The Union: The Business Behind Getting High Page #2

permanent brain damage is one of

the inevitable results

of the use of marijuana.

Monkeys pumped

full of marijuana,

apparently 30 joints a day,

had begun to atrophy and die

after 90 days.

Brain damage was determined

after counting

the dead brain cells

of both monkeys

who had been

subjected to the marijuana

and ones who had not.

The study became the foundation

of the government

and other

special-interest groups' claim

that marijuana

kills brain cells.

Here's what they didn't

tell you.

After six years of requests,

how the study was conducted

was finally revealed.

Instead of administering

Dr. Heath used

a method of pumping

through a gas mask within

five minutes over three months.

( man )

They suffocated the monkeys.

What they did is they

put these gas masks,

basically on their face,

and they pumped pot into it,

but without additional oxygen,

so after "X" amount of time,

the brain shut down.

Well, if you suffocate,

the first thing

that's gonna happen

is your brain cells are gonna

die with lack of oxygen.

So what they did is they

suffocated the monkey,

showed all these

dead brain cells,

and then went on to

associate it

by saying that cannabis use

causes your brain cells to die.

And how many people, not knowing

the origin of the study,

have gone on to

quote it and re-quote it,

and now people believe it.

Studies since have shown no

signs of any brain-cell damage.

In 2005,

new research suggested

that marijuana could possibly

stimulatebrain-cell growth.

That study hasn't received

the same attention.

Another common belief--

marijuana causes lung cancer.

In the 1999 study by the

Institute of Medicine

that was paid for by

the United States Government,

they had to use words like "may"

and "should" cause cancer.

We've been hearing

for years them trying to say

that it causes lung cancer,

and we say, "Really ?

"That's interesting, because

you can't even show us one case

of cancer being caused by

cannabis use alone."

You definitely

have to do it moderately

because it does paralyze

the cilia,

but if it's not radioactive,

you're probably not going

to get cancer from it.

( man )

Smoking it can be harmful

because of the properties

of smoke.

Not as a result of anything

in the cannabis plant,

but because they're

intaking heated plant matter

into their lungs.

People said,

"Well, you don't know.

We haven't been smoking it

long enough."

Look what happened

with cigarettes.

We've had about four decades,

more than four decades,

of experience.

If this was gonna show up,

it should have shown up by now.

Finally, a study came out just

in the last month verifying

that cannabis smoke

does not cause cancer.

It's different than nicotine,

and the elements in the tobacco

smoke do cause cancer,

and elements

in the marijuana don't.

There's no cases of

marijuana-only smokers

getting brown-lung syndrome.

There's no cases of

marijuana-only smokers

getting emphysema.

Strange for a plant

that's so "dangerous."

How come none of that ?

Marijuana is as bad for you

or worse than tobacco ?

Impossible.

If they had the evidence,

they'd be putting emaciated

bodies or emphysema,

lung cancer, black lungs,

they would be parading them

throughout the media.

They don't have one,

yet people, somehow or other,

think that it might cause

the same thing.

In fact, if you look at the

straight deaths from substances,

a different type of picture

starts to appear.

The number-one killer

in the country--

it beat out AIDS,

heroin, crack, cocaine,

alcohol, car accidents, fire

and murder combined.

Tobacco.

That's a nasty,

dirty thing to say, sir.

A lovely, pure, white cigarette,

causing cancer.

It gets me right here.

( coughing )

With an average of 430,000

deaths per year,

considering it's

the number-one killer,

it's interesting to know that

tobacco receives

government subsidies--

and is grown with radioactive

fertilizer.

Now get out there

and sell cigarettes !

Number two on the list ?

If we don't include poor diet

and physical inactivity,

with well over 85,000

deaths a year... alcohol.

As we look much further

down the list,

there are others

that may surprise you.

Caffeine comes in with one

to 10,000 deaths a year.

And some of our most

popular pain relievers--

nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory

drugs such as aspirin--

still make an appearance with

over 7,500 deaths annually.

Where does marijuana lie

in this ?

What kind of staggering

number do we find ?

I don't know, 50,000 ?

From marijuana ?

I would probably say,

then, 80,000.

I would say it would

be hundreds of billions.

Get ready for it--

here it comes.

There are no deaths from

cannabis use anywhere.

You can't find one.

( Joe )

In 10,000 years of

known use of marijuana,

there's never been a single

death attributed to marijuana.

There's 400,000 deaths

in America alone

every year that are directly

attributed to tobacco.

I've heard that you have

to smoke something like

to get a toxic amount of

delta 9-tetrahydracannabinol.

I challenge anybody

to do that.

And even in

the animal studies

where people have loaded

the animals up

with doses that would

be hundreds of times

what a human could possibly

be exposed to,

no, animals don't die.

The LD50 seems to be

astronomical.

You can die from ingesting

too much aspirin.

You can die from

ingesting too much coffee.

The drug warriors who say,

"We have to protect society,

save these people,"

are being just a little bit

disingenuous.

Not one university

or medical facility

has ever

recorded a single death

directly attributed

to marijuana.

But never mind that.

There's other problems,

other reasons to fear it.

Take addiction, for example.

There are more kids in

addiction clinics for marijuana

than any other substance.

This must mean

that marijuana

is the most addictive

substance today.

It's undoubtedly true

that there are more teenagers

and kids in treatment

for marijuana

than all the

other drugs combined.

What the DEA never tells you

iswhythat's true.

( Lester )

A kid is caught

possessing or smoking marijuana.

He's taken to court,

he's given a choice.

Either you, you know,

some horrible penalty,

or you go to

a treatment center.

Obviously chooses to go

to treatment,

and goes to treatment there,

he's considered an addict.

But then the DEA gets the point

of that stat and says,

"Look at all these kids

in treatment for marijuana.

"God, it must be because

today's marijuana

is not the marijuana that

your parents were smoking."

As far as I understand,

only 3% of the people

in treatment for marijuana

are there voluntarily.

The other 97% were

told to by their guardian

or told to by a judge,

"You can choose between jail

or treatment."

A lot of people

choose treatment.

It provides no basis for

speaking about addiction.

Anybody who is at all

sophisticated about marijuana

Rate this script:0.0 / 0 votes