Willie Nelson sentenced to... sing.

[Tom Sawyer]

...the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal.

Alex, in my utopian vision you would be excluded for your ignorance.  You have made several comments regarding cannabis that show you are clearly ignorant on the matter.

The LD 50 for THC, the lethal dose for 50 percent of a group, would require the THC from 1,500 lbs of cannabis consumed in 15 minutes.

Drug Enforcement Administration's Chief Administrative Law Judge Francis Young found:
"In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within the supervised routine of medical care."

In spite of their own judges ruling the DEA still refuses to take cannabis off of Schedule 1.

[Russell Kanning]

it seems like with most natural things (as in the whole plant) you couldn't eat enough to kill you ... you would start throwing up or something before you got that far

[MaineShark]

Intent might not matter from a legalistic point of view, but it does influence public opinion.  Are you just as (un)likely to ostracize a person giving a 12-year-old girl mouth-to-mouth to save her life, vs for his sexual gratification (with her / her parents' "consent")?  Both would be legal in a free society, but the latter is a lot more likely to get a person seriously ostracized.

Interesting unrelated "analogy."

How about apples to apples, eh?  One mind-altering substance, compared to another...

Anything, when taken in extreme amounts, can kill you, even water.  Tylenol's active ingredients are more concentrated, but that doesn't mean Tylenol is a more dangerous drug.  Tylenol could be mixed with more fillers so you can't OD without swallowing ten pounds of pills, just as the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal.

Except we're talking about Tylenol, as-used, and marijuana, as-used.  As they are actually used, in the actual concentrations in which they are delivered, Tylenol is extremely dangerous, and marijuana is not really dangerous at all.  As Tom Sawyer notes, it would be essentially impossible to overdose on marijuana plants.  Even chemically-purified THC would require three or more ounces to kill an average adult male.  With any drug, the risk of overdose is defined largely upon the therapeutic ratio - the ratio of the lethal dose to the effective dose.  THC has a therapeutic ratio on the order of 1000:1, so you would have to take a thousand times the normal dose, in order to OD.  The ratio for alcohol is on the order of 10:1, which is why it is much easier to OD on alcohol.  Tylenol is on the order of 20:1.

In other words, even purified THC is two orders of magnitude safer than Tylenol.  Actual marijuana plants are beyond that, essentially reaching the point where it is literally impossible to overdose, because you cannot consume enough of the impure substance to reach a lethal dose of the active ingredient.

So, as I said, if it comes down to who is more responsible, making me more likely to hire them, I'll take a pot-smoker who doesn't use Tylenol, over a Tylenol user who doesn't smoke pot.

Joe

[littlehawk]

I take Tylenol and smoke weed. I drink booze too.   

[Russell Kanning]

i was thinking that some guys on this forum have attempted to overdose on mj .... but all they seem to do is dose

I had no idea that tylenol could kill you. Really only one bottle?

[KBCraig]

I had no idea that tylenol could kill you. Really only one bottle?

There is "significant risk of toxicity" at 200mg acetaminophen per 1kg of body weight. For a 220 pound (100kg) adult, that is 40 extra-strength (500mg) Tylenol, or just 20 tablets for a 110 pound person.

[Alex Libman]

...the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal.

Alex, in my utopian vision you would be excluded for your ignorance.  You have made several comments regarding cannabis that show you are clearly ignorant on the matter.

The LD 50 for THC, the lethal dose for 50 percent of a group, would require the THC from 1,500 lbs of cannabis consumed in 15 minutes.

You seem to have lost all context of the conversation.  (Short term memory loss... hmmm...)

We were talking about the social perception of recreational drug use compared to that of taking Tylenol, and why I believe that the majority of drug prohibitions would remain in effect in a free society through various instruments of Contract Law.  I've explained that Tylenol, although lethal in extreme doses, would very rarely be prohibited by private institutions like schools, insurance companies, etc.  The fact that Tylenol is a concentrated pill rather than a plant makes it easier to OD, but what's the point of that factoid?

You are now on the record as saying that THC and other substances in pot cannot be condensed into a pill as lethal as Tylenol, comparing apples to apples, which is completely false.  The ignorance of modern pharmacology that you've just exhibited may be excusable, especially if you went to a government school, but please do try to look things up before you resort to insults.

Intent might not matter from a legalistic point of view, but it does influence public opinion.  Are you just as (un)likely to ostracize a person giving a 12-year-old girl mouth-to-mouth to save her life, vs for his sexual gratification (with her / her parents' "consent")?  Both would be legal in a free society, but the latter is a lot more likely to get a person seriously ostracized.

Interesting unrelated "analogy."

How about apples to apples, eh?  One mind-altering substance, compared to another...

Firstly and most crucially...  The sentence-ending period should logically be placed outside the single-word mock quotes.   

Now...  My analogy was perfectly suited for this conversation, as it attempted to refute the claim at which it was directed.  If you make a [distinction] between a lifeguard saving a child's life by giving mouth to mouth and a pedophile, as the overwhelming majority of people do, then intent clearly does matter in your decisions regarding ostracism.

The vast majority of people make a distinction between drugs that are shown through medical research to be a cost-effective way of combating an illness vs recreational drugs like pot or cocaine.  Many people would voluntarily choose to live in neighborhood associations, charter cities, company towns, universities, giant space stations, etc that have strict rules against recreational drugs, possibly including alcohol, while Tylenol is sold in broad daylight and is accepted by all.  If Willie Nelson's tour bus drives through such a contract city with pot on board, he can face forceful intervention and punishment from the local security agencies, and rightly so.

And, given the memory loss that sadly is so prevalent among many Free Staters (especially when combined with libricide of old forum posts), I should once again remind everyone that I am an outspoken Anarcho-Capitalist and I favor ending all governmental prohibitions, and all government in general.  This, however, does not mean that everyone in a free society will be walking around with red eyes and answering every question with "wha".  Like I said, "I think a rational society would ostracize drug users to some degree".  It just shouldn't be the #1 issue of a freedom movement, probably not even in the top 10...

[...]  So, as I said, if it comes down to who is more responsible, making me more likely to hire them, I'll take a pot-smoker who doesn't use Tylenol, over a Tylenol user who doesn't smoke pot.

You are free to do that.  But I'd rather invest my money in a place like pot-banning Singapore, which can change from a nation to a voluntary charter city on a dime, rather than in MaineShark's Tylenol-banning Muchiesville.  Reality will determine which philosophy will yield the greatest fruits.

[Tom Sawyer]

...the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal.

From the source you cite...
"According to the Merck Index, 12th edition, THC has an LD50 (dose killing half of the research subjects) value of 1270 mg/kg (male rats) and 730 mg/kg (female rats)"

You made the statement that "one tiny pill that is 100% lethal". So for rats my weight the "tiny pill" that would be 50% lethal would be 127 grams or 4.48 oz.

The 4 deaths that the FDA attributes to Marinol, if you read the report, they don't actually connect that it caused the death just that the subject had taken it. Just like the government claims that marijuana was the cause of a train wreck that killed people, ignoring that the clown driving the train was also drinking beer and watching the football game on TV.

As to my insult to you...
I said that I would exclude you in my utopian vision... and said you are ignorant.

You don't like recreational drug usage... that is ok, just acknowledge that it is your prejudice.

[Silent_Bob]

I had no idea that tylenol could kill you. Really only one bottle?

Ya and that's without the cyanide...

[Pat K]

I had no idea that tylenol could kill you. Really only one bottle?

Ya and that's without the cyanide...

That's what makes it Extra strength.

[Alex Libman]

You made the statement that "one tiny pill that is 100% lethal".  [...]

The full statement, without your selective quoting was:  "Anything, when taken in extreme amounts, can kill you, even water.  Tylenol's active ingredients are more concentrated, but that doesn't mean Tylenol is a more dangerous drug.  Tylenol could be mixed with more fillers so you can't OD without swallowing ten pounds of pills, just as the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal."

If you think it is impossible for 21st century science to isolate and condense the toxic substances in pot (not necessarily just THC) further then you are simply wrong, but what's worse is that you're getting sidetracked.  What it would take to make pot comparable to Tylenol is a side-issue.

The main issue is the "pot is illegal, therefore it's a panacea" fallacy that so many libertarians unfortunately exhibit (or unconsciously come very close to).  Cannabis is definitely a remarkable plant, providing more protein per acre of land than soy, for example, but it has many downsides that libertarians like to downplay.  Many other remarkable plants (including hybrids and many GE possibilities) don't ever get a mention because they don't have a stoner culture around them.

You don't like recreational drug usage... that is ok, just acknowledge that it is your prejudice.

I do acknowledge it quite openly (as my "karma" numbers here will reflect).  Recreational drugs make people less coherent, less productive (unless they work for Comedy Central), and less rational.  My whole life has been a constant struggle to attain the opposite effect -- to embrace reality rather than try to escape it -- and so the pot-head culture is not one that I am willing to accept as the foundation for a model Anarcho-Capitalist society.

Recreational drugs should be legal, but universally scorned.

[jerry]

=
The full statement, without your selective quoting was:  "Anything, when taken in extreme amounts, can kill you, even water.  Tylenol's active ingredients are more concentrated, but that doesn't mean Tylenol is a more dangerous drug.  Tylenol could be mixed with more fillers so you can't OD without swallowing ten pounds of pills, just as the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal."

If you think it is impossible for 21st century science to isolate and condense the toxic substances in pot (not necessarily just THC) further then you are simply wrong, but what's worse is that you're getting sidetracked.  What it would take to make pot comparable to Tylenol is a side-issue.

Two people have tried to explain to you why you are wrong.  Why do you persist in claiming  you can, without changing the laws of physics,  make a "tiny pill"  out of out of a half-pound of pure THC?

[Russell Kanning]

maybe he will die trying

[Alex Libman]

Two people have tried to explain to you why you are wrong.  Why do you persist in claiming  you can, without changing the laws of physics,  make a "tiny pill"  out of out of a half-pound of pure THC?

Because I am factually right, and they are factually wrong (and easily distracted).  Those two people don't seem to remember what they were taught in a 6th grade science class, even in a government school...

Or even watch much popular science fiction...  Note to self for next Star Trek movie script: Captains Cheech and Chong encounter black hole...  made of THC!   

[MaineShark]

The fact that Tylenol is a concentrated pill rather than a plant makes it easier to OD, but what's the point of that factoid?

That one is much more dangerous than the other.  If I have a double-wall oil tank, my homeowners' insurance goes down, compared to a single-wall tank, because the double-wall tank is less likely to leak.  Having any oil at all, poses some hazard (just like having any drugs at all), but one is safer than the other (just as marijuana is safer than Tylenol).

You are now on the record as saying that THC and other substances in pot cannot be condensed into a pill as lethal as Tylenol, comparing apples to apples, which is completely false.  The ignorance of modern pharmacology that you've just exhibited may be excusable, especially if you went to a government school, but please do try to look things up before you resort to insults.

Um, no, that would not be an apples to apples comparison.  We're talking about drug use, so the only comparison that's "apples to apples," would be in how the drugs are actually stored and used.  If you want to amend your statement to be that only those who super-concentrate THC into pills would be ostracized, you may.  But that is not the statement you made.

Firstly and most crucially...  The sentence-ending period should logically be placed outside the single-word mock quotes.   

No, grammatically, most punctuation goes inside quotation marks.

Now...  My analogy was perfectly suited for this conversation, as it attempted to refute the claim at which it was directed.  If you make a destruction between a lifeguard saving a child's life by giving mouth to mouth and a pedophile, as the overwhelming majority of people do, then intent clearly does matter in your decisions regarding ostracism.

A "destruction"...? (incidental example of punctuation that does not go inside quotation marks)

The vast majority of people make a distinction between drugs that are shown through medical research to be a cost-effective way of combating an illness vs recreational drugs like pot or cocaine.

Tylenol is an analgesic.  It doesn't combat illness.  Its sole purpose is to alter your perception of reality such that  you feel better.  Sort of like marijuana and cocaine.

Approximately 100 metric tons (dry weight) of coca leaf are imported (legally) into the US, each year, for cocaine extraction by the Stepan Company of Maywood, NJ.  The cocaine is shipped to pharmaceutical companies for use as a precursor to other drugs, or for direct sale as unaltered cocaine.  See, cocaine is actually still used for medicinal purposes.

Marijuana also has recognized medicinal purposes.  Maybe it doesn't cure absolutely everything under the sun, the way some folks might claim, but it does have actual, medicinal purposes.

Many people would voluntarily choose to live in neighborhood associations, charter cities, company towns, universities, giant space stations, etc that have strict rules against recreational drugs, possibly including alcohol, while Tylenol is sold in broad daylight and is accepted by all.

So, because of how the State does things, now, folks will continue doing those things, without the State?

If Willie Nelson's tour bus drives through such a contract city with pot on board, he can face forceful intervention and punishment from the local security agencies, and rightly so.

And, given the memory loss that sadly is so prevalent among many Free Staters (especially when combined with libricide of old forum posts), I should once again remind everyone that I am an outspoken Anarcho-Capitalist and I favor ending all governmental prohibitions, and all government in general.

If you believe in "punishment," not restitution, then you aren't an anarcho-capitalist.  Maybe a socialist of some sort; since they oppose money, they would oppose restitution.

Like I said, "I think a rational society would ostracize drug users to some degree".  It just shouldn't be the #1 issue of a freedom movement, probably not even in the top 10...

I agree.  I'm going to start by ostracizing Tylenol users.  They either know the risks, and are intentionally engaging in reckless behavior, or they are ignorant of the risks, and are engaging in recklessness by not educating themselves about the risks of the drugs they take.  Someone who engages in recklessness to that level would be dangerous to have around as an employee, right?

The full statement, without your selective quoting was:  "Anything, when taken in extreme amounts, can kill you, even water.  Tylenol's active ingredients are more concentrated, but that doesn't mean Tylenol is a more dangerous drug.  Tylenol could be mixed with more fillers so you can't OD without swallowing ten pounds of pills, just as the active ingredients in pot could be condensed into one tiny pill that is 100% lethal."

If you think it is impossible for 21st century science to isolate and condense the toxic substances in pot (not necessarily just THC) further then you are simply wrong, but what's worse is that you're getting sidetracked.  What it would take to make pot comparable to Tylenol is a side-issue.

Um, no, your notion that marijuana could, hypothetically, be rendered more toxic than it already is, is a side-issue.  The question is about how each are actually used, not how they hypothetically might be altered at some hypothetical point in the future.

And no, you cannot condense THC (the "active ingredient" to which you referred) any more than it is.  Once a substance is at 100% purity, that's it.  Heck, even if it was at 99% purity, and you wanted to purify it further, you're not going to convert a multi-ounce pile of chemical into a pill by removing 1% of it's mass.

The main issue is the "pot is illegal, therefore it's a panacea" fallacy that so many libertarians unfortunately exhibit (or unconsciously come very close to).

Um, no, that's not an issue at all, let alone the main issue.  Unless you can quote someone here saying anything like that...

I do acknowledge it quite openly (as my "karma" numbers here will reflect).  Recreational drugs make people less coherent, less productive (unless they work for Comedy Central), and less rational.  My whole life has been a constant struggle to attain the opposite effect -- to embrace reality rather than try to escape it -- and so the pot-head culture is not one that I am willing to accept as the foundation for a model Anarcho-Capitalist society.

Recreational drugs should be legal, but universally scorned.

And yet, you admit to using them.  And say you would, again, if a doctor recommended it.  Tylenol alters your perception of reality; analgesics are the ultimate in escapism.

Because I am factually right, and they are factually wrong (and easily distracted).  Those two people don't seem to remember what they were taught in a 6th grade science class, even in a government school...

You were taught that a chemical can be reduced in mass/volume, to any arbitrary level?

If you need half a pound of a substance to be 100% lethal, and that substance has a given density, then you will need a certain number of cubic inches of volume of that substance to reach a lethal dose.  I'm not going to waste time looking up the density of THC, but I'll flat-out guarantee you that it is dramatically less dense than lead.  And you couldn't even swallow half a pound of lead in a single pill (half a pound of lead takes up almost one and a quarter cubic inches - a sphere an inch and a third in diameter).  Unless you develop a magic shrink-o-matic ray gun, you cannot make a single pill of THC that would be lethal to an adult human.  You'd have trouble even making one that could kill a child.

What you're suggesting violates the laws of chemistry and physics.  All that Tylenol must be interfering with your ability to understand and perceive reality.

Joe