Marijuana has no medical value, will stay classified as dangerous drug, DEA rules

Noveson

Hall of Fame
"That category of drugs, which includes heroin, is defined as substances that have a "high potential for abuse" and "no currently accepted medical use."

The DEA concluded that's where marijuana, a drug used by one in 10 Oregonians, belongs.

The agency said cannabis "does not meet the criteria for currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," that there is a lack of "accepted safety for its use," and it has "a high potential for abuse.""

I wanted to see what you guys thought....It's a very simple in my mind, maybe not so much in others. Personally I think it's absolutely idiotic, and probably budget driven.
 

Vcore89

Talk Tennis Guru
Medical marijuana must stay classified as dangerous if grown on hydroponic greenhouses with irrigation system piped from a cistern drowned in Naeglera fowleri!
 

newpball

Legend
That category of drugs, which includes heroin, is defined as substances that have a "high potential for abuse" and "no currently accepted medical use."
The DEA concluded that's where marijuana, a drug used by one in 10 Oregonians, belongs.
The agency said cannabis "does not meet the criteria for currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," that there is a lack of "accepted safety for its use," and it has "a high potential for abuse."


I fully agree with this!

I think that using the substance should be decriminalized though, I see people who use this substance more as patients than criminals.

:D
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
That category of drugs, which includes heroin, is defined as substances that have a "high potential for abuse" and "no currently accepted medical use."
The DEA concluded that's where marijuana, a drug used by one in 10 Oregonians, belongs.
The agency said cannabis "does not meet the criteria for currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," that there is a lack of "accepted safety for its use," and it has "a high potential for abuse."


I fully agree with this!

I think that using the substance should be decriminalized though, I see people who use this substance more as patients than criminals.

:D

Wait which part do you agree with?
 

elga

Rookie
Job-security statement of the 21st Century by the DEA - protecting their jobs and budget.

"The drug continues to be classified as more dangerous than cocaine." (source: LA Times) :rolleyes:
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
You got it!
No benefit and hgh potential for abuse!

I wonder do you really want to know people's opinion or was your questions just agitprop?

:D

If you have anything to back up what you believe I would love to hear it! I've yet to see anyone of that opinion be able to adequately back it up, and not just say "good, keep those lazy stoners out of here" or some such drivel.

I'm genuinely confused how people can believe that Marijuana deserve to be in the same group of drugs as Heroin, and how weed is less beneficial and more dangerous(or addictive) than cigarettes or alcohol.
 

newpball

Legend
If you have anything to back up what you believe I would love to hear it! I've yet to see anyone of that opinion be able to adequately back it up, and not just say "good, keep those lazy stoners out of here" or some such drivel.
I know people who use those substances function really well in this society, we should really get everybody be stoned all the time, what a wonderfully productive society we will have! :rolleyes:

:D
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
I know people who use those substances function really well in this society, we should really get everybody be stoned all the time, what a wonderfully productive society we will have! :rolleyes:

:D

Hahahah didn't I just say nothing but the "keep those lazy stoners out of here" argument?

You're just arguing from a position of pure ignorance, and I really doubt you have any experience with weed at all. Where did you get the idea that a large portion of this nation doesn't already smoke weed? We are the 12th highest country in weed usage per person. Over 13% of people. Guess what we are also the 3rd highest country in GDP per hour worked.

Sure there's some people that get addicted and it hurts their motivation, but it's a drop in the pond compared to the alcoholics and cigarette addicts of the world. What's the worst a really high person can do? Eat too much? Meanwhile you have millions dying of lung cancer, 2nd hand smoke killing millions more, and don't even get me STARTED on the damages alcohol/alcoholics cause. What portion of car accidents/rapes/violence have alcohol involved?
 
Last edited:

stringertom

Bionic Poster
Job-security statement of the 21st Century by the DEA - protecting their jobs and budget.

"The drug continues to be classified as more dangerous than cocaine." (source: LA Times) :rolleyes:
1. Decriminalize it.
2. Tax the hell out of it like alcohol and nicotine.
3. Funnel the revenue into lung cancer research and substance abuse treatment instead of the cartels' fat pockets.

Problems solved.
 

mmk

Hall of Fame
I don't smoke anything, never have (okay, tried a cigar once, turned green and puked after the first puff). I don't consume alcohol, never have. But if alcohol & cigarettes are allowed, I see no reason why marijuana shouldn't be.​
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
1. Decriminalize it.
2. Tax the hell out of it like alcohol and nicotine.
3. Funnel the revenue into lung cancer research and substance abuse treatment instead of the cartels' fat pockets.

Problems solved.

What you got stashed under that rickshaw seat?
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
I don't smoke anything, never have (okay, tried a cigar once, turned green and puked after the first puff). I don't consume alcohol, never have. But if alcohol & cigarettes are allowed, I see no reason why marijuana shouldn't be.​

You should really try getting drunk just once:D Nothing quite like it, easily abused, but very very enjoyable if done well.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
And you are proud of that?

:(

That's your response to that? Really?

To answer your question(even if it's completely avoiding the argument) I'm proud of the progress we have made legalizing it in some states. I myself only smoke maybe once or twice a month, but I know a ton of people that smoke regularly and I have not seen negative effects even approaching something like alcohol.

In fact my Dad and his brother are both non smokers, but they used a marijuana based cream on their hands and knees to play golf without pain and they swear by it.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
Why am I not surprised!

:D

....If you don't know people that smoke, then you're probably a hermit, or just ignorant and don't realize they smoke.

Do you actually have an argument? I've yet to see someone argue against it that wasn't just plain unintelligent.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
1) the medical harm to adults from moderate use seems fairly small; periodontal (gum) disease has been shown in a number of adequately done studies. LIttle else has been demonstrated of great concern.

2) daily use is clearly bad, with shrinkage of the hippocampus (memory area) of the brain and other worrisome effects reported in the medical literature.

3) use by people under age 18 or so is clearly bad, with various data showing interference with proper development of the brain.

4) medical benefits are not all that great, some value in treating nausea and some cases of glaucoma, not a whole lot else at this point.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
1) the medical harm to adults from moderate use seems fairly small; periodontal (gum) disease has been shown in a number of adequately done studies. LIttle else has been demonstrated of great concern.

2) daily use is clearly bad, with shrinkage of the hippocampus (memory area) of the brain and other worrisome effects reported in the medical literature.

3) use by people under age 18 or so is clearly bad, with various data showing interference with proper development of the brain.

4) medical benefits are not all that great, some value in treating nausea and some cases of glaucoma, not a whole lot else at this point.

You're greatly underselling the medical benefits. Study after study shows patients with chronic pain experience some relief from Marijuana, as well as a decrease in the use of Opioids and a decrease in Opioid related suicides.

http://www.webmd.com/pain-management/features/medical-marijuana-research-web?page=3
http://norml.org/component/zoo/item/chronic-pain

However even forgetting that, and the obvious point that developing brains shouldn't use marijuana, all of those things listed do not compare to the damage caused by cigarettes or alcohol. Yet marijuana is criminalized in the same group as heroin, while neither of those are at all. It's just the most obvious money grab there is.
 

newpball

Legend
Do you actually have an argument?
Let's see you invited people's thoughts on the matter, I gave you my thoughts but you seem to have trouble accepting them!

So you know tons of people who smoke regularly but you only smoke once or twice?
So may I ask what attracts you in seeing those people or do you only know those people professionally?

:D
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
The immiseration of large swathes of society due to economic impoverishment and drug use are closely linked, as the recent opioid epidemic in America would clearly demonstrate.
 

newpball

Legend
Drug use and the immiseration of large swathes of society due to economic impoverishment are closely linked.
True, when people are miserable they resort to drugs to find comfort and unfortunately once they start using drugs their condition only gets worse!

The best thing poor communities can have is to have local advocates AGAINST drugs.
Those folks are heroes! At least in my book!

WgB.jpg


:(
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
Let's see you invited people's thoughts on the matter, I gave you my thoughts but you seem to have trouble accepting them!

So you know tons of people who smoke regularly but you only smoke once or twice?
So may I ask what attracts you in seeing those people or do you only know those people professionally?

:D

This has been the sum of your "thoughts":
we should really get everybody be stoned all the time, what a wonderfully productive society we will have! :rolleyes:

You haven't replied to any of the points I've made, and seem to want to ignore any evidence to the contrary. Do you have any intention of making an actual point? Or are you continue posting drivel?

People I work with, my friends, people from my tennis team, just about everyone I knew in college, I don't even think it'd be possible to NOT know people that smoke. I work at a large ad agency that does most of Nike's stuff, I'd say at least half the people there smoke once a month. We're are talking about people that are at the pinnacle of marketing. Let alone the Bill Gates' and Barack Obamas' of the world that smoke.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
The immiseration of large swathes of society due to economic impoverishment and drug use are closely linked, as the recent opioid epidemic in America would clearly demonstrate.

Marijuana use lowers the chance of Opioid related deaths, that UCLA research article is located above. You throw around the word "drug", do you consider alcohol a drug?
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
The appeal to alcohol, which often comes up when this topic is discussed, seems a bit off the mark to me tho. It to me doesn't say as much about marijuana as beg the question of how we should really treat alcohol and tobacco.

If alcohol didn't exist and a drug came out today with its exact properties, the vast majority of civilized societies would criminalize it, so I don't think it's ultimately a telling comparison to make. I mean, it's a useful example to highlight a sense of hypocrisy and inconsistency in many instances, but in itself it ultimately tells us little about how policy should treat marijuana.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
Study after study shows patients with chronic pain experience some relief from Marijuana

Everything works at least for a while in chronic pain studies, probably because most studies don't use "active" placebos and aren't truly blind.
 

WildVolley

Legend
I think you'll see a number of new states legalize recreational cannabis during the November election.

Too much tax money is being lost to the States for them to allow the Federal government to continue to unconstitutionally ban the substance. The DEA, the police, and the drug cartels will lobby to keep it illegal. Police around the country have become addicted to civil asset forfeiture based primarily on cannabis stops. The Mexican cartels do not want to give up an easy source of profit.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
Everything works at least for a while in chronic pain studies, probably because most studies don't use "active" placebos and aren't truly blind.

Hmm that's funny, because right in the references in the bottom you can see numerous articles that are cited as double-blind. Including ones in The Clinical Journal of Pain, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, and the Journal of the American Medical Association

Where's your research stating otherwise?
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
The appeal to alcohol, which often comes up when this topic is discussed, seems a bit off the mark to me tho. It to me doesn't say as much about marijuana as beg the question of how we should really treat alcohol and tobacco.

If alcohol didn't exist and a drug came out today with its exact properties, the vast majority of civilized societies would criminalize it, so I don't think it's ultimately a telling comparison to make. I mean, it's a useful example to highlight a sense of hypocrisy and inconsistency in many instances, but in itself it ultimately tells us little about how policy should treat marijuana.

So would you rather make the argument that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol, or that both alcohol and marijuana deserve to be criminalized, and on the same tier as heroin?

For me it's clear that all three(including cigarettes) should not be in that spot, and marijuana is by far the least deadly of them. You are seeming to say alcohol should be criminalized like marijuana and heroin, which frankly I think is absurd, but hey, that's a whole different argument.
 

newpball

Legend
People I work with, my friends, people from my tennis team, just about everyone I knew in college, I don't even think it'd be possible to NOT know people that smoke. I work at a large ad agency that does most of Nike's stuff, I'd say at least half the people there smoke once a month. We're are talking about people that are at the pinnacle of marketing. Let alone the Bill Gates' and Barack Obamas' of the world that smoke.
So basically you are saying it is all great, you know tons of people who regularly use this drug and they are all doing great, and they are successful!

So you are effectively advocating people to use drugs!

Why not go to schools and tell children how great it is, that when they are 18 they should go ahead and use it on a daily basis! Go out to poor neighborhoods and tell people they should use this drug! Because after all everybody uses it except for hermits like NewpBall but he is uninformed he does not know how great this drug actually is!

It's great this drug, is wonderful! Perhaps we should arrest people who actually refuse to use this garbage and accuse them of libel against this wonderful substance that is going to make everybody's life on Earth so much better!

Unbelievable!

:(

WDD15_logo_EN.jpg
 
Last edited:

r2473

G.O.A.T.
I think you'll see a number of new states legalize recreational cannabis during the November election.
The legal stuff is so expensive in Colorado, that only "tourists" buy it.

Though I guess I do know a few people that buy it legally to "support the cause". But most regular smokers find it cheaper elsewhere.
 

WildVolley

Legend
The legal stuff is so expensive in Colorado, that only "tourists" buy it.

Though I guess I do know a few people that buy it legally to "support the cause". But most regular smokers find it cheaper elsewhere.

I'm hardly an expert on what is going on in Colorado, but from the articles I've read, it looks like legal sales will top $1 billion this year and the state is enjoying the tax money. If California legalizes, legal sales will be many multiples of that.

I'm sure that some of those sales are from new demand, but I'd be willing to bet that the illegal market has dropped in size. I know when I want to buy hard liquor, I don't look for the local moonshiner. I recognize cannabis is much easier to grow than it is to make moonshine, but a lot of people just don't want to be associated with the criminal class that distributes illegal cannabis.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
So would you rather make the argument that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol, or that both alcohol and marijuana deserve to be criminalized, and on the same tier as heroin?

For me it's clear that all three(including cigarettes) should not be in that spot, and marijuana is by far the least deadly of them. You are seeming to say alcohol should be criminalized like marijuana and heroin, which frankly I think is absurd, but hey, that's a whole different argument.

You seem to miss the gist of what I'm saying here: I'm saying that alcohol would clearly be criminalized in the hypothetical scenario that it was recently invented and didn't have the particular history that it has. And from that it follows that it's a real nonsensical argument to claim that, "look, alcohol is legal, and cannabis ain't more dangerous, thus cannabis should be legalized". Criminalizing alcohol would, as it is, perhaps be completely unfeasible, but that has very little to do with its actual pharmacological properties and more to do with its context. I'm not saying that cannabis is more dangerous than alcohol, nor that it is equal to heroin.

If you want to argue for the legalization, that's fine, and I think there's a very good argument to be made, but the above argument isn't one of them, which is why it's tiring to always see it come up.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
So basically you are saying it is all great, you know tons of people who regularly use this drug and they are doing great.
So you are effectively advocating people to use drugs! Why not go to schools and tell children how great it is, that when they are 18 they should go ahead and use it on a daily basis! Because after all everybody uses except for hermits like NewpBall . It's great this drug is wonderful! Perhaps we should arrest people who actually refuse to use this garbage and accuse them of libel against this wonderful substance that is going to make everybody's life on Earth so much better!

Unbelievable!

:(

You almost leave me speechless. I can't tell if I'm arguing with a 12 year old that has watched too many D.A.R.E videos, or a 70 year old mormon.

You keep saying drugs. Drugs are not all one thing that can be lumped together. Meth is a drug, and so is aspirin. Marijuana and alcohol are both drugs. So yeah, there's a lot of drugs I advocate the use of. I think alcohol can be absolutely amazing, and marijuana has a lot of possible benefits too. I don't think kids should smoke, but I think criminalizing it is absolutely absurd, especially when it 's coming from people that probably have alcohol problems. It should be a choice we have, just like alcohol.

BTW it's obviously legal in oregon, has our state ground to a stop yet?
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
Hmm that's funny, because right in the references in the bottom you can see numerous articles that are cited as double-blind. Including ones in The Clinical Journal of Pain, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, and the Journal of the American Medical Association

Where's your research stating otherwise?

lots of studies done years ago show many so-called double-blind studies aren't truly double-blind because the study doesn't use an "active" placebo (I.E. a placebo with the same side-effects as the real drug) so both patients and often researchers (if patients report the side effects) know who's on drug and who isn't.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
This is true but not how politics really works. The fact is society creates things that it admires and despises in a seemingly arbitrary manner. And most societies that have existed employed intoxicants of some sort.

Religion has always functioned as an alternative intoxicant, but the cure is often worse than the disease.

If alcohol never existed perhaps it would be criminalised, but then again wouldn't that be a pity given the undoubted charms of alcohol?

The appeal to alcohol, which often comes up when this topic is discussed, seems a bit off the mark to me tho. It to me doesn't say as much about marijuana as beg the question of how we should really treat alcohol and tobacco.

If alcohol didn't exist and a drug came out today with its exact properties, the vast majority of civilized societies would criminalize it, so I don't think it's ultimately a telling comparison to make. I mean, it's a useful example to highlight a sense of hypocrisy and inconsistency in many instances, but in itself it ultimately tells us little about how policy should treat marijuana.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
lots of studies done years ago show many so-called double-blind studies aren't truly double-blind because the study doesn't use an "active" placebo (I.E. a placebo with the same side-effects as the real drug) so both patients and often researchers (if patients report the side effects) know who's on drug and who isn't.

So I suppose your studies that I'm eagerly awaiting are actually new and TRULY double-blind then? In case you still haven't looked, many of those studies were done in 2015. The oldest on the list is from 2008.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
o I suppose your studies that I'm eagerly awaiting are actually new and TRULY double-blind then? In case you still haven't looked, many of those studies were done in 2015. The oldest on the list is from 2008.

you completely miss my point.....are you stoned? The studies done years ago demonstrate that double blind is in fact a very difficult condition to create. Was true then, still true now. So something like pain control, very subject to placebo effect, seems to work in many studies where the effect seems not to hold up later.
 

Sysyphus

Talk Tennis Guru
This is true but not how politics really works. The fact is society creates things that it admires and despises in a seemingly arbitrary manner. And most societies that have existed employed intoxicants of some sort.

Religion has always functioned as an alternative intoxicant, but the cure is often worse than the disease.

If alcohol never existed perhaps it would be criminalised, but then again wouldn't that be a pity given the undoubted charms of alcohol?

No, but that's basically what I'm saying. But I wouldn't call it arbitrary at all. Maybe not rational, but not arbitrary. What I'm saying is that the historical facts of a drug have a very large bearing on how it is treated by a society, and not just pharmacological properties. And alcohol is clearly an aberration in that sense, because countless of drugs with less risk of dependency and less physical harm that do not share such a history are criminalized left and right. And so the appeal to the health effect of alcohol and the fact that it's legal is a poor argument in these discussions, because that's clearly not the distinguishing feature which makes societies treat it the way they do in the first place.
 

Noveson

Hall of Fame
You seem to miss the gist of what I'm saying here: I'm saying that alcohol would clearly be criminalized in the hypothetical scenario that it was recently invented and didn't have the particular history that it has. And from that it follows that it's a real nonsensical argument to claim that, "look, alcohol is legal, and cannabis ain't more dangerous, thus cannabis should be legalized". Criminalizing alcohol would, as it is, perhaps be completely unfeasible, but that has very little to do with its actual pharmacological properties and more to do with its context. I'm not saying that cannabis is more dangerous than alcohol, nor that it is equal to heroin.

If you want to argue for the legalization, that's fine, and I think there's a very good argument to be made, but the above argument isn't one of them, which is why it's tiring to always see it come up.

I completely understand what you're saying, but you're making a lot of assumptions and missing a lot of implications(like that if given the chance we'd make alcohol illegal, I have NO idea how you could believe that, it's been tried before). A law being inconsistent right now is not good reason for it to stay inconsistent in the future.

We have an ability to make the distinction between which is more dangerous, and we are choosing to ignore it in favor of making the DEA money. Trying to enforce the criminalization of alcohol would be about as effective as it is for weed, which is to say you'd probably get nothing done but putting a **** ton of people in prison on the tax-payers dime. Both have been around for a very long time, and I don't see why comparing them doesn't make sense to you.

You can't just choose to ignore an inconsistency in the law and push it off as something we can do nothing about
 
Top