4 ms·

Because it's a popular drug that's mostly harmless for most people in "normal" dosage and there has been a lot of disinformation spread by authorities. Now most

by narag 10y ago

Because it's a popular drug that's mostly harmless for most people in "normal" dosage and there has been a lot of disinformation spread by authorities. Now most cannabis consumers tend to see everything like a government conspiration, not believing even true adverse effects. Heavy use for enough time will get you in a mist of passivity and poor memory. Every experienced weed smoker would have told you so much, a few years ago. Now there's a resistance to concede even that.

givinguflac 10y ago
Your last paragraph is conjecture based on hearsay, and I disagree. I know many consistent "users" and all are successful, hardworking people who are engaged in their lives. Is it nice to relax for a night and chill? Of course. But to say that it affects how a person acts throughout their life is just wrong. But, lazy/passive people will find any excuse that isn't personal responsibility, so I think your study is flawed at best.
- throwawaycanada 10y ago
  Consistent users that are successful and hardworking are not usually also extremely heavy users. When I picture a heavy user I picture someone who gets high all day, every day.
  - metaphorm 10y ago
    > When I picture a heavy user I picture someone who gets high all day, every day. that's what I think of as well. however, many people will interpret "heavy user" as meaning like, someone who smokes a joint with any regularity at all. once a week might count as a heavy user by some definitions. the disagreement on what counts as heavy use is really the problem here. what you're describing is someone who is basically high all the time. very little disagreement that being high on cannabis profoundly effects your concentration and memory while you're high. a lot of controversy and ambiguity about what happens the day after.
  - bsenftner 10y ago
    If you have to "picture a heavy user" that implies you are using your imagination. That implies you don't know any. I personally know many daily, heavy users that are very successful, research scientists, 3D developers, media production digital artists, producers, and even studio heads. The idea that cannabis makes people passive is simply wrong. The idea that it impacts creativity or drive also simply wrong. If you don't have examples of successful daily pot users, those around you either hide it from you, or your circles do not have any. I work in technology's creative industries, and I have examples all around me.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- narag 10y ago
  My last paragraph isn't conjecture based on hearsay. It's more like 40 years of (sometimes first hand) experience and observing a lot of people. Ignore it at your own risk.
metaphorm 10y ago
> Heavy use for enough time will get you in a mist of passivity and poor memory. Every experienced weed smoker would have told you so much, a few years ago. Now there's a resistance to concede even that. depends on what you're counting as "heavy use" and "enough time". also depends on whether or not you still smoke, and how much, and how often. I don't disagree that there are some values for those parameters that do lead to "passivity and poor memory". we just don't really have a clear view on what the range of effects is across different values for those parameters, and how much variability there is within individuals. heavy use for one person might only be moderate use for another. the resistance to conceding those obvious points is really just based on ambiguity. yeah, every experienced smoker is familiar with the cannabis haze. the questions are really more about the specifics than the generals.
- JPKab 10y ago
  There's certainly a debate about what constitutes "heavy use". My thoughts on it are that once or twice a week, single doses that intoxicate probably aren't that bad. The issue is that there are some people who ingest cannabis not only on a daily basis, but throughout each of those days they are consistently ingesting it. I can't imagine this not having a detrimental effect, at least while they are using it this way.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
panzagl 10y ago
Weed is a religion. My most downvoted comment on Reddit was about stoned elementary school kids coming to my wife's class in the morning- apparently it doesn't happen and it's all just hearsay and gov't conspiracies.
- natdempk 10y ago
  This may be a bit odd, but I looked up this comment pretty easily because I was curious what it said to elicit such a strong response and I feel like you misrepresent it here. The comment is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/5bm3kp/colorado_cannabis_retailers_dont_sell_to_minors/d9pvi4m/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/5bm3kp/colorado_ca... It isn't your most down-voted comment. It has -3 and you have about 10 other comments with lower scores. In the comment you solely mention the smell of kids. This doesn't mean that they are using cannabis at all. This could easily be similar to kids whose parents smoke cigarettes. Yes second hand smoke is bad for the kids over time, but that doesn't make them stoned by any means. I don't disagree with you though that there are dogmatists around cannabis. There definitely are and they don't help anything.
  - panzagl 10y ago
    Hah, I forgot about baiting the French in that WWII thread... My wife works at a low socio-economic status school. They're not using directly, no they're not stoned to the 'whoa, dude' level, it's more of a general 'grogginess' that kind of goes away late in the morning. It's definitely 'anec-data' of the finest sort, but it's something the teachers notice and comment on. What I don't understand is why no one ever thinks that suddenly 'legalizing' a drug that produces a docile population is somehow more ominous than the previous gov't action to suppress it.
    - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
      How does she differentiate between those kids and the ones that simply have a biological clock mis-matched with school? Do they all definitely smell of the smoke? I ask mostly because I could have been that kid. I'm that adult. I smoke now, but my parents didn't and I didn't start while I was in school. My mother fought to get me awake for years: I wouldn't even wake up early for Santa Clause presents. Seriously, I chose to sleep and wait to open them until after we went to Grandma's house.
simplyluke 10y ago
Everyone knows people from high school/college too who started off as great high performing students and absolutely burned out at least in part due to abuse. Part of the problem is it makes you okay with not improving your condition.
- eonw 10y ago
  Though cannabis use can increase apathy, i don't think there is a lot of correlation, lots of kids step out of sports and other activities as they age, for many reasons. I am a daily user and have always had a burning desire to improve myself, my situation and the world around me. My list of hobbies and interests increases constantly and I haven't dropped very many, even the ones I suck at. Blanket statements are rarely correct.
simplyluke 10y ago
Everyone knows people from high school/college too who started off as great high performing students and absolutely burned out at least in part due to abuse. Part of the problem is it makes you okay with not improving your condition.

by narag 10y ago

givinguflac 10y ago

Your last paragraph is conjecture based on hearsay, and I disagree. I know many consistent "users" and all are successful, hardworking people who are engaged in their lives. Is it nice to relax for a night and chill? Of course. But to say that it affects how a person acts throughout their life is just wrong. But, lazy/passive people will find any excuse that isn't personal responsibility, so I think your study is flawed at best.

throwawaycanada 10y ago
Consistent users that are successful and hardworking are not usually also extremely heavy users. When I picture a heavy user I picture someone who gets high all day, every day.
- metaphorm 10y ago
  > When I picture a heavy user I picture someone who gets high all day, every day. that's what I think of as well. however, many people will interpret "heavy user" as meaning like, someone who smokes a joint with any regularity at all. once a week might count as a heavy user by some definitions. the disagreement on what counts as heavy use is really the problem here. what you're describing is someone who is basically high all the time. very little disagreement that being high on cannabis profoundly effects your concentration and memory while you're high. a lot of controversy and ambiguity about what happens the day after.
- bsenftner 10y ago
  If you have to "picture a heavy user" that implies you are using your imagination. That implies you don't know any. I personally know many daily, heavy users that are very successful, research scientists, 3D developers, media production digital artists, producers, and even studio heads. The idea that cannabis makes people passive is simply wrong. The idea that it impacts creativity or drive also simply wrong. If you don't have examples of successful daily pot users, those around you either hide it from you, or your circles do not have any. I work in technology's creative industries, and I have examples all around me.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
narag 10y ago
My last paragraph isn't conjecture based on hearsay. It's more like 40 years of (sometimes first hand) experience and observing a lot of people. Ignore it at your own risk.

metaphorm 10y ago

> Heavy use for enough time will get you in a mist of passivity and poor memory. Every experienced weed smoker would have told you so much, a few years ago. Now there's a resistance to concede even that. depends on what you're counting as "heavy use" and "enough time". also depends on whether or not you still smoke, and how much, and how often. I don't disagree that there are some values for those parameters that do lead to "passivity and poor memory". we just don't really have a clear view on what the range of effects is across different values for those parameters, and how much variability there is within individuals. heavy use for one person might only be moderate use for another. the resistance to conceding those obvious points is really just based on ambiguity. yeah, every experienced smoker is familiar with the cannabis haze. the questions are really more about the specifics than the generals.

JPKab 10y ago
There's certainly a debate about what constitutes "heavy use". My thoughts on it are that once or twice a week, single doses that intoxicate probably aren't that bad. The issue is that there are some people who ingest cannabis not only on a daily basis, but throughout each of those days they are consistently ingesting it. I can't imagine this not having a detrimental effect, at least while they are using it this way.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

panzagl 10y ago

Weed is a religion. My most downvoted comment on Reddit was about stoned elementary school kids coming to my wife's class in the morning- apparently it doesn't happen and it's all just hearsay and gov't conspiracies.

natdempk 10y ago
This may be a bit odd, but I looked up this comment pretty easily because I was curious what it said to elicit such a strong response and I feel like you misrepresent it here. The comment is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/5bm3kp/colorado_cannabis_retailers_dont_sell_to_minors/d9pvi4m/ https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/5bm3kp/colorado_ca... It isn't your most down-voted comment. It has -3 and you have about 10 other comments with lower scores. In the comment you solely mention the smell of kids. This doesn't mean that they are using cannabis at all. This could easily be similar to kids whose parents smoke cigarettes. Yes second hand smoke is bad for the kids over time, but that doesn't make them stoned by any means. I don't disagree with you though that there are dogmatists around cannabis. There definitely are and they don't help anything.
- panzagl 10y ago
  Hah, I forgot about baiting the French in that WWII thread... My wife works at a low socio-economic status school. They're not using directly, no they're not stoned to the 'whoa, dude' level, it's more of a general 'grogginess' that kind of goes away late in the morning. It's definitely 'anec-data' of the finest sort, but it's something the teachers notice and comment on. What I don't understand is why no one ever thinks that suddenly 'legalizing' a drug that produces a docile population is somehow more ominous than the previous gov't action to suppress it.
  - Broken_Hippo 10y ago
    How does she differentiate between those kids and the ones that simply have a biological clock mis-matched with school? Do they all definitely smell of the smoke? I ask mostly because I could have been that kid. I'm that adult. I smoke now, but my parents didn't and I didn't start while I was in school. My mother fought to get me awake for years: I wouldn't even wake up early for Santa Clause presents. Seriously, I chose to sleep and wait to open them until after we went to Grandma's house.

simplyluke 10y ago

Everyone knows people from high school/college too who started off as great high performing students and absolutely burned out at least in part due to abuse. Part of the problem is it makes you okay with not improving your condition.

eonw 10y ago
Though cannabis use can increase apathy, i don't think there is a lot of correlation, lots of kids step out of sports and other activities as they age, for many reasons. I am a daily user and have always had a burning desire to improve myself, my situation and the world around me. My list of hobbies and interests increases constantly and I haven't dropped very many, even the ones I suck at. Blanket statements are rarely correct.

simplyluke 10y ago