Cannabis Vs Alcohol?
#61
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: London
Posts: 4,797
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brendan - OK, I am convinced now
however, phrases like "five joints a day" seem a little vague...
overall, the report seems to suggest that the main reason the the health effects of canabis are not as important as those of alcohol or tobacco is because canabis is used less. that doesn't necessarily make it less dangerous.
however, phrases like "five joints a day" seem a little vague...
overall, the report seems to suggest that the main reason the the health effects of canabis are not as important as those of alcohol or tobacco is because canabis is used less. that doesn't necessarily make it less dangerous.
#62
New Scientist report
High anxieties
What the WHO doesn't want you to know about cannabis
Health officials in Geneva have suppressed the publication of a politically sensitive analysis that confirms what ageing hippies have known for decades: cannabis is safer than alcohol or tobacco.
According to a document leaked to New Scientist, the analysis concludes not only that the amount of dope smoked worldwide does less harm to public health than drink and cigarettes, but that the same is likely to hold true even if people consumed dope on the same scale as these legal substances.
The comparison was due to appear in a report on the harmful effects of cannabis published last December by the WHO. But it was ditched at the last minute following a long and intense dispute between WHO officials, the cannabis experts who drafted the report and a group of external advisers.
s
As the WHO's first report on cannabis for 15 years, the document had been eagerly awaited by doctors and specialists in drug abuse. The official explanation for excluding the comparison of dope with legal substances is that "the reliability and public health significance of such comparisons are doubtful". However, insiders say the comparison was scientifically sound and that the WHO caved in to political pressure. It is understood that advisers from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse and the UN International Drug Control Programme warned the WHO that it would play into the hands of groups campaigning to legalise marijuana.
One member of the expert panel which drafted the report, says: "In the eyes of some, any such comparison is tantamount to an argument for marijuana legalisation." Another member, Billy Martin of the Medical College of Virginia in Richmond, says that some WHO officials "went nuts" when they saw the draft report.
The leaked version of the excluded section states that the reason for making the comparisons was "not to promote one drug over another but rather to minimise the double standards that have operated in appraising the health effects of cannabis". Nevertheless, in most of the comparisons it makes between cannabis and alcohol, the illegal drug comes out better--or at least on a par--with the legal one.
The report concludes, for example, that "in developed societies cannabis appears to play little role in injuries caused by violence, as does alcohol". It also says that while the evidence for fetal alcohol syndrome is "good", the evidence that cannabis can harm fetal development is "far from conclusive".
Cannabis also fared better in five out of seven comparisons of long-term damage to health. For example, the report says that while heavy consumption of either drug can lead to dependence, only alcohol produces a "well defined withdrawal syndrome". And while heavy drinking leads to cirrhosis, severe brain injury and a much increased risk of accidents and suicide, the report concludes that there is only "suggestive evidence that chronic cannabis use may produce subtle defects in cognitive functioning".
Two comparisons were more equivocal. The report says that both heavy drinking and marijuana smoking can produce symptoms of psychosis in susceptible people. And, it says, there is evidence that chronic cannabis smoking "may be a contributory cause of cancers of the aerodigestive tract".
From New Scientist, 21 February 1998
High anxieties
What the WHO doesn't want you to know about cannabis
Health officials in Geneva have suppressed the publication of a politically sensitive analysis that confirms what ageing hippies have known for decades: cannabis is safer than alcohol or tobacco.
According to a document leaked to New Scientist, the analysis concludes not only that the amount of dope smoked worldwide does less harm to public health than drink and cigarettes, but that the same is likely to hold true even if people consumed dope on the same scale as these legal substances.
The comparison was due to appear in a report on the harmful effects of cannabis published last December by the WHO. But it was ditched at the last minute following a long and intense dispute between WHO officials, the cannabis experts who drafted the report and a group of external advisers.
s
As the WHO's first report on cannabis for 15 years, the document had been eagerly awaited by doctors and specialists in drug abuse. The official explanation for excluding the comparison of dope with legal substances is that "the reliability and public health significance of such comparisons are doubtful". However, insiders say the comparison was scientifically sound and that the WHO caved in to political pressure. It is understood that advisers from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse and the UN International Drug Control Programme warned the WHO that it would play into the hands of groups campaigning to legalise marijuana.
One member of the expert panel which drafted the report, says: "In the eyes of some, any such comparison is tantamount to an argument for marijuana legalisation." Another member, Billy Martin of the Medical College of Virginia in Richmond, says that some WHO officials "went nuts" when they saw the draft report.
The leaked version of the excluded section states that the reason for making the comparisons was "not to promote one drug over another but rather to minimise the double standards that have operated in appraising the health effects of cannabis". Nevertheless, in most of the comparisons it makes between cannabis and alcohol, the illegal drug comes out better--or at least on a par--with the legal one.
The report concludes, for example, that "in developed societies cannabis appears to play little role in injuries caused by violence, as does alcohol". It also says that while the evidence for fetal alcohol syndrome is "good", the evidence that cannabis can harm fetal development is "far from conclusive".
Cannabis also fared better in five out of seven comparisons of long-term damage to health. For example, the report says that while heavy consumption of either drug can lead to dependence, only alcohol produces a "well defined withdrawal syndrome". And while heavy drinking leads to cirrhosis, severe brain injury and a much increased risk of accidents and suicide, the report concludes that there is only "suggestive evidence that chronic cannabis use may produce subtle defects in cognitive functioning".
Two comparisons were more equivocal. The report says that both heavy drinking and marijuana smoking can produce symptoms of psychosis in susceptible people. And, it says, there is evidence that chronic cannabis smoking "may be a contributory cause of cancers of the aerodigestive tract".
From New Scientist, 21 February 1998
#63
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ajm
Sure its natural! Have you never seen a wasp drunk on eating a fermented apple? Yeast occurs naturally on leaves and fruit, which is how wine and beer came to be unintentionally fermented in the first place!
I think people should be able to eat, drink, smoke, inject what the hell they like, and in exchange for that freedom they must accept responsibility for their own actions.
I think people should be able to eat, drink, smoke, inject what the hell they like, and in exchange for that freedom they must accept responsibility for their own actions.
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: same time, different place
Posts: 11,313
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
For anyone interested, one of the authors of the report has also written the occasional other article on drug and or alcohol problems. If you can't access the first link I gave, look here for "WHO project on health implications of cannabis use".
I don't say the guy is brilliant and I don't say he's infallible. But you can't argue that he has to be pretty good for WHO to contract him to write the report in the first place, whether or not they choose to publish the end product.
I don't say the guy is brilliant and I don't say he's infallible. But you can't argue that he has to be pretty good for WHO to contract him to write the report in the first place, whether or not they choose to publish the end product.
#66
Scooby Regular
In 15 years time cannabis will be legal, and this debate will not exist - scary but true IMO.
Remember that back in the "olden days", Tea and Coffee were banned substances, just in the same way that Cannabis has been for so long.
Remember that back in the "olden days", Tea and Coffee were banned substances, just in the same way that Cannabis has been for so long.
#67
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK drug death figures: deaths per annum for 1995 (latest I could find)
Alcohol[1] 4,235
Tobacco[1] 120,000
Cannabis[1,2] 1
LSD[1] 0
Peanuts[3] 7
Viagra[3] 7
Ecstasy[1] 4
[1] Hansard figures for 1995.
[2] Death caused by inhaling vomit [Lord's Hansard report on medicinal cannabis]
[3] BBC news
Alcohol[1] 4,235
Tobacco[1] 120,000
Cannabis[1,2] 1
LSD[1] 0
Peanuts[3] 7
Viagra[3] 7
Ecstasy[1] 4
[1] Hansard figures for 1995.
[2] Death caused by inhaling vomit [Lord's Hansard report on medicinal cannabis]
[3] BBC news
#68
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It makes you wonder how they work these figures out though.... for example do the alcohol figures include misadventure whilst drunk, does tobacco assume that all heart attacks suffered by smokers are due to tobacco etc.?
#70
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rik1471
As long as you don't harm/affect anyone an adult should be able to take anything he/she wishes.
#71
Scooby Regular
The bottom line with cannabis is that there are certain people that it simply just doesn't agree with and can cause psychotic episodes... trust me on ths one as have been there. This tends to happen when the content of the cannabis (THC or whetever the active ingredient is) is particularly strong
However as Brendan (I think) has pointed out in the past, these are people that are predisposed to this and tend to have an existing underlying condition.
Leslies comment about brain damage are simply not true I agree with most of Leslie's posts on here but you've got that one plain wrong mate.
as for the above well... cannabis is effectively an exagerator (sp) of emotions/senses... ie, doesn't music sound much better etc.... so, if there is an underlying anxiety condition then it will maginify the problem big time, so the last thing I'd prescribe is strong weed... panic attack here we come... but if you are relaxed in the first place then it's going to maginify that and you'll be even more so..
This argument has been done to death on SN and as so many people have already pointed out in this thread... never resolved
PS Smoked the damned stuff daily for 17 years... prior to growing up and saving myself from middle-age hippidom and feel 100% qualified to comment, also suffered acute anxiety/panic attacks for 12 of those years and would love to argue the toss with anyone who thinks there is no direct link between the two
Peace brothers
However as Brendan (I think) has pointed out in the past, these are people that are predisposed to this and tend to have an existing underlying condition.
Leslies comment about brain damage are simply not true I agree with most of Leslie's posts on here but you've got that one plain wrong mate.
I was told you can (or at least you could) get cannabis prescribed to you in parts of usa for anxiety etc.
This argument has been done to death on SN and as so many people have already pointed out in this thread... never resolved
PS Smoked the damned stuff daily for 17 years... prior to growing up and saving myself from middle-age hippidom and feel 100% qualified to comment, also suffered acute anxiety/panic attacks for 12 of those years and would love to argue the toss with anyone who thinks there is no direct link between the two
Peace brothers
#72
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree siPie as my m8 had the same problem with grass a few years ago. He stopped and was put on various drugs like seroxat, prozac, venlafaxine and citalopram, all of which made him feel much worse especially seroxtat which made him feel so low he couldnt go outside for months. He is now on ciprimil and occasionally has a pipe of good organic grass now and again with no apparent side effects. The only problems is he cant give up ciprimil as he feels terrible without it. Nothing is simple in brain chemistry especially for those people who through stupidity or misinformation smoke the crappy toxic resin/soap mainly available in the UK. That crap would make anyone ill.
#73
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ajm
I agree, although I think it should come with the caveat that they must accept responsibility for their own welfare. For example, a habitual drinker should not expect to receive indefinate free treatment if they are unwilling to stop.
Last edited by Jye; 01 April 2004 at 12:08 PM.
#74
Scooby Regular
is simple in brain chemistry especially for those people who through stupidity or misinformation smoke the crappy toxic resin/soap mainly available in the UK. That crap would make anyone ill.
Sorry to hear your mate is struggling to give up the meds, good luck to him.
I'm free of all meds and have been for a number of years but agree that Seroxat is an evil drug, it made me feel like **** too. I was on it for a few months, years ago and I binned it and refused all other meds since. Luckily I managed to sort my head (admittedly with help) and got my life nicely back to what it should be but I sure pity the other poor sods that have had similar episodes brought on by weed
Even after the nonsense that I went through I would still lean towards cannabis being 1,000,000 times safer than excess alcohol...as long as it ain't cut with the crap that you mention appears in soap bar ... YUK
#75
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
N1 siPie, glad to hear it m8. I have told him he'd be better of stopping smoking atm but he 'says' he's OK and that it actually helps him now. I'm not so sure myself, especially as he doesnt/cant come of the prescribed meds. I cant do more than that though I'm keeping an eye on him.
#76
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Leslie
Jye,
As I said in my post, I quoted what has been said by the medical experts about smoking cannabis being a cancer risk as well as causing brain damage in the long term. Don't how that justifies you calling me "silly".
Fatherpierre, my mistake for not reading all the first post a second time!
Les
As I said in my post, I quoted what has been said by the medical experts about smoking cannabis being a cancer risk as well as causing brain damage in the long term. Don't how that justifies you calling me "silly".
Fatherpierre, my mistake for not reading all the first post a second time!
Les
No offence Leslie, but silly seemed an apt word to describe the brain damage 'theory'. Have you a link to this brain damge article btw.
BTW eating vegetables is a cancer risk these days Leslie
#77
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The biosphere
Posts: 7,824
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jye
Why not ajm? If the government allow it to be sold and then tax these highly addictive products then should they (we) not expect to pay a heavy price somewhere down the line. Its not as if they dont know whats harming the population. Surely thats why alcohol and tobacco are taxed so heavily, to pay for health care. If not we should all be free to have stills in our gardens, cheap tobacco and to pay for our health care. The government cant have it both ways.
#78
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Dumbartonshire
Posts: 5,896
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But you were talking about habitual drinkers and drink, which irc is more than adequately taxed. Until they can prove good quality herbal cannabis costs the tax payer money through health care they can bog off wae the tax
#79
>>I don't think people should have one without the other<< LOL
Weed can make people dozy - that's fine at home but not if it carries over to work though. You need to be focussed at work not spaced! Moderation in all D
Weed can make people dozy - that's fine at home but not if it carries over to work though. You need to be focussed at work not spaced! Moderation in all D
#84
Jye
No I have not got a link over that brain damage article, I do remember reading it a while ago and that was why I quoted it. "Misinformed" sounds better anyway and not having claimed to be an expert I accept that may be true. I hope so anyway. I have never tried any drug anyway except having been hooked on tobacco and I am very glad to be off it now. Don't mind a drink either. I did not like the thought of a lot of people manufacturing the chance of early dementia for themselves in the future which was what the article was saying. I quoted it as what appeared to be an accredited result of the use of cannabis. Hope this answers your point too Sipie.
When it comes to the point of all those other prescribed drugs, it is true that they are likely to have all kinds of side effects. The doctor will weigh up the pros and cons of the side effects versus the problems caused by the particular illness and prescribe for whatever is the better course for the patient.
Les
No I have not got a link over that brain damage article, I do remember reading it a while ago and that was why I quoted it. "Misinformed" sounds better anyway and not having claimed to be an expert I accept that may be true. I hope so anyway. I have never tried any drug anyway except having been hooked on tobacco and I am very glad to be off it now. Don't mind a drink either. I did not like the thought of a lot of people manufacturing the chance of early dementia for themselves in the future which was what the article was saying. I quoted it as what appeared to be an accredited result of the use of cannabis. Hope this answers your point too Sipie.
When it comes to the point of all those other prescribed drugs, it is true that they are likely to have all kinds of side effects. The doctor will weigh up the pros and cons of the side effects versus the problems caused by the particular illness and prescribe for whatever is the better course for the patient.
Les
Last edited by Leslie; 03 April 2004 at 10:43 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post