Does A Have A Marajawana Many Marajawana Does
Razdan and G Acta, 56, 519 (1973)
Preparations must be made well before curing begins. The experienced grower harvests his crop when 50 to 80% of the pistles have turned color. If you have grown out the strain before you have a good idea when they will be ready. You will need to clear the plants of nutrients (fertilizer) right before you harvest. The growing Jack Herer medium and the plants themselves store some of the nutes you have given them. This will give a nasty taste if you harvest without clearing it out. Plantar Cannabis
, 97, 185 (1978); (j) 1
Flo is very strong and clones very easily….from 10 seeds I got two good mothers. One was an indica dominate one a sativa.. as for the high... It is a very fun high...not paranoid at all...very up...the weed tastes real good... after the first joint you are high...real high...go ahead and roll another after this one you are going to trip for about 30 minutes then you will come down quietly... but you don’t want to do that,...so roll another and trip again...it never makes me sleepy until I stop smoking...the end of the buzz will relax ya so you can sleep...but shit man...we usually just keep rolling...3:00 am still got a big grin on my face and deep perception is warped...it is by far my favorite morning...day...evening...all time smoke... especially when you want to talk and socialize with friends. ..so I say it is exactly how it is described...there are definitely more potent...but I haven't found a more fun."- Eric To date, the blueberrys have been grown to 18 to 24 inches, placed into bud, and finished at about 36 inches, yielding about 1 to 1 * ounces per plant. They have been grown in 5 gal grow bags containing the super soil mix . To try to figure the best pruning method, the following trial was conducted. Started with 35 clones (18 BL-8 and 17 BL-10) that were placed into 5 gal grow bags containing the super soil mix. When they reached 20 inches, 13 were placed into flower (Group A) while the remaining 22 were pruned back to 12 inches. When these 22 clones reached about twenty inches, 10 were placed into flower (Group B). The remaining 12 (Group C) were pruned back to 18” and placed into flower when they reached 20”. These clones were grown amongst other clones in a 12 by 12 area lit by 2 1000w HPS and 1 1000w MH on a fast moving suncircle. One HPS was in a horizontal reflector, one in a vertical reflector and the MH was in a parabolic reflector. This worked out to about 20w per sq ft. All weights are dry weights unless otherwise specified. , 1977 (1976)
uk bongs
uk bongshow many leafs does a marajawana plant have
Dalzell, Nirvana Cannabis Seeds and R Uliss et alMighty Mite is a famous BC indica bongs bubblers strain from Sensiseedbank the Himalayas cultivated for 12 - 15 Bud Orange years here. It is uniquely suitable for indoor or outdoor cultivation. All Mighty Mite varieties and hybrids feature a dominant main cola that explodes in the 6th to 8th week of flowering.
When you want to grow cannabis indoors and outdoors, you do not have to be an expert in gardening of course, it would be helpful to know the basics in planting and it would be. What you need to know about growing cannabis bongs and supplies growing white wombat cannabis weed indoors what does white wombat flower like. Cannabis - psychology wiki cannabis seeds for indoors cannabis seeds for outdoors indooroutdoor cannabis seeds feminized marijuana seeds indica cannabis seeds sativa cannabis seeds white cannabis seeds strains. Cannabis indoors the latest offering from the world renowned author of indoor marijuana horticulture this book describes how to choose a safe house, build. Paradise seeds - marijuana amp cannabis seeds cultivation indoors or outdoors the basic elements of the environment light, water, air, and soil provide plants with their fundamental needs.kushmaster sound
beaver bong picture 6 weeks Bongs Bubblers reveg the plants went on autobud again so into flowering they went.Larger this time.sb seriousness of the
drug problem, because more pot and less alcohol would be consumed. See Bloomquist
Marijuana, pp. 85, 86. (back)
51. David E. Smith, "Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Marijuana," Journal of Psychedelic
Drugs 2, no. 1 (Fall 1968): 41. (back)
52. Of Fort's many publications, perhaps the most relevant to these points is "A World
View of Marijuana: Has the World Gone to Pot?" Journal of Psychedelic Drugs 2, no. 1
(Fall 1968): 1-14. See also "Pot: A Rational Approach," Playboy, October 1969, pp. 131,
154, 216, et seq., in which Fort argues for the legalization of marijuana. See also The
Pleasure Seekers (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1969). (back)
53. Andrew T. Weil, Norman E. Zinberg, and Judith M. Nelsen, "Clinical and
Psychological Effects of Marihuana in Man," Science 162, no. 3859 (December 13, 1968):
1234-1242; Zinberg and Weil, "Cannabis: The First Controlled Experiment," New Society/
(January 19, 1969): 84-86; Zinberg and Weil, "The Effects of Marijuana on Human
(24 of 25)4/15/2004 1:04:59 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Chapter 5
Beings," The New York Times Magazine, May 11, 1969, pp. 28-29, 79, et seq.; Weil,
"Marihuana," Letter to the Editor, Science 163, no. 3872 (March 14, 1969): 5 (back)
54. Alfred Crancer, Jr., Cannabis Statistics James M. Dille, Jack Delay, Tean E. Wallace, and Martin D.
Haykin, "A Comparison of the Cannabis Statistics Effects of Marihuana and Alcohol on Simulated Driving
Performance," Science 164, no. 3881 (May 16, 1969): 851-854. (back)
55. Tod H. Mikuriya and Kathleen E. Goss, "Thinking About Using Pot" (San
Francisco: The San Francisco Psychiatric Mental Clinic, 1969), p. 24. (back)
56. Eugene Schoenfeld, "Hip-pocrates," The East Village Other 3, no. 36 (August 9,
68): pp. 6, 16. (back)
57. I am not making the claim that marijuana is inherently part of an intellectual avantgarde
movement. At certain times and places, it may be looked upon as reactionary. It is
just that today, in America, it is so considered.
We also do not say that it is only among
those who consider themselves in the historical vanguard that marijuana will appeal; it is
just that those who do think this way will be more likely to try marijuana than those who
do not. (back)
58.
Stanley F. Yolles, "Pot Is Painted too Black," The Washington Post, September 21,
1969, p. C4. Compare this later statement with those made in the National Clearinghouse
for Mental Health Information, NIMH pamphlet, published in part in the March 7, 1968
issue of The New York Times, p. 26, and the article "Before Your Kid Tries Drugs," The
New
beer bongs York Times Magazine, November
beer bongs 17, 1968, pp. 124, et seq. (back)
59. In an actual mail-in questionnaire study by a physician of the attitudes of
psychiatrists and physicians in the New York area on the legalization of marijuana, it was
found that the large majority (about 60 percent) said that they were against legalization.
Only a quarter were for it. See Wolfram Keup, "The Legal Status of Marihuana (A
Psychiatric Poll)," D
and informants. Many effects deal with
(1 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
areas of knowledge that are not generally well known even among scientists, such as those concerning
meditation or ostensible paranormal phenomena, so I have given literature references to guide the reader
seeking more understanding. I have tried to avoid speculation and interpretation as much as possible and
to stick to the basic findings.
Each chapter also contains a section on additional effects, a ranking of effects according to increasing
minimal levels of intoxication, a summary of background factors modulating the effects, and a general
summary.
Terminology
It is impossible to write about these phenomena in a readable style without using descriptive adjectives.
To avoid the ambiguity usually inherent in quantity adjectives, I have used a standard set of them, which
are defined in Table 5-1. Whenever other adjectives than those defined are used, I am speaking generally
rather than describing the exact form of the data.
To illustrate: if an intoxication effect is described as "very characteristic" and "primarily beginning to
occur at Moderate levels," this indicates that more than 50 percent of the users rated this effect as
occurring Very Often or Usually when
making bongs they have been intoxicated in the last six months, and my
judgment of the distribution of responses on minimal levels of intoxication is that the Moderate ("Fairly
Stoned") level is the most representative2] level indicated.
TABLE 5-1
DEFINITION OF TERMS
TERM DEFINITION
Frequency of Occurrence Terms
"Rare" >/=75% indicate Never, Rarely
"Infrequent" >/=50% indicate Never, Rarely
"Fairly Frequent" /=50% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Very Common" >/=75% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" 50% indicate Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" Bottom third of distribution
"More Characteristic"
Middle third of distribution
"Very Characteristic"
(2 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
"Most Characteristic"
Top third of distribution
"Extremely Characteristic"
Levels of Intoxication Terms
"Low" Questionnaire term Just
"Moderate" Questionnaire term Fairly
"Strong" Questionnaire term Strongly
"Very Strong" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Very Strongly
"Maximum" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Maximum
a. Infrequent and Fairly Frequent are not always identical in practice
because of variable numbers of users skipping particular questions.
Linking
Many pairs or sets of question called for statistical comparison because of obvious similarity or because
they described converse effects. This was always done by a chi-square test of the distributions. I have
usually presented graphical results when they would be illustrative, as well as the probability figures.
Many other links exist that I have not analyzed in the text. The reader interested in part and informants. Many effects deal with
(1 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
areas of knowledge that are not generally well known even among scientists, such as those concerning
meditation or ostensible paranormal phenomena, so I have given literature references to guide the reader
seeking more understanding. I have tried to avoid speculation and interpretation as much as possible and
to stick to the basic findings.
Each chapter also contains a section on additional effects, a ranking of effects according to increasing
minimal levels of intoxication, a summary of background factors modulating the effects, and a general
summary.
Terminology
It is impossible to write about these phenomena in a readable style without using descriptive adjectives.
To avoid the ambiguity usually inherent in quantity adjectives, I have used a standard set of them, which
are defined in Table 5-1. Whenever other adjectives than those defined are used, I am speaking generally
rather than describing the exact form of the data.
To illustrate: if an intoxication effect is described as "very characteristic" and "primarily beginning to
occur at Moderate levels," this indicates that more than 50 percent of the users rated this effect as
occurring Very Often or Usually when they have been intoxicated in the last six months, and my
judgment of the distribution of responses on minimal levels of intoxication is that the Moderate ("Fairly
Stoned") level is the most representative2] level indicated.
TABLE 5-1
DEFINITION OF TERMS
TERM DEFINITION
Frequency of Occurrence Terms
"Rare" >/=75% indicate Never, Rarely
"Infrequent" >/=50% indicate Never, Rarely
"Fairly Frequent" /=50% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Very Common" >/=75% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" 50% indicate Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" Bottom third of distribution
"More Characteristic"
Middle
Bongs And Thongs third of distribution
"Very Characteristic"
(2 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
"Most Characteristic"
Top third of distribution
"Extremely Characteristic"
Levels of Intoxication Terms
"Low" Questionnaire term Just
"Moderate" Questionnaire term Fairly
"Strong" Questionnaire term Strongly
"Very Strong" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Very Strongly
"Maximum" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Maximum
a. Infrequent and Fairly Frequent are not always identical in practice
because of variable numbers of users skipping particular questions.
Linking
Many pairs or sets of question called for statistical comparison because of obvious similarity or because
they described converse effects. This was always done by a chi-square test of the distributions. I have
usually presented graphical results when they would be illustrative, as well as the probability figures.
Many other links exist that I have not analyzed in the text. The reader interested in part and informants.
Many effects deal with
(1 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
areas of knowledge that are not generally well known even among scientists, such as those concerning
meditation or ostensible paranormal phenomena, so I have given literature references to guide the reader
seeking more understanding. I have tried to avoid speculation and interpretation as much as possible and
to stick to the basic findings.
Each chapter also contains a section on additional effects, a ranking of effects according to increasing
minimal levels of intoxication, a summary of background factors modulating the effects, and a general
summary.
Terminology
It is impossible to write about these phenomena in a readable style without using descriptive adjectives.
To avoid the ambiguity usually inherent in quantity adjectives, I have used a standard set of them, which
are defined in Table 5-1. Whenever other adjectives than those defined are used, I am speaking generally
rather than describing the exact form of the data.
To illustrate: if an intoxication effect is described as "very characteristic" and "primarily beginning to
occur at Moderate levels," this indicates that more than 50 percent of the users rated this effect as
occurring Very Often or Usually when they have been intoxicated in the last six months, and my
judgment of the distribution of responses on minimal levels of intoxication is that the Moderate ("Fairly
Stoned") level is the most representative[2
Bongs And Thongs level indicated.
TABLE 5-1
DEFINITION OF TERMS
TERM DEFINITION
Frequency of Occurrence Terms
"Rare" >/=75% indicate Never, Rarely
"Infrequent" >/=50% indicate Never, Rarely
"Fairly Frequent" /=50% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Very Common" >/=75% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" 50% indicate Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" Bottom third of distribution
"More Characteristic"
Middle third of distribution
"Very Characteristic"
(2 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
"Most Characteristic"
Top third of distribution
"Extremely Characteristic"
Levels of Intoxication Terms
"Low" Questionnaire term Just
"Moderate" Questionnaire term Fairly
"Strong" Questionnaire term Strongly
"Very Strong" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Very Strongly
"Maximum" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Maximum
a.
Infrequent and Fairly Frequent are not always identical in practice
because of variable numbers of users skipping particular questions.
Linking
Many pairs or sets of question called for statistical comparison because of obvious similarity or because
they described converse effects. This was always done by a chi-square Marijuana Seed test of the distributions. I have
usually presented graphical results when they would be illustrative, as well as the probability figures.
Many other links exist that I have not analyzed in the text. The reader interested in part and informants. Many effects deal with
(1 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
areas of knowledge that are not generally well known even among scientists, such as those concerning
meditation or ostensible paranormal phenomena, so I have given literature references to guide the reader
seeking more understanding. I have tried to avoid speculation and interpretation as much as possible and
to stick to the basic findings.
Each chapter also contains a section on additional effects, a ranking of effects according to increasing
minimal levels of intoxication, a summary of background factors modulating the effects, and a general
summary.
Terminology
It is impossible to write about these phenomena in a readable style without using descriptive adjectives.
To avoid the ambiguity usually inherent in quantity adjectives, I have used a standard set of them, which
are defined in Table 5-1. Whenever other adjectives than those defined are used, I am speaking generally
rather than describing the exact form of the data.
To illustrate: if an intoxication effect is described as "very characteristic" and "primarily beginning to
occur at Moderate levels," this indicates that more than 50 percent of the users rated this effect as
occurring Very Often or Usually when they have been intoxicated in the last six months, and my
judgment of the distribution of responses on minimal levels of intoxication is that the Moderate ("Fairly
Stoned") level is the most representative2 level indicated.
TABLE 5-1
DEFINITION OF TERMS
TERM DEFINITION
Frequency of Occurrence Terms
"Rare" >/=75% indicate Never, Rarely
"Infrequent" >/=50% indicate Never, Rarely
"Fairly Frequent" /=50% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Very Common" >/=75% indicate Sometimes, Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" 50% indicate Very Often, Usually
"Characteristic" Bottom third of distribution
"More Characteristic"
Middle third of distribution
"Very Characteristic"
(2 of 7)4/15/2004 7:05:25 AM
On Being Stoned - Chapter 5
"Most Characteristic"
Top third of distribution
"Extremely Characteristic"
Levels of Intoxication Terms
"Low" Questionnaire term Just
"Moderate" Questionnaire term Fairly
"Strong" Questionnaire term Strongly
"Very Strong" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Very Strongly
"Maximum" ("Very High") Questionnaire term Maximum
a. Infrequent and Fairly Frequent are not always identical in practice
because of variable numbers of Overgrow users skipping particular questions.
Linking
Many pairs or sets of question called for statistical comparison because of obvious similarity or because
they described converse effects. This was always done by a chi-square test of the distributions. I have
usually presented graphical results when they would be illustrative, as well as the probability figures.
Many other links exist that I have not analyzed in the text. The reader interested in part
Plants were vegged in an aeroponic/NFT system for 3 weeks under a 1000MH with an AgroSun bulb. They were about 18-20 inches tall when switched. Each plant beaver bong picture was topped twice. Flowering was in an NFT system. The first 2 weeks a single 1000MH w/ AgroSun was used. A second identical light was added at the third week. Flowering took about 70 days. These were the most crystallized plants of this variety that I've ever grown.
Slow cured over 1 1/2 months.
First on newspaper, then into paper bags, then into mason jars. Smell is incredible. High is incredible. Normally I find BB a little less potent that I'd like. This crop just floors me. High starts out mellow, upbeat, then when you start the second round of bong hits it just hits you like a wave. Immediate couch melt. Cancel your plans, you're not going anywhere. But it lets your mind stay somewhat sharp, which is the best thing about it. Overall I was pretty pleased with this harvest.
I had a couple of problems in the early weeks of flowering with mites, and then nearer the end the cold started to set in a bit.
So considering that I was pleased with the yield. Although it did suffer the typical Big Bud problem of slightly looser buds. I had one plant that was a monster! A good 8 inches taller than all the other plants, I ended up having to tie her down. 4 huge colas each around 4x11. That plant probably yielded almost 4 ounces alone - Content(Big Bud x Skunk 1) 23.25 oz. Cured, VERY well manicured. Also made 2 lb of butter, that turned out way too strong) Bud Rot Harmful To Smoke and 10 grams of hash. There were 8 1/2 plants grown from clone(one was a complete runt, I don't know why I even let her live). Plants were vegged in an aeroponic/NFT system for 3 weeks under a 1000MH with an AgroSun bulb. They were about 18-20 inches
beaver bong picture
tall when switched. Each plant was topped twice. Flowering was in an NFT system. The first 2 weeks a single 1000MH w/ AgroSun was used. A second identical light was added at the third week. Flowering took about 70 days. These were the most crystallized plants of thisbeaver bong picture
variety that I've ever grown. Slow cured over 1 1/2 months. First on newspaper, then into paper bags, then into mason jars.Smell is incredible. High is incredible. Normally I find BB a little less potent that I'd like. This crop just floors me. High starts out mellow, upbeat, then when you start the second round of bong hits it just hits you like a wave. Immediate couch melt. Cancel your plans, you're not going anywhere. But it lets your mind stay somewhat sharp, which is the best thing about it. Overall I was pretty pleased with this harvest. I had a couple of problems in the early weeks of flowering with mites, and then nearer the end the Bud Rot Harmful To Smoke cold started to set in a bit. So considering that I was pleased with the yield. Although it did suffer the typical Big Bud problem of slightly looser buds. I had one plant that was a monster! A good 8 inches taller than all the other plants, I ended up having to tie her down. 4 huge colas each around 4x11. That plant probably yielded almost 4 ounces alone - Content Dieffenbachia drug Making Bongs Culture seeds cannabis buy seeds Culture Castagnoli,
Making Bongs
uFor me Flo is Kali Mist couch lock weed. despite the literature, I would rate
Dieffenbachia Dieffenbachia
it at 90% body, 10% head high.Cheap Bongs Orange County
Matures very fast, like 45 days, has tons of resin, almost no odor, tends to be purplish in color. Difficult to clone, gets nute overdose leaf curl Awesome Homemade Bong down when others don't. not a strain to continue.The high is very physically relaxing and emotionally amotivational.”
Dieffenbachia marihuana
- Splif LipsitClear and strong high.
kushmaster kushmaster
The plants have an explosive flowering trait and are extremely resinous. Very high yield.Green Spirit is a hybrid of Big Bud and Skunk 1. Was developed because Big Bud itself is not a very consistent strain, with very big differences among individual plants. By crossing Big Bud and Skunk 1, Green Spirit became quite homogeneous. Good results under artificial lights. Clear and strong high. The plants have an explosive flowering Beaverbong Photos trait and are extremely resinous. Very high yield. Thompson, J Overgrow 1) is likely to
involve
Dieffenbachia marihuana a common allylic cation,
bongs
bongs and since both
kushmaster sound
Dieffenbachia Drug cis-and trans-verbenols give the same
products to time who do not now because of
the laws, but who do not like to drink. Thus, the figure who use some intoxicant would
increase were pot legalized, but it would be far lower than the additive effect of all those
who now use liquor added to all those who might use pot.
If we want to consider the effect of the marijuana laws on public safety, we are
therefore faced with the prospect of comparing the relative merits of alcohol and
marijuana. As stated earlier, marijuana users cite the comparison as a powerful argument
in the drug's favor, while physicians dismiss the argument. Where does that leave us?
In terms of tissue damage, the evidence is clear; no sane observer of the American drug
use scene would claim for marijuana the ravaging effect that alcohol has. Daily
moderately heavy usage of American or Mexican cannabis, say, six joints a day, produces
no known bodily harm. (But we must remember that we have no valid studies of
potsmokers which span any length of time.
) Daily moderately heavy use of alcohol—the
quantity comparable to the amount of marijuana which Marijuana Seed would intoxicate the user for an
equal length of time, i.e., the whole day, would be about half a quart a day—will destroy,
threaten or damage most of the body's vital organs over a long period of time. In terms of
auto accidents, the evidence we have suggests a gain. The drunk driver behind the wheel
is far more of a threat and a danger than the high pothead. Empirical tests show that
alcohol discoordinates the driver far more than marijuana—if it occurs with marijuana at
(23 of 31)4/15/2004 1:08:37 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Chapter 11
all.[45] Decrease in aggression, violence, and crime, too, would be only a positive gain.
Alcohol moreover is often directly linked with the commission of crime; far from inciting
crime, marijuana, contrastingly, possibly inhibits it. Our speculations on insanity would
have to be even less firmly grounded in known fact than those for tissue damage,
automobile accidents, and violence, but marijuana would have to strive to catch up with
alcohol's record; one of four admissions to a mental hospital is an alcoholic. Here, too, I
think, the use of pot would be a clear gain.
The members of the antipot contingent who claim that alcohol is preferable to
marijuana, and that legalization would be nothing but a disaster for this or any nation, do
have a single telling point, as I see it. This is that marijuana is always used to become
intoxicated, or high, and alcohol is often, indeed, perhaps most of the time, used for
nonintoxicatory purposes. Alcoholic substances are frequently consumed on many
occasions where the drinker does not become drunk or intoxicated. For instance, at many
sporting events—football and baseball games—several bottles of beer may be drunk by a
spectator without effect. The same may be said for wine at a meal, cocktails (sometimes)
at a party, or sherry as a nightcap. Of course, many marijuana smokers do to time who do not now because of
the laws, but who do not like to drink.
Thus, the figure who use some intoxicant would
increase were pot legalized, but it would be far lower than the additive effect of all those
who now use liquor added to all those who might use pot.
If we want to consider the effect of the marijuana laws on public safety, we are
therefore faced with the prospect of comparing the relative merits of alcohol and
marijuana. As stated earlier, marijuana users cite the comparison as a powerful argument
in the drug's favor, while physicians dismiss the argument. Where does that leave us?
In terms of tissue damage, the evidence is clear; no sane observer of the American drug
use scene would claim for marijuana the ravaging effect that alcohol has. Daily
moderately heavy usage of American or Mexican cannabis, say, six joints a day, produces
no known bodily harm. (But we must remember that we have no valid studies of
potsmokers which span any length of time.) Daily moderately heavy use of alcohol—the
quantity comparable to the amount of marijuana which would intoxicate the user for an
equal length of time, i.e., the whole day, would be about half a quart a day—will destroy,
threaten or damage most of the body's vital organs over a long period of time. In terms of
auto accidents, the evidence we have suggests a gain. The drunk driver behind the wheel
is far more of a threat and a danger than the high pothead. Empirical tests show that
alcohol discoordinates the driver far more than marijuana—if it occurs with marijuana at
(23 of 31)4/15/2004 1:08:37 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Chapter 11
all.
45] Decrease in aggression, violence, and crime, too, would be only a positive gain.
Alcohol moreover is often directly linked with the commission of crime; far from inciting
crime, marijuana, contrastingly, possibly inhibits it. Our speculations on insanity would
have to be even less firmly grounded in known fact than those for tissue damage,
automobile accidents, and violence, but marijuana would have to strive to catch up with
alcohol's record; one of four admissions to a mental hospital is an alcoholic.
Here, too, I
think, the use of pot would be a clear gain.
The members of the antipot contingent who claim that alcohol is preferable to
marijuana, and that legalization would be nothing but a disaster for this or any nation, do
have a single telling point, as I see it. This is that marijuana is always used to become
intoxicated, or high, and alcohol is often, indeed, perhaps most of the time, used for
nonintoxicatory purposes. Alcoholic substances are frequently consumed on many
occasions where the drinker does not become drunk or intoxicated. For instance, at many
sporting events—football and baseball games—several bottles of beer may be drunk by a
spectator without effect. The same may be said for wine at a meal, cocktails (sometimes)
at a party, or sherry as a nightcap. Of course, many marijuana smokers do to time who do not now because of
the laws, but who do not like to drink. Thus, the figure who use some intoxicant would
increase were pot legalized, but it would be far lower than the additive effect of all those
who now use liquor added to all those who might use pot.
If we want to consider the effect of the marijuana laws on public safety, we are
therefore faced with the prospect of comparing the relative merits of alcohol and
marijuana. As stated earlier, marijuana users cite the comparison as a powerful argument
in the drug's favor, while physicians dismiss the argument. Where does that leave us?
In terms of tissue damage, the evidence is clear; no sane observer of the American drug
use scene would claim for marijuana the ravaging effect that alcohol has. Daily
moderately heavy usage of American or Mexican cannabis, say, six joints a day, produces
no known bodily harm. (But we must remember that we have no valid studies of
potsmokers which span any length of time.
) Daily moderately heavy use of alcohol—the
quantity comparable to the amount of marijuana which would intoxicate the user for an
equal length of time, i.e., the whole day, would be about half a quart a day—will destroy,
threaten or damage most of the body's vital organs over a long period of time. In terms of
auto accidents, the evidence we have suggests a gain. The drunk driver behind the wheel
is far more of a threat and a danger than the high pothead. Empirical tests show that
alcohol discoordinates the driver far more than marijuana—if it occurs with marijuana at
(23 of 31)4/15/2004 1:08:37 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Chapter 11
all.
45 Decrease in aggression, violence, and crime, too, would be only a positive gain.
Alcohol moreover is often directly linked with the commission of crime; far from inciting
crime, marijuana, contrastingly, possibly inhibits it. Our speculations on insanity would
have to be even less firmly grounded in known fact than those for tissue damage,
automobile accidents, and violence, but marijuana would have to strive to catch up with
alcohol's record; one of four admissions to a mental hospital is an alcoholic. Here, too, I
think, the use of pot would be a clear gain.
The members of the antipot contingent who claim that alcohol is preferable to
marijuana, and that legalization would be nothing but a disaster for this or any nation, do
have a single telling point, as I see it. This is that marijuana is always used to become
intoxicated, or high, and alcohol is often, indeed, perhaps most of the time, used for
nonintoxicatory purposes.
Alcoholic substances are frequently consumed on many
occasions where the drinker does not become drunk or intoxicated. For instance, at many
sporting events—football and baseball games—several bottles of beer may be drunk by a
spectator without effect.
The same may be said for wine at a meal, cocktails (sometimes)
at a party, or sherry as a nightcap. Of course, many marijuana smokers do to time who do not now because of
the laws, but who do not like to drink. Thus, the figure who use some intoxicant would
increase were pot legalized, but it would be far lower than the additive effect of all those
who now use liquor added to all those who might use pot.
If we want to consider the effect of the marijuana laws on public safety, we are
therefore faced with the prospect of comparing the relative merits of alcohol and
marijuana. As stated earlier, marijuana users cite the comparison as a powerful argument
in the drug's favor, while physicians dismiss the argument. Where does that leave us?
In terms of tissue damage, the evidence is clear; no sane observer of the American drug
use scene would claim for marijuana the ravaging effect that alcohol has. Daily
moderately heavy usage of American or Mexican cannabis, say, six joints a day, produces
no known bodily harm. (But we must remember that we have no valid studies of
potsmokers which span any length of time.) Daily moderately heavy use of alcohol—the
quantity comparable to the amount of marijuana which would intoxicate the user for an
equal length of time, i.e., the whole day, would be about half a quart a day—will destroy,
threaten or damage most of the body's vital organs over a long period of time. In terms of
auto accidents, the evidence we have suggests a gain. The drunk driver behind the wheel
is far more of a threat and a danger than the high pothead.
Empirical tests show that
alcohol discoordinates the driver far more than marijuana—if it occurs with marijuana at
(23 of 31)4/15/2004 1:08:37 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Chapter 11
all.
45 Decrease in aggression, violence, and crime, too, would be only a positive gain.
Alcohol moreover is often directly linked with the commission of crime; far from inciting
crime, marijuana, contrastingly, possibly inhibits it. Our speculations on insanity would
have to be even less firmly grounded in known fact than those for tissue damage,
automobile accidents, and violence, but marijuana would have to strive to catch up with
alcohol's record; one of four admissions to a mental hospital is an alcoholic. Here, too, I
think, the use of pot would be a clear gain.
The members of the antipot contingent who claim that alcohol is preferable to
marijuana, and that legalization would be nothing but a disaster for this or any nation, do
have a single telling point, as I see it. This is that marijuana is always used to become
intoxicated, or high, and alcohol is often, indeed, perhaps most of the time, used for
nonintoxicatory purposes.
Alcoholic substances are frequently consumed on many
occasions where the drinker does not become drunk or intoxicated. For instance, at many
sporting events—football and baseball games—several bottles of beer may be drunk by a
spectator without effect. The same may be said for wine at a meal, cocktails (sometimes)
at a party, or sherry as a nightcap. Of course, many marijuana smokers do
“These buds are army-green colored, crystally, Image Cannabis and evenly covered with long dark orange (almost brown) hairs. Broken up, these buds release the scent of sweet freshly cut grass or even hay with Sensiseedbank some slightly skunky undertones. The smoke is smooth, non-expansive and has a mild sweet taste. Although the high does not hit you right away, it first creeps through your body making you feel stoned and then beer bongs only moderately effects your cerebrum, allowing you to concentrate on any task at hand. **” – Homepage Amsterdam
, 13, 1101 (1976)Petrzilka Graine Cannabis and Use Of Cannabis W
Buzz- The first time I smoked some Shiskaberry yesterday it really didn’t stone me. Today it has whipped me
:) A few hits on the way Water Pipes Bongs to school were a few too many, it hit and I became Cannabis Floraison unmotivated. This evening a friend
and I finished off two bowls and it was quite the experience. Fair amount of visual distortion, lots of laughs
which lead to tears and falling on floor. Totally a fun indica. I place it a little below the NL x shiva in power
level, but still above average.
I'd put the Shisk in the social indica category, with the nlxshiva toward the
unsociable side. I did have to pull myself from the couch also.