Is it wrong to not let a pregnant chick smoke weed?

[thugpassion]

Every hippie chick Iv known thats gotten pregnant has continued to smoke herb, and thier kids have turned out well. I think theres a big difference between "drugs" and marijana. Smoking herb, especialy in the latest mounths of pregnancy, after the babys developed dosent seem that negitive.

 

[phr]

Everyone who says it's ok to smoke weed while pregnant; what are your feelings on a 2 year old smoking weed?

Of course I'm assuming the same frequency as the pregnant smoker, let's say 2-3 times a week...

 

[DarthMom]

see my post on the previous page, read the link. if it is used medicinally, i have no problem with that.

 

[Khadijah]

I can't believe this thread. Judging by the responses of many in this thread (lacey k included), you advocate the administration of smoked drugs to an unborn child? You're inhaling smoke directly into your lungs, putting a great deal of carcinogens and chemicals into your bloodstream (and in effect into your baby's bloodstream). Not to mention that the womb is the most crucial developmental stage of the child. She is not 'her own person', she has another life inside of her, one that has no say in the affairs of it well-being. Unlike the abortion question, the fetus is most likely going to live and hopefully live a productive life. And if that mother is too retarded not to put down the pipe for nine months out of her life, someone else has to step in and judge. Would you force your 3 year old child to smoke weed? How about 10? Because that's exactly what you're doing when you smoke weed while pregnant. Until smoking marijuana can be proven to be as safe as drinking water while pregnant, it isn't a good idea, period.

Are you OK with mothers taking prescription drugs during pregnancy? What about drinking diet soda? What about riding in a convertible, where you inhale tons of toxic fumes from the cars ahead of you? What about......

My point is that there is many things way worse than smoking weed that people do while pregnant, and there is nothing to show that smoking weed while pregnant damages the fetus. So, whether you want to say "OMG UR MAKIN UR KIDZ ZMOKE WEED!" or not, it still dont harm the kid. I dont really give a fuck about whatever else you want to say about it, cuz the fact is STILL that it aint damaging to the fetus. So, your rhetoric dont really apply at all. Its a moot point, it aint related becuz the goal is not hurting the kid, and weed dont hurt the kid, the goal is achieved.

I still think its hilarious that marijuana been used for thousands of years for the purpose of alleviating pregnancy pain, and somehow now its this demonic thing to do.



No one would even be saying this shit if weed was legal. its so funny the way that its impossible for people to get the propaganda outta their minds. I dont say use heroin while youre pregnant, or mushrooms, or nothing like that. but weed is HERE to be used exactly for shit like this, and there aint no way to justify willfully ignoring the evidence that there is no proof to show marijuana harms a developing fetus. Cry all you want about it, but you have a idea, versus a fact. thats all i need to know.

Have fun with your girl when she gets pregnant someday and is flipping out and you wont let her smoke some weed to deal with the pain, insomnia, aches, nausea, and general feeling like complete shit. Give her some good ol thalidomide instead.

 

[kultron]

Are you OK with mothers taking prescription drugs during pregnancy? What about drinking diet soda? What about riding in a convertible, where you inhale tons of toxic fumes from the cars ahead of you? What about......

My point is that there is many things way worse than smoking weed that people do while pregnant, and there is nothing to show that smoking weed while pregnant damages the fetus. So, whether you want to say "OMG UR MAKIN UR KIDZ ZMOKE WEED!" or not, it still dont harm the kid. I dont really give a fuck about whatever else you want to say about it, cuz the fact is STILL that it aint damaging to the fetus. So, your rhetoric dont really apply at all. Its a moot point, it aint related becuz the goal is not hurting the kid, and weed dont hurt the kid, the goal is achieved.

I still think its hilarious that marijuana been used for thousands of years for the purpose of alleviating pregnancy pain, and somehow now its this demonic thing to do.

No one would even be saying this shit if weed was legal. its so funny the way that its impossible for people to get the propaganda outta their minds. I dont say use heroin while youre pregnant, or mushrooms, or nothing like that. but weed is HERE to be used exactly for shit like this, and there aint no way to justify willfully ignoring the evidence that there is no proof to show marijuana harms a developing fetus. Cry all you want about it, but you have a idea, versus a fact. thats all i need to know.

Have fun with your girl when she gets pregnant someday and is flipping out and you wont let her smoke some weed to deal with the pain, insomnia, aches, nausea, and general feeling like complete shit. Give her some good ol thalidomide instead.

I am not okay with any of the things you listed, but none of these are even remotely comprable to the negative effects of inhaling smoke from combusted plant matter.

It has been proven that tobacco smoke is harmful to the fetus. How is cannabis any different? Smoke is smoke, something that humans aren't made in inhale. You have not proved anything. Show me 5 seperate sources that come to a consensus that inhaling marijuana smoke is not harmful (must be smoking, eating or pure thc doesn't count but I'm still against that too).

I would still say this if weed was legal. Your ad hominem is worthless.

You make getting pregnant seem like a death sentence. My great grandma had 14 children and never touched marijuana in her life. Same with my grandma, who had 5, and my mom who had 2. No amount of pain unless life threatening justifies the administration of any drug, no matter how tame, to an unborn child. Oh and you still didn't answer my question about administrating cannabis to 3 year old children. Are you fine with that?

 

[Nwalmaer]

say what you like you

Its her choice if she wants to smoke

However if its your pot then you could refuse to share because shes pregnent
its what id do

"Not going to tell you what ot do but I dont have to give your this and I dont want to"

 

[Coolio]

From http://www.thesite.org/drinkanddrugs/drugsafety/drugsandyourbody/cannabisandlungcancer

This would seem to be in direct contradiction to the findings of Dr Louis Harris from the Medical College of Virginia though, who discovered that delta-8 THC, delta-9 THC and cannabinol (all components of THC) are quite active as anti-cancer agents.
...
However there is a body of evidence which suggests that it is radioactive elements within the chemical fertilisers used on tobacco plants that causes cancer. The phosphates used in the fertilisers are rich in radium 226 which breaks down into two daughter elements: lead 210 and polonium 210, which each have a huge half life (they stay toxic for a very long time). These radioactive particles become airborne, and attach themselves to the fine hairs on tobacco leaves.

From http://www.ccguide.org.uk/nocancer.php

The U.S. federal government has failed to make public its own 1994 study that undercuts its position that marijuana is carcinogenic - a $2 million study by the National Toxicology Program. The program's deputy director, John Bucher says the study found absolutely no evidence of cancer. In fact, animals that received THC had fewer cancers. Bucher denies his agency had been pressured to shelve the report, saying the delay in making it public was due to a personnel shortage.

An 8-year study at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) School of Medicine, concluded that long-term smokers of cannabis do not experience a greater annual decline in lung functions than non-smokers.
Researchers said:
"Findings from the present long-term follow-up study of heavy, habitual marijuana smokers argue against the concept that the continuing heavy use of marijuana is a significant factor for the development of [chronic lung disease]"
"No difference were noted between even quite heavy marijuana smoking and nonsmoking of marijuana."

Michael Roth's "preliminary evidence" suggesting that the THC in marijuana may promote a carcinogenic effect (This week, 25 July, p 16) flies in the face of Louis S. Harris's findings in Analgesic and Anti-Tumor Potential of The Cannabinoids (Medical College of Virginia, 1972) that delta-8 THC, delta-9 THC and cannabinol are quite active as anticancer agents.

At the time of Harris's research, no anticancer agent that was much more potent than delta-9 THC existed and no compounds differentiated between tumour and normal cells the way delta-9 THC does. Considering that delta-9 THC alone increased survival in cancerous rats by 36 per cent, it seems very unlikely that THC promotes carcinogenic effects.

THC's known anticarcinogenic properties are probably the reason the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia, has never been able to trace any cancers to marijuana use.

From http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4350642.stm

Dr Robert Melamede, of the University of Colorado, said that, while chemically the two were similar, tobacco was more carcinogenic.

He said the difference was mainly due to nicotine in tobacco, whereas cannabis may inhibit cancer because of the presence of the chemical THC.

From http://www.qmul.ac.uk/news/newsrelease.php?news_id=175

Researchers investigating the role of cannabis in cancer therapy reveal it has the potential to destroy leukaemia cells, in a paper published in the March 2006 edition of Letters in Drug Design & Discovery. Led by Dr Wai Man Liu, at Barts and the London, Queen Mary’s School of Medicine and Dentistry, the team has followed up on their findings of 2005 which showed that the main active ingredient in cannabis, tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, has the potential to be used effectively against some forms of cancer. Dr Liu has since moved to the Institute of Cancer in Sutton where he continues his work into investigating the potential therapeutic benefit of new anti-cancer agents.

From http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11630-cannabis-compound-slows-lung-cancer-in-mice.html

Ramesh Ganju at the Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts, US, and colleagues deposited human lung cancer cells under the skin of a dozen mice and allowed the tumours to grow in the animals for about two weeks. They then began giving half of these mice daily injections of about 250 micrograms of synthetic THC right next to the tumours for three weeks. A cannabis cigarette may contain as much as 150 milligrams of THC.

Tumours in the control mice averaged about 0.6 grams in weight by the end of the five-week trial. By comparison, those in the mice that received THC weighed just 0.25 grams – 60% less.
Blood blocker

In a separate experiment to test whether THC could slow the spread of cancer cells (metastasis), the researchers injected human lung cancer cells into the tail veins of mice to mimic such a spread. The team immediately started giving half of these animals a daily 250 microgram injection of THC for three weeks. They found 60% fewer cancerous lesions in the mice that received THC compared to the control animals.

Ganju believes that THC inhibits cancer growth by blocking the formation of blood vessels within tumours. Previous tests on human lung cancer cells in a dish suggested that THC blocked the signalling of a substance known as epidermal growth factor (EGF). Under normal circumstances, EGF may promote blood vessel development, Ganju says.

Previous studies have also found that THC can shrink brain tumours.

 

[kultron]

None of those studies conclusively prove that smoking cannabis while pregnant has no negative consequences on unborn children. You fail.

 

[Coolio]

From http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/medical/can-babies.htm

Objective. To identify neurobehavioral effects of prenatal marijuana exposure on neonates in rural Jamaica.

Design. Ethnographic field studies and standardized neurobehavior assessments during the neonatal period.

Setting. Rural Jamaica in heavy-marijuana-using population.

Participants. Twenty-four Jamaican neonates exposed to marijuana prenatally and 20 nonexposed neonates.

Measurements and main results. Exposed and nonexposed neonates were compared at 3 days and 1 month old, using the Brazelton Neonatal Assessment Scale, including supplementary items to capture possible subtle effects. There were no significant differences between exposed and nonexposed neonates on day 3. At 1 month, the exposed neonates showed better physiological stability and required less examiner facilitation to reach organized states. The neonates of heavy-marijuana-using mothers had better scores on autonomic stability, quality of alertness, irritability, and self-regulation and were judged to be more rewarding for caregivers.

Conclusions. The absence of any differences between the exposed on nonexposed groups in the early neonatal period suggest that the better scores of exposed neonates at 1 month are traceable to the cultural positioning and social and economic characteristics of mothers using marijuana that select for the use of marijuana but also promote neonatal development.

Smoking marijuana while pregnant leads to smarter babies...

 

[DarthMom]

None of those studies conclusively prove that smoking cannabis while pregnant has no negative consequences on unborn children. You fail.

no dearie, you fail, becaue i already did post such a thing.

 

[Khadijah]

I
It has been proven that tobacco smoke is harmful to the fetus. How is cannabis any different? Smoke is smoke, something that humans aren't made in inhale. You have not proved anything. Show me 5 seperate sources that come to a consensus that inhaling marijuana smoke is not harmful (must be smoking, eating or pure thc doesn't count but I'm still against that too).

I would still say this if weed was legal. Your ad hominem is worthless.

You make getting pregnant seem like a death sentence. My great grandma had 14 children and never touched marijuana in her life. Same with my grandma, who had 5, and my mom who had 2. No amount of pain unless life threatening justifies the administration of any drug, no matter how tame, to an unborn child. Oh and you still didn't answer my question about administrating cannabis to 3 year old children. Are you fine with that?

And that is YOUR FUCKIN OPINION! Bottom line dude, no matter how much you repeat it, no matter how extreme you take it , no matter how serious you get on here, its still just gonna be your opinion on how to raise a kid, and it will never be more than a opinion. Im seriously LMAO right now at a guy telling me that no pain is ever worthy of takin drugs for when pregnant, Why dont you give it a shot? go head dude. Try bein pregnant. Im sure you will have a blast Mr High Horse.

Humans aint made to inhale smoke? Why do you say that? you still aint responded to the fact that humans have been smoking and using plants and psychoactive plants as medicine for thuosands and thousands of years. if it wasnt meant to be i dont think that from the earliest times of man that people would be doin it. If we werent meant to smoke weed, why is there cannibinoids naturally occuring in the brain and receptors made just for cannibis.

As far as your would you smoke down a 3 year old question,
A fetus is not a concscious being and therefore cannot experience the psychoactive effects of the drug, so it aint even the same thing dude. Smokin weed to feel better while your kid in the womb is makin it impossible to eat or sleep is alot different than smokin a joint and handing it to a 3 year old kid like "haha, lets get little dude STOOONEEEDD!!"

. its different physically, and its different as far as the intent goes. its 2 seperate situations. Just the same way that a mother in afghanistan putting opium in tea to give to her screaming baby is alot different than a mom addicted to heroin in the US who thinks its funny to blow hits of smoke in her kids face.

I get it, it IS the same thing to you, thats cool. but it aint to me. So lets agree to disagree, becuz this aint goin nowhere, you aint willing to listen to logic and you got the right to your own opinion, and i aint really interested in tryin to make someone see shit my way if A, its impossible and B, there is no point, since you aint me and will never be pregnant and will never be the person that is with me when i become pregnant someday. at this point ur opinion is pretty much irrelevant, I said my piece but obviously you aint tryna hear it.

 

[a mandy jooo]

its funny how someone says one thing and the rest of you follow like "yeah, poor baby!!!! what a stupid bitch!!!! kill her!!!!"

but most of you are dudes and have no idea what you're talking about. the girl can make her own decisions. if she's not an idiot she won't do anything that she believes will harm her baby. and besides, it's not like she was slamming down beers. a little marijuana never hurt anybody.

i'm with lacey k on this one, if i ever get pregnant i'd much rather take a hit off a pipe rather than pop a painkiller.

 

[TheDrizzle]

my wife is pregnant right now and she gets headaches really bad but won't take any medicine, so i had her read all kinds of studies and i convinced her that if it got bad enough smoking weed wouldn't be that bad. she is a nurse and doesn't smoke cigarettes, i won her over....

Kultron you are acting very childish in something that more or less is a done deal. First off, as has been stated your not pregnant. Have you been with someone who was pregnant? Second, studies are pretty conclusive that occasional use causes no harm. Third, your argument excludes the though of a mother using a vaporisor. So, I now have made your argument totally useless. The mother can smoke marijauna, without the harm of smoke. Find me 10 studies that show a consensus that delta-9-THC is definately harmful to the fetus.

 

[Khadijah]

^Thank you, becuz so far it has been a bunch of dudes telling us females that we dont know shit about pregnancy and we are selfish stupid bitches for wanting to get our (theoretical) babies high. It must just be that women are selfish and want to put themself before their kids. Well, it looked that way till you came in . good to see a dude who is able to see it clearly

 

[fasteddie]

^Thank you, becuz so far it has been a bunch of dudes telling us females that we dont know shit about pregnancy and we are selfish stupid bitches for wanting to get our (theoretical) babies high. It must just be that women are selfish and want to put themself before their kids. Well, it looked that way till you came in . good to see a dude who is able to see it clearly

Not all.

I've never been in the position. But it's like Darth Mom said, it's not like the lady's slamming down beers. I'd never presume to interfere if some pregnant woman wanted to toke up a little, or even take a drink or smoke a cigarette. Even if it was my kid she was carrying.

When she gets out the spoon, glassine envelope, and syringe, that's different.

 

[DarkCode]

How about we just drop the fucking debate and all shut the fuck up, I mean, lets just all hit a joint and leave the pregnant chick out of it, heh.

 

[fasteddie]

How about we just drop the fucking debate and all shut the fuck up, I mean, lets just all hit a joint and leave the pregnant chick out of it, heh.

I have to pass. I'm looking for work in a field where it's not uncommon to be piss tested.

 

[DarkCode]

I have to pass. I'm looking for work in a field where it's not uncommon to be piss tested.

Thats cool, I actually haven't smoked since last year, lol.

 

[AmphetamineNinja]

Yes!

 

[Ungoliath]

I know alot of women who smoked weed when they were pregnant.
When the baby was born, and was crying, if it smelt weed smoke, it would stop.

Dunoo what that means but its something