Texas Cannabis

[toddnjoyce]

My post had nothing to do with yours.
I merely stated what I have been taught and researched to be true.
Sorry if my timing indicated otherwise.

No worries. I may have taken it out if context.

I do believe however it falls into my previous comment about jumping off a bridge because everyone else does.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Pot should be legal already....

Why?

The very, very limited, studies around medicinal qualities only indicate it may be useful in a limited number of scenarios.

Again, just because another state, where YOU can legally, freely, and easily relocate to agrees it’s a good thing to jump off a bridge doesn’t require this state to do so, just because other states have done is.

 

[Younggun]

I believe the legitimacy of studies for the numerous health benefits of pot about as much as I believe studies that promote homeopathy.

It's the least persuasive argument I've heard for recreational use.


And if reading through my posts sounds like I'm going back and forth sitting on the fence, it's because I am.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

Every individual case is different, results aren't written in stone....

 

[toddnjoyce]

And if reading through my posts sounds like I'm going back and forth sitting on the fence, it's because I am.

As am I, @Younggun. Evolving, as it were. Please don’t take my questions as critical of you or you views.

The questions and philosophies being discussed (not debated) help me better understand my own beliefs and inform my beliefs.

You, and several others have been a ‘net positive’ in that. Even if we wind up not agreeing, this thread ‘wins’ in the dialogue and thought provoking category.

 

[C_Hallbert]

If the fact that cannabinoids become sequestered in human tissue and remains detectable in urine for months doesn’t cause you to question its use, I don’t know what else to say. Marijuana is not a narcotic, opioid or an analgesic, so it doesn’t affect pain, it is just a mind altering substance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Younggun]

As am I, @Younggun. Evolving, as it were. Please don’t take my questions as critical of you or you views.

The questions and philosophies being discussed (not debated) help me better understand my own beliefs and inform my beliefs.

You, and several others have been a ‘net positive’ in that. Even if we wind up not agreeing, this thread ‘wins’ in the dialogue and thought provoking category.

I've not been bothered by any responses. I can see both sides of the debate easily as I have personal objections to both it's use and it's criminalization.

It's perfectly possible to use marijuana just as responsibly as alcohol and I believe people should absolutely be able to do as they wish so long as that action doesn't violate anyone else's rights.

I can sit and write an essay rebutting my own arguments for either side but if I were told tomorrow that I must make the decision whether or not it would be legalized for recreational use I would have to say yes for the reason stated above.

I would prefer that society get its shit together though so things like this wouldn't be such divisive issues. I doubt anyone would give a shit if a portion of the population chose to take a hit or two on Friday evening. Hell, lot of people do and just keep it to themselves.

 

[Younggun]

If the fact that cannabinoids become sequestered in human tissue and remains detectable in urine for months doesn’t cause you to question its use, I don’t know what else to say. Marijuana is not a narcotic, opioid or an analgesic, so it doesn’t affect pain, it is just a mind altering substance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Analgesic is a clinical classification. Lack of classification isn't proof that it doesn't have the same effect.

As far as being detectable for months, pretty much irrelevant. Almost any substance, including those which are deadly, has an amount in which it's considered completely meaningless.

So, unless you can provide numbers for THC blood content required to have a mind altering effects for the majority of the population, as well as the ability for THC stored in body fat to be metabolized at a rate sufficient to reach that content...it's pretty much irrelevant.

 

[rman]

this thread has done the same for me. I'm completely pro-pot for medicinal uses, contrary to what other believe. I've had a shit ton of studies, hearsay, and actual doctors lead to believe it's more than a correlation.

but as stated, the recreational aspect, which I also think is just fine for those who partake, has a tendency to attract the trash.

Also, being a California transplant, have been around just about a gazillion stones, and have yet to see it cause any issues, dangers, or problems. The losers who smoke pot are losers for other reasons. I know just as many successful and productive stoners.

Sent from my SIG Sauer

 

[easy rider]

If the fact that cannabinoids become sequestered in human tissue and remains detectable in urine for months doesn’t cause you to question its use, I don’t know what else to say. Marijuana is not a narcotic, opioid or an analgesic, so it doesn’t affect pain, it is just a mind altering substance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you have research on this or is that just a belief? Or do studies that say the contrary not fit your way of thinking?
And when it comes to drugs, define mind altering, since many pain medications fall into that line.

 

[C_Hallbert]

My belief regarding long term persistence of cannabinoids detectable in Urinalysis is from experience on a Hospital Safety Committee over about 24 yrs reviewing monthly reports on random testing, reviewing statements from personnel, and discussion with Registered Laboratory Technologists related to Testing Limitations, Detectable Ranges, Persistence and potential Wrong positive results.

My belief regarding the potential persistent psychological effects that might occur while the drug is still present In Urinalysis was established during my CLEET Training in 1987.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[easy rider]

A lot has changed in 30 years.

 

[benenglish]

My belief regarding the potential persistent psychological effects that might occur while the drug is still present In Urinalysis was established during my CLEET Training in 1987.

Have you revisited that? I know that a great deal of what I knew/was taught 30 years ago has since turned out to be really, really wrong.

 

[Vaquero]

We've all been lied to.
On a lot of subjects.

 

[toddnjoyce]

My belief regarding long term persistence of cannabinoids detectable in Urinalysis is from experience on a Hospital Safety Committee over about 24 yrs reviewing monthly reports on random testing, reviewing statements from personnel, and discussion with Registered Laboratory Technologists related to Testing Limitations, Detectable Ranges, Persistence and potential Wrong positive results.

My belief regarding the potential persistent psychological effects that might occur while the drug is still present In Urinalysis was established during my CLEET Training in 1987.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t believe anyone is trying To change your mind here: I think there is a genuine curiosity to better understand.

For persistence, I agree, based o a Significant number of studies that THC is the psychoactive component and it can remain detectable and impair cognitive ability for at least 30 days, strain dependent.

 

[Younggun]

Some interesting information on the subject.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037578/#!po=45.5882

 

[Texas42]

There really aren’t any novel arguments here.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Some interesting information on the subject.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037578/#!po=45.5882

Quite interesting indeed, especially with respect to decision-making, which is the required of a free society.

“Cannabis appears to continue to exert impairing effects in executive functions even after 3 weeks of abstinence and beyond. While basic attentional and working memory abilities are largely restored, the most enduring and detectable deficits are seen in decision-making, concept formation and planning.”

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I don’t believe anyone is trying To change your mind here: I think there is a genuine curiosity to better understand.

For persistence, I agree, based o a Significant number of studies that THC is the psychoactive component and it can remain detectable and impair cognitive ability for at least 30 days, strain dependent.

Do you really feel someone could remain impaired 20-30 days after getting high?

ETA: I still am skeptical even after reading that.

 

[toddnjoyce]

Do you really feel someone could remain impaired 20-30 days after getting high?

ETA: I still am skeptical even after reading that.

Define impaired. I do believe that reduced cognitive abilities persist as long as THC is detectable. Currently that benchmark is set at four weeks.

Does ‘reduced’ = “impaired”? I can’t answer and there isn’t an established standard for THC impairment that I’m aware of.