Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jude]

Yeah, weed is about as harmful as alcohol, if not less, since it doesn't cause dependency to anywhere even close to the degree alcohol does. The main reason for people thinking it needs to be illegal, is that it IS illegal.

That said, I don't like it. It always makes me feel like my mind quits working and just runs in 3-second circles for a couple hours and like I'm floating away from everything and can't reconnect. Presumably it doesn't have that effect on everyone since some people get high all the damn time, but I'll stick to my drank.

[Wiles]

Yeah the effects vary from person to person, but also from plant to plant. I think the sativa and indica varieties have a different "high". The quality of the stuff you have changes the effect too. For people who are using it medicinally I don't think the goal for many is to get high, but to get to the point where you get the beneficial effects without being too "stoned".

But yeah, I didn't like the way it made me feel when I tried it either. Though if my health ever got bad again I might consider it. I would certainly rather try it than some prescription opioid.

[Agdune]

The downside of smoking pot is that, if you're pre-disposed to paranoid Schizophrenia it will invariably be triggered, as opposed to only having 'some chance' of the symptoms develop in your adult life. It doesn't make you more likely to develop the condition, but if you had a chance of getting it, it turns into a definite with pot use. I used to work in disability services and pretty well 2/3rds of our clients with paranoid Schizophrenia were heavy pot smokers.

Still, it's no worse than chronic alcohol abuse. Except one's an addiction, the other's with you for life. Buuut, you had a chance of getting it to begin with so... huh. I'm caught in a logic loop.

[Jude]

The downside of smoking pot is that, if you're pre-disposed to paranoid Schizophrenia it will invariably be triggered, as opposed to only having 'some chance' of the symptoms develop in your adult life. It doesn't make you more likely to develop the condition, but if you had a chance of getting it, it turns into a definite with pot use.

Oh wow

According to which set of peer reviewed studies

I used to work in disability services and pretty well 2/3rds of our clients with paranoid Schizophrenia were heavy pot smokers.

Have you ever heard of this phrase called "correlation does not imply causation"

I'm assuming not

[ChairmanPoo]

IIRC in psychiatry class we were told that it speeds up the apparition of schizophrenia, but doesn't per se increase the incidence (aka: you might get it sooner, but you were going to get it anyway)

[Jude]

IIRC in psychiatry class we were told that it speeds up the apparition of schizophrenia, but doesn't per se increase the incidence (aka: you might get it sooner, but you were going to get it anyway)

Whatever psychiatry class you were in sounds like BS

show me some studies that clearly indicate causation

[LegoLord]

IIRC in psychiatry class we were told that it speeds up the apparition of schizophrenia, but doesn't per se increase the incidence (aka: you might get it sooner, but you were going to get it anyway)

Whatever psychiatry class you were in sounds like BS

show me some studies that clearly indicate causation

I think this sort of response is a bit uncalled for.  One, what Poo said he learned in class (a class that, if I'm not mistaken, is supposed to prepare students for a career, being a non-high school course) is an entirely possible occurrence.  It's not like he's suggesting stool softener causes brain tumors; THC actually does do it's work in the brain from what I understand, so it's not unreasonable to suggest that it may adversely affect those with a different brain chemistry (granted I'm no doctor and can't say how much this is the case with Schizophrenia).

Two, to take that one piece of information about the course and making an such an assumption about the entirety of the course doesn't exactly suggest confidence in your own argument.  Especially considering there was no real provocation for such an insult.  Not to mention, if he does in fact come up with what you ask for, it would likely be embarrassing for you.

[Zironic]

Just legalize it already, if its actually helping in some respects then why ban it?

Cigarettes are completely bad for you and don't even make you feel good yet they are still legal....

1) They aren't sure just how beneficial it is, and even if what the studies show is correct, smoking it for recreation probably isn't terribly good for you anyway.
2) Sadly that is a case in which a drug has managed to get itself entrenched in the economy before it's negative effects could be discovered.

Marijuana is illegal because hemp is a superior paper making material and paper companies at the time feared it eating away at lucrative contracts with lumbermills.

[Jude]

THC actually does do it's work in the brain from what I understand, so it's not unreasonable to suggest that it may adversely affect those with a different brain chemistry (granted I'm no doctor and can't say how much this is the case with Schizophrenia).

It isn't technically "unreasonable to suggest that it may" do something but unless you have empirical evidence for such a conclusion, then stating it would be real dumb

Not to mention, if he does in fact come up with what you ask for, it would likely be embarrassing for you.

Not really then I would change my conclusions based on evidence that's what science is all about

[DJ]

Marijuana is illegal because hemp is a superior paper making material and paper companies at the time feared it eating away at lucrative contracts with lumbermills.

I thought it was the cotton lobby. Hemp fibre can be processed into a good replacement for cotton, and it's cheaper.

[Earthquake Damage]

It isn't technically "unreasonable to suggest that it may" do something but unless you have empirical evidence for such a conclusion, then stating it would be real dumb

To be fair, people generally accept what a professor tells them during lecture.  For good reason, too.  Any so-given fact need not be true, but it's usually (nearly always, even) well-founded if you take the time to research it yourself.

[ChairmanPoo]

Gee, how about you do your own research, Jude? IŽll be damned if I spend any significant ammount of time digging article references on a subject I already passed, to convince a guy I don't even know, on a topic about which I care only marginally.

I am under the impression, though, that you have an odd view on how science works. You are rather free with demands for "peer reviewed studies", despite the fact that you haven't quoted any serious sources yourself.
But let's grant you the benefit of doubt and assume that you indeed have some articles stashed up that support your opinion. Now here comes the million dollar question: have you bothered to read any of the opposing literature? Or did you just stick to your guns and merely collect article(s?) which kind of agree with your opinion on the matter?

[Jude]

Gee, how about you do your own research, Jude? IŽll be damned if I spend any significant ammount of time digging article references on a subject I already passed, to convince a guy I don't even know, on a topic about which I care only marginally.

:Shrug: OK well since it's pretty much common knowledge that weed doesn't cause psychosis the burden of proof is on you, but yeah if you don't care about the topic (understandable...I sure wouldn't dig up articles for an internet debate) then don't bother

I am under the impression, though, that you have an odd view on how science works. You are rather free with demands for "peer reviewed studies", despite the fact that you haven't quoted any serious sources yourself.
But let's grant you the benefit of doubt and assume that you indeed have some articles stashed up that support your opinion. Now here comes the million dollar question: have you bothered to read any of the opposing literature? Or did you just stick to your guns and merely collect article(s?) which kind of agree with your opinion on the matter?

I haven't read any literature on the subject, however I have heard of various reviews that have concluded there is no basis for believing weed causes mental health problems, and never heard of any review that found evidence it does - besides which it's pretty much common knowledge

Also the burden of proof is always on the person making the proposition that a connection exists; I say there is not evidence for a significant causal connection and so the burden of proof would be on the position that says there is one

And remember correlation is not causation; just because people with certain mental illnesses smoke a lot of weed does NOT mean the weed caused it. Black people commit a lot more crimes than other ethnic groups but that doesn't mean being black causes you to commit crimes.

[Qloos]

Black people commit a lot more crimes than other ethnic groups.

Provide a source before you say another word.

[Jude]

Black people commit a lot more crimes than other ethnic groups.

Provide a source before you say another word.

Are you really gonna dispute that

I'll revise it to say "within the US, per capita"

and obviously race is not the causal factor

and if you still dont' believe me then I'll tell you that blacks are incarcerated at a far higher rate and we'll use that as the analogy instead