Stuff Libertarians OUGHT to worry about more than drugs.

[Diogenes]

The Last Generation of the West and the Thin Strand of Civilization

I am not engaging in pop counterfactual history, as much as reminding us of how thin the thread of civilization sometimes hangs, both in its beginning and full maturity. Something analogous is happening currently in the 21st-century West. But the old alarmist scenarios — a nuclear exchange, global warming and the melting of the polar ice caps, a new lethal AIDS-like virus — should not be our worry.

Rather our way of life is changing not with a bang, but with a whimper, insidiously and self-inflicted, rather than abruptly and from foreign stimuli. Most of the problem is cultural. Unfortunately it was predicted by a host of pessimistic anti-democratic philosophers from Plato and Aristotle to Hegel and Spengler. I’ve always hoped that these gloom-and-doomers were wrong about the Western paradigm, but some days it becomes harder.

http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/th ... epage=true

[Diogenes]

Murphy's Law: Top Ten Bad Decisions of the 20th Century

10-Playing down the Islamic terrorist threat. Islamic terrorism is an ancient and recurring threat. Despite signs in the 1970s that another upsurge was coming it became popular in Western diplomatic and academic circles to play down this threat. This happened despite a serious outbreak of Islamic terrorism in Saudi Arabia in the late 1970s. This one involved heavily armed Islamic terrorists seizing control of some of the holiest places in Islam. In the West this was dismissed as an isolated event. Similar excuses were created to explain the growing number of Islamic terrorist incidents for the rest of the decade. For many, the self-deception continues and so does the terrorist violence.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurp ... 40121.aspx

[MSimon]

Well I don't care if civilization falls as long as those defending it are pogromists.

When I see you calling for an end to drug prohibition or at least an end to the war on Cancer Cures I'll start defending the civilization you hold so dear. In the mean time if Democrats champion an end to prohibition I'm going to promote them. Sorry 'bout that.

If there are things I should worry about more than drugs you should be leading the charge against Prohibition. 1932.

But I did a post just for you: http://classicalvalues.com/2014/01/why- ... -drug-war/

The punch line:

Marijuana Prohibition is a crime against humanity. I would bring the Republic (such as it is) down to end this abomination. Let those of you into politics take note.

The culture war is over. You lost.

[ladajo]

Too bad facts aren't on your side Simon.

Pot trashes your brain


And wrecks your body's mechanisms

Glad to see you care so much about others you are willing to trash their lives for your personal vendetta against "the man".

Bitter one tour nukes never were good at anger management. Part of the reason for one tour huh?

[MSimon]

And I might also note that prohibition enforcement is racist. That should amuse YOU.

[MSimon]

ladajo,

If pot trashes brains why does the body make so many endocannabinoids? Especially between ages 15 to 25. Is your body trying to trash itself? I'm sure with your great medical knowledge you will have a very clear explanation.

I may get back to you on debunking your links. But I may not. What would be the point? You are immune to contrary facts. Not that that is new in human nature.

"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." - Max Planck

But you are up against politics and a younger generation that has heard of the body's endocannabinoid system. I see a 1932 in your future. Enjoy. Because I will. Of course you could back Rand Paul. That might earn my support.

In any case we know that cannabinoids cure cancer and we know why. Are you against that? BTW the Federales have known that for at least 30 years.

http://patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpr ... ince-1974/

http://healthland.time.com/2013/10/28/s ... cer-cells/

http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/2013/0 ... ncers.html

But on the off chance you want to get an education. A biochemist, Dennis Hill, explains how cannabis (THC and CBD) kills cancer cells.
http://www.cureyourowncancer.org/how-ca ... works.html

You know I am enjoying learning in a whole new field. Great fun learning biochemistry. You ought to try it. If your body is still making enough endocannabinoids so your brain is sufficiently plastic for the learning required. For most men after age 27 endocannabinoid production declines drastically. But there are always a few on the tail of the curve that don't have the problem. I may have been lucky that way. It didn't take me too long to learn Polywell. Biochemistry is tougher though. But I'm at it.

[ladajo]

I may get back to you on debunking your links. But I may not. What would be the point? You are immune to contrary facts. Not that that is new in human nature.

You really shouldn't talk about yourself that way.

I know full well you will not challenge the links. It is your norm. When confronted with fact, you either go away for a while, or you post a lot of nonsense in an argument by quantity vice quality.

The simple fact is drugs, including pot, are bad for you. They mess up your body and mind, and do so in a way that makes you want more. This in turn, for a significant number of users, results in user caused harm to others.

Drug addcits are the ultimate selfish machines.

Rage on dude. Rage on.

Popcorn anyone?

[williatw]

And I might also note that prohibition enforcement is racist. That should amuse YOU.

And as long as that is true and it is, I wouldn't support the WOD period. When they start mass jailing middle/upper middle class white youth pot smokers instead of predominately minority males, at least I would say they had the strength of their convictions, though I still wouldn't agree with them. I know it was posted before but it deserves another go:

Moderator/Simon here - the image was too big.

img---> http://www.msnbc.com/sites/msnbc/files/ ... k=hUBUWe4E[/img]

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/marijuana-le ... ion-elites

A tale of two pot users: OK for elites, illegal for others

Colorado rang in 2014 by becoming the first state to sell marijuana to its residents for recreational use. Along with Washington, Colorado legalized recreational marijuana use by state referendum in the 2012 election. Despite the fact that marijuana use is still illegal under federal law, the feds have decided to allow these two states to experiment with legalized marijuana as long as they follow certain guidelines.

Along with the usual barrage of tired stoner jokes, there has been some handwringing over the possible consequences of legalized pot use. Among them, the potential health risks, the possibility of more marijuana users, and, in particular, increased use among children. But rarely do those concerned about the consequences of legalized marijuana confront the consequences of our current marijuana prohibition regime, under which some groups of Americans are swiftly labeled criminals and set on a path of being marginalized by society for what the elite and well-off usually end up recalling as foolish but ultimately harmless experimentiation with drugs.

Consider that at least the last three American presidents, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, have all more or less admitted to smoking weed. Bush’s former budget director and former Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, was arrested for possession of marijuana and other drugs while a student at Princeton. On Friday, two major newspaper columnists, Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post and David Brooks of the New York Times, admitted to using marijuana. Yet just as all three of the above presidents presided over a criminal justice system that imposes harsh punishments for marijuana use, Marcus and Brooks argue against Colorado and Washington’s marijuana initiatives, on the basis that marijuana is bad for you.

The real question with marijuana legalization, however, is not whether it’s not healthy to consume, but whether our current system of prohibition makes things worse. Excessive consumption of alcohol is not healthy, either, but after more than a decade of banning alcohol, Americans decided the collateral consequences of prohibition were far worse than the consequences of letting people have a drink.

Presumably, Brooks and Marcus don’t think of themselves as criminals who should have gone to jail for their drug use, any more than our three past presidents. Marcus all but acknowledges as much, saying that “[t]hrowing people in jail for smoking pot is dumb and wasteful.” But that’s what marijuana being illegal means in most states and under federal law: It means people go to jail.

It almost never means, however, that people like Brooks and Marcus go to jail. Anyone who wants to see what a de facto legalization environment looks like can visit an elite college campus, where both the trade and use of marijuana are highly visible, and where those who get caught face the relatively minor sanctions associated with breaking campus rules rather than the lifelong consequences of breaking the law. What we basically have now is a system where marijuana is practically legal for the wealthy and white and illegal for everyone else.

Although marijuana use among blacks and whites is about the same, according to a 2013 report by the ACLU, blacks are almost four times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana possession. This startling graph from the report tells the story:



According to the report, there were more than 8 million marijuana-related arrests between 2001 and 2010, almost 90% of which were for possession. Marijuana arrests now make up more than half of all drug arrests in the country. And use of the drug has only increased over time.

As Michelle Alexander notes in her book, The New Jim Crow, the consequences of being convicted of felony marijuana possession can be far more dire than the sentence itself. Former offenders can find themselves deprived of professional or driver’s licenses, educational aid, food stamps, public housing, their right to vote, and they may find themselves fired and unable to find new employment, having been marked by society as little more than a criminal. For blacks caught up in the system it can compound the already considerable effects of ongoing racial discrimination.
Yet with their own acknowledged marijuana use our current and former presidents, as well as our well-respected newspaper columnists, are implicitly acknowledging that mere marijuana use does not make you a criminal who should be driven from society and made a pariah, it does not consign you to fate as an addlepated dunce or violent sociopath incapable of holding a job or raising a family. Would that the worst consequence for marijuana use was something resembling Brooks’ recollection of a botched attempt to deliver a presentation in English class while stoned. Legalization means that other people, not just elites and their children, can have the opportunity to shrug off past drug use as a youthful dalliance rather than a life sentence.

There are degrees of decriminalization between marijuana prohibition and legalization–and people can argue how far the government should go. What’s clear is that under the current system, the wealthy and connected are almost entirely shielded from the consequences of marijuana being illegal, while the poor and non-white face catastrophe for engaging in the same behavior.

Brooks writes that legalizing marijuana means “nurturing a moral ecology in which it is a bit harder to be the sort of person most of us want to be.” The current system already can make it not a bit harder, but insurmountably hard to become the sort of person most of us want to be. But not for Brooks or Marcus, not for any of our recent presidents, and probably not for their children.

[MSimon]

ladajo,

Did you actually read your "And wrecks your body's mechanisms" link? I'll give you a few quotes from it. You are about to get educated. You won't like it. Heh. Your link: http://coruraltrack.org/wp-content/uplo ... n-2013.pdf

Marijuana is classified as a schedule I substance by the FDA, so it is difficult for contemporary researchers to study marijuana even though its therapeutic properties have been known for more than 5000 years. 13 Cannabis contains many compounds, of which at least 60 are known to be cannabinoids (active components of cannabis). 13 In the 1960s, when marijuana was increasingly used as a recreational drug, the cannabinoid Delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) was isolated and determined to be the principal cause of marijuana’s psychoactive effects. 14 Other cannabinoids have been isolated and found to be present in cannabis, but they are not nearly as psychoactive.

Pharmacodynamics

In the 1990s, the mechanism of action for many of the cannabinoids was determined with the discovery of the cannabinoid CB1 and CB2 receptors. The CB1 receptors are found in high densities in the neuron terminals of the basal ganglia (affecting motor activity), cerebellum (motor coordination), hippocampus (short-term memory), neocortex (thinking), and hypothalamus and limbic cortex (appetite and sedation). 13 To a lesser extent, the CB1 receptors are found in periaqueductal gray dorsal horn (pain) and immune cells. CB2 receptors are primarily found on immune cells and tissues and, when activated, can affect inflammatory and immunosuppressive activity. 15 For example, CB2 receptors on leukocytes may modulate cell migration, although these effects are difficult to elicit from standard dosing. CB2 receptors are also found in the brainon microglia; thus, cannabinoids have begun to be studied for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease, but their role has not been established. Numerous cannabinoid compounds present in medical cannabis interact with these receptors to create varying responses (Figure 1). It is unknown how the major nonpsychotropic compound in cannabis, cannabidiol (CBD), exerts its activity, but it may be an inverse agonist, because several studies have shown that it decreases the psychotropic activity of THC. 15 It has no direct affinity for CB1 and CB2 receptors, yet it appears to enhance the activity of the endogenous cannabinoid, anandamide. 16 Because of the uncontrolled production of medical cannabis in various preparations (dried to be smoked or in oils to be applied, eaten, or drunk), there can be vastly different concentrations of the can- nabinoid compounds in each product. As such, it is difficult to predict what pharmacologic response any cannabis product is likely to elicit. However, because of the relative efficacy (the ability of a drug to induce a biologic response at its molecular target when bound) of THC compared to other cannabinoids, it is routinely found to be the compound associated with the most pharmacologic effects of cannabis. Current researchers are trying to further differentiate the poorly binding cannabinoids by looking into the noncannabinoid targets linked to pain. 13 In these studies, other G-protein receptors (e.g., GPR55), G-protein – coupled receptors (coupling with l - and d-opioid receptors), and transient receptorpotential channels (TRPVs), which are respon- sive to capsaicin, are being identified as targets. 13 In the TRPV example, it is interesting that non-CB1 and non-CB2 active phytocannabinoids (and not THC) have been shown to have the most effects. 15

Now compare that with http://www.cureyourowncancer.org/how-ca ... works.html

First let’s look at what keeps cancer cells alive, then we will come back and examine how the cannabinoids CBD (cannabidiol) and THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) unravels cancer’s aliveness.

In every cell there is a family of interconvertible sphingolipids that specifically manage the life and death of that cell. This profile of factors is called the “Sphingolipid Rheostat.” If endogenous ceramide(a signaling metabolite of sphingosine-1-phosphate) is high, then cell death (apoptosis) is imminent. If ceramide is low, the cell is strong in its vitality.

Very simply, when THC connects to the CB1 or CB2 cannabinoid receptor site on the cancer cell, it causes an increase in ceramide synthesis which drives cell death. A normal healthy cell does not produce ceramide in the presence of THC, thus is not affected by the cannabinoid.

The cancer cell dies, not because of cytotoxic chemicals, but because of a tiny little shift in the mitochondria. Within most cells there is a cell nucleus, numerous mitochondria (hundreds to thousands), and various other organelles in the cytoplasm. The purpose of the mitochondria is to produce energy (ATP) for cell use. As ceramide starts to accumulate, turning up the Sphingolipid Rheostat, it increases the mitochondrial membrane pore permeability to cytochrome c, a critical protein in energy synthesis. Cytochrome c is pushed out of the mitochondria, killing the source of energy for the cell.

Ceramide also causes genotoxic stress in the cancer cell nucleus generating a protein called p53, whose job it is to disrupt calcium metabolism in the mitochondria. If this weren’t enough, ceramide disrupts the cellular lysosome, the cell’s digestive system that provides nutrients for all cell functions. Ceramide, and other sphingolipids, actively inhibit pro-survival pathways in the cell leaving no possibility at all of cancer cell survival.

The key to this process is the accumulation of ceramide in the system. This means taking therapeutic amounts of CBD and THC, steadily, over a period of time, keeping metabolic pressure on this cancer cell death pathway.

How did this pathway come to be? Why is it that the body can take a simple plant enzyme and use it for profound healing in many different physiological systems? This endocannabinoid system exists in all animal life, just waiting for its matched exocannabinoid activator. This is interesting. Our own endocannabinoid system covers all cells and nerves; it is the messenger of information flowing between our immune system and the central nervous system (CNS). It is responsible for neuroprotection, and micro-manages the immune system. This is the primary control system that maintains homeostasis; our well being.

Just out of curiosity, how does the work get done at the cellular level, and where does the body make the endocannabinoids? Here we see that endocannabinoids have their origin in nerve cells right at the synapse. When the body is compromised through illness or injury it calls insistently to the endocannabinoid system and directs the immune system to bring healing. If these homeostatic systems are weakened, it should be no surprise that exocannabinoids are therapeutic. It helps the body in the most natural way possible.

====

There is more. But isn't it funny that your own link refutes you? Well I AM amused. You?

[MSimon]

ladajo,

If pot trashes brains why does the body make so many endocannabinoids? Especially between ages 15 to 25. Is your body trying to trash itself? I'm sure with your great medical knowledge you will have a very clear explanation.

[GIThruster]

And I might also note that prohibition enforcement is racist. That should amuse YOU.

And as long as that is true and it is, I wouldn't support the WOD period.

Have you seen any studies about how the various users are apprehended and their behavior patterns? I haven't. If for example it were popular for some groups to smoke weed on the street and others to smoke in private, this would explain the seeming racist statistics. I haven't see any studies that include such variables. For one to conclude from an uninformed position that enforcement is racist is a huge leap. Show evidence of this please. Is there a difference in arrest rates vs. convictions? Do these correlate with free/paid and missing legals assistance? Are there really no details that inform the issue?

I'm sure there are just as I'm sure you're just race baiting. If someone wants to press the race issue they should have some evidence and I haven't seen it. Just lots of vacuous claims.

[GIThruster]

ladajo,

If pot trashes brains why does the body make so many endocannabinoids? Especially between ages 15 to 25. Is your body trying to trash itself? I'm sure with your great medical knowledge you will have a very clear explanation.

He posted the details in another thread, and just as he predicted, you did not bother with them. Why confuse your position with the facts?

[GIThruster]

ladajo,

If pot trashes brains why does the body make so many endocannabinoids? Especially between ages 15 to 25. Is your body trying to trash itself? I'm sure with your great medical knowledge you will have a very clear explanation.

"Frequent use of cannabis, especially in adolescence, is associated with the development of schizophrenia, a chronic neurodevelopmental disorder. During adolescence, when schizophrenia typically presents, profound changes occur in the brain, often through synaptic pruning, a process that endocannabinoids help regulate.72 Using cannabis interferes with adolescent neurodevelopment, and imaging studies associate marijuana use with adverse development of the hippocampus and the cerebellum.73–75 Epidemiologic data associate heavy adolescent use of marijuana with both an earlier onset of schizophrenia and a 2-fold increased risk of developing schizophrenia.76 To be clear, the use of cannabis in adolescence does not cause schizophrenia but increases the risk of its onset, suggesting interplay between marijuana use and genetic predisposition for schizophrenia.77 For people who develop schizophrenia, ongoing use of marijuana is associated with more severe psychosis and impaired performance on tests of attention and impulsivity.78, 79 Marijuana is a psychoactive substance whose psychiatric complications are known to increase with early onset and regular use.

Cannabis use is associated with impairments in memory and cognition. Heavy cannabis users have deficits in the encoding, storage, and retrieval of memory.80 A recent animal model found that cannabis impairs working memory by activating astroglial cannaboid receptors in the hip- pocampus.81 These findings correlate well with the association between heavy marijuana use and bilateral volume reduction of structures involved in memory like the amygdala and hippocampus.82 Marijuana users often perform poorly on tests of executive function, information processing, and visuospatial perception.83

The use of cannabis is more modestly associated with depression and suicide in epidemiologic data. Frequent cannabis use is significantly associated with depressive disorders in bothanimal models and epidemiologic studies.84 Hyperactivity of the endocannabinoid system is associated with impulsivity and suicidality, which is borne out in epidemiologic studies where a significant association is observed between marijuana use and suicidal ideation and attempt.85

Finally, cannabis is the most commonly used and abused illicit substance in the world. In the United States each year, approximately 6500 individuals begin to use marijuana daily, of whom 10–20% will develop cannabis dependence.86, 87 Among people admitted to substance treatment facilities in the United States, marijuana is the most frequently identified illicit substance.88"

[MSimon]

Well let us talk schizophrenia:

At this post: http://rockford-for-safe-access.blogspo ... ideos.html a schizophrenic discusses his experience with high CBD low THC cannabis (video).

Another: http://rockford-for-safe-access.blogspo ... enics.html text only.

Of course the black market is not very good at delivering cannabis with specific ratios of cannabinoids. The schizophrenic may need low THC high CBD cannabis. The Cancer patient high THC high CBD cannabis. Trouble is prohibition prevents us from learning as much as we can as fast as we can. Which is what your link said. Funny, Huh?

DEA Judge Young said in 1988: http://www.ccguide.org/young88.php

12. The therapeutic ratio for prescribed drugs is commonly around 1:10 or lower. Valium, a commonly used prescriptive drug, may cause very serious biological damage if patients use ten times the recommended (therapeutic) dose.

13. There are, of course, prescriptive drugs which have much lower therapeutic ratios. Many of the drugs used to treat patients with cancer, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis are highly toxic. The therapeutic ratio of some of the drugs used in antineoplastic therapies, for example, are regarded as extremely toxic poisons with therapeutic ratios that may fall below 1:1.5. These drugs also have very low LD-50 ratios and can result in toxic, even lethal reactions, while being properly employed.

14. By contrast, marijuana's therapeutic ratio, like its LD-50, is impossible to quantify because it is so high.

15. In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating ten raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death.

16. Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care."

And yet the DEA denies everything the Judge said. Why? Well Upton Sinclair knew why.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his livelihood depends on not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair

[MSimon]

Well GIT - hate to bust yer bubble: From Dec 2013.

Harvard: Marijuana Doesn’t Cause Schizophrenia

Good news for people who’ve worried that smoking too much marijuana (cannabis) — especially as a teenager — might lead to some dramatic problems in the future, even schizophrenia.

New research from Harvard Medical School, in a comparison between families with a history of schizophrenia and those without, finds little support for marijuana use as a cause of schizophrenia.

“The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself,” note the researchers.

The new study is the first family study that, according to the researchers, “examines both non-psychotic cannabis users and non-cannabis user controls as two additional independent samples, enabling the examination of whether the risk for schizophrenia is increased in family members of cannabis users who develop schizophrenia compared with cannabis users who do not and also whether that morbid risk is similar or different from that in family members of schizophrenia patients who never used cannabis.”