NationStates Jolt Archive

Who belives that the legalization of marijuania would be an asset to the country and could help stablize the economy

Nah. You'd make loads more stoners. And they're lazy, so productivity would collapse. Also, they all live with their moms, so the housing market would never get back into growth.

help, sure, but not really that much in the grand scheme of things. its just another commodity, and a relatively cheap one at that. it could serve as a good source of tax revenue, of course.

it would significantly help in other areas - like undermining the cartels' profits and emptying the prisons and such.

help, sure, but not that much in the grand scheme of things. it would, however, significantly help in other areas. like undermining the cartels' profits and emptying the prisons and such.

Happiness is a full prison.

At least make it a non jailable offense.

At least make it a non jailable offense.

decriminalization that keeps fines and whatever in place is the best of all possible worlds...if you are a drug cartel.

because the sale and production are still illegal (even if only at the level of paying fines), you still get to charge black market premiums. but you have a slightly easier time in the sales and legal departments, and so can rake in even more cash doing it. which means that organized crime will benefit most and they'll continue to run illegal plantations in the national forests and such. and since there still won't be any legal recourse for settling disputes, the violence will continue.

nah the place will be full of ignorant young American tourists in a fortnight

also its a shit drug so I don't see what the fuss is all about

Nah. You'd make loads more stoners. And they're lazy, so productivity would collapse. Also, they all live with their moms, so the housing market would never get back into growth.

But if Marijuana was legal all the money they have use to arrest them could go to help the stimulus and give more money to health care.
And also they could benefit the money these stoners are using and tax it so it would deffinitly be economicly efficiant

decriminalization that keeps fines and whatever in place is the best of all possible worlds...if you are a drug cartel.

because the sale and production are still illegal (even if only at the level of paying fines), you still get to charge black market premiums. but you have a slightly easier time in the sales and legal departments, and so can rake in even more cash doing it. which means that organized crime will benefit most and they'll continue to run illegal plantations in the national forests and such. and since there still won't be any legal recourse for settling disputes, the violence will continue.

Also would shit production to the US lowering the violent cartels strangle hold on it as violent cartels tend to be across the boarder. Also will make small scale competition on based on quality more sustainable.

help, sure, but not really that much in the grand scheme of things. its just another commodity, and a relatively cheap one at that. it could serve as a good source of tax revenue, of course.

it would significantly help in other areas - like undermining the cartels' profits and emptying the prisons and such.

what about the medical reasons. it is a safer alternative as a pain killer. It could be used as a mind altering drug just as alcohol and cigarrets are used but no one has died from smoking.

But if Marijuana was legal all the money they have use to arrest them could go to help the stimulus and give more money to health care.
And also they could benefit the money these stoners are using and tax it so it would deffinitly be economicly efficiant

Yeh, but the money would go straight back on their welfare checks. Its an unfair levy on the moms who are already having most of their money taken by their workshy stoner kids to buy drugs if you try and put taxes on pot on top of what they're already paying.

Yeh, but the money would go straight back on their welfare checks. Its an unfair levy on the moms who are already having most of their money taken by their workshy stoner kids to buy drugs if you try and put taxes on pot on top of what they're already paying.

Really the mother doesnt have to be responsible for the kid. Also is it really good to support ur kids drug habits? Why dont the mothers take stand and not give the kids there money. And for research of marijuana could create jobs also to grow so it would make more jobs in the us

Really the mother doesnt have to be responsible for the kid. Also is it really good to support ur kids drug habits? Why dont the mothers take stand and not give the kids there money. And for research of marijuana could create jobs also to grow so it would make more jobs in the us

But then the stoners will go round stealing money from old ladies to pay for their habit, meaning you have to put the policing budget up :(

And also they could benefit the money these stoners are using and tax it so it would deffinitly be economicly efficiant

either that or they will just grow it at home anyway leading to the whole process of taxation being useless

what about the medical reasons. it is a safer alternative as a pain killer.

oddly I don't remember the last time painkillers turned me into a drooling paranoid wreck

It could be used as a mind altering drug just as alcohol and cigarrets are used but no one has died from smoking.

only both those drugs are being increasingly restricted in their use

Yeh, but the money would go straight back on their welfare checks. Its an unfair levy on the moms who are already having most of their money taken by their workshy stoner kids to buy drugs if you try and put taxes on pot on top of what they're already paying.

your stoner stereotype smells like old people

Yeh, but the money would go straight back on their welfare checks. Its an unfair levy on the moms who are already having most of their money taken by their workshy stoner kids to buy drugs if you try and put taxes on pot on top of what they're already paying.

But then the stoners will go round stealing money from old ladies to pay for their habit, meaning you have to put the policing budget up :(

So, because I recreationally smoke pot, I'm a lazy anti-work hippie who's kist going to mooch off the back of hard working citizens? Nice, just nice. Way to perpetuate a stereotype. I'm back in school studying for a second diploma, with one more semester left in my program before I go for field placement, which will lead to a permanent job. What I do in my free time should be none of the government's damn business; I'm not hurting anyone if I want to light up. I'm a good citizen otherwise. I pay my taxes every year, I vote. The money that we use for weed comes out of the family income and it's insignificant because we have no debt.

your stoner stereotype smells like old people

Its a well-founded generalization, based on a scientific observation of a number of films featuring Seth Rogen :p

either that or they will just grow it at home anyway leading to the whole process of taxation being useless



oddly I don't remember the last time painkillers turned me into a drooling paranoid wreck



only both those drugs are being increasingly restricted in their use

Ok but some people cant handle marijuana thats diffrent. What about all the drunk drivers and drunk bar fights? When was the last time you seen someone fight on weed. I Belive it is alot safer. They could make it only legal to buy if ur 21 and illegal to grow.

So, because I recreationally smoke pot, I'm a lazy anti-work hippie who's kist going to mooch off the back of hard working citizens? Nice, just nice. Way to perpetuate a stereotype. I'm back in school studying for a second diploma, with one more semester left in my program before I go for field placement, which will lead to a permanent job. What I do in my free time should be none of the government's damn business; I'm not hurting anyone if I want to light up. I'm a good citizen otherwise. I pay my taxes every year, I vote. The money that we use for weed comes out of the family income and it's insignificant because we have no debt.

Kryo, Dumb Ideologies is kidding. It's satire.

Ok but some people cant handle marijuana thats diffrent. What about all the drunk drivers and drunk bar fights? When was the last time you seen someone fight on weed. I Belive it is alot safer. They could make it only legal to buy if ur 21 and illegal to grow.

Do weed smokers a favour and use proper spelling. You're doing us a disservice by demonstrating grammatical and spelling laziness. It also detracts from the validity of the argument, I find.

Kryo, Dumb Ideologies is kidding. It's satire.

Negative stereotypes and generalizations are still negative stereotypes and generalizations.

Its a well-founded generalization, based on a scientific observation of a number of films featuring Seth Rogen :p

Dont belive everything u see. If u never tried it or been with someone who has dont stereotype these people. Hydrocodon Oxycotons Have more of an effect mentaly then weed and they are a perscribed medicine. If not legal to public legalize for medical to make furthur research

Negative stereotypes and generalizations are still negative stereotypes and generalizations.
I don't believe you're getting what Dumb Ideologies means. It's a parody. Satire.
A parody (pronounced [ˈpɛɹədiː] US, [ˈpaɹədiː] UK, also called send-up or spoof), in contemporary usage, is a work created to mock, comment on, or poke fun at an original work, its subject, or author, or some other target, by means of humorous, satiric or ironic imitation
Dumb Ideologies is using the arguments that the anti-drug nitwits use, but is so straightforward with it, not using the fancy prose and skipping around that they do, and thereby criticizes them by exposing the stupidity of the arguments.

Also would shit production to the US lowering the violent cartels strangle hold on it as violent cartels tend to be across the boarder. Also will make small scale competition on based on quality more sustainable.

maybe, though that will depend on how the legal status of cultivation shakes out. i mean, oregon decriminalized it decades ago, but their penalties for cultivation and sale aren't significantly better than anywhere else. so while they are one of the major domestic production centers, there is clearly still a place for the larger-scale (and lower-quality) production from places where organized crime has more or less free reign.

So, because I recreationally smoke pot, I'm a lazy anti-work hippie who's kist going to mooch off the back of hard working citizens? Nice, just nice. Way to perpetuate a stereotype. I'm back in school studying for a second diploma, with one more semester left in my program before I go for field placement, which will lead to a permanent job.

:p

Ok but some people cant handle marijuana thats diffrent. What about all the drunk drivers and drunk bar fights? When was the last time you seen someone fight on weed. I Belive it is alot safer. They could make it only legal to buy if ur 21 and illegal to grow.

1) as it turns out quite allot of people can't handle Cannabis which as your using it as a replacement for painkillers throws a rather large spanner in the cogs

2) of the examples you listed for alchohol both are up to individual responsibility and again head fucking in this case paranoia throws a spanner in your cogs when it comes to violence

3) its already illegal to grow and it doesn't work

Also What about cantheism people. Its in there religon to smoke hemp. If its illegal and therefore making it illegal to practice there religion is against the constitution.

I don't believe you're getting what Dumb Ideologies means. It's a parody. Satire.

Do not use that derisively condescending tone with me. I know precisely what a parody is; I know what satire is. It doesn't change that it's a negative stereotype, and a broad generalisation.

Though it's not directly on-topic, I recently came across this (http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/reefer-badness/) little nugget, dispelling the popular myth that cannabis is now 25 times stronger' than 90s pot.


To get their scare figure, The Independent have compared the worst cannabis from the past with the best cannabis of today. But you could have cooked the books in exactly the same way 30 years ago if you’d wanted: in 1975 the weakest herbal cannabis analysed was 0.2%; in 1978 the strongest herbal cannabis was 12%. Oh my god: in just 3 years herbal cannabis has become 60 times stronger.

And in fact, what’s most amazing is that this scare isn’t new. In the US, in the mid 1980s, during Reagan’s “war on drugs”, it was claimed that cannabis was 14 times stronger than in 1970, which rather sets you thinking. If it was 14 times stronger in 1986 than in 1970, and it’s 25 times stronger today than the beginning of the 1990s, does that mean it is now, in fact, 350 times stronger than 1970?

That’s not even a crystal in a plant pot. That’s impossible. That would require more THC to be present in the plant than the total volume of space taken up by the plant itself. That would require matter to be condensed. If I was a physics-minded branding manager, I would suggest Quark Gluon Plasma as the most appropriate street name for this substance: and I look forward to reading about the scare in the Independent tomorrow.

Dont belive everything u see. If u never tried it or been with someone who has dont stereotype these people.

so I can stereotype people if I have? sweet.

"yo lets all sit in my bedroom smoking pot all weekend"

So, because I recreationally smoke pot, I'm a lazy anti-work hippie who's kist going to mooch off the back of hard working citizens? Nice, just nice. Way to perpetuate a stereotype. I'm back in school studying for a second diploma, with one more semester left in my program before I go for field placement, which will lead to a permanent job. What I do in my free time should be none of the government's damn business; I'm not hurting anyone if I want to light up. I'm a good citizen otherwise. I pay my taxes every year, I vote. The money that we use for weed comes out of the family income and it's insignificant because we have no debt.

Kryo, Dumb Ideologies is kidding. It's satire.

Yeh, it kind of is. Sorry, I didn't think anyone would take me seriously. No offence meant, especially towards one of our esteemed, much appreciated, and undoubtedly hard-working mods :D

Its just an issue that no-one here is really going to disagree with, so I thought I might try and have a little bit of fun with the TV and film stoner trope. Apologies since it looks like I misjudged it a bit and actually offended people :( :fluffle:

Do not use that derisively condescending tone with me.
I'm not trying to. Also, I don't remember any rules against that :p
I know precisely what a parody is; I know what satire is. It doesn't change that it's a negative stereotype, and a broad generalisation.
*sigh*

I'm not going to continue this. It's obvious I'm getting absolutely nowhere.

so I can stereotype people if I have? sweet.

"yo lets all sit in my bedroom smoking pot all weekend"

well if it was legal they could do it outside

Also What about cantheism people. Its in there religon to smoke hemp. If its illegal and therefore making it illegal to practice there religion is against the constitution.

actually they can iirc not that the whole religion isn't founded on just being able to smoke pot legally

Do not use that derisively condescending tone with me. I know precisely what a parody is; I know what satire is. It doesn't change that it's a negative stereotype, and a broad generalisation.

omg everyone stand back hes freaking out man!

Yeh, it kind of is. Sorry, I didn't think anyone would take me seriously. No offence meant, especially towards one of our esteemed, much appreciated, and undoubtedly hard-working mods :D

Its just an issue that no-one here is really going to disagree with, so I thought I might try and have a little bit of fun with the TV and film stoner trope. Apologies since it looks like I misjusged it a bit and actually offended people :( :fluffle:

The language was too close to that used. It wasn't extreme enough to convey the meaning you were attempting to get across.

You know, people will disagree. After a couple of hours, they come out of the woodworks. There are always those who are anti-marijuana. They're just not glued to their computer at this time.

I'm not going to continue this. It's obvious I'm getting absolutely nowhere.

Good, because I'm notoriously obstinate.

omg everyone stand back hes freaking out man!

You are only saying that because I have decided against the use of contractions, sir, it is not in my programming. Of course, I can alter the neuro pathways to allow for it.

btw, facebook is in on the act now:

http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/9701/suggest.jpg

well if it was legal they could do it outside

done that too all you do is sit on some park bench/bus stop worrying the elderly

1) as it turns out quite allot of people can't handle Cannabis which as your using it as a replacement for painkillers throws a rather large spanner in the cogs

"allot" [sic] =/= "all"


2) of the examples you listed for alchohol both are up to individual responsibility and again head fucking in this case paranoia throws a spanner in your cogs when it comes to violence

I'm sure you'll have no problems showing a causal factor between marijuana use and violence.

"Paranoia" doesn't make necessarily you violent any more than "the munchies" turns you into a bloodthirsty cannibal, so you're going to have to do better than that. And I don't think you can.

oddly I don't remember the last time painkillers turned me into a drooling paranoid wreck

That's pretty odd, since you know, as a drooling paranoid wreck you'd have great memory.

"allot" [sic] =/= "all"



I'm sure you'll have no problems showing a causal factor between marijuana use and violence.

"Paranoia" doesn't make necessarily you violent any more than "the munchies" turns you into a bloodthirsty cannibal, so you're going to have to do better than that. And I don't think you can.



That's pretty odd, since you know, as a drooling paranoid wreck you'd have great memory.
Exactly paranoia is all mental not physical. If what they are saying is true then how can someone thats lazy and sits on a couch all day hurting anybody

"Paranoia" doesn't make necessarily you violent any more than "the munchies" turns you into a bloodthirsty cannibal, so you're going to have to do better than that. And I don't think you can.


My cousin, who was suffering from paranoia (most likely caused by drug taking), attacked someone in Ibiza because he thought a government agent was following him LOL. I shouldn't laugh, he's very sick.

btw, facebook is in on the act now:

http://img2.imageshack.us/img2/9701/suggest.jpg

I am a fan on facebook.

Exactly paranoia is all mental not physical. If what they are saying is true then how can someone thats lazy and sits on a couch all day hurting anybody

Well I guess we're only supposed to take into account paranoia as an effect, and ignore all the others that nullify any real risk that involves. But then we're also supposed to consider marijuana users to be "drooling wrecks," which sounds to me more a description of someone addicted to - oh, I don't know, morphine for example.

Also id like to add the fact that marijuana is safer then sex.

Ok serious point time. I've heard the argument made that marijuana is now many times stronger than it was in the past, meaning that it has equivalent health impacts to drugs traditionally thought to be more severe, meaning that it is no longer logical to de-legalize. Is there any basis to that?

Ok serious point time. I've heard the argument made that marijuana is now many times stronger than it was in the past, meaning that it has equivalent health impacts to drugs traditionally thought to be more severe, meaning that it is no longer logical to de-legalize. Is there any basis to that?

Made by Government Organizations, who are most likely making shit up to keep their jobs. If they can show me some actual evidence, and not just the records from ten years ago when they said it was OMG A HUNDRED MILLION BILLION TIMES STRONGER!!!11!11 than it was ten years ago, I'll think about believing them.

Ok serious point time. I've heard the argument made that marijuana is now many times stronger than it was in the past, meaning that it has equivalent health impacts to drugs traditionally thought to be more severe, meaning that it is no longer logical to de-legalize.
I thought someone might bring this up (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14731221&postcount=27).

Is there any basis to that?
It's what we in the trade call 'bullshit'.

Marijuana is a mental drug its only as strong as you make it

Also I'd like to add the fact that marijuana is safer than sex.

Not if you use marijuana then have sex. Experience says the two do not play well together. Video games and marijuana on the other hand, that's a match made in heaven.

Ok serious point time. I've heard the argument made that marijuana is now many times stronger than it was in the past, meaning that it has equivalent health impacts to drugs traditionally thought to be more severe, meaning that it is no longer logical to de-legalize. Is there any basis to that?

nah, that argument goes wrong in at least three ways. Chwumbly's link a bit ago (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14731221&postcount=27) covers the first part. beyond that, THC doesn't appear to have very notable health impacts besides curing cancer, so additional potency wouldn't seem to mean anything much on that front. and the part that could actually be bad - the inhaling of smoke - would actually be reduced by increased potency anyways.

"allot" [sic] =/= "all"

well done with that, have a sweetie

"Paranoia" doesn't make necessarily you violent any more than "the munchies" turns you into a bloodthirsty cannibal, so you're going to have to do better than that. And I don't think you can.

yes causing mental health issues such a schizophrenia is not at all a worry but being drunk on alchohol will turn you into a knife wielding maniac by lowering inhibitions

this is sound logic.

That's pretty odd, since you know, as a drooling paranoid wreck you'd have great memory.

I don't see what your getting at here and where memory comes into it :confused:

Exactly paranoia is all mental not physical. If what they are saying is true then how can someone thats lazy and sits on a couch all day hurting anybody

by deciding that the guy standing near their driveway is going to kill them and running out brandishing a knife?

Marijuana is a mental drug its only as strong as you make it
Funny, because as much as I try to make it stronger in my mind, that shit piece of soapy is still shit.

yes causing mental health issues such a schizophrenia is not at all a worry

given the rates we'd be talking about, no, it really isn't.

Not if you use marijuana then have sex. Experience says the two do not play well together. Video games and marijuana on the other hand, that's a match made in heaven.
Nah its great sex and weed is like milk and cookies Haha

well done with that, have a sweetie



yes causing mental health issues such a schizophrenia is not at all a worry but being drunk on alchohol will turn you into a knife wielding maniac by lowering inhibitions

this is sound logic.



I don't see what your getting at here and where memory comes into it :confused:



by deciding that the guy standing near their driveway is going to kill them and running out brandishing a knife?

Listen to me for a second while i spit u some knowledge of my experiences. If u kill someone because u think there going to kill u cause there in ur driveway, then your smoking crack my boy.

If a president ever does think it should be legal, do not look for it to happen until the 2nd term. It would be too big of a political gamble as a 1st term proposal.

If a president ever does think it should be legal, do not look for it to happen until the 2nd term. It would be too big of a political gamble as a 1st term proposal.
Yes but if they do choose to do it first term what if it stabliizes the goverment we need to worry abour doing stuff soon not wait.

well done with that, have a sweetie

That you missed the point doesn't change the fact that I made it.


yes causing mental health issues such a schizophrenia is not at all a worry but being drunk on alchohol will turn you into a knife wielding maniac by lowering inhibitions

Ah, so now you're claiming that marijuana causes schizophrenia, and that this is a worse health problem than the problems caused by alcohol use.

Which I'm sure you'll be able to easily support by showing how marijuana-caused schizophrenia 1) exists and 2) that it causes more damage in some quantifiable way (i.e., lives lost) than alcohol abuse.

this is sound logic.

Well no, it's a strawman fallacy, but we can pretend if it makes you feel better.

I don't see what your getting at here and where memory comes into it :confused:

Maybe you should lay off the painkillers then.

Funny, because as much as I try to make it stronger in my mind, that shit piece of soapy is still shit.

stoner yoda says, "do, or do not. there is no try."

support by showing how marijuana-caused schizophrenia 1) exists


http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

what if it stabliizes the goverment

how?

That you missed the point doesn't change the fact that I made it.



Ah, so now you're claiming that marijuana causes schizophrenia, and that this is a worse health problem than the problems caused by alcohol use.

Which I'm sure you'll be able to easily support by showing how marijuana-caused schizophrenia 1) exists and 2) that it causes more damage in some quantifiable way (i.e., lives lost) than alcohol abuse.



Well no, it's a strawman fallacy, but we can pretend if it makes you feel better.



Maybe you should lay off the painkillers then.

Exactly look at any census and u will see there have never been a marijuana caused death.

[QUOTE=Hydesland;14731380]http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html
It also says alcohol which is legal. :/

[QUOTE=Hydesland;14731380]http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html
It also says alcohol which is legal. :/

Well I'm not really arguing that it should be illegal, I think cannabis should be legal, but I still think there is evidence to suggest a link.

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

That does not show that there is marijuana-induced schizophrenia. A correlation does not translate to causation, and there is nothing in that article that goes beyond positing a correlation. It may well be that those who are likely to develop schizophrenia are more likely to take the 'street drugs' listed in that article (alcohol, meth, LSD, hash/cannabis).

And of course as far as a superior comparison to alcohol, it does not look good: "It is also notable that some research suggests that alcohol abuse is a stronger predictor of psychotic symptoms than regular cannabis use," says that article.

Who belives that the legalization of marijuania would be an asset to the country and could help stablize the economy
Seeing as weed does not (to most accounts) contain the infinite power of Jesus, God or indeed even the Holy Ghost, it won't stabilise the economy.

Who belives that the legalization of marijuania would be an asset to the country and could help stablize the economy

i do.

i dont think that it is strong enough to stabilize the economy but it would have many benefits on many levels.

ive been waiting a loooong time for politicians to stop being so stupid about marijuana. im 51 years old.

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

indeed. though bear in mind that the prevalence of schizophrenia is something around 0.5% of the population. so those numbers sound huge, but they are actually about a ridiculously small set of cases. taking the high end estimate, about 0.06% of people might have schizophrenia that can be linked to marijuana.

but if you've got known risk factors for various psychological issues, probably best to stay away from street drugs in general.

given the rates we'd be talking about, no, it really isn't.

and looking at the rates of petrol stations that blow up when you smoke in them etc etc

Listen to me for a second while i spit u some knowledge of my experiences. If u kill someone because u think there going to kill u cause there in ur driveway, then your smoking crack my boy.

heh funny

oddly enough I've known recreational pot smokers who have suffered from both panic attacks and some pretty antisocial bouts of paranoia

Ah, so now you're claiming that marijuana causes schizophrenia

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/cannabis-can-increase-risk-of-schizophrenia-by-40-459184.html

and that this is a worse health problem than the problems caused by alcohol use.

actually thats not what I'm saying at all

what I am saying is its messed up to use alchohol as an example of a drug we currently use when the government is already phasing out its use

Maybe you should lay off the painkillers then.

maybe you should stop attending student rallies and monging in your council house but that (probabaly) wouldn't help me understand what your getting at

i do.

i dont think that it is strong enough to stabilize the economy but it would have many benefits on many levels.

ive been waiting a loooong time for politicians to stop being so stupid about marijuana. im 51 years old.

Hemp has so many uses and if thc didnt have so much effect on the brain it would be legal. Any other plant could do what cannabis could it would be our largets crop

and looking at the rates of petrol stations that blow up when you smoke in them etc etc



heh funny

oddly enough I've known recreational pot smokers who have suffered from both panic attacks and some pretty antisocial bouts of paranoia



http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/cannabis-can-increase-risk-of-schizophrenia-by-40-459184.html



actually thats not what I'm saying at all

what I am saying is its messed up to use alchohol as an example of a drug we currently use when the government is already phasing out its use



maybe you should stop attending student rallies and monging in your council house but that (probabaly) wouldn't help me understand what your getting at Mabey the people u know should stop smoking then

That does not show that there is marijuana-induced schizophrenia. A correlation does not translate to causation, and there is nothing in that article that goes beyond positing a correlation. It may well be that those who are likely to develop schizophrenia are more likely to take the 'street drugs' listed in that article (alcohol, meth, LSD, hash/cannabis).


There are arguments to complement the statistics, including dopamine effects and genetic causation.

A correlation does not translate to causation

however when correlation courses a burst in research into the matter and the UK government to reclassify the drug because of the evidence one has to wonder if more research should be done into the affects before its given to the general public

and looking at the rates of petrol stations that blow up when you smoke in them etc etc

ah, but there is a difference in how risk works there. marijuana doesn't cause schizophrenia in the way that applying flame to petrol causes fires. if your cigarette comes into proper contact with the fumes, the chance of fire goes up to near 100%. it doesn't happen often because of various precautions, but the risk of petrol fire given the proper exposure conditions is enormous. not so with pot and mental illness.

im smoking a bong right now and im not " bugging out"

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/cannabis-can-increase-risk-of-schizophrenia-by-40-459184.html
I remember discussing this review by the Lancet of 35 studies before.

It's worth noting from the article you've posted that "the research was challenged by experts who said that there had been no increase in schizophrenia over the past 40 years, despite the explosion in cannabis use by young people... researchers led by Stanley Zammitt of Cardiff University say they cannot prove cannabis causes schizophrenia but the association is strong enough to warn young people of the dangers".

Ben Goldacre of badscience (http://www.badscience.net/), the same doctor who debunked (http://www.badscience.net/2007/03/reefer-badness/) the nonsense about cannabis being 25 times stronger than it was in the 90s, shows how (http://www.badscience.net/2007/07/blah-blah-cannabis-blah-blah-blah/) this 'meta-analysis' is poorly represented:

In fact they identified 175 studies which might have been relevant, but on reading them, it turned out that there were just 11 relevant papers, describing seven actual datasets. The Mail made this figure up to “35 studies” by including 24 separate papers which the authors also found on cannabis and depression, although the Mail didn’t mention depression at all...

But what was left out is as interesting as what was added in. The authors were clear - as they always are - that there were problems with a black-and-white interpretation of their data, and that cause and effect could not be stated simply. For ongoing daily users, as an example, it’s difficult to be clear that cannabis is causing people to have a mental illness, because their symptoms may simply be due to being high on cannabis all the time. Perhaps they’d be fine if they were clean.

It was also interesting to see how the risk was numerically reported. The most dramatic figure is always the “relative risk increase”, or rather: “cannabis doubles the risk of psychosis”, “cannabis increases the risk by 40%”. Because schizophrenia is comparatively rare, translated this into real numbers this works out - if the figures in the paper are correct, and causality is accepted - that about 800 yearly cases of schizophrenia are attributable to cannabis. This is not belittling the risk, merely expressing it clearly.

But what’s really important, of course, is what you do with this data. Firstly, you can mispresent it, and scare people. Obviously it feels great to be so self-righteous, but people will stop taking you seriously. After all, you’re talking to a population of young people who have worked out that you routinely exaggerate the dangers of drugs, not least of all with the ridiculous “modern cannabis is 25 times stronger” fabrication so beloved by the media and politicians.

And craziest of all is the fantasy that reclassifying cannabis will stop six million people smoking it, and so eradicate those 800 extra cases of psychosis. If anything, for all drugs, increased prohibition may create market conditions where more concentrated and dangerous forms are more commercially viable. We’re talking about communities, and markets, with people in them, after all: not molecules and neuroreceptors.

So, 800 cases of schizophrenia p/a can be attributable to cannabis use. A terrible misfortune, to be sure, but hardly a reason to keep the substance criminalised.

Yes but if they do choose to do it first term what if it stabliizes the goverment we need to worry abour doing stuff soon not wait.
What if it falls to the floor in congress by just one single vote? Kiss a re-election goodby.

And craziest of all is the fantasy that reclassifying cannabis will stop six million people smoking it, and so eradicate those 800 extra cases of psychosis.

exactly.

Mabey the people u know should stop smoking then

omg I'd never thought of it that way

the risk of petrol fire given the proper exposure conditions is enormous. not so with pot and mental illness.

ie in a perfect storm scenario you could take out the petrol station, oh hey look its a guy with a previous history of mental illness lets get him!

im smoking a bong right now and im not " bugging out"

you should be I'm watching you on COPS

omg I'd never thought of it that way



ie in a perfect storm scenario you could take out the petrol station, oh hey look its a guy with a previous history of mental illness lets get him!



you should be I'm watching you on COPS
Its fucking weed not crack heroine meth coke nothing harmful or even outside for that matter why would i be on cops.
If the person gets psyco stop smoking if u dont its ur own damn fault its not addictive

If the person gets psyco stop smoking if u dont its ur own damn fault

lol wut

Yeah it is habit forming though.

actually thats not what I'm saying at all

what I am saying is its messed up to use alchohol as an example of a drug we currently use when the government is already phasing out its use


Alcohol is a drug we currently use. Even if the government were "phasing out its use" (?), currently, it is in use and therefore a perfect example.

maybe you should stop attending student rallies and monging in your council house but that (probabaly) wouldn't help me understand what your getting at

You said that you did not remember when (or if) painkillers turned you into a drooling wreck.

Well, if they had, your very status as a "drooling wreck" makes your memory on the issue unreliable, making your anecdote here even more worthless than any other internet argument anecdote. Understand?

What the hell is a council house, anyway?

What the hell is a council house, anyway?
Errr... it's a council house. They're a bit lame but better than yer ridiculous trailer parks in the US.

ie in a perfect storm scenario you could take out the petrol station, oh hey look its a guy with a previous history of mental illness lets get him!

what 'perfect storm'? that shit is fucking flammable, and even a minute slip-up causes fires. that is not how the mental illness link works at all.

What the hell is a council house, anyway?
State-owned housing in the UK which is rented at a rate below the market's by the local authority, a council, to those who cannot afford their own home.

Errr... it's a council house. They're a bit lame but better than yer ridiculous trailer parks in the US.

Google tells me they spawned from Margaret Thatcher, which frightens me.

Trailer parks, however, just sorta evolved on their own, and are therefore almost impressive.

Google tells me they spawned from Margaret Thatcher, which frightens me.
Did they fuck. We had similar schemes as far back as the mid-1930s, when we started building flatblocks for the plebery.
Trailer parks, however, just sorta evolved on their own, and are therefore almost impressive.
Bleuch.

What the hell is a council house, anyway?

I'd like to know what 'monging' is. Why can't these people speak English?

I'd like to know what 'monging' is. Why can't these people speak English?
Err the act of being monged out?

As in all sleepy and retaded, esp. if in front of the TV.

I'd like to know what 'monging' is. Why can't these people speak English?

its just disrespectful of the queen, says i

Weed is legal in amsterdam and they also have prostitues and no wat

Weed is legal in amsterdam and they also have prostitues and no wat

wat

Did they fuck. We had similar schemes as far back as the mid-1930s, when we started building flatblocks for the plebery.


Was not Thatcher alive back then? I thought her insidious reign lasted as long as old Elizabeth the First's, only she required the daily sacrifice of a an unbaptized, screaming infant in order to sustain her.

watsorry keyboard is fucked up and stoped i ment that amsterdam europe is in better shape then us and they have weed and prostitues legal so its not whats legal but how u act on it as a person they should allow a giant vote were every1 has an equal vote to end the topic now

sorry keyboard is fucked up and stoped i ment that amsterdam europe is in better shape then us and they have weed and prostitues legal so its not whats legal but how u act on it as a person they should allow a giant vote were every1 has an equal vote to end the topic now

I want to see some periods, commas, question marks, and/or exclamation points next time. Please.

amsterdam europe is in better shape then us

Errr, I'm not sure about that. Who is 'us'? And what do you mean by 'better shape'?

All i know is weed should be a personal choice. It can be used as a safe alternative to ciggarettes and or alcohol. If they made it legal to people 18 or 21 and over it could stop the millions of deaths to ciggarette smokers.Also second hand smoke isnt deadly like it is in tobacco.

Errr, I'm not sure about that. Who is 'us'? And what do you mean by 'better shape'?

United states and as far as crime rate.

what about the corruption of our police? Since weed has been illegal increassing numbers of corrupt cops.

Beasting, I'm totally on your side, but could you just not try to make arguments? It's killing my buzz here.

i aint got nothing better to do lol.

what about the corruption of our police? Since weed has been illegal increassing numbers of corrupt cops.

if this were true, it would be by virtue of there being more cops total. as far as i can tell, the corruption has been brought down somewhat over the past few decades, at least in USia.

if this were true, it would be by virtue of there being more cops total. as far as i can tell, the corruption has been brought down somewhat over the past few decades, at least in USia.i read it in a census for 2000

who likes obama??

if this were true, it would be by virtue of there being more cops total. as far as i can tell, the corruption has been brought down somewhat over the past few decades, at least in USia.

hmm, it appears that this hasn't actually been much studied, at least partly due to the lack of good data on it. fuckers!

hmm, it appears that this hasn't actually been much studied, at least partly due to the lack of good data on it. fuckers!

What's to study. Cops are corrupt. As the definition of crime changes the locus of the corruption changes. Think about it, what sort of person does that sort of job attract? Jesus?

Though I'd imagine the war on drugs has been a godsend, simply because it means more cops and more crimes.

What's to study

how effective the various sorts of oversight that have been put in place have been, mainly