Reply #18: Says who?

[Asgaya Dihi]

I tend to read the research myself rather than to trust what someone tells me it says. What I find says that it can aggravate a preexisting condition but it can't be shown to cause a new one, not in a way that stands up to peer review. Pot as a cause isn't widely accepted as being shown. People with instabilities, diagnosed or not, can have bad reactions to legal alcohol or legal mood altering substances such as prozac or zoloft.

Personally I think the rise in potency is overstated, we went from seeded and poor quality Mexican and Columbian to good quality seedless when the growers moved indoors so most of the supposed "rise" in potency can be attributed to the drug war itself. When the pressure got high and the growers moved indoors there was nowhere for it to go but up, seedless makes more sense and is easier to control indoors and it doesn't have far to travel.

But let's assume for a moment that it is climbing in real terms rather than just changed in quality, where are we best going to be able to control things like potency and what ages are able to buy it? In basement grow rooms that hide from the cops and who are regulated by nobody, or behind the counter in a liquor store or pharmacy?

And if it does cause someone a problem are they better off afraid of seeking help, afraid of arrest, or would they be better off if they could seek help and guidance as easily and with as little risk and reason not to as we can now attend an AA meeting? The law keeps those who need help from seeking it and punishes those who were never really at risk.

You offered a reason to legalize and regulate it if you're right, not to keep it hidden with nobody but the criminals in charge of what the kids get. You don't legalize because it's ok, you legalize because they are safer with regulation than without it.