Is the new anti-smoking law working?
Jan 20th 2011, 1:06 am
#436
Ex Expat
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: West Midlands, ex Granada province
Posts: 2,140
Jan 20th 2011, 6:48 am
#437
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 443
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
There would be a lot more if it was realised the damage it does.
In 2009 20,000 people were treated for addiction and psychological problems in the NHS.
Marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco.
Brain scans of marijuana users have revealed physical brain damage and have shown decreased activity in the Pre-frontal cortex and temporal lobe.
There is a wealth of reputable medical and scientific evidence if you choose to Google and read it. Whereas the supporters can get away with, I estimate that ten per cent of this and twenty per cent of that, with absolutely no necessity to come up with any evidence.
Jim
In 2009 20,000 people were treated for addiction and psychological problems in the NHS.
Marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco.
Brain scans of marijuana users have revealed physical brain damage and have shown decreased activity in the Pre-frontal cortex and temporal lobe.
There is a wealth of reputable medical and scientific evidence if you choose to Google and read it. Whereas the supporters can get away with, I estimate that ten per cent of this and twenty per cent of that, with absolutely no necessity to come up with any evidence.
Jim
Jan 20th 2011, 6:54 am
#438
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Land of no recession
Posts: 10,718
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
Observed this morning,
The new law does not apply to the Guardia at the Gibraltar frontier
The new law does not apply to the Guardia at the Gibraltar frontier
Jan 20th 2011, 7:23 am
#440
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Aracena area Huelva Spain
Posts: 1,631
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
Hi bil, yes you are correct; the morbidity due to Aspirin far exceeds that of Ecstacy. Prof. Dr. Nutt, formerly head of the UK drugs advisory council and may I add whose services were shamefully dispensed of by the UK government in the interests of political expediency, was amusingly quoted as saying that taking ecstacy was less dangerous than horse-riding.
Your comment on heroin is reasonable. It is a very addictive drug for most of humanity and the social fallout from its abuse is only matched by the ineptness of our politicians in handling such abuse. Interestingly, nicotine is an even more addictive substance than opiate-based drugs yet tobacco is freely available. I know thats historical, but were one to instantly remove tobacco from sale then the resulting social fallout would be up there with any addictive drug you care to name.
Of course legalisation of presently banned substances would eliminate virtually overnight the negative effects on society caused by their illegality. But politicians like to perpetuate the myth that suppression is the better of two evils. In a sense they are correct, for to have a society that treats drugs responsibly means individuals taking far more responsibility for their own actions, which, unfortunately in todays world, is far from the case.
Your comment on heroin is reasonable. It is a very addictive drug for most of humanity and the social fallout from its abuse is only matched by the ineptness of our politicians in handling such abuse. Interestingly, nicotine is an even more addictive substance than opiate-based drugs yet tobacco is freely available. I know thats historical, but were one to instantly remove tobacco from sale then the resulting social fallout would be up there with any addictive drug you care to name.
Of course legalisation of presently banned substances would eliminate virtually overnight the negative effects on society caused by their illegality. But politicians like to perpetuate the myth that suppression is the better of two evils. In a sense they are correct, for to have a society that treats drugs responsibly means individuals taking far more responsibility for their own actions, which, unfortunately in todays world, is far from the case.
worlds evils! "Taking responsibility for their own actions"
Jan 20th 2011, 7:55 am
#441
Forum Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 32
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
My point being that Skunk is stronger than the normal run of the mill Cannabis in the same way as the alcohol analogy I gave.
With regard to the Mexican example I gave marijuana is one of the main income sources of the drug traffickers, it gives them high returns with less of the potential penalties, and please, don't make cannabis growers in the UK out to be some sort of back yard hippie who love watching countdown while their drugs grow, the vast majority of cannabis grown in this country is done by organised gangs of Vietnamese, Chinese and Thai gangs who make huge amounts of money out of supplying what is a very easy crop. The problem isn't the drug, its the evil bastards involved in the growing and supply of drugs. Period.
As an aside Skunk is actually a hybrid, by definition a hybrid is genetically separate from the parent plant.
With regard to the Mexican example I gave marijuana is one of the main income sources of the drug traffickers, it gives them high returns with less of the potential penalties, and please, don't make cannabis growers in the UK out to be some sort of back yard hippie who love watching countdown while their drugs grow, the vast majority of cannabis grown in this country is done by organised gangs of Vietnamese, Chinese and Thai gangs who make huge amounts of money out of supplying what is a very easy crop. The problem isn't the drug, its the evil bastards involved in the growing and supply of drugs. Period.
As an aside Skunk is actually a hybrid, by definition a hybrid is genetically separate from the parent plant.
Matt, like you I understand well the collateral damage associated with illegal drugs and their adverse effects on society. As I pointed out in an earlier post, there are solutions but no political will to implement these.
Jan 20th 2011, 8:04 am
#442
Straw Man.
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: That, there, that's not my post count... nothing to see here, move along.
Posts: 46,302
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
Hi matt, Skunk is a hybrid of the original landrace plants, i.e. it remains within that genepool. To my knowledge their are no GM cannabis plants as of today.
Matt, like you I understand well the collateral damage associated with illegal drugs and their adverse effects on society. As I pointed out in an earlier post, there are solutions but no political will to implement these.
Matt, like you I understand well the collateral damage associated with illegal drugs and their adverse effects on society. As I pointed out in an earlier post, there are solutions but no political will to implement these.
GM is a rather misleading phrase much like Global Warming, for the last 10,000 years man has been genetically modifying plants and animals through forced selection to meet our needs, GM is simply a natural progression of that long drawn out process, another step in our evolution and cannabis is part of that process.
Jan 20th 2011, 9:08 am
#443
Forum Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 32
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
There would be a lot more if it was realised the damage it does.
In 2009 20,000 people were treated for addiction and psychological problems in the NHS.
Marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco.
Brain scans of marijuana users have revealed physical brain damage and have shown decreased activity in the Pre-frontal cortex and temporal lobe.
There is a wealth of reputable medical and scientific evidence if you choose to Google and read it. Whereas the supporters can get away with, I estimate that ten per cent of this and twenty per cent of that, with absolutely no necessity to come up with any evidence.
Jim
In 2009 20,000 people were treated for addiction and psychological problems in the NHS.
Marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco.
Brain scans of marijuana users have revealed physical brain damage and have shown decreased activity in the Pre-frontal cortex and temporal lobe.
There is a wealth of reputable medical and scientific evidence if you choose to Google and read it. Whereas the supporters can get away with, I estimate that ten per cent of this and twenty per cent of that, with absolutely no necessity to come up with any evidence.
Jim
This had researchers scratching their heads. All combustible plant material has a deleterious effect on the lungs. So why should cannabis be an exception ? Well it would seem that the active substances in the plant were providing some sort of protection to its users. One theory is that these substances actually target and destroy defective DNA. You can google the study in full. Easy to find.
Brain damage : I don't know where you got that from, Jim, and I could spend an hour refuting it, but consider 2 points, one scientific, one anecdotal :
The brain has clusters of endocannabinoid receptors of verying densities. When these receptors encounter ingested cannabinoids, they 'light up' as it were. The classic lock-and-key combination. The brain has its own biochemistry for handling cannabinoids. So somewhere in our evolution, Jim, cannabinoids were an important part of our existence and the brain simply adapted over time.
Furthermore, in the last 50 years or so, millions upon millions of humans have smoked cannabis. If it were to inflict the damage you believe it does, would not there have been some very strong evidence of this in society ? I've mentioned earlier that people who are predisposed to mental health problems appear to have these problems amplified or precipitated due to ingesting cannabis and I would suggest that any permanent cortex brain damage is not primarily due to cannabis but to a pre-existing condition.
Jan 20th 2011, 9:28 am
#444
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 7,749
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
One of the most evil companies in the world in Monsanto which go around handing out free seeds to farmers (especially those in the developing world) and them charging them a fortune for the chemicals they need to buy from Monsanto in order for the seeds to grow.
At university I had a professor who says he would be ashamed if anyone in his class went on to work for the Monsanto or the similar GM-seed/chemical based companies (we were a biochemistry/genetics class).
There is not much wrong with the science, but the moralty and ethics of the GM food industry is appaling. And here is a case when they could be using the technology to make sure noone goes hungry in the developing world. And do they use it for that? Of course not. Poor people have no money!
Jan 20th 2011, 9:40 am
#445
Straw Man.
Joined: Aug 2006
Location: That, there, that's not my post count... nothing to see here, move along.
Posts: 46,302
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
No, I'm looking at it from the perspective of a horticulturist. The process of artificial selection is exactly the same process as GM principles, you are choosing certain genes to produce a desired product, the only difference is the way its done and the amount of modern science is applied. We have always genetically modified animals to our needs, do you honestly think pigs are naturally pink? Nope, they have been genetically engineered for ease of slaughter.... but now, instead of waiting years and generations for that natural mutation to become standard through selective breeding we can now do it in the lab.... the process is the same.
Jan 20th 2011, 9:57 am
#446
Banned
Joined: Feb 2008
Location: Vejer de la Fra., Cadiz
Posts: 7,653
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
There would be a lot more if it was realised the damage it does.
In 2009 20,000 people were treated for addiction and psychological problems in the NHS.
Marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco.
Brain scans of marijuana users have revealed physical brain damage and have shown decreased activity in the Pre-frontal cortex and temporal lobe.
There is a wealth of reputable medical and scientific evidence if you choose to Google and read it. Whereas the supporters can get away with, I estimate that ten per cent of this and twenty per cent of that, with absolutely no necessity to come up with any evidence.
Jim
In 2009 20,000 people were treated for addiction and psychological problems in the NHS.
Marijuana is more carcinogenic than tobacco.
Brain scans of marijuana users have revealed physical brain damage and have shown decreased activity in the Pre-frontal cortex and temporal lobe.
There is a wealth of reputable medical and scientific evidence if you choose to Google and read it. Whereas the supporters can get away with, I estimate that ten per cent of this and twenty per cent of that, with absolutely no necessity to come up with any evidence.
Jim
Even if that were true, (which a subsequent post denys,) people smoke up to 100 fags a day. (I know someone who used to do 100 a day, but how the hell he found the time....) No-one, but no-one could do that much dope.
Jan 20th 2011, 10:14 am
#447
Ex Expat
Joined: Oct 2006
Location: West Midlands, ex Granada province
Posts: 2,140
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
I do actually know a couple who smoke (dope) almost constantly from getting up to going to bed.
Jan 20th 2011, 11:13 am
#448
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,171
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
Hi jim, your statement that cannabis is more carcinogenic has actually been proven to be incorrect. I refer you to an important UCLA study from 2006 where a group of exclusively cannabis smokers and exclusively tobacco smokers were tracked over a number of years to determine the incidence of lung cancer in each group. To everyone's surprise, the cannabis group had a much lower incidence of lung cancers than the tobacco group.
This had researchers scratching their heads. All combustible plant material has a deleterious effect on the lungs. So why should cannabis be an exception ? Well it would seem that the active substances in the plant were providing some sort of protection to its users. One theory is that these substances actually target and destroy defective DNA. You can google the study in full. Easy to find.
Brain damage : I don't know where you got that from, Jim, and I could spend an hour refuting it, but consider 2 points, one scientific, one anecdotal :
The brain has clusters of endocannabinoid receptors of verying densities. When these receptors encounter ingested cannabinoids, they 'light up' as it were. The classic lock-and-key combination. The brain has its own biochemistry for handling cannabinoids. So somewhere in our evolution, Jim, cannabinoids were an important part of our existence and the brain simply adapted over time.
Furthermore, in the last 50 years or so, millions upon millions of humans have smoked cannabis. If it were to inflict the damage you believe it does, would not there have been some very strong evidence of this in society ? I've mentioned earlier that people who are predisposed to mental health problems appear to have these problems amplified or precipitated due to ingesting cannabis and I would suggest that any permanent cortex brain damage is not primarily due to cannabis but to a pre-existing condition.
This had researchers scratching their heads. All combustible plant material has a deleterious effect on the lungs. So why should cannabis be an exception ? Well it would seem that the active substances in the plant were providing some sort of protection to its users. One theory is that these substances actually target and destroy defective DNA. You can google the study in full. Easy to find.
Brain damage : I don't know where you got that from, Jim, and I could spend an hour refuting it, but consider 2 points, one scientific, one anecdotal :
The brain has clusters of endocannabinoid receptors of verying densities. When these receptors encounter ingested cannabinoids, they 'light up' as it were. The classic lock-and-key combination. The brain has its own biochemistry for handling cannabinoids. So somewhere in our evolution, Jim, cannabinoids were an important part of our existence and the brain simply adapted over time.
Furthermore, in the last 50 years or so, millions upon millions of humans have smoked cannabis. If it were to inflict the damage you believe it does, would not there have been some very strong evidence of this in society ? I've mentioned earlier that people who are predisposed to mental health problems appear to have these problems amplified or precipitated due to ingesting cannabis and I would suggest that any permanent cortex brain damage is not primarily due to cannabis but to a pre-existing condition.
You dont need to be a scientist or a doctor to know inhaling any type of smoke is bad for you.
Jan 20th 2011, 11:29 am
#449
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 443
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
Let me be a bit more even handed than you and suggest that you "Bing" the sub-caption where you will find a number of conflicting answers which you can slant as you wish. You will also find a comment by your mentor to a Sub-commitee of Parliament where he implies that cannabis is virtually benign.
But do try to read the others.
Jim
Jan 20th 2011, 12:18 pm
#450
Forum Regular
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 32
Re: Is the new anti-smoking law working?
No, I'm looking at it from the perspective of a horticulturist. The process of artificial selection is exactly the same process as GM principles, you are choosing certain genes to produce a desired product, the only difference is the way its done and the amount of modern science is applied. We have always genetically modified animals to our needs, do you honestly think pigs are naturally pink? Nope, they have been genetically engineered for ease of slaughter.... but now, instead of waiting years and generations for that natural mutation to become standard through selective breeding we can now do it in the lab.... the process is the same.
He names Monsanto but there are any number of other companies out there who are working on similar projects. We are now seeing seeds, for example, which have been engineered to render them sterile, being sold to farmers. So the farmers sole source of seed becomes the agrotech supplier. Worrying.
Your a horticulturist eh ? I practice it as a very enjoyable pastime. Did you know that Hydrangea can be used as a soil test kit ? I learned the other day that the bloom will be either blue or pink depending on the acidity/alkilinity of the soil ? Fascinating.