Yes you are actively working against the legalization of medical marijuana.

By not supporting the decriminilization of Marijuana and acknowledging that prohibition actually creates a black market rather than

trying to stem it and actually controls the price of the recreational drug

....anyways time will tell.......

ie

If somebody discovered that dried and shredded lantana got you off....

How much do you think dried lantana would be worth an ounce on the black market considering the amount that grows wild by the

sides of most country roads?????

This is where the "legal' pain management drugs has led society

http://www.news.com.au/national-news/queensland/codeine-addiction-a-growing-problem-as-aussies-abuse...

We had a lesson in the folly of being seduced by the quick fix in the '80s when Bex and Vincent's powders were taken off the market after a couple of decades of being swilled down for everything from headaches to calming nerves.

A mix of aspirin, caffeine and phenacetin (which targets the nervous system), Bex was withdrawn from sale after its addictive nature became clear and kidney disease spiked among users.

The withdrawal came long after the powder's advertising slogan, "Have a cup of tea, a Bex and a good lie down", became a part of our national lexicon.

Rowan compares the "normalisation" of codeine-mixed drugs such as Nurofen Plus (codeine and ibuprofen), Panadeine Extra (codeine and paracetamol) and Mersyndol (codeine, paracetamol and doxylamine succinate) with what happened with Bex. "It's the normality, or domesticity of the tablet," he says.

"The tendency for people to say, 'I've had a stressful day, I'll take some tablets', is greater than it was in the Bex era. Whether it's taking some over-the-counter codeine or popping a few Valium or Xanax, it's creeping in."

In Rowan's clinic, it is "socially stable" women under 45 who represent the biggest slab of patients addicted to OTC codeine. He puts some of the responsibility for the reliance on a pill on the shoulders of the manufacturers that launch aggressive marketing campaigns.

While the codeine-based products that often come with a "plus" or "extra" in their name cannot be advertised, their purely ibuprofen or paracetamol relatives can. With advertising - and results - that show a drug works on babies, some consumers develop the attitude that a product range is harmless.

http://samhs.org.au/Virtual%20Museum/Medicine/Australian_analglesia/Australian_analglesia.html

 AS COMPARED TO A NON ADDICTIVE TINCTURE THAT CAN BE PREPARED WITH MINIMAL PHYSCOACTIVE COMPONENTS YET IT SUCCESSFULLY ALLEVIATES PAIN

Thus far, there is little indication of increases in the incidence of mental health problems that are attributable to cannabis use.

This may reflect the fact that only frequent, heavy cannabis use has been strongly linked to such problems.

The prevalence of at least yearly cannabis use in Australia has been stable for the past twenty years with minimal changes in the incidence of mental health problems.

Similarly, the considerable increase of cannabis use in the previous thirty years was not accompanied by a corresponding increase in mental illness.

As with other drugs like alcohol, most cannabis users do not seem to experience serious or enduring problems from the drug.

That a small proportion of users do progress to problem use is clear, but the reasons for this, and therefore the ability to identify such persons and minimise the harm they suffer, is not apparent. How to acquire that ability is the present challenge

"If you had seen the shattered lives of bright young people, once full of potential, maybe you wouldn't be so blasé about the effects marijuana can have. Its a game of Russian roulette. Sure, not everyone who uses it will be damaged but we are all affected, the individual, the families and the community."

exactly

In my opinion, the problem with this kind of debate, particularly where the proper clinical science of it is not studied by those arguing it, is that what people want versus what science knows differently.

The other problem is that it does indeed affect each person individually and that is what makes any addictive substance unpredictable.

---

@tasfleur wrote:

In my opinion, the problem with this kind of debate, particularly where the proper clinical science of it is not studied by those arguing it, is that what people want versus what science knows can't work.

 

The other problem is that it does indeed affect each person individually and that is what makes any addictive substance unpredictable.

---

exactly

everything old is new again ...like the pro prohibition lobbies arguments

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ny5SUdLIBV4