Weed + Music

miroslav said:
Then came the Grunge period during the 1990s, and everyone was smoking weed again.
Click to expand...

Well... and shooting heroin, unfortunately. That was the scourge that took out quite a few in that era. More of them should have just smoked weed, then there would be a lot more of them around. Now everyone just goes to their grandparent's medicine cabinet to pop a bunch of pharmaceuticals. This reflects in their music: Poorly.
 
wkrbee said:
Tobacco and alcohol are "gateway" drugs too-along with Chocolate Chip Cookies.
Click to expand...

Statistically, a lot of people get into hard drugs these days via pain pill prescriptions from their doctors. 3/4 of fatal Opiate overdoses aren't even from street drugs, they're from popping pills and writing terrible yuppie youth music.
 
MrUserNameIV said:
Well... and shooting heroin, unfortunately. That was the scourge that took out quite a few in that era. More of them should have just smoked weed, then there would be a lot more of them around. Now everyone just goes to their grandparent's medicine cabinet to pop a bunch of pharmaceuticals. This reflects in their music: Poorly.
Click to expand...

I mean... it's a shame that Cobain did all that heroin.

I personally don't mind not having to hear more Alice 'n' Chainz tho.
 
miroslav said:
Mmmm.....yeah...just pull up any album recorded from about (1967 to about 1980). During the 1980s, it was more to do with lots of cocaine...which is why we ended up with New Wave and Punk. Then came the Grunge period during the 1990s, and everyone was smoking weed again. Of course, when Ecstasy showed up...we got Alt/Indie Rock.
Now days, it's a all over the place...
Click to expand...
Which all speaks for itself, I'm afraid.

At best I think that's something to do while listening, not composing, but to each their own and whatever works I guess.


gecko zzed said:
Tread warily in this thread please.

The terms of use (which are here https://homerecording.com/privacy.html)

state that you should not: "Encourage conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, or that may give rise to civil liability"
Click to expand...
It may be illegal in Tasmania, but it's legal at least some places here in the states. ;) (PS I neither endorse nor condemn it personally)


Chuku said:
Not Drugs... Medicine.. Herbs. If you take it regularly it is obviously like Drugs.. In fact too much of any thing is harmful for your body.. But when you do sometimes, it cures your impure mind and soul, Reduces stress, increase your creativity, even kills cancer cells.. So main point is that you get high, can concentrate on particular things, get new ideas which helps to generate new thing in your composition..
Click to expand...

lol @ "kills cancer cells." I suggest not going to Towlie for medical advice. Everything else you said is subjective, to be kind. But again, to each their own.


Greg_L said:
I'm not believing the tales of a pothead. I don't need to google it. I know that there are some things that aren't harmful even in large quantities.
Click to expand...
Pardon sidetracking further, but I'm curious. Like?
 
All I see is "may" do this or that, not "does." It also is only about studies on mice and rats. When something substantial comes out about it working on people, then it makes sense to say "pot kills cancer cells." Until then, it's a foolish and grossly irresponsible thing to say.
 
Here's some comments from the late-great Bowie...talking about the whole drug thing and how it can take over...
...though listen to him at about 4:20...his overall view of his experience.

 
joey2000 said:
All I see is "may" do this or that, not "does." It also is only about studies on mice and rats. When something substantial comes out about it working on people, then it makes sense to say "pot kills cancer cells." Until then, it's a foolish and grossly irresponsible thing to say.
Click to expand...

My point is that it's closed minded to characterize this as "from Towlie". Of course it's not conclusive, but that's largely due to the social bias against the plant having halted research for decades. If a conservative (not in the political sense) organization like the NCI is willing to admit that cannabinoids "may be able to kill cancer cells" the preclinical evidence must be rather strong.

And Choku didn't say it cures cancer. At worst he oversimplified the message, which is pretty standard behavior for humans. You can't take what most people say too literally, though that's also standard human behavior.
 
joey2000 said:
All I see is "may" do this or that, not "does." It also is only about studies on mice and rats. When something substantial comes out about it working on people, then it makes sense to say "pot kills cancer cells." Until then, it's a foolish and grossly irresponsible thing to say.
Click to expand...

Just keep smoking your weed, no one actually cares.
 
Hey, someone should get stoned, then record a cover of Cream's "I'm so glad".
Just change the lyrics to "I'm so stoned"

See? All the songwriting is done for you! All you have to do is get stoned and record it.

I wanna hear it. :D
 
Can we aim higher? Weed is such a stupid drug. It's barely one baby step above cheap beer. Step your game up, people. There are so, so, so many better drugs out there.
 
As a performer I don't find weed very beneficial, it makes me feel less confident and energetic. That being said it's a great cure for headaches, insomnia, nausea, and boredom.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
My point is that it's closed minded to characterize this as "from Towlie".
Click to expand...
It was a clumsy joke attempt, my bad. But my point is that's irresponsible and misleading to simply say it "kills cancer cells." There's enough alt-med garbage out there that people put false hopes in as it is.

Of course it's not conclusive, but that's largely due to the social bias against the plant having halted research for decades.
Click to expand...
No, it's inconclusive because study after study have shown it to be.

If a conservative (not in the political sense) organization like the NCI is willing to admit that cannabinoids "may be able to kill cancer cells" the preclinical evidence must be rather strong.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call "may" a strong statement. Again, it's inconclusive......AND it's only with rodents. Zero effectiveness has been shown with people.

And Choku didn't say it cures cancer.
Click to expand...
Whether he meant to or not I can't say, but that's how it comes off. When you say something "kills cancer cells," it's reasonable to conclude it cures cancer.

Except it doesn't.



Greg_L said:
Just keep smoking your weed, no one actually cares.
Click to expand...
I don't, but thanks for the idiotic, douchebag comment. Perhaps you should start, since your "better drugs" don't seem to be doing much for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top