18 ms·

I think Randy Marsh from "South Park" had the most effective anti-marijuana speech I've ever heard: Stan: I've been told a lot of things about pot, but I've co

I think Randy Marsh from "South Park" had the most effective anti-marijuana speech I've ever heard: Stan: I've been told a lot of things about pot, but I've come to find out a lot of those things aren't true! So I don't know what to believe! Randy: Well, Stan, the truth is marijuana probably isn't gonna make you kill people, and it most likely isn't gonna fund terrorism, but… well, son, pot makes you feel fine with being bored. And it's when you're bored that you should be learning some new skill or discovering some new science or being creative. If you smoke pot you may grow up to find out that you aren't good at anything.

Vexs 11y ago
Seriously, the only things that have ever made me think a second time about drugs are the honest descriptions of it, not the "I did drugs and now I have no teeth" kinda descriptions, but the ones that go, "When you're on meth, meth feels great! Everything is amazing, you feel like you can do so much, but when you're off it everything seems boring! So you go back for more, and eventually you're addicted." kinda descriptions. If you talk about LSD, and say, "I've had some amazing times on it, and other times I've had spiders in my eyes", I think most people would be less likely to try it. Sure, not everyone, but still more than people saying just spiders in your eyes. I mean, it's a classical argument tactic, give something up to make your point more valid. But damned if it doesn't work.
- astazangasta 11y ago
  Or, just do drugs. I mean, LSD is great, and people should try it. Smoking pot is also nice, I've done some great writing while stoned. Heck, Paul Erdos did amphetamines his whole life. Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?
  - philwelch 11y ago
    We're not; it's just one drug cartel trying to push out the competition. Whenever you hear drug use described as "self-medicating", you're hearing the notion that drugs like Zoloft and Ritalin are ok but drugs like marijuana and MDMA aren't.
  - hristov 11y ago
    Nobody has ever done any great writing while stoned. Even Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most pro-drug writers ever, said that pot is the only drug that prevents him from doing any good work. And no, people should not try LSD. LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia, and that is no fun at all. It is better not to risk it. Just because you may have gotten lucky so far, there is no reason to invite others to take spin on the russian roulette. If you have any mental illness in your family, it is strongly advisable you steer clear, but even if you don't, it is not worth the risk.
    - pstuart 11y ago
      > LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia Citations please. It's a powerful drug but has incredible value when used properly. If you're going to start wringing your hands over dangerous drugs, start with the killers of today: alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs.
      - hristov 11y ago
        http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302
        Cryptokeeper 11y ago
        That article is 50 years old. Perhaps this one from 2013: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063972 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... "21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems."
        thrwyycombinatr 11y ago
        But temporary schizophrenia is very common. Cmon guys, this is ridiculous. I've seen it so many times. It literally re-wires your brain. And yes, temporary schizophrenia can be extremely dangerous. This is something no one can argue. I hate pedants.
  - Houshalter 11y ago
    C0nc0rdance is a scientist who makes well researched videos about various subjects, and did a few videos on the health effects of marijuana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless or non-addictive. LSD can cause mental illness to emerge in some people. I also remember a study that gave LSD to 10 people during a religious sermon. 9 of them went on the be preachers or priests later in life. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. But anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. Amphetamines certainly seem pretty cool. Especially if you have ADHD. But it definitely has side effects and potential for addiction. It's long term effects are not well studied, and a few studies I did see were concerning. E.g. brain damage in monkeys, and a group of kids taking it did worse than the control group after 3 years. I think people should be educated on the risks and facts before they decide to take a drug. If they still want to do it, fine. But at least they know the risks. And it's not enough just to put a warning sticker on the back of it that no one reads. Even widespread education that a drug is dangerous isn't enough. Everyone knows cigarettes cause cancer, but why do new people take up smoking?
    - forgetsusername 11y ago
      >It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless I'm no advocate of the claims that marijuana is "harmless" or, as some even claim, "good for you". But harm is relative. Sitting in your chair all day is harmful. Eating half the food we do is harmful, as are most medications. Arguing that marijuana is "not harmless" isn't much of an argument at all.
      - Houshalter 11y ago
        According to that video, it increases cancer risk at a higher rate than cigarettes, and it is very addictive to some percent of the population.
    - pantalaimon 11y ago
      > anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. I find that statement absurd, anything with an effect that powerful should be cherished! Would life be desirable if it were stripped from all emotions, as they too have a powerful effect on the mind? Even if you agreed to that, it wouldn't be feasible as we are biological creatures and not pure rational beings. Denying that our biological self exists, with feelings and all, doesn't solve anything. The spiritual experience you describe is just another part of the human condition, I don't quite believe that 9 out of 10 people on LSD would become preachers, but I see how it can lead to a better understanding of religion. This doesn't require superstition, quite the opposite. When you know that those effects are caused by LSD or substances contained in Mushrooms, ferns or cacti, you don't need a higher power as an explanation for this peculiar state of mind. You might however find yourself coming to conclusions about life that other people on similar states of mind (whether induced by drugs or other means is irrelevant here) had before you, and who used the vehicle of religion to transport them. So yes, psychedelics, as well as most drugs, should not be taken lightly, but banning them is like razing the Niagara Falls because someone might fall over the edge.
  - qmalxp 11y ago
    I think it's a bit misleading to simply say "LSD is great and you should try it". It can be interesting, but also can be scary as fuck, and you should be in a good place mentally before trying it.
    - visarga 11y ago
      I read an article yesterday about micro-dosing LSD at a level where no hallucinations appear, but a boost in energy and creativity is felt. Like a different kind of coffee that doesn't wane after only two hours.
      - ryanlol 11y ago
        Microdosing of psychedelics isn't very well (or at all?) researched and it's hard to tell whether what people are experiencing is a placebo or not.
    - astazangasta 11y ago
      "Snorkeling is great and you should try it," is a similar statement I might make with no qualifications or equivocation from you. Many pleasurable activities have attendant dangers that you should be aware of before engaging in them. Drugs are no different, except we surround them with the stink of moral judgment and refuse to educate people on how to use them safely.
      - s73v3r 11y ago
        Snorkeling and psychotropic drugs are two completely different things.
      - qmalxp 11y ago
        The difference is most people snorkeling for the first time do it with an instructor who is very much interested in their well-being. I don't think the guy who sells you LSD is gonna lose sleep if you happen to develop a lifelong mental condition.
  - jeffdavis 11y ago
    "Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?" I guess you could say that occasional use is not a big problem for most drugs. But I wouldn't recommend it, because most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply. We dismiss people who join cults that sound crazy -- an alien ship coming to rescue them or something -- but I think a high percentage of people could be recruited if the cult appears at just the right time in their lives. If you are a regular user of drugs, it's like always having the cult recruiter in your house, just waiting for the right time.
    - visarga 11y ago
      > most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply Sometimes people do drugs to cope with their other problems in life. They need drugs as a reprieve. Life can be hard and people have used alcohol, pot and many other substances to create a refuge. Of course that doesn't solve the problem, but solving the problem is not always the top priority, and many times the problem has no solution. Why should we morally deny a refuge from anxiety and suffering to other people?
      - jeffdavis 11y ago
        Sure, they can help, too. But I wouldn't recommend it, because I have no idea which drugs would help and which would make things worse. I'm not suggesting we deny anyone anything. I'm answering the question: "why do we try to convince people not to use drugs?".
  - andrepd 11y ago
    "LSD is great, and people should try it" is as dishonest and misleading and agenda-pushing as "pot makes your teeth fall off".
ossreality 11y ago
I almost want to login to my non-throwaway/hellbanned account just to laugh at this notion. The times I've been most curious. Most engrossed in a piece of new tech has been when I'm high. Some night, I will go home from a 9-10 hour work day and get high to relax and make dinner and then go to bed... but will wind up reading about the latest and greatest in container tech, or whatever. The notion that pot makes you distinctly less interested is just laughable in my opinion.
- cbgb 11y ago
  I think that what you may be experiencing is a heightened sense of concentration toward a passion of yours that you were passionate about before you smoked pot. However, think about children who smoke pot from an early age and don't develop the kind of curiosity that I'm sure proceeded the pot smoking you're talking about. Did you first discover your passions while you were young, impressionable, and smoking pot? Or did that come afterward, after all the initial experimentation and learning about yourself had already occurred? I think the following quote from a NYC high school teacher better explains what I'm trying to get at: “I hate pot. I hate it even more than hard drugs. I’ve taught high school for 25 years and I hate what marijuana does to my students. It goes beyond missing homework assignments. My students become less curious when they start smoking pot. I’ve seen it time and time again. People say pot makes you more creative, but from what I’ve seen, it narrows my students’ minds until they only reference the world in relation to the drug. They’ll say things like: “I went to the beach and got so high,” or “I went to a concert and got so high.” They start choosing their friends based on the drug. I hate when people say that it’s just experimenting. Because from what I’ve seen, it’s when my students stop experimenting.”[0] [0] http://www.humansofnewyork.com/post/129574836736/i-hate-pot-i-hate-it-even-more-than-hard-drugs http://www.humansofnewyork.com/post/129574836736/i-hate-pot-...
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - xj9 11y ago
    Teenagers should not smoke cannabis or consume alcohol, not because it is harmful to adults, but because it is harmful to them. Teenagers should not consume any kind of mind-altering substance because it fucks their their brain development. There are very few proven negative side-effects of cannabis on healthy adults.
afarrell 11y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_tx_fTjhBI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_tx_fTjhBI Basically takes that same tack.
mistercow 11y ago
> pot makes you feel fine with being bored The problem with that is that it's also super not backed up by data.
- tonyarkles 11y ago
  Anecdote, data, yadda yadda. This is precisely why pot has a very infrequent place in my life. In my misspent youth, I came to the same realization: when I was smoking weed frequently, I had no problem just doing nothing with my life. Edit: on the flip side, I have come up with some really cool solutions to problems after having a bit. But it'll never be a frequent thing for me again, precisely because of the probability of just getting back to the "OK with not doing anything" state.
  - static_noise 11y ago
    > it'll never be a frequent thing for me again This is how drugs are taken best: Not frequent.
    - mistercow 11y ago
      Sorry, that's just still a huge overgeneralization. If you are deriving significant therapeutic benefit from a drug, this statement is completely false.
  - mistercow 11y ago
    >Anecdote, data, yadda yadda. Sorry, are you waving away the comparative value of hard data and personal experience? > when I was smoking weed frequently, I had no problem just doing nothing with my life Sounds like pot isn't for really you then. I'd even be OK with a statement like "A danger of pot is that some people find it makes them OK with being bored". But making sweeping generalizations that don't apply to everybody (and haven't even been shown to apply to most or many people) is exactly what is wrong with anti-drug propaganda. First off it's bad because, you know, lying is wrong. Secondly, it destroys your credibility with anyone who decides to see for themselves, and doesn't have anything close to the experience you described. And with drugs like cocaine, meth and heroin out there, it's probably a good idea for kids to have someone with a little credibility to turn to when they want to know what's up.
FireBeyond 11y ago
If you want to convince teenagers not to try (certain) drugs - have them watch Trainspotting and Requiem For A Dream. Emotionally punishing, both of them.
- pstuart 11y ago
  Sigh. Then have them read Bukowski and have them never touch a drink again. Edit: my brother died of a heroin overdose, so I have zero fucking tolerance for this bullshit simplistic reasoning.
- MichaelGG 11y ago
  Eh Trainspotting has a decent chance of encouraging heroin use. At least that was my (apparently not too uncommon) reaction to the film. Requiem seemed too nonsensical. And all they really do is show that you should have money and the real problems aren't the drugs but finances and society.
  - stuaxo 11y ago
    I'm curious about how, it seemed pretty horrible what thy were going through.
    - user_0001 11y ago
      "wow the fun bits look fun, as long as I don't get addicted....." If you are a drug user, reading / watching something that others may thing would turn people away from drugs, a certain kind of drug user (perhaps more adventurous) will be thinking, "yeah I'd like to try that". Used to be like that for me and others I knew. Case in point, all the PCP scare stories, "man gets super human strength, fights off 10 police, gets naked". I would just focus on the "gets super human strength" - yeah should get some of that. But at the end of the day, drugs are pretty stupid. Fun. But stupid. Doesn't mean we should stop people taking them. Lots of things are stupid - really, if you think about it. Riding your bike down mountains, any of the more "extreme" sports, rock climbing. Anything with a risk that isn't necessary. But it is up to the individual to weigh the risk, the "fun" reward and decide what they want to do
TelmoMenezes 11y ago
Bullshit. There are numerous counter-examples to this, from artists and musicians to game developers, engineers and scientists. I suspect that the perceived correlation between smoking cannabis and being a loser is that successful cannabis smokers have a strong incentive against disclosing this habit -- they could lose their jobs, or be excluded from further opportunities. They also have more resources and possibly life experience and wisdom to protect themselves from law enforcement and the social status quo (i.e people like you who might judge them unfairly). Of course I am not advocating cannabis use. I am advocating seeing what works for you and making up your own mind. Some people love coffee, some people don't. None of our business. One problem I suspect that the status quo has with cannabis is that it is a type of drug that makes you more relaxed about status games. Some people describe the experience like this: it's not that you don't want to do things anymore, it's that you don't care so much about what other people think you should be doing. But mostly, cannabis is illegal because of racism (it was associated with black people and the jazz scene when it became popular in the west) while alcohol -- a much more dangerous drug that is indeed heavily used to mask boredom -- is ok because white people were used to it, it was part of their culture.
- kalleboo 11y ago
  > There are numerous counter-examples to this I'm not saying the GP is correct (I'd rather see a study than "something a cartoon said"), but there are "numerous counter-examples" to everything. Pack-a-day smokers who lived to 110, high-functional alcoholics, people who lived long lives around lead, mercury and asbestos. That doesn't mean you don't want to encourage people to not try to beat the odds.
  - TelmoMenezes 11y ago
    Tobacco smoking, alcohol abuse and exposure to lead, mercury and asbestos have been shown to have strong negative health effects by extensive studies with a lot of statistical power and grounded in theory. This is not the case for cannabis use. The public perception of cannabis as having horrible negative health consequences comes from state propaganda, not science. Look it up yourself. But look for scientific articles, not newspaper articles. So before you use that classical argument, you have to actually have some data that provides evidence for the substance under question being generally harmful. Carl Sagan (one of the counter-examples) used to confront his scientist friends with this, and they were surprised to find that there is indeed very little scientific support for this view. For a while, the strongest result was that cannabis could help trigger early schizophrenia, but even this research is on shaky grounds (turns out that the population under study was highly biased).
danschumann 11y ago
When I was going through the period of learning to program where every solution creates 3 more problems, the hard times, the learning, I was smoking. I made a rule. "IF I SMOKE, I CAN ONLY PROGRAM AFTERWARDS" IT WORKED!!!! :P
draw_down 11y ago
My favorite part about this quote is that it comes from a television show.

Vexs 11y ago

Seriously, the only things that have ever made me think a second time about drugs are the honest descriptions of it, not the "I did drugs and now I have no teeth" kinda descriptions, but the ones that go, "When you're on meth, meth feels great! Everything is amazing, you feel like you can do so much, but when you're off it everything seems boring! So you go back for more, and eventually you're addicted." kinda descriptions. If you talk about LSD, and say, "I've had some amazing times on it, and other times I've had spiders in my eyes", I think most people would be less likely to try it. Sure, not everyone, but still more than people saying just spiders in your eyes. I mean, it's a classical argument tactic, give something up to make your point more valid. But damned if it doesn't work.

astazangasta 11y ago
Or, just do drugs. I mean, LSD is great, and people should try it. Smoking pot is also nice, I've done some great writing while stoned. Heck, Paul Erdos did amphetamines his whole life. Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?
- philwelch 11y ago
  We're not; it's just one drug cartel trying to push out the competition. Whenever you hear drug use described as "self-medicating", you're hearing the notion that drugs like Zoloft and Ritalin are ok but drugs like marijuana and MDMA aren't.
- hristov 11y ago
  Nobody has ever done any great writing while stoned. Even Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most pro-drug writers ever, said that pot is the only drug that prevents him from doing any good work. And no, people should not try LSD. LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia, and that is no fun at all. It is better not to risk it. Just because you may have gotten lucky so far, there is no reason to invite others to take spin on the russian roulette. If you have any mental illness in your family, it is strongly advisable you steer clear, but even if you don't, it is not worth the risk.
  - pstuart 11y ago
    > LSD leads to a high danger of psychosis or schizophrenia Citations please. It's a powerful drug but has incredible value when used properly. If you're going to start wringing your hands over dangerous drugs, start with the killers of today: alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs.
    - hristov 11y ago
      http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302 http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196512022732302
      - Cryptokeeper 11y ago
        That article is 50 years old. Perhaps this one from 2013: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063972 http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... "21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems."
        thrwyycombinatr 11y ago
        But temporary schizophrenia is very common. Cmon guys, this is ridiculous. I've seen it so many times. It literally re-wires your brain. And yes, temporary schizophrenia can be extremely dangerous. This is something no one can argue. I hate pedants.
- Houshalter 11y ago
  C0nc0rdance is a scientist who makes well researched videos about various subjects, and did a few videos on the health effects of marijuana: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnNPm5cG85c It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless or non-addictive. LSD can cause mental illness to emerge in some people. I also remember a study that gave LSD to 10 people during a religious sermon. 9 of them went on the be preachers or priests later in life. That doesn't necessarily mean it's bad. But anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. Amphetamines certainly seem pretty cool. Especially if you have ADHD. But it definitely has side effects and potential for addiction. It's long term effects are not well studied, and a few studies I did see were concerning. E.g. brain damage in monkeys, and a group of kids taking it did worse than the control group after 3 years. I think people should be educated on the risks and facts before they decide to take a drug. If they still want to do it, fine. But at least they know the risks. And it's not enough just to put a warning sticker on the back of it that no one reads. Even widespread education that a drug is dangerous isn't enough. Everyone knows cigarettes cause cancer, but why do new people take up smoking?
  - forgetsusername 11y ago
    >It may not be the most harmful drug, but it's certainly not harmless I'm no advocate of the claims that marijuana is "harmless" or, as some even claim, "good for you". But harm is relative. Sitting in your chair all day is harmful. Eating half the food we do is harmful, as are most medications. Arguing that marijuana is "not harmless" isn't much of an argument at all.
    - Houshalter 11y ago
      According to that video, it increases cancer risk at a higher rate than cigarettes, and it is very addictive to some percent of the population.
  - pantalaimon 11y ago
    > anything with that powerful an effect on the mind is concerning. I find that statement absurd, anything with an effect that powerful should be cherished! Would life be desirable if it were stripped from all emotions, as they too have a powerful effect on the mind? Even if you agreed to that, it wouldn't be feasible as we are biological creatures and not pure rational beings. Denying that our biological self exists, with feelings and all, doesn't solve anything. The spiritual experience you describe is just another part of the human condition, I don't quite believe that 9 out of 10 people on LSD would become preachers, but I see how it can lead to a better understanding of religion. This doesn't require superstition, quite the opposite. When you know that those effects are caused by LSD or substances contained in Mushrooms, ferns or cacti, you don't need a higher power as an explanation for this peculiar state of mind. You might however find yourself coming to conclusions about life that other people on similar states of mind (whether induced by drugs or other means is irrelevant here) had before you, and who used the vehicle of religion to transport them. So yes, psychedelics, as well as most drugs, should not be taken lightly, but banning them is like razing the Niagara Falls because someone might fall over the edge.
- qmalxp 11y ago
  I think it's a bit misleading to simply say "LSD is great and you should try it". It can be interesting, but also can be scary as fuck, and you should be in a good place mentally before trying it.
  - visarga 11y ago
    I read an article yesterday about micro-dosing LSD at a level where no hallucinations appear, but a boost in energy and creativity is felt. Like a different kind of coffee that doesn't wane after only two hours.
    - ryanlol 11y ago
      Microdosing of psychedelics isn't very well (or at all?) researched and it's hard to tell whether what people are experiencing is a placebo or not.
  - astazangasta 11y ago
    "Snorkeling is great and you should try it," is a similar statement I might make with no qualifications or equivocation from you. Many pleasurable activities have attendant dangers that you should be aware of before engaging in them. Drugs are no different, except we surround them with the stink of moral judgment and refuse to educate people on how to use them safely.
    - s73v3r 11y ago
      Snorkeling and psychotropic drugs are two completely different things.
    - qmalxp 11y ago
      The difference is most people snorkeling for the first time do it with an instructor who is very much interested in their well-being. I don't think the guy who sells you LSD is gonna lose sleep if you happen to develop a lifelong mental condition.
- jeffdavis 11y ago
  "Why are we trying to convince everyone not to do drugs again?" I guess you could say that occasional use is not a big problem for most drugs. But I wouldn't recommend it, because most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply. We dismiss people who join cults that sound crazy -- an alien ship coming to rescue them or something -- but I think a high percentage of people could be recruited if the cult appears at just the right time in their lives. If you are a regular user of drugs, it's like always having the cult recruiter in your house, just waiting for the right time.
  - visarga 11y ago
    > most people go through some vulnerable time when they could become addicted (or otherwise abuse drugs), and at that time you don't want to have the stuff in your house or a dealer friend ready to supply Sometimes people do drugs to cope with their other problems in life. They need drugs as a reprieve. Life can be hard and people have used alcohol, pot and many other substances to create a refuge. Of course that doesn't solve the problem, but solving the problem is not always the top priority, and many times the problem has no solution. Why should we morally deny a refuge from anxiety and suffering to other people?
    - jeffdavis 11y ago
      Sure, they can help, too. But I wouldn't recommend it, because I have no idea which drugs would help and which would make things worse. I'm not suggesting we deny anyone anything. I'm answering the question: "why do we try to convince people not to use drugs?".
- andrepd 11y ago
  "LSD is great, and people should try it" is as dishonest and misleading and agenda-pushing as "pot makes your teeth fall off".

ossreality 11y ago

I almost want to login to my non-throwaway/hellbanned account just to laugh at this notion. The times I've been most curious. Most engrossed in a piece of new tech has been when I'm high. Some night, I will go home from a 9-10 hour work day and get high to relax and make dinner and then go to bed... but will wind up reading about the latest and greatest in container tech, or whatever. The notion that pot makes you distinctly less interested is just laughable in my opinion.

cbgb 11y ago
I think that what you may be experiencing is a heightened sense of concentration toward a passion of yours that you were passionate about before you smoked pot. However, think about children who smoke pot from an early age and don't develop the kind of curiosity that I'm sure proceeded the pot smoking you're talking about. Did you first discover your passions while you were young, impressionable, and smoking pot? Or did that come afterward, after all the initial experimentation and learning about yourself had already occurred? I think the following quote from a NYC high school teacher better explains what I'm trying to get at: “I hate pot. I hate it even more than hard drugs. I’ve taught high school for 25 years and I hate what marijuana does to my students. It goes beyond missing homework assignments. My students become less curious when they start smoking pot. I’ve seen it time and time again. People say pot makes you more creative, but from what I’ve seen, it narrows my students’ minds until they only reference the world in relation to the drug. They’ll say things like: “I went to the beach and got so high,” or “I went to a concert and got so high.” They start choosing their friends based on the drug. I hate when people say that it’s just experimenting. Because from what I’ve seen, it’s when my students stop experimenting.”[0] [0] http://www.humansofnewyork.com/post/129574836736/i-hate-pot-i-hate-it-even-more-than-hard-drugs http://www.humansofnewyork.com/post/129574836736/i-hate-pot-...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- xj9 11y ago
  Teenagers should not smoke cannabis or consume alcohol, not because it is harmful to adults, but because it is harmful to them. Teenagers should not consume any kind of mind-altering substance because it fucks their their brain development. There are very few proven negative side-effects of cannabis on healthy adults.

afarrell 11y ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_tx_fTjhBI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_tx_fTjhBI Basically takes that same tack.

mistercow 11y ago

> pot makes you feel fine with being bored The problem with that is that it's also super not backed up by data.

tonyarkles 11y ago
Anecdote, data, yadda yadda. This is precisely why pot has a very infrequent place in my life. In my misspent youth, I came to the same realization: when I was smoking weed frequently, I had no problem just doing nothing with my life. Edit: on the flip side, I have come up with some really cool solutions to problems after having a bit. But it'll never be a frequent thing for me again, precisely because of the probability of just getting back to the "OK with not doing anything" state.
- static_noise 11y ago
  > it'll never be a frequent thing for me again This is how drugs are taken best: Not frequent.
  - mistercow 11y ago
    Sorry, that's just still a huge overgeneralization. If you are deriving significant therapeutic benefit from a drug, this statement is completely false.
- mistercow 11y ago
  >Anecdote, data, yadda yadda. Sorry, are you waving away the comparative value of hard data and personal experience? > when I was smoking weed frequently, I had no problem just doing nothing with my life Sounds like pot isn't for really you then. I'd even be OK with a statement like "A danger of pot is that some people find it makes them OK with being bored". But making sweeping generalizations that don't apply to everybody (and haven't even been shown to apply to most or many people) is exactly what is wrong with anti-drug propaganda. First off it's bad because, you know, lying is wrong. Secondly, it destroys your credibility with anyone who decides to see for themselves, and doesn't have anything close to the experience you described. And with drugs like cocaine, meth and heroin out there, it's probably a good idea for kids to have someone with a little credibility to turn to when they want to know what's up.

FireBeyond 11y ago

If you want to convince teenagers not to try (certain) drugs - have them watch Trainspotting and Requiem For A Dream. Emotionally punishing, both of them.

pstuart 11y ago
Sigh. Then have them read Bukowski and have them never touch a drink again. Edit: my brother died of a heroin overdose, so I have zero fucking tolerance for this bullshit simplistic reasoning.
MichaelGG 11y ago
Eh Trainspotting has a decent chance of encouraging heroin use. At least that was my (apparently not too uncommon) reaction to the film. Requiem seemed too nonsensical. And all they really do is show that you should have money and the real problems aren't the drugs but finances and society.
- stuaxo 11y ago
  I'm curious about how, it seemed pretty horrible what thy were going through.
  - user_0001 11y ago
    "wow the fun bits look fun, as long as I don't get addicted....." If you are a drug user, reading / watching something that others may thing would turn people away from drugs, a certain kind of drug user (perhaps more adventurous) will be thinking, "yeah I'd like to try that". Used to be like that for me and others I knew. Case in point, all the PCP scare stories, "man gets super human strength, fights off 10 police, gets naked". I would just focus on the "gets super human strength" - yeah should get some of that. But at the end of the day, drugs are pretty stupid. Fun. But stupid. Doesn't mean we should stop people taking them. Lots of things are stupid - really, if you think about it. Riding your bike down mountains, any of the more "extreme" sports, rock climbing. Anything with a risk that isn't necessary. But it is up to the individual to weigh the risk, the "fun" reward and decide what they want to do

TelmoMenezes 11y ago

Bullshit. There are numerous counter-examples to this, from artists and musicians to game developers, engineers and scientists. I suspect that the perceived correlation between smoking cannabis and being a loser is that successful cannabis smokers have a strong incentive against disclosing this habit -- they could lose their jobs, or be excluded from further opportunities. They also have more resources and possibly life experience and wisdom to protect themselves from law enforcement and the social status quo (i.e people like you who might judge them unfairly). Of course I am not advocating cannabis use. I am advocating seeing what works for you and making up your own mind. Some people love coffee, some people don't. None of our business. One problem I suspect that the status quo has with cannabis is that it is a type of drug that makes you more relaxed about status games. Some people describe the experience like this: it's not that you don't want to do things anymore, it's that you don't care so much about what other people think you should be doing. But mostly, cannabis is illegal because of racism (it was associated with black people and the jazz scene when it became popular in the west) while alcohol -- a much more dangerous drug that is indeed heavily used to mask boredom -- is ok because white people were used to it, it was part of their culture.

kalleboo 11y ago
> There are numerous counter-examples to this I'm not saying the GP is correct (I'd rather see a study than "something a cartoon said"), but there are "numerous counter-examples" to everything. Pack-a-day smokers who lived to 110, high-functional alcoholics, people who lived long lives around lead, mercury and asbestos. That doesn't mean you don't want to encourage people to not try to beat the odds.
- TelmoMenezes 11y ago
  Tobacco smoking, alcohol abuse and exposure to lead, mercury and asbestos have been shown to have strong negative health effects by extensive studies with a lot of statistical power and grounded in theory. This is not the case for cannabis use. The public perception of cannabis as having horrible negative health consequences comes from state propaganda, not science. Look it up yourself. But look for scientific articles, not newspaper articles. So before you use that classical argument, you have to actually have some data that provides evidence for the substance under question being generally harmful. Carl Sagan (one of the counter-examples) used to confront his scientist friends with this, and they were surprised to find that there is indeed very little scientific support for this view. For a while, the strongest result was that cannabis could help trigger early schizophrenia, but even this research is on shaky grounds (turns out that the population under study was highly biased).

danschumann 11y ago

When I was going through the period of learning to program where every solution creates 3 more problems, the hard times, the learning, I was smoking. I made a rule. "IF I SMOKE, I CAN ONLY PROGRAM AFTERWARDS" IT WORKED!!!! :P

draw_down 11y ago

My favorite part about this quote is that it comes from a television show.