420 today - anybody uhhh "celebrating"?

[The Goon]

[North East Goon]

Has anybody ever ordered those supposed Legal buds you can buy on-line? It's got to be some sort of scam.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Has anybody ever ordered those supposed Legal buds you can buy on-line? It's got to be some sort of scam.

They are no good. You might get a tiny itsi-bitsi "buzz" but they are useless. For the price you pay online (material, shipping, etc), you could buy a nice sack o' green.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Hope everyone had a good 420, and before this thread is locked:

OMG, hahha that is awesome! The first time l ever took a hoot from one of these, l felt like l was freefalling for an hour, then l saw a vision of Moses. No joke.

[Traditional_Ale]

^ You know you're supposed to use weed and not meth, right?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I was really hoping for BBS to reply to my post...

Ah, my post was directed towards a guy who was saying that smoking weed was way better for you than smoking pot becasue pot is "Natural".

I found some info that showed that the composition of the two is basically the same, and that his original postion that weed is better for you because it is natural, was stupid and wrong.

You have now posted the opinion of a doctor, that doesn't just back up my post that weed is NOT safer to smoke than cigarettes, but in fact takes it further and says that smoking weed is much much worse than smoking a cigarette.

So why exactly are you waiting for me to reply?
Did you not understand the context of my post, and assumed I was on the pro weed side, or are you waiting for me to thank you for helping prove that noel's argument was ######ed?

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Ah, my post was directed towards a guy who was saying that smoking weed was way better for you than smoking pot becasue pot is "Natural".

I found some info that showed that the composition of the two is basically the same, and that his original postion that weed is better for you because it is natural, was stupid and wrong.

You have now posted the opinion of a doctor, that doesn't just back up my post that weed is NOT safer to smoke than cigarettes, but in fact takes it further and says that smoking weed is much much worse than smoking a cigarette.

So why exactly are you waiting for me to reply?
Did you not understand the context of my post, and assumed I was on the pro weed side, or are you waiting for me to thank you for helping prove that noel's argument was ######ed?

I misread your posts. I thought you were arguing that they were equal and I was posting to say that in the opinion of this doctor weed is 50X worse.

My bad. I thought you were on the otherside of the fence and at the time I was drunk and wanted to pick s***.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I misread your posts. I thought you were arguing that they were equal and I was posting to say that in the opinion of this doctor weed is 50X worse.

The opinion is the key to his doctors 50 to 1 BS. His opinion means nothing unless he can back it up with more than his word. I want to see his research and personally I don't think he knows what he is talking about considering he thinks pot dealers cut their product. Weed is one of the least expensive drugs out there so cutting it with more expensive product doesn't really make much finanical sense, does it? Just silly.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by HOOT

The opinion is the key to his doctors 50 to 1 BS. His opinion means nothing unless he can back it up with more than his word. I want to see his research and personally I don't think he knows what he is talking about considering he thinks pot dealers cut their product. Weed is one of the least expensive drugs out there so cutting it with more expensive product doesn't really make much finanical sense, does it? Just silly.

Aparently he uses a device which allows him to see into the smallest and deepest areas of the lungs. He says that even if someone hasn't smoked anything in 20 years he can still tell by the permanent damage.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

Aparently he uses a device which allows him to see into the smallest and deepest areas of the lungs. He says that even if someone hasn't smoked anything in 20 years he can still tell by the permanent damage.

But how does that prove that a joint is 50 times worse than a smoke?

I'm not debating smoking weed isn't bad, hell I even give people the 1 for 1 as shown by many studies, but 50 to 1? Where is his reserch to prove such a thing?

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by HOOT

But how does that prove that a joint is 50 times worse than a smoke?

I'm not debating smoking weed isn't bad, hell I even give people the 1 for 1 as shown by many studies, but 50 to 1? Where is his reserch to prove such a thing?

I really don't want to paraphrase the entirety of a two year thread, but a 27 year expert in the field I would imagine can tell a lot from observing the damage done to one's lungs. Or in other words, can tell the difference between cig and pot damage.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale

I really don't want to paraphrase the entirety of a two year thread, but a 27 year expert in the field I would imagine can tell a lot from observing the damage done to one's lungs. Or in other words, can tell the difference between cig and pot damage.

I'm just curious why I've never run into this research or opinion ever before. Honestly, if they could prove that it was 50 to 1 I would quit tomorrow but for me 1 to 1 is nothing considering the amount I acutally smoke, well, now vapor.

You will never find me saying weed is healthier than smoking cigs but I think the figure of 50 to 1 is just a scare tactic. Reminds me when you were in junior high and they would try and say one joint was equal to a pack of cigs, which has been proven to be bunk. So what your friend (or other poster) is saying is that one joint equals 2 packs of cigs. I just find it hard to believe without actually seeing some research and more than just one doctors opinion. I have heard a lot of opinions from doctors on many different subjects that were later found to be wrong.

I would actually feel so confident his claim is obsurd that I would call him a liar.

[Traditional_Ale]

I wish he would show up in this thread. I feel like I am doing a real crap job of presenting his view.

And I really need a vaporizer.

[Kybosh]

Ah, the internet. Where everyone is an expert except actual experts.

[Heavy Jack]

Hey everyone, it's 4-30

[Traditional_Ale]

^ You're an hour early!

[HOOT]

^ Date not time.

[HOOT]

Originally Posted by Kybosh

Ah, the internet. Where everyone is an expert except actual experts.

Don't know if that was a shot at me but I'm not claiming to be an expert, I'm just looking for actual research or proof on it. Someones opinion even if they are a doctor doesn't mean much if they haven't done the research on it to claim such a thing. If someone can prove to me it is 50 to 1 I will quit tomorrow and that's no joke!

[FlamesAddiction]

Arguing about which is worse (tobacco or pot) is like arguing whether it's worse to step in dog crap over human crap. Obviously, smoking anything isn't good for your health - whether it's tobacco, pot, banana peels, heroin... whatever.

The whole "pot being natural" argument holds no water either as pot has been pretty much genetically engineered to have properties that it doesn't have in nature (25% THC versus 5%).

I really have nothing against it and think it should be legal, but don't act like it isn't a bad habit. I also get annoyed at how people flaunt that they do it like they are making some big social breakthrough or it makes them hipper than people who don't do it.

[Traditional_Ale]

Originally Posted by HOOT

Don't know if that was a shot at me but I'm not claiming to be an expert, I'm just looking for actual research or proof on it. Someones opinion even if they are a doctor doesn't mean much if they haven't done the research on it to claim such a thing. If someone can prove to me it is 50 to 1 I will quit tomorrow and that's no joke!

Did you even read my post? I said the guy is a medical doctor/researcher specializing in lungs and has been in that field for 27 years.