It is a weed used in its natural state. You can pull substances and chemicals from any plant and call it a drug. It's the THC thing. The DEA is using a model that is 1000 years old. It's not LSD, heroin, or processed cocaine. It is a weed that is pulled from the ground. No different than any other plant grown by farmer. Hell even apple seeds contain arsenic cyanide Why are they legal?

no. it is a safe substance with no potential for abuse and potential benefits according to (non) DEA classification.

it still puzzles me why "get the government off our backs" conservatives are all "let's crack down on individuals ingesting a weed that makes them feel better and harms no one". it also puzzles me why at least some of the Democratic leadership goes along with this.

Our last 24 years of presidents all inhaled. Then they jailed.

that anything not defined as good by authority or religion is bad. It amazes me because I know of very few folks, who are actually intelligent, that think pot is bad. The ones that do seem to be pseudo intellectual.

are more "get government off MY back...and make certain those people over there adhere to my religious and moral values or else"

The DEA will never reclassify cannibis. It's against their best interests and the CSA gives them plenty of legal cover to kick the can down the road.

Change will have to come from Congress in the form of unique legislation. Cannibis needs its own sets of laws, separate from heroin or Percocet, different than alcohol and tobacco.

It's its own category, IMO as it has both medicinal and recreational uses.

i only know of one religion that has an explicit stand on marijuana, and it is not about banning it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rastafari#Reasoning

Jesus and Moses never talked about it. Islam is against some forms of intoxication, I guess.

But how is it a moral issue in the US? What is the moral framework? That to be stoned is in itself immoral? What if you feel stoned, but it is not due to smoking anything? etc.

Ridiculous. When will we grow up?

point toward positive therapeutic use, there is no way that inhaled smoke is good for the lungs.

Using it in a pill or other mechanism of delivery is viable though

Proponents want us to believe that inhaling smoke can actually be good for you. That's a ludicrous, biased point of view from those who want the freedom to smoke in public.

That and promoting the idea that marijuana is some sort of 'super-drug' that can cure warts as well as cancer and still have time to do the dishes.

That being said, if there are medicinal benefits to other forms of marijuana, research it away.

Even if it's eventually legalized, the government should strongly discourage smoking it, imo.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

However, in regard to smoke, this is what used to be spew about smoking:

Which proponents are specifically stating that inhalation of smoke is health benefit?

I don't recall the references because I was laughing too hard. There was even a 'study' that purported to show students did better at tests while under the influence. It's totally self-serving bullshit like this that keeps us at odds.

Of course students did better at tests. They'd probably do better with a strong dose of caffeine or a small dose of brandy or a box of glazed donuts, too. It sure as hell does not mean that marijuana is beneficial because...well, because it's marijuana!

I agree that possession should be decriminalized but I also believe that its use should be strongly discouraged, same as cigarettes, same as anything else that puts someone in an altered state of mind. It's why we have warnings on liquor. It's why we have sky-high taxes on cigarettes.

The vast majority of users would prefer to smoke instead of vaping. That's just reality.

Personally, I value my health too much to 'indulge'. One of my teenaged daughters told me recently that she tried pot at a party and she knows I'm okay with it, that I'll discourage the hell out of it but recognize that she's young enough to want to experiment. No rantings from me!

I just think it's hilarious that those who want to smoke marijuana tell us how natural it is.

First, there is nothing 'natural' about sticking a weed in your mouth and setting it on fire.

Secondly, if you need something external to find inner peace of mind, you're probably not doing it right.

Just my personal opinion, of course.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

As much as I agree with people that want to legalize it, there will always be risks when smoking anything. Smoking is unnatural to the body.

But 'inner peace' is usually not the goal. It's to get high and I sympathize with those who want to but let's not delude ourselves about the effects on one's metabolism and overall health.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

to find 'inner peace'? It is merely a recreational drug like booze imo. It will be good just for the ability to study it finally imo.

seems to be the polar opposite of freedom.

for people to spew that smoke ingested into the lungs is good for the lungs. It doesn't matter if it is marijuana, cigarettes, etc.

is more or less carcinogenic than cigarettes. Not saying you said anything is carcinogenic. I get that the exhaled smoke could be undesirable to others.

me at likely isn't good for one's lungs

I understand your point also and agree

"there is no way that inhaled smoke is good for the lungs...

Hence, infusion into edibles, drinks, candies, and vapors.

That said, there is no way that chemotherapy, in and of itself is good for the body, yet science tells us that a cost-benefit analysis illustrates it is often better than not taking the therapy.

I started smoking in '65. Still do. Haven't been to a doctor in 30 years, and
that was for stitches. (knock on wood). All four kids are successful and
intelligent, including a valedictorian. Never got lazy until recently when the
jobs got scarce. I think weed is good for you.

without any ill effects.

I had an uncle who lived well into his nineties, and smoked unfiltered cigarettes. My wife's grandmother smoked unfiltered lucky strikes and lived until 102.

What does this say about the long term effects of smoke on the lungs? Nothing

It is anecdotal.

Smoke is harmful to lung health. Whether from burning wood, tobacco or marijuana, toxins and carcinogens are released from the combustion of materials. Smoke from marijuana combustion has been shown to contain many of the same toxins, irritants and carcinogens as tobacco smoke.

Some people should not use MJ for anxiety. Never, ever. Increases it exponentially. Other than that it's a fun weed.

the relationship between THC and anxiety as a way to develop treatments.

The only people who still want cannabis to remain illegal are either willfully ignorant on the issue, bigoted against the culture associated with cannabis, or they're benefiting in some way from continued prohibition.

Even the DEA admits that the classification isn't about danger anymore. It's still perverse that they classify it with heroin just because it doesn't have any 'official' medical uses though. By the DEA logic why is nicotine not schedule 1?

The medical people really need to be separating themselves from the 'smoking' method of consumption IMO. Nobody in the medical field is gonna take you seriously when you suggest smoking a drug. They should focus more on measured doses of edibles or vaping.

Even cocaine has medicinal use and is schedule 2

I don't see nicotine on any schedule. I don't think they scheduled it. It has been researched for medicinal use.

marijuana's scheduling definitely appears more political than scientific

I only use quotes because the research is peer research.

It's well known and documented that the various strains of pot are being grown and tweaked to feature such things as anti-nausea effect, anti-inflammatory effect, anti-anxiety effect, and a host of others. I'm skeptical about some things but believe others for personal reasons.

I'm one of those boomers who has smoked on and off since I was old enough. I quit for years because I had children and couldn't imagine not being all together in case of emergency. Same reason I've been a very temperate drinker. These days I fairly regularly smoke a low-THC, high CBD strain that is magnificent for inflammation and joint pain, and has essentially no high. A tad relaxing.

Having the gov't. involved is a good/bad thing. Regulations are a good thing, but it also put paid to the medical marijuana shops that have been very helpful to many, many people. Now they're being folded into simple retail and the employees aren't allowed to give "medical" advice when you go looking for a specific thing. Fortunately they can give anecdotal advice. The young woman I talk to most often works in a shop and has RA, and keeps up with what helps her.

It's an interesting thing to go to a shop and see how many different people are there and for what reasons. It's a true cross section.

It stands to really disrupt their profits. Quite honestly, if the DEA or FDA were that worried about public safety, they would make oxycontin and oxycodone illegal considering the huge epidemic we have with those 2. Endo pharmaceuticals has invested quite a bit already into its star drug and that won't happen.

I don't have a link, but I remember someone telling me how Endo did a big push on oxycodone a few years back in pain management and has essentially created the mess that is today. I didn't look it up but it sure rings true.

I have favorite strains, I know dosages, I hold down a job, function normally in society, and most people can't tell I treat with it.

Since beginning self treatment, I have gotten off of social security disability. Cannabis (indica) is a miracle worker.

For example: Marijuana is illegal, but alcohol is legal and it kills people.
Communist cubans are bad, but communist chinese are good.

We can profit from made in China, just like pharma apparently sells more pills in states that don't have medical cannabis

backyard. Pot is way too populist for authoritarians to ever let go of. It is a political tool that nets LEO billions a year in annual profits.