8 ms·

As a recovering addict I’m quite mixed about legalisation. On one hand it helps out a lot of people and removes stigma around a form of indulgence. At the same

As a recovering addict I’m quite mixed about legalisation. On one hand it helps out a lot of people and removes stigma around a form of indulgence. At the same time this is probably creating orders of magnitude more addicts. The adverse effects of a strong dependence can be severe: from people letting life blast past them without much realisation to lung/brain function/psychological disorders. I wish we could have a proper debate about this to work out a regulated form of legalisation. Somehow this too is politicised and there’s a lot of misinformation (“weed is not addictive “ etc) so we get the bipolar version of this issue as we do with pretty much everything else these days

Krasnol 5y ago
I'm sure we'll get a lot discussion once the tabu is gone. People were reluctant to talk about it because of fear from stigma and prosecution. Most of the people you've heard talking about it were either "kids" or artists (musicians, comedians, etc.).
rconti 5y ago
> probably creating orders of magnitude more addicts [citation needed]
- jimsimmons 5y ago
  If there’s x% chance of addiction and the availability increases by few orders of magnitude wouldn’t it naturally follow?
  - chishaku 5y ago
    No. There is precedent in various US states and a handful of countries. Cost benefit analysis of what is actually happening in these places is a key motivator for the continued wave of legalization around the world. This is much studied. DYOR but here's a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=portugal+drug+policy&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=portugal+drug+policy&hl... Also, I'm not sure if you literally mean "a few orders of magnitude" or are using that phrase to simply mean "an increase".
    - jimsimmons 5y ago
      TIL thanks. By few OOM, I mean that the use is very small now due to taboo and legal barriers that it is likely to be faaar more pervasive once they go away. But your data seems to contradict this so I need to do more research
      - sokoloff 5y ago
        Is the use very small now? In the US, even before state-by-state decriminalization, anyone who wanted it could quite easily get it. There will be an uptick in consumption once it’s more convenient to buy and has better QC and labeling, but I’d be shocked if overall use even doubled let alone went up 100x.
      - monopoledance 5y ago
        Germany is not Singapore. You won't face any legal consequences in most places for minor possession, and even dealing weed won't necessarily get you prison time. In Germany everyone who wants to smoke weed, smokes weed, legal or not. It's really, really prevalent as of now.
  - immmmmm 5y ago
    no. legalisation or at least decriminalisation can lead to less use, as was the case in portugal for instance.
  - yodsanklai 5y ago
    No. Because availability is high already. Especially for teenagers who are most vulnerable to addiction. Also, making it legal can also help promoting safe usage, rather than simply pretending the problem doesn't exist.
    - piva00 5y ago
      > Also, making it legal can also help promoting safe usage This is one of the main arguments that I support for legalisation. I grew up in Brazil, living there up to my late 20s, moved to Sweden and have lived here for the best part of a decade. Drug education in both countries is abysmal. Abysmal and dangerous, pushing people into ignorance and killing users in the process because they are simply ignorant about dangers, dosage, etc. In Brazil the D.A.R.E. program was imported and used in public schools for a long time, I went through it in 4th grade, the program is taught by a police officer coming every week to class to basically repeat Nancy Reagan's stupidity "Just say no!". There is no deeper exploration of the topic, just say no. In Sweden from what I can gather through friends that were educated here, drug education is basically the same as in Brazil, just say no to drugs and all drugs are equivalent. I have a friend that was terrified for years as a teenager when she found out her sister smoked pot, she was taught in school that pot, heroin, cocaine, all are equally dangerous and will kill you over time, no matter what. For 2 years this girl lived with the anxiety of not wanting to tell on her sister and at the same time in absolute fear for her sister's life. Drug users in Sweden are absolutely irresponsible due to their ignorance. It's hard to find people who actually know the basics of harm reduction. The danger is compounded by the fear of actually calling an ambulance if needed, because in Sweden it's not only illegal to possess, sell, distribute drugs but also to consume them, if some drug's trace is found in a blood or urine test then that, by itself, is a crime that could be prosecuted. People simply avoid calling an ambulance in dangerous drug situations due to this draconian policy, as a result Sweden has the highest death rate of drug users in the whole EU, something like 25x the rate of Portugal and 20x the rate of the Netherlands. Education is necessary in all aspects of life and the war on drugs made education about drugs absolutely atrocious even in supposedly progressive and well-educated societies.
  - saiya-jin 5y ago
    No, anybody who wants weed knows how to get some, of questionable quality, elevated price and can't avoid mingling with people who more often than not deal with hard drugs, illegal weapons etc. I would expect the opposite in fact - legal stuff loses quite a bit of its cool factor for youth, its not much rebelling if you can buy it in shop just around the corner, with better quality and effect you exactly prefer. Added tax revenue is just a bonus. Even strong cannabis usage is very easy to wean off compared to hard stuff like alcohol or tobacco... which is completely legal.
    - jimsimmons 5y ago
      > questionable quality, elevated price and can't avoid mingling with people who more often than not deal with hard drugs, illegal weapons etc. How many people have stayed away from weed or used it less frequently due to these reasons? If they were to go away and weed was just another shop like it is here in SF, don’t you think the consumption would spike? Agree with the cool factor being undercut. But weed he hella fun and can get you hooked. Take it from someone who has struggled with recovery: it’s not easy to quit. I suggest you browse r/leaves subreddit to see how many people struggle with it
- iostream23 5y ago
  Cannabis “addicts” Which has dubious harm potential, considering that not a single human being has ever fatally overdosed on cannabis in the history of the world. I’m not justifying my choice of vice, merely pointing out that it’s safer than coffee
  - jimsimmons 5y ago
    Harm potential is not dubious. Do browse r/leaves subreddit to see how many people struggle with it
    - james_burden 5y ago
      Also the little (but becoming increasingly more) known cannabinoid induced hyperemesis.
      - meowfly 5y ago
        It's also very well established that cannabis can cause psychosis[1] or depersonalization disorder[2]. Most conversations around cannabis risks usually just reference teens but that's just because there is a strong link between early teen cannabis psychosis and schizophrenia. My understanding is adults over 30, while way less likely to develop schizophrenia are not immune to transient cannabis induced psychosis or DPDR, 1. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psychosis-review https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psych... 2. https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2018.130202 https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.20...
iostream23 5y ago
Are you suggesting that I should remain in the legal shadows due to your inability to manage cannabis consumption?
- jimsimmons 5y ago
  In a way. Many people can text and drive but it’s advised against for everybody for a reason. it’s an extreme example but it illustrates a point that ultimately it’s a trade off between liberty and having guard rails. I’m just disappointed that we seem to be going from one extreme to the other without considering intermediate options.
  - iostream23 5y ago
    Well, it’s clear that we are at loggerheads. I fundamentally disagree with and resent your position (you are trying to restrict my daily psychiatric medicines and the closest thing to a religious sacrament this old atheist can acknowledge) but I don’t think its appropriate to hijack this thread to debate this alleged issue. I won’t be visiting Reddit to hear about the alleged harm cannabis causes some people, and as I’ve stated, there’s never been a single overdose for cannabis in the history of the world. I wish you will find your peace without trying to step on my freedom as my use of cannabis does not harm me nor society nor you.
  - lopis 5y ago
    From the article, it doesn't sound like an extreme at all. The sale and consumption of weed products seems to be quite limited to certain places. But at the end of the day, this is all about regulating something that people are doing regardless of legality. People can be severely addicted to gambling, eating, and sex. Addiction's a mental illness that should be treat as such, without punishing the whole world for it.

Krasnol 5y ago

I'm sure we'll get a lot discussion once the tabu is gone. People were reluctant to talk about it because of fear from stigma and prosecution. Most of the people you've heard talking about it were either "kids" or artists (musicians, comedians, etc.).

rconti 5y ago

> probably creating orders of magnitude more addicts [citation needed]

jimsimmons 5y ago
If there’s x% chance of addiction and the availability increases by few orders of magnitude wouldn’t it naturally follow?
- chishaku 5y ago
  No. There is precedent in various US states and a handful of countries. Cost benefit analysis of what is actually happening in these places is a key motivator for the continued wave of legalization around the world. This is much studied. DYOR but here's a start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=portugal+drug+policy&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=portugal+drug+policy&hl... Also, I'm not sure if you literally mean "a few orders of magnitude" or are using that phrase to simply mean "an increase".
  - jimsimmons 5y ago
    TIL thanks. By few OOM, I mean that the use is very small now due to taboo and legal barriers that it is likely to be faaar more pervasive once they go away. But your data seems to contradict this so I need to do more research
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      Is the use very small now? In the US, even before state-by-state decriminalization, anyone who wanted it could quite easily get it. There will be an uptick in consumption once it’s more convenient to buy and has better QC and labeling, but I’d be shocked if overall use even doubled let alone went up 100x.
    - monopoledance 5y ago
      Germany is not Singapore. You won't face any legal consequences in most places for minor possession, and even dealing weed won't necessarily get you prison time. In Germany everyone who wants to smoke weed, smokes weed, legal or not. It's really, really prevalent as of now.
- immmmmm 5y ago
  no. legalisation or at least decriminalisation can lead to less use, as was the case in portugal for instance.
- yodsanklai 5y ago
  No. Because availability is high already. Especially for teenagers who are most vulnerable to addiction. Also, making it legal can also help promoting safe usage, rather than simply pretending the problem doesn't exist.
  - piva00 5y ago
    > Also, making it legal can also help promoting safe usage This is one of the main arguments that I support for legalisation. I grew up in Brazil, living there up to my late 20s, moved to Sweden and have lived here for the best part of a decade. Drug education in both countries is abysmal. Abysmal and dangerous, pushing people into ignorance and killing users in the process because they are simply ignorant about dangers, dosage, etc. In Brazil the D.A.R.E. program was imported and used in public schools for a long time, I went through it in 4th grade, the program is taught by a police officer coming every week to class to basically repeat Nancy Reagan's stupidity "Just say no!". There is no deeper exploration of the topic, just say no. In Sweden from what I can gather through friends that were educated here, drug education is basically the same as in Brazil, just say no to drugs and all drugs are equivalent. I have a friend that was terrified for years as a teenager when she found out her sister smoked pot, she was taught in school that pot, heroin, cocaine, all are equally dangerous and will kill you over time, no matter what. For 2 years this girl lived with the anxiety of not wanting to tell on her sister and at the same time in absolute fear for her sister's life. Drug users in Sweden are absolutely irresponsible due to their ignorance. It's hard to find people who actually know the basics of harm reduction. The danger is compounded by the fear of actually calling an ambulance if needed, because in Sweden it's not only illegal to possess, sell, distribute drugs but also to consume them, if some drug's trace is found in a blood or urine test then that, by itself, is a crime that could be prosecuted. People simply avoid calling an ambulance in dangerous drug situations due to this draconian policy, as a result Sweden has the highest death rate of drug users in the whole EU, something like 25x the rate of Portugal and 20x the rate of the Netherlands. Education is necessary in all aspects of life and the war on drugs made education about drugs absolutely atrocious even in supposedly progressive and well-educated societies.
- saiya-jin 5y ago
  No, anybody who wants weed knows how to get some, of questionable quality, elevated price and can't avoid mingling with people who more often than not deal with hard drugs, illegal weapons etc. I would expect the opposite in fact - legal stuff loses quite a bit of its cool factor for youth, its not much rebelling if you can buy it in shop just around the corner, with better quality and effect you exactly prefer. Added tax revenue is just a bonus. Even strong cannabis usage is very easy to wean off compared to hard stuff like alcohol or tobacco... which is completely legal.
  - jimsimmons 5y ago
    > questionable quality, elevated price and can't avoid mingling with people who more often than not deal with hard drugs, illegal weapons etc. How many people have stayed away from weed or used it less frequently due to these reasons? If they were to go away and weed was just another shop like it is here in SF, don’t you think the consumption would spike? Agree with the cool factor being undercut. But weed he hella fun and can get you hooked. Take it from someone who has struggled with recovery: it’s not easy to quit. I suggest you browse r/leaves subreddit to see how many people struggle with it
iostream23 5y ago
Cannabis “addicts” Which has dubious harm potential, considering that not a single human being has ever fatally overdosed on cannabis in the history of the world. I’m not justifying my choice of vice, merely pointing out that it’s safer than coffee
- jimsimmons 5y ago
  Harm potential is not dubious. Do browse r/leaves subreddit to see how many people struggle with it
  - james_burden 5y ago
    Also the little (but becoming increasingly more) known cannabinoid induced hyperemesis.
    - meowfly 5y ago
      It's also very well established that cannabis can cause psychosis[1] or depersonalization disorder[2]. Most conversations around cannabis risks usually just reference teens but that's just because there is a strong link between early teen cannabis psychosis and schizophrenia. My understanding is adults over 30, while way less likely to develop schizophrenia are not immune to transient cannabis induced psychosis or DPDR, 1. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psychosis-review https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/cannabis-induced-psych... 2. https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2018.130202 https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.20...

iostream23 5y ago

Are you suggesting that I should remain in the legal shadows due to your inability to manage cannabis consumption?

jimsimmons 5y ago
In a way. Many people can text and drive but it’s advised against for everybody for a reason. it’s an extreme example but it illustrates a point that ultimately it’s a trade off between liberty and having guard rails. I’m just disappointed that we seem to be going from one extreme to the other without considering intermediate options.
- iostream23 5y ago
  Well, it’s clear that we are at loggerheads. I fundamentally disagree with and resent your position (you are trying to restrict my daily psychiatric medicines and the closest thing to a religious sacrament this old atheist can acknowledge) but I don’t think its appropriate to hijack this thread to debate this alleged issue. I won’t be visiting Reddit to hear about the alleged harm cannabis causes some people, and as I’ve stated, there’s never been a single overdose for cannabis in the history of the world. I wish you will find your peace without trying to step on my freedom as my use of cannabis does not harm me nor society nor you.
- lopis 5y ago
  From the article, it doesn't sound like an extreme at all. The sale and consumption of weed products seems to be quite limited to certain places. But at the end of the day, this is all about regulating something that people are doing regardless of legality. People can be severely addicted to gambling, eating, and sex. Addiction's a mental illness that should be treat as such, without punishing the whole world for it.