Why Is Marijuana Illegal?

frag420

old hippy wrote: »

The Govt here in the UK are trying to do just that.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/03/lobbying-bill-corporate-prs-silence-protest

The "transparency of lobbying, non-party campaigning and trade union administration bill" will treat charities, thinktanks, blogs, community groups and activists of every hue as political parties. From tiny groups vocal on local matters to great national organisations, all risk being silenced in the year before a general election, to avoid falling under electoral law.

Anyways, back on topic - it's up to me what I put in my body - my body is my property - nobody elses. As for what demographic smokes weed?

Everybody. I've met police, doctors, monks and medics, couriers, receptionists, office folk, city boys, famers, labourers, life savers and lawyers who all partake.

So when's your next party, sounds awesome!

Mar Mar Marmalade

I can imagine it's going to be legal close-to worldwide in about 35-50 years.

tashiusclay

smoking_kills wrote: »

Thanks for proving my point about not watching crap on the internet.

I should have stopped watching when he said it was a gift from god....

But anyway a few min in he claims it Cures Cancer :eek:, and a Harvard University study said so....

So off we go to the page he shows on the video....


"Harvard University researchers have found that, in both laboratory and mouse studies, delta-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) cuts tumor growth in half in common lung cancer while impeding the cancer's ability to spread"

Oh that says nothing about curing cancer, also the study is using lab mice...

"According to the researchers, THC fights lung cancer by curbing epidermal growth factor (EGF), a molecule that promotes the growth and spread of particularly aggressive non-small cell lung cancers. "It seems to go to (EGF) receptor sites on cells and inhibit growth," said Horovitz, who was not involved in the study"

That says it curbs the growth of PARTICULAR TYPES of lung cancer????

"The findings are preliminary, however, and other outside experts urged caution.

"It's an interesting laboratory study (but) you have to have enough additional animal studies to make sure the effect is reproducible and to make sure that there are no overt toxic effects," said Dr. Norman Edelman, chief medical officer of the American Lung Association. "It's a little more than tantalizing because it's a compound that we know has been in humans and has not caused major problems."

Tantalizing, but still no "Cures Cancer" ....

Stopped watching there...






@ DrunkenMonkeys
I'll tell you what it does do, improve your spelling and grammar.

Well is that all you have??? Still nothing to support your <--- opinions eah... If I cant spell i must be wrong :eek:

Such a rant filled post full of waffle, good man/woman yourself, thanks for that, very enlightening.

Tell me this, since you're so adamant that it full-stop doesn't cure Cancer, can you tell me of a substance/treatment that does have good consistent success in curing Cancer?

Grayson

tashiusclay wrote: »

Such a rant filled post full of waffle, good man/woman yourself, thanks for that, very enlightening.

Tell me this, since you're so adamant that it full-stop doesn't cure Cancer, can you tell me of a substance/treatment that does have good consistent success in curing Cancer?

If the word treating had've been used instead of curing the discussion would have stopped a couple of pages back.

smoking_kills

tashiusclay wrote: »

Such a rant filled post full of waffle, good man/woman yourself, thanks for that, very enlightening.

Tell me this, since you're so adamant that it full-stop doesn't cure Cancer, Can you tell me of a substance/treatment that does have good consistent success in curing Cancer?

I never said it full-stop dosen't cure cancer. The study said that..The point was that video claimed it cured cancer. Thats nonsense. The study said nothing of the sort. Pro weed campaigners do more harm to their cause spouting crap like that, as it brings into question everything else they say.

Secondly whats the point of that question? Do tell?

Plenty of cancer treatments have excellent success rates, but it depends on a number of factors, like how early the cancer was diagnosed, age, general health, type of cancer. Its not a question of any sort, and nothing to do with anything...

smoking_kills

Grayson wrote: »

If the word treating had've been used instead of curing the discussion would have stopped a couple of pages back.

Correct.