Is marijuana addictive?

tiger · Jan 29, 2003

interesting. cigarrettes, i'm hooked on, alcohol i like to drink sometimes, but weed-i never want it. i used to force myself to smoke with my friends. it made me either/or sleepy/paranoid or hungry (every time). i always got the munchies. mostly, other than the munchies, i wanted to sit and do nothing or go to bed. very diffferent than alcohol. i smoked it alot though when i was with one particular boyfriend. so no, i don't feel it is physically addictive. i have tried it again years later------still don't like it.

sbic56, BSN, RN · Jan 29, 2003

My whole point with these anti-marijuana commercials is that the message is over inflated and often erroneous. It will only take a few times of getting high for any kid who does smoke that joint to realize that he really doesn't feel like lustily attacking his girlfriend. He won't shoot his friend in the den, because the gun he finds is more apt to make him paranoid about something like that happening than intrigued to "play" with it. He won't likely run over the little kid at the drive- thru any more than he would if he was in a car full of kids and being inattentive because of what's going on in the car. These scenarios are not realistic. I am all for dissuading kids to stay away from pot, alcohol, cigarettes, etc. I merely think the anti-drug agencies could get their message across in an honest and more responsible fasion. These scare tactic films didn't work when started in the 30's, (Refer Madness) and they aren't going to work now.

If the anti-marijuana people would focus more on keeping lines of communication open, adults talking to the kids, (I know there are a few like that), I would commend them. There are negative effects from marijauna. It is bad for the lungs. State that. It lowers motivation. Let the kids know it will negatively impact on their school work or desire to take part in important activties. Kids will acknowlege these things because they are more than just propoganda.

I do favor legalization of marijuana for use by adults. It is not going to be erradicated by this so called drug war. Continuing education about the effects and enforcing responsible use by adults who so desire to use it are the only sensible solutions to a very old issue.

allnurses Guide · Jan 29, 2003

The stats come from a new book by Meg Meeker M.D. called "Epidemic: How Teen Sex Is Killing Our Kids". Look on Amazon.

The newest studies link cervical cancer cases almost exclusively with HPV.

Marijuana is pretty well known for making people "H O R N Y" for want of a nicer word :)

There was a case recently of some kids busted for driving over 100 mph and they were all under the influence of pot. You cannot say that ALL kids would drive slowly out of a drive through restaurant and not hit a kid on a bike. If marijuana skews your abilities, lowers your inhibitions, etc . . .then why not point out to kids the consequences? It is more than just sitting in a corner contemplating your navel and eating Cheetos.

I try to teach my kids that they can have fun by using their own abilities and strengths. Let's not sit in front of the tv . . .lets hit the slopes and snowboard. Get on a bike and take a look at this beautiful place we live. Head to the city to see a basketball or baseball or football game. Go over to the hospital and volunteer some time with the LTC patients. Take a load of wood over to grandma's house as a surprise. Invite a bunch of your friends over for a barbeque.

Recently some of our docs and nurses did an assembly with the high school students regarding using substances to supposedly enhance athletic prowess . . . .. pointing out that they should rely on the weight room, hard work, practice to enhance their physical abilities - not things like creatine, ephedrine-based substances, etc. Isn't is more honorable to use your natural ability than to cheat with stuff you pop in your mouth?

At least we are trying to help . . . .. geez. :confused:

fergus51 · Jan 29, 2003

Linking cervical cancer cases exclusively with HPV does not mean that all HPV cases become cancer which is what I thought you were saying?

It could be that 99% of cervical cancer patients have HPV.

That doesn't mean that 99 % of HPV patients will get cervical cancer.

fergus51 · Jan 29, 2003

From Planned Parenthood:

Does HPV cause cervical cancer?

A small number of genital HPVs is linked to cancers of the cervix, vulva, lady parts, orifice, and member. Long-term HPV infections increase the risk of cervical cancer.

Most women recover from HPV infections with no health problems at all. It is not known why some women develop long-term HPV infection, pre-cancerous abnormal cell changes, or cervical cancer.

Most HPV infections go away by themselves within six months. Many women develop immunity - a natural protection - against different types of HPV.

How do I protect myself against cervical cancer?

Pap tests are the best protection against cervical cancer. They can find very early pre-cancerous conditions - which are easily treated. All sexually active women - especially those who have had genital warts or other sexually transmitted infections - should get a Pap test at least once a year.

Pap tests can also detect

infections and inflammations of the cervix. (Pap tests cannot identify specific sexually transmitted infections, but they can detect symptoms.)

thinning of the cervical tissue from lack of estrogen

A woman can lower her risk of cervical cancer by

practicing abstinence

having sex play that does not include lady partsl intercourse

having regular Pap tests to check for early symptoms

using condoms every time to reduce the risk of infection

eating a diet high in beta-carotene and the vitamin B known as folic acid.

(Yellow and orange fruits and vegetables - mangoes, corn, squash, tomatoes - and dark-green, leafy vegetables like collard greens have lots of beta-carotene. Whole grains, beans, peanuts, and dark-green, leafy vegetables are loaded with folic acid.)

avoiding cigarette smoking, which increases the risk of cervical cancer

researchrabbit · Jan 29, 2003

Just wanted to say one more thing about very young mothers: this is nothing new (although there are certainly more of them now). My mom was a public health nurse in a rural area in the 60s and 70s. She had several moms who were 9, and 10, 11, and 12 were not unusual. She came home and cried over the 9 year old.

nurseman · Jan 29, 2003

Originally posted by stevielynn
However, I will tell you that the stats for babies born in my county with illegal drugs in their system is accurate. At least 50%.

Obviously the DEA is a complete and total failure. If lived there I would demand my politicians eradicate that agency and try to fix the problem from scratch. When you have 50% of babies born with illegal drugs in there systems then you know the war on drugs has been lost. To continue fighting it is not only a waste of money but also stops an effective strategy from replacing it.

allnurses Guide · Jan 29, 2003

nurseman -

I completely disagree with you about the war on drugs being lost due to the DEA. It is being lost because of many things, not the least of which is this generation of parents (me included) who are too afraid to appear hypocritical to our kids by telling them that using illegal drugs is a bad idea. Talk to most "Baby Boomers" who lived in the "recreational drug" use era and you find that most of them have trouble with a firm message to their kids. However, hypocrisy is when you tell someone to stop doing what you are currently doing or still agree with. I, for one, deeply regret my choice to try illegal drugs. I tell my kids the truth, that I was stupid, peer-driven, weak, and cared very little about myself and that I want them to be smart, values-driven, strong and to care very very much for themselves. I also say that using illegal drugs is wrong. And that is not hypocritical. Legalizing methamphetamine would be an extremely harmful thing to do. That is the #1 illegal drug being used in our area and the #1 drug found in new mom's blood and new baby's urine. Legalizing drugs does absolutely nothing to the chemical components that make them so harmful. I will never understand how legalizing drugs makes them ok to use. All it does is let the dealers off the hook for breaking the law. The drug war will never be 100% won as there will always be people who will care so little for themselves and others that they will use. However that does not mean that we just quit. If demand lessens then supply lessens . ..lessening demand is the place to focus. I just cannot get the image of the newborn who is positive for meth going home with her addicted mom. CPS is worthless . . . but that's another thread.

nurseman · Jan 30, 2003

Originally posted by stevielynn
Legalizing drugs does absolutely nothing to the chemical components that make them so harmful. I will never understand how legalizing drugs makes them ok to use. All it does is let the dealers off the hook for breaking the law. The drug war will never be 100% won as there will always be people who will care so little for themselves and others that they will use

I have thought about what you said and I stand corrected. The DEA did not lose the war on drugs. The war on drugs was a hopeless battle from the beginning. If someone is stupid enough to take drugs then they are going to take them. Canada and America did not learn their history lesson and are condemned to repeat it. During prohibition, if someone wanted whisky they went to the mafia to buy it. Now that it is legal, anyone over 19 years of age (in Ontario) is able to buy it in a government owned liquor store. With legalization came strict controls on the percentage on alcohol. The price also went down and organized crime was driven out of business. The problems with drinking were there before, during and after prohibition. The only difference was that criminals got rich during it.

If marijuana were legalized and sold beside the whisky then drug dealers would not get off the hook. They would be put out of business. I would rather the government get tax dollars to put into the health care system than have organized crime make money to buy guns.

allnurses Guide · Jan 30, 2003

Nurseman: And I'd rather my government didn't get involved in making profits off of people using drugs. To me that is immoral. And I don't care about the argument that the government already makes money off poor people who use alcohol and cigarettes . . . . three wrongs don't make a right.

If you start with pot, how can you argue against making any other illegal drug legal? What socially redeemable value can you place on methamphetamine or crack cocaine? And here we go down the slippery slope . . . .

As the country song says "you have to stand for something or you'll fall for anything"

We'll just have to agree to disagree . . .as you say "I'm preaching" and it ain't gettin through. Thanks though. :)

mattsmom81 · Jan 30, 2003

Originally posted by stevielynn

Just a few stats . . . .One is five kids age 11 have genital herpes, which is a 500% increase since 1976. A new study shows teenage girls have a 46% chance of contracting HPV which results in cervical cancer 99% of the time. 15.3 million new outbreaks of STD's occur EACH YEAR with more than half occuring to teens. 13% of girls age 15-19 test positive for chlamydia. The rate of gonorrhea is highest among 15-19 y.o. I'd say kids are engaging in sexual activity way way too early.

This ain't the 60's anymore . . . . . sex is much more high risk. Sex can kill you. Marijuana lowers inhibitions. So does alcohol. Why in the world would I want my daughter to put herself in the position to be so high that she cannot make good decisions and ends up having sex with someone WHO DOES NOT CARE ABOUT HER, only his own orgasm, and puts her at risk for pregnancy and STD's? Why would I want my sons to put themselves at risk? Why is it bad to teach our kids to value themselves more? Why is everyone afraid to appear "judgmental"? Have we come so far that we turn a blind eye to injustice?

Great post. Couldn't agree more. As a 'child' of the 60's and 70's I watched many friends experiment with drugs, tried a few myself but fortunately was suspicious and thus never got into any of it. Alcholism is rampant in my family and I was in Alateen and edumacated myself. :)

I saw that the sex was a natural consequence of the drugs and ETOH in use. I watched many old friends ruin their lives and those of their familes and friends, sex partners, etc.. Naivete hurts ....and kills....and this even more true today.

Vsummer1 · Feb 1, 2003

Originally posted by Susy K
I think the ad was meant to state that when you're high, you are bound to make stupid choices. I've seen many a chick have sex as a result of being too doped up or drunk to make a wise choice.

Besides, is it really that bad of a message to send to teenagers for cripe's sake??

Suzy, nothing personal here, but uh... the chick comment seems pretty sexist to me. It does take TWO to tango. Being that there are some "newer" drugs "dudes" could use to mess with "chicks" minds to have sex -- er, date rape comes to mind on this...

On another note -- I noticed someone state that they had a friend in California who used legal pot medicinally. Not so, marijuana remains a Schedule I drug (all nonresearch use forbidden by the controlled substance act and enforced by the DEA). That is a Federal offense, and you go to State vs Fed regs here. I had a friend on chemo with a rx for it and that may be well and good BUT the DEA doesn't see it that way. They say rx marinol, not the herbal form. The debate here rages on, and places that sell it and users who use it even prescribed by the docs face an arrest. Fact is, that friend was a pot head who wanted her pot and went out of the way to find it "legal" even to the point of searching out a dr who would write a script (this was years ago before the DEA busted the pot stores in SF though I hear some diehards still believe a state has a right to over step fed laws). Did it help her? YES, I believe it did but that is MHO and my opinion means diddly to the DEA.

THE FACT REMAINS THAT MARIJUANA AS OF MAY OF 1971 is illegal in the USA for all but nonresearch use whether or not I agree.

** PARENTS who have a problem teaching their kids about drugs and fear being a hypocrite because the parent themselves used them: Simply tell your kids that in those days there was no DEA, the laws were different prior to 1971. WE DIDN'T KNOW then what we know now about a lot of things (good time to tell them about other improvements in life since 1971).

Toke on... :)