Green Room

Video: Pot aficionados as up-to-speed on current events as you’d expect

posted at 4:47 pm on April 26, 2013 by

To be fair, you’d probably get the same level of engagement in current affairs on your average college campus. On the other hand, there is a lot of overlap between those two populations:


Bill O’Reilly challenges Jesse Watters on picking and choosing his interview subjects, but Watters claims that this was a representative sample. I think we need to see how well the Uranian demo was represented before we can accept that, however.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Here’s your sign:

Effects on Life

Research clearly demonstrates that marijuana has the potential to cause problems in daily life or make a person’s existing problems worse. In fact, heavy marijuana users generally report lower life satisfaction, poorer mental and physical health, relationship problems, and less academic and career success compared to their peers who came from similar backgrounds. For example, marijuana use is associated with a higher likelihood of dropping out from school. Several studies also associate workers’ marijuana smoking with increased absences, tardiness, accidents, workers’ compensation claims, and job turnover.
Research has shown that, in chronic users, marijuana’s adverse impact on learning and memory persists after the acute effects of the drug wear off; when marijuana use begins in adolescence, the effects may persist for many years. Research from different areas is converging on the fact that regular marijuana use by young people can have long-lasting negative impact on the structure and function of their brains.

A recent study of marijuana users who began using in adolescence revealed a profound deficit in connections between brain areas responsible for learning and memory. And a large prospective study (following individuals across time) showed that people who began smoking marijuana heavily in their teens lost as much as 8 points in IQ between age 13 and age 38; importantly, the lost cognitive abilities were not restored in those who quit smoking marijuana as adults. (Individuals who started smoking marijuana in adulthood did not show significant IQ declines.)

What Are the Other Health Effects of Marijuana?

Marijuana use can have a variety of adverse, short- and long-term effects, especially on cardiopulmonary and mental health.

Marijuana raises heart rate by 20-100 percent shortly after smoking; this effect can last up to 3 hours. In one study, it was estimated that marijuana users have a 4.8-fold increase in the risk of heart attack in the first hour after smoking the drug. This may be due to increased heart rate as well as the effects of marijuana on heart rhythms, causing palpitations and arrhythmias. This risk may be greater in older individuals or in those with cardiac vulnerabilities.

Marijuana and Driving

Because it seriously impairs judgment and motor coordination, marijuana also contributes to accidents while driving. A recent analysis of data from several studies found that marijuana use more than doubles a driver’s risk of being in an accident. Further, the combination of marijuana and alcohol is worse than either substance alone with respect to driving impairment.
Marijuana smoke is an irritant to the lungs, and frequent marijuana smokers can have many of the same respiratory problems experienced by tobacco smokers, such as daily cough and phlegm production, more frequent acute chest illness, and a heightened risk of lung infections. One study found that people who smoke marijuana frequently but do not smoke tobacco have more health problems and miss more days of work than nonsmokers, mainly because of respiratory illnesses.

A number of studies have shown an association between chronic marijuana use and mental illness. High doses of marijuana can produce a temporary psychotic reaction (involving hallucinations and paranoia) in some users, and using marijuana can worsen the course of illness in patients with schizophrenia. A series of large prospective studies also showed a link between marijuana use and later development of psychosis. This relationship was influenced by genetic variables as well as the amount of drug used and the age at which it was first taken—those who start young are at increased risk for later problems.

Associations have also been found between marijuana use and other mental health problems, such as depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts among adolescents, and personality disturbances, including a lack of motivation to engage in typically rewarding activities. More research is still needed to confirm and better understand these linkages.

Marijuana use during pregnancy is associated with increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in babies. Because THC and other compounds in marijuana mimic the body’s own cannabinoid-like chemicals, marijuana use by pregnant mothers may alter the developing endocannabinoid system in the brain of the fetus. Consequences for the child may include problems with attention, memory, and problem solving.

Finally, marijuana use has been linked in a few recent studies to an increased risk of an aggressive type of testicular cancer in young men, although further research is needed to establish whether there is a direct causal connection.

Last bolded part: Don’t bogart that joint, numbnuts.

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM

People have eaten hempseed for millennia. They made gruel out of it, and it happens to be very nutritious. How tasty is a matter of conjecture, but they kept eating it.

Fine, but let’s not pretend that this argument is about legalizing it for food.

As for the Bible, cannabis IS an “herb bearing seed” with medical properties which has been used all throughout human history, with NONE of the societal evils that alcohol has fosted upon us.

Squiggy on April 28, 2013 at 3:10 PM

Foisted, really? Like we had no choice and had to drink alcohol and endure its ills?

As to the medical point, I’d also rather we stopped pretending this is only about medicinal use, though I’m sure a Christian who was prescribed pot as a course of treatment would have peace of mind in inhaling.

Esthier on April 28, 2013 at 3:59 PM

let’s not pretend that this argument is about legalizing it for food.
Esthier on April 28, 2013 at 3:59 PM

The whole “God gave dope to me” angle just isn’t all that compelling as a rationalization/excuse.

whatcat on April 28, 2013 at 4:26 PM

Really? Come and talk to my college age sons and their friends..

Nice try though!

CW on April 28, 2013 at 3:27 PM

Come on, now. College students tend to be clueless regardless of substance use.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 4:29 PM

Besides, no one’s eating weed for food. So I can see an argument saying the verse doesn’t apply anymore than it would for tobacco.

Esthier on April 28, 2013 at 2:12 PM

What is the concept of “food”, in terms of the way he’s supposed to have said it? Is aloe food? Was it put here to heal our wounds? Is wood “food” when it’s made into cellulose and used as filler for various foods?

When I see “food”, I’m thinking “consumption”. Consumption need not merely be the acts of mastication, peristalsis and digestion.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 4:31 PM

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Thanks Bob for trying to bring some clarity to the conversation. But it’ll be ignored by the people that want their drugs.

njrob on April 28, 2013 at 4:41 PM

But it’ll be ignored by the people that want their drugs.
njrob on April 28, 2013 at 4:41 PM

I don’t know of any addict who is comfortable contemplating the full implication and consequences of his addiction.

whatcat on April 28, 2013 at 4:50 PM

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM

To your first bolded point, the same can easily be said of heavy alcohol users.

To the second, nobody is advocating for legalization of teen marijuana use. However, it is illegal, and they’re doing it more than ever. Your way isn’t working.

To the third, apart from a nitwit here and there, marijuana advocates are not calling for elimination of DUI laws, which would apply as much to marijuana users as alcohol users. Legalization of pot would not affect those laws.

To the fourth(danger to health vs tobacco), I counter with a study that shows no pulmonary impairment from 10-20 years of low-level pot use(defined as a joint a day). I’m not trying to say I’m right just because I have an article. My point on that is that because of the illegality of marijuana, there exist few peer-reviewed studies of the drug and its effects. Legalization would open the door for heavy research to find conclusive answers.

To the fifth(mental illness), you omit the fact that mental illness is also linked to the use of alcohol, cigarettes, and cocaine. Addictive substances of any kind go hand-in-hand with mental illness, but even so, no studies have yet demonstrated marijuana to be physically addictive in the same way as those other substances. Should those other substances be illegal, or should they remain legal and society retain the responsibility to persuade individuals not to use them?

As to the last part, you’ve got me there. But then, I make no claims that the use of marijuana is healthy, or that it is not a detriment to the health. I simply believe it is up to the individual whether or not they want to make that choice about their lifestyle, not up to the State, as much as they have the choice to make about sodas bigger than 16 oz, salt, MSG, cigarettes, coffee, energy drinks, and all the other stuff that the government considers us too stupid to be able to avoid on our own.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 5:00 PM

To the fourth(danger to health vs tobacco), I counter with a study that shows no pulmonary impairment from 10-20 years of low-level pot use(defined as a joint a day). I’m not trying to say I’m right just because I have an article. My point on that is that because of the illegality of marijuana, there exist few peer-reviewed studies of the drug and its effects. Legalization would open the door for heavy research to find conclusive answers.

And vaporizers severely mitigate any pulmonary effects. More to the point, even if you only smoke joints, the average weed smoker can barely smoked a whole joint in a day, vs heavy cigarette smokers who can easily make it through half a pack or more in a day. This is where the risk for heart and lung disease emerges. Studies which merely compare the amount of particulates in a single puff are disingenuous.

As to the last part, you’ve got me there. But then, I make no claims that the use of marijuana is healthy, or that it is not a detriment to the health

There is simply no argument about whether daily consumption of marijuana is healthier than daily consumption of McDonalds. The later is significantly more deadly.

libfreeordie on April 28, 2013 at 6:01 PM

Thanks Bob for trying to bring some clarity to the conversation. But it’ll be ignored by the people that want their drugs. alcohol and cigarettes and fast food french fries

njrob on April 28, 2013 at 4:41 PM

Fixed that for you.

libfreeordie on April 28, 2013 at 6:04 PM

Libfree and Madcon are both arguing in favor of pot because alcohol and tobacco are worse.

Whats next, legalizing embezzling and insider trading because its not as bad as armed robbery?

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 6:23 PM

Just a reminder once again that if you’re on the side of LibFreeToAbortBabies you might want to reconsider your position.

njrob on April 28, 2013 at 6:28 PM

There is simply no argument about whether daily consumption of marijuana is healthier than daily consumption of McDonalds. The later is significantly more deadly.

libfreeordie on April 28, 2013 at 6:01 PM

There you display your own prejudice. Check out the documentary “Fat Head”. It’s a sort of counter-piece to “Super Size Me”, the disingenuous Spurlock documentary where he changed his lifestyle from that of a regular-exercising, vitamin-taking health nut to that of a disability/drug addict-level sedentary blob…and proceeded to blame all subsequent health decline to a diet of McDonald’s. “Fat Head” does the opposite, in that the diet is still McDonald’s, but that an otherwise healthy and responsible lifestyle more than makes up for it. At the end, his cholesterol has dropped and he’s lost 12 pounts.

Pertinent to the discussion, as with marijuana, McDonald’s food is something that can be responsibly used on a regular basis with minimal impact on one’s health, job quality, or life in general. Certainly, some people will abuse anything given the chance. The question is whether it is right for the government to deny us the ability to make our own choice about how we will live our lives. The Left and the Right both dabble in this, though the Left demonstrably wallows in Statist nonsense.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 6:51 PM

Whats next, legalizing embezzling and insider trading because its not as bad as armed robbery?

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 6:23 PM

That doesn’t make any sense. Embezzling, insider trading, and armed robbery are all illegal. Alcohol and tobacco are not, while marijuana is. Make a proper analogy.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Libertarian argument is simple:
Marijuana, when enjoyed properly, harms zero people. Maybe the growth and the sale of it hurt people because it is illegal, but that is simply part of a decent argument about why its dumb that its illegal. When someone enjoys marijuana improperly, someone gets hurt. They should be punished for making a poor decision by enjoying marijuana improperly. I’m not against throwing people in jail when they kill someone with their car while driving high.
When I light up a bowl, it is my sober decision to do so because I know that I am going to enjoy it and I know I don’t have anything to do because I was soberly preparing to spend 2 or 3 hours high. I enjoy it as responsibly as any user of alcohol for the purposes of becoming drunk.
When a person gets drunk or high in a situation that they could have easily avoided had they planned ahead when they were sober, they should be soberly responsible to deal with those implications. It is not alcohol’s fault that Timmy DECIDED to drink more than he could handle after driving to the bar. It is not society’s job to tell Timmy how many beers he can handle. We live in a society where we HAVE TO TRUST OTHER ADULTS TO ACT LIKE ADULTS AND PUNISH THEM WHEN THEY DONT. That is the point of laws. There is an element of adult trust involved.
I treat you like an adult until you prove that you aren’t one. The simple act of GETTING HIGH BECAUSE ITS AN ENJOYABLE EXPERIENCE is not an un-adult situation because interchanging high and drunk, the act of being drunk is not illegal.

jimmy the notable on April 28, 2013 at 7:37 PM

etc, etc, etc. It is my job as an adult member of society to be responsible for my own ass. If someone calls me and asks me for a ride when I know I’m stoned out of my gourd, its my responsibility to tell him, “No, man, I’m cheesed out of my mind right now.” If I don’t, lock me up, because I know when I’m high. Its not like high tries to trick me into being sober.

I smoke weed. I get high. I’m responsible enough to know when I’m high and if I commit a crime while I’m high, I’m man enough to stand before a judge and do my time. For the crime, not for getting high or possessing a plant that harms no one.

THINK ABOUT THIS, PURITANS, you don’t want me to be allowed to possess a plant that grows in dirt and water and sun. Where are we as a society when our system of laws is so invasive that possessing something that grew from the ground could be considered an offense against the law. Its just ridiculous.

jimmy the notable on April 28, 2013 at 7:44 PM

How can my argument not appeal to you people?

I am simply asking everybody to grow up. We’re not asking you not to punish people who harm other people. We’re asking you to let us enjoy our lives. “Well if he wasn’t stoned he wouldn’t have done that.” Great, let’s outlaw having a hot neighbor too. “Well if she wasn’t so beautiful, he wouldn’t have slept with her and her husband wouldn’t have killed him, so its really her fault for being so hot.”

jimmy the notable on April 28, 2013 at 7:47 PM

And if you think it should be ILLEGAL because its immoral and people will just do bad things if its legal, well, ASK me to be a better person, don’t assume you know who I am and force me to live up to a standard that doesn’t fit who I am when I’m just minding my own business IN F.U.C.K.I.N.G. A.M.E.R.I.C.A.

Out

jimmy the notable on April 28, 2013 at 7:52 PM

Alcohol and tobacco are not, while marijuana is. Make a proper analogy.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Alcohol and tobacco are illegal, unless you have permission from the government to produce, transport, and sell them. It is also a crime to purchase these materials, until you reach the proper age…..set by the government. It is also a crime to sell these materials to anyone who has not reached the proper age.

So in effect the laws surrounding alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana are arbitrary, and are formed around a revenue stream in the form of taxes.

On one hand, the government tells you these materials are harmful to you, but on the other hand if you pay a tax, help yourself.

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 8:11 PM

It seems most of the nastiness in these comments is coming from so-called conservatives who would normally claim to be against statism. The truth is you are nothing more than statists but in the other direction. The only freedom and liberty you want is for yourselves while forcing your nanny-statist “ideals” on others. You love the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, but only when it suits you.

JimRich on April 28, 2013 at 8:44 PM

So in effect the laws surrounding alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana are arbitrary, and are formed around a revenue stream in the form of taxes.

On one hand, the government tells you these materials are harmful to you, but on the other hand if you pay a tax, help yourself.

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 8:11 PM

And if the people of a state vote for that, I am with them. It’s beyond debate that marijuana, like any other recreational substance, has a cost to society. However, with the reasonably low rate of usage, as well as the low rate of heavy usage, I’m of the opinion that the cost would be negligible enough to be financed by the levied proceeds from legalized, private(with minimal goddamn regulation) entrepreneurship.

However, as a side deal…what do you say we reduce income taxes by a couple of points? Call it a “spending reform initiative”. A new tax comes in, it pushes a bit out. Waters down the entitlement state, perhaps?

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 8:56 PM

It seems most of the nastiness in these comments is coming from so-called conservatives who would normally claim to be against statism. The truth is you are nothing more than statists but in the other direction. The only freedom and liberty you want is for yourselves while forcing your nanny-statist “ideals” on others. You love the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, but only when it suits you.

JimRich on April 28, 2013 at 8:44 PM

Conservatives do not support destructive behavior. Just like we don’t support murdering the unborn. You obviously like using drugs. I hope you see the error of your ways before you go to jail for it. God bless.

P.S. Stop confusing libertarian positions with conservative ones. Thanks.

njrob on April 28, 2013 at 9:31 PM

Well aren’t you just precious. Statist, but precious.

JimRich on April 28, 2013 at 10:40 PM

Well aren’t you just precious. Statist, but precious.

JimRich on April 28, 2013 at 10:40 PM

If you mean I won’t allow anarchy to reign, then yep, I’m a statist. You don’t understand that amoral behavior leads to a rot in society that cannot be cured. Just because you imagine your own behavior to be responsible when you engage in illicit behavior doesn’t mean the majority will do the same. Grow up, you aren’t a kid anymore.

Too bad it’s the real statists that encourage your acts just because they don’t want to be held responsible for their actions. They want big daddy government to save them when they inevitably screw up.

njrob on April 28, 2013 at 11:52 PM

Stop confusing libertarian positions with conservative ones. Thanks.
njrob on April 28, 2013 at 9:31 PM

It’s nigh on impossible to expect addicts to see beyond themselves, it’s just part and parcel of the addicted personality. It’s not a political, libertarian issue they struggle with – it’s a personal issue.

whatcat on April 29, 2013 at 12:10 AM

Last bolded part: Don’t bogart that joint, numbnuts.

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM

Thank you for this. Thank you very much.

Chaz706 on April 29, 2013 at 2:07 AM

If you mean I won’t allow anarchy to reign, then yep, I’m a statist. You don’t understand that amoral behavior leads to a rot in society that cannot be cured. Just because you imagine your own behavior to be responsible when you engage in illicit behavior doesn’t mean the majority will do the same. Grow up, you aren’t a kid anymore.

Too bad it’s the real statists that encourage your acts just because they don’t want to be held responsible for their actions. They want big daddy government to save them when they inevitably screw up.

njrob on April 28, 2013 at 11:52 PM

A liberal will be a statist for your own good.

A libertarian will sometimes confuse evil for good.

An anarchist will think that all men are good.

A Conservative rejects all of those notions.

Chaz706 on April 29, 2013 at 2:10 AM

You’ll be famous – no one ever before has gotten the goods on Tiffany’s stocking it’s shelves with illegal jewelry. That is, unless you’re just talking about your emotions in the above quote – just BSing to try to make some point – instead of being factual. (If so, maybe you better hold off a bit on contacting LE about the Tiffany’s Caper.)

whatcat on April 28, 2013 at 11:09 AM

You use the phrase “spaced out druggies” in one post, then decry the alleged use of “emotions” in another post.

Nice use of unintentional irony.

soundingboard on April 29, 2013 at 2:29 AM

On this, I must disagree. As with alcohol, of course…it depends on the person. However, a good buzz from weed severely affects your awareness in most cases, and you’d best get a taxi or a ride within the first hour.

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 11:16 AM

This, sorta. I’m not getting into any vehicle in which the operator has ingested any intoxicant in the preceding few hours.

soundingboard on April 29, 2013 at 2:37 AM

Nah, I’m having much more fun watching and mocking the dopeheads trying to assuage guilty consciences via bizarre routes of moral equivalency and total relativism. I understand they need their drugs, but going off on snipe hunts of guns, diamonds and booze just doesn’t validate that need. Or exempt them from snark or mockery, though it hurts their feelings.

whatcat on April 28, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Substitute “gun nuts”, for “dopeheads” in the above, and you’ve essentially replicated most of the talking points, and debate tactics of the gun grabbers.

soundingboard on April 29, 2013 at 2:43 AM

It’s like a bathtub filled with water. People can hop in it and get clean, other people drown their kids in it.

whatcat on April 28, 2013 at 3:06 PM

Then we Must. Make. Water. Illegal.

soundingboard on April 29, 2013 at 2:51 AM

Last bolded part: Don’t bogart that joint, numbnuts.

BobMbx on April 28, 2013 at 3:50 PM

So Lance Armstrong was doping and doping.

soundingboard on April 29, 2013 at 2:56 AM

BobMbx – You’re seeing a whole team of doctors for your condition, aren’t you? Talk about spouting nonsense. I’m not sure if one thing this nut said was completely true.

Marijuana: The dirty low-down

Dr. Mercury on April 29, 2013 at 7:46 AM

However, as a side deal…what do you say we reduce income taxes by a couple of points? Call it a “spending reform initiative”. A new tax comes in, it pushes a bit out. Waters down the entitlement state, perhaps?

MadisonConservative on April 28, 2013 at 8:56 PM

Now you’re talking. Be advised I don’t give a damn who smokes what. I do get irritated when arguments are put forth that are modelled on politician-style statements, i.e; “The other guy is worse than me” instead of the benefits of marijuana (and it does have some…no question there). I don’t believe a bus driver should have legal access to another ‘influential’ substance because his grandmother has glaucoma.

BobMbx – You’re seeing a whole team of doctors for your condition, aren’t you? Talk about spouting nonsense. I’m not sure if one thing this nut said was completely true.

Marijuana: The dirty low-down

Dr. Mercury on April 29, 2013 at 7:46 AM

What non-sense, specifically?

BobMbx on April 29, 2013 at 10:05 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3