<p>Keep in mind that most intelligent pot smokers do not smoke blunts. It's realized that they are the most harmful to the lungs out of any of the smoking methods. Bongs are used to pass the smoke through water, which filters out some of the bad stuff in the smoke (and 100% of the ash). Also don't blunts contain a ton of weed? If people smoke a blunt, it is usually passed around, not solely smoked by one person. Even if a person smokes one blunt a week, with say, four other people, that's 1/5 a blunt per week. So that's two cigarettes a week (at the max, I've heard mostly 4 times as worse, not 10 times). Also it is my opinion that marijuana is not carcinogenic because it hasn't been proven by studies that it is, in fact studies point to it being non carcinogenic. The amount of carcinogens in the air that we breathe every day is probably greater than weed, even if weed was carcinogenic, right?</p>
<p>I think the damage to the lungs is minimal as long as you smoke responsibly (or don't smoke at all and ingest it). What about what alcohol and weed do to the brain?</p>
<p>Alcohol is definitely worse for you: it's just that alcohol's been legal and marijuana isn't. It's really a social stigma. You can arguably be just as harmful to yourself under the influence of alcohol as on pot (lack of judgement), but physically, alcohol has a more significant negative impact on your body than pot does, as there are various ways of taking pot and really only one way of, well, drinking alcohol.</p>
<p>Can you give reasons why? Sorry I'm just really interested in comparing the two. I drink occasionally and I've had pot maybe half a dozen times. My friends back at home think weed is so terrible, but I think they're hypocrites because they get drunk, yet are telling me weed is bad. My girlfriend thinks it's fine if I drink, but despicable if I smoke pot. I prefer smoking pot though. The feeling is much better, it isn't possible to puke or OD, it goes away just about when you start wanting to be sober again, and you don't feel crappy the next morning. However, I'm interested in comparing drinking and weed physically.</p>
<p>I know a few people who also harbour the hypocritical views of being pro-alcohol but being anti-pot. Like Forgetmenots said, it's a social stigma. Alcohol, especially brand name premium alcohol, is associated with affluence, trendiness, and the kind of harmless hedonism promoted by teen soap operas. Pot, on the other hand, is associated with the exact opposite. </p>
<p>In this episode of The OC (no, I don't watch the show, haha, but I did catch a few episodes on TV when I was bored), this Anna character is repulsed by the fact that Seth had a "drug phase". To me, the message was clear: rich, popular, beautiful preps drink, while poor, ugly, marginalized subcultures blaze.</p>
<p>Personally, I don't like pot because it makes me rather anti-social, whereas alcohol does the opposite.</p>
<p>Yeah, alcohol is more socially acceptable because it is a social drug. Marajuana definitely isn't. You can't really interact with someone when they are stoned because they have a hard time focusing and comprehending</p>
<p>"Yeah, alcohol is more socially acceptable because it is a social drug. Marajuana definitely isn't. You can't really interact with someone when they are stoned because they have a hard time focusing and comprehending"</p>
<p>PFFT I have been around people who are drunk and people who are high. The drunks were complete a*holes and the people who were high were EXTREMELY friendly and kind. Alcohol makes people mean.</p>
<p>Kenshi has a point. Alcohol and pot have such a wide range of effects on individudals that it's sometimes unwise to generalize. </p>
<p>Krnpsychopath-</p>
<p>I think you're referring to the numerous studies about red wine in particular. It's not the alcohol in it that is beneficial. You've probably seen the study conducted by the Harvard Medical Researchers that released its results last November. One chemical in red wine, resveratrol, actually lenghtened the lifespan of lab mice, even if they ate an excessive amount of calories. Biology is the most important science! I need to get my hands on that stuff.</p>
<p>I think you could OD on weed if you ingested it (after activating it or whatever). You would have to eat like no tomorrow though probably, and it definitely wouldn't be fun. Actually, you'd probably puke it all up before you had a chance for the THC to enter your system, so maybe it really is impossible to OD on weed.</p>
<p>The parents just had a lengthy discussion on this very topic. There were a couple of threads - one called 'Question About Drugs' and the other was 'Teenage alcohol & drugs: Can it be stopped? How?' I contributed my fair share of comments already to those threads, many of which addressed some of the questions being asked on this thread, so I won't repeat them here.</p>
<p>edit: I just bumped both of those threads. They're in the Parent Cafe, if anyone is interested. Lots of good info there, on both sides of the fence, from people who've been down that road as well as from those who avoided it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think you could OD on weed if you ingested it (after activating it or whatever). You would have to eat like no tomorrow though probably, and it definitely wouldn't be fun. Actually, you'd probably puke it all up before you had a chance for the THC to enter your system, so maybe it really is impossible to OD on weed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is really ignorant. I've already said that the LD50 for THC is huge and no one has actually consumed that amount. Consuming marijuana doesn't increase the amount of THC you get from it very much (I've heard it possibly doubles it, but I've heard from others that it decreases it).</p>
<p>Directly from wikipedia:
Lethal dose</p>
<p>According to the Merck Index, 12th edition, the LD50, the lethal dose for 50% of rats tested by inhalation, is 42 mg/kg of body weight. That is the equivalent of a 165 lb (75 kg) man inhaling all of the THC in 21 one-gram cigarettes of extremely high-potency (15% THC) cannabis buds at once, assuming no THC was lost through burning or exhalation, though a substantial amount of THC is lost through smoking, making the actual amount of cannabis required higher. For oral consumption, the LD50 of THC for rats is 1270 mg/kg and 730 mg/kg for males and females, respectively, equivalent to the THC in about a pound of 15% THC cannabis. Only with intravenous administration may such a level be even theoretically possible.[32] The ratio of cannabis required to saturate cannaboid receptors to the amount of cannabis required to have a fatal over dose is 1:40,000.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I hate to say it, but pot is a gateway drug.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There have been studies that show that alcohol is even more of a gateway drug. Most drug addicts original started with alcohol.</p>
<p>It doesn't make any sense to me that alcohol is legal and weed isn't. In my mind, alcohol is much more dangerous and only legal because it is more socially acceptable. When it came down to deciding whether to stop prohibition, the right people were supporters and most likely users of alcohol.</p>
<p>If any drug could be classified as a gateway drug it would be nicotine. Nicotine is incredibly addictive, even more so than heroin, and cigarettes are often the first drug people use/abuse. Once a person is hooked on nicotine they have joined the ranks of addicts and will have less of a problem opening the gates to “harder drugs”. (“The most addictive drug that kills more people than any other drug is tobacco”). Marijuana, however, is not addictive. Pot smokers are generally people who don’t want to become addicted and do not want to suffer from long term effects through the moderate use of a drug. Some may actually claim that addicts smoked pot before becoming dependent upon “harder drugs”, which is absolute nonsense. Many of those same people have probably vacuumed their house, kissed a friend, chewed gum, voted for a president, and celebrated a special occasion. Are we to assume that these activities lead to Marijuana as well? It is a fallacy.</p>
<p>Also, there are interminable benefits with legalizing marijuana. There would no longer be an illegal market, which would remove criminal intent, reducing crime associated with pot, and subsequently decreasing gang involvement. No, one would bother to buy drugs from a dealer if they could simply go to a pharmacy. The gross amount of tax dollars spent prohibiting Pot use could actually be allocated towards more important causes…say homelessness and veteran’s benefits, which have become one in the same. The government could also release those who are incarcerated on pot related offenses, again saving tax dollars and refrain from releasing violent offenders to make room for harmless pot smokers. Legalizing pot would also provide the public with a safer alternative drug. Legalization would establish a profitable market (farmers, distributors, factories, etc.) that the government could tax.</p>
<p>Ultimately, though social prejudices- Anslinger- have prevailed and too many people make too much money from the prohibition business. Marijuana will probably never be legalized.</p>
<p>Weed is by far the less bad of the two, but the inherent fact is that pot is still illegal, and is the primary cause of failing drug tests, which will disqualify you for work. It stays in the system longer than any other drug. It also is a gateway drug too, many potheads also do cocaine on the weekends, more than you realize. I would say 40-50% of potheads also do coke.</p>