Cannabis withdrawal worse than heroin

Rezident

Laughable.

There is zero "withdrawal" from cannabis as it is not physically addictive, it can be psychologically addictive, you know like chocolate and everything else. Heroin, on the other hand, I have it on good authority, can be tricky to get off. Amazed at the misinformation on this one.

DoYouEvenLift

RandomIrishGuy wrote: »

Anyone who says cannabis isnt addictive is talking rubbish! Iv been smoking heavily since im 12 years of age. Im now 26 and still puffing away,not as much as i used to,maybe 1 or 2 at the most in the evening to relax,but im finding it impossible to quit completley :-(

Have been off it for 1 or 2 months at a time over the years,mainly because of drought,but i have never sufferd any withdrawl symtoms,just a craving like craving a ciggerette exept the ciggerette dosnt kill the craving

Do you smoke only weed or mix in tobacco also? If it's all weed, that is a whole lot of weed weekly. How much do you spend and how often?

denhaagenite

rubadub wrote: »

There is no GM herb as said. Many are smoking pretty much the same strains their fathers were too, its simply grown using better methods. People grow rosehips to extract vitamin C, I expect in the last 30-40years the farmers have also developed ways to increase potency from the exact same strains, and figure out which strains are best.

Get in a time machine and get seom reasonable seeds from the 60's and a grower with todays knowledge would likely be able to get near the same potency as the weed the gutter press might call "skunk" which is usually the one said to be genetically modified. Many of the seed breeding sites will openly talk of the genetics of the plants, and many would date back to the 70's, they are keeping the same "mother plants" going by taking cuttings over & over.

Also you talk like high potency is a negative thing, it is a huge improvement health wise. It is often said its 10 times stronger today or even more. Do you really think doctors prescribing patients to smoke cannabis would prefer them to be smoking 10 times the amount of plant matter to give them relief? Many people vapourise to avoid smoking plant matter at all.

... similarly a person today smoking high potency correctly grown, correctly trimmed weed is not going to smoke the same weight as his "forefather" who was getting low quality poorly grown stale ditch weed including parts of the plant which no grower would consider smoking.

Sorry, I just think your post is one massive contradiction. You say that people are smoking the same strains as the 60s, yet of higher potency.... The potency being altered is a change in the actual substance so I really don't believe that it is the same stuff. Not to mention nobody would have had access to stuff that was grown overseas, or the seeds, and this is possible now.

rubadub wrote: »

I have never heard of this done on a street level. I have no doubt some home growers might want to increase potency and could possibly extract oil from low potency left over leaves. The only additions I have heard in recent years are silica & glass substances, contaminating it to add weight and make it appear like it has "crystals".

This is certainly a reason for testing & regulation, just like prohibition in the US was lifted partly due to all the dangerous contaminated alcohol going on.

In many countries extracted oil is class A or its equivalent, so its rarely seen or made for commercial sale.

Well if you've never heard of it obviously it's not happening :rolleyes:. Even here in NL, where it is legal to sell and consume (subject to stringent conditions set out by the municipalities) there is a grey area around manufacture and supply. There are no checks, you can find out where your tomatoes come from but not your weed. If you grow it yourself then fine, but I think of all the weed consumed here, very little is self grown.

Bottom line is, it has been legal here for years and despite all the money it has brought in to previously struggling areas through general taxation, tourism etc etc, they are now back tracking. You can draw your own conclusions as to why this is happening. They have introduced a membership card system, for which you need to first go to your local council and get a proof of residence (which requires a reason for the proof to be stated) so it is suspected they are currently trying to conduct some kind of longitudinal study on the effects of cannabis use. The sellers and users in Amsterdam objected so strongly to this on the grounds that it was a breach of privacy that it was scrapped there after 48 hours or so but it is in place in most of the other major cities.

I have no doubt that there are plenty of responsible growers and users but I think it is better to really think about all aspects of the issue whether you smoke it or not, rather than sticking your fingers in your ears and pretending that there's no down side. I don't smoke it (have tried it a few times but not habitually, can't even roll a joint), I have friends that don't, friends that do and have no issues at all and friends that do who have already or who I can foresee having issues. Just like alcohol, which is already a huge problem so I don't see the benefit of adding another substance to the fire.

old_aussie

It's not pot, it's not heroin, it's peanuts that are the real killers in todays society.

I hear a peanut can kill you, so why aren't they banned.

Why isn't the government doing something to save the children.

Peist2007

Cannabis, if made legal, would not be made available to school children. So the above stories (Laoisman's is bull by the way given his behaviour on this thread) are not relevant to the legalisation debate as i think we are all in agreement that teenagers will not be permitted to just walk in and buy it.

Legalisation will help keep it out of teenager's hands as they will now need ID to prchase it, as opposed to buying off their local dealer now who, as far as i know, would not demand ID before sale.

Poncke

I am Dutch, smoked during my whole teenager career, into my early twenties, a gram or more a day, puffing it up with my friends, until I grew up and just enjoy the occasional splif. No withdrawals ever, no urge to go on heroine either. If its legal in Holland, I am sure its not as harmful as people make it out to be. More and more countries are loosening up their laws to allow recreational smoking. Heck, even in the USA its legal in some states, where they have a fierce war on drugs going on. Its all good lads and lassies, blaze it up, responsibly.

DamagedTrax

Poncke wrote: »

I am Dutch, smoked during my whole teenager career, into my early twenties, a gram or more a day, puffing it up with my friends, until I grew up and just enjoy the occasional splif. No withdrawals ever, no urge to go on heroine either. If its legal in Holland, I am sure its not as harmful as people make it out to be. More and more countries are loosening up their laws to allow recreational smoking. Heck, even in the USA its legal in some states, where they have a fierce war on drugs going on. Its all good lads and lassies, blaze it up, responsibly.

unfortunately a lot of people seem to imagine responsible smokers as mong heads that just havent found heroin... yet.

Laois6556

Peist2007 wrote: »

Cannabis, if made legal, would not be made available to school children. So the above stories (Laoisman's is bull by the way given his behaviour on this thread) are not relevant to the legalisation debate as i think we are all in agreement that teenagers will not be permitted to just walk in and buy it.

Legalisation will help keep it out of teenager's hands as they will now need ID to prchase it, as opposed to buying off their local dealer now who, as far as i know, would not demand ID before sale.

My story is not bull. Just goes to show again the self centered nature of most of the pro legalisation side. You don't care that cannabis can be very dangerous for kids, you don't care that legalising it will increase it's usage amongst teenagers, all you care about is yourselves and being able to smoke when you want.

Poncke

DamagedTrax wrote: »

unfortunately a lot of people seem to imagine responsible smokers as mong heads that just havent found heroin... yet.

Agree, they seem to use a certain stat to support their argument, which really is just a fallacy.

9 out of 10 heroine users, have used weed, so they say that smoking weed (or hasj) leads to heroine addiction. Utter BS. You need to look at the people taking the step from weed to heroine. And those numbers paint a different story.

I never had any urge to step it up. I did have the urge to tone it down, become and adult and get on with life. Funny story, my mom was worried about me smoking, fear of getting into heroine, then she read up about it. She realised it wasnt all that bad, resulting in her trying it herself once, in the form of a chocolate. Happy days.

mikom

Laois6556 wrote: »

My story is not bull. Just goes to show again the self centered nature of most of the pro legalisation side. You don't care that cannabis can be very dangerous for kids, you don't care that legalising it will increase it's usage amongst teenagers, all you care about is yourselves and being able to smoke when you want.

Cars can be very dangerous for kids.
Alcohol can be very dangerous for kids.

Horses can be very dangerous for kids.
Peanuts can be very dangerous for kids.
Rugby can be very dangerous for kids.
Farms can be very dangerous for kids.

Trolling can be very dangerous for kids.

Peist2007

Laois6556 wrote: »

My story is not bull. Just goes to show again the self centered nature of most of the pro legalisation side. You don't care that cannabis can be very dangerous for kids, you don't care that legalising it will increase it's usage amongst teenagers, all you care about is yourselves and being able to smoke when you want.

Your behaviour on this thread from the start completely gives your position away. You have decided that your baiting was getting you nowhere so you changed tack. And it has been spotted and noted. I really couldnt give a toss what your opinion is on this subject, i just enjoyed calling you out. As i said before, trolling is an artform, you're a long long way from that standard

Edit: and AGAIN your point on its legalisation increasing use amongst teenagers is absurd.

catallus

mikom wrote: »

Cars can be very dangerous for kids.
Alcohol can be very dangerous for kids.

Horses can be very dangerous for kids.
Peanuts can be very dangerous for kids.
Rugby can be very dangerous for kids.
Farms can be very dangerous for kids.

Trolling can be very dangerous for kids.

Are you saying drugs are ok for kids?

Poncke

catallus wrote: »

Are you saying drugs are ok for kids?

You are creating a fallacy and putting words in someone's mouth.

Everything is dangerous for kids, even a freaken KinderSurprise chocolate egg, that doesnt mean we want to hand out drugs to kids !

mikom

catallus wrote: »

Are you saying drugs are ok for kids?

Are you saying cannabis should be legalised for kids?

catallus

Poncke wrote: »

You are creating a fallacy and putting words in someone's mouth.

Everything is dangerous for kids, even a freaken KinderSurprise chocolate egg, that doesnt mean we want to hand out drugs to kids !

Fallacy? No, that would be this other guy.

mikom wrote: »

Are you saying cannabis should be legalised for kids?

ScumLord

denhaagenite wrote: »

Sorry, I just think your post is one massive contradiction. You say that people are smoking the same strains as the 60s, yet of higher potency.... The potency being altered is a change in the actual substance so I really don't believe that it is the same stuff. Not to mention nobody would have had access to stuff that was grown overseas, or the seeds, and this is possible now.

There are certainly more breeds out there now, seed sellers have travelled all over the world looking for isolated breeds untouched by man for centuries or used by a small collection of people living high in some mountains somewhere, they've found them, packaged them and sold them. They also mix breeds to come up with new breeds but what we're talking about here is no different than different breeds of oranges or grapes. While someone might say they prefer Valencia oranges over another breed it's still just an orange that might be slightly juicier than the other breeds. I don't think we have weed today that's massively more potent than in the past we just have more variety and I think a lot of that is simply down to the fact people are making a business out of selling seeds, they need new products and they have to have reasons why you'd pay more for one seed over another.

It's still just weed and nothing compared to it's hash counterpart. People have used hash since the beginning of cannabis consumption, so to say weed has gotten slightly more potent and people aren't used to it is like saying to someone they shouldn't drink an 8% beer because it's twice as strong as normal beers and you've never had anything stronger than a normal beer.

Generic Dreadhead

I would have thought Strains, not Breeds

JC01

Laois6556 wrote: »

My story is not bull. Just goes to show again the self centered nature of most of the pro legalisation side. You don't care that cannabis can be very dangerous for kids, you don't care that legalising it will increase it's usage amongst teenagers, all you care about is yourselves and being able to smoke when you want.

Increase it's usage amongst teenagers? How do you come to that conclusion?

And before you think I'm a 24/7 stoner I used to smoke very regularly but quit years ago, I'm just very curious about where your getting that idea from

Rory28

Why do people always bang on about the kids and teenagers?
They shouldn't be doing any kind of drugs illegal or legal. They shouldn't even be included in the debate.

ScumLord

Cormac... wrote: »

I would have thought Strains, not Breeds

You could be right but I can't find anything definitive. The only source that asks that question the replies say it's the same thing.

Rory28 wrote: »

Why do people always bang on about the kids and teenagers?
They shouldn't be doing any kind of drugs illegal or legal. They shouldn't even be included in the debate.

Because sometimes when people become parents they see the world in levels of danger to my child.

mikom

ScumLord wrote: »

Because sometimes when people become parents they see the world in levels of danger to my child.

While horsing the sugerpuffs into the little nippers.

ScumLord

mikom wrote: »

While horsing the sugerpuffs into the little nippers.

And unnecessary antibiotics.

Roquentin

puff the magic dragon lives by the sea....

DamagedTrax

Rory28 wrote: »

Why do people always bang on about the kids and teenagers?
They shouldn't be doing any kind of drugs illegal or legal. They shouldn't even be included in the debate.

they'll get it legally or illegally. a concentrated effort on pushing better, more open parenting would be money better spent than locking up some kid caught with an ounce of weed.

i have open discussions with my son about it. he's not allowed to smoke it and he knows that.. maybe he has tried it, i've never noticed and as a smoker myself i do know the signs. the point is that he's not afraid to talk about it, he's asked my my position on legalisation and ive told him.

trying to terrify teenagers with the evils of cannabis is 100% guaranteed to get them trying it. then they'll love it and it'll be something amazing that their parents tell them is bad. thats teen rebelllion 101 right there.

we live in 2014, not 1950. kids are not stupid. kids know that governments have lied about the effects. kids discuss politics on a level that applies to their everyday lives. the days of 15 year olds playing football on the field daily are nearly all but gone. these kids are connected in ways most of their parents dont understand.

the war on drugs is a worldwide disaster with kids everywhere sharing cells with rapists, murderers and all sorts in between.

what the actual fcuk is the logic of the 'war on drugs' and what the fcuk is the logic in keeping something illegal that has a death rate of 2 people, EVER, while something as physically damaging as alcohol is packaged to entice the very kids you dont want smoking a non fatal plant.

legalise it, make sure there's a water tight age system in place backed up by a perscription/permit or whatever. sell it in chemists like any other controlled drug. price it and provide a quality that puts dealers out of business. let people grow a capped amount of plants for private use to PUT THE DEALERS OUT OF BUSINESS. sure, kids will still get it somehow but at least they wont be risking the dangers involved in street dealing or the dangers involved with prison life.

if all the above STILL doesnt make the case for it then we have medicinal benefits (both physically and psychologically), the tax revenue it could generate, the crime levels that it will affect, the jobs that an industry could generate.

its nuts... and all because some people are way too concerned with other people's choices.

AngryHippie

Laois6556 wrote: »

You don't care that cannabis can be very dangerous for kids, you don't care that legalising it will increase it's usage amongst teenagers

Have you any evidence to back up your claim that legalizing and regulating something makes it more available to minors ? or is this more spurious nonsense from you ?
Sure, some teenagers will still manage to get their hands on it, but at least you can disseminate critical information through points of sale. Information regarding the increased risk of psychosis among adolescents who smoke weed compared to those 18 and over.
A hold would also be gained on supply, which is critical in the whole process, at present it is completely out of control and is feeding cash into the pockets of some seriously unsavory characters.

Your story does sound like bull btw. It sounds like you are blaming weed for you pi$$ing several years of your life away, which you now regret, same can be said for anything to excess.
Getting excessively involved in sport can damage your long-term career, getting married too young can relieve you of half of your possessions.

Take some fcuking responsibility for your decisions. I spent a good 4 years of my life toking and playing risk with mates, listening to tunes, watching movies and being a bohemian when I should have been studying harder and applying myself, It wasn't weed's fault, it was me being a man-child, when the realization grew, I had two options....blame it all on dope, and spout nonsense about it, or put in perspective, weigh up the positives and negatives of that period of my life, and realize that it was part of growing up. It's made me what I am today, I still have an occasional blaze if I'm struggling with stress levels, or injure myself, but any "addiction" involved is purely psychological and I'm 100% certain could be treated with CBT.

J Mysterio

Risk is pretty awesome though...

mikom

Risk, you say.............

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQGYMq4KBaI

MaroonAndGreen

Weed is definitely one of the most harmless drugs in circulation, probably the most harmless. But thats only if its used responsibly and in moderation.

Of course there are going to be negative effects if you smoke everyday or 5-6 days in the week, you might not become addicted to the actual substance, but I think you can become addicted to the act of doing it.. like creating a habit thats really difficult to break (maybe like having a cup of tea after work or something as banal as that).

Too much of most things are bad for you IMO, weed included.

Poncke

Weed is less addictive than a cigarette if you ask me

JJJJNR

Its the tobacco mix that makes it harmful and addictive, people forget they are smoking unfiltered chemically altered tobacco when its mixed with MJ. The withdrawal from giving up tobacco has been known to be worse than heroin. VAPE