Paper on the Legalization of Cannabis Sativa aka MARIJUANA!

Sooooo...
I thought I would post this so that people may share their thoughts and input and the like.

There is much more I could write in this, and i plan on doing that.
This is only the alpha phase of the essay, which i wrote for class, and i intend on expanding it in order to persuade most readers more efficiently.

Please critique!!


(Btw, those (****) are citations.. i will pm someone the bibliography if they want it???

oh and... i got the grade back... 100% on the content.
hahah.
but i didn't cite correctly in a few places so a b overall.
oh well, the 100% is all that matters to me.

Legalization of Cannabis Sativa, Commonly Known as Marijuana​

​

Legalization of Cannabis Sativa, Commonly Known as Marijuana


Cannabis sativa, commonly known as marijuana, is a plant species that is mainly known for its psychoactive effects when consumed – either through smoking, ingesting, or vaporizing. Being outlawed in most states by the year 1937 (Marijuana: The Facts), it has since been falsely accused with many negative side-effects... none of which have been scientifically proven. It causes a knowledgeable person to wonder why marijuana is kept prohibited, while harmful substances such as alcohol and tobacco are kept legal and supported by the government subsidiaries. Basing its legalization on another fallacy is illogical. However, basing its justification on sheer evidence and practical morals is quite the contrast.
There are many common misconceptions on marijuana; its’ supposed physically addictive properties being one of them. The hype around marijuana’s addictiveness is misleading to the core. In fact, marijuana has shown to be the least addictive out of 6 commonly used drugs – caffeine, alcohol, heroin, cocaine, nicotine, and marijuana (Markoff). Studies show that it can actually help patients who are dependent on ‘hard’ drugs, such as cocaine, in the battle on their dependence (Hess). Not only are its physically addictive properties a misconception, but also its psychologically addictive properties:
\tStudies have estimated that between 5 and 10% of those who try smoking \tcannabis will become daily users sometime during their life, but most of these \tsmokers will have given up the habit by age 30 and few remain daily smokers \tafter age 40. (Erowid)
In fact, marijuana’s addictiveness is so highly disregarded by doctors that caffeine is regarded as 3 times more addictive than marijuana. 3. Moreover, nicotine is more addictive than marijuana and the 4 other drugs in the study – alcohol, heroin, cocaine, and caffeine. In addition, alcohol is more addictive as well (Markoff). Making the addictive properties of marijuana a foundation in an argument supporting its prohibition is misleading. When in comparison to the other 5 commonly used drugs, marijuana’s addiction is practically insignificant. It causes one to ponder to why alcohol and nicotine are legal with their high magnitude of addiction, whereas marijuana is prohibited.
Another false belief of marijuana is its connection to various types of cancer, such as lung and oral cancer. This belief is supported by the fact that marijuana contains 50 percent more carcinogens, which are cancer causing substances, than tobacco (BBCNews). However, research has proven that marijuana use is not connected to a higher risk of cancer. Many studies actually show no sign of increased risk at all (Boyles, Bates, Gardner). Surprisingly, marijuana use evokes a positive affect on cancerous tumors. The main ingredient in marijuana, THC, has been attributed to this positive effect, says the American Association for Cancer Research. (AACR).
\tAnother myth about marijuana is its retarding of the human brain after long term use. It is believed that it causes brain cells to die, which is a side effect of consistent binge alcohol drinking. However, research says otherwise. Contrary to wide belief, marijuana use actually promotes neurogenesis - the growth of brain cells (University of Saskatchewan), and causes no negative cerebral structural changes (DeLisi), which is differing from the true hard drugs like meth and cocaine.
\tOne of the major problems of common medical drugs is their addictive, and sometimes more harmful, side-effects. A solid testament to this notion is a painkiller known as OxyContin, whose main ingredient is oxycodone. If used consistently for a mild period of time, oxycodone causes dependence in the user (The Center for Substance Abuse Research). A prime example is a prescribed painkiller known as OxyContin, whose main ingredient is oxycodone. If used over a long period of time, oxycodone causes dependence in the user (The Center for Substance Abuse Research). On the other hand, marijuana not only helps with chronic pain in many patients, but it also sidesteps the negative side effects that come along with most prescription painkillers (Weiss). It is morally wrong to allow patients to continually suffer from the negative side affects of their prescribed drugs, when there is a safe and logical alternative – marijuana. Yes, as we perfect the medicines, sometimes the harmful side-effects cease, but for now we have a great alternative which only causes mild intoxication concerning motor skills. Furthermore, not only does marijuana act as an analgesic, it also aids a variety, and can even prevent, of other illnesses. These include, but are not limited to: ADD/ADHD, Alzheimer’s, Anorexia, Arthritis, Asthma, Atherosclerosis, Chemotherapy, Diabetes, Depression, Epilepsy, Fibromyalgia, Glaucoma, Heart and Cardiovascular Disease, Hepatits, Herpes, HIV and AIDS, Multiple Sclerosis, Neuropathic Pain, Osteoporosis, Parkinson’s Disease, and Post traumatic stress syndrome (Above the IGNORANCE). It is upsetting to most people not living in the medical marijuana states as they cannot take the safe alternative. Also, with all prescriptions, one runs the risk of an accidental overdose. However, with marijuana there have been no reported overdoses. According to government authorities, one would have to either smoke 1/3 of their body weight within a time span of 15 minutes ("Lethal Dose of Maijuana").
With marijuana’s multiple medicinal advantages, the question as why it is continued to be prohibited arises. But with all great things, come flaws, however miniscule in size. Compared to non smoking people, marijuana users had a slight difference in lung capacity. Compared to tobacco users, however, marijuana measured much better. While the lungs exposure to marijuana smoke over causes a slight decrease in lung capacity there are safe alternatives. One way is through the means of ingestion. There are a variety of ways to prepare marijuana in food, and it is a perfectly safe alternative to smoking. Another perfectly safe alternative is the act of vaporizing.
\tVaporization is a technique for avoiding irritating respiratory toxins in marijuana smoke by heating cannabis to a temperature where the psychoactive ingredients evaporate without causing combustion. You inhale a mist instead of actual smoke (Marijuana Vaporizers). This allows for the same medical and psychoactive benefits of marijuana, without any harmful toxins being inhaled into your lungs. It leads one to ask “Why not?”
\tAnother argument that the majority people support is that if marijuana were to be legalized, it would cause many “high-driving” incidents. The notion that people believe is that marijuana use hinders one’s driving ability. However, this has been unsupported by research. In fact, marijuana use has actually shown to increase caution in drivers, as they are aware of their state of mind. This causes them to drive slower and less riskily. Also, research has not been able to link a higher risk of a traffic collision in people who drive while under marijuana’s influence.
\tFor example, a recent study sponsored by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) involving analysis of nearly 2000 fatal accident cases, found 6.7 % of drivers positive for marijuana. In more than two-thirds of those, alcohol was present and may have been the primary contributor to the fatal outcome (Zimmer). If one does not condone research as the foundation of the legalization of any potentially harmful substance, then what? Marijuana use should be legal within the private confines of an individual’s house. If not legal for all, marijuana should be legal as a medical drug for peoples in all 50 states. Marijuana has been proven safe and its prohibition is wrong on many levels..
\t"Prohibition...goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded."
-- Abraham Lincoln December, 1840

"Cannabis Research." Above the IGNORANCE. Above The IGNORANCE. 9 Dec 2008 \t<http://www.abovetheignorance.org/>.
American Association for Cancer Research. "Marijuana Cuts Lung Cancer Tumor \tGrowth In Half, Study Shows." ScienceDaily 17 April 2007. 9 December 2008 \t<http://www.sciencedaily.com¬ /releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm>.
Bates, Karl. " Study fails to find link between marijuana use and cancer." The University \tRECORD Online 16 Oct 2006 9 Dec 2008 \t<http://www.ur.umich.edu/0607/Oct16_06/01.shtml>.
Battle, Allen. Web Chat interview. 15 May 2005. \t<http://www.utmedicalgroup.com/pages/webchat_addiction.html>
Boyles. Salynn. "Marijuana Does Not Raise Lung Cancer Risk," FOX News 23 May \t2006. 9 Dec 2008 <http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,196678,00.html>
"Cannabis smoke 'worse' than tobacco," BBCNews 11 Nov 2002. 9 Dec 2008 \t<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2419713.stm>
Cushing, Raymond. "Pot Shrinks Tumors; Government Knew in '74." AlterNet 31 May \t2000 1-2. 9 Dec 2008 <http://www.alternet.org/story/9257/>.
DeLisi, Lynn. "A preliminary DTI study showing no brain structural change associated \twith adolescent cannabis use." Harm Reduction Journal 3:179 May 2006 9 Dec \t2008 <http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/3/1/17>.
Erowid, "Cannabis Basics." EROWID. 8 July 2007. Erowid. 9 Dec 2008 \t<http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_basics.shtml>.
Gardner, Fred. "Smoking Cannabis Does Not Cause Cancer Of Lung or Upper Airways, \tTashkin Finds; Data Suggests Possible Protective Effect." California Cannabis \tResearch Medical Group 2005 9 Dec 2008 \t<http://ccrmg.org/journal/05aut/nocancer.html>
Hess. Michael "Moderate Marijuana Use Helpful in ADHD Cocaine Addicts," BBSNews \t10 Dec 2006. 9 Dec \t2008 <http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20061210235129584>
"Marijuana: The Facts." Drug Policy Alliance Network. Drug Policy Alliance Network. 9 \tDec 2008 <http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/>.
Markoff, Stephen. "Is Marijuana Addictive?." Is Marijuana Addictive? 15 May 1997 9 \tDec 2008 \t<http://www.drugsense.org/mcwilliams/www.marijuanamagazine.com/toc/addicti\tv.htm>.
"Profile: Oxycodone." cesar.umd.org. The Center for Substance Abuse Research. 9 Dec \t2008 <http://www.cesar.umd.edu/cesar/pubs/oxy.pdf>. University Of Saskatchewan.
"University Of Saskatchewan Research Suggests Marijuana Analogue Stimulates \tBrain \tCell Growth." ScienceDaily 16 October 2005. 9 December 2008 \t<http://www.sciencedaily.com¬ /releases/2005/10/051016083817.htm>.
Weiss. Rick. "Research Supports Medicinal Marijuana AIDS Patients in Controlled \tStudy Had Significant Pain Relief," Washington Post 13 Feb 2007. 9 Dec 2008 \thttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-\tdyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201332.html
"What is the lethal dose of marijuana? ." Schaffer Library of Drug Policy. 9 Dec 2008 \t<http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/mj_overdose.htm>.
\t

Edit: Tried to kill some of the aggressiveness in the intro paragraph. Also fixed the wording of the 2nd paragraph.

Edit 2: Dampened some of the aggressive throughout the paragraph. Also fixed some of the wording concerning the addictiveness point. Mainly just bringing down the bias throughout the paper. Put in the negative side effect of marijuana - decreased lung capacity. This brings the bias down greatly. Fixed some of the cites. All of these are websites so there are no page numbers, only author/site (what to use if there is no author according to MLA) name.

Edit 3: Put in the bibliography for better reference.

 

well, as to the attack thing, that is what i was going for... but now i realize it probably isn't a good idea if i want to win people over with this paper...

Thanks for all that constructive criticism.
Keep it coming people.. please!

 

bump.

 

hmm.
i thought cannabis sativa covered it as a whole.
it does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_sativa
i don't mean the strain sativa.
if thats what you mean?

 

thanks a lot, and check the intro again...
i fixed it... sorta

 

Well, I have a bibliography i could post up, if you wish, but in MLA Format, you cite by doing (insert author/web site name here). haha.
that's why.

very good criticism.
I have not yet read through it, thoroughly, so I will soon, and correct anything that I believe could be worded better.

hahah
nahh, she's actually very intelligent, and not anti-weed in any way whatsoever.
and thankss

thank you. I agree.
Hmm..


On how to make this seem less biased... I'll have to work on it.

 

bumpp
no more critiques?its not that good..
haha.
or anymore suggestions?