infectedmushroom
Bluelighter
^To true.
-
-
AADD Moderators: andyturbo
The Cannabis Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Fieldy
- Start date
- Status
jaurk
Bluelighter
lul :D
It honestly scares me, that it wont be legal by the time I die.
There's not really any movement in Australia, and if there is, it's hard to find.
I've "liked" all of the mj Australia pages and I don't ever seen any big updates.
I guess we'll have to wait for America, UK or some other big country.
Maybe one day someone who's got power will step up.
poledriver
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 11,543
Occasional Pot Smoking Won't Harm Lungs
Occasional Pot Smoking Won't Harm Lungs
http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/Smoking/30593
Occasional Pot Smoking Won't Harm Lungs
Smoking marijuana now and then doesn't appear to hamper lung function, researchers found.
In fact, during a 20-year longitudinal study, patients who occasionally used marijuana actually saw an increase in levels of forced expiratory volume (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC), Stefan Kertesz, MD, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and colleagues reported in the Jan. 11 issues of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
"Up to moderate levels of marijuana use -- by that we mean up to the amount a person would smoke if they had a joint a day for seven years -- there's not a loss of air flow rate, there's not a loss of lung volume," Kertesz told The JAMA Report. "In essence, marijuana doesn't seem to behave like tobacco at those levels of use."
Smoke from marijuana contains many of the same chemicals as tobacco, but it's not clear if it has similar adverse effects on lung function, the researchers wrote, though some work has linked pot with airway inflammation, cough, and wheeze. Action Points
An analysis of over 20 years of data from the more than 5,115-participant CARDIA study found that minimal or moderate smoking of marijuana did not adversely affect pulmonary function.
Some detrimental effect was observed among heavy users, but the number of such individuals in the study was too small to draw firm conclusions.
To assess the different effects on the lungs, Kertesz and colleagues looked at data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study, which collected measurements of pulmonary function and smoking over 20 years for 5,115 patients in the U.S.
Smoking pot was almost as common as smoking cigarettes, but its use was lighter, with a median of two to three episodes per month, they reported.
As expected, they saw that greater tobacco exposure was associated with lower FEV1 and FCV, but the association between marijuana use and pulmonary function wasn't linear, they found.
Lower levels of exposure were associated with higher FEV1 and FCV values; air flow increased by 13 mL per joint-year and lung capacity rose by 20 mL per joint-year, they reported (P<0.001 for both).
If a patient smokes one joint a day for seven years, or one a week for 49 years, there's "no evidence that increasing exposure to marijuana adversely affects pulmonary function," they wrote.
This could be attributed to the way pot smokers inhale deeply, which may stretch the lungs and increase volume or strengthen chest wall muscles, the researchers said.
On the other hand, at higher exposure levels, there was a leveling off or even a reversal of the trend. Air flow was reduced by 2.2 mL per joint-year after smoking daily for 10 years -- although this was of borderline significance (P=0.08) -- and by 3.2 mL per episode if a patient smoked more than 20 times per month (P=0.02).
Among the heaviest users, air flow was reduced, but not significantly so, and that's likely a result of the very small number of users in this group, so estimates of high marijuana exposure may be imprecise. This issue requires further investigation, the researchers said.
Kertesz warned that the findings shouldn't be misinterpreted to suggest that smoking pot is good for your health: "It would be very incorrect to look at this study and say, 'Wow, if I smoke marijuana, that's going to improve my lung health,'" he told The JAMA Report.
Other experts emphasized that point. Robert Glatter, MD, of Lenox Hill Hospital, who wasn't involved in the study, said in an email to MedPage Today that "although marijuana smoking may have some positive effects on appetite and pain control in chronic disease states, it is important to emphasize that regular heavy use can lead to a rapid decline in lung function."
Glatter also noted that even though smoking pot occasionally doesn't appear to harm lung function, "marijuana smoke does contain high levels of tar and can lead to chronic cough, wheezing, and excess production of phlegm that we see in tobacco smokers."
Kertesz and colleagues noted that a positive short-term effect (stretching the lungs to increase volume) and a negative long-term effect (damage from smoke exposure) would result in a non-linear relationship like the one seen in the study.
The study was limited by its reliance on self-reported measures of pot and tobacco smoking; absence of data on other pulmonary function such as diffusing capacity; radiographic information about emphysema; or method of smoking marijuana (cigarette, pipe, bong). It also was limited by the potential of unattributed confounders found in any observational study.
The researchers concluded that occasionally using marijuana, particularly for medicinal purposes such as pain control, management of mood, and other chronic symptoms, may not be harmful to the lungs in the long run.
In fact, during a 20-year longitudinal study, patients who occasionally used marijuana actually saw an increase in levels of forced expiratory volume (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC), Stefan Kertesz, MD, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and colleagues reported in the Jan. 11 issues of the Journal of the American Medical Association.
"Up to moderate levels of marijuana use -- by that we mean up to the amount a person would smoke if they had a joint a day for seven years -- there's not a loss of air flow rate, there's not a loss of lung volume," Kertesz told The JAMA Report. "In essence, marijuana doesn't seem to behave like tobacco at those levels of use."
Smoke from marijuana contains many of the same chemicals as tobacco, but it's not clear if it has similar adverse effects on lung function, the researchers wrote, though some work has linked pot with airway inflammation, cough, and wheeze. Action Points
An analysis of over 20 years of data from the more than 5,115-participant CARDIA study found that minimal or moderate smoking of marijuana did not adversely affect pulmonary function.
Some detrimental effect was observed among heavy users, but the number of such individuals in the study was too small to draw firm conclusions.
To assess the different effects on the lungs, Kertesz and colleagues looked at data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study, which collected measurements of pulmonary function and smoking over 20 years for 5,115 patients in the U.S.
Smoking pot was almost as common as smoking cigarettes, but its use was lighter, with a median of two to three episodes per month, they reported.
As expected, they saw that greater tobacco exposure was associated with lower FEV1 and FCV, but the association between marijuana use and pulmonary function wasn't linear, they found.
Lower levels of exposure were associated with higher FEV1 and FCV values; air flow increased by 13 mL per joint-year and lung capacity rose by 20 mL per joint-year, they reported (P<0.001 for both).
If a patient smokes one joint a day for seven years, or one a week for 49 years, there's "no evidence that increasing exposure to marijuana adversely affects pulmonary function," they wrote.
This could be attributed to the way pot smokers inhale deeply, which may stretch the lungs and increase volume or strengthen chest wall muscles, the researchers said.
On the other hand, at higher exposure levels, there was a leveling off or even a reversal of the trend. Air flow was reduced by 2.2 mL per joint-year after smoking daily for 10 years -- although this was of borderline significance (P=0.08) -- and by 3.2 mL per episode if a patient smoked more than 20 times per month (P=0.02).
Among the heaviest users, air flow was reduced, but not significantly so, and that's likely a result of the very small number of users in this group, so estimates of high marijuana exposure may be imprecise. This issue requires further investigation, the researchers said.
Kertesz warned that the findings shouldn't be misinterpreted to suggest that smoking pot is good for your health: "It would be very incorrect to look at this study and say, 'Wow, if I smoke marijuana, that's going to improve my lung health,'" he told The JAMA Report.
Other experts emphasized that point. Robert Glatter, MD, of Lenox Hill Hospital, who wasn't involved in the study, said in an email to MedPage Today that "although marijuana smoking may have some positive effects on appetite and pain control in chronic disease states, it is important to emphasize that regular heavy use can lead to a rapid decline in lung function."
Glatter also noted that even though smoking pot occasionally doesn't appear to harm lung function, "marijuana smoke does contain high levels of tar and can lead to chronic cough, wheezing, and excess production of phlegm that we see in tobacco smokers."
Kertesz and colleagues noted that a positive short-term effect (stretching the lungs to increase volume) and a negative long-term effect (damage from smoke exposure) would result in a non-linear relationship like the one seen in the study.
The study was limited by its reliance on self-reported measures of pot and tobacco smoking; absence of data on other pulmonary function such as diffusing capacity; radiographic information about emphysema; or method of smoking marijuana (cigarette, pipe, bong). It also was limited by the potential of unattributed confounders found in any observational study.
The researchers concluded that occasionally using marijuana, particularly for medicinal purposes such as pain control, management of mood, and other chronic symptoms, may not be harmful to the lungs in the long run.
http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/Smoking/30593
drug_mentor
Bluelight Crew
Hey TripppAR I merged your thread into this one. I agree with you it has relevance to AusDD but its tidier to keep it in the cannabis thread, especially since you linked to it in here as well.
it's tricky, in such a conservative country, to stick your neck out for a cause like this.
i mean, australians are very, very critical of their public figures.
to use the current situation as an example, i see a lot of anger directed at people like the prime minister or bob brown - not just the general public, but the media too. and not only legitimate anger and frustration, but insulting, personal, vitriolic attacks.
now i do not want to talk about whether we agree with either of these people, but if you look at the reaction they cause - amongst what seems to be the mainstream - not just a bunch of fringe dwelling crazies - you get some idea as to why nobody is willing to seriously champion the cause of cannabis in this country. it's a double bind; as well as being controversial, cannabis is also illegal.
basically, if you want to stand up and state that cannabis should be legal to the press and the community, people are going to assume that you use it. you would be forever associated with cannabis in the public mind.
if you don't actually use it, this would be an unnecessary reputation, to some - a smear. if you do use it, you open yourself up to police harassment and being a target. it would become very risky for you to have on your possession at any time, as it is still illegal!
part of the problem with pro-cannabis campaigns is that they can easily be led astray by well-meaning, but ultimately damaging individuals who reinforce some of the public's more prejudiced views about weed and people who use it. because these people have a lot less to lose than people who are concerned about their public image (for work or family reasons, for fear of being branded a criminal) they are often enthusiastic campaigners. in the game of winning public perception, the last thing you need is a bunch of stoned people stumbling around living up to all the stereotypes we want to challenge. the media love that simplistic shit.
whilst most australians under the age of 50 would most likely have come across cannabis at least one point in their lives, and it is far from an unpopular drug, it is still lumped with a stigma for a big part of the community. hard to believe when all of your friends and acquaintances smoke, but apparently it is true.
whether it is because people associate cannabis with hippies and the cultural shifts of the 60s and 70s or because it is illegal, or a so-called 'gateway drug', it is still a minority of people who would like to see it legalised.
while there are plenty of people who could easily put an enormous amount of reasoned, logical arguments forward as to why we should reform cannabis (and other drug) laws, there are a lot of people who will automatically dismiss them as "hippies", "deadbeats", "druggies" and so fourth. these are people that cling to a certain understanding of society, that have heard a lifetime of drug scare campaigns and have taken some of it on board. they might not be scared of marijuana, but they might be scared of their kids trying it. that is the kind of psychology propaganda works on. we can't change these people, but we can offer information.
we can have calm, unemotional debate, and we can share our thoughts without getting upset if people don't agree with them. unfortunately the media does not make this easy, as conflict and drama sells more papers, gathers more listeners or viewers. you could make a hundred valid points, but the headlines the next day will be some christian "family" lobby group's hysterical response.
i'm not really offering any answers here - just my own analysis.
there is a danger in thinking that cyber campaigns actually achieve something, because once we've clicked 'like' or signed the petition, we feel good - like we've done our bit. in fact, we haven't really done anything, but the fact that we feel like we have stops us from taking the next step. cyber activism has many valid uses and potentials, but it can also take the wind out of the sails of certain campaigns.
the idea of a mainstream politician standing up for cannabis is unlikely for lots of reasons - it is political suicide, for one - but even people who aren't career politicians would find the heat of public scrutiny too much on this issue. unless you loved your cannabis, it wouldn't be a road worth going down - and that's not to say that only stoners want to see the many benefits of law reform - just that you would instantly (and forevermore!) be "the pot guy/girl". and if you love your cannabis that much, you might be unwilling to jeopardise your peace of mind by becoming the public face of pot. imagine the paranoia!
i know some of you will disagree with the 'political suicide' remark (it should be a huge proportion of the population, right?) but liberalisation of cannabis used to be a policy platform of the greens.
now, without getting in to what any of us think of them (seriously don't want to discuss it) - they were pressured to drop that on the basis of persistent criticism, particularly in the corporate media, several years before they had even come close to forming a minority government or holding much power. in terms of right-wing spin, the legalisation of cannabis is a real political lead weight, in this country at the moment, anyway.
what it comes down to is that the various threads of the e s t a b l i s h m e n t is in cahoots when it comes to drug prohibition.
the cops and the government and the media and the education system and the health system and pretty much any institution you care to mention. you stand up against it, and you stand up against them.
this is not a conspiracy theory - it is not a conspiracy - it is just the system. when the story is "pot is illegal", "pot is dangerous", "pot is unhealthy", "pot destroys young minds" and so on, you find that practically everyone works against even the slightest opening up on the issue. pot smokers are disenfranchised for all of the above reasons, therefore their opinions, wellbeing and needs are not considered as part of public discourse. drugs are a bogeyman that we are all expected to stand up against - our society defines itself by what it shuns.
so - i have my own tiny little microcosmic approach.
for the last few years, i've changed my attitude to smoking pot in public. in high school we'd hide in the bush smoking pot, or maybe having a cone in a toilet cubicle. a relaxing backyard smoke was a luxury.
these days however, i really enjoy sparking a joint casually in a public place. i don't mean flaunting it, i don't mean to be challenging, showing off or asking to get arrested - i just mean treating it for what it really is; a harmless puff of herb that will most likely turn you into a more mellow, gregarious citizen. you won't be any more likely to say sleazy things to people's girlfriends or try and pick fights with whoever else is around. the most effect it has on those around you (unless you're in a really confined space - obviously pick your moments!) is a sweet smell in the air for a few minutes.
for me it is a liberating act that blows away some of the cobwebs of paranoia that have been built up in what we are raised being told about drugs. unless it's unwise to do so, i'd rather not hide it away like it's shameful.
i am a streetwise person, and i'm not advocating everybody does this all the time for the sake of getting a reaction or being a rebel, for the sake of pissing people off or making a scene.
obviously there are lots of people who aren't comfortable enough with the effects of weed to smoke in public, but i think we need to stop thinking of it as a big nasty dangerous drug. more and more evidence seems to be suggesting that for most people it is one of the safest drugs known to man.
we have an uphill battle when it comes to having full social acceptance. but the closer we get to that, the closer we will get to legal acceptance. i don't think we can have one without the other, and i don't think it will ever be legalised without almost full public support. it seems like we've had a nation-wide shift away from the decriminalisation that occurred in a few states a few years ago, to the extent that a lot of (most?) states have banned bongs, which had been sold openly since the 1970s. a real regression.
so - i treat it like a normal everyday thing, which it fucking well is. smoking a joint need not be a revolutionary act, but i think we need to make it one. homosexuality was illegal only a few decades ago. now there is a mainstream debate about allowing same sex couples to marry. this is a progressive victory in a country like a australia.
what was the positive affirmation gay people have long used to stand up and be counted? it's PRIDE.
that's how i feel about smoking a joint - i feel proud.
* i know i say this every second post, but i'm sorry this has turned into a fucking essay. again.
i'm trying to keep shit brief, i'm just a passionate motherfucker.
TripppAR
Bluelighter
Nah true! Nice wrap up on the whole thing there....
And I believe even if the majority were for legalisation, that ISN'T the driving factor! Just look at the carbon tax... over 85% plus AGAINST it...government PROMISES THE PUBLIC it won't happen... and then lies to your face and puts it through.
I mean... off that example alone it makes me loose faith. Not that I have ANY in government and it would be incredible naive and fool hardy to have any at all...
Also I enjoy blazing up in public now... I don't really care if I get a few greasys from passer byers haha..! Its funny. I sometimes have mates that will be a little sketchy but i'm like dude.. we aren't doing anything wrong. They wouldnt give a smoker a greasy but cause we are puffing a slightly different looking cigi we get looks? haha.
Always blaze in pubic at festivals, pubs I'm a little more discrete but still get it cranking in a good beer garden.. I used to smoke a joint walking home every day after work and believe me MORE TIMES THEN NOT I was asked for a puff haha. One bloke was surprised when I told him he was smoking legit white rhino one day, really nice stuff.
Even 2 rastas early morning when I was having a blunt on the way in to work stopped me upon seeing me and had a good laugh haha. "On de blunts already mon? tis early mornin'!" hahahaha... good times.
Got plenty of shitty stories bout grog but!
And I believe even if the majority were for legalisation, that ISN'T the driving factor! Just look at the carbon tax... over 85% plus AGAINST it...government PROMISES THE PUBLIC it won't happen... and then lies to your face and puts it through.
I mean... off that example alone it makes me loose faith. Not that I have ANY in government and it would be incredible naive and fool hardy to have any at all...
Also I enjoy blazing up in public now... I don't really care if I get a few greasys from passer byers haha..! Its funny. I sometimes have mates that will be a little sketchy but i'm like dude.. we aren't doing anything wrong. They wouldnt give a smoker a greasy but cause we are puffing a slightly different looking cigi we get looks? haha.
Always blaze in pubic at festivals, pubs I'm a little more discrete but still get it cranking in a good beer garden.. I used to smoke a joint walking home every day after work and believe me MORE TIMES THEN NOT I was asked for a puff haha. One bloke was surprised when I told him he was smoking legit white rhino one day, really nice stuff.
Even 2 rastas early morning when I was having a blunt on the way in to work stopped me upon seeing me and had a good laugh haha. "On de blunts already mon? tis early mornin'!" hahahaha... good times.
Got plenty of shitty stories bout grog but!
TripppAR
Bluelighter
I remember the days I wouldn't leave the house without clear-eyes to go get munchies haha! "THEY KNOW!!!! THEY ALL KNOW!!!!" ROFL!!!!
These days I look forward to going for a fish and taking a few nice joints down to the local spot.. big deal if a few peeps smell it, right? Its only a erb' mon. Meanwhile they are sucking down beers and smoking cigi's and finishing dinner with coffee haha.
Who is doing more damage?
These days I look forward to going for a fish and taking a few nice joints down to the local spot.. big deal if a few peeps smell it, right? Its only a erb' mon. Meanwhile they are sucking down beers and smoking cigi's and finishing dinner with coffee haha.
Who is doing more damage?
I remember once i had a nice chop at home, only to have my brother come into my room and suspect i was baked, i remember him saying look at me, being in my baked stage, i looked at him knowing he's got nothing and cant pin me being ripped. Thank god for clear eyes!!! I really wish the lights in 7-11 were not so bright....:D
TripppAR
Bluelighter
Word... especially when your trippin' goin' in to buy nangs at 3am. ^^^^
Demanufacturer
Bluelighter
Ok here is one for you guys.. How long do you hold in your hits?
I've heard that the majority of active stuff is absorbed by your lungs within 3 seconds but i don't think this is true, probably more like double that.
When I'm running low on bud I usually hold it in for 4-6 seconds and it seems to get you reasonably higher. When its in abundance however its a simple inhale exhale because I'm a bit worried about the negative affects it seems to have on my lungs and throat the next morning.
Just read a news article yesterday saying that weed smoke isn't harmful to your lungs, i need to look into that a bit more but because from first hand experience this doesn't ring entirely true.
I've heard that the majority of active stuff is absorbed by your lungs within 3 seconds but i don't think this is true, probably more like double that.
When I'm running low on bud I usually hold it in for 4-6 seconds and it seems to get you reasonably higher. When its in abundance however its a simple inhale exhale because I'm a bit worried about the negative affects it seems to have on my lungs and throat the next morning.
Just read a news article yesterday saying that weed smoke isn't harmful to your lungs, i need to look into that a bit more but because from first hand experience this doesn't ring entirely true.
more like 58% mate - if you believe opinion polls (which consist of corporate news agencies calling a set number of 'random' houses to ask potentially loaded questions about an issue - ie a crock).
for someone who is into conspiracy, you haven't noticed that the campaign against pricing carbon has been led/funded/(mis)informed by the fossil fuel industry? i mean...people think it is a tax that is going to noticeably push all the prices up. that's just not true.
as far as i'm concerned it only goes to reaffirm the point that we (the public) are an easily-led bunch, even giving over to support big business, the oil giants and the other motherfuckers who are killing this planet. incidentally, the same people who had cannabis banned in the first place - petrochemical companies. leading us to doom and shitty drugs.
coincidence? i think not. how's that for a conspiracy FACT?
TripppAR
Bluelighter
Yeh mate I'm aware how opinion polls work. Although the majority of people I speak to in my work/ day to day adventures seems to think a tax isn't the best way forward. Although if you believe carbon dioxide to be a pollutant then I'm afraid we cannot even discuss the matter any further because that is insanity.
In school I learnt that carbon dioxide is what plants breathe. In fact if I was to pump carbondioxide from say a welding tank into a grow tent marijuana plants will grow up to 5 x as fast and grow WAY stronger and healthier. Also a volcano last year released more carbon in 3 days then all our cars in the last 50 years and plants/ tree's are thriving in surrounding areas.
The whole thing is a con bigger then religion it actually aims to be the NEW religion. It really is a matter of faith when you think about it.. most people don't do any research and still believe we are in a warming phase when in fact we are cooling! They got busted so had to change to climat change instead of global warming... and of course the climate is changing it always has and always will with or without us here!
back on topic. Some latest news on dispensaries.
http://blog.norml.org/2012/01/12/ju...s-state-licensed-colorado-cannabis-providers/
In school I learnt that carbon dioxide is what plants breathe. In fact if I was to pump carbondioxide from say a welding tank into a grow tent marijuana plants will grow up to 5 x as fast and grow WAY stronger and healthier. Also a volcano last year released more carbon in 3 days then all our cars in the last 50 years and plants/ tree's are thriving in surrounding areas.
The whole thing is a con bigger then religion it actually aims to be the NEW religion. It really is a matter of faith when you think about it.. most people don't do any research and still believe we are in a warming phase when in fact we are cooling! They got busted so had to change to climat change instead of global warming... and of course the climate is changing it always has and always will with or without us here!
back on topic. Some latest news on dispensaries.
http://blog.norml.org/2012/01/12/ju...s-state-licensed-colorado-cannabis-providers/
see, i knew mentioning australian politics beyond "drugs are good" would make somebody argue this ignorant horseshit.
it's just plain misinformation mate - spread by such intellectual heavyweights as alan jones and that monckton phoney Lord creep. if you think humans aren't effecting the world with atmospheric pollution, you're deluded.
this is the kind of battle we're facing - convincing a nation of people that aren't actually capable of making informed decisions because they believe the shit preached to them by these gods of human stupidity - and yes, i'm talking about drug law reform now.
but the hordes of greedy dumbfucks that believe the push to save the planet is a con (particularly in this country) highlight the mentality we are dealing with.
cannabis/hemp has long been championed by the green movement because it is a sustainable option for making fuels, various materials, resins paper, etc.
if you look back to the days of ansligner and the original prohibition of cannabis he enacted, there is a lot of well-founded speculation that he was working with the duponts and other oil industry figures who made their business from petrochemicals and saw a huge market in creating materials from oil that were (at the time) made from such frustratingly natural sources as hemp. and, at the time, oil was plentiful.
it was then denigrated as a 'dangerous madness-causing drug' under the name "marijuana" (to make it sound foreign and play on the racist fears of white america) and mislead people away from knowing they were talking about a familiar crop!
i'm sure you've heard it all before, blah blah, but i find this argument that environmentalism is trying to con us all out of trashing the planet (as is our god-given right, surely?) offensive and devolved, to say the least.
at least when we crawl back into the oceans after re-living our cro-magnon phase, it will be dead of any life to compete with but i suppose that is just a natural occurance too?
and i have to mention that you should do your homework - nobody was "busted" - the "climategate" "conspiracy" has been dismissed by the majority of analysts as a beat-up.
the earth is NOT cooling. man-made climate change has NOT been debunked.
that's a lie, and unless you are a climate scientist (which i really doubt), you are not qualified to even begin to interpret such data, it's beyond your understanding, no matter what you've read. the only people who are capable of understanding the EXTREMELY complex data involved in analysing climate patterns are scientists that work in that field. do i have "faith" in them, over...say, commercial media sources, or oil firm PR people? you betcha.
the people pushing this agenda are paid by the fossil fuel industry or its interests.
just like the people telling us that cannabis is dangerous and should never be accepted are part of the prohibition industry. there are a lot of similarities in the way people are manipulated in both debates.
this doubt that is out there in the community is all hot air, as your arguments have proven. they're pretty convincing...if you're taken in by simplistic arguments or you hate hippies.
same as the cannabis debate!
if you're going to make such a claims about something you don't understand, you could be a little bit less arrogant about it. this anti-green shit makes me sick - at least make your own mind up without listening to all the rednecks and thinking you're informed.
anyway, back to cannabis - no, it will never be legalised in australia.
people here are too right-wing and too suspicious of change. the prevailing attitude seems to be increasingly one of fear and superstition. the overfed peasants are the majority in this country, and so long as they have their football and beer, the masses will not be open to new ideas, it's just not how things happen in australia in 2012.
no progression will happen here unless we have a major, major catastrophe that wipes out a large chunk of the population and changes everything.
ps trippar, we've both had our say so let's leave it at that now and not totally derail the thread, huh?
Jakeperson
Bluelighter
If pro-cannabis people don't believe that it will ever be legal, who will?
Giving up is not an option, who cares if it isn't in our life time? It's a good goal.
Giving up is not an option, who cares if it isn't in our life time? It's a good goal.
poledriver
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 11,543
saying something will NEVER be seems unrealistic, especially something like pot being made legal, with such a strong push in America and half the population polled wonting it to be legal, there seems a chance to me, especially since we follow alot of the American trends, even if it is 10-15 yrs behind them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_country
If a few other countries take the step first, and do make it fully legal, and so many people and politicians here see it doesn't change much when it is (except making the government a shit load more in tax), then who knows what may happen, even if it is along way in the future.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_country
If a few other countries take the step first, and do make it fully legal, and so many people and politicians here see it doesn't change much when it is (except making the government a shit load more in tax), then who knows what may happen, even if it is along way in the future.
The mission today is to graft some scions from a semi-mature white widow onto a rootstock from Mali to be grown outdoors. Of the 5x WW seeds I germinated this year 3 went to male quite early 
and one got yomped by hoppers, so this is it. I'm unable to grow under lights so, provided the grafts take, the rest is up to me and the elements. The Mali plants typically get to 3+ metres though the buds are airy and lightweight on arching branches compared to the compact growth of the WW. The Mali buds deliver a creeping, long-lasting heady buzz but I'm hoping the WW will retain the punch and body-load I prefer. So, is anyone else out there still grafting for fun or effect these days, or can't people be arsed trying?
and one got yomped by hoppers, so this is it. I'm unable to grow under lights so, provided the grafts take, the rest is up to me and the elements. The Mali plants typically get to 3+ metres though the buds are airy and lightweight on arching branches compared to the compact growth of the WW. The Mali buds deliver a creeping, long-lasting heady buzz but I'm hoping the WW will retain the punch and body-load I prefer. So, is anyone else out there still grafting for fun or effect these days, or can't people be arsed trying?
TripppAR
Bluelighter
Carbon Dioxide is good for the cannabis plants and is good for the earth! Did you guys know?
hehe
Mah plants SUCK that shit down on the reg and grow extra big for me and give me extra oxygen for ME to breathe!
hehe
Mah plants SUCK that shit down on the reg and grow extra big for me and give me extra oxygen for ME to breathe!
- Status