The Official "I'm High" Thread
- Thread starter Mama.
- Start date
MomentaryMuon
Member
13534232:JakeSmith said:
Aha I gave my sister some brownies late one night. The next morning she had to skip a meeting and class because she was still to baked... Probably because she doesn't 420 blaze that often but still right funny.
No.Quarter
Active member
13540122:max_taffer said:
Haha yeah, I gave a pretty potent one to my friend who has a really low tolerance and she had her first kush coma. It was the classic, head in hands, only talks when they have to, slumped over in a camping chair kush coma.
.squirrely.
Active member
13534232:JakeSmith said:
Every time I eat one of these fuckers I wake up just as stoned as I was the night before, great for some people but I hate that feeling.
Bamjam
Member
13540122:max_taffer said:
Brownies always make for good stories.
My friend and I have been avid THC consumers for a while now, and his sister knows that, so when it came time to find something new and interesting for her and her friends' grad party they hit us right up asking for brownies. ONLY ONE of the 8 or so people partaking had ever tried pot, which is where the first wrong move lies. We told them EXPLICITLY that the brownies we were getting them would fuck them up if they weren't careful, we said eat half and wait an hour or two before you go for the other half, if at all.
Bamjam
Member
13540122:max_taffer said:
Brownies always make for good stories.
tldr;
My friend and I have been avid THC consumers for a while now, and his sister knows that, so when it came time to find something new and interesting for her and her friends' grad party they hit us right up asking for brownies. ONLY ONE of the 8 or so people partaking had ever tried pot, which is where the first wrong move lies. We told them EXPLICITLY that the brownies we were getting them would fuck them up if they weren't careful, we said eat half and wait an hour or two before you go for the other half, if at all.
My friend gets a call later that night from his sister and we both look at each other like this is either really good, or really bad. She's FRANTIC on the phone, "THREE PEOPLE ARE IN THE HOSPITAL ... WHAT DID YOU GIVE US ... I FEEL SO CRAZY RIGHT NOW."
THREE PEOPLE in the hospital LOL. Turns out they didn't adhere to the "wait an hour or two" policy, waited like 30 minutes then woofed the rest. I can't even imagine how baked those kids must've been cause those were some dank ass brownies and they're like 24-25 years old without a trace of THC their entire lives. They were fine the next day but now they look at us like we're maniacs, like we get THAT high every time we smoke.
Shit I'm baked that was a bit long winded. Boutta put the tldr warning above it.
Long story short don't give weed brownies to anyone that's graduating from a goody goody college with an integrated bible curriculum.
ForeverYung
Active member
Just watched Keefer's new edit it was really good
GayWolf420
Active member
really enjoy taking a snapper or two while on adderall while doing homework, it really gets me into a zone and ive been really productive.
No.Quarter
Active member
My name is earl has awesome music
trannyfinder.edu
Member
Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon is amazing af when you've smoked the devils lettuce.
butterfactory
Member
http://www.yooouuutuuube.com/v/?width=192&height=120&flux=1&direction=rand&yt=SOQEWZzz3L412405623:eazy. said:
vid related, my biological father
No.Quarter
Active member
I love wake n bake. That was the dankest omelet I have ever made
Bodhisattva_
Active member
13559012:JakeSmith said:
That's my morning routine when I don't have work. I wake up, roll a doobie to smoke in the shower then put some oldies on do a quick yoga routine and make an omelette. So nice.
000000000000
Member
I really hope jobs stop screening for ganja in states that have legalized medicinal/ recreational use.
ImNotARacist
Active member
I'm literally always high. I am not exaggerating, I smoke 1 gram a day as if it were prescribed, it's why I'm so stupid.
Bodhisattva_
Active member
13562686:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
A gram? Lol
DJtearegas
Member
see a rig post a rig
Bodhisattva_
Active member
13562716:DJtearegas said:see a rig post a rig
Very clean banger hanger. Who blew that? To lazy to find a pic of my rig already on the Internet lol but I am probably the biggest boro head on this site.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13562711:Thizzle. said:
Well that's what it averages out too. A gram a day for 2 years.
Doesn't mean I don't dome a 3gram Blunt on occasion. if you have to smoke more than a gram a day to get high you need to stop dabbing and start thinking about your future.
.squirrely.
Active member
13562726:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
Dudeeeeee youre the fucking man
DJtearegas
Member
13562719:Thizzle. said:
this guy jonny car, heres an album
http://imgur.com/a/UMziz
Also have a serendipity Doom pendy tube and a wicked sands sidecar, and a Sov king stemline for flower
http://imgur.com/7eA1fSn
whats your collection like?
No.Quarter
Active member
My friends and I finally got to use the dab rig that we got for free pieced together from some other people and actually use it for some dabs instead of with an ashcatcher and it was absolutely amazing I went for two dinners and then we ordered pizza and then I made some fucking taquitos and oh my god those were delicious and now im about to get in my bed and absolutely melt until I fall asleep.
corona
Active member
13562726:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
think of what you could have done with those 5000 bucks you smoked. (assuming you buy a quarter oz at a time)
1000 bucks and you could have a kickass hydroponic closet grow room going. grow 3 plants at a time but stagger so every 6-8 weeks you're harvesting a new plant even at a modest 2 oz per plant that more than covers what you smoke and over the course of 2 years you would have paid back that 1000 bucks and you'd now be making money off of it.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13563776:VinnieF said:
"I suspect that a day's breathing in any city with poor air quality poses more of a threat than inhaling a day's dose --"
"marijuana smoke also contains cannabinoids such as THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) and CBD (cannabidiol), which are non-carcinogenic and demonstrate anti-cancer properties in vivo and in vitro..."
http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medl..._as_well_as_its_growth_and_metastasis_in_vivo
I also don't drink alcohol. How much do you think people spend at bars every year?
You would never say this to someone who drop $100 on a Friday at a bar which is easily a months worth of nug.
I hate double standards.
I did grow plants this year so good call.
corona
Active member
13563993:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
If you don't see smoking marijuana as the source of a serious risk of cancer then you must be high.... oh, wait.
But yea, pretty much everything causes cancer and I agree it's also pretty dumb to frequently binge drink, so no double standard here.
Good on you for growing your own. Everyone should if they have the means.
I guess I'll slowly back out of this thread since I don't smoke..
No.Quarter
Active member
Everyone needs to try and hit a bong with hot water in it. So smooth and it's like breathing in a sauna. Also so nice to hold something warm in a frosty car when it's 0 degrees outside.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13567031:-MK- said:
.
corona
Active member
13567031:-MK- said:
13567722:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
13567769:Willgum said:
I know it's cool to deny that there are any harmful effects of cannabis smoke, but do just an ounce of research other than what stoners will tell you and you'll find a plethora of information on carcinogenic compounds you inhale while smoking pot.
If you smoke anything, ANYTHING, then you're inhaling carcinogens. Doesn't matter if it's pot, tabacco, smoke from a fire, a newspaper, candle smoke, you are breathing in carcinogens when you inhale it.
And here, you want studies? I know it's from California and they probably list your toothpaste as a potential carcinogen and dangerous for pregnant females, but it's a pretty decent compilation of many different peer-reviewed studies
http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/hazard_ident/pdf_zip/FinalMJsmokeHID.pdf
Also here. Here's a list of 33 known carcinogens that are in marijuana smoke. Whether cannabis smoke is carcinogenic really isn't debatable.
acetaldehyde, acetamide, acrylonitrile, 4
-
aminobiphenyl, arsenic,
benz[
a
]anthracene, benzene, benzo[
a
]pyrene, benzo[
b
]fluoranthene, benzo[
j
]fluoranthene,
benzo[
k
]fluoranthene, benzofuran, 1,3
-
butadiene, cadmium, carbazole, catechol, chromium
(hexavalent compounds), chrysene, dibenz[
a,
h
]anthracene, dibenz[
a,i
]pyrene,
dibenzo[
a,e
]pyrene, diethylnitrosamine, dimethylnitrosa
mine, formaldehyde, indeno[
1,2,3,
-
c,d
]pyrene, isoprene, lead, mercury, 5
-
methylchrysene, naphthalen
e, nickel, pyridine, and
quinoline
corona
Active member
13567031:-MK- said:
13567722:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
13567769:Willgum said:
and obviously since you won't lift a finger to do some research on this topic, I'll link you to some primary sources:
This study found a higher link of cannabis smoking to lung cancer than cigarette smoking:
http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/31/2/280.short
This study found that cannabis may be a risk factor for lung cancer:
http://journals.lww.com/jto/Abstrac...ng_Cancer_and_Past_Use_of_Cannabis_in.13.aspx
This study is sort of a meta-analysis and finds positive correlation between cannabis smoking and various cancers.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00003.x/abstract
This study finds that cannabis smoke is a risk factor for lung cancer:
http://journals.lww.com/jto/Abstrac...king_and_Risk_of_Lung_Cancer_in_Men__A.7.aspx
This study found that cannabis does not increase the risk of head and neck cancer. yay!
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0194599807019985
Anyways, you get the point. I'm totally OK with smoking, I'm just not in denial about its health risks like so many are.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13567820:VinnieF said:
From one of your sources.
There is very little evidence that THC is mutagenic. Studies of animal cells suggest that THC can produce alterations to cell metabolism, DNA synthesis and cell division in the test tube (Nahas & Latour 1986). These changes, however, are more likely to delay or stop cell division rather than to produce cellular changes that may lead to cancer (MacPhee et al. 1999).
THC and other cannabinoids are not mutagenic in standard microbial assays, such as the Ames test (MacPhee et al. 1999; Marselos & Karamanakos 1999). There is inconsistent evidence on whether the cannabinoids are clastogenic (i.e. produce breaks in chromosomes) (Marselos & Karamanakos 1999) However, even if they are clastogenic they are unlikely to be mutagenic (MacPhee et al. 1999), because chromosomal abnormalities are more likely to kill the affected cell than to produce malignant transformation and proliferation (MacPhee et al. 1999). A recent study in rats and mice has also found no evidence that THC was carcinogenic (Chan et al. 1996).
did you actually read any of your sources? None of them have actually found anything. It's all speculation through carcinogenic similarities.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13567813:VinnieF said:
Since Cannabis smoke contains many of the same components as tobacco smoke, there are valid concerns about the adverse pulmonary effects of inhaled Cannabis. A longitudinal study in a noncancer population evaluated repeated measurements of pulmonary function over 20 years in 5,115 men and women whose smoking histories were known.[5] While tobacco exposure was associated with decreased pulmonary function, the investigators concluded that occasional and low-cumulative Cannabis use was not associated with adverse effects on pulmonary function (forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration [FEV1] and forced vital capacity [FVC]).
Burnt toast has just as many carcinogens as tobacco smoke. Doctors wouldn't prescribe cancer patients weed if they thought it was going to give them cancer. You are starting to seem like a troll.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13564056:VinnieF said:
Here's another one for you chump.
"As more and more Americans consider the pros and cons of cannabis legalization, many points are worth repeating, and chief among them: cannabis actually decreases the risk of lung cancer.
It's a counter-intuitive notion, since tobacco smoking causes cancer, marijuana smoking must as well. But as the LA Weekly highlights Monday, it's just not true. Decades of pulmonary research is in: pot decreases the risk of lung cancer and does not cause chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
LA Weekly managed to quote one of the nation's leading pulmonologists, Dr. Donald Tashkin. The professor emeritus of medicine at UCLA once sought to prove pot causes lung cancer, but the evidence forced him to conclude the opposite.
Cannabis tar has more carcinogens than tobacco, but, Tashkin states, "we failed to find any positive association [with cancer]." Instead, "the association would be negative, between lung cancer and the use of marijuana. The likelihood is, that despite the fact that marijuana smoke contains carcinogens, we don't see the same heightened risks of cancers that we see in tobacco."
For one, THC, CBD and other cannabinoids have been shown in cell and animal studies to kill cancer.
Tashkin also states that smoking marijuana does not cause chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) perhaps because "marijuana is a potent anti-inflammatory and suppressive," he says."
I grew up around 2nd hand smoke my entire life. For all we know my pot smoking is saving me from Lung Cancer
corona
Active member
13567997:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
No, THC does not seem to be a carcinogen. I never once mentioned THC. THC is just one component of hundreds in marijuana smoke. This really isn't part of the argument whether THC is carcinogenic or not. The smoke is and there is no arguing otherwise.
13568008:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
Adverse pulmonary function in this case is not referring to the long-term possibility of lung cancer or other types of cancer. Also that studies statement is rather flawed. They're saying 'smoking tobacco decreases lung function and occasionally smoking pot doesn't'. So how does occasionally smoking tobacco compare to regularly smoking pot?
And dude, have you read side effects of medications? An 8% increase in lung cancer or whatever it is is a pretty minuscule side effect compared to some drugs. Doctors prescribe drugs with serious adverse effects all the time. So long as benefits outweigh consequences. Also they don't necessarily recommend smoking it. There are many other far more benign methods of ingestion.
corona
Active member
I actually can't believe I'm having this discussion of whether cannabis smoke is carcinogenic or not. To think it's not is to disregard dozens of peer-reviewed primary literature sources. How else does one explain their findings? This isn't some big conspiracy. This is fact based.
GayWolf420
Active member
woah, youre totally harshing my mellow, man.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13568036:VinnieF said:
JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING HAS CARCINOGENS DOESNT MEAN IT GIVES YOU CANCER, ESPECIALLY WHEN THAT THING HAS ANTI CANCER AND ANTI INFLAMMATORY PROPERTIES
I CANT BELIEVE YOU CAN IGNORE ALL THE FACTS JUST TO HOLD ONTO AN OPINION THAT IS NO LONGER VALID.
I UNDERSTAND THAT EVERYTHING YOU HAVE EVER LEARNED FROM POT PROPAGANDA IS BEING CHALLENGED AND YOU DONT LIKE BEING WRONG.
corona
Active member
13568077:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
You are ridiculous. Blow up about ignoring the facts, meanwhile ignoring plainly printed facts in peer-reviews articles such as this:
"In conclusion, the results of the present study indicate that long-term cannabis use increases the risk of lung cancer in young adults."
or this:
"The fact that it is cannabis smoke that is carcinogenic (Bloch et al. 1983) suggests that any cancers caused by cannabis smoking are most likely to develop in organs that receive maximum long-term exposure to cannabis smoke or its constituents, namely, the lung and possibly the upper aerodigestive tract (mouth, tongue, oesophagus) and bladder (MacPhee et al. 1999)."
or this:
Our results suggest that cannabis smoking may be a risk factor for lung cancer.
How are you completely ignoring this? How to you explain these findings?
ImNotARacist
Active member
http://enewspf.com/2014/06/23/study...ssociated-with-increased-risk-of-lung-cancer/13568025:VinnieF said:
13568030:VinnieF said:
We are not having a discussion on whether or not smoke has carcinogens. You are confused. We are arguing whether the existence of those carcinogens in Marijuana cause lung cancer. You logic relies on the idea that carcinogens are the main cause of lung cancer in Tobacco smokers which is not true regardless of the fact that tobacco is not marijuana.
The studies you posted rely entirely on the carcinogen connection which has been proven to be insignificant.
13568036:VinnieF said:
A new study published in the latest edition of the International Journal of Cancer finds habitual pot smokers are at no greater risk of being inflicted with lung cancer than part-time stoners or even people who don't smoke at all.
To make this determination, a team of researchers from the United States, Canada, New Zealand and the United Kingdom set out to explore the records of several studies involving 5,000 participants. What they found was despite the tales of cannabis smoke causing lung cancer, there appeared to be very little reason to suspect weed use led to a greater threat of this disease.
An accompanying commentary in the same journal affirmed, "[C]annabis smoking does not seem to increase risk of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or airway cancers. In fact, there is even a suggestion that at low doses cannabis may be protective for both conditions."
Like I said before you'll get lung cancer from poor air quality way before you even have a chance of getting it from marijuana smoke.
if you don't understand by now then all I have to say to you is enjoy the view from that pedestal your sitting on, it must be nice up there.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13568096:VinnieF said:
Your information is a bit outdated bud...
corona
Active member
13568101:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
nah, those were from recent studies.
I'm just going to push this on on you for maybe a 4th time in hopes you read it
http://erj.ersjournals.com/content/31/2/280.short
corona
Active member
13568097:MALEPRIVILEGE said:
You read the article, did you read the study?
this is the study the article is basing it's information off:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.29036/abstract
Here's their summary of results from the abstract. Read this.
"Weak associations between cannabis smoking and lung cancer were observed in never tobacco smokers. Spline modeling indicated a weak positive monotonic association between cumulative cannabis use and lung cancer, but precision was low at high exposure levels. Results from our pooled analyses provide little evidence for an increased risk of lung cancer among habitual or long-term cannabis smokers, although the possibility of potential adverse effect for heavy consumption cannot be excluded."
Not so straight cut, is it.
ImNotARacist
Active member
13568108:VinnieF said:
^^^DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00065707 Published 1 February 2008
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.29036/abstract
^^^Article first published online: 30 JUN 2014
i win