When you get baked by your brownies

Why you would post this is beyond me revere. And what comes out of law enforcements mouths these days is hardly believable as they love to tweak the facts, plant false evidence and make themselves out to be saviors.
The horrendous amount of tax payers dollars spent on the bogus war on drugs is enough to boggle the mind of any person with reasonable intelligence. Let alone the young lives they ruin for simple possession.

You should have been at the Boston Freedom Rally this weekend. http://bostonfreedomrally.com/

Maybe NORML, MPP, LEAP, or SAFER will post an accurate analysis on this not so news worthy story.

You really should get the book 'Marijuana is SAFER - So why are we driving people to drink?" Authors Steve Fox, Paul Armentano, and Mason Tvert.

Apparently Lea would appreciated being drugged without her consent by random strangers

... Or maybe the problem is that she is currently in such a state.

you should really read "some random book written by a nutjob" because it justifies my point!

Interesting story! Thank you. I personally knew some people who accidentally ingested pot.

Um, yeah. I have no problem with marijuana whatsoever and think it should be legal, but if anybody had me ingest it without my knowledge, I'd be pretty miffed.

Also, eating it when you don't know it's there is a great way to wind up having way more than is comfortable. I bet it was pretty scary having the too-much-weed symptoms for no known reason.

Actually I should have said: Why you would post this is beyond me revere because you've said several times that you believe marijuana (cannabis) should be legal.

And no, I don't think this should have been given to children however it leads me to believe that this was an inside job because of the success of Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in California now.

It was probably a cop or Prohibitionist that did this in order to discredit the movement.

... nausea, dizziness, headache, and numbness and tingling of fingertips ...

Most people who cook and/or consume pot brownies are after a different result (though the finger-tingles might be fun, for those in that kind of mood) - and reportedly usually achieve it.

With all of these involuntary participants reporting only adverse effects, does this indicate that the brownies were cooked wrong (with other undesirable ingredients?), that the subjects share some unusual physiology, or that being around lots of pre-schoolers tends to harsh one's buzz?

@Pierce:

perhaps it suggests a large expectation effect in those who use pot?
i.e. you get the good buzz because you want it.

Felix @ # 7 - ... a large expectation effect ...

Andrew Weill made a similar suggestion back in the '70s - thereby curing a large number of stoners of my acquaintance of confidence in statements made by Andrew Weill.

Hmmm...Lea sounds...paranoid. This makes me think of another rather interesting outbreak involving mary jane in the early 1980's in Steubenville, Ohio. Except this one, ironically, involves salmonella-tainted marijuana as opposed to marijuana-tainted brownies. Look it up, very interesting investigation, indeed.

Hmmm...Lea sounds paranoid. This reminds me of another interesting outbreak involving mary jane from the early 1980's, except this one involves salmonella-tainted marijuana as opposed to marijuana-tainted brownies. Look it up, very interesting.

Not paranoid in the least, just aware of the corrupt tactics that the guberment and law enforcement use to justify their agenda.
With the Medical Marijuana dispensaries in California now it is very feasible that those who oppose them would dream up this type of action to discredit it.

Not clear what the point of this posting is so here is a similar story for your collection...

Back when I was working in the ER, one of the nurses brought in some brownies. We ate them and all had subsequent loose stools. Turns out she had put ExLax in the brownies. Someone complained, she confessed and was fired.

I believe the point of this post is to entertain - call it a "CDC News of the Weird" item if you need justification.

Isn't it rather presumptuous to conclude that there is an ulterior motive to the post? After all, I don't see anything that could be construed as political in the revere's commentary. Additionally, we do not (and I doubt we ever will) know the full details of this case. All we've been told are:

1. Someone set up a table selling brownies outside of a church.

2. This person was not affiliated with the church.

3. A teacher bought several of the brownies.

4. The teacher's son and several of the teacher's co-workers ate the brownies, and became ill.

5. The symptoms were consistent with oral ingestion of marijuana.

6. The serum and urine from one of the teachers was tested, and the THC-COOL levels in both were consistent with ingestion of marijuana.

7. One of the brownies was recovered and tested, and found to contain marijuana.

We don't know if the vendor knowingly sold laced brownies (it's reasonable to assume so, but it's not a certainty). We don't know if the teacher that bought the brownies knew they were laced (it's reasonable to assume not; however, again, this is not a certainty). Before we conclude some sort of smear campaign on pot by the LAPD, big religion, etc., let's get some more information.

Conspiracies are fun brain exercises, but I believe Occam's Razor will prove to be the case here. I'm going with some doofus trying to play a prank on people - kinda like the Ex-Lax in Mark's comment.

I am a religious believer in Occam's Razor. Thanks CPF!

No wonder they sold for $1.50 per brownie.

Apparently the vendor was using the "Alice B. Toklas Cookbook".

From personal experience when I was a teenager, I ingested 2-3 small pot cookies and essentially became nonfunctional. My vision was extremely blurry, my thoughts incoherent, and I could not stand up. It seemed like being extremely drunk. It was a much different effect than smoking marijuana, and one that I wouldn't want to experience again.

The effects are consistent with studies and what people have experienced. A few years ago a Swedish teacher baked a space-cake for his colleagues, who soon fell ill with the same symptoms.

I recall seeing a recent TV documentary about the psychological effects from various drugs. One subject knowingly ingested amphetamine, while the other did so unknowingly. The former enjoyed his experience a lot and the latter had a panic attack.

You don't get "ill" from ingesting cannabis. Marijuana has NEVER killed anyone, unlike alcohol.
When marijuana is eaten it normally takes one to two hours for the effects to be felt.

THC - regardless of potency - is virtually nontoxic to human cells or organs, and is incapable of causing a fatal overdose. Currently, doctors prescribe Marinol, a legal prescription medication that is 100 percent synthetic THC, and nobody at the drug czar's office seems overly concerned about its health effects.

Lea,

Me thinks thou dost protest too much... This really is much ado about nothing. The story, interesting though it is, has no further known outcome, no known villain or victims, and the arguments that follow, in reality, are meaningless. It's all smoke and brownies.

So write me off River.
It's still an opportunity to discuss propaganda against an illegal plant, marijuana, which IS NOT a meaningless subject. The article was pretty lame yes, however, it does illustrate, one way or another, how misinformation reins supreme in the minds of the ignorant. (ignorant meaning when it comes to the subject of marijuana prohibition).
In addition, people's lives, Good People, are having their world ripped apart by this ridiculous war on drugs.

And no disrespect Abe, what you said was just plain silly to boot. Marijuana doesn't do that to a person.

Wow, Lea, Write you off? Not my intention at all!

Does there need to be a debate on recreational use of marijuana and an end to the War on Drugs? Absolutely.

Do I think the LAPD would spike brownies, sell them under the guise of a church sale, and then blame the reckless potheads for it? Absolutely not.

Do I think that folks are coming to this blog to explore the marijuana debate and conspiracy theories? Certainly I didn't.

But, you find this the right forum for your protest? You go, Girl.

But, I'll move on to another room in these hallowed halls.

You're a mouse revere for not commenting on this subject. It can only be left to my imagination that you are lying and think that "drugs" are a joke.
Do you realize, really, how many innocent lives this ridiculous 'war on drugs' has ruined? How active are you to end this injustice?

OR do you prefer http://www.cnoa.org/ ???

Lea: Give me a fucking break. I've told you I think the war on drugs is a joke and that they should be legalized. Just because I'm not obsessed with it the way you are doesn't mean anything. How many lives has Mormonism screwed or the War in Iraq or any of a zillion other things. I don't see you doing anything about it. People have different concerns and it is a bit self-centered to think everyone should be as whacko over marijuana as you are. It's another thing in this world. It's not the whole world. There was nothing in that post that indicated one way or another if it was good or bad, but if you think that a reasonably powerful psychoactive drug ha no adverse effectsthen you don't know much about the pharmacology. You're just another enthusiast/advocate. You just have an opinion, based on your own prejudice. I'm sorry if I'm not macho enough for you on the drug issue. You're not courageous enough for me on war or poverty. So we're even.

What I find interesting is that you don't hear any of these teachers becoming addicted to marijuana now that they've tried it... Isn't that one of the reasons it is still a Schedule One Narcotic? Oh yeah... that's another lie told to us by the government. NO Addiction and NO Death... man this is a terrible substance!!!

Also... no "pothead" is going to sell pot brownies for $1.50 each... do you even have an idea what the street value of marijuana is? IF they used schwag (cheap low THC pot) to make the brownies the taste would have been overwhelming and the teachers would have known something was up as soon as they put them in their mouth. However, if good pot was used they may have been deceived. One joint = 1 gram of pot. Good pot will run you $120/ quarter or $17+/gram... To me it just doens't sound reasonable that the brownies were laced... or that the teacher bought them for $1.50 a piece like was being claimed. My bet would be on the son making them at home and the teacher unknowingly bringing them in as a treat. The "I bought them at a church fund-raiser" excuse sounds like a way to keep her son out of trouble.

revere:

"...but if you think that a reasonably powerful psychoactive drug has no adverse effects then you don't know much about the pharmacology."

I contend sir that YOU do not know much about the pharmacology of marijuana and until you do you should probably back off of the attacks. The FACTS are that there have been no studies to show any harmful effects of marijuana on the human body. That's right... NONE. All studies that have been done by the Federal Government have exclusively used smoking as the delivery method. They simply will not study other methods even though the chemistry of the plant material shows that there are better ways of injesting marijuana than by smoking it. But the government contends that you have to put the plant material through the process of combustion in order to injest the drug (this article shows another method - baking). The process of combustion creates carcinogens which would then be brought into the human body which could then lead to cancer (even though there are alternative studies showing THC's cancer fighting properties). Most patients prefer not to use the baking method because the onset takes longer and is much harder to control dosages when the effects aren't immediate. With vaporization you get the benefits of rapid onset and easier titration controls, while at the same time eliminating the carcinogens created when the material is burned and the smoke inhaled. This process works because THC and the other Cannabinoids (the ingrediants that cause the desired effect) actually vaporize at a temperature below that of combustion. The vapors are then collected and inhaled to deliver the effect.

I'm glad that you are ANTI-PROHIBITION but you can't go around spreading the lies that Prohibitions tell. The greatest of all lies being that marijuana is harmful.

Darth: Consider the subjects in this example. These were all adverse events, and if they were operating machinery, potentially fatal ones. All medications have adverse effects, including aspirin. The idea that there is no possibility of an adverse effect is fatuous and shows a lack of familiarity with both terminology and the clinical world. And some of us have had remarkably bad experiences with marijuana and seen many.

I am in favor of decriminalizing marijuana and some other drugs. But I've worked in ERs and I know what an adverse event is.

revere:

Sorry, but just because you worked in an ER doesn't mean anything to me. Fact of the matter is many peeople blame marijuana for a whole host of issues. For instance, when I was in college I took too much LSD and went into a bad trip... I ended in in the emergency room and when the doctor finally asked me what was going on I told him that I had smoked too much marijuana that night. I never said anything about the LSD because I was scared of what might have happend (sent to a psyciatric ward)...

The subjects in this example had "adverse effects" only because they did not know what they were eating. They ate what they thought was a brownie that should have given them the effects of a full stomach, maybe a sugar high.... so anything that was unexpected would be considered (based on the definition) as an adverse effect. To that degree I concede your point. But to the point that even marijuana (like all medications) has adverse effects in general I totally disagree. If the effects you receive are the effects you expect and desire, then there are no adverse effects. You mention asprin. The biggest side effect of taking asprin (as with most manufactured chemical compounds)is that it can be lethal. On the other hand, marijuana's LD50 is so far off the charts it is commonly said to be unable to cause death by overdose. So what unwanted effect does marijuana actually have?

My main point is that marijuana is in no way harmful to the human body as our Government has tried to perpetuate for the past 72 years. They insist that "smoking" is the only means of delivery thus marijuana must be harmful, but that simply is not the whole truth. If long-term marijuana use were so harmful to the human body why have there been no long-term studies of the patients that receive medical marijuana from the Federal Government. There are people that have been receiving marijuana directly from the Federal Government for 33+ years and not one study has been done on those individuals. Looks like the Goverrnment is afraid of what it might find and would have to admit that they have twisted the truth for far too many years.

Darth: OK. My clinical experience doesn't mean anything to you because you lied to a doctor. But I personally had a very unpleasant experience with your harmless drug, so I don't consider it harmless. I also don't consider it very dangerous, probably not anywhere near as dangerous as alcohol (with which I have also had some unpleasant experiences). If you think there is no possibility of an adverse effect from it then I think you are in willful denial, ignorant or already have had effects that cloud your reason and judgment. To say that the subjects of the MMWR report probably had a sugar high is so idiotic it's not worth further discussion.

Then you didn't fully read my comment... What I said was that the subjects in the story, when they ate the brownies, had the thought that they were just brownies, so the effects they were expecting were a full stomach or a sugar high (what other reason for eating a brownie).... the effects they received were only "Adverse" because they weren't expecting them to be laced. Originally you mentioned that I didn't understand the "terminology" and I was saying that in this example YOU WERE CORRECT because "adverse" is a discription of the expectations from the use of the substance (in this case a normal brownie). Since the effects they received were different from their expectations they were indeed "adverse" effects. Again this is caused by the brownies being laced and the subject being unaware of this. If the effects you receive are the effects you expect and desire, then there are no "adverse effects".

In regards to my lying to the ER doctors... we constantly see that ER admissions for marijuana use are on the rise... well this is because people blame marijuana even though it's not marijuana that caused the problem... as you would know, if at anytime an ER patient is given a toxicology screen that comes up with marijuana the visit is classified as a marijuana related ER admission... the marijuana could have been injested 2 weeks prior to the ER visit but it is still classified this way. This is another way the Government uses statistics to make their point.

Not Harmless??? Can you give me an example of how marijuana can harm you?

Darth: For therapeutic cannabinoids, dizziness and nausea are well accepted adverse events (and designated as such). This is true whether you believe it or not.

Interesting that you would suggest nausea as being an adverse effect. I guess if you use government sources for your information. If this is true why would marijuana be recommended to cancer patients in chemotherapy to deal with their nausea?

As far as the dizziness... I would suggest that for users this the sensation that they are after (can't be adverse if it is welcomed).

Can't come up with how marijuana can actually harm you?

Darth:

I would suggest that the short-term memory loss, disorientation, inability to concentrate, rapid heartbeat, and lack of coordination experienced by folks who are not habitual marijuana users (and many who are) can certainly be considered adverse effects.

They may not be permanent, but they are adverse.

Sorry River... but those effects are obviously from the list that the Government has put out... based on 72 continued years of lies on the subject, nothing the government claims can be taken seriously.

To illustrate this point, let's take some of those "effects":
inability to concentrate --- If this was a true statement why would marijuana be prescribed to individuals to treat ADHD?
Nausea ---- If this was true why would this be prescribed to patients undergoeing chemotherapy?
Rapid Heartbeat ---- symptom caused by inhaling smoke (this has nothing to do with the effects of marijuana)
Lack of Coordination --- Explain to me how athletes like Michael Phelps or Ricky Williams can be pot smokers yet still have the coordination to excell in swimming and football?
Disorientation ---- This "symptom" like that of "dizziness" is the "effect" that is desired by most users.. which cannot therefore be considered "adverse".

Can you answer either of these two questions:

Can you name one person who has died from a marijuana overdose?

Can you come up with how marijuana can actually do harm to the human body?

If you can't put an answer to these two questions can you really sit there and say that this plant should be illegal to use? How can you justify that point of view????

Darth,

Actually, the symptoms I listed are based entirely on personal experience from the one time I smoked pot.

As to answering your questions, (to summarize) how can apparently habitual users not experience the adverse effects I experienced? In a nutshell: Because they are not me.

Longer answer: The same way I was able to smoke cigarettes (I've been a nonsmoker now for five years). I was a habitual smoker. Through repeated use, my throat no longer involuntarily closed when I inhaled a breath of smoke, I no longer noticed my heartbeat quickening, I no longer got dizzy halfway through a cigarette. Basically, I forced my body to override the adverse effects so I could experience the effects I was after: momentary relaxation, sharpened concentration, quickened thinking.

As for disorientation being the desired effect of pot... It certainly wasn't for me. I was told it would make me "high," as in happy,giggly. I was told it was "fun." It was neither. It was dreadful. For others I know who smoke marijuana now, they don't smoke it for the disorientation, but rather for that "mellow, relaxed, 'everything is alright with the world'" feeling that I did not experience.

Again, just because the adverse effects aren't permanent or habitual users no longer experience them doesn't make them any less adverse.

Just so you know, I'm bowing out at this point. This is a meaningless argument for me. Getting stoned is just below getting a root canal in my book. I have better things to do.

Be well.

Thanks DarthNole, you're correct on every comment and you've done what I could not.
The g'ment has been extremely effective in controlling the public's thoughts as has been demonstrated here. We have our work cut out for us.

This is ONLY one very small reason my commitment leans heavily in the direction to Legalize Marijuana:

"U.S. law enforcement made 847,863 arrests on marijuana charges last year, 89 percent of which were for possession, not sale or manufacture â more arrests for marijuana possession than for all violent crimes combined.
One American was arrested on marijuana charges every 37 seconds".

This is not acceptable, and anyone here who believes so should once again get the book:

Marijuana is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink?
by Steve Fox, Paul Armentano, Mason Tvert, and Norm Stamper

http://www.amazon.com/Marijuana-Safer-Driving-People-Drink/dp/160358144…

-------------------
And revere, you said: "Just because I'm not obsessed with it the way you are doesn't mean anything. How many lives has Mormonism screwed or the War in Iraq or any of a zillion other things. I don't see you doing anything about it".
------------------
Wrong revere, wrong. Just because I don't post as often here anymore doesn't mean I don't strive to combat lies and manipulation on ANY subject.
You, and River, do not understand the subject of Prohibition, nor how the "high" affects people differently.
Gees revere, you research cancer. There are multiple studies that have proven marijuana can and does kill cancer cells.
As far as trying marijuana once, that was not a fair trial. Like all good clinical studies or trials it has to be done over a period of time, now doesn't it?
***********

Lea: First I agree that you have a good reason. Second, you obviously are not telling the truth when you say you combat all lies and manipulation. I know this because nobody does that. It's not only impossible time-wise but you'd have to know about all the times you were being lied to and manipulated and you don't. You have opinons about it, many of them based on good evidence, but most you know nothing about and probably many you'd care nothing about if you knew about them. You have an obsession. That's OK. I have many of them. The fact that your obsessions and mine don't coincide is no reason to accuse someone of cowardice ("you are a mouse"). I don't claim to be the bravest person around. In fact I am a very fearful person. But despite my fear I've gotten beaten up and jailed and had bones broken. I don't recommend it and I didn't intend for any of those things to happen. But I don't think I'm "a mouse" just because I won't hop on board your personal bandwagon. Your cause is worthy but I've only got so much time left. And BTW, inhaling PAHs from smoking marijuana causes cancer, it doesn't cure it. But that's hardly the issue with drug policy.

As someone that researches cancer I am appaulled at your misrepresentation of PAHs and there relation to marijuana:

PAHs occur in oil, coal, and tar deposits, and are produced as byproducts of fuel burningâ¦.

This goes precisly to MY point, that marijuana is not what causes cancer, but that the burning of the plant is what causes it. By vaporizing the active ingrediants out of the plant matter (without burning) means you can inhale vapors that do not contain the cancer causing PAHs.

Furthermore: Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons are lipophilic, meaning they mix more easily with oil than water. The larger compounds are less water-soluble and less volatile (i.e., less prone to evaporate). â- so this tells you that they donât vaporize like THC and the other cannabinoids!!!

Moreover: Different types of combustion yield different distributions of PAHs in both relative amounts of individual PAHs and in which isomers are produced. ââ so if you eliminate the âcombustionâ you eliminate the PAHâsâ¦.. this is why the government continually uses the term âSMOKEDâ when talking about marijuana and medicine. But just like the 1999 IOM report suggested, an alternative rapid-onset delivery system should be developedâ¦â¦ and thus we have the vaporizor!!!

THC fights cancer:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/17/health/webmd/main2696726.shtml

Injested in the proper manner, cannibis may fight off cancer or at least stop it from spreading.

Marijuana Vaporization - 2007 study done at the University of California:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070515151145.htm

I didn't want you to think I was just spouting off a bunch of BS... the studies have been done which plainly show that the cause of the cancer you mention is the combustion of the plant not the plant itself!!!

River:

"Actually, the symptoms I listed are based entirely on personal experience from the one time I smoked pot."

The one time???

From my experience most people that tried marijuana did so after first having a few drinks of alcohol. Is this the case with you? If so, no wonder you had a bad experience. But you can't blame the marijuana. Anytime you mix alcohol with any drug the combined effect is different. Come hang out with me for the weekend and you will have a different point of view.

The one time???

I thought this was a scientific blog... don't you believe in reproducible results?

Now go back to your response and realize that your comparison to cigarette smoking only makes my point that much stronger. All the effects you listed relating to the "One time" you smoked pot were the same effects you had while smoking cigarettes (dizziness, rapid heartbeat). Maybe it's the smoke (the method of delivery) causing the effects and not the substance causing the effects you describe.

"Just so you know, I'm bowing out at this point. This is a meaningless argument for me." --- maybe it's because you know you are way over-matched on this subject.

Well revere, I got your attention by calling you a mouse. And you've known me for over four years now. There's been plenty of times that you've broken my heart with your words. (and please don't ask me for examples, you'll have to extend some trust here).
BTW, sorry I didn't get back sooner.
As far as combating lies and manipulation I'll do it when it comes to my attention but I won't go looking for it, so perhaps I didn't word it right?

Never the less there is a great deal of myth and downright lies that surround Prohibition of Marijuana and if it happens to come up on a blog that I happen upon, or your blog that I check on occasion now, you bet I'll be sharing my opinion.
As far as fear goes, did you mean a fear of talking about the marijuana subject or a fear of losing your credibility in your job and community over talking about marijuana?

so let me get this strait.... only one person got "high" and was the only one that tested positive, yet the other people didnt test positive and had no effects and the cops then said that the brownies tested positive for marijuana....hmmmmmm yea, noone sells pot brownies for $1.50 each..... so someone here is lying... ill bet any amount of money it was the police.... it doesnt add up

Darth: Of course the PAHs are from combustion of organic material. And most people use MJ by smoking it. Look, I want to decriminalize it and other drugs. But it is a drug and it has adverse effects. All drugs do. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Lea: No, you didn't get my attention. You just pissed me off. My attention is on what matters to me at the time and at this time it isn't the marijuana issue at the top o the list. But it's on my list. I don't mind you posting here, but your opinions are yours, not mine. I think the idea that this drug has no adverse effects whatsoever is fatuous and discredits advocates of decriminialization.

Your response to me revere is fair enough, and if I pissed you off well ... think of how a huge number of people feel that CANNOT tolerate pharmaceuticals and DO want to use marijuana - yet they can't because of the ridiculous lies that are out there.

It's a battle, rather a war, that does not need to be fought. For those that are starting to get concerned over where their tax dollars are going you may want to find out how much is spent by the DEA, prisons, law enforcement and a multitude of other needless agencies over this. Darn, we could probably come close to providing better health care in America with what those agencies spend combined.
Prisons for instance revere. The Netherlands closed something like seven prisons last year because crime is down. And why do I bring this up? Cannabis is as close to Legal as one can get there. Plus statistics from the Netherlands prove that cannabis use in young adults dropped significantly when they had the brain's to open the Coffee Shops.

Lea: I agree completely with everything you said in your last comment. That's why I can't understand why we are battling over this. In fact, I thought I made it slyly evident that I included in the post the length of time the substance was detectable in the urine as potentially interesting information for people who thought they might get tested or worried they might.

revere: I totally agree that most people injest marijuana by SMOKING it, but that doesn't mean that scientists and politicians should go around saying that MARIJUANA causes cancer. You're a scientist, so report the science of the plant. Stand up and explain that it is the delivery system not the plant that COULD cause cancer. It is however, very possible that even the carcinogen caused by combustion are mitigated by the tumor killing properties of THC. This would explain why in double blind studies marijuana ONLY smokers had a smaller risk of developing cancer than non-smokers.

The SCIENTISTS and POLITICIANS in this country need to focus more on education than incarceration. They need to promote the healthy alternative to smoking marijuana and that is vaporization. Believe me, many pot smokers don't know what a vaporizor is and even some that do don't understand how and why it works. Even in my circles I have to explain how it actually is a more efficient delivery system as well, because THC and other Cannabinoids are lost in the combustion process. This makes you able to use less than before to get the desired results.

"All drugs do." --- well here's the main difference between marijuana and ALL other drugs. All other drugs have the side effect of DEATH (from asprin to cocaine, from water to heroin). If you injest too much you will die!! BUT marijuana... cannot cause death! The LD50 is so far off the charts that is is ONLY hypothesized that one would have to injest 1500 pounds in a 15 minute time frame in order to induce death. Not only would I like to have 1500 pound available to me, but I'd like to see anyone accomplish that task.... it is simply impossible!!!

DarthNole:

Those adverse effects are listed in my father's pharmacology books, from when extract of marijuana was LEGAL and PRESCRIBED! They are listed in many old pharmacy and medical books from the legal era.

revere I can only ask you to please not make light of this subject. Please don't poke fun, as your title indicates, of marijuana. It is no longer a laughing matter.

And for those of you who have read the comment section of this post, and still believe marijuana is bad, please reconsider. The lives of good people are continually being ruined over a plant. The lives of good people are continually being broken and ruined by runaway fanatics that want to turn us all into puritans. The drug cartels in Mexico are happy that you do not support Legalizing Marijuana, it keeps their wallets stuffed. If it were legalized, taxed and regulated just like alcohol and tobacco we'd see a different picture.

And for those of you who have read the comment section of this post, and agree that marijuana should be legal please come out of the closet. If you won't do so publicly then dig into your wallets and donate to MPP, NORML, LEAP, SAFER, the front runners against Prohibition.

Forgive me for not being able to offer up a better comment today, my health continues to suffer, as well as thousands of others, because of the insane drug policies in this country.

Tsu Dho Nimh: Marijuana was last listed in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia in 1942... so your telling me that your going to rely on science from the 40's??? This was the era of "Reefer Madness" when Harry Anslinger stood in front of the US Congress and bodly stated that marijuana was a deadly drug that was being brought across our borders by the mexicans. This was the same era that produced the propaganda that associated marijuana use to the jazz mucians and other people of color. The American public was told that marijuana would make white women look at blacks in a sexual manner. ARE YOU SERIOUSLY GOING TO BRING THIS ERA UP???

The fact of the matter is that the science on the matter is evolving constantly. Let's just look at the past 10 years. In 1999 the Institute of Medicine declared the medicinal value of marijuana but determined that the conventional method for injestion (smoking) would not allow marijuana to be considered medicine (see the above discussion of PAH's - #39 and #40). The IOM report stated that an alternative, rapid onset delivery system should be developed in order to allow those who would benefit to receive a safe dose of medicine. Then in 2007 the University of California released findings from a study they did on Marijuana vaporization that showed how it is possible to remove the carcinogens that were so concerning in the IOM report (I linked to that article above in #41).

Furthermore... THC was first discovered in 1964, so anything referencing the scientific nature of the drug prior to that year is incomplete since scientists didn't even understand the chemical make up of the plant.

Face the facts... the US Government has been providing medical marijuana to patients in this country (4 are still alive today) for the past 33 years. Not one long term study offthese patients has ever been done. Why is this? Why would our government not take the opportunity to use these patients knowing the quantity of marijuana that they go through each and every day? Sounds like they are simply afraid of what they will find. Just like when they asked the IOM to study marijuana and now everytime a government official talks about marijuana as medicine they only refer to SMOKED marijuana (because they know that it is the combustion of the plant that causes the adverse effects and not the plant itself).

This just isn't the same without MRK.

Real cute Otto.
How is it people just don't want to read and really learn the credible facts that are right under their nose.
(rhetorical)

Ingesting marijuana is NOT SAFE for EVERYONE. My husband was rushed to the ER after collapsing 1 hour after eating only 1/8th of a medical marijuana brownie, purchased at a licensed medical marijuana shop in Oakland, Ca.
I ate the same amount and got very high, but DID NOT have the same reaction as my husband, who is in fantastic physical shape. Neither one of us drank any alcohol or ingested anything else, and we don't smoke cigarettes.
We had eaten a regular healthy dinner before eating the brownie and drank nothing but water.
Within 1 hour, my husband had ALL the symptoms of a stroke and then some. He first became very nauseous, then he started to experience a tingling in his left arm and hand, followed by his right side. He collapsed and was BARELY able to speak. I dialed 911 and helped him to slow down his breathing, which had become panting...He actually saw the "white light", and thought he was dying. ...NOT exactly a NOTHING reaction to ingesting a small amount of pot.
We have both smoked pot before and even eaten the same amount, just a week before, and got high but didn't have to be rushed to the ER.
My husband went into shock, started shaking all over, couldn't move his limbs and was unable to speak more than the slightest mumble and only after repeatedly saying his name, was he able to even mumble.
In the ER, they put him into full triage, electrodes all over his body, CAT scan, the whole deal. His blood pressure was elevated and his heart was racing at 100-105 BPM. He shook all over, was cold and very nauseous.
The ER team treated started an I.V. of saline to flush the THC from his system, gave him Ativan via the I.V. to stop the shaking, and an anti-nausea drug via the I.V...Only after 6 hours was he able to speak and regain control of his limbs enough to turn on his side...It was 2 more hours before he could use his legs enough to walk up and down the hall, slowly.
I brought him home and he has had a terrible headache since yesterday and is still mildly nauseous.
Both of us have always thought that marijuana should be legalized and, although, we only use pot rarely, now, and generally, by smoking small amounts, we are no strangers to weed.
We now know better.
The ER docs and nurses said that they have seen several cases of patients brought into the ER after eating pot, where they have to sleep 8-10 hours before they can regain mobility. One of the nurses confided to me that she had had a similar reaction, but without the shakes, where she felt that something extremely heavy was pushing down on her body and caused her arms and legs to feel like lead. She said she slept for 10 hours and felt like hell. She went on to say that her neighbor ate a whole mini-muffin of medicinal pot and was down for 2 days...
Now, the only thing that I can figure out that could have exacerbated my husband's response is that he might have a sinus infection and he does suffer from migraines. When he was having this terrible reaction, he kept saying it was like a migraine without the migraine head pain..so maybe he was having a migraine and the pot kept the pain at bay, but the combo of a migraine and being high sent him over the top. Whatever the case, he was totally messed up and the ER docs didn't think it was a nothing response.
Let's just say that that is a definitive end to our pot ingesting days.
As far as legalizing pot. We both still think it should be, with the caveat that there will be warnings about potential O.D.'s from ingesting it, along with specific dosage info.
An O.D. doesn't have to kill you, but people should know that you could be completely out of commission and unable to function if you're an unlucky respondent to the effects.
Remember, I had the same amount as my husband. I'm 5.5, 130lbs. He's 6.2, 180lbs. We're both in very good shape, and neither one of us drank alcohol with the pot. In fact, we were both dancing to music at a relatively mellow 40th birthday party of a friend, when he became ill.
Pretty much most of our friends think pot should be legalized and we're both lifetime professional musicians, so no stranger to pot, if you know what I mean.
Sorry for the long post..but, as much as I don't want to villify pot use, I want others to know that IT IS possible to O.D. and the Kaiser E.R. triage team will back us up on that.