DHS Pot Patents

[ladajo]

Outlaw alcohol. The #1 escapist drug in America

Nope, I think escapism is the number one drug in america.

Everybody is a winner. Those with must pay for those without.

"It is not my fault"

"Someone should pay for my pain"

"it is <insert convienient target>'s fault and responsibility"

"It is not my responsibility"


You are sounding like a friggin european who insists on blaming their own self-created problems on someone else.

Drugs take away the ability to reason, which is their point. Not being able to reason properly makes escapism all that much easier, and at the same time creates non-rational thinkers. Non-rational thinkers tend not to give a crap about others, and create involuntary risk to people around them.

That is bullshit and selfish.

Man up, and take personal responsibility for your life dope heads. Stop living in a drug and social welfare supported fantasy world where others bear your burdens.

[kcdodd]

Religion is escapism too. And it is protected specifically in the constitution.

[Teahive]

I do know this much. You call them "cannabinoid receptors", but they weren't designed to attach to cannabis. Cannabis was designed to attach to them. The chemical was designed by the plant to F*ck up our neurology, and some people are just too slow to have figured this out yet! Plants evolved chemical toxins similar to our own endocrinal secretions so that they would be effective in rendering predators harmless. Perversely, some predators now seek out the plant just to experience the toxic effects. I'm betting the plant is going to win in the long run though.

Many plants have evolved to rely on animals to spread their seeds, often to mutual benefit. Crop plants are an extreme form of this, with humans intentionally and systematically distributing the seeds due to the plant's exceptional utility.

If that's the objective moral code decided by nature...

[Teahive]

Marijuana also delays people from actually searching for the root emotional causes of their problems. They get high, instead of getting to the core of what is bothering them.

Marijuana is the antithesis of insight-oriented psychotherapy. It is a Band-Aid over suffering that will not stay covered up forever by inhaling smoke from a burning plant (marijuana) or, for that matter, injecting the byproduct of another plant (heroin, from the poppy).

That's certainly true in some cases. People are already using those band-aids, though. For the most part it's alcohol. Making marijuana legal does not fundamentally change that situation, it just changes the composition of band-aids used.

If the good doctor (who explicitly supports marijuana legalization, by the way) wants his preferred method of treatment to be used he should consider a market solution. That is, improve supply and accessibility for his product by increasing availability, bringing down costs, informing the public, and building trust. Without that, why would people give up their band-aids?

[paperburn1]

Your answering the question your self, you use anologs in place of cannabis

But the analogs are only endogenous so far. And cannabis is the cheapest route to the chemicals. So funny how otherwise sane people will go to extreme lengths to avoid reality. It is as if emotion has taken away reason. The very thing you accuse the opposition of. Too funny.
t.

The Internet is buzzing about a new breed of marijuana that apparently causes no buzz of its own. Israeli researchers have bred cannabis plants that look, smell and taste like ordinary marijuana — but lack THC, the active ingredient responsible for the spacy, giddy and sometimes hallucinatory part of pot’s high.

What’s the point of weed that doesn’t get you high, you ask? The new product could potentially fight conditions ranging from schizophrenia to Alzheimer’s disease.

The new marijuana isn’t just low-THC ditch weed or hemp by a different name. Tzahi Klein of the Israeli company Tikkun Olam and his colleagues have created a strain of pot that lacks THC but is abundant in cannabidiol (CBD), typically the second most common active compound in cannabis.



Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2012/06/04/a ... z2BwMP7S3f

Thank you everyone for solving the problem

[Betruger]

Marijuana also delays people from actually searching for the root emotional causes of their problems.

Once again culture at the root of it all.

Before we get to the pro/anti drug argument, there is a population subjected to the use/non-use that's prone to indulging in band-aid solutions to their problems. Magic pills and herbs and powders being a very convenient pool of sand to stick their heads in.

Fix your shit and you won't need aromatherapy.

[Diogenes]

Ah. But the War On Drugs drove the youth to the left. I remember Nixon very well. And every Republican President since.

This is a case of the rooster taking credit for the sunrise. There are a dozen or more vectors as to why the youth went to the left, and least among them is the "War on Drugs."

Youth is when political habits of a lifetime are formed. And the Brilliant Rs have been running a War On Youth AKA the Drug War for four decades. In case you didn't know it - pot use peaks in the 15 to 25 YO cohort.

It is hard to get them back after warring on them.

Don't care. Darwin will weed them out.

But I despise both parties. Although this week I despise the Rs more. For being terminally stupid. For believing that "We will make war on our own citizens" is a winning political stance. Not that the Ds aren't making war on us too. They just hide it better during campaign season.

Yes, all the exit polls show that it was the "War on Drugs" that tipped the election. It had nothing to do with the fact that everything you see on television goes through a Liberal-Democrat-Union-Member-from-New-York Filter before anyone is allowed to see it.

Had George H.W. Bush been running, we would have had a years worth of the leading news stories being about how bad the economy was, how many people were laid off, how many factories and businesses had closed, how high gas prices were, and how we needed a young man from Arkansas to work on the "it's the Economy Stupid" .

We didn't get that this year because Liberal-Democrat-Union-Members-from-New-York Define what we get to see, and how long and how often we talk about it. They didn't want to talk about their guy's failures, (Fast and Furious, Green Energy scams, Golfing, Benghazi, 1.5 billion dollars in Vacations) they wanted to talk about Republican Gaffe's like "binders full of women" and "47%", and what those two idiots running for Senate seats said.

The Ds pretend to only make war on the 1% and the Rs make no bones about warring on 50%. Such political savvy. Genius in fact.

Nobody gives a f*** about the war on drugs except for a small collection of kooks. The only reason I am becoming more vocal about it is because i'm sick of hearing about it.

You are like those F***** evangelicals who will not shut up about their stupid religion! People get sick of being proselytized to, and I am beginning to be one of them.


On Second thought, I think it would be useful to society to cut all the suspension wires holding it up, and let Darwin sort it out. Seeing as how a drug infection will spread massively through the cities first, I say let's do it! Let's Legalize Drugs!

It is the mindset which occurs in predominately urban areas which is currently killing us. I am now in favor of whatever it takes to burn them to the ground, and so I think legalizing drugs is a good start!

It is almost as if the Rs hadn't studied the political shifts that came with the end of Alcohol Prohibition. FDR ring a bell? Didn't think so.

It is as if the Rs want to be losers. Well they earned it.

The Consequences will not fall mostly on the R's. Most of them are very responsible and competent people. No, the consequences will fall mostly on those who picked the wrong horse.

It's not the people who pack parachutes that are ultimately responsible, it is the people who jump with them.

[Diogenes]

Well the Drug Warriors don't seem to be doing a very good job of differentiating teddies from grizzlies. They treat all the bears alike. Catch them all and jail them is their motto.

Perhaps you are unaware that the Teddies grow up to be Grizzlies. Let me show you the Quote from the Psychiatrist again.

I believe the substance is dangerous when used for pleasure—especially, habitually. It has poorly understood and substantial neurochemical effects on the brain.

No matter what anyone says, I am utterly convinced from my 20 years practicing psychiatry, that it does act as a gateway drug, tempting people to use other illicit substances, including opiates. And that’s just the beginning of the trouble.

Marijuana also delays people from actually searching for the root emotional causes of their problems. They get high, instead of getting to the core of what is bothering them.

Marijuana is the antithesis of insight-oriented psychotherapy. It is a Band-Aid over suffering that will not stay covered up forever by inhaling smoke from a burning plant (marijuana) or, for that matter, injecting the byproduct of another plant (heroin, from the poppy).

That’s why, in the longer run, I predict a second, more destructive wave of trouble from marijuana. This will represent the groundswell of unaddressed psychiatric issues that will have been temporarily camouflaged by the drug.

Not a very winning political stance is it?

Not a very survivable stance to go the other way. Like Socialism, if it wins, we all lose.

The shift in the tide pleases me very much. Especially given your stance on the whole matter. I LOVE seeing prohibitionists in pain. Have a drink. It might make you feel better. Or not.

Simon, if I have any pain, it is certainly not regarding your silly drug issues, it is regarding the recognition that we have the closest thing to a Nazi takeover of this nation that I have ever seen.

That you cannot recognize how dire is the circumstances demonstrates how obsessively focused you are on this stupid topic.

One of my Best Friends always thought the greatest issue facing America was racism. At a time when we had both finished reading "When War Comes", and "The Curve of Binding Energy", he thought RACISM was the biggest problem we faced. Every time he said this I thought "This man is blind. He is so focused on his pet issue, that he can't see anything else."

Simon, that is you. You would be pleased to d@mn us all to h3ll, if that's what it took to indulge your pet issue. Well I assure you, when things do go to h3ll, drugs will be legal. So will everything else (if you can get away with it) but this "freedom" will come at a horrible price.

[Diogenes]

You can't run a full fledged drug war on opiate users alone. There are not enough of them. So you are stuck with what you have. Can't get off the tiger and can't continue riding it either.

You can let it eat you. That's what happened to China.

The horns of a dilemma. Just where any good military commander wants the opposition. The only way to win is to not engage. But the prohibition faction is too enmeshed to try that now. Stuck.

Dilemma? What Dilemma? The country is going in the toilet, and legalizing drugs is just one more piece of evidence for this.

How does it feel to be a Democrat enabler? FDR and the End of Alcohol Prohibition ring a bell? I thought not.

I'm not the one who voted for Barack Obama for Senator. There is no problem that can be improved by Adding a democrat.

Well I have been warning the Right about this problem for a decade or two. And now it is coming to pass.

You mean Socialism? Yeah, but that has little to do with your issue, and much to do with the social dynamics that has made it attractive to short-sighted and ignorant people. You have been pointing at a symptom, not a cause.

Lucky you guys are so smart that you derided me at every opportunity available. I get the last laugh. Delicious.

And many more after that one, if you don't shed your obsessiveness.

[TDPerk]

"No matter what anyone says, I am utterly convinced from my 20 years practicing psychiatry, that it does act as a gateway drug, tempting people to use other illicit substances, including opiates. And that’s just the beginning of the trouble. "

None of that matters when the most grotesquely unconstitutional means are used to suppress the drug trade and they fail repetitively at great cost. Who should care if they are gateway drug when a small fraction of people are susceptible to drug addiction any way, and those who are can largely stay functional even using regularly?

I note China is supposed by you to be the pluperfect example of how horrible drug use supposedly is, when the most extreme example of ubiquitous drug addiction you can find is nowhere duplicated in history, the suppression of it was attempted by the most extreme possible of means, failed, and neither the addiction rate before nor after the failure of that suppression was the end of that society.

You're as laughable and GIThruster and his obsession with the inevitability of little green men:

"http://talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3903"

[Diogenes]

Your answering the question your self, you use anologs in place of cannabis

But the analogs are only endogenous so far. And cannabis is the cheapest route to the chemicals. So funny how otherwise sane people will go to extreme lengths to avoid reality. It is as if emotion has taken away reason. The very thing you accuse the opposition of. Too funny.

Well the younger generations are not so encumbered. And they have reached an age where they have started to vote in enough numbers to turn elections.

And naturally, you regard the youth, whom the founders didn't even allow to vote, as having more wisdom than people who have actually learned something about life? You forget, this stuff has all happened before.

The times they are a changin'. And I predicted it (well my timing was off - but I had he direction dead on).

As you can't seem to grasp the significance of this logarithmic function,




it doesn't surprise me that you didn't see the acceleration of the stupidity which is coming.

From the start of a substance prohibition until its end takes about 50 years. Historically. Alcohol Prohibition was an aberration. Probably because it affected so many people at once. If you count the start with Nixon ramping up the WOD in '72 you get 2022 as the end. Won't be long now. Might even come sooner if the Republicans stop being stupid. But what are the odds of that? Slim and none.

With faith in the correctness of their positions they have abjured thinking about them. It will cost them. The only unfortunate thing about that is having to live under Democrat rule until the Rs get it.

I would rather you were right, but the evidence I see is that misery and death will be the order of the day. You are at least lucky enough to live in a different world from the rest of us.

[Diogenes]

Religion is escapism too. And it is protected specifically in the constitution.

Mebbe so, but it is beneficial to society.

[Diogenes]

I do know this much. You call them "cannabinoid receptors", but they weren't designed to attach to cannabis. Cannabis was designed to attach to them. The chemical was designed by the plant to F*ck up our neurology, and some people are just too slow to have figured this out yet! Plants evolved chemical toxins similar to our own endocrinal secretions so that they would be effective in rendering predators harmless. Perversely, some predators now seek out the plant just to experience the toxic effects. I'm betting the plant is going to win in the long run though.

Many plants have evolved to rely on animals to spread their seeds, often to mutual benefit. Crop plants are an extreme form of this, with humans intentionally and systematically distributing the seeds due to the plant's exceptional utility.

If that's the objective moral code decided by nature...

Your argument would be plausible if Marijuana was fruit.


Objective morality *IS* decided by what we anthropomorphically refer to as "nature". The economic equivalent is referred to as "the invisible hand."

[Diogenes]

"No matter what anyone says, I am utterly convinced from my 20 years practicing psychiatry, that it does act as a gateway drug, tempting people to use other illicit substances, including opiates. And that’s just the beginning of the trouble. "

None of that matters when the most grotesquely unconstitutional means are used to suppress the drug trade and they fail repetitively at great cost. Who should care if they are gateway drug when a small fraction of people are susceptible to drug addiction any way, and those who are can largely stay functional even using regularly?

I agree with you about the unconstitutional means, but I disagree with you about there being a "small fraction of people susceptible to drug addiction." Cigarettes in this country, and Opium in China, demonstrates that 50% of the population of a country can become addicts.

With the minor effects of cigarettes, that's a tolerable condition. It would not be tolerable for Alcohol or Opium. It MIGHT be tolerable for Marijuana, but I doubt it.

As you have pointed out, there ARE people who can remain functional while using minor drugs, and even in history there are people who have been able to work while using serious drugs, but these people represent the exception, not the rule.

I note China is supposed by you to be the pluperfect example of how horrible drug use supposedly is, when the most extreme example of ubiquitous drug addiction you can find is nowhere duplicated in history, the suppression of it was attempted by the most extreme possible of means, failed, and neither the addiction rate before nor after the failure of that suppression was the end of that society.

I wish I could understand your sentence above. It seems like you are tantalizingly close to saying something to which I can respond. Yes, China is the most glaring example regarding what occurs if you legalize a dangerous drug. It was a massive disaster for them, and I believe it is responsible for them being too weak to prevent the Japanese invasion.

It is, however, not the only example. Switzerland tried a mini-experiment that worked out about as well as China.

You're as laughable and GIThruster and his obsession with the inevitability of little green men:

"http://talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3903"

And yet you cannot respond to the China example? You must have a different meaning for the word "laughable".

[paperburn1]

Guys guys!!!!!
are you not listening to me? The problem is solved
The Internet is buzzing about a new breed of marijuana that apparently causes no buzz of its own. Israeli researchers have bred cannabis plants that look, smell and taste like ordinary marijuana — but lack THC, the active ingredient responsible for the spacy, giddy and sometimes hallucinatory part of pot’s high.

What’s the point of weed that doesn’t get you high, you ask? The new product could potentially fight conditions ranging from schizophrenia to Alzheimer’s disease.
The new marijuana USN’t just low-THC ditch weed or hemp by a different name. Tzahi Klein of the Israeli company Tikkun Olam and his colleagues have created a strain of pot that lacks THC but is abundant in cannabidiol (CBD), typically the second most common active compound in cannabis.
Read more: http://healthland.time.com/2012/06/04/a ... z2BwMP7S3f
Now we can have pot that has the 90 percent of the medical effects that it is proclaimed to have without the nasty drug addicting high that is associated with it. a crop that hemp is the byproduct so cheap paper , cloth, rope, and a myriad of other products
Unless of course you only reason is to get high then who would want this stuff.
I really need to get off vacation I am turning into a troll