Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Disclosure:

The statements in this forum have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and are generated by non-professional writers. Any products described are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.

Website Disclosure:

This forum contains general information about diet, health and nutrition. The information is not advice and is not a substitute for advice from a healthcare professional.

I wonder.

Discussion in 'Apprentice Marijuana Consumption' started by CaliGrown., Feb 18, 2009.

  1. Ok well, we all know that people all throughout the world have been smoking for like 10,000 years, correct?

    Who DIDN'T smoke weed?

    An answer to this question will lead on to an endless rant about my belief that everything leads back to evolution. It's quite interesting, indeed. :D
  2. Hmm. I don't know the answer to your question, but would like to hear more about your whole rant thing.

    Happy Toking.:smoking:
  3. #3 CaliGrown., Feb 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2009
    Well I was thinking...
    Evolution takes thousands and thousands of years to make an adjustment correct? Well, if humans have been smoking reefer for 10,000 years, what if the human body has been accustomed to the intake of thc? Say like milk or fruits or something of the sort?
    The brain locks in only the most important information for storage and creation of another. What if the constant gratification and health benefits hidden from us by the watchful eye we call "government" of smoking some mary jane has become essentially part of daily life, like water, fruit, and oxygen. Maybe not with as much importance as water, but you get the jist.
    Taking a slight right from the subject...
    What if evolution says day time is for being awake and performing daily activities/rituals, and night time is for sleeping? Could that be a possible reason for the increase in eye problems with our world? Maybe this whole, "sleep in 3-5 hours after sunrise and going to bed 3-5 hours after sunset" isn't working wonders on our eyes. It's just my opinion, but I think the constant dialation of the pupils can lead to some sort of eye troubles. Remember, evolution says that our eyes are made to be adjusted to the sun, and dark.
    Only in the last 200 years have we gone from planning your day around the sunrise and sunset, to having lighted paths in every direction within 500 miles of civilization. Maybe evolution simply hasn't caught up with technology yet, and our body's, as humans, are telling us shit is fucked up!

    Any thoughts?

    These are just general numbers. When I say 3-5 hours, 200 years, and 500 miles, they're broad numbers and guesstimates, of course, if you're pickin' up what I'm puttin' down!
  4. Dude that was the most trippy thing I have ever read. I LOVE thinking about, and talking about shit like this. And I can see where you are coming from, and agree with a lot of it too.

    The way I see the THC thing, would be like,if humans have/had smoked it for 10,000 years it would have been so involved in our lives, that evolution would be working around it, and actually using it to benefit us (which, in reality is what evolution does, it changes us to better adapt to new things). Oh damn I lost my train of thought right there. I hope this makes sense, I'm pretty baked right now.

    + rep, and

    Happy Toking.:smoking:
  5. Yes me too! I think facing a blunt and thinking about evolution is the most interesting subject I can come up with (other than weed :p)

    Does anyone else have any opinions on the matter?
    Please, don't be shy!
  6. I started thinking last night as to whether you could find an average to iq back say 100 years, and then study the usage of mj through the same period to see if growing adaptation to thc (i know 100 years is a short period and how could i possible get results going back to early 20th century but still the mind wonders) has had an effect on iq.
    it's very silly, and I don't know a great deal on evolution but if I could know that it has positive effects on learning capability I'd be that bit happier!
  7. Well, that is something that I wish I could look into also. I notice that I'm a thinker. Some people are very social, some like to sit around and stare at the tv, but I like to sit and study behavior and patterns in people and what not.
    I've found myself coming up with new ways to solve problems, being able to look at a problem and plug in 5 different decisions I can make, and accurately predict the outcome of each factor. I've drifted into deeper thinking that I've ever been in, and come up with viable solutions to so many problems that I've come across.
    My quality of life has also started to improve as I've been noticing these changes.
    One day I just woke up and smelt the coffee so to speak, and smelling that coffee put me into a whole other state of mind that I've been swirling in since 2006.

    Let's spark another blunt shall we?
    Ok this next conversation will be purely hypothetical and I'm speaking from a scientific stand point, no sexism intended.

    I noticed one thing, don't a lot more girls do homework than guys?
    Since the dawn of life, animals, including humans, have served on purpose in life; reprodution. The males grow, learn, and evolve into men. Men serve the purpose of impregnating a female, hunting for food, keeping his family safe, and teaching his son. What does a wife/mother do? She learns to do tasks at home, preparing for life. Taking care of the child, cooking, making clothing.
    Do you think it is possible that somewhere buried deep in the genetic code, evolution says that men are born to think with logic, as well as instinct, and women are born to learn tasks and do them repetitively? Such as doing homework/house work?
    (I'm talking about people from thousands of years ago.)
    Only in the last 60 years or so have women gone from taking care of the children and house to going out and working. Maybe as I stated before, hypothetically of course, evolution just simply has not caught up with technology.

    I'm blazed. Gram blunt of that Cali grown purps.:smoke:
  8. Come on blades! That's all you've got? Shoot me some feedback or something!

    Do you agree? Do you think I'm stupid?
  9. #9 Qful, Feb 19, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2009
    I haven't read the whole thread, but sorry guys, evolution is MUUUUUCH to slow to make much progress in just 10,000 years. I'll read the whole thread later, just wanted to point that out first.

    k i read the thread. i didn't really get the first part of your first rant. about people "adapting" to THC? and the vision thing, I didn't quite get that either. But I do believe that females are definitely psychologically different than men due to evolution.
  10. You think 10 milleniums is not enough time for the human body to make a change?

    When I say "adapt," I mean become, for lack of a better word, dependant on thc. Constant ingestion of something that have a positive or gratifying effect on the human body will result in a kind of dependancy or need for it, am I correct? Maybe humans smoking weed for 10,000 years and obviously enjoying it, has lead to a slight, minute mutation in the dna of homo sapiens.

    As for the sight thing, I'll try to reword everything and try to get the broad picture.

    Humans have, since the dawn of man I'm sure, slept at night, and functioned during the day, correct? Well maybe the constant strain put on your eyes by staying awake at night, looking at computer/television screens, and trying to navigate your house with only 2 lamps on have some effect on our eyes. Your body works like a well oiled machine. Maybe the continuous dialation of your pupils has it's wear and tear?
  11. To put it simply, no. First of all, the human body doesn't "make a change". A trait has to be so essential that long-term reproduction is practically impossible without it. I feel sinful trying to describe the qualifications of a successful trait in one sentence. Evolutionary theory is veeery complicated and easily butchered if one makes any intuition-based assumptions. I will not pretend to be any sort of expert on evolution, but it is a favorite subject of mine that I have had the good fortune to learn about on many occasions. I think about it sometimes too, here are my thoughts. Think of how many mutations it takes to get a mutation that doesn't result in some completely random, retarded change that results in still-birth. Now think of how many mutations that don't kill you it takes to find one that results in something that is advantageous. Now think of how much luck you need for that trait to spread to the majority of the genepool. Evolution takes a bitchload of time, and works in very peculiar, complicated ways.

    That's not how evolution works. Non-genetic traits are not passed on through DNA. DNA is not affected by anything other than sex, random copying errors, or deformation by radiation. Smoking marijuana is not only incapable of changing your DNA with the exception of cancer, but a gene that somehow affected humans' dependency on MJ would first have to prove advantageous enough to pass the ridiculous test of natural selection. Not to mention that, for homo sapiens' DNA to include such a gene, it would be their ancestors that would have evolved a trait resulting from any selective forces of MJ. And Homo Sapiens became such about 200,000 years ago. And MJ comes from the Himalayas, IIRC, far from where humans developed (africa).

    What I've thought about (somewhat related) sometimes is, I bet the reason teenagers sleep in and stay up late is so that our ancestors' communities would have a longer waking time, with teenagers able to keep guard late into the night, able to watch against predators and what not. Staggered sleep schedules might have been key to defending ancient communities. And this was probably evolved long before humans came around, shit, probably long before mammals were even around.
  12. Wow, Qful I don't know weather to be happy you came in and shed light on this, or if I am pissed at you for pooping on my party. I wanted what CaliGrown said to all be possible, and likely:D

    Haha +rep


    Correct me if I am wrong, please! It was my understanding that humans (in evolutionary terms) have just recently adapted this sleep all night wake all day eat 3 meals a day stuff.

    As far as I know, much like the earth, our bodies follow a pattern, or routine, known as Circadian rhythm

    In humans our Circadian rhythm is 24 hours, and 11 minutes, with 16 minutes for give or take. Now this is the part where I am unsure, I always just assumed, that by default humans sleep when they get tired, get up when they have energy, and graze on food as they get hungry. My evidence to support this would be babies keeping odd hours, sleeping in the day, screaming and crying for food late at night. etc. I always have just thought that we are sort of 'trained' to sleep all night, be up during the day, and eat 3 meals.

    idk maybe I am dumb.. haha

    Happy Toking.:smoke:
  13. No, patrick, you're absolutely right. Our internal clock is biologically set by our behavior patterns. You can train your body to sleep during the day and be awake at night, but a baby has yet to do that. Yes, you can train a baby to sleep during the night and wake in the day, but as for it waking at odd hours, that usually only happens during the first few weeks/months of life.

    As for evolution, traits can be sped up in the gene pool. Take into account the different races of humans. White, black, asian. All because of an isolated group of a certain species that develops a particular genetic trait that spreads BECAUSE of the species isolation. But in the usual case, such interbreeding either leads to a drastic gene change resulting in a new species, or it kills off that particular species. Think of the Finch. A small bird with hundreds of different variations due to isolated populations that cause drastic gene frequencies. Our DNA DOES respond to external stimuli. And only saying that it responds to genetics is foolish. Natural Selection works on the premise that only those BEST equipped to survive in a particular environment will survive and spread genes. Like say if a fish population started developing bigger fins because of migratory patterns in strong currents. The fish with smaller fins would begin to die off, leaving those with larger ones, thus drastically changing gene frequencies in a way that would BETTER the species. Like the early humanoids having lots of hair. Used for warmth. With the ceasement of the ice age the hair was no longer needed, and was basically done away with through evolution. Who's to say that THC rich environments such as asia, wouldn't have an effect on gene frequencies. Until say 300 or 400 years ago, Asia prime was essentially an isolated continent, and an isolated gene pool. With a strong cannabis influence on the isolated gene pool, it may have had an underlying and unknown influence on the evolution of the Asian race, ESPECIALLY those in the Himalayas. The tribes that lived there were isolated populations, while the plains species like the Mongols were nomadic and would have a more spread out gene frequency. Cannabis very well COULD have an impact, should a secluded population find in some way to make it a strong influence enough on them for it to effect the gene frequencies.

    Just MY two cents on evolution.
    Now put THAT in your pipe and smoke it.

    -The Genius
  14. So you're saying that the odds of this happening are SO astronomical that it couldn't happen? Take a look at people. What are the odds that a monkey could have a sort of mutation that evolves such an animal into what we are today? Humans have been evolving and undergoing vast amounts of change, why could this ONE thing not happen?

    This is quoted from Evolutionary Biology;
    "The changes in populations that are considered evolutionary are those that are inheritable via the genetic material from one generation to the next. Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
    Some things move much faster through evolution than others. Height changes, body types, and foot sizes all take place in the evolutionary path at a different speed. Well, what if the enormous satisfaction received from smoking, the constant belief and possible or probable truth of, "oh boy this is good for me" has triggered the brain into believing smoking weed is a good thing. I mean, cannabinoid receptors weren't developed for nothing, correct? Natural selection said it would be best to have them, right?
  15. #15 The_genius, Feb 19, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 19, 2009
    Not exactly true. We have an Endo-Cannabinoid system that produces certain chemical cannabinoids in the body. THC is just like...a jump start for it. But, successive and frequent use of THC could influece environmental evolution in such a way that we become MORE receptive to the chemical, or Less receptive. Either makes a HELL of a topic to talk about...and I'm SOBER!

    The EndoCannabinoid system controls Appetite, pain sensation, mood, and memory...The chemicals produced are done ON DEMAND unlike other lipids in the body. (The system is named after the Endogenous Lipids that bind the cannabinoid receptors). These systems naturally produce chemicals. THC is just a particular cannabinoid that can be recieved and utilized by this system. I basically jumpstarts it for a short time. Increasing appetite, affecting mood and memory, blah blah
  16. I bet you guys would have liked the special National Geographic had on a couple weeks ago. It was called "morphed" if you did not see it, I recommend watching it. It explains and tells you/shows you how the modern Turkey became a Turkey, Whales ancient ancestors, and what Bears evolved out of.

    Happy Toking.:smoke:
  17. Exactly. The last ice age ceased around 12,500 years ago. In that time, people have shed a marjoity of the hair they once had approx. 13,000 years ago. The extra strain on the body to produce hair was not necessary, thus, less hair. Who's to say the positive effect on the brain and your mindset after ingesting thc triggered a mutation in the human gene that says thc is...good?
  18. In a gene pool, over time, yeah, of course DNA responds to external stimuli. I was saying that an individual's DNA wouldn't change because of something you did, like smoke weed.

    The odds that "a monkey" has a mutation that "evolves him" into a human are unfathomably small. That's why it took soooooo damn long for humans to come about. It took billions of small mutations, most useless/deadly, and even when advantageous in some way, almost irrelevant when singled out. I'm not saying that weed has had no evolutionary effect on humans, I'm just saying that in order to affect the human gene pool in ANY way, there have to be some STRONG selective forces for a LONG period of time. Or just a ridiculously catastrophic force for a short period of time.

    I know you are probably speaking metaphorically, but just to be clear, your brain cannot alter your genes, regardless of how constantly you believe something. In order for a belief to have an effect on your genes, the belief would have to make it more or less likely that your genes will be passed on. Which is certainly possible, and I'm sure there are many examples of that. But I don't know how believing that smoking MJ is awesome would have that sort of effect.

    The hair thing is a very notable difference in humans from 10,000 years ago and humans today. Now, I'm no expert on this, but I don't think we should use that as a representation of the typical change/time ratio. Let me think out loud for a minute.
    10,000 years ago, humans were in Africa, Europe, Asia, and the Americas. So the loss of hair was evolved separately by a bunch of different gene pools. But MJ was only present in a very small area, and alleles dealing with an interaction with MJ would not be present in all humans.

    Man, this is confusing stuff. I'll think about it more later, my brain hurts.
  19. No matter how small, it could happen. That's what scientists use in thier research, probability, measured risk. It only has to happen once to set off a chain reaction of small, unknown changes, or changes that have been recorded, but may not have been told to the "public."

    How are you going to say "MJ was only presented in a very small area?" Do you think that just because weed originated in the middle east, that it will only affect that area? The thesis of this thread was that people all over the world have been smoking weed for tens of thousands of years, correct? THAT is what we're focusing on. The constant barrage of a substance on the human body.

    Let me just put this out there. Evolution is the creation and/or adaption of the use of another tool, correct? The beaks of a finch slowly changed over time to better suit the needs of that particular group of bird in the particular area. A human does not share 99.9% of DNA with humans for nothing. A monkey realizes one day that it's brain is it's best tool. Maybe it didn't realize it, evolution did. Evolution said a monkey's best tool was it's brain, it's ability to use a stick as a tool to get bugs from a narrow hole. Well, this tool evolved over time. The brain grew smarter, monkeys changed.
    They discovered it would be easier to get the fruit if they stood up, maybe if they grabbed that stick and poked the fruit, it would fall off. There's no more fruit within reach of the stick, now what? Climb here, jump here, poke here, point there, BAM, that's learning. What is evolution, but the constant need to better yourself, to learn, to carry on your genes.
    Let's say the continuous smoking of weed, the gratification, the beneficial effects of weed has caused a mutation in a small group of people in a particular area, like you said. This group undergoes several mutations throughout time. Hypothetically, 10 of 100,000 have this mutation. You don't think that this mutation, carried by DNA and aided by the force of nature and the laws of evolution, couldn't spread throughout a vast region? I mean, people don't stay in one place and have sex with their family, do they? They migrate, change location, find a mate, and carry on the dominant traits.

    Maybe one persons body discovered it would be beneficial to the health of a human being to ingest thc, and that lead to the most celebrated and unknown mutation in the history of marijuana and smoking, itself.
  20. I'll type up a full response later when I have more time to fully analyze it. But right now I'll address a few points.

    You said "Evolution is the creation and/or adaption of the use of another tool, correct?". I would say, no. The converse is true, but that isn't. Evolution is ANY sort of chage that is a result of different genetics having increased the likelihood that said genetics would be more successful than the others in its genepool.
    Evolution is NOT a result of reason or learning.

    Mutations are not caused by other things. They just happen. I think you just meant to use another word, but I still needed to point that out.

    Now, I think I understand what you're saying. Tell me if this is an accurate rephrasement of what you said.

    At some point, more than 10k years ago, there were humans, and there was weed. The humans were pretty much unaffected by weed. Then, a mutation in an individual human altered the phenotype of his cannabinoid receptors. Maybe he had the first cannabinoid receptors, maybe they were just different than others', but for whatever reason, this difference in his phenotype caused him to be beneficially affected by weed. Then, he reproduced, and his lineage, due to this mutation, was better able to pass on their genes than the rest of their genepool. Eventually, the whole genepool carries the genotype that causes the ability to be beneficially affected by weed.

    Is that what you're saying?

Share This Page