #2 posted by ivo on May 26, 2005 at 12:03:03 PT:

what a load of crap
It is sad people can be so stupid as to believe this garbage. I bet he was hired by the white house to put his name on their article. That is their latest M.O. right? Fake news.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on May 26, 2005 at 11:39:37 PT

Remember Anti-Drug Commercials Years Ago
Why is only marijuana addressed when it comes to substance use now? I remember anti-drug ads about people withdrawing from heroin. It showed a person shooting up. I also remember a commercial with a girl thinking she had bugs crawling on her. They chase marijuana because there aren't many hard drug users and to keep the money flowing Cannabis has to be at the top of the list even though it shouldn't even be on the list.
[ Post Comment ]







  Post Comment