puntiniCAZpuntini

If you know the references, it all makes perfect sense. I’m missing this Matula, but I don’t think it’s essential to know who he is to understand the rest. If you have to explain everything in minute detail, it turns into an encyclopedia; somehow you have to compress it.

Good, very.

I'm sorry, but I can't access URLs or external content. However, if you provide the text you'd like me to translate, I'd be happy to help!

Alright, let me explain the example: it was just to list other things, perfectly legal, that if abused (if abused) create serious harm. Refined sugar, pork, industrial cheese full of fats and preservatives, salt. I didn't say "a sandwich is as bad as a joint," nor do I think that. I’m just saying that just as people think one shouldn’t binge on raw pork or eat jars of sugar two at a time, they should also consider that if weed is legal, one shouldn’t go to the coffee shop at eight in the morning to get wasted on Jack Herer II with a meter and twenty Ice Master.

"Are you trying to put food and smoking on the same level?" I just made a quick example; you're the one who wants to have a nutritional debate. And just to clarify, I mentioned pork, not all the meat in the world. And, above all, nobody gives dairy to a small child. Dairy, not milk. When they get a bit older, you can put some cheese in their soup, but you don't let them have snacks with cheeses loaded with fat. If you really want to have a nutritional debate, then let's be precise; by generalizing a lot, we end up with "if you don't eat, you die," and we’re all happy about that.

Worn out and overused for me and you, but I often find people who, if you mention the Tax Act of '37, tell you it’s just Fattoni nonsense.

Do everything with hemp, but really everything. I'm in favor, mind you. I just wanted to emphasize that often the comparisons made in books are laughable. I've read the "carcinogenic" issue in various ways; I've never delved into it because I think it's somewhat silly since, at the end of the day, you still have to mix it with tobacco. If you don't smoke every single day, you can't just smoke weed; you cough like an idiot. ||| Jack Daniel's, you’re a born dietitian! And how come vegetarians don’t all drop dead like flies? Strange, I see them all healthy and beautiful.

Do they just get bogged down? The "desire to do" and the spirit of initiative are cut off at the root; you don’t feel like doing a damn thing except watching movies, playing video games, and smoking more. But too much of anything ruins everything; even too much fried food makes you gain weight and limits your motivation because your body is busy digesting. But fried food is legal.

"If someone smoked a '2pack' of joints a day, they wouldn't survive 5 years." I am living proof that it's not true, and if by "pack" you mean "about twenty," then I have far exceeded that, and it's been at least 9 years. I had to stop that pace because my memory was seriously deteriorating, but I didn't die, and my memory came back once I cut down those crazy habits.

<< the smoke from marijuana contains four times more tar and condensate than that of tobacco, and in any case, both cannabis and tobacco smoke largely contain the same carcinogens and tumor promoters. >> It depends on which tobacco plant and which ganjah plant those who wrote what you read have analyzed. In the little books that circulate, both pro and con, I've read tons of bullshit comparisons that if you're not an expert, you can't understand how bullshit they are. The "pro" ones analyze little buds for thirteen-year-olds and use the phrase "a moderate use" comparing it to strong dark tobacco smoked at a pack a day, while those "against" analyze Bluebarry purple like Paris Hilton's phone, hydroponic cultivation with fertilizers and additives, with daily consumption of about 10 grams smoked with a bong versus 10 grams of medium tobacco smoked with a filter. Anyway, yes, ganjah isn't good for you. Sugar, salt, pork, and dairy products aren't good either. I'm in favor both for economic reasons and for individual freedom, but the bullshit I've read in the "legalize it" booklets is truly Oscar-worthy; soon they'll be saying it's multivitaminic, improves memory, and enhances athletic performance. From a pharmaceutical standpoint, it absolutely needs to be legalized without ifs and buts, also because they would use modified indicas to achieve extremely high THC content, which even if they ended up on the black market wouldn't be easily smokable, both due to the mechanics of the situation (I want to see how you crumble a ball of resin in the street in winter at 5 degrees) and because of the high you get: heavy sleepiness, no desire to talk even remotely on the horizon, and reasoning at the speed of Peter Griffin.