Matt Every Suspended Three Months for Marijuana

[Vinsk]

6 hours ago, Pretzel said:

(GP's often don't even take new patients below 16ish, much less actual children that are 5)

Not true. Just sayin....Parents may often prefer a pediatrician for kids but FP/GP see any age. We don’t just decide to stop seeing young ones. We decide to not do OBGYN often ( really just OB) but most GP/FP don’t stop taking patients under 18 or 16 or 5. 

[Pretzel]

1 minute ago, Vinsk said:

Not true. Just sayin....Parents may often prefer a pediatrician for kids but FP/GP see any age. We don’t just decide to stop seeing young ones. We decide to not do OBGYN often ( really just OB) but most GP/FP don’t stop taking patients under 18 or 16 or 5. 

Good to know. My experience as a kid (8-10) when a trio of clinics were opened up near my parents' was that I had to go to the pediatricians rather than the GP's, and then after I turned 18 I was transferred to the GP's. Must have been clinic rules rather than general practices.

[Bonvivant]

13 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

Good to know. My experience as a kid (8-10) when a trio of clinics were opened up near my parents' was that I had to go to the pediatricians rather than the GP's, and then after I turned 18 I was transferred to the GP's. Must have been clinic rules rather than general practices.

$$$ makes the world go round. I think that most GPs that take children probably already see the parents though. If you showed up to a GP with a 10 YO and you weren't already a client, they would probably direct you somewhere else.

[Vinsk]

23 minutes ago, Pretzel said:

Good to know. My experience as a kid (8-10) when a trio of clinics were opened up near my parents' was that I had to go to the pediatricians rather than the GP's, and then after I turned 18 I was transferred to the GP's. Must have been clinic rules rather than general practices.

Possible...not a good practice if so. Internal Medicine docs only see 18 and above but GP/FP see all. That’s one of the major differences between FP and Internal Med.

8 minutes ago, Bonvivant said:

$$$ makes the world go round. I think that most GPs that take children probably already see the parents though. If you showed up to a GP with a 10 YO and you weren't already a client, they would probably direct you somewhere else.

I won’t get off topic but not true either for the reason I just posted. There’s no reason to be a FP doc if you’re not going to see adults and kids. That’s what defines our field.

[Zekez]

15 hours ago, Pretzel said:

My primary issue with it, personally, is that it is proven to change the brain chemistry of those who use it during the period in which their brain is still developing. This is all people under the age of 25 or so, which is a group that also includes most people who use marijuana heavily and regularly. The population that uses it the most is the same group that has their physical development altered by its use.

If there were no permanent physical side-effects like that I wouldn't have any reservations at all. Even with those observed results I believe in legalization, but personally I avoid its use because I fall into the category of people whose brain development would be permanently altered. I believe those who decide to blindly believe there are no consequences to marijuana use despite evidence to the contrary are making unwise decisions.

It's your choice if you want to permanently alter the structure of your brain. That doesn't mean it's a smart choice to make.

I don't ascribe to the research that shows that usage causes issues with brain development.  I know that there are studies done that indicate this, but there is also research that shows the impact isn't nearly as destructive as one would believe.  

Home

---

Scientific American is the essential guide to the most awe-inspiring advances in science and technology, explaining how they change our understanding of the world and shape our lives.

Adult using weed should be 100% legal.

[rehmwa]

18 hours ago, Zekez said:

I have never even had one hit off of a joint, but what's your beef with using marijuana recreationally?  Stuck in the 1940's are you?  Man get some FACTUAL information about pot before you make this kind of ridiculous statement.

Do you drink alcohol at all?

pretty much the same issues I have with cigarettes and cigars - I think smokers are idiots for using too - mostly 2nd hand smoke and that it crosses into the areas of non-smokers - find a way to do it that's not intrusive and I'm good to go.  But I have no issue with people arguing for recreational use with arguments that are solely on topic.  People do a lot of dumb stuff with their bodies and they should have the freedom to make those choices.....and any other choice.

As for abusers showing clear sign of brain dysfunction - seen it so much.  Doesn't seem worth it.  but I don't think it matters - it should be legal.  People do a lot of legal self destructive things

For that matter, I'm not a fan of drunks either.  These can be used smartly, but those that are fanatical about it are the ones to ruin it for others.

Edited October 23, 2019 by rehmwa

[saevel25]

5 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

As for abusers showing clear sign of brain dysfunction - seen it so much.  Doesn't seem worth it.  but I don't think it matters - it should be legal.  People do a lot of legal self destructive things

Is it lasting after stopping, or is it a side effect that only lasts when you excessively use the product? If it's the later then its not damage. 

[rehmwa]

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Is it lasting after stopping, or is it a side effect that only lasts when you excessively use the product? If it's the later then its not damage. 

i'm talking the long term degradation I see in friends and others.  (I'd caviat that these were long term and relatively heavy users - friends that are casual recreation fare relatively normally with no issues - my only issue with them is how bad their jackets and breath smells.....worse than cigarettes - this is coming from an asthma and migraine history, so 2nd hand annoyance is very personal for me...)

again - my philosophy is people should be able to do with themselves anything they like.  but they should do these things with eyes wide open and avoid rationalization and denial.  This absolutely includes things I disagree with (which apparently is a strange attitude in today's world).

Edited October 23, 2019 by rehmwa

[Zekez]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

i'm talking the long term degradation I see in friends and others.  (I'd caviat that these were long term and relatively heavy users - friends that are casual recreation fare relatively normally with no issues - my only issue with them is how bad their jackets and breath smells.....worse than cigarettes - this is coming from an asthma and migraine history, so 2nd hand annoyance is very personal for me...)

again - my philosophy is people should be able to do with themselves anything they like.  but they should do these things with eyes wide open and avoid rationalization and denial.  This absolutely includes things I disagree with (which apparently is a strange attitude in today's world).

You do know that no one has ever died from overdosing on marijuana?  Seems relatively safe to me.  Your use of the term "idiots" is what got me questioning your knowledge of marijuana.

 

[rehmwa]

15 minutes ago, Zekez said:

Your use of the term "idiots" is what got me questioning your knowledge of marijuana.

nope, just a generic gripe against stinky unhealthy shit people do to themselves from the perspective someone that actually medically effected by said shit in addition to just being annoyed or mildly inconvenienced - it doesn't change my philosophy concerning individual choice, but drugs and smoking do seen to stretch it to it's limit - we're good.

Quote

You do know that no one has ever died from overdosing on marijuana?  Seems relatively safe to me. 

"not dying" ...sure, if we define the debate by that criteria - it's safe,

People don't die from over drinking either, it's the car wreck that kills them, or the house burning down.

(Seriously, I don't care.  I don't have any reason to research the topic.  I don't plan to participate, nor do I plan to try and outlaw it.  I support legalization, but that's due a general philosophy of live and let live, so trying to justify it beyond that reason is moot.  I consider legalization needs to come with the ability of employers to choose their people if they smoke, and with limits when use affects others, and for private businesses to prohibit on their property - no one needs to walk through a smoker's cloud or eat or otherwise - they've done a piss poor job in this area for smoking, I don't expect better with pot.  And visiting CO is just a shit show - everything stinks of it.  especially the airport).

Edited October 23, 2019 by rehmwa

[Double Mocha Man]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

again - my philosophy is people should be able to do with themselves anything they like. 

 

Unless we, the taxpayers, have to bail them out... i.e. paying their hospital/emergency room bills, cleaning up after the horrific car accident they caused while high, etc.  I'm all for personal responsibility but it needs to be tempered with intelligence and good judgement. Weed is fine... I voted to legalize it in my state but legalization doesn't provide anyone with a "get out of jail free" card.

[guiseppe]

You have to play within the rules, or suffer the penalty.  He knew what he was doing and chose to smoke at the risk of getting suspended.

Now, whether the rule makes sense....I have yet to hear an argument which justifies prohibiting the use of marijuana when legal, that would not likewise justify prohibiting the consumption of alcohol.  

[Vinsk]

20 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

2 hours ago, rehmwa said:

 

Unless we, the taxpayers, have to bail them out... i.e. paying their hospital/emergency room bills,

You mean like those people who choose to BASE jump off of downtown buildings? Or plunge down Niagara Falls? Or sail across vast distances of the ocean only to need the Coast Guard to recuse them? 

[iacas]

41 minutes ago, Zekez said:

You do know that no one has ever died from overdosing on marijuana? Seems relatively safe to me.

Wow. That is your definition of “safe”?

[colin007]

55 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

People don't die from over drinking either, it's the car wreck that kills them, or the house burning down.

Uhhhhh.....

[phan52]

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

 

People don't die from over drinking either, it's the car wreck that kills them, or the house burning down.

.

Not true. People do die from alcohol poisoning and more often from excessive use over time.

[Patch]

I think if you do a search, you will find that some lady down south died from a marijuana (thc) overdose as determined by her autopsy. Rare case to be sure, but can happen. 

[rehmwa]

13 minutes ago, phan52 said:

Not true. People do die from alcohol poisoning and more often from excessive use over time.

and if they live - they die from embarrassment because their friends wrote on them with permanent markers before getting stomach pumped...

(too insensitive?  I'm pretty sure)