The Big Weed Debate

• Hanna wrote on 2014-08-22 00:48

  Quote from EndlessDreams;1242078:

  lol, these two statement contradict with each other.
  
  If there is a debate about weed while pregnant, then, the statement weed won't ruin your body is completely false.
  
  Earlier last century, it was inconceivable to think that smoking is harmful to the body. In fact, they promoted smoking as healthy to the body.
  
  Also, concerning illegal drugs, if you worry about the law, don't do it.
  Some jobs/professions won't accept you if you broke an illegal substance law.

  
  "They didn't think so back then!" argument doesn't really work here considering how much science and medicine has advanced since then. There are people all over the globe who smoke pot, many first world countries have pot legalized. These people have been studied a lot, and if there were any serious adverse effects of smoking weed, we'd know about them already.
• Space Pirate Nithiel wrote on 2014-08-22 01:09
  There have been tons of studies that indicate smoking weed while pregnant is terrible for the baby and causes a giant list of bad shit in their bodies, minds, and personalities. But the pro-weeders ignore these studies as "The man tryin'a keep us down".
• Hanna wrote on 2014-08-22 01:17

  Quote from Space Pirate Nithiel;1242121:

  There have been tons of studies that indicate smoking weed while pregnant is terrible for the baby and causes a giant list of bad shit in their bodies, minds, and personalities. But the pro-weeders ignore these studies as "The man tryin'a keep us down".

  
  
  I wasn't arguing about pregnancy, I agreed about the pregnancy bit.
  Also citation needed.
• Yoorah wrote on 2014-08-22 02:31
  The science around weed's effects on an adult's body are inconclusive. Things are different for teenagers and younger children whose brains are still developing, where science is leaning more towards showing that weed can have a harmful, lasting effect.
  
  My stance on it? I think smoking something that makes you dumb is, well.. dumb. I'm more neutral on weed for medical use, however--mostly because I don't know enough about this topic. Is it really the best way to manage the relevant illnesses, or are they just used as a means to justify weed smoking? Maybe, maybe not. I don't like to argue a point without having enough knowledge to back up my position. :p
  
  Personally, I wish they put in stricter laws against regular cigarette smoking. I hate walking down the street with a smoker in front of me. Do it like in Japan, where there are no smoke-free zones. In Japan, instead, there are designated smoking zones. lol
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2014-08-22 03:24

  Quote from Hanna;1242119:

  "They didn't think so back then!" argument doesn't really work here considering how much science and medicine has advanced since then. There are people all over the globe who smoke pot, many first world countries have pot legalized. These people have been studied a lot, and if there were any serious adverse effects of smoking weed, we'd know about them already.

  
  
  It does work here. A lot of the heavy smoking is good for health advertisement is around the WW1 Era. It wasn't around until the mid 1900s do the long term effects of smoking was really studied because they were apparent.
  
  As more and more population smokes pot legally, and is actually studied, we will have a more better understanding on the long term effects of weed.
  
  It is harder to make studies on people who smoke week illegally. It is harder to study them because the substance is illegal. Because the substance is illegal, it is harder to get grant money to do proper research on it.
  
  I wouldn't count two countries with legalized pot as "many" countries. About 12 countries decriminalize it, but still illegal.
  
  The only country that is completely legal to do anything with weed is North Korea. (Includes Sale, Transport, Cultivation)