7 ms·

It's very interesting how this whole period of cannabis prohibition has played out. First the UN says cannabis is bad on advice from the US. My country, Sweden,

It's very interesting how this whole period of cannabis prohibition has played out. First the UN says cannabis is bad on advice from the US. My country, Sweden, bans the THC cannabinoid. And institutes a zero tolerance policy. So CBD was never banned and people have been selling CBD oils in shops, and even pharmacies, for a while now. The US leading the way in decriminalization apparently banned CBD on a federal level. This just shows how little governments knew about cannabis when it was banned. And finally; I used to be dependent on cannabis. It has been a very hard struggle to stop smoking so much cannabis and focus on working, sober instead. I can't imagine what that struggle would be like if cannabis was being sold for recreational use where I live. Someone somewhere once said that cannabis makes it fun to be bored, and that's the real danger with it. It's not toxic, it's not terribly addictive but you get addicted to feeling good when doing nothing at all. Edit: Just to clarify if anyone is curious, CBD was being handled by the Swedish quivalent of the FDA. While THC was being handled as an illegal narcotic. So our FDA could approve the use and sale of CBD based products without affecting the legal ban of THC.

wslh 8y ago
> Someone somewhere once said that cannabis makes it fun to be bored, and that's the real danger with it. It's not toxic, it's not terribly addictive but you get addicted to feeling good when doing nothing at all. Well, like social media or watching TV. It is not clear what is your point.
- goldenkey 8y ago
  It's just the middle paths fallacy. Acting as if you "see the perspective" of the lawmakers because you used to use the substance but are now evolved enough to see its triflings. But when the triflings are cheetos eating and alleviating boredom, any legalese doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Marijuana is simply illegal because of history and bad leadership in government. Things are changing - but make no mistake, whatever vices MJ has are not any reason for the law to be involved
  - posterboy 8y ago
    > whatever vices MJ has are not any reason for the law to be involved first of all you are relativizing because you are not even sure. And then the law get's involved in much more trivial issues like littering. That's oranges to apples, but the point is I guess that law exerts control not just to protect the active individual.
- throwanem 8y ago
  Those are also harmful when taken to excess.
  - jsjohnst 8y ago
    Breathing oxygen is harmful when taken to excess. Try breathing 100% oxygen at 33ft underwater and you very likely won’t live long. The point I’m making is something can be BOTH very vital to our health as well as a cause of death if misused. Hence outright prohibitions of things that “can be bad if misused” is just silly.
    - throwanem 8y ago
      The argument isn’t in favor of prohibition; the argument is that marijuana has risks. The argument also isn’t, I think, that marijuana, or television, or social media, is “very vital to our health”. So I’m not super clear on what you’re arguing against, here.
      - jsjohnst 8y ago
        > The argument isn’t in favor of prohibition Then you didn’t do a very good job of communicating your argument, as it could easily be assumed you were against it existing. > the argument is that marijuana has risks. As does almost everything in the world, especially when misused. I gave one concrete example of this, happy to provide a lot more. Sugar has significant health risks when consumed in excess, there’s a world wide obesity pandemic in fact, should we ban sugar or otherwise inhibit it’s consumption? > The argument also isn’t, I think, that marijuana, or television, or social media, is “very vital to our health”. This shows your lack of knowledge on the subject. For those with Crohn’s disease (a debilitating auto-immune disease), CBD is more effective at controlling symptoms than any Rx drug or diet plan. The most commonly prescribed drug is Humira and costs patients / insurance $11,500 per month (assuming weekly injections). The company behind Humira has made more money on Humira sales (it’s closing in on $100B in sales) than any other prescription drug in history (including Viagra). Yet it’s not as effective as taking CBD when it is properly extracted and can be done so at a significantly lower patient cost. I’m not advocating for the “CBD head shop” explosion we are seeing, as many sell utter crap, and in rare cases crap so bad it could be dangerous. I am advocating instead for us ending a century old racism influenced law and getting proper labs and real scientists working on quality products for all.
- freeflight 8y ago
  And just like all of those, everything should be enjoyed responsibly. Cannabis can quite easily be abused when just consumed "out of boredom", which sadly tends to happen quite often. Imho it should enable or enhance what one does, and not be the sole reason one does anything at all.
  - root_axis 8y ago
    I think people should eat dinner before dessert, but that's not really my prerogative except at my own dinner table. If someone wants to consume cannabis "out of boredom" that's completely fine.
    - EForEndeavour 8y ago
      I didn't see the comment you replied to as an attack on personal freedom, but as a commentary on what they think is and is not a poor life choice. Of course you're free to do as you wish with your own body and mind, provided it's legal and doesn't infringe on others' freedoms. But there's no denying that a lot of things you could choose to do to yourself would be pretty stupid by any reasonable standard. Just because you can get stoned whenever you feel bored doesn't mean you should. The fact that nobody has the right to tell other people what to do to themselves shouldn't preclude discussion.
posterboy 8y ago
> you get addicted to feeling good when doing nothing at all That I will say again and again is a placebo effect, perhaps mediated through some active ingredients, the taste, or just lack of oxygen, but this euphoric image that it has, that's mediated through social engineering.
- throwanem 8y ago
  What you say may be true of CBD, I don’t know, but your quote is from the grandparent comment’s description of cannabis, i.e. marijuana. It is an accurate description of that drug’s effect.
  - moate 8y ago
    Nah, you don't smoke CBD so OP is clearly talking about pot. "Pot is all placebo effect" is a novel, wacky theory I've never heard from the legalization opposition before, so that's sorta fun.
    - 50656E6973 8y ago
      CBD can be and is commonly smoked, it can be in flower form or concentrate
      - moate 8y ago
        Brah, IDK what your street corner pharmacist told you, but if you're smoking "CBD flowers", you're smoking weed.
        jsjohnst 8y ago
        Not necessarily. You can buy concentrates to vape that are very CBD rich and contain almost no THC (<0.1%).
        moate 8y ago
LambdaComplex 8y ago
> Someone somewhere once said that cannabis makes it fun to be bored, and that's the real danger with it. It's not toxic, it's not terribly addictive but you get addicted to feeling good when doing nothing at all. I think that was South Park
- wrboyce 8y ago
  Yep, Randy Marsh.
slantaclaus 8y ago
A lot of people have had problems with alcohol too and that’s not illegal.
- mikekchar 8y ago
  Speaking as someone who definitely doesn't want alcohol banned, this is kind of a specious argument. Bad-for-you-X is not banned therefore bad-for-you-Y should not be banned either, is not really sensible. A better argument, should you wish to produce one, is to describe the societal benefit you get that offsets the potential negative consequences. Or perhaps you can explain how banning does not produce the desired societal effect in the first place (I'm visiting Canada at the moment and it's amusing how legalisation of cannabis seems to have led to a dramatically reduced availability...) I think these kinds of arguments are going to be more effective in getting your message across.

wslh 8y ago

> Someone somewhere once said that cannabis makes it fun to be bored, and that's the real danger with it. It's not toxic, it's not terribly addictive but you get addicted to feeling good when doing nothing at all. Well, like social media or watching TV. It is not clear what is your point.

goldenkey 8y ago
It's just the middle paths fallacy. Acting as if you "see the perspective" of the lawmakers because you used to use the substance but are now evolved enough to see its triflings. But when the triflings are cheetos eating and alleviating boredom, any legalese doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Marijuana is simply illegal because of history and bad leadership in government. Things are changing - but make no mistake, whatever vices MJ has are not any reason for the law to be involved
- posterboy 8y ago
  > whatever vices MJ has are not any reason for the law to be involved first of all you are relativizing because you are not even sure. And then the law get's involved in much more trivial issues like littering. That's oranges to apples, but the point is I guess that law exerts control not just to protect the active individual.
throwanem 8y ago
Those are also harmful when taken to excess.
- jsjohnst 8y ago
  Breathing oxygen is harmful when taken to excess. Try breathing 100% oxygen at 33ft underwater and you very likely won’t live long. The point I’m making is something can be BOTH very vital to our health as well as a cause of death if misused. Hence outright prohibitions of things that “can be bad if misused” is just silly.
  - throwanem 8y ago
    The argument isn’t in favor of prohibition; the argument is that marijuana has risks. The argument also isn’t, I think, that marijuana, or television, or social media, is “very vital to our health”. So I’m not super clear on what you’re arguing against, here.
    - jsjohnst 8y ago
      > The argument isn’t in favor of prohibition Then you didn’t do a very good job of communicating your argument, as it could easily be assumed you were against it existing. > the argument is that marijuana has risks. As does almost everything in the world, especially when misused. I gave one concrete example of this, happy to provide a lot more. Sugar has significant health risks when consumed in excess, there’s a world wide obesity pandemic in fact, should we ban sugar or otherwise inhibit it’s consumption? > The argument also isn’t, I think, that marijuana, or television, or social media, is “very vital to our health”. This shows your lack of knowledge on the subject. For those with Crohn’s disease (a debilitating auto-immune disease), CBD is more effective at controlling symptoms than any Rx drug or diet plan. The most commonly prescribed drug is Humira and costs patients / insurance $11,500 per month (assuming weekly injections). The company behind Humira has made more money on Humira sales (it’s closing in on $100B in sales) than any other prescription drug in history (including Viagra). Yet it’s not as effective as taking CBD when it is properly extracted and can be done so at a significantly lower patient cost. I’m not advocating for the “CBD head shop” explosion we are seeing, as many sell utter crap, and in rare cases crap so bad it could be dangerous. I am advocating instead for us ending a century old racism influenced law and getting proper labs and real scientists working on quality products for all.
freeflight 8y ago
And just like all of those, everything should be enjoyed responsibly. Cannabis can quite easily be abused when just consumed "out of boredom", which sadly tends to happen quite often. Imho it should enable or enhance what one does, and not be the sole reason one does anything at all.
- root_axis 8y ago
  I think people should eat dinner before dessert, but that's not really my prerogative except at my own dinner table. If someone wants to consume cannabis "out of boredom" that's completely fine.
  - EForEndeavour 8y ago
    I didn't see the comment you replied to as an attack on personal freedom, but as a commentary on what they think is and is not a poor life choice. Of course you're free to do as you wish with your own body and mind, provided it's legal and doesn't infringe on others' freedoms. But there's no denying that a lot of things you could choose to do to yourself would be pretty stupid by any reasonable standard. Just because you can get stoned whenever you feel bored doesn't mean you should. The fact that nobody has the right to tell other people what to do to themselves shouldn't preclude discussion.

posterboy 8y ago

> you get addicted to feeling good when doing nothing at all That I will say again and again is a placebo effect, perhaps mediated through some active ingredients, the taste, or just lack of oxygen, but this euphoric image that it has, that's mediated through social engineering.

throwanem 8y ago
What you say may be true of CBD, I don’t know, but your quote is from the grandparent comment’s description of cannabis, i.e. marijuana. It is an accurate description of that drug’s effect.
- moate 8y ago
  Nah, you don't smoke CBD so OP is clearly talking about pot. "Pot is all placebo effect" is a novel, wacky theory I've never heard from the legalization opposition before, so that's sorta fun.
  - 50656E6973 8y ago
    CBD can be and is commonly smoked, it can be in flower form or concentrate
    - moate 8y ago
      Brah, IDK what your street corner pharmacist told you, but if you're smoking "CBD flowers", you're smoking weed.
      - jsjohnst 8y ago
        Not necessarily. You can buy concentrates to vape that are very CBD rich and contain almost no THC (<0.1%).
        moate 8y ago

LambdaComplex 8y ago

wrboyce 8y ago
Yep, Randy Marsh.

slantaclaus 8y ago

A lot of people have had problems with alcohol too and that’s not illegal.

mikekchar 8y ago
Speaking as someone who definitely doesn't want alcohol banned, this is kind of a specious argument. Bad-for-you-X is not banned therefore bad-for-you-Y should not be banned either, is not really sensible. A better argument, should you wish to produce one, is to describe the societal benefit you get that offsets the potential negative consequences. Or perhaps you can explain how banning does not produce the desired societal effect in the first place (I'm visiting Canada at the moment and it's amusing how legalisation of cannabis seems to have led to a dramatically reduced availability...) I think these kinds of arguments are going to be more effective in getting your message across.