Weed accepted in 2014 Olympics?

Exactly, you just made his point, he never said that smoking THC was harmful (even though studies show that it does not only have positive effects,ie cognition and motor skills), only that inhaling hot vapors is harmful, and that is a fact. Of course moderation will then minimize the harmful effects, but what is moderation? That is such a relative term that it is impossible to use in this context. I'm not hating on weed, on the contrary I find it way less harmful then for example alcohol, which has huge physical, psychological and sociological repercussions. I'm just saying that weed isn't a wonder drug without harmful side effects.
 
word, I guess "moderation" is a term that gets thrown around a lot, and is next to impossible to set a definition for moderation, and I think to an extent moderation is (arguably) different for everyone. The only real way to define cannabis moderation, would be to have regular check ups wth your doctor (lung exams ect.) ....like I said before smoking isnt the only method of consumption....infact thousands of years ago the main way of consuming cannabis was "eating hash", smoking is (in retrospect) a somewhat new method
 
if feel as if many freeskier wouldnt give up the once in a lifetime chance too represtent there country in the olypics, just for smoking weed. its fun and all, but in no way does it beat going to the olympics
 
or not. I mean technically yes but the harm is so fucking small the way you worded it is to harsh. Some possibly potentially mildly inconvenient slightly but not noticeable side effects may occur
 
Last time I checked alcohol wasn't a banned substance either. Now is anyone here stupid enough to try and argue with me that weed is more harmful than alcohol.
 
anyone stupid enough to think this is about the harmful effects and not performance enhancing effects

 
I don't think they should pass it. I mean it's the Olympics.. You would think as an Olympic level athlete, if you got chosen to represent your country in the biggest sports competition in the world, you would be able to stop smoking for a couple months. It can't be that big of a problem.
 
I have nothing wrong with marijuana, and personally I think it should be legalized, but I do not think that it should go uncontrolled in sports. Maybe it shouldn't be controlled by the Anti-Doping Agency, but I don't know who would do it then.

I think if an illegal substance can be found in someone's blood, or urine, or whatever, it should be punishable. As I said, i think it should be legal, but until then, there should be no double-standard.
 
how would you define what's legal or illegal for the olympics though? would that be based on where the games are held? or where the WADA is located?

which substances are permitted in and banned from the olympics should be decided without regard to any specific place's laws imo.
 
huh? if its illegal it simply isnt allowed and if its legal but performance enhancing then its also illegal... i dont understand what your post is saying...
 
i got the sense from his post that he meant illegal in terms of like national laws. if he meant it in the sense that the ADA considers it illegal in the Olympics, then it would go without saying that finding a banned substance in blood or urine should be punished, so idk why he would make that point.

it also seemed like he was saying that if for example, the ADA for some reason removed a ban on an already legal (by that i mean legal in many places worldwide) drug, that would be fine. but the bottom line is that smoking weed is a crime in many parts of the world, so even if it isn't viewed as performance enhancing by the ADA (and therefore was removed from the ban list), athletes are still likely committing a crime by using it, depending on where they live. so i think he's saying it's just the principle of it. sure he thinks weed should be legal, but if the ADA lifts the ban then it will almost seem like they are approving of Olympic athletes committing a crime.

am i reading his post completely wrong? made sense to me
 
sorry, its seems i accidently went full retard in my last post, should probs have read chaiteas post over again.

i think i see what you mean now, and i agree. you cant just legalise weed in the olympics because its not performance enhancing, its because it jjust plain illegal... god damn politics..

i hope that came out right...
 
haha no worries. i personally think that it shouldn't matter (since the fact that weed is illegal in so many places is absurd) so i couldn't care less if athletes are committing that particular crime, but i can certainly see the principle of chaiteas past as well.
 
seriously? does anyone actually even regard this as a major issue? for fucks sake i gave up weed for my day job, you dont think that athletes could give it up for the fucking OLYMPICS? grow the fuck up, its just getting high, there are other ways to have fun, half you kids seem to think giving up the ganj is a deal-breaker
 
It's funny when people bring up the fact that it's not addictive. You could say that but if you're basing decisions around it, maybe it's time to reevaluate what you're doing.
 
I don't really think that's the issue here man.

I fully agree with you in the sense that if I were in the olympics as an athlete, I feel like I would definitely give up smoking to focus on getting as prepared as possible. why do you seem to think the athletes that smoke won't be able to quit smoking if weed is no longer banned? if you could quit for your job, i'm sure many will have the will power to quit for the olympics. some might not, but who cares? you don't see alcohol on the list of banned substances, but it's not like athletes are drinking all day while training for the olympics. many probably stop drinking entirely for a bit.

they're not considering lifting the ban because the athletes want to smoke so bad that the ADA caved to the pressure. i think it's the fact that they ban drugs that are performance enhancing. weed isn't performance enhancing, so why have it on the list? it just doesn't make sense, and the ADA is realizing that. that's the issue here, not that the athletes HAVE to be able to smoke.
 
It would appear that you might be the dumb fuck here. However your post does not make much sense, but I assume you're trying, in your own unintelligent way, that there are no side effects of cannabis use/misuse? If that is correct, then you certainly are one dumb fuck.
 
You just keep being a douche. It's not only you're douchy tone that ruins your argument, but your completely useless internet articles that you're trying to pass of as a credible source, probably do a better job at that. FACT: Using cannabis, be it smoking or other methods, can be harmful, FACT: Most people use smoking as their method of ingesting cannabis, and smoking in itself is harmful.

Stop believing that weed is some sort of wonder drug. Yes, it has many good qualities, but, as for many other things, it has a flipside. Accept it.
 
This isn't about whether weed is good or bad for you it's about if it is a performance enhancing drug, which for most sports it isn't. Also if you believe that marijuana should be illegal while tobacco and alcohol and even prescription opiates are legal, please kill yourself or move to a communist country.
 
Da hell is wrong with you?

I fully understand why you wouldn't want to indulge yourself, but the hate makes absolutely no sense to me.
 
Well to everyone saying weed shouldn't be in the Olympics just because its illegal. Well possessing steroids is totally legal In Canada its illegal to sell them but owning and using them is more legal then weed is lol.
 
No shit smoke is bad for you, kid. Using does not mean smoking. If you think that consuming raw cannabis is harmful then you are completely fucked LOL!

And if you checked the links provided by that article you would see that it's not just an article. Too much reading, I know. Besides saving people's lives, what are the other many harms that you claim? Herb is a plant, bitch.
 
this. if you can't stop smoking for a couple months, you don't deserve to represent your country. olympic athletes are supposed to be the best in the world, physically and mentally. if you don't have the drive or motivation to quit long enough to pass a drug test, then you shouldn't make the cut
 
So because it's a plant, it's automatically good? That is probably the greatest argument of all time, because as we all know, all plants are good for us. Except for the poisonous ones i guess.

You keep ignoring facts, which makes it quite difficult to make you realise what it is that i'm trying to say. But hey, as long as you can keep making yourself feel good about weed, I guess it's all good. And throw in some condescending remarks on your part, and I guess you're all cozy up in your little dirty weed cave, and can keep justifying your pathetic life to yourself.
 
jesus, why do people keep posting this in here? it makes no sense whatsoever.

the problem isn't that the athletes can't stop smoking, it's that weed isn't performance enhancing. so there is no reason for it to be banned. alcohol isn't banned either, and you don't see the athletes showing up to the events drunk.
 
What the hell are you guys even arguing about? If it isn't performance enhancing the Olympics shouldn't give a shit. There isn't anything else to say.
 
So just say what you are trying to say then? I haven't ignored any facts, kid. The only fact that you typed up was the following:

"FACT: Most people use smoking as their method of ingesting cannabis, and smoking in itself is harmful."

haha cool story

So what other facts were you trying to say? Your first problem was being ignorant and assuming that I even smoke. I am just an advocate for freedom of choice. Who cares if it is automatically good or bad??? You are too young to understand freedom yet alone the facts and many uses of cannabis.

The people that live pathetic lives are those that demonize helpful plants which grow in soil. lol

By the way, cannabis is not one of those poisonous plants that you are highly concerned about.
 
You are seriously to retarded to have a discussion with. I have at no point "demonized" weed, on the contrary. And you can probably stop calling me kid, it's condescending, wrong, and it makes you look like a pompous douche. You were the one who went on a defensive all out rant concerning weed, and you obviously didn't bother actually reading what I personally had to say about weed, but just assumed that everyone that doesn't express the same kind of reverence for weed that you do, are automatically against it.

Long story short: Weed is not a wonder drug, and people shouldn't blindly accept it as such. It has side effects, especially when misused, which a lot of people do.

Stop being so defensive and butthurt, and try to actually listen to what i have said/am saying.
 
Oh my dear lord, you guys are relentless in your stupidity. Please tell me what, as it pertains to my previous statements, in this article should make me weep? For the last time, I am generally positive towards weed, I am merely stressing that it is unequivocally scientifically proven that THC, the active ingredient in weed, has both short and long term side effects. Curiously enough you yourself provided me with a source to quote, and i quote from the above posted article: "

In the near term, smoking marijuana irritates the airways and can cause coughing, and public health advocates stress that it causes impairment that reduces attention, lowers motivation and heightens the risk of accidents. Over days or weeks, chronic use can lead to problems with learning and memory. But whether smoking marijuana sets off the type of pulmonary changes that lead to lasting damage like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, a leading cause of death among Americans, was not entirely clear."

The fact that smoking moderate amounts of weed, which is not the fact for all weed smokers, does not seem to cause pulmonary damage is news to me, but as i stated above, weed still have well proven side effects. Another thing to remember while putting this study in perspective, is that many smokers smoke a lot more than one joint a day, and that the study concludes that "Dr. Kertesz noted that with heavier marijuana use, described as 10 joint-years of exposure or more, lung function did begin to decline".

I will therefore conclude, using an article you posted, that weed indeed does have side effects, and that smoking weed indeed can cause pulmonary damage. Thank you for helping to prove my point, I guess I have been to lazy to find my own sources, but with people in here being so helpful in finding sources, I guess i got lucky.
 
No hard feelings man, the article posted was super relevant and interesting, it just seems you may not have read my previous posts.
 
this would be good news, weed isn't gonna help any athletes training for the olympics, so why should it be banned?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top