What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- socialexpert, on 11/17/2008, -3/+125The aspirin/ulcer connection is scary.
- fish0507, on 11/17/2008, -6/+36and obvious... pharmaceuticals drugs usually cause new problems.. and then they sell you new drugs for that particular problem
- jster89, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1That would explain why they developed other drugs which are anti-inflammatories like aspirin but which don't cause ulcers. Called COX-2 inhibitors. Quit complaining about pharmaceutical companies they'll save your life some day. For a fee of course but thats capitalism.
- republicker, on 11/17/2008, -3/+59Know your aspirin fiend. You will not be able to see his eyes because of tea shades, but his knuckles will be white from inner tension and his pants will be crusted with semen from constantly jacking off when he can't find a rape victim.
- popfrogs, on 11/17/2008, -18/+7+1 for referencing the propaganda film in Fear and Loathing. Or Reefer Madness, which ever one it was.
- elitebmo, on 11/17/2008, -3/+20@popfrogs
-1 for ruining the funny - Ookadoo, on 11/17/2008, -1/+14+1 speed from cocaine usage
- Starshope, on 11/17/2008, -1/+8they usually give people with chronic pain high amounts of aspirin. Although Docs are supposed to give them anti-ulcer drugs along with that too.
- sabach, on 11/17/2008, -3/+14High doses of aspirin will cause internal bleeding. High doses of ibuprofen seem like a better solution to chronic pain.
- ludar, on 11/18/2008, -2/+1@ sabach
it depends on what the pain is associated with. If its cardiac in nature aspirin is better due to it considering it decreases systemic vascular resisitance and could disolve that nasty little clot in the stroke pt's brain, or the blood in the bed ridden elderly person's legs from clotting. ibuprofen is better though for pain associated with trauma (if you take aspirin to numb this pain i will personally find you and kick you in the balls or overies whatever the case may be) - NicoNicoNico, on 11/18/2008, -1/+2It's really bad to take high amounts of ibuprofen as well. For chronic pain, they often prescribe anti-convulsants or anti-depressants, especially if it is neurological in nature. I know this from experience because I have CRPS (Complex Regional Pain Syndrome) and used to take Cymbalta (now on something else because of the side effects, but I forgot what it's called and don't have the pills handy atm). They'll only prescribe other types of pain meds, like Oxycontin, Tramadol, or morphine, if it's severe or if temporary pain relief is needed. That's because of the addictive nature of narcotics.
Of course, that's all for moderate to severe pain. If it's minor and temporary, ibuprofen is fine.
- specialK16, on 11/17/2008, -11/+11Question.
I had some very strong ***** on Saturday that lasted at least 6 hours.
Now I've been felling way too relaxed for the last couple of days, and that "high" seems to come and go every few hours.
Is this ***** normal?- orkist, on 11/17/2008, -2/+16Well were you doing SPECIAL K or marijuana? ......................
- cathpah, on 11/17/2008, -4/+24nope. not normal. I've smoked some goooooooooooood *****, both domestically and been to amsterdam twice.
I do believe you done smoked some laced stuff. yucky. - specialK16, on 11/17/2008, -3/+4What the hell is laced stuff?
Well anyways, the effects began again soon after having and ibuprofen pill 24h after smoking..... - oninbonin, on 11/17/2008, -7/+39You're lying, you idiot. You're probably some anti-drug ***** being payed to troll anything that is pro marijuana so you can ask ***** questions like this. Go away.
- specialK16, on 11/17/2008, -20/+13***** you oninboin. Like really, go ***** yourself. If weed doesn't cause this "effect" I'm talking about then perhaps the combination of some other drugs I use are causing this, or maybe something else altogether is causing this. The only thing I'm looking for is for a "Yes, it happens" or for a "No, must be something else".
I have no reason why to talk some out out of anything. I don't give a ***** about you or anyone else. I was simply looking for an answer you *****. As I said, go ***** yourself ***** moron. - apena89, on 11/17/2008, -0/+15lol
- Temo1, on 11/17/2008, -2/+2For frequent smokers, stuff like this is known to happen. It usually occurs during strenuous exercise though, so unless you've been working out too, I don't see that happening.
- mulling, on 11/17/2008, -1/+8Your username is 'special k 16' so I'm assuming you take special K, also known as ketamine. If you're mixing different drugs without medical supervision we can only guess at what you may have done to yourself. Marijuana's effects generally taper off after six hours, but if you're a hardcore smoker you may be experiencing a longer 'high' because of the long half-life that THC has in the body.
- TexasCanuck, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Most definitely not normal. The high should start wearing off at about 2 hours, and by 4 hours, you should be pretty much back to normal.
- tdskate, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8Answer.
In a few minutes you're gonna find that only 5 minutes will have been passed since you took whatever it is you took :) - hiPpymIck, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2i smoked very heavily daily for about ten years
powders pills etc - only occasionally - maybe for parties
i found when i decided to quit for while - to prove to myself that i could live without it .. it took about 6 mts to get straight
now i can take it or leave it
(probly only because unlike many other drugs inc alcohol its non addictive) - jrackow, on 11/17/2008, -1/+1lol just made me lol.
- YoctoYotta, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2The length of the marijuana high can vary depending on how frequently you smoke. Not too long ago, I had laid off smoking for a few months while expecting to have to take a UA at some point in the near future and then ate a particularly potent brownie a friend had made, and I was ***** up for a good 18 hours. I've gone through eighths in a day, so I'm pretty familiar with both sides of the coin, but, yeah, no telling what might cause that to happen without more information.
- ozid, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2@orkist - special k only lasts for like 45 minutes
- specialK16, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1ok then that high was maybe the painkillers I took, not the weed.
Hmm... my nick comes from the Kellog's Brand, not from a medicine, although yes, I tend to overdose myself with medication. - ldmyers, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1sucks to be you. HA!
- chuckduck, on 11/17/2008, -1/+1The connection is scary. I knew a guy that actually died 2 weeks ago from a stomach ulcer which was induced by his regular usage of advil. I wasn't close with him or anything, but it's still very sad. He had a drinking problem and used to use it to help him get up in the morning. He was in the hospital for a week and never made it out. Try to avoid advil unless absolutely necessary.
- Grym11, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3Advil is ibuprofen which is different from aspirin. Both, however, have adverse GI effects.
For people with stomach ulcers or GI bleeding, it's probably best to stick with acetaminophen (Tylenol). If you're going this route though, be VERY careful not to exceed the maximum dose (keeping in mind acetaminophen from other sources like flu medications, etc.). Likewise NEVER DRINK ALCOHOL when taking acetaminophen. Acetaminophen toxicity is very lethal, but so long as you take below the recommended dose and a maximum of amount of less than 3 grams per day you should be fine.
- Grym11, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3Advil is ibuprofen which is different from aspirin. Both, however, have adverse GI effects.
- johnruk, on 11/18/2008, -2/+2The thought of mental illness scares me a hell of a lot more than any ulcer.
- Azulya, on 11/19/2008, -1/+0That explains why you're afraid to think before posting..
- jster89, on 11/19/2008, -2/+1Watch out cos on digg no one gets away with mentioning a single side effect of cannabis. It's all natural man... must be good. Look at tobacco.
- johnruk, on 11/19/2008, -1/+1There are plenty of natural things that are poisonous too though. Cannabis may be natural, but the amount of THC added these days isn't.
- samssf, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Question:
I have asthma and already have lung damage from near-death experiences as a kid. Anyway, there are times like right now, where I'm getting over bronchitis and sprained / strained my intercostal ligaments/muscles between my ribs, that I wish I could try some weed. It feels like someone is stabbing me in the side whenever I move around or take deep breaths.
What are differences between side-effects, etc when taking it in other forms, such as orally. I would assume there could be more side effects orally... Are there any suggestions for someone like me who wouldn't dare inhale smoke into my lungs?- pr0carbine, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2orally consuming marijuana will generally last much longer than smoking. Depending on the weed(that part is the most important), you could have a more intense "body high," or you could just "freak out" and think you're heart isn't beating right...If you're more of a laid back kind of person, eating weed should be ok, but if you have self esteem issues, etc.. I would avoid weed altogether.
- errortastic, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0Vaporize.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporizer
- Tiak, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1The aspirin/liver connection is scarier. (The stomach isn't strictly necessary to live... The liver is.)
- elliotys, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2Aspirin is mainly excreted through the kidneys, I think your are talking about tylenol.
- elliotys, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Actually the connection is well explained and makes sense. Aspirin, acetyl-salicilic acid, is a non-selective COX inhibitor. COX enzyme is responsible for converting arachadonic acid into prostaglandins, thromboxanes, leukotrienes, etc. . . PROSTAGLANDINS are involved in all sorts of things in the body (inflammation, Contractions, etc. . .) and one of their roles is in signaling the stomach to secreted more bicarbonate and mucus, to protect the lining of the stomach. So when you inhibit prostaglandin synthesis, by taking aspirin, you decrease the amount of bicarbonate and mucus secreted, and you get ulcers. :)
- jster89, on 11/19/2008, -0/+1Yes that's why we've got selective COX-2 inhibitors. Unfortunately a few increase your risk of heart disease but hopefully they'll come up with an effective one which doesn't. Then we've solved the NSAID issue.
- anotherghost, on 11/18/2008, -0/+0Yeah dude, I got an ulcer from aspirin. I have migraines all the time and the doctor I was going to kept prescribing me with this medicine that was like half aspirin and half something else, and eventually it ate a hole through my stomach. It was pretty weak.
- fish0507, on 11/17/2008, -6/+36and obvious... pharmaceuticals drugs usually cause new problems.. and then they sell you new drugs for that particular problem
- VanhookJosh, on 11/17/2008, -29/+485Aspirin kills thousands a year. Marijuana kills ... uh... wait... sh!t....
- VanhookJosh, on 11/17/2008, -52/+21Edit* Hundreds.
- 64bitllama, on 11/17/2008, -3/+20No.
- EhBlueDuck, on 11/17/2008, -7/+16Cite/Reference for your lie?
- replikhant, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8hahahahahahahahahhahahahhahaha!
- EhBlueDuck, on 11/17/2008, -0/+13oh wait, my bad, you were probably replacing the word 'thousands', not finishing the sentence 'Marijuana kills...'
Good edit, i'll try not to be so quick to judge next time.
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -74/+38marijuana kills , it doesnt kill through overdose, but anytime you inhale smoke you're putting cancer agents into your body.
im all for legalization but all the bs on both sides needs to end. I'm just as tired of the government forcing its lies onto the public school system as i am about people who use that leave important negative facts out of their essays and public protests.- ceredron, on 11/17/2008, -6/+83well, if by "cancer agents" you mean smoke, then yes, by all means, lots of cancer agents. But I don't think you realize, in the grand scheme of things, just how negligible the carcinogens from marijuana are... like, it's akin to breathing in the smoke from an ordinary wood fire, in the mildness factor.
- Snoosy, on 11/17/2008, -9/+110Pretty much anything you do in the world puts cancer agents in your body.
- JoeMerchant, on 11/17/2008, -4/+24Ordinary wood fires can be pretty harsh, my BBQ last weekend left lots of watering eyes when the wind shifted and smoked the table. I'm confident that if we did that (BBQ smoke) twice a day, every day for 20 years, there would be more than one nasty lump growing as a result.
- elo91, on 11/17/2008, -11/+60there have been numerous studies on this. marijuana smoke does NOT increase your chances of getting lung cancer/disease.
- cawpin, on 11/17/2008, -49/+16"it's akin to breathing in the smoke from an ordinary wood fire, in the mildness factor."
You seriously believe that? Marijuana contains multiple carcinogens. - Leo21k, on 11/17/2008, -3/+21Dont know about you but I try to avoid breathing in smoke from wood fires, couldnt imagine inhaling smoke of any kind several times a day and not expecting health problems.
- twiztidsinz, on 11/17/2008, -5/+19While it's true that inhaling any smoke will put carcinogens in your body, the cannabinoids prevent their build up and growth effectively eliminating the risk of cancer.
- enclaved, on 11/17/2008, -9/+155YOU DONT HAVE TO SMOKE IT
I WIN THIS THREAD - omnithought, on 11/17/2008, -3/+54Then make brownies.
- Mujokan, on 11/17/2008, -1/+14Not cancer, emphysema (if you smoke instead of vaporize).
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -7/+47the people that actually know what they are talking about, i appreciate the comments(inhaling wood smoke isnt harmful?seriously?). To the people that have simply read a highschool health book and pamphlets handed out by pro-legalization sources (aka getting bad info from both sides) i really hope you will in the future do more thinking before you research something, or before telling someone else they dont know what they're talking about.
Most people missed the part where i said it was fine to legalize it because aspirin can kill you with misuse as well. My point is that people think lighting up a joint is safe over a lifetime arent using their heads. Vaporizing is a lot safer as someone mentioned, and so is vaporizing pure tobacco. You cannot overdose on it, which makes it a lot safer than a lot of things that are legal, and it has medical uses, which automatically disqualifies it for schedule 1(in the USA), and is much much less harmful to the body than cigarettes (which is a lot more compelling to compare than marijuana to aspirin).
If you look into even the briefest of research done on the longterm mental effects of marijuana you will find that studies have shown taking drugs at an early age interferes with brain cells and to a lesser extent over a lifetime. Thats eaten, smoked, vaped, anything.
So again, should it be legalized? yes, is it completely safe ? no, nothing is and im tired of ignorant stoners saying it is.
My personal opinion is that even if you are harming yourself, if you are not harming someone else or interfering with someone's rights then the government should not have anything to say about it.
edit: not to mention the added chance of increased mental problems like anxiety - flammablewater, on 11/17/2008, -6/+14Brownies++ No cancer for you.
Actually, on average, because pot is less 'refined' than cigarettes, it usually contain more tar (carcinogen) per puff, plus you hold it in longer. However nicotine is a ridiculously powerful poison and carcinogen, among all the other stuff in cigarettes.
On the other hand there was a recent study that couldn't actually pin a higher rate of lung cancer on pot smokers. There was no apparent correlation. http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/news/200005 ... - Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -18/+9http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/ ...
small snippet:
"Marijuana smoke and cigarette smoke contain many of the same toxins, including one which has been identified as a key factor in the promotion of lung cancer"
harvard is a pack of liars probably. - tsopranos, on 11/17/2008, -2/+31V a p o r i z e r
"Rather than burning the herb, which produces numerous harmful by-products, a vaporizer heats the material in a controlled manner so that the active compounds contained in the plant boil off into a vapor. This new gas is not smoke from combustion, but an evaporated vapor that has the appearance of light smoke. The vapor ideally contains virtually zero particulate matter (tar) and reduced noxious gases such as carbon monoxide." - Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -17/+8read my earlier comment tsopranos, i know its hard to read all the comments in a thread, but if you dont you have zero right to comment.
I said above that vaporizing is safer, but does not eliminate the effects given by the chemical itself, like the possibility for enhancing mental illness, or the stopping of brain cell growth in young adults and over a lifetime of smoking, even with a vaporizer. As well as impairing judgement, ability to operate motor vehicles(although plenty of people say they're fine to drive and because they lack a serious accident after smoking, think that proves they're fine).
you are exactly the kind of person that i am talking about, that closes his ears whenever he hears anything negative, just as the government closes theirs when they hear anything positive. - sajorojas, on 11/17/2008, -10/+4blah blah blah i'm better than everyone, they are all asleep, I can use my powers for good to warn them
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -15/+4blah blah blah i cant refute this guy's points so i have to attack him. whoa, i can do that too. now im cool like you think you are being.
- YourNameHere1, on 11/17/2008, -5/+13Water purification, green butter, vaporizer, moderation.
Your "carcinogens" argument is biased propaganda.
Anyway, my body my choice.... now ***** off. - sajorojas, on 11/17/2008, -7/+4If I thought I was cool, I wouldn't be on digg
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -6/+7yournameishere 1 : you really dont like reading other people's comments do you. i made the exact same statement about personal choice , moderation, vaporizers, and legalization that you did. only without having my hands over my ears to anything bad coming from marijuana.
Also, if you think wrapping marijuana in paper and then smoking it doesnt contain carcinogens when you light that up and smoke, you're beyond help.
Its also not "my" biased propaganda, its from a study based out of harvard university. I'd love to see you go there and tell them their research is "biased propaganda". I bet you don't and continue going through life ignorant and believing only what makes your lifestyle feel good.
Try reading what i have to say and come back sometime. - Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -5/+3yea, you'd just be on digg without a real argument against anything im saying, and only personal attacks.
If all you've got is that im trying to be the personal messiah of diggers as a comment by attempting to bring two groups out of their black and white areas into a gray area of truth, i think my position is pretty safe. - YourNameHere1, on 11/17/2008, -5/+8Yeah, Harvard surly wouldn't have a biased study on cannabis. Not Harvard. Anyway, you might of made close to the "same" argument as me about personal freedoms, but the difference is that you came off sounding like a pompous ***** when you did it.
My hands aren't over my ears, I clearly said, "My body, my choice!"..... just like it's my choice to sit in front of a television, use a microwave oven, talk on a cell phone, choose to drink a coca-cola, or eat fast food..... just like it's my choice to eat red meat full of nasty crap, drink alcohol and sit next to a cigarette smoker..... or even live in the electric grid of a city breathing car exhaust all day.
I've read those arguments of your's for the last 20 years, usually written to be used as a tool of propaganda so people like you can pretend that you're smarter than everyone else because you can post a link to a "Harvard Study". I mean "HaaarVaarddd..... reeeaaaallly."
I've dugg down everything you've written on this page because you try to demean and talk down to everyone like there is nobody wiser than you. - Navicerts, on 11/17/2008, -1/+2@ceredron
Have you ever seen resin? - illt, on 11/17/2008, -2/+9wow 23 responses, and none mentioning that it' has been clinically proven that THC reduces (specifically) lung tumors by up to 50%. (most likely the reason why there is no correlation between increased cancer risk and smoking weed.)
study from harvard i believe if that legitimizes it for some people....
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/07041 ...
http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20070417/mar ...
hell even fox news:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266715,00.html - mulling, on 11/17/2008, -4/+4If marijuana kills (plural), as you claim, please cite multiple instances of medical professionals finding that marijuana caused a person to die.
Oh that's right you can't, because it doesn't. I give your troll effort a 4/10. Weak premise, laughably refutable. - YourNameHere1, on 11/17/2008, -3/+7..... and where exactly did I mention "Rolling Papers"? I didn't.
I said: "Water purification, green butter, vaporizer, moderation.".... meaning a bong hit of top quality indica as opposed to a joint of crappy low grade sativa..... and if you wanted to be healthier, then cook it in butter and eat it, or vaporize it.
And what is truly funny about your argument is that your "HaaarVaarddd" test uses a "one joint a day" theory, not a WATER BONG, VAPORIZER, or a FOOD method, and your study doesn't mention the quality of the pot, or the control study that it used, nor any sources.
And it didn't even say what strain the marijuana used was, nor did it site any proof of it's findings at all. Just a bunch of speculation.
Your article that you linked everyone from digg to throws around blanket statements like, "Studies further suggest" and yet still sites no factual concrete proof.
Seems like a bunch of hearsay to me.
Here is another statement from your "Harvard" study: "In conclusion, it seems that the potential dangers presented by the medical use of marijuana may actually contribute to the dangers..."
Once again it uses words like: "Seems" and "Potential" and "May"..... this is your scientific conclusion. this is fact to you?
This is biased guess work at best, and it's one of the absolute most ugliest html web pages ever linked on digg.com, that links you to yet another super-ugly corny web page, and a bunch of 404 error pages......
I'm DEFINITELY gonna listen to your argument because of the web page that you linked me to, such an intelligent web page FULL OF factual information.... /sarcasm
Anybody can link a page from google to support an argument, here is one that at least list's it's sources:
http://www.drugtext.org/sub/marmyt1.html
Your page also "suggests that marijuana is at the root of many mental disorders", yet it has no factual proof.... where is your proof?
I "suggest" that you're being an *****, I could at least create a structured list of your digg comments from this page to prove it. - Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -5/+4yournameishere, you really dont deserve a response, anyone that makes a response like "xxxx = lies lies lies" shouldnt be listened to until their temper tantrum is over.
- Nidy1, on 11/17/2008, -2/+7YourNameHere1- Have you ever read studies before? Of course it says "seems" and "potentially" and "may". That's how papers are supposed to be written. They aren't going to pretend that they have the end all answer in a study, but please know that when they say "seems", they mean that the data supports the idea or theory being presented. Not that they randomly made it up.
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -6/+5to everyone else still saying that marijuana is completely without negative side effects. I suggest you look again at the research out there. Since some people arent understanding my point on inhaling combusted paper and plant matter over long periods of time = cancer, we can move on to other negative effects.
Lets see the evidence that the sharp spike in heartbeat, the sharp rise in blood sugar followed by a quick drop(guess why you get the munchies after coming down from the stimulant side of the effects) isnt highly dangerous. Lets see the evidence that people do not get anxiety attacks. Lets see someone saying it does not make mental illnesses worse in some cases, it does not affect brain growth in young adults, etc. If you want to ignore these as well as the issues with smoking the product from a rolling paper, and want to say that marijuana is completely safe, i dont have anything more to say to you.
You do not remove the potential heart problems by vaporizing or eating the plant, nor the mental side affects. If you think this should be taken by anyone without any concern for danger, you're just as reckless as someone who drinks and drives and hopes they wont hit someone that night.
To anyone thinking im anti-legalization or pro-war on drugs, you really dont need to bother responding. - crxgames, on 11/17/2008, -1/+4^Shut down.
- DotGet, on 11/17/2008, -2/+3No, it doesn't. Tobacco starts tumors in your lungs because it keeps your cells alive for unnatural periods of time before dying/regenerating. Marijuana KILLS lung cells. That may sound bad, but that basically means you absolutely cannot get lung cancer from cannabis.
Given, cannabis will still tar your lungs if you're smoking it. Vaporizing, on the other hand... - YourNameHere1, on 11/17/2008, -2/+5@ Halsfield:
I read through every comment that you made, and the comments that you chose to comment off of, as well as people that were in agreement with you.... and it seems that you have a noticeable pattern that is observant to anyone with a keen eye.
What you do is "YOU PRETEND THAT YOU AREN'T A PARTISAN HACK", then you pander to us "Woody Harrelson/Jack Herer" legalization types, meanwhile you throw around a few statements about "both sides" having flawed arguments, but when you get your little chance, you attack with your typical "anti-drug" subliminal messaging...... you're nothing new. You're Nancy Regan 2.0 with a face lift (and probably a facebook-lift too)....
You got essay after essay to post in this short amount of time, and you stay in character as this "pretend stoner neutrality".... supposedly mediating from the middle of both sides and playing devil's advocate for laughs, but you always circle back to your ***** web link and a strong yet subliminal anti-drug message.
You bounce through little partnerships that try to make you sound cool.... usually they're saying the EXACT same thing as you..... more fake non-partisan *****..... more fake "Harvard" studies.... seriously, has anyone been to that page and read through it? Where are the facts, where are the charts and tables, where are the medical sources other than the one man "Donald P. Tashkin, M.D." and his 404 web link?
@ Nidy1Nidy1:
to quote you: "That's how papers are supposed to be written. They aren't going to pretend that they have the end all answer in a study,"
So, then don't link me to this page and pretend that it is the end all conclusion to this conversation and topic.
And yes, I like to stay informed about various studies, and this Harvard link is nothing other than a poorly written web page throwing a bunch of speculation around with out proper sources to site, it didn't even have an example of the control study used..... except for the one that I stated, which was the fact that it was based on smoking "one joint a day"..... when my comment was not talking about "smoking one joint a day" as a way to use medical marijuana. I was stating 4 other ways to smoke pot and stay healthy. - DotGet, on 11/17/2008, -5/+1Why did somebody digg me down? Whoever did it obviously doesn't like truth, because otherwise he/she would have just left the comment alone.
"Waa! Somebody disagrees with me but they're right! Waaa! I'm gonna digg them down! *sniffle* That'll show 'em." - YourNameHere1, on 11/17/2008, -3/+4@ Halsfield:
about the comment: "Halsfield = lies + lies + lies"
You know.... the funny thing is that I deleted that comment about 5 seconds after submitting it because I thought it was bit rude, I wanted to keep things a bit more civil. That's quite a window of opportunity to see that comment.... about 4 seconds.
It's strange that you managed to even see that comment and write this to me:
qoute: "yournameishere, you really dont deserve a response, anyone that makes a response like "xxxx = lies lies lies" shouldnt be listened to until their temper tantrum is over."
.... anyway, I'm glad I deleted that comment, but after reading all of your other drivel, I would edit that original comment with:
Halsfield = panders truth + panders truth + subliminal anti-drug message = Nancy Regan 2.0 - beanphoner, on 11/17/2008, -1/+1That's why you use a vaporizer!
- IpecacNeat, on 11/17/2008, -1/+4YourNameHere1, you sound a bit paranoid.
- Tiak, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1@Halsfield
You mentioned the supposed risk of mental illness... You should know this is pretty much complete *****. It has shown up in studies, but not in clinical trials... Those at risk for schizophrenia are more likely to engage in everything that is generally defined as risk behavior, there are also hypotheses that they are more likely to use mind-altering substances in general in an attempt to self-medicate... Which seems reasonable enough considering that studies also show links between alcoholism and nicotine use and schizophrenia...
As for the effects on children... Well, yes, most drugs that activate certain receptors in excess have some risk of brain development issues... Antidepressents should also be kept away from children for the most part, but I don't see how this is an argument for or against legalization for adults. - Jones82, on 11/18/2008, -1/+3Uh, guys, enclaved already won the thread like 20 posts ago
- TripMoon, on 11/18/2008, -1/+0Moron anti-pot diggers: When studies have been done, even SMOKING IT with anything(paper, whatever), it had no effect as to a greater lung cancer percent than non-smokers. They figured that THC has a tumor-inhibiting effect. However, smokers of tobacco and pot, still had tumors on a greater basis than most. That is because nicotine is a super carcinogen. As someone mentioned earlier: it keeps cells alive, and they can re-wire and become cancerous. In the battle between nicotine and THC, nicotine's deadly properties wins. Think about it, even if you Don't smoke nicotine, but chew it: you get throat and mouth cancer. Nicotine, the chemical itself regardless of burning it and the leaf, is carcinogenic. THC, burned with pot leaf, is not. THC, vaporized, does nothing to your lungs. I bet if a study were done comparing even the vaporization of nicotine v. the vaporization of THC, the nicotine vaporizers would still get cancer more often. Nicotine is just bad. THC can be eaten and will not cause cancer. If it did, then THC, the molecule itself, would cause cancer. You would have a lot of reports of stomach and lung cancers associates with THC, and there are none. In this world, where everyone does some drug, even if alcohol, and everyone inhales pollutants from industry and the natural earth, THC is a very minimal contributor to the cancer that exists. It is a SAFE drug, as safe as its gonna get. Hell, your goddamn fast-food, hormone injected meat, preservatives, fillers, food colorings: they have all been shown to cause cancer. SMOKED THC has not, what does that tell you?
- airwalkery2k, on 11/17/2008, -4/+256It kills that little girl that rides her bike past the drive-thru window every day.
- MattFromSeattle, on 11/17/2008, -0/+38The Dave Chappelle take on that is classic.
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -3/+22this is the other side of the idiocy that im talking about. the government is just as stupid and ignorant as the majority of people praying for its legalization. The government thinks that seeing a little girl fall into a pool because of negligent stoners or get hit by a car driven by high kids is going to change the minds of aware people.
What we need is the truth(im absolutely not talking about the sham of an ad campaign against tobacco smoking), the real truth, that people seem so afraid of. The good with the bad, nothing held back, just the true facts.
Part of the governments stated plan is that they leave all the benefits and good parts of any illegal drug out of all info pamphlets/high school books/etc and avoid talking about it whenever possible. On the opposite side heavy users refuse to acknowledge any downsides at all, when there are plenty documented (by independent sources like harvard and european sources). Both sides need to meet in the middle. - RudeTurnip, on 11/17/2008, -0/+13I think it's scarier that she comes back to life every day!
- mickm615, on 11/18/2008, -2/+1^fail
- alanr19, on 11/17/2008, -70/+12Marijuana kills brain cells and makes its users into useless ***** retards who become a drag on their country. Welfare awaits stoners. How nice that you don't mind taking hard working Americans tax dollars.
Joints contain 20+ times the carcinogenic effect of a cigarette too. I'll bet that little fact doesn't go down to well with the Digg hive-mind.
Grow up you stupid kids. Think for yourselves.- mikbunn, on 11/17/2008, -2/+20You could say the same thing about any substance. Even food is turning the country into a bunch of lazy fat pieces of *****. Should we ban food? No. It's just about moderation. Speaking of which, can someone ban this guy?
- latexsolarbeef, on 11/17/2008, -1/+23Okay replace "marijuana" with "alcohol" and "stoners" with "alcoholics" and you've got yourself a deal!
/alcohol kills more people and ruins more lives than marijuana...and I can use other people's tax monies to buy pot? ZOMG how?!
/and if herb is so bad, why is there Alcoholics Anonymous but not Potheads Anonymous? - omnithought, on 11/17/2008, -2/+37The only study that ever linked marijuana to killing brain cells had very bad protocol. They put Rhesus monkeys in a small enclosure and filled it with pot smoke until they died. Then they did autopsies and found brain damage, not stopping to think that dying of asphyxiation causes brain damage.
Furthermore, you don't have to smoke it. You can eat it.
You are wrong. Twice. - catestarrr, on 11/17/2008, -1/+55I smoke daily and I pay a lot of taxes and have never been on welfare. Grow up you stupid kid and keep your thoughts to yourself.
- safetysealed, on 11/17/2008, -4/+8*****, the reason joints are full of carcinogens is because most people are lightweights who need to put tobacco in with their weed.
people looking to get high without causing lung problems should see about getting a vaporizer, I got the Vapureyes Beta, best £100 that I ever spent. - itsthebrod, on 11/17/2008, -2/+13The funny thing is, I guarantee you know people who get high on a regular basis and you have no clue... And joints don't contain 20x the amount of carcinogens. Unless you have a unbiased cite for that, we can just assume you're a liar who buys into the government propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
- flammablewater, on 11/17/2008, -2/+13Dude, I'm a software developer. That, as far as I can tell, requires a lot of brain power and difficult problem solving on a daily basis. It hasn't effected my intelligence, cognitive ability, motor skills or focus. You're just repeating the ***** the government's been feeding you. Think for yourself.
Also, a THC like substance allowed mice to GROW BRAIN CELLS. Did that register with you? GROW ***** BRAIN CELLS. You can only grow brain cells while you're a fetus. After that you only use them over time. Growing brain cells is impossible.
http://www.peak.sfu.ca/the-peak/2005-3/issue9/ne-m ... - mophreo, on 11/17/2008, -0/+9@latexsolarbeef:
"and if herb is so bad, why is there Alcoholics Anonymous but not Potheads Anonymous?"
http://www.marijuana-anonymous.org/
Anything that you put in your body that alters your brain chemistry is potentially addictive. Mentally if not physically. If it gives you that euphoric feeling (read up on dopamine and seratonin) then there is a danger of addiction.
Now, do I think pot is safer than alcohol? Yeah, probably. Is it perfectly safe? Of course not. Do I think pot should be legalized/decriminalized? Of course it should. People should be allowed to do anything they want as long as what they're doing doesn't take away somebody else's right to do whatever they want. - ACiDGRiM, on 11/17/2008, -3/+2No they don't.
- Mudbeast, on 11/17/2008, -1/+11Here to agree with catestarr. I and many of my friends work full time, pay our bills, maintain our vehicles and hygeine and are VERY productive and useful members of society. If YOU can't handle recreational cannabis use then YOU are inferior to US. Feels good to be judged and belittled, eh?
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -3/+4this guy is the other end of the idiot spectrum. what we need instead is the majority of free-thinking individuals to be given the actual facts, the real ones, instead of bits and pieces. The pro people hide the negatives or deny them outright, the con people do the same for the benefits and medical uses.
- esteskid, on 11/17/2008, -3/+3YOU ARE A ***** MORON
- minkusingh, on 11/17/2008, -3/+2I wish I could bury him (alanr19) down million times...
let's see how far down he goes...he's only -35 right now..come on digg - neonerz, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1"Grow up you stupid kids. Think for yourselves."
Irony at its best. Stop watching Refer Madness.
Fact: None of the medical tests currently used to detect brain damage in humans have found harm from marijuana, even from long term high-dose use.
http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/#br ... - Tiak, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Using marijuana makes you a deadbeat! Quick! Someone go back in the time and warn Carl Sagan, Obama, Clinton, Dubya, Washington, Jefferson, Bruce Lee, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Francis Crick, Nietzsche, and Steve Jobs!
(Okay, fine, so Nietzsche was a bit of a deadbeat...) - DotGet, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1FOOD has just as much potential to be addictive as marijuana does. I'd say even more so. How many fat people do you know? An addiction is described as: feeling which incites repeated behavior that is harmful to oneself and/or others. There are a lot of "normal" things that are covered under that umbrella. And while being fat is unhealthy/harmful 100% of the time, weed is only unhealthy/harmful if you smoke it. Eat or vaporize, and you're not getting any of the carcinogens. How it is harmful to one's social life and friends is different, but I know quite a few people who function perfectly in society who smoke weed at least a few times a week.
I know it would seem like most weed-smokers should be fat, but that's not my experience. Out of over 200 people I've encountered that smoke, maybe 30 were overweight, and only 10-ish were obese (1 morbidly so). Thems's good numbers for living in the US.
- BBelleau, on 11/17/2008, -4/+45Actually Halsfield, if you did your research, you would find that marijuana doesn't increase the risk of lung cancer: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196678,00.html That's a pretty important fact that you're leaving out...
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -21/+11i hope you're joking by linking to foxnews and saying they are better than my harvard link, especially on the subject of marijuana. you might as well link the onion.
even if you want to toss aside the smoking aspects of it being harmful, the other issues that my link provided were not covered. the drug itself causes mental harm , saying its as safe as aspirin when it causes anxiety attacks, inhibits brain cell growth when taken as a young person, impairs judgement, motor skills, etc. - Maddjonesy, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7Dugg for the point of Fox being as reliable as the Onion, haha.
You make a fair point, but just out of curiosity Halsfield, do you personally know anyone who has developed mental problems from cannabis use?
I know they exist, but they seem pretty rare to me considering how many people smoke it. - theonlybradever, on 11/17/2008, -0/+23i think the point of referencing Fox News is that they would typically be AGAINST positive news stories about cannabis. therefore, if they're saying something positive, you have to stop and ask why.
- Vegiemaster, on 11/17/2008, -0/+13Here's a better article from a more reliable source. However, I would like to see more studies on this topic.
http://www.webmd.com/lung-cancer/news/20060523/pot ... - illt, on 11/17/2008, -1/+14you're right, it shrinks lung tumors by up to 50%.
study done by halsfield's beloved harvard too! - neonerz, on 11/18/2008, -0/+0One more source
http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/#to ... - maabus, on 11/18/2008, -0/+5Interesting note here: The study was conducted under a grant from the NIH, with the purpose to demonstrate that marijuana INCREASES tumor-size in cancer patients!
The fact that the purpose of the study was to show that marijuana has a negative impact and STILL they found this positive side-effect is very significant. - TripMoon, on 11/18/2008, -0/+0@ Halsfield: Let us compromise: Using pot while young may not be the best, but smoking it when an adult: HELL, it regenerates brain cells! What does it all mean? It means, treat it like alcohol you ***** moron!!! No one is saying that it should be a free-for-all and let's have 3 year olds smoke it! That is where you fail, and your talking point-robot mouth comes into full view. Who says: let babies take aspirin? No one. We are saying: let's be intelligent about it, legalize it for adults, all right? Now calm down, buddy, take a toke, and calm, the *****, down.
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -21/+11i hope you're joking by linking to foxnews and saying they are better than my harvard link, especially on the subject of marijuana. you might as well link the onion.
- ACiDGRiM, on 11/17/2008, -2/+25It's OK, we won't tell your mom if you say ***** on the internet.
- VanhookJosh, on 11/17/2008, -1/+1lol, thought the site auto hid it.
- MforMike, on 11/17/2008, -23/+13aspirin saves lives every year. Marijuana saves...uh...wait....*****....
- KRY4no1, on 11/17/2008, -2/+6I'm not trying to instigate here but...what's an example of aspirin saving a life?
- pyg13, on 11/17/2008, -5/+2Obviously one cannot prove an absence (that 'aspirin saved a life') - but many folks are taking an aspirin a day as an adjunct to blood pressure Rx (and other things) as a blood thinner. Of the many thousands, it had to have 'saved' at least one.
- Rggoalie3, on 11/17/2008, -2/+8"Aspirin has been shown to be helpful when used daily to lower the risk of heart attack, clot-related strokes and other blood flow problems."
Ref: http://www.fda.gov/cder/consumerinfo/dailyaspirin_ ...
Does preventing a heart attack or stroke save a life? I think so. - thePTS, on 11/17/2008, -1/+21And marijuana is used by patients to control, among other things, appetite. To get nutrition into your body, especially when many cells are being broken down, like in chemotherapy, is crucial.
I thought about this for more than 2 seconds. You thought about this.. uh... wait.. *****... - Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6one more exhibit of a wrong one-sided argument being made. Aspirin is helpful and marijuana can be as well, what is so hard about understanding that? Lots of things in moderation can be helpful.
You inject heroin into a patient with any one of deadly diarrhea-based diseases (aka you cannot retain nutrients because you are evacuating them too quickly) and you can easily save his life by keeping his nutrients inside. The same was done for me with morphine when i had a C diff infection.
The reason heroin is illegal is a mix of racism, classism, ignorance, reckless misuse by large amounts of people(including doctors who prescribed it to just about anyone), it being completely OTC for a long period allowing reckless use and avoiding medical care altogether, and many other things. The fact remains that it can be used to help people, but it does have a lot of downsides and dangers. - vandalin7, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6“It stimulates appetite in people with AIDS, it is an analgesic, and blocks nausea in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. And it treats the symptoms of glaucoma.”
http://www.peak.sfu.ca/the-peak/2005-3/issue9/ne-m ... - dwninjungleland, on 11/17/2008, -1/+5Um. Aspirin is one of the drugs EMTs give to you if you're having a heart attack..... It saves probably tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of lives every year.
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2im not sure who dugg dwninjungleland down, but he's absolutely correct. My father had a heart attack and giving him aspirin before the emt's arrived is probably one of the things that saved his life. look up the survival rates of people that did not receive aspirin or cpr while suffering a heart attack before the paramedics arrived to give them shocks or other more advanced means of lifesaving. they are dismal.
- Tiak, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1You have a point... Providing quality of life does not equal saving lives... Really, we're also giving people way more food than they need, we should stop.
- omgwtflawl, on 11/17/2008, -12/+3Now wait a minute, I'm the biggest advocate for pot legalization on this board. But Aspirin is not a bad drug by any standard. If everyone took an aspirin a day, heart attack rates would go through the floor.
- flammablewater, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8did you miss the part about internal bleeding, dementia and irreversible liver damage?
- HigherLogic, on 11/18/2008, -0/+3No thanks. I don't even take aspirin when I have a headache. I try to avoid pills.
- TripMoon, on 11/18/2008, -1/+0Yes, that is a good path to take. I heard once that the pharmaceutical companies actually modeled aspirin after the THC molecule, and was another good reason for them to take it off the legal list.
- DoTheFandango, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7And ulcers would go which way?
- mtwoar, on 11/17/2008, -0/+9Your 'i' is upside down. Just thought you might want to know.
- yevkasem, on 11/17/2008, -5/+6not this again. . . no one dies from marijuana poisoning, true, people have died from marijuana related injuries. heck i know people who have been seriously hurt from being [too] high.
we don't need to make up silly facts, it's not going to convince the feds any faster.- Azulya, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0And people have died from being to fat. What's your point?
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -9/+7who is saying people are dying from marijuana "poisoning" ? People have died from marijuana related heart attack, and have ended their lives after smoking marijuana and their schizophrenia went bezerk. that doesnt mean it shouldnt be legal, alcohol is a much worse scourge and the government is fine with it, but it doesnt mean marijuana is perfectly safe for anyone to take with no restrictions or safeguards or thorough education.
- Azulya, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0Food should be restricted to then. One of my best friends died because of a food-overdose related heart attack. :(
- viet10, on 11/17/2008, -3/+9i'm not against marijuana, but aspirin also saves more lives than marijuana.
- AriaStar, on 11/17/2008, -4/+6Aspirin nearly killed me a few years back when I went into anaphylactic shock. Never had that happen with pot.
- Halsfield, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1anaphylactic shock can happen with any substance. pine tree oil for instance. i have no problem with it but my uncle can die if he gets that onto his skin or eats something with pine nuts.
saying "xxxx is completely fine because ive never had a problem with it" is wrong.
- Halsfield, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1anaphylactic shock can happen with any substance. pine tree oil for instance. i have no problem with it but my uncle can die if he gets that onto his skin or eats something with pine nuts.
- lilshove, on 11/17/2008, -2/+0Hahahaha wait what are we talking about? oh yeah much better than asprin
- dojocasino, on 11/17/2008, -2/+3brain cells?
- Azulya, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0You lack them.
- jeremy111, on 11/18/2008, -0/+3How do you make the upside down i?
- MacintoshMan, on 11/18/2008, -5/+2Anyone forget that marijuana can cause lung cancer after prolonged use along with Schizophrenia? Wait this is digg no one looks at the other side of the argument.
- Ayrapetov, on 11/18/2008, -2/+1Look, I'm sure marijuana isn't anymore dangerous than some legal drugs out there, but you have to remember, Aspirin is taken primarily to relieve pain, while marijuana is taken for enjoyment of the drug.
Also, can you imagine if it is ever legalized, would you be able to stand seeing your parents or friends constantly high? I have enough of a mess on my hands when they're just drunk.- TripMoon, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Umm, being high on pot is a lot different than being drunk. Alcohol can make people obnoxious, aggressive, retarded. On pot, people tend to become milder, more peaceful, insightful. If more people were on pot, perhaps the world would be better.
- Halsfield, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1to be fair tripmoon people can be obnoxious after smoking too, and retarded if you really want to go there. the bad parts of alcohol are the potential aggression, poor motor skills(which marijuana has to a lesser degree), and overdose potential.
- TripMoon, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Umm, being high on pot is a lot different than being drunk. Alcohol can make people obnoxious, aggressive, retarded. On pot, people tend to become milder, more peaceful, insightful. If more people were on pot, perhaps the world would be better.
- craznfish, on 11/18/2008, -1/+7420 diggs!
- eazye123, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1was gonna digg it untill i noticed the +420 diggs. we'll leave the number where it's at!
- elliotys, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1DAMN YOU!!!!! 421 :(
- TinababyK, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1Its 4059 diggs, going to be the most digg story of all time.
- jerstud56, on 11/18/2008, -3/+1+420 diggs +441 / -21
VanhookJoshVanhookJosh
19 hr 26 min ago
Aspirin kills thousands a year. Marijuana kills ... uh... wait... sh!t....
Reply
Now that's awesome. - Fartbandit, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Just because marijuana is illegal and thus makes any scientific study into its effects hard to organise doesn't mean that its harmless. Its more of a case that not enough evidence has been gathered to draw any outright conclusions either way. A comprehensive scientific study on a scale far exceeding the size of any study done previously needs to be undertaken to find out if marijuana has any damaging effects before any steps are taken towards legalisation.
Might i add that if such a study were to be undertaken then i would be first in the queue to be a test subject. :D- Azulya, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0More like many extensive studies have been done and none have found any more problems with it then things like food and water have.
- MacintoshMan, on 11/21/2008, -0/+1Wtf my comment is gone.
- VanhookJosh, on 11/17/2008, -52/+21Edit* Hundreds.
- clintm77, on 11/17/2008, -7/+185If it wasn't for William Randolph Hearst hemp would still be used and the land would not be polluted from all the chemicals that cotton requires.
- rocknrollninja, on 11/17/2008, -0/+47What an *****
- fajitamelt, on 11/17/2008, -2/+5I say we dig up his body, cremate it, use the ashes to plant marijuana plants, and then smoke some joints from them. That'll teach him a lesson.
- soot, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4I know, what a ***** dick.
- vbullinger, on 11/18/2008, -0/+3Agreed.
Here's a sweet quote from that douchebag about the soon to be Spanish-American War to a photographer (totally paraphrased):
"You bring me the pictures, and I'll give you a war!"
I.e. he was drumming up propaganda to get the people to support a war against a country that wasn't hostile towards us. Hey, do some Googling on the sinking of the USS Maine and see if anything's a little fishy about the official story...
- mimbomike, on 11/17/2008, -2/+15Tell me about it. My school just named a building after them and I was disgusted. I wish I had known so I could have protested.
- Zaphrod, on 11/17/2008, -0/+15Them? There was more than one William Randolph Hearst?
- thePTS, on 11/17/2008, -0/+22There were hundreds of them at the time, most of them up to no good.
- dr3minem, on 11/17/2008, -1/+7and they started making trouble in my neighbourhood
- TehJonneh, on 11/17/2008, -1/+1They all got in one little fight and their moms got scared
- Tiak, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1They said, "You're all moving in with your aunties and uncles in Bel Air!"
- fish0507, on 11/17/2008, -1/+7I don't even know who this guy is but I am very disgusted. Shame on you Randolph shame on you !
- mrswirl, on 11/17/2008, -1/+10Haven't you ever seen the classic movie 'Citizen Kane' with Orsen Welles? -- you know: 'Rosebud'? It's well known that the central character was based on WR Hearst.
Hearst was one of the original 'Robber Barren' industrialists of the early 20th century. He owned most of the newspapers in the U.S. at one time along with most of the mining, ranching, and logging businesses that supplied his paper mills with the raw materials needed to make the paper for his publishing business.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_Kane
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hear ... - fish0507, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3thank ya very much for that info, I will actually check that out sounds very interesting. Thanks for taking the time out to do that
- mrswirl, on 11/17/2008, -1/+10Haven't you ever seen the classic movie 'Citizen Kane' with Orsen Welles? -- you know: 'Rosebud'? It's well known that the central character was based on WR Hearst.
- mrswirl, on 11/17/2008, -0/+23Not cotton but paper.
It was Hearst and DuPont that initiated the assault on cannabis because the process of making newsprint from tree fibers requires special oil-based chemicals that DuPont had patented. Hearst also owned all the paper mills that supplied his newspapers with paper.
So they formed a special relationship in order to put the squeeze on hemp paper - which is cheaper to produce and much more naturally renewable than wood pulp - by buying up the "services" of Harry J. Anslinger who was appointed the director of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Harry's personal vendetta was to go after hemp specifically by creating the Marijuana Stamp Act of 1937.
http://www.heartbone.com/no_thugs/hja.htm - EnergyEinstein, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2It was also Nylon manufacturing companies that wanted Hemp ban.
- Abomonog, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1That would also be DuPont.
- rocknrollninja, on 11/17/2008, -0/+47What an *****
- ceredron, on 11/17/2008, -30/+514I ***** love bud man
- BlatheringIdiot, on 11/17/2008, -30/+10I haven't seen a Bud Man commercial in years. I thought Budweiser stopped....What?
Oh. ...completely different meaning.- eloestea, on 11/17/2008, -1/+13Dude, DUFF Man whooped Bud mans ass so horribly the had to sell out to the germans.
DUFF > - saisumimen, on 11/18/2008, -0/+4OOOOOOH YEAAAH!
- eloestea, on 11/17/2008, -1/+13Dude, DUFF Man whooped Bud mans ass so horribly the had to sell out to the germans.
- Garofoli, on 11/17/2008, -1/+36I'm with ya. Nature's painkiller.
- mms13, on 11/17/2008, -2/+13you and me both brotha
- dookie1481, on 11/17/2008, -4/+34I don't. But for *****'s sake, why is it not legal? Really?
Jay- iamthejoker, on 11/17/2008, -1/+14You're named Jay and you don't smoke.
- BrendanJB, on 11/18/2008, -0/+5lol, you're high right now, aren't you Joker?
- ahawks, on 11/17/2008, -34/+4I'm for legalizing it for various reasons, but people like you are why it remains illegal.
That sentence pretty much summed up the essence of "useless piece of ***** pot head ", congrats!- villageatheist, on 11/17/2008, -0/+23Dude. Chill. The. *****. Out.
- darkmagus, on 11/17/2008, -1/+13I ***** love asprin man
- Eqxy, on 11/17/2008, -1/+1I like to wizard.
- xB4R7x, on 11/17/2008, -0/+5Alright, I'm getting tired of people saying ***** like that. With EVERY substance, there are users and abusers. Legal or otherwise. If it was because people abused it that it remained illegal the alcohol and caffeine and countless other legal drugs would be illegal also.
Think about it... you say "useless piece of ***** pothead". like they're worse than the
"worthless piece of ***** alcoholics."
Which honestly... is not true. I'd much rather be a pothead than an alcoholic. - MarkusDee, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2Ordell Robbie: Goddamn girl, you gettin' high already? It's just 2 o'clock!
Melanie: [chuckling] It's that late?
Ordell Robbie: You know you smoke too much of that *****, that ***** gonna rob you of your own ambition.
Melanie: Not if your ambition is to get high and watch TV...
- WhipkickeN, on 11/17/2008, -1/+29Was about to take an aspirin, but then saw this article and remembered i have a little bud left! Thanks.
- BMAnderson, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1me too cheers!
- wtfy0, on 11/17/2008, -0/+5ramen
- figglypooz, on 11/17/2008, -6/+1right on man, meee tooooo.
and to you, who said "people like you are why it remains illegal" and "useless piece of ***** pot head", you need a jay hardcore man, chill out... - iamghost, on 11/17/2008, -0/+16funny how all my aspirins look like nicely rolled blunts.
- BMAnderson, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2you mean joints
- UNL1M1T3D, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2Nana nana nana nana Bud Man!
- MrPingu, on 11/17/2008, -0/+11I ***** love you man.
- SDMDPM14X, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8This comment is ingenious in its simplicity.
- Clbull, on 11/17/2008, -9/+1BUD...
WEIS...
ER - MizanWtf, on 11/17/2008, -0/+5Hell ***** yeah bro
- dracostimpy, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4The ultimate Bud Man:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTr9E9CnDww - hatdrop, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2i ***** love coloring too
- joechristenson, on 11/18/2008, -0/+5i dug you down, but it was just because you were +421 diggs.
I thought it was for a good cause . . . - So1o, on 11/18/2008, -0/+3Thought about undigging to keep it at 420. Got high instead.
- ldner77, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1dug down for 420
- zephyrnug, on 11/18/2008, -0/+3truest and best statement ever.
- BlatheringIdiot, on 11/17/2008, -30/+10I haven't seen a Bud Man commercial in years. I thought Budweiser stopped....What?
- Snoosy, on 11/17/2008, -11/+598Laughter, Introspection, Creative Impulse, and Euphoria.
Those sure are some scary side effects.- GeoGrapher, on 11/17/2008, -6/+102You forgot the other common side effects, like running over little girls in fast food drive throughs.
Man, if I had a dollar for every time that's happened to me...- L1ghtning, on 11/17/2008, -0/+126...then you could go through the drive-through again.
- ethanpack, on 11/17/2008, -2/+13That commercial was wiiiiiild....
- DubiousDrewski, on 11/17/2008, -2/+6hey, I haven't seen that. Can someone link it?
- chirt, on 11/17/2008, -0/+4@ L1ghtning
First time something on digg has made me laugh in a while... - elliotys, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Actually, in that skit, the little girl got ran over because she was high.
- Zephik, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1I actually got hit by a guy who was high as a kite one time, he was leaving a taco bell.
I still support the legalization of marijuana though. A few dumb people aren't going to change my mind, especially when alcohol is legal. It makes me wonder though, had the guy been drunk, would I have been okay? or even alive??
Pot heads: Harmless even when they are harmful? I guess anyways, I mean, he was driving so slow I don't know how the ***** I didn't have time to jump out of the way. lol
- Tenetri, on 11/17/2008, -10/+28yeah, or that one time I shot off the top of my head when I thought that shotgun was made of chocolate.
That was one hell of a bong- PleaseJustDie, on 11/17/2008, -2/+28Pot isn't a hallucinogen
- Glo0, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8Yeah im still waiting to find some pot that makes me think that?? So thats the angle there going with over in the states to stop you all from smoking pot?? Geez in the UK they have given in pretty much, the only thing we get is "it MAY increase the chance of mental health issues later in life" MIGHT....or it leads to Heroin or Meth. If they wanna play that card my mum got me hooked on tea before i can remember, so i blame me liking getting high on that. Its always the parents fault!!
- Tenetri, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6It was from that stupid commercial... same people who made the commercial of the guys running over a girl at a drive though.
The guys all "OMG IM SO HIGH, I CAN DO ANYTHING" and he shoots himself in the face with a shotgun. Which is obviously flawed, because you would actually be 100x less likely to do something harmful to yourself.
Both completely retarded commercials, making completely false claims. - Olumide84, on 11/17/2008, -9/+2@ PleaseJustDie
You couldn't be more wrong about that. Pot IS a hallucinogen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana#Classificat ...
.: You fail. - johnquincysmith, on 11/17/2008, -1/+10@Olumide
"You fail" was kind of funny and ridiculous, seeing as though your link led to some ***** not even relevant.
However, pot defenitelly is classified as a hallucinogen:
"While many drugs clearly fall into the category of either stimulant, depressant, hallucinogen, or antipsychotic, cannabis, containing both THC and CBD, exhibits a mix of all properties, leaning towards hallucinogen properties due to THC being the primary constituent.[51][52][53]"
Now, it's not a hallucinogen as most understand what a hallucinogen is. But marijuana is difinitelly classified as a hallucinogen. - Eqxy, on 11/17/2008, -2/+5weed is definitely a hallucinogen. Anyone that's ever gotten super ripped would know this...
- Olumide84, on 11/17/2008, -2/+0@ johnquincy... If you took 1/2 a second to look at the link, i.e. the "#Classification" portion, you would clearly see that what you quoted is EXACTLY what I linked to. :P
P.s. Thanks for the copy/paste job. - Dymo, on 11/17/2008, -2/+0@olumide84
I don't know about you, but I have tried to hallucinate on pot, and it just doesn't happen. Hash oil, honey oil, and resin balls the size of my fist have not made me hallucinate. Whoever classified pot as a hallucinogen needed to test it first. - hatdrop, on 11/18/2008, -0/+0@eqxy
i don't think that was weed you were smoking - TheNik, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Eat bud brownies or some kind of space cake. I ingested the smoke-equivalent of 3/8ths and my vision was fish-eyed and I experienced close-eyed visuals while listening to music.
- akamarkman, on 11/17/2008, -12/+3LICE anyone?
- nj10ii, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7Shudder, the side affects are scary...
- Amadeus2490, on 11/17/2008, -4/+10Okay, at least be realistic: Some people experience paranoia, especially on their first time and/or when mixed with alcohol.
- yujisaurus, on 11/17/2008, -0/+15yeah, but why would you be mixing it with alcohol if using for medicinal reasons?
- dobbmcrowell, on 11/17/2008, -0/+17They experience paranoia because it's illegal.
- robdazomba, on 11/17/2008, -1/+11The paranoia comes primarily from a fear of getting caught by police. That reaction usually comes from people who are prone to being especially nervous even when sober. If it were legalized, that so-called side effect would disappear.
- Amadeus2490, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1No, i'm not referring to people experiencing the fear of getting caught smoking it. I'm referring to the effects of the THC itself causing paranoia in some people. My point is that marijuana isn't for everybody, the same way that alcohol isn't for everyone. It's unfair to say that it has NO side-effects at all, or that it affects every individual the same way: Some people become mellow, focused and philosophical, while some people lose their attention span and giggle a hell of a lot, etc.
People should have the freedom to smoke marijuana if they so choose, the same way they can drink tequila if they so choose. At least marijuana won't necessarily tokillyou, unless you drop the joint and catch the drapes on fire, or something. - Azulya, on 11/19/2008, -0/+0What's unfair is comparing marijuana to the likes of alcohol..
- dstz, on 11/17/2008, -2/+3You forget paranoia, and some people indeed don't stand a mild hallucinogen (amongst other effects) like THC very well. I can't read the original article, so I'm not sure what you reacted too though.
- OGTL, on 11/17/2008, -3/+3THC doesn't have hallucinogenic properties. Period.
- robdazomba, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3People tend to experience paranoia over getting caught using drugs. The only people I've ever been around who had that reaction with pot were very nervous even when sober and expressed inordinate concern over having the cops catch them.
I'm betting if it was legal, that "side effect" would disappear overnight.
And as OGTL points out, THC is not a hallucinogen, not even mildly so. The only time people hallucinate after smoking pot is when they smoked some that was laced with other drugs--something people wouldn't have to worry about if it was legal and legally distributable.
*****' hell, I get so tired of these circular arguments on this topic. - PissedOffDigger, on 11/17/2008, -3/+3@OGTL, sure it does. Depends on the person.
I'd hallucinate all the time, thinking people were breaking into my house upstairs while I was downstairs. I'd actually hear what sounded like footsteps walking around, or doors opening/closing. Once I dropped a push pin into my carpet and I couldn't find it, so every time I took a step, my foot hurt with a stinging pain because I thought I had stepped on the missing pin.
Especially auditory hallucinations. I'd seriously hear Weird Al's "Just Eat It" as if it were playing. I'd look around at people "..who's playing Weird Al?!" Them: "...wtf?"
So yeah... you most certainly can hallucinate. Not to the extent of LSD, but it's a form. - GeoNine, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7You make a good point, some people definitely get paranoid (i'm one of them), but I think as the Snoosy covered that with "introspection". Some people look within and aren't ready for what they see. Human mind can have some dark corners.
- Dymo, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3@pissedoffdigger
I think you need to find a shrink man... - mykool, on 11/17/2008, -1/+2I cannot tell you how much LSD or how many magic mushrooms I've had in my time, but I can tell you this - nothing has ever made me hallucinate. Does that mean LSD and mushroom aren't hallucinogenic? No. Marijuana is a hallucinogenic.
- hatdrop, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1@ mykool
interesting reverse strawman, never heard that argument before, but it's still fallacious. taking an extremely improbable scenario and applying it's truth to one chemical does not make it true to another chemical.
i've taken niquil so many times it no longer induces extreme drowsiness anymore (like your situation highly improbable but true to myself). does that mean niquil doesn't make people extremely drowsy? no. tylenol will make people drowsy.
the only time anyone would hallucinate smoking weed is if it's laced with some other chemicals.
- figglypooz, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7don't forget the munchies...thats scary ***** man when you run out of doritos and taco bell...
- caes08, on 11/18/2008, -0/+0and funyuns, and if your me sour patch kids.
i gotta have my sour patch kids when im smoking - icmp, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1HAHA. Last weekend my roommate figured out that you can tell someone is a stoner when they stock bags of doritos, cookies and other snacks in their house.
I love it. :)
- caes08, on 11/18/2008, -0/+0and funyuns, and if your me sour patch kids.
- donquixotex, on 11/17/2008, -0/+8I don't find marijuana in general to be negative, and most users are fine, productive members of society. The only issue I have with marijuana is that it makes the user OK with being bored (well, I guess it depends on the high you're getting, but that's often the case) instead of finding a cool hobby, a new book, or something else that actually improves your short existence on this earth. Oftentimes, it just ends up being sitting around doing nothing. Which is fine sometimes, but when it's done too often, you end up wasting away your life.
- Dymo, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1@donquixotex
I like to just sit. It helps me relax. During the day I get too wound up at work, stressed about school and other random *****. Sitting back, and tokin on a bowl smooths me out. It helps me find myself after a ***** day. Only after that can I really begin to try and go have fun with a book, or hobby. - Dodobutt222, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1So basically marijuana gives you L.I.C.E.?
Acronyms rule our world... - lilshove, on 11/17/2008, -0/+0yeah no doubt. lets see... munchies or a bleeding ulcer? gee,maybe the ulcer is good for the health. twisted ***** idiots in the medical industry should really think about the real side effects of both.
- emilychap, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3marijuana has given me panic attacks before even in small doses and i was a regular smoker for a while.. i know that this is actually quite common and have read forums where a lot of people say the same thing about it and have had to stop smoking. while i love it i can't smoke it anymore because of the panic attacks.. :(
so some people do have adverse reactions to it.- L1ghtning, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1I had a panic attack once as well. I find it to be a consequence of my uncontrolled thoughts rather than a symptom of the bud itself. Just calm yourself down perhaps? I know it sounds lame but just think happy thoughts.
- zardoz73, on 11/18/2008, -0/+3I love the bud and am all for legalization, but let's be honest and add one more to that list: paranoia. Doesn't happen often, but when you're thrust into a situation when you - often unexpectedly - have to interact with *gasp!* sober people, you can't help but think "He knows I'm high. He knows I'm high. *****, he knows I'm high." The irony being that it may very well not be true, but the paranoia can be a real thing.
Then again, I'm kind of a nervous person anyway. Some people never seem to be paranoid on weed. - gordonf238, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1Oh yeah, because pot really compels people to... do things.
- Mobius7, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2Actually some people can get depersonalization from smoking weed. I know I did. This isn't some pussy ***** either. I remember crying from the feeling. I thought i was having an anxiety attack for more then 6 months. I am actually very blessed to get over it. Many people do not. I know i can still feel it sometimes but only for maybe 5 minutes or less. Even if i get second hand smoke it could trigger it all again. At least a definite panic attack.
Don't get me wrong I'm sure it's great for 99% of the population but for m little 1% or even less. I can trigger hell. I actually wish i could smoke it, I'm jealous of people walking around or going to school smacked. But...i cant
- GeoGrapher, on 11/17/2008, -6/+102You forgot the other common side effects, like running over little girls in fast food drive throughs.
- Tanktunker, on 11/17/2008, -31/+203Didn't they think cocaine was good for you back then?
- alanr19, on 11/17/2008, -5/+98They also thought smoking cigarettes was too. Go figure.
- DiggDuggDunn, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3I remember the ad (yes....I'm that old)...
"More doctors prefer Camels for their patients who smoke" - joopie, on 11/17/2008, -2/+1Well, cocaine is comprised of many chemicals, pot is natural.
- Matt8Matt, on 11/17/2008, -1/+2And tree frogs emit a natural chemical on their skin. Because it's natural, it can't be bad for you, right?
- iamghost, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2@Matt8Matt
the natural chemical the tree frog is meant to kill/immobilize. the natural chemicals that are in marijuana that get you high don't serve that purpose and won't kill you. it will make you happy, sleepy, and hungry however. - samssf, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1@joopie
Natural...right, until you light it on fire... - thebigdirty, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1@joopie
Cocaine, in its purest form (keep in mind, it comes from coca plant leaves), is just as natural as marijuana. In addition, cocaine can be - and has been - used as medication. Obviously cocaine is a ridiculous comparison to marijuana, however. Just thought a little insight wouldn't hurt. - Tiak, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1@joopie
The coca plant is perfectly natural... So is the poppy for that matter...
Cocaine is to coca as THC pills (which would be a more ideal way of using marijuana) are to cannibis as heroine is to the poppy.
- DiggDuggDunn, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3I remember the ad (yes....I'm that old)...
- AndrewMoyer, on 11/17/2008, -2/+75Yeah, but science is not exactly finding contradicting evidence that either cigarettes or cocaine are medically useful.
The same cannot truthfully be said about marijuana.
Don't forget: pot can be consumed by means other than smoking, virtually eliminating any health concerns of its use.- grantface, on 11/17/2008, -4/+18tea?
- trickyt, on 11/17/2008, -0/+23You didn't know that cocaine is used in the medical setting? It's schedule II for a reason. Meth is a prescription drug as well.
- nj10ii, on 11/17/2008, -3/+12Even smoking it has shown no link to lung cancer! And actually to the contrary.
- AndrewMoyer, on 11/17/2008, -4/+2@trickyttrickyt: How right you are.
I was under the impression they were Schedule I's. I guess it shows that I'm not a doctor/lawyer! - fajitamelt, on 11/17/2008, -3/+1Since when did science have any say in anything?
- fistikuffs, on 11/18/2008, -1/+1The problem with ingesting it any other way than smoking is that the effect is much stronger and more variable which makes it harder to determine accurate doses.
- Stavrosian, on 11/17/2008, -0/+66My grandfather is a doctor. He still maintains that doctors should be able to prescribe cocaine for pretty much everything - it always causes an amusing argument at family gatherings.
- bipolarruledout, on 11/17/2008, -0/+45I think that's awesome. That's almost worth going to a family gathering for.
- popfrogs, on 11/17/2008, -3/+26As a localized general anesthetic, it does a pretty good job and is cheap to produce. If it wasn't banned it'd be even cheaper but the potential for dumbass abuse is too great.
- Medicamusic, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Although it does cause necrosis in any cell it comes in contact with (hence the cause of 'dope nose')
- dbisping, on 11/17/2008, -1/+34for the people in the Andes mountains, coca is a good thing. as it is in natural form coca isn't all that bad.
the problem is prohibition. once you make something illegal there is then new crime associated with it. the artificial value of controlled substances is all related to scarcity and risk.
now that we have an entrenched criminal justice and prison industry based on this prohibition, cocaine is good for us again. just one gov't body, the DEA has a yearly budget over $2.5 billion and the black market economy is in the hundreds of billions of dollars in the US alone. the black market narcotics economy is something that funds part of our, the US, clandestine intelligence infrastructure.
see how good cocaine still is for you? the irony is delicious.- popfrogs, on 11/17/2008, -0/+10When the Taliban was in control of Afghanistan, opium production dropped to nearly zero. After the US began occupation tactics, all of a sudden there was bumper crop after bumper crop. Now Afghanistan can pride itself on being the worlds single largest exporter of opium. Coincidence? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opium_production_in_A ...
- professorfurley, on 11/17/2008, -0/+19cocaine is still in most pharmacies to this day. it's mixed with hydrogen peroxide to create a paste that is used as a numbing agent.
- LemonChicken, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3So that's what that bit in A Scanner Darkly was about?
- ATXChappy, on 11/17/2008, -1/+17They still use cocaine in medical procedures to this very day.
- rivalius13, on 11/17/2008, -3/+10And heroin, it cures what ails ya.
- Halsfield, on 11/17/2008, -0/+9cocaine does have benefits, it has great downsides as well.
- Tbyrd073, on 11/17/2008, -2/+42Cocaine's a helluva drug.
- ether3a1, on 11/17/2008, -0/+9I was wondering how long it'd take...
- filefly, on 11/18/2008, -0/+2That's what she said.
- beesaretasty, on 11/17/2008, -1/+2Most new antidepressants are eerily similar to cocaine but since they are artificial and not just anybody could grow it, they can sell it for whatever they want.
- hoowah, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6I'd love if you could intelligently explain how they are similar. Cocaine is a dopamine reuptake inhibitor whereas most antidepressants are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. the important difference is dopamine's involvement in the reward pathways in the nucleus acumbens and VGA (among others) in the brain and hence its highly addictive properties. but, i'll wait for a response from you...
- opieateit, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Wellbutrin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopamine_reuptake_inh ...
and Ritalin is chemically very similar was well.
http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/addiction/i ... - beesaretasty, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1Bravo on your diggs for calling me out knowing that I will not give you a lecture on the correlation between prolonged antidepressant drug use and the increased sensitivity in dopamine receptors which is leading to the new wave. I will merely ask that you take my superficial assurance that it is the case and if you would like to know more you may contact your local drug addiction counselor who may attend a conference or two on the subject.
- AndrewMoyer, on 11/17/2008, -5/+1I was not aware that the raw chemical form of those drugs were in use in the medical field; I thought they merely used derivatives.
But I guess it shows that I am not a doctor! - derekmas10, on 11/17/2008, -0/+6What??? it's not STILL good for you?
Anything in moderation people... - luciofulci, on 11/17/2008, -0/+9Heroin in the 20s was sold OTC as cough medicine.
- Locke23, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Ironically, Heroin was used to treat Opium addicts.
- fhqwgads, on 11/1
- alanr19, on 11/17/2008, -5/+98They also thought smoking cigarettes was too. Go figure.