Agnostic Forums - View Single Post

GX · 02-09-2008, 02:06 PM

[/quote]

You have some good points here.

That’s why I speak of it interns as an arbitrary line. Where you are misleading is the statements about the 3 or 3 puffs thing. That is not totally true. If a person did 2-3 puffs on a Friday or Saturday night that would not be bad.

I have direct experience with families where mom or dad puffs away. I can only say that once they stopped the family life improved. No raw data here, just my little observation.

How does eating make it safer?

Vaporizing it? What does that mean? I am way out of the loop. I

I agree with Rom, we need data.[/quote]

You make some good points as well which I will address one by one.

“That’s why I speak of it interns as an arbitrary line. Where you are misleading is the statements about the 3 or 3 puffs thing. That is not totally true. If a person did 2-3 puffs on a Friday or Saturday night that would not be bad.”

This is where education comes in. There is a point of diminishing returns when toking. After 2 or 3 puffs you reach a plateau and technically do not need anymore weed and will not get any higher than if you smoke more than 2 or 3 puffs. Those who do are wasting it and needlessly trashing their lungs. There is also no evidence supporting that if you hold the smoke in your lungs longer, you will get higher.

“I have direct experience with families where mom or dad puffs away. I can only say that once they stopped the family life improved. No raw data here, just my little observation.”

I agree, but did its illegality stop them from smoking in the first place? Also, if it were legal, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the thc content would be dramatically reduced so good ole dad would be merely “lightly intoxicated” around his kids instead of in a “zombiefied” stupor that the current illegal moonshine grade stuff gives you. If parents are to smoke, a better situation would be “light intoxication” similar to a few drinks as opposed to a “zomibified stupor”.

“How does eating make it safer?”

You do not do any damage to your lungs. That is big health reason given by the anti pot advocates against legalization

“Vaporizing it? What does that mean? I am way out of the loop.”

Vaporizing is a new technology of ingestion. Quite simply a vaporizer is a device that heats the plant material to a point prior to combustion that releases the thc into a non-smoke “vapor”. This makes any negative consequences to your lungs virtually non-existent

“I agree with Rom, we need data.”

We already have data and it is quite benign. The government has pumped millions into research to uncover the dangers of pot and have found nothing. See my previous postings today on the research conclusions of the studies that were conducted.

02-09-2008, 02:06 PM	#53 (permalink)
GX Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Male, Chicago Illinois, USA Posts: 315	[/quote] You have some good points here. That’s why I speak of it interns as an arbitrary line. Where you are misleading is the statements about the 3 or 3 puffs thing. That is not totally true. If a person did 2-3 puffs on a Friday or Saturday night that would not be bad. I have direct experience with families where mom or dad puffs away. I can only say that once they stopped the family life improved. No raw data here, just my little observation. How does eating make it safer? Vaporizing it? What does that mean? I am way out of the loop. I I agree with Rom, we need data.[/quote] You make some good points as well which I will address one by one. “That’s why I speak of it interns as an arbitrary line. Where you are misleading is the statements about the 3 or 3 puffs thing. That is not totally true. If a person did 2-3 puffs on a Friday or Saturday night that would not be bad.” This is where education comes in. There is a point of diminishing returns when toking. After 2 or 3 puffs you reach a plateau and technically do not need anymore weed and will not get any higher than if you smoke more than 2 or 3 puffs. Those who do are wasting it and needlessly trashing their lungs. There is also no evidence supporting that if you hold the smoke in your lungs longer, you will get higher. “I have direct experience with families where mom or dad puffs away. I can only say that once they stopped the family life improved. No raw data here, just my little observation.” I agree, but did its illegality stop them from smoking in the first place? Also, if it were legal, as I mentioned in an earlier post, the thc content would be dramatically reduced so good ole dad would be merely “lightly intoxicated” around his kids instead of in a “zombiefied” stupor that the current illegal moonshine grade stuff gives you. If parents are to smoke, a better situation would be “light intoxication” similar to a few drinks as opposed to a “zomibified stupor”. “How does eating make it safer?” You do not do any damage to your lungs. That is big health reason given by the anti pot advocates against legalization “Vaporizing it? What does that mean? I am way out of the loop.” Vaporizing is a new technology of ingestion. Quite simply a vaporizer is a device that heats the plant material to a point prior to combustion that releases the thc into a non-smoke “vapor”. This makes any negative consequences to your lungs virtually non-existent “I agree with Rom, we need data.” We already have data and it is quite benign. The government has pumped millions into research to uncover the dangers of pot and have found nothing. See my previous postings today on the research conclusions of the studies that were conducted.