To co wyprawiaja Amerykanie ze swoja wolnoscia u siebie, to jest to parodia, groteska i karytura razem wziete, ze nawet sam Mohomet moglby wybuchnac smiechem. Kumpel doniosl z HAmeryki, ze tam poszukujac pracy trzeba biegac z resume i probowka na mocz. Nie oddasz moczu, to nie dostaniesz pracy. Dziwna jest ta "amerykanska wolnosc".
W Ameryce jakas firma zaczela produkowac sztuczne siurki. Mezczyzna kupowal sobie takiego i nosil razem z prawdziwym. Jak byla lapanka, czy inna nagonka, czy szukalo sie pracy to zawsze swierzutki, syntetyczny, z juz odpowiednia temperaturka mocz byl gotowy do oddania do probowki. Po prostu na oczach "policjanta" wyciagalo sie drugiego siurka i sikalo.
Doszly mnie sluchy, ze podobno rzad amerykanski zabronil produkcji tych siurkow. Zawsze mnie ta "amerykanska wolnosc" fascynowala.
The Whizzinator (http://www.whizzinator.com).
Marihuana jest tak groznym narkotykiem jak tyton. Z tym ze tyton zabija dziesiatki tysiecy obywateli Kanady rocznie. Ostatnie badania wykazuja, ze w kwestji raka pecherza moczowego, marihuana moze byc nawet grozniejsza od tytoniu. Palacz wypalajacy jednego skreta z marihuany dziennie przez 48 lat, lub dwa dziennie przez 24 lata, ma az 19.3% wiecej szans dostania raka pecherza od niepalacza.
Most Doctors Mishandling Teen Drug Tests
Tue Feb 7. 11:47 PM ET
TUESDAY, Feb. 7 (HealthDay News) - Urine tests aimed at detecting teen drug abuse are more widely used than ever before, but a new study suggests most doctors don't have enough training to ensure test results are correct and unadulterated.
According to experts, a properly collected urine sample includes: making sure those being tested provide identification; having patients empty their pockets and use the bathroom without running water; checking the sample immediately for proper temperature; and placing blue dye in any standing water. Also, a staff member should directly observe the patient as they provide the sample, or at least be present inside the bathroom.
But when researchers at Harvard Medical School and Children's Hospital in Boston surveyed of 360 primary-care doctors, they found that most reported failed to use these techniques when collecting urine samples from kids aged 12 to 18. Many were also unaware of the tests' limitations.
"This study shows that although most primary-care physicians order urine drug tests, most do not use recommended procedures for urine tests collection, validation and confirmation, and lack the knowledge needed to correctly interpret positive and negative results," the study authors wrote in the February issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.
The study found that only 23 percent of doctors used an effective method of collecting urine samples and only 10 percent knew that nitrous oxide, ecstasy and oxycodone could not be detected in standard urine tests. Sixty-one percent of the doctors gave the incorrect answer or said "don't know" when asked if secondhand exposure to marijuana smoke would bring about a positive result on a urine drug test.
"Physicians and parents may be falsely reassured that their child is not using a particular drug when the child never underwent proper testing," the Boston team conclude. On the other hand, "misinterpretation of a false-positive finding can put adolescents at risk for false accusation of substance use and diminished trust from parents, school personnel and counselors" (Rogers Yahoo News - http://news.yahoo.com/s/hsn/20060208/hl_hsn/mostdoctorsmishandlingteendrugtests;_ylt=AiPlDBig8Fwiwuz14nyyHER.3QA).
San Francisko Chronicle
EDITORIAL
Marijuana madness
Thursday, December 29, 2005
AMERICAN LAW enforcement has a proud tradition of courageous souls standing up against corrupt and dangerous criminal elements. Think Eliot Ness, the federal agent who prosecuted Al Capone, or Frank Serpico, the New York cop who at great personal risk exposed dirty cops within his department.
Then think about the new focus of American law enforcement - marijuana - and ask yourself if the expense of arresting, prosecuting and jailing offenders makes sense.
The Marijuana Policy Project crunched U.S. Justice Department statistics for arrests in 2004 and found that there were more arrests for marijuana possession - 684,319 - than for all violent crimes combined. The Washington Post reported in May that the Sentencing Project, another think tank, "found that the proportion of heroin and cocaine cases plummeted from 55 percent of all drug arrests in 1992 to less than 30 percent 10 years later." While Americans might think law enforcement has mobilized to fight dangerous drugs that can lead to fatal overdoses and kill users, the study found that marijuana arrests rose to 45 percent of drug arrests.
Here in California, federal agents have raided a string of medical-marijuana clubs, including a South of Market club in San Francisco, and seized plants grown to supply the clubs. No doubt some of the raided clubs have catered to users who just want to get high. They also serve sick people.
Members of the Santa Cruz Wo/Men's Alliance for Medical Marijuana - raided by the feds in 2003 - have argued that marijuana enables them to use fewer high-powered narcotics like Oxycontin. California voters approved a medical-marijuana initiative in 1996 precisely because Californians don't want their tax dollars to pay for the arrest and prosecution of people who use marijuana to control their pain, increase their appetite or address other symptoms.
Estimates as to the cost of the war on drugs vary, with the Washington Post figuring the cost to be some $35 billion a year. Are taxpayers getting their money's worth? No.
In a report commissioned by Taxpayers for Common Sense, Boston University economist Jeffrey A. Miron estimated that the federal government spent a cumulative total of $257 billion (in 2003 dollars) over three decades on anti-drug efforts, and some $3.67 billion in 2004 on programs designed to reduce marijuana use. Still, Miron wrote, "Marijana-use rates are little different now than in 1975."
Republicans in Congress have been scrambling to cut federal spending to reduce a record deficit. Their 2006 Deficit Reduction Act would cut a paltry $40 billion over five years. If they want to find more savings, they should look to dubious spending on the dubious war on drugs - to the high cost of incarcerating first-time nonviolent drug offenders, of mandating longer sentences for crack cocaine than powder cocaine and of using federal clout to raid medical-marijuana clubs, prosecute offenders and house them in prison. Cut these programs and Washington could move this country closer to what President H. W. Bush announced as his goal, "a kinder, gentler" America (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/12/29/EDGG6GDPDI1.DTL).
Pot smokers at risk of bladder cancer: study
MIDDLE-AGED MEN TESTED
NEW YORK * Pot smokers could be putting themselves at risk for developing bladder cancer, according to the results of a study of middle-aged men who were seen at two U.S. Veterans Administration facilities.
Marijuana smoking "might be an even more potent stimulant" of malignancy than cigarette smoking. Dr. Martha K. Terris of the Medical College of Georgia in Augusta and her colleagues write in the medical journal Urology.
Dr. Terris and her team point out that head and neck and lung cancers have been tied to marijuana use, and there is evidence that these marijuana-associated malignancies may strike at an earlier age.
To determine whether marijuana use might also be associated with bladder cancer, she and her colleagues evaluated 52 men with the disease who were all younger than 60 years, along with 104 age-matched controls.
Among the men with bladder cancer, 88.5% were habitual marijuana smokers, compared with 69.2% the control group.
The average quantity of marijuana use also was higher in the men with bladder cancer, the investigators found. The cancer group clocked up an average of 48 joint-years per patient - i.e., the individuals smoked the equivalent of one joint a day for 48 years, or two joints a day for 24 years, etc. - while the comparison group reported an average of 28.5 joint-years.
Tobacco use was also heavy among the study subjects, with more than 90% of the men in either group using tobacco, making it impossible to identify any link between cigarettes and cancer risk.
Marijuana could be more cancer-promoting than tobacco, the investigators note, given its longer half-life (up to 60 hours versus 12 hours) and the fact that marijuana is smoked without a filter and held longer in the lungs.
The drug also reduces bladder contractility, the researchers add, which could increase urine retention and thus greater exposure of the bladder to marijuana compounds.
The researchers advise that younger patients with symptoms that might suggest bladder cancer, who aren't usually considered at high risk, "should be questioned about a history of marijuana use." If they answer positively, the researchers conclude, it might be advisable to conduct further tests.
Reuters (NATIONAL POST, Saturday, February 4, 2006).
No comments:
Post a Comment