Marijuana Sponsorship ??? Liveries

[SectorOne]

Yea Ferrari has Marlboro, Force India has an alcohol advertisement as well.
You are only fooling yourself if you don´t think Alcohol, Tobacco and Caffeine in your coffee is not drugs.
In fact all three are many orders of magnitude more dangerous then for example Cannabis.

(i´m not promoting or condoning any drugs, i just like to know the facts and not some crap coming out of a politician´s mouth)

I was being sarcastic...

Yes i know. My post was just a spin-off of what you discussed and not directly aimed at you specifically, hence the no quotation.
It was just to say that we do have drug advertisement in F1 already even though Tobacco is a bit of a shadow-PR at the moment.
The rest of the post was just aimed at the other part of discussion and had no relation to your post.

[Miguel]

Yea Ferrari has Marlboro, Force India has an alcohol advertisement as well.
You are only fooling yourself if you don´t think Alcohol, Tobacco and Caffeine in your coffee is not drugs.
In fact all three are many orders of magnitude more dangerous then for example Cannabis.

(i´m not promoting or condoning any drugs, i just like to know the facts and not some crap coming out of a politician´s mouth)

I was being sarcastic...

Yes i know. My post was just a spin-off of what you discussed and not directly aimed at you specifically, hence the no quotation.
It was just to say that we do have drug advertisement in F1 already even though Tobacco is a bit of a shadow-PR at the moment.
The rest of the post was just aimed at the other part of discussion and had no relation to your post.

Doh! I'll have to apologise then.

[SectorOne]

It´s my fault, i could have written the post better
Anyway, time for a beer i think.

[SectorOne]

Jamaican Grand Prix anyone?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nzcErqri6k[/youtube]

[WillerZ]

From the WADA 2014 prohibited substances list (in competition, reference S8):

Natural (e.g. cannabis, hashish, marijuana) or synthetic delta 9- tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabimimetics (e.g. “Spice”, JWH018, JWH073, HU-210) are prohibited.

FIA-governed athletes are subject to this (as am I as a cyclist). Of course as per (P1) FIA-governed athletes are also forbidden alcohol in competition (although I can apparently race a bike blind-drunk if I wanted to). The important difference which will mean they won't want smoking-sponsors is that you can get enough THC in your system to fail a test from secondhand smoke.

[SectorOne]

WADA not so long ago increased their limit of Cannabis use by 300% after several cases of MMA fighters having smoked 1-2 weeks before a fight but was still deemed to have carried an advantage into the fight itself.
NAC quickly followed suite which is nice to see. At least have some consistency across the board.

The Nevada Athletic Commission has raised its cannabis testing threshold by 300 percent.

Sherdog.com recently verified with NAC Executive Director Keith Keizer that the regulatory body increased its cannabis testing limit from 50 ng/mL to 150 ng/mL effective Sept. 4.

The change comes roughly four months after the World Anti-Doping Agency raised its threshold from 15 ng/mL to 150 ng/mL. According to WADA’s official statement on the decision this past May, the limit increase will significantly reduce the chances of an athlete testing positive for out-of-competition use.

In mixed martial arts, marijuana testing has become a hot topic. Several notable fighters have been flagged for cannabis use, including former Strikeforce welterweight champion and UFC title contender Nick Diaz. A medical marijuana patient in his home state of California, Diaz has twice tested positive for the drug in Nevada. Additionally, competitors like Dave Herman, Matt Riddle and Robbie Peralta have been reprimanded for marijuana use.

In May, lightweight Pat Healy’s positive marijuana test after UFC 159 cost him big, as the Strikeforce import saw $130,000 in post-fight bonus money rescinded after he submitted Jim Miller. The result was also changed to a no-contest, and Healy was suspended for 90 days by the New Jersey State Athletic Control Board.

[Moxie]

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer- ... use-cancer

The lung cancer side of my research involved using Adeno-Associated Virus to carry the p53 gene into the cancer cells to replace the damaged genes. The linked article discusses the relation between benzyprene and the p53 gene. While I have been out of the field for 16 years, and I do not have the evidence to back up the following statement, I will make it anyway: CANNABIS CAUSES LUNG CANCER.

Are you sure you have actually read the article?

I agreed up until you made that blanket statement.

Reading the very link you posted it´s crystal clear there´s contradictions among the different studies so to make a statement out of that, knowing that, is not a scientific nor intelligent way of doing things.

You have reports saying it does, you have reports saying it doesn´t, you have reports saying there´s a link, you have reports saying they can´t find a link.

You even have reports of Cannabis killing cancer cells.
That just there should tell you that making a blanket statement is not the smartest thing to do.

Conclusion = obviously more data is needed before anyone make any statements. Let´s stick to definitive facts and if the facts contradict each other you get more facts.

Yes, and I do recognize that my blanket statement may be a little cocky. But the damage to the P35 tumor suppressor gene is so strongly associated with tumorgenesis, that once I read that benzyprene is among the chemicals in cannabis smoke, I am confident in making such a bold statement. As I mentioned, the question for me is not whether cannabis causes lung cancer, but at what rates.

I do believe that there are probably beneficial chemicals in cannabis, and those chemicals do need to be investigated. Oftentimes, a the nature of a chemical is about balance, and how it is used. Cocaine, has its benefits, and can be prescribed by and MD in the USA. Cannabis should be no different. Without a doubt there are beneficial effects. But don't for a second think that you are going to light em up like cigarettes, and inhale all of that smoke without the deleterious effects associated with those chemicals. You will be damaging the P53 gene in your lung cells and that is bad news.

[Moxie]

Jamaican Grand Prix anyone?

I don't know where I heard this quote, but it applies.

"In America they drive on the right side of the road. In England they drive on the left side of the road. In Jamaica they drive in the shade." Might make for an entertaining Grand Prix.

[Rikhart]

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer- ... use-cancer

The lung cancer side of my research involved using Adeno-Associated Virus to carry the p53 gene into the cancer cells to replace the damaged genes. The linked article discusses the relation between benzyprene and the p53 gene. While I have been out of the field for 16 years, and I do not have the evidence to back up the following statement, I will make it anyway: CANNABIS CAUSES LUNG CANCER.

Are you sure you have actually read the article?

I agreed up until you made that blanket statement.

Reading the very link you posted it´s crystal clear there´s contradictions among the different studies so to make a statement out of that, knowing that, is not a scientific nor intelligent way of doing things.

You have reports saying it does, you have reports saying it doesn´t, you have reports saying there´s a link, you have reports saying they can´t find a link.

You even have reports of Cannabis killing cancer cells.
That just there should tell you that making a blanket statement is not the smartest thing to do.

Conclusion = obviously more data is needed before anyone make any statements. Let´s stick to definitive facts and if the facts contradict each other you get more facts.

Yes, and I do recognize that my blanket statement may be a little cocky. But the damage to the P35 tumor suppressor gene is so strongly associated with tumorgenesis, that once I read that benzyprene is among the chemicals in cannabis smoke, I am confident in making such a bold statement. As I mentioned, the question for me is not whether cannabis causes lung cancer, but at what rates.

I do believe that there are probably beneficial chemicals in cannabis, and those chemicals do need to be investigated. Oftentimes, a the nature of a chemical is about balance, and how it is used. Cocaine, has its benefits, and can be prescribed by and MD in the USA. Cannabis should be no different. Without a doubt there are beneficial effects. But don't for a second think that you are going to light em up like cigarettes, and inhale all of that smoke without the deleterious effects associated with those chemicals. You will be damaging the P53 gene in your lung cells and that is bad news.

I am surprised someone involved with research would make such an erroneous comment... Cannabis does not cause cancer. Inhaling smoke causes cancer, be it from Cannabis or dried lettuce. Smoking is only one of the ways to take cannabis you know.

[MOWOG]

It´s scary when you realize that the people that run the country are not smarter then a cat.

Actually, my cat is quite a bit smarter than the vast majority of politicians!

[Moxie]

I am surprised someone involved with research would make such an erroneous comment... Cannabis does not cause cancer. Inhaling smoke causes cancer, be it from Cannabis or dried lettuce. Smoking is only one of the ways to take cannabis you know.

So when was the last time you smoked dried lettuce? While picking at my choice of words you have inadvertently made my argument for me. As a practical matter people don't smoke lettuce, or oak leaves, splitting hairs on the matter seemed unnecessary.

If you go back and check, you will find that I did make the comparison to inhaling other sorts of fumes, namely automotive exhaust. I also stated that the cancer rates of cannabis smokers needs to be compared to other activities. One way of doing this is to study the specific chemicals in the smoke to identify known carcinogens. Benzyprene, a known carcinogen, is in cannabis smoke. Therefore, cannabis smoke is a carcinogen.

Smoking is not the only way to consume cannabis, but it is the most common way. I will leave it to the stoners to explain why smoking is the preferred method of intake.