Posted by Viridis on July 24, 2003, at 14:26:12
In reply to Re: Ultram dose, posted by stjames on July 24, 2003, at 13:14:10
I have nothing in particular against pot, but the fact that humans have THC receptors doesn't necessarily mean that people were "intended" to use it. There are all sorts of receptors that were first characterized by response to a particular chemical -- for example, the "nicotinic" receptors bind nicotine (this is how they were first discovered), but I doubt this means that we were intended to smoke tobacco. And in the body, they're not binding to nicotine (unless you introduce it); they respond to other chemicals that have some similarity to nicotine.
In many cases, there's a natural (or synthetic) chemical that's similar enough in some ways to a substance produced in the body that it can bind to the receptors for the body's chemical and activate the cells that have those receptors. Sometimes this is a positive thing, and I don't disagree that THC and other components of marijuana can be beneficial for some people. But again, this doesn't mean that we were "intended" to use it. An awful lot of poisons (especially neurotoxins) interact with receptors in some way, yet obviously this isn't the result of a "need" for these substances.
poster:Viridis
thread:243298
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030723/msgs/244910.html