Medical Marijuana-- - Page 13

PanTheMan · 06-25-2008, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

I always find the worse thing about "pro" arguments is the complete dismissal of the cons of said argument . I find that sort of approach tends to invalidates the original pro argument

here...

Pro and Con...

http://www.medicalmarijuanaprocon.org/

mousepod · 06-25-2008, 07:59 PM

Pan, thanks for all your research. You have convinced me.

Not Afraid · 06-25-2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PanTheMan

And I do understand those with addictive personalities must use EXTREME caution or avoidance but that is up to the person to know where they are when it comes to the substance or behavior.

The very existance of an "addictive personality" is still actively debated in the medical, neurobiological and psychology communities. Some would say that EVERYONE has the ability to develop an "addictive personality".

Personally, in my own experience, I don't believe that such a blanket personality trait exists at least in the sense that either you have it or you don't.

innerSpaceman · 06-25-2008, 08:29 PM

Well, to be frank, alcohol has been shown to have benefits to the heart, if imbibed in moderation. I think this is mostly true of red wine. Not sure if it applies to other types of booze ... but if so, far less so. At least by today's subject-to-constant-change medical and scientific evaluations.

I don't think pot has any such benefit. However, it seems to have benefit for sick people, whereas alcohol does not.

So, well folk - get drunk ... and sick folk - get stoned.

innerSpaceman · 06-25-2008, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

The very existance of an "addictive personality" is still actively debated in the medical, neurobiological and psychology communities

I think there's such a thing as a non-addictive personality. So maybe the inverse is true.

But I don't know. I just know one exists. That its opposite does too is just an assumption on my part.

Not Afraid · 06-25-2008, 08:32 PM

Maybe I wasn't clear. It's not an either/or thing but one that can and may (or may not) develop over time. I did NOT have an "addictive personality" for 30 years. What happened?

LSPoorEeyorick · 06-25-2008, 08:35 PM

Purely on a logical level, the harmfulness of one thing does not change the harmfulness of another. One thing is very harmful. One thing is somewhat harmful. The very-harmful doesn't negate the somewhat-harmfulness of the other. It simply means they are both harmful in different ways to different degrees.

This is a totally ridiculous comparison, but the "not AS bad for you" statement seems to me a bit of a ridiculous defense, so I'm going to go for it.

Dude A shows up late for work every day for a month. Dude B plays hookey and forgets to call in once. Dude B is probably getting a warning, maybe fired. But that doesn't mean Dude A isn't going to get a talking-to about his chronic tardiness.

I was going to go with murder and rape, but it struck me that those are crack crimes, not pot ones, heh.

(ETA: maybe that was poor humor. I was being glib.)

innerSpaceman · 06-25-2008, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

Maybe I wasn't clear. It's not an either/or thing but one that can and may (or may not) develop over time. I did NOT have an "addictive personality" for 30 years. What happened?

Oh, I see. I wonder if it's like adult-onset allergies. That's rampant. Perfectly immune for 30 years, then OMG, allergic to everything floating in the air.

Yes, the body changes over time. The body's reaction to things will evolve.

Makes things much more difficult, and only slightly more interesting.

cirquelover · 06-25-2008, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

So, well folk - get drunk ... and sick folk - get stoned.

What if I can't decide how I feel, can I do both?

JWBear · 06-25-2008, 11:05 PM

I do believe that some people are more prone to addiction. I had a friend once who was a walking addiction magnet. You name it, and he was addicted to it at one time or another. His big three were booze, cigarettes, and sex; and he never had less than two of those three addictions at any given time. And, If he tried to quit one, then he'd usually get hooked on something else.

He knew he had a problem, but he just didn't give a fvck. I still wonder what became of him....

06-25-2008, 07:59 PM	#122
mousepod You broke your Ramadar! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4,635	Pan, thanks for all your research. You have convinced me. __________________ "Give the public everything you can give them, keep the place as clean as you can keep it, keep it friendly" - Walt Disney
	Submit to Quotes

06-25-2008, 08:29 PM	#124
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Well, to be frank, alcohol has been shown to have benefits to the heart, if imbibed in moderation. I think this is mostly true of red wine. Not sure if it applies to other types of booze ... but if so, far less so. At least by today's subject-to-constant-change medical and scientific evaluations. I don't think pot has any such benefit. However, it seems to have benefit for sick people, whereas alcohol does not. So, well folk - get drunk ... and sick folk - get stoned.
	Submit to Quotes

06-25-2008, 08:32 PM	#126
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	Maybe I wasn't clear. It's not an either/or thing but one that can and may (or may not) develop over time. I did NOT have an "addictive personality" for 30 years. What happened?
	Submit to Quotes

06-25-2008, 08:35 PM	#127
LSPoorEeyorick scribblin' Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: in the moment Posts: 3,872	Purely on a logical level, the harmfulness of one thing does not change the harmfulness of another. One thing is very harmful. One thing is somewhat harmful. The very-harmful doesn't negate the somewhat-harmfulness of the other. It simply means they are both harmful in different ways to different degrees. This is a totally ridiculous comparison, but the "not AS bad for you" statement seems to me a bit of a ridiculous defense, so I'm going to go for it. Dude A shows up late for work every day for a month. Dude B plays hookey and forgets to call in once. Dude B is probably getting a warning, maybe fired. But that doesn't mean Dude A isn't going to get a talking-to about his chronic tardiness. I was going to go with murder and rape, but it struck me that those are crack crimes, not pot ones, heh. (ETA: maybe that was poor humor. I was being glib.)
	Submit to Quotes

06-25-2008, 11:05 PM	#130
JWBear Worn Romantic Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Long Beach California Posts: 8,435	I do believe that some people are more prone to addiction. I had a friend once who was a walking addiction magnet. You name it, and he was addicted to it at one time or another. His big three were booze, cigarettes, and sex; and he never had less than two of those three addictions at any given time. And, If he tried to quit one, then he'd usually get hooked on something else. He knew he had a problem, but he just didn't give a fvck. I still wonder what became of him.... __________________ Unrestrained frivolity will lead to the downfall of modern society.
	Submit to Quotes