Teens have access to vastly more potent cannabis than their parents had at their age. Parents need to understand the risks, including psychosis
He “dabbled” with other substances as well (Xanax, Ecstasy)
Yeah sure it’s cannabis… I have no words.
Lmfao, what if we started smoking the green because of low grade psychosis? Chicken or egg that.
Teens have access to vastly more potent cannabis than their parents had at their age
Oh FFS. I’ve been hearing this same bullshit for the last 25 years and it’s still irrational Reefer Madness conservative fearmongering.
So what? If anything, more potent weed is less harmful because you are putting a smaller amount of burned plant material into your lungs to get the same effect.
It’s not like people just… consume one marijuana and however high that gets you, that’s what you’re going with today. No, you’re going to continue smoking until you get sufficiently stoned and then stop and put it out.
It doesn’t take long for anyone to figure out how high is too high and how much it takes to get there, and plan accordingly.
It might be a vape pen with 92% THC hash oil in it so you take a couple of sippy little puffs and get mildly buzzed and you’re fine with that. Or conversely you can pack up a handful of that leafy brown prohibition-era crap and do gravity bongs until you cough your lungs out, and get a lot higher, because that was your goal.
They sell those oil-soaked kif-encrusted joints here. You do not want to finish one in one sitting. The point of these isn’t to get insanely baked, it’s that one good hit will do it and you can put it out and save it in the glass jar it came in.
As others have explained already- if you have the kind of brain prone to psychosis, weed is likely to push you over the edge- and that’s likely to happen when you’re a teenager, because lots of people try it at that age- but something else would have triggered it a few years later. And yes it’s just universally worse for adolescent brains. It is already illegal, everywhere it’s legal, for people under 21, which is reasonable. But parents need to parent.
The idea that we can and should protect the kids who are predisposed to go schizo by keeping the available cannabis weak enough that no one can smoke enough of it to ever get really high is just absurd when you phrase it that way but that’s exactly what anyone pushing this “It’s so much more potent now!” pearl-cluching FUD is trying to sell you.
If anything, more potent weed is less harmful because you are putting a smaller amount of burned plant material into your lungs to get the same effect.
Yes. The actual issue is the THC/CBD ratio, CBD being antipsychotic as well as blocking the metabolisation of THC into more psychoactive variants.
Add to that criminalisation and the desire of dealers to impress clueless customers with head highs and you get selective breeding for high-THC strains. I’d say the main reason I stopped back in the days was because there was essentially nothing but white willow on the market, ~20% THC ~1% CBD. And that’s not even the worst of the strains.
Hopefully legalisation cuts back on that BS, with every satchel coming with test results showing people how off-kilter or balanced the weed is. There’s certainly no shortage of CBD-heavy seeds available, the market is obviously there.
The link between diabetics and insulin is real
These Zelda games are getting out of hand
As a someone who studied biology: at an early age, you don’t want more neuroplasticity. You already have enough. More may do you harm, and cannabis gives more, so cannabis may do you harm.
When you’re 70 and your neural networks are set in stone, do consider what could safely increase neuroplasticity. But whatever you consume, don’t consume it by inhaling smoke. :)
Calling bullshit on this one.edit: misread
Yeah gummies or die
Op saying that 70 year people don’t need neuro plasticity is one of the dumbest things I’ve read today and I’ve been on Reddit.
This reactionary comment gives me flashbacks of reddit
OP said the exact opposite of that
That’s not what OP wrote though.
lemmy did not get Reddit’s best and brightest 😭
oh right, my bad. That was quite a spaghetti of a sentence tho
I worked inpatient psych for a long time, and can tell you first-hand the link between psychosis and cannabis is real. No, this does not mean “if you smoke weed you’re going to get psychotic!” What it does mean is that if you’re someone with a genetic predisposition for schizophrenia (e.g. you have a known family history) weed is a potential trigger for a psychotic episode. If someone has already developed schizophrenia, smoking weed can make their symptoms worse and more difficult to manage with medications.
80% of people coming through the psych hospital, whatever, I don’t care if you smoke weed. Honestly, I wish people would smoke weed rather than use meth, K2, or a bunch of other drugs that fuck people up. But for that subset of people prone to psychotic episodes, the conversation centers around “some people can smoke weed and be fine, and you are not one of those people.”
The most common ages for men to develop first episode psychosis are 18-25, and while it’s dumb that this article focuses on teenagers, the risk in that age group is genuinely higher. This article really is dumb overall and does not explain any of this well
Hey I work in inpatient psych too and want to back you up. It’s totally a known observation that patients have been coming in younger and younger. And it’s very common to see a history of drug use of some kind (yeah usually for kids it’s weed, if not polysubstance).
Sad to see because once they start coming back to the hospital a few times, it’s like they’re in the system so to speak. Too many kids don’t break out of that cycle. I always discharge kids like, “I hope to never see you again. Don’t come back here” lol.
The article, most of all, misses that it’s about CBD to THC ratio, not raw overall cannabinoid content. CBD is an antipsychotic and on the cusp of getting the stamp of approval for treating schizophrenia. Strains on the street, in the meantime, have been bred for THC at the expense of CBD because it’s THC which gives a head-high, makes consumers believe they got strong stuff.
The deeper question, overall, is why we live in a society which prompts people to take anxiolytics to cope.
I also work inpatient psych, doing admission evaluations. Anecdotally, it seems like my patients who report using synthetics and distillates get the worst psychotic symptoms while under the influence. I’m guessing the delta-8 edibles and vaporizers they’re buying legally from local shops probably contain no CBD at all.
I smoked heavily in college, now I do like two hits of a joint once in a while because it was giving me anxiety attacks.
I never been so fucked up as when I tried HHC thinking it was like CBD, and when I say fucked up I mean FUCKED UP, like suicidal ideation, deep depressive toughs, disconnect from reality and so on.
I linked below a systematic review where many of the studies do find this to be the case.
Just to add to your (excellent) comment; in the UK you can be prescribed medical marijuana but it has to be done by a consultant level doctor and a multi disciplinary trial. The most important disqualifying factor is any history of psychosis, if they see that on your medical records they will not write you a prescription.
So I would a assume there is some published medical literature they are following which states cannabis exacerbates the symptoms of psychosis.
I switched from drinking too much alcohol too often (wine, beer, etc) to occasionally dry vaping weed about 8 years ago. And from my mental and physical perspective it was a extreme shift to the better.
So I would even include alcohol in your list.
And I wouldn’t let my kids use weed as long as long as I am capable to control that aspect.
Alcohol can make you feel like shit and can do great damage if used too often, but meth and K2 can fuck someone’s brain up after even one use due to lack of quality control
Help me out here. I read the symptoms of psychosis, and I’ve definitely experienced those a couple times but only when I get super baked. But when it wears off I’m normal again.
What am I missing? To me this sounds like there’s a link between bad driving and people that drink which is like “duh” to me.
Substance-insuced psychosis (psychotic symptoms while you’re intoxicated) is a different diagnosis than a psychotic episode. That psychotic symptoms are not due to substance intoxication is actually one of the criteria of a psychotic episode. What I’m talking about are people for whom weed can trigger a psychotic episode that doesn’t go away after the high wears off.
Wikipedia will be a much better source, but my understanding is that psychosis can be a temporary symptom, or it can be a permanent health condition that calls for medical treatment.
Psychoactive drugs like marijuana, mushrooms, LSD, etc. can trigger permanent psychotic health condition on people who have genetic traits predisposed to such conditions.
It’s like a genetic game of roulette whenever any of us smoke it-- it could be the beginning of a very difficult health condition to manage for the rest of our lives.
It’s disingenuous to group cannabis along with psilocybin and LSD. They are very different molecules, bond with different receptors in the brain and have very different medicinal and spiritual effects.
I’m not discounting these other medicines can have negative impacts on people, just that they are not the same.
I am unsure of why you felt the need to write a rebuttal to a point that was not made.
can trigger permanent psychotic health condition on people who have genetic traits predisposed to such conditions
Why this guy and not the other guy who’s asymptomatic? Ah, a “genetic predisposition.”
That doesn’t seem like a scientific explanation, more a Just So Story, or at best, a hypothesis. It might be true, but where’s the evidence?
This systematic review lists 12 studies that almost all concluded THC has a causative relationship with schizophrenia.
i heard this too, some people have accounted thier friends went full schizo after getting baked, of couse they need to have underlying disease first.
I have friends who are now diagnosed schizophrenics, whose first major symptoms occurred while they were smoking weed. I have more friends whose schizophrenia appeared during or immediately after use of psychedelics. I tend to favor the belief that they had an underlying condition that was triggered, but I’m also slightly suspicious of the reasoning, which is too much like “they were already cracked and that’s why they broke at that time” which can be tautological.
Hopefully, someone will do a good study of people who show early or precursor symptoms of schizophrenia and look at their risk of getting full-blown symptoms versus the baseline population, with or without recreational drug use.
They cite one such study right there in the article, and there are others: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38775165/
This isn’t new information either, the experience I related above was a decade ago, and the impact of weed on people prone to psychotic disorders was already well known to the medical community at that time.
Cannabis doesn’t do it. I need a sledgehammer to my pineal gland please
you dropped this: e
Thanks it must have fallen out from my ear at some point
This article blows. “Genetically modifying” cannabis for higher THC content? You mean breeding, like every other plant grown for consumption?
Listen, I tell my countrymen all the time: we want to legalize, but only "low grade* to “mid grade”. I.e not high grade. We’re kind of strict though, almost dry state. Why?
Skunk and the likes have been bred to maximize THC content at the cost of the CBD content. The problem there being that THC is psychoactive and in strong amounts can even be sort of psychedelic, whereas CBD is an antipsychotic that counteracts the negative effecta THC has.
The bigger nut though - and this is the frustrating part - THC can never actually cause psychosis, but can bring out latent psychotic tendencies or be part and parcel of bringing onset psychosis - but a drunken stooper or even an intense run could do that too.
When it comes to high grade tho: do not fuck around with it. If you’ve never tried cannabis, make sure you don’t get a skunk type strain or anything that is deemed “heavy”. It’s not necessary anyway, it’s just a stupid trend between bros to try to out stone or out high each other. “Ooo, I’m the most high! ha ha ha ha”
It’s been an arms race between breeder for decades now regarding maximizing THC content, but let me just say gtfo here with that noise. Give me a working man’s spliff any day, thank you very much. We’re supposed to function as well.
As a daily smoker I agree. Strong stuff is really fucking bad cause people have no temperance due to hit delay and almost always over do it.
The key to recreational cannabis, like any drug, is temperance and small doses make it so much harder to fail here.
Also the effects of extreme concentrations imo are borderline heroin-like as it’s just escapism rather than enhancer. I really dont get dabbing and other high concentration cannabis use - that goes against everything weed is all about.
It’s really bad if the wrong person gets a hold of it too. Suddenly latent psychosis gets triggered - which could have been healed by itself over the years, but instead destroys a life that then will become a burden to their family and the welfare system. It’s also what could lead us right back to criminalization.
Most of the irresponsible stoners in this thread don’t get that, because that care only about themselves, but as a civilized society we can’t just let that stuff run rampant.
Yeah, I used to be very libertarian with drugs but some people just suck and our society in no way ready to support and educate everyone just yet.
Its a really hard position to take as there’s no clear path here unless we spend billions on drug education and support which no one’s going to do unfortunately.
I think the next best thing we can do is regulate distribution, decriminalize possession and push education. This includes educating people how powerful and controlling high thc substance can be and taking articles like this seriously like any real psychonaut would.
I strongly disagree with that view. The stronger the strain, the less you have to smoke or vape to get a desired effect. Smoking, in particular, has well-documented side effects, including COPD.
Your beliefs about the psychopharmacology of THC and CBD are simplistic. The actual mechanisms (and number of different cannabinoids involved) are far more complex.
Go ahead and choose the strength that suits you, but don’t presume that gives you the right to impose that choice on others.
I second your position. I’m a recreational user, but my girlfriend has chronic pain and a medical card. If we take the same dosage, I can be halfway to my limit while she’s only just starting to feel a high. If only low-potency cannabis were available, I can’t imagine the dosages she’d have to consume. If it were too weak, it wouldn’t be an option for her at all.
At least with high-potency cannabis, she is able to avoid opioids, which would be far more dangerous for her.
That’s fine to have your own opinion but don’t restrict my rights to grow the stickiest of the icky. Sometimes I want to roast a fat joint and be functional. Sometimes I just want to sleep without toking for a half hour. One hit shit absolutely has its place, and with accurate labeling, you can be the judge.
It’s not opinion, you irresponsible doofus, but verifiable fact at this point - hence the article.
You can’t prevent people from growing it themselves at home no, but selling high grade over the counter? Heeeell no. Not in my country.
That would get cannabis super banned almost instantly after legalization, which would be dumb, counter productive - and irresponsible.
And if you went around distributing it without clearly informing of it’s THC/CBD ratio and the implications thereof?
Straight to jail - because it could be a costly, irresponsible form of stupid, that could cause harm to someone else and lasting damage to them - all because “that shit be hype”?
One year in prison. Same as when selling ethanol. No exceptions.
“One hit shit”. You mean noisy, loud, tweak head shit. Why not skip a step and go straight to meth? Maybe synthesize a concentrate you can inject straight into your groin even. Call it groinnabis. Smh.
And if you went around distributing it without clearly informing of it’s THC/CBD ratio and the implications thereof?
Say you’ve never been to a legal dispensary without saying you’ve never been to a legal dispensary.
I’ve been to cannabis dispensaries in five different states. Never have I ever seen anything sold without clear labeling of the THC/CBD ratio (as well as listing percentages of various other terpenes), but also every container features a warning about health risks. The high potency products I’ve bought all contain labels that specifically highlight their strength, and warn about an increased risk of psychosis.
Yeah, it would be nice if there could be more specific information on the labels, or a unified authority across the US to enforce standards across states. Unfortunately, anti-cannabis zealots have done well to hold back research by keeping cannabis illegal, while simultaneously using lack of research as a reason for keeping it illegal.
…can you read? I wasn’t talking about dispensaries. I was talking about home grown high grade - but also: high grade in general would be illegal in my country based on how we already regulate other drugs.
Not that you give AF about your countrymens well being, which we know you don’t when you intimate that you would actively grow skunk and distribute to people without warning people about the THC content - because you’re an absolute irresponsible sociopath.
Or, you can’t read.
Which one is it?
I said it should be tested and labeled properly so consumers can make their own decisions. The article sucks, it’s not “verifiable fact”. Hit me with those peer reviewed studies in a journal worth a shit if it’s such a fact.
You can’t prevent people from growing it themselves at home no, but selling high grade over the counter? Heeeell no. Not in my country.
You want people who would like to use strong cannabis have to go to the black market instead of buying something tested and labeled over the counter and making an informed decision.
Are you in full honest making the argument equivalent to “people should only drink beer and wine. Even imagining spirits is equivalent to jumping off a bridge”?
Me? No, I’m not. That’s the argument of the person I’m responding to.
Dammit I hit the wrong guy
They could grow it themselves and not distribute it without telling people what it contained…
This is why high grade is bad, because it impedes ones reading retention - apparently.
Do you realize how complex proper sampling is, or expensive the testing is? Ideally you’re also going to be looking for bacterial and fungal growth as well. I see no reason that high potency cannabis - also the most efficient in terms of energy for light/cooling, water usage, fertilizer usage per quantity THC - shouldn’t be commercially available, tested to pharmaceutical standards, and regulated to permit users to make responsible decisions.
Arguing for low potency cannabis is forcing others to be wasteful because you can’t regulate your own consumption. I don’t get absolutely stupid with strong weed or extracts, it’s just nice to not have to smoke an entire gram joint before bed. A few hits is all I need.
Grow… it… yourself… but do not distribute WITHOUT… informing… of THC content…
Got that, cookie? Does it enter into your skull? Do you understand why? Of course not.
Do you ignore the article because it doesn’t suit your agenda? Yes. Are you a licensed neurologist? No. Are you a licensed therapist? No. Do you understand why it’s a problem? No. Do you care? No. Are you a selfish little goblin? Yes…
The anti-weed agents are out in full force these days. Dishonest pieces of shit! “It’s weed, so you might as well do meth.” Get out of here, narc. This is what they have to do to hurt marijuana.
But walking into any store and legally buying a lethal amount of alcohol is cool and legal
Not if it’s 60 proof - not in my country anyway. Then you’d go to jail - and I’d say the same should be for high grade.
My case is still - if you bothered to read - that high grade should remain illegal, but that low to mid grade should be legalized.
Why bother using words? Maybe I should just smash my face on my phone. Seems to be working for you guys.
In what country is 60 proof illegal? No vodka, whiskey, rum, basically any spirits? Seems like a nanny state situation, if someone wanted to get drunk they can just drink twice as much sugary liqueur to get there… why should the government term them what form to use.
That said, I do agree for cannabis. The fact there is no percievable difference when using it makes it dangerous. But with alcohol over 80 proof like most spirits is pretty obvious. In fact I think theres a higher risk with the sweet liqueurs at 23% because theyre easy to drink
It sort of is a “nanny state”… or a welfare state. In any case, its to prevent deaths caused by dehydration. 60 is allowed, but everything upwards is not.
ಠ_ಠ
Stupor.
Beware of the gEneTiC MoDifICaTiOn!!!
I like my genes pure, unmodified whatsoever - just the way they arise from the primordial soup.
Mmm, soup…
Oh no! The GMOz!
And many that aren’t! Ornamental, like flowers, are also bred for hardiness or to look pretty!
But it’s also not discrediting the post…
You can crossbreed anything till it becomes lethal. This is part of it. If crossbreed beyond reasonable strain? You now have a problem if it enters the market.
You could smoke a garbage bag full of weed and it wouldn’t be lethal. Try again.
They don’t care about the accuracy of their words. They have no clue how much weed you would have to smoke for it to kill you, if it would even be possible. And when they realize just how little people really are smoking compared to that standard, they should have no complaints at all! It’s not lethal.
You and the other person missed the point entirely…
No one is saying weed was lethal. But the way it’s being manipulated now, could lead to something bad. Lethal is obviously an extreme example, bu t I assumed people could connect the dots… Unfortunately we’re basically on reddit, zero critical thinking and my opinion vs your opinion!!!
I’m sick of this.
You said it yourself 🤦♂️:
“You can crossbreed anything till it becomes lethal.”
Don’t take me for a fool. For being so anti-weed, it’s you with the memory problems!
Your whole argument is that growers can selectively breed for strength. That’s been done for as long as smokable cannabis has divereged from hemp. With proper labeling and testing, that’s not a problem unless some form of lethality or other risk does emerge as a property of weed. So far it hasn’t. Until then, it’s all hypothetical.
Until it’s no longer hypothetical. It won’t be the breeding that pushes it. It’ll be laced with something and that will push it over.
The solution to this is to legalise it and regulate, but ofc that’s not happening… “We’ve tried nothing and we’re all out of ideas”, weed is the prime example of this saying.
Idk, smoke it all at once and the lack of O2 might kill you through the smoke. But that’s not the THCs fault
That’s what I heard happened to the chimps they were testing to determine it’s lethality. They suffocated.
he had had persistent delusions for more than six months. Sam was fully convinced that the government was following him and constantly surveilling him
That’s not a delusion tho.
The government probably is surveilling them.
Also, anecdotes are not evidence unless you’ve got a brain worm.
not anymore it isnt
You know, I’m not really interested in a long anecdote about Sam and his father. It doesn’t add any real information.
I had hoped to read about the actual evidence.Please stop smoking weed. The alcohol industry is suffering. Won’t someone think of the alcoholics!!
The war on drugs has made research into cannabis difficult and compared to alcohol and tobacco, we are practically blind. Legalization has changed this and we should pay attention.
The only thing to match the propaganda of the drug war is the CBD cure-all craze. I think that it’s wise to do some basic research so that one day we can have an informed opinion rather than a knee jerk reaction.
Research into tobacco and alcohol, use used to be practically impossible, but there were several congressional acts which pushed for independent analysis to get to the truth of these matters. But this happened after possibly centuries of their youth. Cannabis is only entered, mainstream consciousness, recently, and so it’s going to take a while before the taboo around it’s use fades enough forthere to be reasonably and rationally funded research into the effects of its use.
there were several congressional acts which pushed for independent analysis to get to the truth of these matters.
It’s wild to imagine the U.S. congress actually promoting independent scientific research. I wish I lived in a world like that.
deleted by creator
Its quite simple. They make quite a lot of fun and also because they give you the possibility to escape the dystopian world we live in.
I don’t understand why teens want to drink, smoke weed, and take drugs so badly, anyway.
someone told them not to
Wow, you solved it. Now all you need to do is give that spiel and all teenagers will become straight A students
Kids want to escape from their dysfunctional families or trauma or whatever other adversities they’re experiencing and they don’t have a support system to show them healthy coping.
As someone who was raised by narcissists with anger issues, I can understand that argument. Still waited until my mid 20s, though, because I didn’t want to screw up my developing brain.
That said, I’m still fucked in the head from childhood trauma. On second thought, maybe it would have been worth it to sacrifice some brain cells for a little escape from my family…
There are many ways to act out. Drugs, rage, alcoholism, sex, shopping, gambling etc.
Glad you had that privilege
Wow they fail basic science. Correlation does not equal causation. More gateway drug scare in its modern form.
No, they don’t “fail basic science”. They point out that there is a correlation and we need better studies, but the mere existence of the correlation is worrying, especially considering a lot of recent studies are confirming the link between cannabis and teen psychosis. A lot of the early studies on the harm of cigarettes started similarly. Correlation between lung cancer and smoking tobacco doesn’t imply causation, but it’s one hell of an alarm bell.
The author of the article themselves doesn’t say cannabis is a gateway drug and even recognizes that asking people to just not use it isn’t realistic.
They fail to explore systemic correlations and hyperfocus on cannabis. I am claiming they are repeating reactionary history instead of systemic analysis. Focusing on what is wrong with the individual rather than the system that bore them.
The article is an opinion as stated at the bottom.
Maybe the issue isn’t individual, but societal. Brave New World had vacation pills, interestingly named Soma. The current people don’t even want you to have a mind vaycay.
My concern is another Reefer Madness type of propaganda campaign. We need legit, replicable and replicated studies. I don’t indulge anymore, for several reasons. Most were practical but also unrelated to health/employment.
My concern is another Reefer Madness type of propaganda campaign.
That’s a political, not a scientific concern, and with the present maladministration, a possibly legitimate one.
We need legit, replicable and replicated studies.
I completely agree. More fact-based decision making is sorely need on this and many other questions.
deleted by creator
Hell yeah. Correlation studies are useless guys! I know very much science.
Anecdotal stories aren’t evidence, take your first year science class over.
Hey thank you! I thought Lemmy could never have the full Reddit experience, but there’s completely lazy and misinformed comments here too.
Try reading the article next time.
asking people to just not use it isn’t realistic.
Why though?
The same reason abstinence only sex ed doesn’t work.
And alcohol prohibition
I mean (most) humans are naturally driven to have sex, but no such instinct exists for weed.
no such instinct exists for weed.
I’d argue an instinct for getting high does exist.
Which may have scientific or medical reasons that the user isn’t even aware of. Which can be just fine, too. Enjoy! Not everyone has to become a scientist. Just if it’s important enough to you, or because you have to defend from the army of “Just Say No” types. They aren’t speaking about any of the benefits of marijuana. Pure ignorance or worse.
I’m more thinking socialism evolution over hundreds of thousands of years, than a personal preference.
I mean, I believe that where my personal preference came from, to be accurate.
I contend that Neanderthals were smarter, but didn’t get high, and due to hominids at that time (and still) being rather easily aggravated into (even mortal) fights, I dare say getting high while meeting up with new people would definitely be an advantage to a species. Which the Neanderthals didn’t have, and thus dies out while the h sapienses were out getting high and fucking
There’s no such instinct for weed in particular, but almost everyone seeks out psychoactive substances in one form or another.
Uh… What?
From a Medical Marijuana Educational Guide (full disclosure, it’s connected to a dispensary):
*Also note: it uses “Medical Marijuana” language because it’s from a state where only medical is legal, not recreational.
Medical Marijuana works by impacting the Endocannabinoid System we all have in our bodies.
“Your body already makes Medical Marijuana-like chemicals that affect pain, inflammation, sleep and many other processes. It mimics those naturally occurring compounds in the body, and can produce therapeutic effects.” -Laura Borgelt, PharmD, University of Colorado
Alcohol, then. Prohibition didn’t work and a lot of people died making and selling their own moonshine.
I mean part of that was because of how idiotic the application of prohibition was, because on the other hand I can think of one very successful prohibition campaign.
but no such instinct exists for weed.
Based on what exactly?
Humans have found creative ways to get fucked up for millennia.
And that in no way implies that they’re all good for us. In fact, we know many that aren’t.
Instinct for pleasure does.
History proves this correct. It’s never worked. They’ve even gone so far as to jail people. Maybe others should learn something from this instead of constantly beating the marijuana bad drum.
Jailing people is the whole point
Okay let’s be clear that no matter where you ultimately stand on abstinence the war on drugs was a massively idiotic affair. Also given global downward trends in smoking I’d say there’s merit to the idea of anti-drug education/propaganda, with hopefully fewer bullets than the war on drugs.
I’m having trouble following some of the last parts of your comment. Are you saying that it’s worth it for the anti-smoking angle, like for health benefits? There are other methods for taking marijuana that have nothing to do with inhalation. Additionally, children can be prescribed CBD, to be taken through digestion or sublingually. This is a proven treatment for controlling seizures.
If you want to address smoking, I think there’s much to be said. But making it all about smoking is a distortion. And until others prove otherwise, to me it’s deliberate. Vaping isn’t seen today as harmful like combustion is. I’m sure there’s more to learn there, but all of these things are positive developments, that should be spoken about along with the negatives folks simply want to focus on.
Are you saying that it’s worth it for the anti-smoking angle, like for health benefits?
I’m trying to say that if there turn out to be significant health issues caused by cannabis (which seems likely given the data in the article), then an anti-cannabis campaign should be viable and at least partially successful, in the same way anti-tobacco campaigns have been successful in reducing tobacco use. Drug use isn’t some force of nature that can’t be stopped if we have a good reason to stop it; the war on drugs failed to stop it because the war on drugs was stupid.
Right, only if you are speaking about children. The proof I use is the massive demand for it, along with the no massive damage to people or society over all these years. And, this is in the face of illegality and jail time. So other than some focused study on the effects of youth that result in an appropriate response, you can get out of here with your junk science and reefer madness. Alcohol is much more damaging on the brain. Look it up!
Correlation does not equal causation.
And cutting and pasting isn’t a reasoned argument, either.
Without correlation, there is no causation. So correlation can be taken to be an an indication that causation is not ruled out.
You’re gonna get tired of repeating this in about, oh, 20 years.
I’m speaking from experience.
You’re entirely correct, just to be clear. You’re just gonna get tired of repeating it.
For me it’s real simple: I talk to my kids about drug use and its negative impact on their growing minds and bodies. Like any growing organism, they need good food, fresh air, plenty of water, and exercise. Smoking, drinking, and drugs do not provide any of that, and all I ask of them is to wait until they are older.
What you’re describing is basically plants. Humans need much more than air, food and exercise. Thats an extremely limited point of view from your side.
Humans need social and spiritual experiences and substances in the right hands are tools for achieving this. A tool is only as good as the person using it so obviously kids shouldn’t be dropping acid but a responsible adult who had years of human experiences can gain a lot through altered states of mind.
Brennan Mulligan doesn’t do drugs (or alcohol I think) and he has told his mother’s insanely good talk about it on Gianmarco’s Soresi’s podcast. https://youtu.be/8t12OsPeCFY?t=49m59s
Still true for adults tho
I’m wondering about dosage here, really. As a kid, I smoked weed like maybe once a week but I knew kids who were constantly high all day, every day. We called them “permafried” and some even self-identified that way as a matter of pride.
Hopefully, with further study and research, we can get more information about the actual risk to teens with a variety of usage patterns. Then it’s a matter of education so that they’re aware of the risk before they’re presented with the choice to smoke.
The problem is, a bunch of people with very limited drug experience sharing their anecdotal stories isn’t evidence. It’s just a story.
Yeah, I’m aware of that. We need more study and research, like I said. I’m very pro-weed (I’m smoking right now lol), but we can’t make reasonable conclusions about the level of risk involved in teen smoking yet. We just don’t know the full extent of any negative effects on developing brains.
I think assessing risk based on consumption makes sense in terms of teens (and young adults too because their brains are still developing) being informed of the level of risk involved in how much they smoke, so that’s why I advocated for that.
Lol
what would you consider extensive drug experience with cannabis, particularly in the context of minors as to be relevant to the study?
I think that a scientific study would be a better place to start than anecdotes. Preferably one run by actual research professionals.
My hot take is that teens should be allowed to smoke weed but only if they grow it themselves. Wand some kid? (Hands grow light and tent) get to work. It takes patience since you won’t get your first crop for 3-4 months and the quantity they consume is limited to what they can grow, and it’s a skill they’d learn
