alabama alaska american samoa arizona arkansas california colorado connecticut delaware district of columbia florida georgia guam hawaii idaho illinois indiana iowa kansas kentucky louisiana maine maryland massachusetts michigan minnesota mississippi missouri montana nebraska nevada new hampshire new jersey new mexico new york north carolina north dakota northern marianas islands ohio oklahoma oregon pennsylvania puerto rico rhode island south carolina south dakota tennessee texas utah vermont virginia virgin islands washington west virginia wisconsin wyoming america usa u.s.a. u. s. a. united states
How Much Weed Should I Use Each Time I Use It?
Try Just One Little Puff Per Day. This takes about 10 seconds or less to smoke or vape "one puff" of weed. Most marijuana used today is very potent. We don't have to smoke or vape anymore than one tiny puff - maybe two. We do not sit and smoke or vape for even five minutes. We sit and smoke or vape for 5 to 10 seconds instead.
Then perhaps we have a glass of lemonade for 10 minutes. But we do NOT smoke or vape marijuana anymore than one or two tiny little puffs.
If we use more than that, we're wasting it. We should not fill our lungs with the residue from vaping or smoking for anymore than one or two tiny puffs. Remember that what goes in to our lungs, must come out. So we minimize our usage in order to minimize the coughing, and sneezing, etc.
Sun Grown Weed Has Better Effect?
There's something special about weed which was grown under the sun, rather than indoors. The "high effect" is better. This implies that the measured percentage of THC may not be related to the "high effect" to any great extent.
A medical marihuana dispensary in my town just started selling "sun-grown" weed. I tried it and I was very surprised at the overall effect. I felt noticably more "high" than I usually do from using weed. But outdoor grown weed will usually exhibit lower THC than indoor grown. This "sun-grown" local legal medical marihuana appeared to be normal "kind-bud", like any other indoor grown. But it was not grown indoors, but rather in an outdoor but very protected outdoor environment apparently. The price was US$60 for 1/2 ounce, which is an enormous amount.
Why does outdoor grown weed have a greater "high" effect than indoor grown? Why is science always lagging behind empirical testing? And what produces the "high effect" if not THC?
Could it be that weed grown under high-UV light exhibits a greater "high" effect? Or does the sun exert a special effect on marihuana plants?
In Europe, they generally use "mercury vapor" grow-lamps which produce more ultra-violet light. Some have also stated that weed grown at high altitude (in high UV sunlight) produces a better "high" effect.
From MPP (Marijuana Policy Project, Alaska, and Washington, D.C.)
Yesterday, December 20 (2018), the Marijuana Control Board adopted rules that allow cannabis retailers to apply for licenses authorizing on-site use of cannabis by adults 21 and over. This is a major step forward for cannabis policy in Alaska and the United States.
The issue of on-site use came to the forefront over four years ago. Since voters enacted the state’s marijuana initiative, the only option for cannabis consumption was private residences. The new rules provide adult residents and tourists with a place to consume that complies with state and local law.
MPP would like to thank all those who provided testimony to the board in support and the many residents and businesses who worked toward a solution during these past several years!
EDITOR'S NOTE: I predict that opiate deaths in Alaska will plummet as long as the unfortunate myth of "marihuana overdose" dangers can be quashed. When people think opiates and cannabis are somehow equivalent, they might choose opiates instead of cannabis, leading to opiate overdose death. The cannabis cafe is the perfect place for people to learn about cannabis, marihuana, and hashish (marihuana concentrates), and how to use it intelligently. There is no danger of overdose death from using even the strongest marihuana, marihuana concentrates, and/or hashish. In fact, pure THC is absolutely safe as far as causing overdose deaths or injury. The main problem in the world now is ignorance and misinformation about cannabis.
Stop Using Weed if You Have Trouble With It!
Recreational Marihuana Usage is the answer for the problems of 1)"psychosis", 2)"vomiting", and 3)"marihuana overdose". Why? Because it isn't enjoyable or recreational to experience psychosis, vomiting, or overdose, that's why. With the built-in assessment process that is going on all the time for those enjoying life, why would anyone deliberately use weed in such a way that it's not enjoyable?
Those using weed due to receiving a recommendation from a doctor for that, may be continuing to use it such that it isn't enjoyable. This is a tragic situation. I would personally recommend to anyone having trouble with weed, to stop using it.
Note that science has finally discovered that THC measured in the blood is not related to impairment. Science may eventually discover how the "high" effect is created by marihuana. At the moment, no one seems to know how "feeling high" is created from the usage of marihuana.
I would also like to see a move toward using weed of varying potencies so that more people begin to see and appreciate something other than just "high-THC" marihuana.
It is well known in Amsterdam that given total freedom to choose from a plethora of different kinds of hashish and weed, that not everyone chooses the high-THC types.
In the annual "Cannabis Cup" tradition from quite a few years ago, there was one guy, Soma is his name, who came out with a new type of weed (and seed) a few decades ago that everyone liked, but which was not at all merely another "high-THC" variety. This was when "New York City Diesel" by Soma Seeds was introduced, and this type of weed became very popular, even though it was more in the 10-15% THC range (I think). But it had a nice high effect, and tasted really good. (I don't think Soma even cares what percentage of THC his weed exhibits.)
I say, let the market decide. Don't impose a limit on THC, but let the customers buy what they want. In the USA, the high-THC types of weed are dominant, and all we hear these days is about people having trouble with marihuana. I hope the law doesn't force the industry to lower the THC necessarily, but if that happens due to market forces, I will not complain.
Do we need 100,000 different types of weed in the USA? I also would like to see American marihuana entrepreneurs openly state the genetics of their strains more often, and to stop putting out so many differently named types of weed. Most weed outlets here are hawking 100 to 200 different kinds, but this changes from day to day. At the moment, names change as often as the wind changes here, and those seeking to enjoy this or that specific variety have no idea what they are actually using due to the habits of the weed producers.
Stop behaving like Monsanto, OK? In Holland, there are so many fewer types of weed available apparently than in the USA. The breeders there do not (always) compulsively give new names to old strains, just to appear to be having something new. I would prefer it also if the American providers of weed would mimic the business, seed-breeding, and marketing habits of the Dutch industry more and more. Consumers are not aided by the availability of so many strains of weed.
I think most people would prefer that subjective qualities experienced by people should be given more weight than scientific cannabinoid analyses and breakdowns. I would prefer an attitude more akin to how new wines are created, rather than sending each bred specimen off to the lab for THC/cannabinoid analysis.
A big error is to not promote the cannabis cafe. A cafe or coffeeshop can be a "medicine" for people. On the other hand, let's hope that someone doesn't shoot a lot of people in a coffee shop.
The cannabis cafe is the perfect place for those using cannabis to learn the various subtle points about usage with others, without burdening emergency responders with imagined emergencies. There is no sane reason to call for an ambulance after using marihuana, regardless of potency!
The current regulatory regime for "soft-drugs" in the USA? Why should we rely on any third party to determine if a freedom loving U.S. citizen should be allowed to use, or not use, their choice of over-the-counter medicine? Is there any sane reason to use an expensive government regulatory agency to control a substance that is not in the same league as alcohol, Seconol, Heroin, or other potentially deadly substances?
FACT: No One is Actually Dying from Marihuana Overdose!
But Someone is Creating Mass Hysteria in the USA!
Mass confusion: due to the wretchedly poor quality of the U.S. media and other groups in 2018, quite a few people still believe that marihuana is as dangerous as Heroin, Seconol, and so forth. Selling it in special "dispenaries" reinforces that lie. Reporting on marihuana "overdoses" adds to this confusion.
In fact, I would bet anyone that quite a few people in the world still believe that cannabis sativa is like an opiod, and can be used to kill people, just like opiods and other truely dangerous substances do every day. This is the damaging and perverse illusion recently created by the U.S. media, and which is killing people right now.
In Holland, you can't call an ambulance for a marijuana O.D.!
The is a new thing in the USA, and a new way to steal taxpayers money! Recently, too many inexperienced people who use weed and feel horrible afterwards, are calling for an ambulance! This never happened back in 1972. When did it start????? Why allow this waste of money, and subversion of precious medical resources? Being able to call an ambulance for a marihuana "overdose" is as dumb as being able to call an ambulance for a chocolate overdose. I know for a fact that this is not allowed in the Netherlands, where they know the difference between chocolate, heroin, and cannabis. Why is the U.S. medical community not speaking out about this????
It's no wonder we pay so much for medical care in the USA when anyone can call an ambulance if they feel like vomiting, probably.
But if some people are so misinformed in the USA as to think that cannabis is as dangerous as fenatyl, then that idiocy or ignorance is a major danger for the entire world.
Americans are dying in vast numbers these days due to misuse of drugs. I am embarrassed to be an American at the moment. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness?
Soft Drug: cannabis, hashish, marihuana edibles.
Hard Drug: heroin, opiates, other dangerous sedatives, other dangerous drugs, alcohol.
Marihuana overdoses in Holland: note that some people who are not regular users of tobacco, or who are not addicted to tobacco, sometimes faint if they use tobacco, or a marihuana joint made with tobacco and cannabis. ("Syncope" means fainting.) When this happens in Holland, and it's not that common, they still don't call an ambulance, since the "victim" will recover in about 5 or 10 minutes. The "cure" for this fainting is to give them dextrose sugar candy, or any other sugary candy, fruit juice, or soda pop, which is available at most Dutch "weed" coffee shops.
However, tobacco is said to have been banned in most weed cafes in Holland.
The main symptom of fainting is paleness in the face.
RE: marihuana overdoses in the Netherlands. I personally have never seen anyone actually faint in a Dutch pot coffee shop after using a Euro-style joint containing tobacco with weed, but once I saw someone getting up after having fainted and fallen down. That means one time in nearly 30 years.
Marihuana overdoses in the USA: most such episodes in North America are probably panic attacks experienced by inexperienced people, who just feel awful, for whatever reason, after using weed the first time. Most here in the USA do not mix tobacco with weed, so there is little if any fainting here in the USA from using weed. In fact, I've never heard of it happening even once in the USA or other areas of North America.
Falling asleep from weed: marihuana is not a knock out drug, but some people who are already tired, will sometimes feel their fatigue a great deal more if they get stoned from marihuana.
The solution is to take a nap, if possible. This is not "passing out" or fainting involuntarily since it can be over-ridden with stimulants such as coffee. Such sleepy and tired people are not unusually pale when they succumb to the need for sleep, so it's likely not a fainting spell. But some call falling asleep, "passing out".
One of the functions of the body that is connected to the endo-cannabinoid system, is regulation of sleep. If the body needs sleep, marihuana can aid in bringing it on, but this can be over-ridden with stimulants such as coffee, easily. But why use weed when you're tired? That's a waste of cannabis unless you're trying to get to sleep.
QUESTION: How do they know which drug you have used when an "overdose" occurs?
Answer: the only drugs which are used socially in regular cafes in Holland are just two: alcohol, and cannabis. Therefore, in that social setting, everyone in the area knows which drug the person overdosing, has overdosed on. The only drug among those two which would be concerning to the emergency responders, would be alcohol overdose. But most alcohol overdoses are not fatal.
I'm sure that if a heroin user calls for emergency help, or someone calls on their behalf, the emergency people would respond to that.
But recreational users of hard drugs are not treated well in Holland. Restaurant owners and operators, cafe owners, coffee shop operators, are always making sure hard drug users are kicked out of their shops. If they don't kick them out, the shops eventually get shut down by the police. The shutting down by the police of any cafes or coffee shops which cater to hard drug users takes place all the time in Holland. This is one reason the death rate in Holland is quite low from hard drug overdose: they don't treat well socially the "recreational" users of hard drugs. This anti-social treatment of hard drug users in the Netherlands is a tradition in that country that helps to discourage hard drug usage, and therefore, hard drug deaths.
But regular citizens or legal residents there who get addicted to hard drugs can get help without having to turn to street dealers.
Did the World Trade Center Towers collapse due to deliberate controlled demolitions, or was it due to the airliners, etc.????
My opinion: first of all, I have heard from probably about 50 different people over the past 14 years that they could see on many videos what appears to be small explosions (or puffs of dust) being emitted around the edges of the buildings, just below the area where the pancaking process of collapse is occurring, just as the buildings are "pancaking down", floor by floor, as they fell.
The fact that so many Americans are convinced that our country attacked itself on 9-11-2001, is also very disturbing in itself. Why are so many so confused? Who are confusing the people, and what are their motives?
Back to the collapse of the WTC towers:
Well, yes. I can see that also (the puffs of dust or smoke as the buildings collapse). But think about this:
MY OPINION: go to YouTube and play some videos of all the controlled demolitions that you want. Notice that YES, in a controlled demolition, there are always a series of controlled and carefully timed explosions created by the demolition crew engineers, to create just the precise sort of collapse that is desired in order to bring the building(s) down in the required and desired manner. But in the controlled demolitions that I have seen, the explosions always occur JUST BEFORE the buildings are actually collapsing.
The small puffs of dust or smoke being emitted as both of the WTC towers fell, were occurring AS the buildings were falling, not before. That actually proves that there were no controlled demolitions occurring at the WTC towers on 9-11-2001.
Here are a number of back-up points that further prove my theory:
- Controlled demolitions are normally very carefully set off using explosive charges connected by wires to the operator's control position.
- Using wired rather than wireless connections is the traditional method used, as wireless control can be unpredictable.
- Also, usage of any strong radio transmitting equipment is usually prohibited by the demolition crews anywhere near such demolitions to prevent the accidental setting off of demolition explosions before the proper moment caused by strong wireless signals. Strong radio (wireless) signals always cause "induced currents and voltages" to occur accidentally in nearby metal or electrical circuits of all types, resulting sometimes in unpredictable and accidental premature explosions of the demolition charges.
They also make sure that all strong radio transmitting equipment nearby is shut off before they even place the charges!
- Why the charges must be detonated before the collapse occurs: 1)if the collapse has begun occurring before any charges are set off, then it wasn't the charges being set off that caused the collapse, and 2)the wires leading to each explosive charge attached to the building's structure must be intact in order to function. If the building has started falling already, there is no way the wires will still be in place properly.
- Therefore, the puffs of smoke or dust observed by everyone in the world on TV as the WTC buildings are falling is not being caused by explosive charges being set off, but rather by the building structure popping apart as it falls due to structural failure of the rivets holding the building together. Some or all of that is dust or disturbed building material, not smoke. END OF STORY.
- Even if someone tried to use wirelessly activated explosive charges attached to the buildings' structures, as the buildings are falling, it is unlikely that these charges would work properly due to the physical vibrations, fractures, massive movements and flexing, that would tend to detach or damage the carefully placed charges with attached mobile-phone detonation circuits being activated wirelessly, presumably by mobile cell phones.
- Another thing: as we all know from personal experience that the modern mobile cell phone networks have small, unpredictable, but very noticable delays in the voice and data transmission that would preclude the required precise timing of the detonation of many wirelessly activated explosive charges, if terrorists had tried to use that method.
It's very easy for terrorists to set off ONE, TWO, OR THREE roughly coordinated explosive charges for a roadside bomb project, using existing mobile phone technology. But for hundreds and hundreds of such explosive charges to be set off at precisely the right moment to bring down two of the tallest buildings in the entire world, would be virtually impossible using today's mobile phone or data networks due to the unpredictable delays in timing.
- If the terrorists skipped using the existing mobile phone networks as part of the detonation circuits, they would then necessarily have to use conventional radio (analog) equipment to do the same thing. Considering that the WTC towers are the actual location in New York City where many millions of watts of radio signals are being broadcast all the time for commercial TV and radio, those ultra strong signals tend to interfere with, or overpower many electronic and electic circuits in the nearby area, making it impossible to use conventional (analog) radio equipment for such purposes.
As stated above, strong radio signals are prohibited near any demolition projects due to the danger of accidental explosions occuring prematurely due to these very strong radio signals from commercial broadcasters, which induce uwanted currents and voltages in all nearby metal structures and wiring, precluding the use of controlled explosions in such areas.
- Some have stated that there isn't enough fuel in airliners to create enough heat to melt metal. BULLSHIT. Well more than half the weight of most modern airliners consists of fuel, if the airliner is full or nearly full of fuel, and airliners weigh hundreds of thousands of pounds. Airliners which crash without hitting buildings are usually almost totally melted away after the fires are put out; therefore, I'm sure this steel building would melt in some semi-confined areas if exposed to such heat as well as the airliner metal.
Not enough fuel onboard to melt steel? A typical American tanker truck trailer hauls from about 5,000 to 11,000 gallons of fuel. A Boeing 757 when fully fueled contains about as much fuel as a fully loaded tanker truck trailer. The Boeing 767 when nearly full of fuel contains about as much as two fully loaded tanker truck trailers.
These planes that hit the WTC towers were in a semi-enclosed building when burning, not sprawled openly on the ground outside, so heat would be greater in such a semi-confined area, perhaps hot enough to melt or weaken steel beams.
Both wired and wireless demolition methods would be difficult or impossible due to the extreme amount of high power radio signals in the area, which would make it impossible to even safely place the charges, much less to later control them.
For the above reasons, I have never suspected that controlled demolition methods were used in the destruction of the WTC towers by terrorists, domestic or foreign after seeing the many videos of those buildings falling.
I read an article many years ago written by a structural engineer that stated that the WTC Towers were near the edge of the envelope in terms of structural safety due to their immense height and modern "naked-steel" frame construction. The large airliners nearly full of fuel crashed into the buildings well below the very top floor, so that there is enough weight and mass of the buildings above the impact point, to create sufficient further stress and pressure to initiate the collapse process after the super-heated steel lost its strength due to nearly melting, or actually melting. Once begun, the pancaking process would continue all the way down due to the marginal design strength.
This article stated that if the airliners had hit reinforced-concrete framed buildings such as the Empire State Building, the collapses would not have occurred at all, as those older buildings whose entire steel framing is ensheathed in concrete are more "over-built" than the newer "naked steel frame" designs.
