James

[font=georgia][size=4][b]Folllowing on from Siren...[/b] Alice took the fish by its fin and followed him deeper into the river. The water wasn't as cold as she'd expected; in fact, it felt quite warm and comfortable. As the fish led her further away from the bank, Alice noticed that the sky had darkened and the water had developed a mild pink hue. Within moments, Alice bobbed underwater. She could hear the river rushing past her ears and she could also hear the fish mumbling to himself: "English girls are such curious creatures," he said, "do they have nothing better to do than harass fish at the river bank?" It wasn't long before the sound of rushing water almost completely disappeared. Alice could still feel the warm water around her, but now everything seemed to have fallen somewhat silent (except, of course, for the fish's mumbling). She opened her eyes cautiously and saw that both she and the fish were flying over a vast forest of seaweed. [i]"And to think",[/i] pondered Alice, [i]"I have never been able to swim!"[/i] - (in fact, Alice had always been afraid of swimming, ever since falling into the very same river as a little girl) - [i]"Falling down stairs without a single tear and now swimming in such a deep river; how brave they'll think me at home!"[/i][/font][/size]

[center][img]http://img59.exs.cx/img59/9372/returntowonderland6gk.jpg[/img][/center] [center][font=palatino linotype][size=4][b]Alice's Evidence[/b][/size][/font][/center] [quote][font=georgia]"Wake up, Alice dear!" said her sister; "Why, what a long sleep you've had!" "Oh, I've had such a curious dream!" said Alice, and she told her sister, as well as she could remember them, all these strange Adventures of hers that you have just been reading about; and when she had finished, her sister kissed her, and said, "It WAS a curious dream, dear, certainly: but now run in to your tea; it's getting late." So Alice got up and ran off, thinking while she ran, as well she might, what a wonderful dream it had been. But her sister sat still just as she left her, leaning her head on her hand, watching the setting sun, and thinking of little Alice and all her wonderful Adventures, till she too began dreaming after a fashion, and this was her dream:-- First, she dreamed of little Alice herself, and once again the tiny hands were clasped upon her knee, and the bright eager eyes were looking up into hers--she could hear the very tones of her voice, and see that queer little toss of her head to keep back the wandering hair that WOULD always get into her eyes--and still as she listened, or seemed to listen, the whole place around her became alive the strange creatures of her little sister's dream. The long grass rustled at her feet as the White Rabbit hurried by--the frightened Mouse splashed his way through the neighbouring pool--she could hear the rattle of the teacups as the March Hare and his friends shared their never-ending meal, and the shrill voice of the Queen ordering off her unfortunate guests to execution--once more the pig-baby was sneezing on the Duchess's knee, while plates and dishes crashed around it--once more the shriek of the Gryphon, the squeaking of the Lizard's slate-pencil, and the choking of the suppressed guinea-pigs, filled the air, mixed up with the distant sobs of the miserable Mock Turtle. So she sat on, with closed eyes, and half believed herself in Wonderland, though she knew she had but to open them again, and all would change to dull reality--the grass would be only rustling in the wind, and the pool rippling to the waving of the reeds--the rattling teacups would change to tinkling sheep- bells, and the Queen's shrill cries to the voice of the shepherd boy--and the sneeze of the baby, the shriek of the Gryphon, and all thy other queer noises, would change (she knew) to the confused clamour of the busy farm-yard--while the lowing of the cattle in the distance would take the place of the Mock Turtle's heavy sobs. Lastly, she pictured to herself how this same little sister of hers would, in the after-time, be herself a grown woman; and how she would keep, through all her riper years, the simple and loving heart of her childhood: and how she would gather about her other little children, and make their eyes bright and eager with many a strange tale, perhaps even with the dream of Wonderland of long ago: and how she would feel with all their simple sorrows, and find a pleasure in all their simple joys, remembering her own child-life, and the happy summer days. [/font][/quote] [center][font=palatino linotype][size=4][b]Rabbit Hole Syndrome[/b][/size][/font][/center] [font=georgia]Welcome to [b]Return to Wonderland[/b]. Let me take a brief moment to explain what this thread is all about, for those who are interested in participating. The concept for this thread has been done a couple of times before. If you are familiar with "Through the Looking Glass", you'll know what I mean. Also, some of you may have played a PC game called "Alice", which is all about her return to Wonderland. Through the Looking Glass wasn't really written in the same way as the original novel and Alice was a uniquely morbid twist on the story of Wonderland. My intention with this thread is to write a kind of "true sequel" to the original novel. But I'm not going to do this on my own. In fact, all writers (and even non-writers) on OtakuBoards are welcome to join me in this little endeavour. This thread will be somewhat like The Reanimatrix and somewhat like 55 Fiction. Like Reanimatrix, it will involve contributions from anyone at any time, with all contributions centered around the subject matter. And like 55 Fiction, I will require that posts are limited in length - with perhaps three paragraphs for each [i]post[/i] at the very [i]most[/i]. ~_^ So how does it work? Well, allow me to demonstrate: [quote][b]Post 1:[/b] They were indeed a queer-looking party that assembled on the bank--the birds with draggled feathers, the animals with their fur clinging close to them, and all dripping wet, cross, and uncomfortable. [/quote] Followed by: [quote][b]Post 2:[/b] The first question of course was, how to get dry again: they had a consultation about this, and after a few minutes it seemed quite natural to Alice to find herself talking familiarly with them, as if she had known them all her life. Indeed, she had quite a long argument with the Lory, who at last turned sulky, and would only say, I am older than you, and must know better; and this Alice would not allow without knowing how old it was, and, as the Lory positively refused to tell its age, there was no more to be said.[/quote] Followed by: [quote][b]Post 3:[/b] At last the Mouse, who seemed to be a person of authority among them, called out, "Sit down, all of you, and listen to me! I'LL soon make you dry enough!" They all sat down at once, in a large ring, with the Mouse in the middle. Alice kept her eyes anxiously fixed on it, for she felt sure she would catch a bad cold if she did not get dry very soon. [/quote] These examples were taken directly from a chapter of the novel and they are condensed (ie: only one paragraph per post here), but hopefully they give you an idea. The concept is that, like an RPG, each post follows on from the last in sequence. However, we are not playing as characters or anything like that. Instead, we are all writing a story together. The challenge is that if you post after someone else, you'll have to follow their lead; in other words, you will need to consider what to add and where to take the story. By injecting many writers into this process, we should come up with lots of interesting scenarios and ideas. Some people will want to throw a curve-ball into the mix and even if it seems weird, the following writer will have to follow on from it as best they can. The aim isn't to have a totally random story -- I would hope that members will follow on with some logic, even though the story will no doubt be odd. However, by having only one to three paragraphs in each post at a time, we can see the story rapidly unfold and it can be pulled in many directions.[/font] [center][font=palatino linotype][size=4][b]Advice from a Caterpillar[/b][/size][/font][/center] [font=georgia]Now, for this thread to work, it's going to be important to just reiterate a few points. These points will help to ensure that things stay somewhat focused, even if people are injecting lots of different ideas. [list] [*]Remember: [b]one[/b] to [b]three[/b] paragraphs per post. Your paragraphs can be any length, but not ridiculously long. The idea is to encourage somewhat rapid posting and fluidity through the story. [*]Pay attention not just to the post before yours, but to the last two or three posts. Posting in a total void could make things a bit confusing. So be sure that even if you include your own new ideas, you're still following on from the previous narrative. [*]Remain in the [b]third person[/b] at all times; Alice in Wonderland is written this way and for our purposes, it makes sense anyway. If we jump between first and third person all the time, the thread won't read properly. [*]You may include images and artwork in your posts if you like; the formatting is up to you. [*]In some cases, because this is a continuous story, people's posts may overlap (ie: people may both post at the same time or something). Please be aware of this and try to avoid posting when someone else is also posting. Sometimes it's unavoidable though, so if it happens, it's recommended that the second post is deleted (ie: if two people post at once, the [b]second[/b] post is the one that should be removed). [*]It would be a great idea if everyone [b]included the name of the person who's post they are following[/b] at the beginning of their post. This will not only help to avoid overlap, but it'll also ensure that we know there are no gaps anywhere. [*]Finally, sequences with lots of dialogue are exempt from the three paragraph rule, due to the way dialogue is structured. You may write three paragraphs in addition to a section of dialogue (at most), but again, try not to make it too long. [/list] Hopefully that isn't too much to take in! As long as we follow these simple steps, this thread should turn out well. Since I'm running low on ideas right now, I'm not entirely sure how great my first entry will be. But here goes...[/font] [font=georgia][size=3]Alice had become all-too accustomed to sitting by the bank with her sister and having nothing to do. As had happened many times before, her sister's nose was buried in the pages of a hefty-looking book, which (as usual) contained no pictures or conversation. With her sister in her own little world (and apparently now completely unaware of Alice's presence), she reached for a little clump of stones that sat against the reeds on the bank. [i]"I've no idea how anyone can find interest in a novel without pictures or conversation,"[/i] thought Alice, as she fingered the smooth stones. [i]"I shall never understand it."[/i] She then carelessly flicked the stones across the river's surface. The first stone skipped twice and sunk: [i]tak, tak, ...glomp![/i] The second stone skipped three times but didn't sink: [i]tak, tak, tak..."Ouch!"[/i] Alice woke from her lethargy and squinted in the direction of the sound. The sun was in her eyes, but she could almost make out a small dark object on the water's surface. Upon closer inspection, she noticed that the object was, in fact, a fish. [i]"Poor thing, I hope he isn't too sore,"[/i] thought Alice (this was her very first thought at the time, as it didn't immediately occur to her that fish generally do not speak). Alice wandered closer to the water and noticed that the fish appeared to be making a gesture. "You!" she heard it cry, "Are you responsible for that rock?"[/size][/font]

[color=#334366]I totally identify with Tori's comment about eating chicken 24/7. As far as I'm concerned, chicken is the food of kings. I can eat it with rice, BBQ'd, in spicy sauce, among a salad, in a sandwich, as part of a soup, in a pie, on a pizza, etc... Such a versatile animal. [/color]

[color=#334366]I think my biggest addiction is Coca Cola. Other than water, milk and OJ...it's the drink I have the most. Yum. Other than that, I'm not really sure. I think I am slowly becoming addicted to buying movie posters; I already have a ton that haven't yet been framed up. But thankfully I can't afford to buy all the posters I want. Lack of money can curb an addiction for sure. ~_^[/color]

[quote=Syk3] In a lot of ways, we're preaching similar things to a different set of people, and therefore, we stress different things. You are saying to those who think that it's harmless that there are consequences. We are saying to those who used to think it was harmless, but then changed their opinion because of what they learned in school, that it's safer than they think it is. We're not saying that you're wrong that pot isn't completely harmless, just as you're not saying that we're wrong that responsible and moderate use is alright (I think). [/quote] [color=#334366]Correct. I think that your views are significantly more moderate than Zeta's though. Zeta clearly has an axe to grind and he doesn't seem to really acknowledge the harmful properties of the drug. There is [i]still[/i] no acknowledgement about the data that I posted earlier, for example. I have seen that information in many forms and in many locations -- I can keep going and going, with unbiased sources. I think the main point is that I'm intending to share information to educate those who have incorrect ideas about marijuana -- whether they believe it's harmless or whether they believe it's the most dangerous drug in the world. Clearly it's not the most dangerous drug out there, but it's [i]far[/i] from harmless. It's still a significantly dangerous substance, particularly if abused. In regard to legalization specifically, I would tend to oppose it save for medical marijuana. There's a simple reason, too. It's like cigarettes. If cigarettes were invented right now, today, no government would sanction their legal sale. The only reason we face this "it's legal but harmful" dilemma is because it became legal long before anyone knew about the health consequences. At least with marijuana, we know about many of the harmful impacts that it can have on the human body. So since we're more ahead of the curve than we were with tabacco at the beginning, we can at least not go down that path.[/color]

[QUOTE=M.Ali][font=trebuchet ms] The point [i]is[/i], is that people know it isn't good for them, but they continue to do it anyway. Why? [b]Because we like it.[/b] [/font][/QUOTE] [color=#334366]The only thing is, some people (quite a lot apparently) [i]don't[/i] know about very large chunks of data related to marijuana research (including the example I posted earlier on). If people know the risks and they still choose to take it, I'm not going to criticize them; it's their choice. My aim isn't so much like Morpheus; if you smoke, I really don't care. That's your choice. All I'm saying is that it's important to dispel the myth that marijuana isn't harmful or linked to several health problems/risks. Once that myth is broken, adults can make edjucated choices about their use of the substance (in the same way as junk food, cigarettes or alcohol). Also, Zeta...I noticed that you [i]totally[/i] misinterpreted one of my posts back there, lol. If I can be bothered (and right now I can't), I'll try to further clarify my post so that it's more understandable. You came away with vastly incorrect assumptions about what I was saying, and I don't think it'd be fair to leave that unanswered.[/color] [quote name='Syk3']No one here is saying that marijuana is a harmless drug. No one is saying that there are no problems associated with it. [/quote] [color=#334366]Well, no, that's not true really. Zeta directly said that no matter how much you smoke, it won't have any impact. lol The problem isn't that I'm trying to make it out to be worse than it is -- the problem is that some of you are making it out to be a lot more harmless than it really is. That's the key issue. As long as the facts are out there (and the quote in my earlier post is a great summary for a large body of research out there), then everyone can make decisions based on that. But as soon as that research starts being rejected (especially by groups who are overzealously interested in marijuana-legalization), well...we start getting into nutty territory. And that's where I drop the debate, lol. But yeah, as I said, if everyone is working off the same research data (and many are working off wonky, emotive data), then we can start making real choices about the drug (ie: legalization or just personal use itself). I am not really interested in debating legalization though. I'm just trying to underscore the evidence, to ensure that any debate being held is done so with at least some basic, neutral information.[/color]

[color=#334366]Yeah, I have encouraged people to post their fiction in different "parts" if they like, especially if they're adding to it. But if you are wanting to edit it and stuff, then yeah, a thread like this is probably a good idea for feedback. People can give you feedback in the official thread, but they can only do so if they are also posting a piece of fiction in the same post (so that we don't have any posts that are discussion-only; maybe that can be a seperate thread somewhere).[/color]

[color=#334366]Um...The Reanimatrix's grave? lol. It's still active, my friend. JJRiddler posted a story there only a couple of days ago. Please direct all Reanimatrix entries into the actual thread, so that we don't get multiple stories spilling out into the forum. [/color]

[QUOTE=Baron Samedi][size=1]I think that the 'Deal With This Member' thread is something that fully deserves nomination etc., and I guess that bandying around the thread is all well and good...I mean, as has been said, it does make a significant contribution to OB. However, I think actually linking to it is a bit much, and unnecessary. After all, every Moderator knows about it, and nobody else can actually [b]see[/b] it ~_^ [/size][/QUOTE] [color=#334366]Now you know how I feel whenever you link to your LSN site and I get the dreaded black box. :bawl: [/color]

[color=#334366]I don't think Valentine's Day is a serious issue really. I think that even if you're in a loving relationship, you can just use the day to do something extra fun and goofy. Or you can just do what you'd normally do. It's no biggie. I didn't think I'd have anyone to spend this year's Valentine's Day with, though now I apparently do. But either way, I don't think it has much impact on me. If I'm with someone, V-Day is just a good excuse to be extra silly or something.[/color]

[color=#334366]The thing is, more research does need to be done. But as you can see by the information I posted above, there are some very significant health concerns/effects with the drug. Now, would I say that [i]too much[/i] emphasis is put on marijuana? Probably. Especially if it's to the detriment of dealing with more serious drugs. But way, [i]way[/i] too many people seem to think that marijuana is a really light substance that doesn't even have as much impact as tabacco. As you can see by what I've posted, it does contain some similar toxins, but it can also have different effects. In terms of the legalization debate, well...I have no real opinion on that. I know there are passionate views on either side, but I really don't have much of a view. I am personally just trying to debunk some of the general concepts about the drug not being significantly harmful. I think it's fine if someone smokes it while being informed, but unfortunately too many don't.[/color] [quote name='Zeta']Because no matter how you do marijuana it is safe, lol. Even if you don't do it responsibly, you are safe, lol.[/quote] [color=#334366]Rubbish. lol Take a look at the information I posted above. Your previous post suggests that you haven't even read through it. Yes, there's more research to be done. But believe me, enough is already known and demonstrated to link marijuana use to various significant health problems -- mental or otherwise.[/color]

[quote name='Syk3']Like Zeta.. well, forgive me if I don't accept this as fact right away. Other than from you, I have never heard of anything to suggest that excessively using pot can lead to mental disorders. It's not because I'm trying to "block out the bad stuff" or anything; that's not the issue at all. I?ve read a lot from both sides of the argument regarding, and I simply have never heard of evidence for this. Based on what you have said, though, with no actual links or sources to support, I could understand that someone with predisposed genetics for a mental disorder might make it worse with the drug, but if it could come from scratch, I'm sure that we would have heard much more about it. Even in extreme cases, it can be argued that it's the user, not the drug, which these effects result from.[/quote] [color=#334366]I'm actually really surprised that you haven't heard about such studies. As I had said earlier, I thought they were just common knowledge. This is probably the reason why I [i]don't[/i] know of any online resources on that subject -- it has been reported so widely (and I have taken short classes that specifically deal with drugs, in high school) that I tended to think it was common knowledge. The problem with your argument is that it reminds me of the "it's the person and not the gun" argument. In a sense both sides are correct. The thing is though, the drug itself is what can trigger mental defects in people. It is known that there are mental consequences for smoking marijuana heavily if you are [i]not[/i] mentally unstable (note that I said "heavily") and it's also known that marijuana can aggrivate existing mental illnesses. So, if someone has a mild mental disorder that can be aggrivated by a drug (whether it's an illegal substance like marijuana or a legal one like alcohol), you could argue that it's the individual's fault for using that drug. And I would agree; I tend to believe that people are responsible for their own actions. However, it's simply not correct for anyone to say that the poor harmless drug is not a problem at all. I mean, you could say that heroin sitting there on its own isn't a problem until someone uses it. Of course that's the case -- but nobody is saying that these drugs jump up and force people to use them. The problem [i]is[/i] "drug use" and "drug addiction" -- not necessarily the mere existence of the substance. My post was not intending to go into those areas. I was simply saying that marijuana is [i]more dangerous[/i] than some are making it out to be. I am [i]not[/i] saying that it is more dangerous than various other drugs -- and I have never said that. What I'm saying is that we have two extremes here. One side is saying that marijuana will lead to the total decay of society and that it is one of the most dangerous drugs out there. That is false. The other side is saying that marijuana is harmless and that it doesn't do anything other than getting you high occasionally. That is also false. So please, try not to react in a knee-jerk fashion, especially if you (or anyone else) are going to start quoting statements from sources that have an interest in legalization of marijuana. Not to say that you are doing that specifically, but the legalization debate tends to lend itself to that kind of interference. I should end this post by saying that I'm not even against the legalization of marijuana. At least, not entirely. I fully support its legalization for medical purposes, because I am aware of plenty of cases where it eases the pain of those with terminal illnesses and such. The main thing I wanted to do here was just clarify my position. I do not have an axe to grind either way.[/color] [quote name='Syk3']Marijuana is not a substance free of its problems and harm, but when you weigh it against other such drugs, it is clearly safer.[/quote] [color=#334366]But see, here is another problem. Comparison and justification. I am not seeking to compare marijuana to other drugs here, lol. If I compare one shot of heroin to being hit by a truck, heroin suddenly looks a lot safer. You see what I'm saying? My intention isn't to compare marijuana to any other drug. I am simply saying that [i]any[/i] drug used in excess can be dangerous. I have no doubt that sensible marijuana use is [i]not[/i] dangerous -- but [b]excessive[/b] use [b]can be[/b] dangerous. I hope that clarifies my position further.[/color] [quote name='Syk3']Weekly or bi-weekly? Doubtful.[/quote] [color=#334366]That kind of tells me that you do have an interest in supporting marijuana here. I mean, I don't think you are as objective as you say. ~_^ But I'm just using an example there. There are so many factors to be considered -- and this is why I wasn't getting into a long and drawn-out debate in the other thread. Obviously the effects of marijuana depend on more thtan how often you smoke it. But again (and again), I haven't said otherwise.[/color] [quote=Syk3] I don't see how you could say that ecstasy, a drug that will kill you if you drink too much or not enough water, is possibly safe. Regardless of the fact that you need to be fully responsible when using it (which in itself is difficult to survive), there's really no comparison to marijuana. [/quote] [color=#334366]Wait a minute. I [i]never[/i] said that it was safe. Don't start twisting my words here. I said that it was "possibly safe if you know how to use it". In that sense, it compares directly to marijuana. How? Responsible use. If you use something in a responsible manner, you're far less likely to suffer serious consequences. If you abuse a substance, you're more likely to suffer serious consequences. [b]That[/b] is the essence of what I am saying. I am therefore not advocating or debating the legalization or validity of using marijuana in general. I am simply saying that marijuana is a drug, it has health risks associated with it (as does eating potato chips, as you accurately pointed out) and that with [b]any[/b] of these substances/foods/whatever, [b]responsible use[/b] is the key. That is really what is underscoring my whole philosophy here. Edit: Before I go, I will leave you with some information about marijuana, gathered from Harvard.[/color] [quote=Harvard.edu Report:]Marijuana has often been touted as one of the safest recreational substances available. This is perhaps true; many reputable scientific studies support the conclusion that cocaine, heroine, alcohol, and even cigarettes are more dangerous to the user?s health than marijuana. In addition, the celebrated pharmacological properties of cannabis have led thirty-six states to permit its use as a therapeutic drug for, among others, those suffering from AIDS; various painful, incurable and debilitating illnesses; the harmful side effects of cancer chemotherapy, and glaucoma. Additional research is being conducted concerning the use of marijuana on the treatment of anxiety and mental disorders. [/quote] [color=#334366]I totally agree with this statement, [i]but:[/i][/color] [quote name='Harvard.edu Report:']Nonetheless, it would be fallacious to conclude that because the chemicals in marijuana have been found to present fewer dangers than some very harmful substances, the medical or recreational use of marijuana is perfectly safe. In a recreational context, marijuana has been shown to affect health, brain function, and memory. And in a medical context, marijuana is like any other powerful prescription drug: it has potentially dangerous side effects, and the decision to use it to treat patients must involve the same balancing test as the one required for chemotherapy or AZT: do the therapeutic effects of the drug outweigh its harmful effects? Though there are many more studies to be done on this issue, current data shows that the answer to this question may not always be "yes."[/quote] [color=#334366]This study (as all should) acknowledge that more tests and research need to be done. But to say that there are no consequences just isn't correct.[/color] [quote=Harvard.edu Report:]EFFECTS OF HABITUAL MARIJUANA USE ON THE IMMUNE SYSTEM The most potent argument against the use of marijuana to treat medical disorders is that marijuana may cause the acceleration or aggravation of the very disorders it is being used to treat. Smoking marijuana regularly (a joint a day) can damage the cells in the bronchial passages which protect the body against inhaled microorganisms and decrease the ability of the immune cells in the lungs to fight off fungi, bacteria, and tumor cells. For patients with already weakened immune systems, this means an increase in the possibility of dangerous pulmonary infections, including pneumonia, which often proves fatal in AIDS patients. Studies further suggest that marijuana is a general "immunosuppressant" whose degenerative influence extends beyond the respiratory system. Regular smoking has been shown to materially affect the overall ability of the smoker?s body to defend itself against infection by weakening various natural immune mechanisms, including macrophages (a.k.a. "killer cells") and the all-important T-cells. Obviously, this suggests the conclusion, which is well-supported by scientific studies, that the use of marijuana as a medical therapy can and does have a very serious negative effect on patients with pre-existing immune deficits resulting from AIDS, organ transplantation, or cancer chemotherapy, the very conditions for which marijuana has most often been touted and suggested as a treatment. It has also been shown that marijuana use can accelerate the progression of HIV to full-blown AIDS and increase the occurrence of infections and Kaposi?s sarcoma. In addition, patients with weak immune systems will be even less able to defend themselves against the various respiratory cancers and conditions to which consistent marijuana use has been linked, and which are discussed briefly under "Respiratory Illnesses." In conclusion, it seems that the potential dangers presented by the medical use of marijuana may actually contribute to the dangers of the diseases which it would be used to combat. Therefore, I suggest that marijuana should not be permitted as a therapy, at least until a good deal more conclusive research has been completed concerning its debilitating effect on the immune system. For more on this topic, please see Donald P. Tashkin, M.D., "Effects of Marijuana on the Lung and Its Immune Defenses," Secretary's Youth Substance Abuse Prevention Intiative: Resource Papers, March 1997, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. Pages 33-51 of this address can be found at the website of the Indiana Prevention Resource Center at Indiana University, located at [url]http://www.drugs.indiana.edu/druginfo/tashkin-[/url] marijuana.html. RESPIRATORY ILLNESSES The main respiratory consequences of smoking marijuana regularly (one joint a day) are pulmonary infections and respiratory cancer, whose connection to marijuana use has been strongly suggested but not conclusively proven. The effects also include chronic bronchitis, impairment in the function of the smaller air passages, inflammation of the lung, the development of potentially pre-cancerous abnormalities in the bronchial lining and lungs, and, as discussed, a reduction in the capabilities of many defensive mechanisms within the lungs. Marijuana smoke and cigarette smoke contain many of the same toxins, including one which has been identified as a key factor in the promotion of lung cancer. This toxin is found in the tar phase of both, and it should be noted that one joint has four times more tar than a cigarette, which means that the lungs are exposed four-fold to this toxin and others in the tar. It has been concretely established that smoking cigarettes promotes lung cancer (which causes more than 125,000 deaths in the US every year), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (chronic bronchitis and emphysema) and increased incidence of respiratory tract infections. This implies, but does not establish, that smoking marijuana may lead to some of the same results as smoking cigarettes. It is notable that several reports indicate an unexpectedly large proportion ofmarijuana users among cases of lung cancer and cancers of the oral cavity,pharynx, and larynx. Thus, it appears that the use of marijuana as a medicine has the potential to further harm an already ill patient in the same way that taking up regular cigarette smoking would, particularly in light of the fact that those patients for whom marijuana is recommended are already poorly equipped to fight off these infections and diseases. For more information, please see the Tashkin website mentioned at the end of the section on immune disorders. See also: [url]www.sarnia.com/GROUPS/ANTIDRUG/mrr/[/url] 21.96.10.html, for information on the link between chemicals contained in marijuana and lung cancer. [url]http://www.marijuananews.com/latest_research_finds_that_heavy.htm[/url], for an article concerning the link between marijuana and cancer, with commentary [b]MENTAL HEALTH, BRAIN FUNCTION, AND MEMORY [/b] It has been suggested that marijuana is at the root of many mental disorders, including acute toxic psychosis, panic attacks (one of the very conditions it is being used experimentally to treat), flashbacks, delusions, depersonalization, hallucinations, paranoia, depression, and uncontrollable aggressiveness. Marijuana has long been known to trigger attacks of mental illness, such as bipolar (manic-depressive) psychosis and schizophrenia. This connection with mental illness should make health care providers for terminally ill patients and the patients themselves, who may already be suffering from some form of clinical depression, weigh very carefully the pros and cons of adopting a therapeutic course of marijuana. In the short term, marijuana use impairs perception, judgment, thinking, memory, and learning; memory defects may persist six weeks after last use. Mental disorders connected with marijuana use merit their own category in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV, published by the American Psychiatric Association. These include Cannabis Intoxication (consisting of impaired motor coordination, anxiety, impaired judgment, sensation of slowed time, social withdrawal, and often includes perceptual disturbances; Cannabis Intoxication Delirium (memory deficit, disorientation); Cannabis Induced Psychotic Disorder, Delusions; Cannabis Induced Psychotic Disorder, Hallucinations; and Cannabis Induced Anxiety Disorder. In addition, marijuana use has many indirect effects on health. Its effect on coordination, perception, and judgment means that it causes a number of accidents, vehicular and otherwise. [/quote] [color=#334366]This page also recommends various resources, which I'll look at as well. The last three paragraphs there underscore what I've been talking about, in terms of psychiatric links. There's plenty of this information out there if you are willing to look. But I also strongly recommend reading the sections that discuss the pros and cons of theraputic use, based on the type of illness (ie: that theraputic use may be okay in some cases but may cause more problems with specific illnesses, particularly disorders with a mental component). I'm not really interested in getting deeply involved in this debate, because I really don't care very much -- by that I mean, I'm not really anti-marijuana itself. But I think it's at least useful to debunk the idea that it's a harmless substance.[/color]

[QUOTE=Dagger IX1]Then start one! Or else I'll be forced to. Yeah, this thread is pretty entertaining. I've really enjoyed reading all of the comments, responses to comments and totally unexpected side debates. :p ~Dagger~[/QUOTE] [color=#334366]There was a big push to start a yaoi/shounen-ai (or whatever it's called) sub-forum a while ago. The only reason that I didn't go ahead with it was mostly because I felt that such threads would be fine in Anime Lounge (ie: I didn't think we had enough fans to support it here). Now that we have a "one forum, one official thread" type system, it probably won't happen. But from what I've seen in AL, there have been a few good threads on that genre. And yes, this is the type of thread that shows what Otaku Lounge can be. It's got debate, humor and everything in between. This is what I want OL to be like -- serious debates are fine, but it's great when people are mature enough to jump in and out of discussion while still keeping within the general theme of the topic. Good stuff, y'all. :blulaugh: [/color]

[color=#334366]We can't physically put Moderator names on the category bar; they just won't fit. And I think it would look unappealing. The main priority is to put the Team pages up. We haven't done that so far because it requires a special backroom system to be developed. But once it's done, it should make staff lists much easier to view and access.[/color]

[color=#334366]Besides, an online quiz said that I'm a "nerdslut". So I clearly have nothing against dorks -- in fact, I'm constantly trying to go on dates with them. So yeah. I'm allowed to use the word. ~_^[/color]

[color=#334366]Phew. International crisis adverted. ~_^ Don't worry, Azure. No hard feelings. OB wouldn't be OB without a good whinge now and then, afterall. Anyway, the whole Moderator discussion has come up at an interesting time. OB7.5 will probably see a reasonably big round of new staff intake. And if certain things go well, we could more than double our staff (and that doesn't include Moderators). So, although I don't really tend to hire people who make it obvious that they want to be staff (because I think those people are doing it for the wrong reasons and don't understand my intentions), I am still somewhat interested to see people's views on Moderation in general. Sometimes people are good candidates but I may not approach them because they may seem totally disinterested in the idea -- that's not usually the case, but sometimes it is. Besides, OB is a unique place. I tend to think that the staff here have the kind of job that goes beyond Moderation itself anyway.[/color]

[color=#334366]Oh, Azure. I give up. Now you're getting all uber-PC on me, by taking offense at my dorky comment. Geeze. lol Nobody is linking to that thread to annoy you. Really...there's just no need to make such a big deal out of it. As I said, if this really bothers you...then you must not have a lot to worry about in general. Let it go. It's okay. ^_^[/color]

[QUOTE=AzureWolf][FONT=book antiqua][SIZE=2][COLOR=blue] Anyway, now that I'm through that drivel for good, time to address the real replies. :therock: Are you, like, doing this on purpose or what? Also, I don't know why you think considering something and it's cause (that probably took the total thinking time of a minute at most) equates to having too much time on one's hands (the most time was probably spent trying to form words for what I was thinking). Does it really matter what I choose to discuss in my free time? "To each his own." Last, I think you misunderstood my point: I'm not envious, haha. I'll elaborate in my reply to Shy's post. [/QUOTE][/color][/font][/size] [color=#334366]Because this is a really, [i]really[/i] lame conversation. lol Who cares if Moderators link to a private thread? As Drix pointed out, it doesn't matter. At all. lol As has been pointed out, the Nifty Fifty isn't about democracy or something. It's about trying to find things that were nifty/noteable and having a committee that takes the pool of information and comes up with final results. Why let such a small thing bother you? Just ignore the links if you don't like them. I'm getting sick to death of the OB parodies here, but I have stopped visiting them for the most part - ignoring stuff works, sometimes. I don't mind people making reference to the staff forum, so long as important private information isn't shared. The only way I can see someone disliking the linkage is if they are feeling put out that they can't see the forum themselves, as if someone is waving something in front of their face. But I don't think that's the intention and even if it was, it's a really silly/lame issue to even worry about. So yeah. I just think the whole conversation is incredibly redundant. My point about having too much time on your hands relates to the fact that you are writing these long posts and taking such a ridiculous topic so seriously. As I've said before, "it's just a message board". ~_^[/color]

[color=#334366]At this point, I think it'd probably be cool to let that conversation continue via PM. Although this has been an interesting tangent, it might be a good idea to try to get back to the subject of the thread. I want to ask you a question. Have you ever been accused of cheating to win a game? I mean, accused of cheating even when you haven't cheated? This happened to me a few times with one of my brother's friends. He'd frequently lose multiplayer games and he'd accuse everyone else of cheating. It got pretty tiresome, so much so that nobody wanted to play with him anymore, lol. I find those things annoying. They aren't exactly serious, but they can still be a problem.[/color]

[QUOTE=Morpheus] Now look at you, you are defending a dangerous drug that is hurting you at this moment and could leave you with lasting damage. Why take that risk?[/QUOTE] [color=#334366]I can't speak for Zeta, but as I said earlier, it comes down to responsible use. It's quite possible to use marijuana or alcohol or whatever in a responsible way and not suffer lasting consequences. But again, I don't know Zeta's habits, so I have no idea. lol But I do think it's important not to necessarily apply a blanket standard to every person who uses marijuana, you know? I mean, I'd tend to seperate the drug itself from people's useage of it. In this thread I have been clarifying the point about the substance itself, but how people use it is another question I think.[/color]

[quote name='Zeta']The reason I have yet to believe that is because I have seen no articles concerning it. I have seen articles saying that those with it pre-determined or all ready have it have had problems. Show me the proof. Show me a conclusive test that says it doesn't run in tehri family, or they don't have it all ready. You can do LSD, PCP, AMT for your whole life, and not develope paranoid schizophrenia or other mental disorders. And those are all powerful hallucinigens in and of themselves. You have a much higher chance of contracting disorders from those drugs, not marijuana.[/quote] [color=#334366]I don't have any links that I can show you; I've read news reports (and seen plenty on television), but I'm not aware of anything on the Internet. I'll see what I can find, though. But be careful. Note that I'm not comparing marijuana to other drugs here. Saying that one drug is more powerful than another is just a way of shifting responsibility. There is definitely evidence that marijuana can significantly compound minor illnesses (particularly with manic depression), but there is also evidence that people can actually develop mental illness through heavy longterm use of the substance. It kind of doesn't surprise me that this may not be so well known in America though, if only because America's drug education system seems to be a little weird. I'm not even sure if any of these studies have been undertaken in the United States -- I assume they have. But I know they've definitely been undertaken in Australia and other countries.[/color]

[QUOTE=Zeta] I am still curious as to the validity of these mental disorders. I know that they can cause further problems if you are pre-determined to the illness, or all ready have it. I have yet to see a case where a mental illness as come [i]directly[/i] from smoking marijuana. [/QUOTE] [color=#334366]I'm really surprised that you've yet to see a case where mental illness came directly from smoking marijuana. I thought it was common knowledge, if only due to the plethora of studies out there. I guess not. Mind you, I'm talking about the most extreme cases here. As I said earlier, if someone smokes it occasionally and they are responsible, then most of that information won't be terribly relevant to them. As far as I can tell, the biggest issue here is that people are extreme on both sides. There are people who want to believe that marijuana isn't at all harmful and that it has no longterm health consequences. Those people are wrong. And then there are people who want to condemn marijuana and focus all of their attention on it, while simultaneously ignoring far more dangerous drugs out there (like heroin, for instance, which is still responsible for a large number of deaths). Those people are also wrong. The reason that I even inject myself into these discussions is because I know I don't have an axe to grind. I personally don't smoke marijuana (I wouldn't want someone to be put through the torture of kissing me while I have marijuana on the breath, lol), but by the same token, I don't really care if friends choose to smoke it. I know they're responsible and I know that they treat these things with the respect that they deserve. I suppose that's the most anyone can ask for.[/color]

[QUOTE] Marijuana doesn't have the impact that you make it out to have, lol. Having been a long time user, every day mind you, nothing is wrong with me. I know thirty year olds who have been smoking since there teens, nothing is wrong with them. You don't even have to smoke it, lol. You can entirely avoid the smoke entering you. It is the safest drug of all the illegal drugs.[/quote] [color=#334366]But see, you have an interest in peddling a point of view. That is to say, you have an interest in justifying the "safeness" of the drug. If you've experienced no problems, that's great. Wonderful. But there are studies that suggest that longterm marijuana use can lead to both minor (depression/chemical imbalances -- if you could call those things minor) and major (various forms of skitzophrenia) mental disorders. We can sit here and debate about how you inhale the smoke or whether you eat it as a cookie or whatever, until we both die of old age. But it's useless trying to say that the substance itself isn't harmful. I am [i]not[/i] saying that it's "the most harmful drug" and I'm not trying to compare it to ecstacy or anything else, in terms of its impact. I am simply saying that it [i]is[/i] a substance that hurts your body and that [i]can[/i] have longterm consequences. Believe me, I'm not an alarmist with this sort of thing -- I have no interest in making something out to be what it isn't. I'm only telling you the truth. There are obviously varying degrees of impact, depending on how you use something and how much you use it. But that's not a debate I'm entering into. As far as I'm concerned, that issue comes down to the individual -- ie: how much a person is willing to put themselves at risk. Obviously people can drink alcohol occasionally and not suffer any longterm consequences (and in fact, small doses of alcohol have proven beneficial effects). But we also know that very heavy and longterm use and lead to serious problems. In that context, marijuana is absolutely no different. Nor is any harmful drug. But again, let's be clear: I am not trying to suggest that marijuana is more or less dangerous than any other drug. I am simply saying that there [i]are[/i] dangers associated with it, based on various factors. Those who suggest that it's entirely harmless are simply ignorant, plain and simple. I don't know of any marijuana user (and I do know several, including a best friend) who would sit there and tell me that it isn't at all dangerous or harmful. But by the same token, those people are sensible with their use. And that's what it comes down to, ultimately.[/color]

[font=Verdana][size=2][color=black]It looks like 2005 is going to be a pretty good year for movies. Already, there are quite a few that I'm looking forward to. I thought this thread would be a good opportunity to share your thoughts on this year's upcoming films and to talk about what you're most looking forward to. I'll get the ball rolling.[/color][/size] [font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [font=Verdana][size=2][b]Note: Each icon/poster links to the trailer page for each film. So if you are curious, you can just click the posters to view the relevant trailers.[/b][/size][/font] [center][url="http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/charliechocolatefactory/"][img]http://movies.apple.com/trailers/wb/images/charlieandthechocolatefactory_poster.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center][b][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font][/b] [/center] [center][b][font=Verdana][size=2]Charlie and the Chocolate Factory[/size][/font][/b][/center] [center][font=Verdana][size=1][b]Directed By: [/b]Tim Burton[/size][/font][/center] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]For me (and for those of you who loved the novel), this one surely has to be a no-brainer. It's based directly on the book (it even shows how Wonka found the Oompa-Loompas, which the original movie didn't). And of course, it contains the visual talent of Tim Burton and combines that with the acting talent of Johnny Depp.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]It was reported that Marilyn Manson was originally slated to play Wonka (which would have been fantastic), but Depp will apparently be basing Wonka off Manson, in terms of mannerisms and so on. I think that's most cool, afterall, Wonka is a pretty twisted guy -- particuarly in the novel.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]I tend to think that Burton and Dahl are pretty similar people in terms of their views on children's fiction, so I'm really hoping for the best with this release.[/size][/font][/left] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/corpse_bride/"][img]http://movies.apple.com/trailers/wb/images/corpse_bride_poster.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center][b][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font][/b] [/center] [center][b][font=Verdana][size=2]Corpse Bride[/size][/font][/b][/center] [center][font=Verdana][size=1][b]Directed By: [/b]Tim Burton[/size][/font][/center] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]This one's been a long time coming. It's nice to have two big Burton films in one year. And this would have to be my second most-wanted, I'd say.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]The story seems pretty cliche, to some degree, but it looks like it'll be a great deal of fun. The trailer really seems to be filled with Burton's humor and the cast is going to be ideal for this film. It's also great to see a return to stop-motion animation (even though it could be argued that this movie could have been done just as well with CGI). The sheer fact that it is using such an incredibly laborious and difficult animation process is part of the charm, I think. Definitely something to watch out for.[/size][/font][/left] [center] [/center] [center][url="http://www.apple.com/trailers/dreamworks/the_ring_two/trailer/"][img]http://movies.apple.com/trailers/dreamworks/images/the_ring_two_poster.jpg[/img][/url][/center] [center][b][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font][/b] [/center] [center][b][font=Verdana][size=2]The Ring Two[/size][/font][/b][/center] [center][font=Verdana][size=1][b]Directed By:[/b] Hideo Nakata[/size][/font][/center] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]There's a bit of back story to this one.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]The Ring, as you all know, was based on Ring (but for clarity's sake, I'll call it "Ringu"), the Japanese horror film. The Ring had a noteably different story and contained elements of Ringu 2. Ultimately it came out pretty well and managed to work well against the original.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]So when it came time to do The Ring 2 (and without Gore Verbinski, the original director), two things became apparent. One, the movie would need a new story and two, it'd need a new director.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]Several directors were passed over and eventually, Hideo Nakata himself took the helm. Nakata is the man who created the original Ringu movies (which themselves are based on a Japanese novel). Nakata successfully blended elements of Japanese mythology into the story, while combining that with unique modern elements (ie: television/video tape).[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]So, Nakata was chosen to direct The Ring 2. If you've seen the trailer, you can probably tell that the movie is already visually different from Verbinski's effort. However, even with a small budget on the Japanese films, Nakata managed to create some very frightening and disturbing sequences (note the ending of the Japanese film versus the American film -- big difference, with the Japanese version being a lot more disturbing). [/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]Considering what he can do with a small budget, one can only wonder how well he'll do with a much bigger budget. Add Naomi Watts to the formula (who really made the original what it was -- without her I doubt it'd have been as enjoyable) and you have a recipe for success. Fingers crossed for this one.[/size][/font][/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2][/size][/font] [/left] [left][font=Verdana][size=2]Anyway, those are probably my three big ones. But there's definitely more. I'll give it a rest for the moment though, so you guys can make your own suggestions -- I'm sure there are plenty of movies that some of you can talk about in more detail (ie: Sin City, Star Wars III, etc...)[/size][/font][/font][/left]

[QUOTE=Syk3] there has never been any research to indisputably prove that longterm use of marijuana in general has a harmful impact on your body, other than what I mentioned about the lungs. But like I said.. better alternatives. [/QUOTE] [color=#334366]That's not entirely true. There have been longterm studies in Australia, which have demonstrated that longterm marijuana use can lead to severe mental disorders. Pound-for-pound, it might be possible to suggest that tabacco is more dangerous, because tabacco can actually cause a wide variety of problems. For instance, it was recently reported that tabacco use can thin out the aorta to the point where it is more prone to bursting. But having said that, even medium term use of marijuana can cause mild to moderate mental side effects. I mean, I've definitely met plenty of medium-term marijuana smokers...and I don't think anyone would want to argue that the drug hasn't significantly affected their consciousness and behavior. So, I think it's important to say two things. One, long term use of [i]any[/i] drug (alcohol, tabacco, marijuana) is dangerous. But two, marijuana should not be classed as some kind of "safe drug" that does no harm. Be careful with that side of it -- there are plenty of people who are trying to advocate that position, and they have no real interest in presenting the facts about the dangers of the drug. There are definitely people on both sides who want to advocate particular positions. So obviously, the general advice should be "don't do drugs at all". Any drug is dangerous if used enough. But if one is going to smoke (tabacco or marijuana), that person really should be informed about what it's doing to their body. People who suggest that marijuana is harmless and that a weekly or bi-weekly smoke is fine, are in the dark, in the sense that they are ignorant about the impact. Having said that, I don't think that the government always approaches these things properly. There are plenty of other dangerous drugs that don't get much attention. For example, ecstacy -- that drug is somewhat safe, if you know how to use it. But many kids don't. And that's why so many of them get taken to hospital or die; as a result of ignorance about it. Anyway, to link this back up to the topic at hand -- I agree that many teenagers have probably been falsely accused. I was once accused of smoking by the son of my dad's workmate. But he only pointed me out because he was in trouble for smoking. He later admitted that he'd pointed me out just to get the heat off himself, lol.[/color]