Nut is cracked by herb.

Talk about shooting the messanger!

Quote:

---

The Government's drugs tsar was forced to resign last night for stating his view that cannabis, ecstasy and LSD were less harmful than the legal drugs tobacco and alcohol.


The Home Secretary Alan Johnson asked Professor David Nutt to resign as chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), saying he had "lost confidence" in his ability to give impartial advice.

---

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-st...s-1812255.html

Yet again our thicko politicians ignore sensible advice just to keep on the good side of the blue rinse brigade. The issue of prohibition on drugs has been shown to be idiotic. If it's too big a leap to de-criminalise hard drugs, at least give some proper consideration to the effect of criminalising soft drugs. The money saved on policing alone would buy an aircraft carrier. Or a bank. :book:

cannabis, ecstasy and LSD can fry your brains, it is not harmless people really ought to stop pretending it is, a little bit of ecstasy is hardly a glass of wine. Study's showing that it is can usually tracked back to people with a history of activism.

HAHAHAHAHAH

What ever.

It is more an emotional issue than one where logic, science, or common sense is of use.

However, I have never heard of tobacco intoxication, have you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

cannabis, ecstasy and LSD can fry your brains

---

So can alcohol with a comparative level of abuse. Ever met a hardcore alcoholic? They're completely nuts/semi-retarded, even when they're sober.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reverend Joe

So can alcohol with a comparative level of abuse. Ever met a hardcore alcoholic? They're completely nuts/semi-retarded, even when they're sober.

---

Try a recreational user of xtc. It just isn't true it is not harmless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

cannabis, ecstasy and LSD can fry your brains, it is not harmless people really ought to stop pretending it is, a little bit of ecstasy is hardly a glass of wine. Study's showing that it is can usually tracked back to people with a history of activism.

---

Fragony, cannabis does not fry your brain if you have half a brain. As long as you aren't baked before important events/work that you need to get done, you are fine. If you feel a little spacey, lay off the cannabis for a couple days and everything reverts back to normal.

X and LSD I'd agree with.

Stranger things have happened. How are you going to do it without having to make a point out of it. Keep it as it is much better, why mess with the balance

No, actually, LSD is the least harmful of them all and the vast majority of scientists, especially chemists protested its classification as a narcotic because it is not quite so. LSD has no noted harmful, long term physical side-effects. Purely psychological. Unlike cannabis, which has a load of possible outcomes, although all are generally mild. Now, I have no idea why he approved of MDMA though... Ecstasy is a dangerous drug that one can grow addicted to and that can result in a deadly overdose, although it does not compare with "hard" drugs.

While at the same time the vast majority of addiction to marijuana is merely psychological, not physical and the possibility of overdose is nearly impossible due to the vast amount one has to consume. Overdosing on water is much easier than with cannabis. And no one has even observed such occurrence as an overdose of LSD.

I prefer the "Nutt Sacked" headline. You know it's the way he wanted to go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

cannabis, ecstasy and LSD can fry your brains, it is not harmless people really ought to stop pretending it is, a little bit of ecstasy is hardly a glass of wine. Study's showing that it is can usually tracked back to people with a history of activism.

---

Cannabis does not cause brain damage.:book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexanderSextus

Cannabis does not cause brain damage.:book:

---

Just psychosis then?

Cannabis seems like the odd on out on his list with ecstacy and LSD alongside it.

I only know what I was taught at school, but doesn't ecstacy cause serious physical side effects, sometimes killing poeple pretty quickly? And LSD causes serious halluciations, such as a guy trying to saw off his arm because he thought it was a snake?

Cannabis, on the other hand, I would not think is so harmful.

The best reason to keep cannabis on the list is to keep commercial hemp from being grown.

In the same way that prohibition ended the threat of alcohol as fuel to the oil industry. Making cannabis illegal was a wind fall (engineered and promoted) to the timber industry.

I don’t think it represents a dire threat to humanity but legal hemp would make paper products a lot cheaper.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

Just psychosis then?

---

There is only a risk of psychosis if you smoke an extremely unreasonable amount on a regular basis.

I asked my doctor about this and he said smoking even 3 grams a day will not give any significant risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

No, actually, LSD is the least harmful of them all and the vast majority of scientists, especially chemists protested its classification as a narcotic because it is not quite so. LSD has no noted harmful, long term physical side-effects. Purely psychological.

---

The psychological effects are the ones a user of LSD should be really concerned about. Nonetheless, I'd like to see some conclusive and neutral studies on marijuana use so that a proper decision can finally be made.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Stranger things have happened. How are you going to do it without having to make a point out of it. Keep it as it is much better, why mess with the balance

---

I'm not quite sure I follow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars

Nonetheless, I'd like to see some conclusive and neutral studies on marijuana use so that a proper decision can finally be made.

---

I am certain there are, but as with everything, you have so much contradictory information, it is difficult to believe any side... :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus

I am certain there are, but as with everything, you have so much contradictory information, it is difficult to believe any side... :shrug:

---

I'd still trust Chemist/Scientist over the Moral Crusader.

Once again when the issue of drugs comes up all logic sense and reason must be tossed aside by the goverment in order to not confront the horror of legalising what they have turned into a monster...


The best reason to keep cannabis on the list is to keep commercial hemp from being grown.

In the same way that prohibition ended the threat of alcohol as fuel to the oil industry. Making cannabis illegal was a wind fall (engineered and promoted) to the timber industry.

I don’t think it represents a dire threat to humanity but legal hemp would make paper products a lot cheaper.

Watched a documentary on this some time ago, some big American timber or paper tycoon basically bought his way into it. Does this mean that the other reason for the law, the targetting of chinese and mexican immigrants was an excuse or like a bonus effect of the prohibition ?

Just psychosis then?

Yes to which only a small percentage are suspectible... a far far smaller percentage than we get off the idiotic things that alcohol causes everyday (especially with our drinking culture) If an end to prohibition caused only a 1/10 of the idiots who go out drinking and causing problems to chill out and have a smoke instead. Infact just by having marijuana as a legal alternative to alcohol you would probably save more on people's state of mind alone, let alone the countless other problems that alcohol causes that would be lessened...

The Italics are unintentional I can't deselect them in quick reply...

Generally they test the effects of ecstasy by giving large quantities of meth to lab rats.

And I think the worst they have on lsd is that it can disorient you and effect decision making, and some sketchy data on temporary psychosis.

Of course there is a lack of data overall because it is hard to test, the government will say it is terrible for you and the drug users themselves will say it is all good.

But I do think alcohol is rated too high by these studies, simply because the wide spread use of it leads to more obvious problems. And you can't discount the cultural factors--people don't drive to parties, have competitions involving who can take the most LSD, and then drive home.

But I do think alcohol is rated too high by these studies, simply because the wide spread use of it leads to more obvious problems. And you can't discount the cultural factors--people don't drive to parties, have competitions involving who can take the most LSD, and then drive home.

Im not sure... I think people are just surprised because its such a culturally acceptable thing.. your used to seeing people do it regularly and still living a normal life whereas you don't see this as much with other drugs as its more hidden.

Im not sure about LSD becuase of the hallucinations but I would definately say alcohol is far far more dangerous to drive on than weed, ectascy, amphetamines or most of the minor drugs. The roads would be safer with people going to a party and taking loads of speed than going to a party and drinking loads...

That and generally the effects of the illegal drugs are somewhat over exagerated (or the way thier described makes it sound worse than it is) if we'd had years of drugs adverts against alcohol in the same way you had other drugs you'd probably be surprised at how tame it actually is... you wouldn't even need to lie flat out with alcohol as it sounds fairly bad anyway just put a little spin on it and you have the biggest threat to children since (some child killer of a horror movie)

I only know what I was taught at school, but doesn't ecstacy cause serious physical side effects, sometimes killing poeple pretty quickly? And LSD causes serious halluciations, such as a guy trying to saw off his arm because he thought it was a snake?

ectascy's mostly fairly tame if not taken constantly (somewhat like alcohol) it can in a small minority cause death you need to be careful with your fluid intake. I think alcohol is at least as bad as ectascy if not a little worse...

I won’t say that any of these substances are harmless or that they could present some sort of danger but do you think any are more dangerous than fluoride? Are they as likely to cause dain bramage as mercury?

I am sure you can see where this is going. I just don’t understand where the government got the right to protect people from themselves along about 1900 or so...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleGrizzly

But I do think alcohol is rated too high by these studies, simply because the wide spread use of it leads to more obvious problems. And you can't discount the cultural factors--people don't drive to parties, have competitions involving who can take the most LSD, and then drive home.

Im not sure... I think people are just surprised because its such a culturally acceptable thing.. your used to seeing people do it regularly and still living a normal life whereas you don't see this as much with other drugs as its more hidden.

Im not sure about LSD becuase of the hallucinations but I would definately say alcohol is far far more dangerous to drive on than weed, ectascy, amphetamines or most of the minor drugs. The roads would be safer with people going to a party and taking loads of speed than going to a party and drinking loads...

That and generally the effects of the illegal drugs are somewhat over exagerated (or the way thier described makes it sound worse than it is) if we'd had years of drugs adverts against alcohol in the same way you had other drugs you'd probably be surprised at how tame it actually is... you wouldn't even need to lie flat out with alcohol as it sounds fairly bad anyway just put a little spin on it and you have the biggest threat to children since (some child killer of a horror movie)

I only know what I was taught at school, but doesn't ecstacy cause serious physical side effects, sometimes killing poeple pretty quickly? And LSD causes serious halluciations, such as a guy trying to saw off his arm because he thought it was a snake?

ectascy's mostly fairly tame if not taken constantly (somewhat like alcohol) it can in a small minority cause death you need to be careful with your fluid intake. I think alcohol is at least as bad as ectascy if not a little worse...

---

E can cause Sudden Death, and it can also is stops you from processing water out of your system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wakizashi

I'd still trust Chemist/Scientist over the Moral Crusader.

---

Yes, of course, but the problem is that all the researchers vehemently deny any ties. Most claim complete neutrality, even in such things as funding. Therefore, we have no idea on which side the researchers are on.

E can cause Sudden Death

Sure so can nuts, Alcohol directly to the user and indirectly to many people causes lots of harm, I wouldn't be surprised if taking into account percentage of users that death is a more likely outcome, on alcohol. The likelyhood of dieing on E is very small probably close to the risk you take stepping onto a plane...

and it can also is stops you from processing water out of your system.

It can which is why I said you have to be careful with your fluid intake, it is what makes E potentially deadly so like I said very small percentage

When I compare the two I think both of direct effects to the user and indirect to everyone else... in direct effects to the user E only is worse for those tiny minority... for indirect alcohol loses on pretty much every scale... It would be light on alcohol to call them equally harmful...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

I won’t say that any of these substances are harmless or that they could present some sort of danger but do you think any are more dangerous than fluoride? Are they as likely to cause dain bramage as mercury?

I am sure you can see where this is going. I just don’t understand where the government got the right to protect people from themselves along about 1900 or so...

---

Indeed.

People are turning to "legal highs" such as sniffing Weed Killer and other things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

I won’t say that any of these substances are harmless or that they could present some sort of danger but do you think any are more dangerous than fluoride? Are they as likely to cause dain bramage as mercury?

I am sure you can see where this is going. I just don’t understand where the government got the right to protect people from themselves along about 1900 or so...

---

REAL TALK.:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

E can cause Sudden Death, and it can also is stops you from processing water out of your system.

---

Apart from this being untrue, this line of argument is irrelevant to this issue.

The point is that the government appointed scientists to look at the scientific evidence about drug control, then ignored the evidence and sacked the chief scientist.

Or should we base government policy on what you believe rather than scientific evidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr

Cannabis seems like the odd on out on his list with ecstacy and LSD alongside it.

I only know what I was taught at school, but doesn't ecstacy tobacco cause serious physical side effects, sometimes killing poeple pretty quickly? And LSD alcohol causes serious halluciations, such as a guy trying to saw off his arm because he thought it was a snake?

Cannabis masturbation, on the other hand, I would not think is so harmful.

---

Fixed.