Not 100% agree with ZOMGits on Marijuana

[Hedley]

Karina made a response video made by Jezuzfreak777

Here is her response:

@zomgitscriss
Your interpretation of epidemiological evidence, is 100% wrong.
if the psycotics syndromes are increases whenever you smoke pot or it decreases the age of appearence; indeed it is evidence in favor of causation!
BTW I hear* a lecture from one of the authors how research here in Sweden about it.**
However, I am agree with the rest of your comments.

*I must say "heard"
**He is the supervisor of my supervisor...

These are my views:
1-I am in favor of legalizing with the same restrictions made for other drugs.
2-I am AGAINST "medical" bullshit: I have never read about high quality evidence that supports it use, and benefits overweights its harm.

What do you think?

 

[BrainBlow]

"medical bullshit"?
You mean the pretty well documented soothing effect that is a very effective painkiller with as good as NONE of the side-effects that the legal painkillers have?
And then there is also that it actually slows the growth of cancerous cells.


The "psycotics syndromes" don't appear while smoking pot. It is more like they disappear.
Some studies even suggest that pot HELPS those with such mental disorders, which wouldn't be surprising at all. It is just like how some people with depression turns to the bottle, but in this case it doesn't lead to that severe a downwards spiral in health.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

An the reason you are having difficulty finding evidence is because it was never gathered. If a drug is classified as illegal because of some reason, no research is done looking for the medical benefits. However, there are many European studies highlighting the effect of medical pot.

 

[BrainBlow]

Cannabis is illegal because fear mongering prohibition Champions who came with blatantly false claims about the plant. Like how they claimed it made people psychotic killers with no minds of their own.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

Cannabis is illegal because fear mongering prohibition Champions who came with blatantly false claims about the plant. Like how they claimed it made people psychotic killers with no minds of their own.

I actually heard something more sinister reasons why it was illegal. Cannabis comes from the hemp plant and this was in competition to the cotton industry because things like clothing and rope could be made much cheaper using hemp than cotton. Because the USA had pretty much a monopoly on cotton, they tried to make it illegal so they could still sell cotton.

 

[Laurens]

The medical benefits are probably one of the main reasons people want it legalized. How come they are bullshit?

Bear in mind that medical use of marijuana would not involve the patient taking hits from a giant bong all day, rather taking medicines extracted from the plant. Often a medical dosage would not be enough to get wasted, in some cases the active ingredient that gets you high would be removed entirely from the medicine.

To say that the plant has no medical benefits is a very misinformed statement to make.

 

[Hedley]

My point is without studies, all "benefits" are conspirancy theories:
the big pharma does not "allow" them, because there is a conflict of interests that could be true, but still there is NO EVIDENCE in favor of "medicine marijuana". According to Occam's razor the false hypothesis is true in absence of evidence, until new evidence comes.

The same applies to god and the "inside job" of 9/11.

To me medical marijuana arguments are the same as the ones in favor of "god": anecdotal evidence, witness and other non-sense.
I have read about glaucoma and topical application from the Canadian Ophthalmogy Society and results are awful!

I understand that keep it illegal means that harm really outweights benefits. Although I can no swallow the "medical marijuana" concept, I do understand that spending money in working against black market is 100% is the same as flushing away millions of dollars.

My challenge is to SEE EVIDENCE that support it, not weak excuses!

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

My point is without studies, all "benefits" are conspirancy theories:
the big pharma does not "allow" them, because there is a conflict of interests that could be true, but still there is NO EVIDENCE in favor of "medicine marijuana". According to Occam's razor the false hypothesis is true in absence of evidence, until new evidence comes.

The same applies to god and the "inside job" of 9/11.

To me medical marijuana arguments are the same as the ones in favor of "god": anecdotal evidence, witness and other non-sense.
I have read about glaucoma and topical application from the Canadian Ophthalmogy Society and results are awful!

I understand that keep it illegal means that harm really outweights benefits. Although I can no swallow the "medical marijuana" concept, I do understand that spending money in working against black market is 100% is the same as flushing away millions of dollars.

My challenge is to SEE EVIDENCE that support it, not weak excuses!

Watch shanedk's Bogosity episode on the war on drugs. He mentions some articles which support the use of medical marijuana.

 

[BrainBlow]

My point is without studies, all "benefits" are conspirancy theories:
the big pharma does not "allow" them, because there is a conflict of interests that could be true, but still there is NO EVIDENCE in favor of "medicine marijuana". According to Occam's razor the false hypothesis is true in absence of evidence, until new evidence comes.

The same applies to god and the "inside job" of 9/11.

To me medical marijuana arguments are the same as the ones in favor of "god": anecdotal evidence, witness and other non-sense.
I have read about glaucoma and topical application from the Canadian Ophthalmogy Society and results are awful!

I understand that keep it illegal means that harm really outweights benefits. Although I can no swallow the "medical marijuana" concept, I do understand that spending money in working against black market is 100% is the same as flushing away millions of dollars.

My challenge is to SEE EVIDENCE that support it, not weak excuses!

You know, it seems like you haven't even TRIED to find the research done on this. And no, it isn't "up to us" since you were never challenged on it.

Hell, you don't even need to go any longer than wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis
And on the bottom of the page there are tons of links.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

The positive and negatives of marijuana and its component chemicals are fairly well-known. Whatever your view on recreational use, in certain cases the medical benefits seem to easily outweigh the potential side-effects.

I don't see why the idea of medical marijuana is such a big fucking deal. We have dozens of prescription opiates on the market, and it hasn't led to any sort of slippery slope ending with the legalization of heroin. It seems perfectly rational to apply a similar division between medicinal and recreational marijuana.

 

[Gunboat Diplomat]

My point is without studies, all "benefits" are conspirancy theories:
the big pharma does not "allow" them, because there is a conflict of interests that could be true, but still there is NO EVIDENCE in favor of "medicine marijuana". According to Occam's razor the false hypothesis is true in absence of evidence, until new evidence comes.

The same applies to god and the "inside job" of 9/11.

To me medical marijuana arguments are the same as the ones in favor of "god": anecdotal evidence, witness and other non-sense.
I have read about glaucoma and topical application from the Canadian Ophthalmogy Society and results are awful!

I understand that keep it illegal means that harm really outweights benefits. Although I can no swallow the "medical marijuana" concept, I do understand that spending money in working against black market is 100% is the same as flushing away millions of dollars.

My challenge is to SEE EVIDENCE that support it, not weak excuses!

Wow, reading failure!

An the reason you are having difficulty finding evidence is because it was never gathered. If a drug is classified as illegal because of some reason, no research is done looking for the medical benefits. However, there are many European studies highlighting the effect of medical pot.

Hedley, there are few American studies because of its illegality but that doesn't mean there are no studies. It sounds like you're independently motivated to deny medicinal use although I can't imagine what that motive might be...

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

An the reason you are having difficulty finding evidence is because it was never gathered. If a drug is classified as illegal because of some reason, no research is done looking for the medical benefits. However, there are many European studies highlighting the effect of medical pot.

There are few American studies because of its illegality but that doesn't mean there are no studies. It sounds like you're independently motivated to deny medicinal use although I can't imagine what that motive might be...

How is that? I give no opinion in the above statement. All I said that these countries have studies done on the effect of medical marijuana and these don't. It seems to me that by tying my statement to the idea that I am against medical marijuana you are only grasping for thin air.

 

[Gunboat Diplomat]

How is that? I give no opinion in the above statement. All I said that these countries have studies done on the effect of medical marijuana and these don't. It seems to me that by tying my statement to the idea that I am against medical marijuana you are only grasping for thin air.

I'm sorry for the confusion. I was still referring to Hedley in my post there. None of my post was a response to you. Instead, I was contrasting Hedley's response to you with what you actually said. I should go back and edit my post to be a little more clear...

 

[Hedley]

Some studies are cases report and higher quality studies are needed in order to know whether medical marijuana is safe and effective. The information on historical evidence, case and even animal model IS NOT ENOUGH!!! The most promising drugs candidates fail in any of the clinical phases. They mention a (one, ett, un -1-) phase III study where marinol has the same effect as placebo controlling cancer-related cachexia-anorexia syndrome. No other phase III study is mention in the wiki.

FDA, in the article HAS NOT approved MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES. It only allows components of it (as happened in other medical herbs) in order to be sold! as I mentioned before, one of them had failed!

FDA also encourages not to smoke it, because possible correlation with lung cancer and COPD. Smoking marijuana alone does not seem to increase lung cancer, but it potentiate (more than 200 times) the harm done to lung by nicotine smoking.

My point is that high qualitity evidence in clinical studies is LACKING! until such evidence is present, then medical marijuana is still considered as true as god (although god lacks of animal models!)

 

[SagansHeroes]

Thankfully scientific data and evidence doesn't really care whether you agree or not. Facts are facts, opinions and points of view don't change them.

Unfortunately for some reason we still live in societies that don't base their legislation/education about harmful substances on facts and evidence.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

Some studies are cases report and higher quality studies are needed in order to know whether medical marijuana is safe and effective. The information on historical evidence, case and even animal model IS NOT ENOUGH!!! The most promising drugs candidates fail in any of the clinical phases. They mention a (one, ett, un -1-) phase III study where marinol has the same effect as placebo controlling cancer-related cachexia-anorexia syndrome. No other phase III study is mention in the wiki.

FDA, in the article HAS NOT approved MARIJUANA FOR MEDICAL PURPOSES. It only allows components of it (as happened in other medical herbs) in order to be sold! as I mentioned before, one of them had failed!

FDA also encourages not to smoke it, because possible correlation with lung cancer and COPD. Smoking marijuana alone does not seem to increase lung cancer, but it potentiate (more than 200 times) the harm done to lung by nicotine smoking.

My point is that high qualitity evidence in clinical studies is LACKING! until such evidence is present, then medical marijuana is still considered as true as god (although god lacks of animal models!)

The FDA is an American organisation. The hardcore anti drug policies of America are most likely found in the FDA too. The FDA is not the only organisation to test if drugs are safe nor is America the only country to do drug testing. I get the impression that you neither read the wikipedia article nor did you watch the war on drugs episode of bogosity on shanedk's channel.

 

[MRaverz]

Medicinal claims linked to cannabis run the risk of being exaggerated due to there not being enough scientific investigation into the field.

In comparison, the dangers are often treated exactly the opposite and real issues such as psychosis, depression, cancers etc. tend to be played down due to the general ignorance of the public.


We know cannabis has links to harmful effect, we know that the benefits are comparably minute and we also know that we don't know enough. So the only sensible option is surely to restrict the use of the plant. If cannabis were going through clinical trials to see if it could be prescribed to patients, it would've been scrapped ages ago but there is so much myth around the plant, as there tends to be with most drugs, that few people know the reality of the situation.

 

[australopithecus]

I have no strong feelings one way or the other. What people who aren't me want to put in their bodies is their look out. Personally I wouldn't touch the stuff but meh, to each his own.

 

[MRaverz]

I have no strong feelings one way or the other. What people who aren't me want to put in their bodies is their look out. Personally I wouldn't touch the stuff but meh, to each his own.

A nice idea in principle, however what about people who are undereducated or mistaken into believing it's safe?

Additionally, what about the knock on effects for those who care for the individual?

 

[televator]

I think the concern over how dangerous or how beneficial it really is or isn't is a moot point with the fact that people still get it in abundance via illegal means...