11 ms·

This isn't complicated: marijuana is addictive to some people, but making it illegal doesn't solve that problem--it should be legal. But it's apparent that's to

This isn't complicated: marijuana is addictive to some people, but making it illegal doesn't solve that problem--it should be legal. But it's apparent that's too much nuance for the average politician. I'll add that I've also experienced this with caffeine: I've got more than one health reason to quit (heart arrhythmia, anxiety, insomnia), but I had a hell of a time quitting, with multiple failed attempts (now a few months out and hoping it sticks this time). And when I talk about it to the people around me, I get shocked and even defensive reactions. But my life is so much better when I'm not drinking coffee. Which is not to say that's the best decision for everyone.

rayiner 3y ago
> marijuana is addictive to some people, but making it illegal doesn't solve that problem--it should be legal. But it's apparent that's too much nuance for the average politician. By your logic, it's futile to ban harmful products, which is a weird take. Making something illegal influences social norms. It signals that something is "bad" and for "bad people." Not everyone will abide by that social signal, but most people will. Banning something where the rest of the culture is trying to normalize it probably is futile. But that doesn't mean that banning things doesn't work, or that legalizing things won't make the problem worse. It's hard to ignore that marijuana seems to be much more prevalent now that it's been legalized in many places.
- JPws_Prntr_Fngr 3y ago
  Great thinking! Surely this will work for alcohol too - let's do that one next.
  - rayiner 3y ago
    Banning alcohol works fine in Muslim countries where there’s not a 2,000 year religious tradition of alcohol use.
- croes 3y ago
  It's weird that alcohol is legal when marijuana isn't. The damage by alcohol is much higher. Banning alcohol didn't work.
  - edgyquant 3y ago
    The damage from alcohol was higher, when it was legal and cannibas was not. It remains to be seen if that stays the case.
    - TylerE 3y ago
      No it doesn’t. This is very very very settled science. Billions of people hVe been smoking the reefer for Millenia. Withdrawing from alcohol has well documented, and extremely dangerous physical side effects (this is why it’s done in a hospital when possible). cami is does not.
      - femiagbabiaka 3y ago
        Weed is stronger and more available now than ever. I've seen people get constipated, get night terrors, cold sweats, etc. from marijuana withdrawals. So I think GP is right, it's left to be seen.
        mcpackieh 3y ago
        > get night terrors [...] from marijuana withdrawals This one can be really bad, although it only lasts for about a week. Dreams so vivid it's terrifying, even when the content of the dreams seems mundane. If somebody were already marijuana as an emotional crutch, I think the bad dreams could have them running back to marijuana immediately.
        mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        I think you're undwrestimating it quite severely. I've had vivid nightmares every single night for months at a time after quitting weed(really heavy user). And hyperhidrosis for several weeks at least.
- gloryjulio 3y ago
  > By your logic, it's futile to ban harmful products, which is a weird take. How is that weird? Maybe try ban cigarette and alcohol first see if it works? I personally don't take any substances except coffee. Really wondering all those ppl who r advocating for banning weed smoke or drink alcohol personally?
- femiagbabiaka 3y ago
  But.. banning things doesn't work. People use illegal drugs anyways, and they do it openly. Legalizing weed alone didn't make the problem worse, the shift of the marijuana industry to mass production did. And that shift was caused by states granting business licenses to dispensaries. After that companies decided (just like alcohol until recently by the way) that the only metric to compete on was strength.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > By your logic, it's futile to ban harmful products, which is a weird take. You are engaging in the fallacy of composition: the argument was that it does not work for marijuana. Not that it does not work for harmful products. It is not generally valid to conclude from “X does not work for Y” and “Y is a Z” that “X does not work for any Z”.
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  > It signals that something is "bad" and for "bad people." Given the absurd disconnect between US law and anything resembling ethics, I doubt this is true. If you're on the left, you're as likely to see law enforcement as bad people, and if you're on the right, substitute guns for marijuana and you're likely to have very different views. While some people might think this way at a surface level, I suspect the number of people who base their view of morality on laws is vanishingly small compared to the number of people who base their view of laws on their morality. > Banning something where the rest of the culture is trying to normalize it probably is futile. Good thing there's no cultural movement to normalize the substance we're talking about. > It's hard to ignore that marijuana seems to be much more prevalent now that it's been legalized in many places. Hard to ignore, but easy to explain with explanations other than "it made things worse". Does it occur to you that maybe people just aren't hiding their use now that it's legal?
  - overrun11 3y ago
    > Does it occur to you that maybe people just aren't hiding their use now that it's legal? But we know for a fact this isn't true because there's data on it. This isn't something we need to speculate about.
- adolph 3y ago
  > Making something illegal influences social norms. It signals that something is "bad" and for "bad people." This is often used by totalitarian governments. It leads to "Preference Falsification," an idea developed by Timur Kuran. Making something illegal for social reasons also degrades each person's sense of autonomy and self-governance. It invites jurisdiction within one's private sphere by removing each person's duty of "Obedience to the Unenforceable." Below is a key description from John Fletcher Moulton's article about it and links to an excellent Econtalk podcast discussing the idea. Preference falsification is the act of misrepresenting a preference under perceived public pressures. It involves the selection of a publicly expressed preference that differs from the underlying privately held preference (or simply, a public preference at odds with one’s private preference). People frequently convey to each other preferences that differ from what they would communicate privately under credible cover of anonymity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification Follow me in examining the three great domains of Human Action. First comes the domain of Positive Law, where our actions are prescribed by laws binding upon us, which must be obeyed. Next comes the domain of Free Choice, which includes all those actions as to which we claim and enjoy complete freedom. But between these two there is a third large and important domain in which there rules neither Positive Law nor Absolute Freedom. In that domain there is no law which inexorably determines our course of action, and yet we feel that we are not free to choose as we would. The degree of this sense of a lack of complete freedom in this domain varies in every case. . . . it is the domain of Obedience to the Unenforceable. The obedience is the obedience of a man to that which he cannot be forced to obey. He is the enforcer of the law upon himself . . . https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-obedience-to-the-unenforceable/ https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-obedience-to-the-... https://aleteia.org/2016/04/11/how-an-expert-in-blowing-things-up-decided-he-had-seen-enough/ https://aleteia.org/2016/04/11/how-an-expert-in-blowing-thin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fletcher_Moulton,_Baron_Moulton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fletcher_Moulton,_Baron_M... https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ362/hallam/NewspaperArticles/LawandManners.pdf https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ362/hallam/Newspap...
matrix_overload 3y ago
Interesting. Always had exactly the opposite with caffeine. Could never tell any effects except for the nice refreshing taste. Normally have 2 cups with breakfast, but can't tell any difference if I skip it (e.g. when travelling).
- reaperman 3y ago
  I can't drink any caffeine either. I'm a fairly large guy, but even 1/4th cup of coffee at 6:00AM causes the same problems - my Apple Watch starts complaining that I have high HR, I get anxiety that blocks me from doing productive work, and my sleep schedule gets completely screwed up.
  - colechristensen 3y ago
    For me I strongly believe it is other alkaloids in coffee and similar plant products which I’m particularly sensitive to. Artificially caffeinated beverages have much less of a negative effect than coffee. And coffee preparation method makes a significant difference as well. Espresso is better than drip coffee which is better than cold brew.
    - kerkeslager 3y ago
      > For me I strongly believe it is other alkaloids in coffee and similar plant products which I’m particularly sensitive to. This does seem to match my experience. Yerba mate doesn't produce the same reaction in me as coffee, despite having more caffeine (and no L-theanine, which could be a confounding factor when comparing with tea).
slibhb 3y ago
> This isn't complicated: marijuana is addictive to some people, but making it illegal doesn't solve that problem--it should be legal. But it's apparent that's too much nuance for the average politician. If weed is illegal and the law is enforced then fewer people will use it and fewer will become addicted. That might not "solve" the problem but it helps. I'm not arguing that weed should be illegal, only that making something illegal reduces its use.
- tehjoker 3y ago
  There's something to that, but I think that there have also been studies that show that regardless of policy, about the same percentage of the population uses drugs and can switch to different drugs when one gets too difficult to acquire. Not an expert on this by any means tho.
- croes 3y ago
  Prohibition didn't really work out for alcohol.
  - edgyquant 3y ago
    We aren’t talking about alcohol though.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      It didn’t work out well for marijuana, either, which isn’t surprising because alcohol has much more of the features the pro-prohibition argument relies on and yet alcohol prohibition was a disaster.
  - steve_adams_86 3y ago
    You’re being voted down at the moment, but I’m not sure why. I think we should view alcohol and cannabis very similarly. Both are potentially addictive and both can seriously harm a person’s life and family. Both require us to address the same question: how do we handle addictive substances in society? If made legal, then how do we navigate the normalization of a substance which can quite literally ruin a life? It prohibited, how do you manage the safety concerns and crime we know will stem from the ceaseless demand for drugs which are unregulated? How do we manage education in either case? In this sense, alcohol and cannabis are the same thing with the same problems attached.
_yb2s 3y ago
I've had the same experience with caffeine- I am very addicted and without it the withdrawal includes a bad headache, serious fatigue, and not being able to think about much else except wanting caffeine. Yet lots of people have told me with a straight face that I am "wrong" and caffeine is not addictive. Interesting, I also have the same symptoms as you, including insomnia even if I limit coffee to early AM. I think these effects are characteristic of "slow caffeine metabolizers," e.g. people for whom caffeine has an unusually long half life. My hypothesis is that for these people blood caffeine levels stay relatively high 24/7, so the body never gets to adapt to functioning without it, making addiction more likely. It's weird to me that people seem adverse to the idea that peoples bodies and genetics vary, and one persons experience isn't going to be the same as another.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  If you want to kick caffeine, I recommend switching to caffeine pills and continue using as many of them as you need to feel normal, then start ramping down the dose. Since pills are discrete it's hard to cheat. When I do this I usually start at 400mg (sometimes 600mg) a day then over the next month ramp down to 100mg a day until finally going to zero. It takes me about a month before I can function normal with no caffeine. ...then a few months later I decide to start again. Oh well. I've done the above about half a dozen times. It's fairly easy to defeat the chemical addiction which I experience as you describe (really awful headaches, fatigue, lack of concentration, etc), but eventually I'll pick it back up to get a little extra edge.
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    Something I used to do is make a big pot of coffee and sip on it throughout the day, which was very hard to regulate (and it was also just too much caffeiene). Now I make a single cup of coffee in the aeropress and I use 16 grams of beans which i weigh manually. And I only have one cup of coffee in the morning instead of multiples throughout the day. Point is, weighing beans and using the aeropress helps me keep my dosage consistent so I don't go overboard.
treeman79 3y ago
“I’m not addicted, it doesn’t affect me.” Every addict I know. Seen a number of people slowly change from it until they are no longer who they are. Never in a good way. Seen some who got off it. One because her husband has such a bad reaction (after several years of use) that he can’t ever touch it again. She became her old self again. Not quite as bright as she once was, but personality improved to the loving person I once knew.
samstave 3y ago
>"Boil Water?! What am I, a Chemist?!" - This may be a long one, but Ill start with simple and see what you think -- The addiction problem is really a dopamine (co)injection problem based on the pychological aspects of earlier experience which created the gates of dopamine/seratonin/melatonin/neural transports desires that affect behavior as you mature. The pathways that are made for each within the brain structure early form bonds, and then its layers of bonds that keep coming, but just like snow on branches, the growth is bigger, the WEIGHT is bigger on the earlier formed branches... (The pathways are formed by an experience that triggers the neurons to neuron (network) and as they do so, if firing patterns keep happening, certain pathways get higher bandwidth, and these pathways "trigger" behaviour due to high bandwidth and thats how we get/devlop/inherit/build AND CHANGE our "PERSON"-ality. So when you're traumatised at an early age - whatever triggers in the neuro-pathways are triggered will be stronger growing up - such that if its a dopamine trauma - you'll go after that largely as you mature... Its reversable, because your biological and physical brain is self aware (conscious, a toroid) - and so you can change your behavior of which neurals get stronger, but will power (desire) has to be the strongest thread. (But this is how BGP was born through LSD) (look at Ciscos comments re hoffmans 100)
teaearlgraycold 3y ago
I feel like something that could help would be a limit to the potency. I like weed - but I really just want a 5-10% THC flower with some CBD in there for good measure (still not convinced the CBD isn't a placebo, but it's there naturally so no harm in having it). But most shops near me don't sell anything less than 20% THC. WTF? Occasionally I can get something 10-15%. And if I'm lucky I can get something less than 10%.
- projectazorian 3y ago
  Mids are easier to get on the illegal market, ironically.
- asadotzler 3y ago
  So do less of it. The concentration is meaningless, the ingested and metabolized amount is what matters.
  - teaearlgraycold 3y ago
    Yes that's usually what I do. But I think in general the average potency at stores encourages people to do too much. It did for me when I first moved to a legal state. I had no idea what I would enjoy and just expected that the average THC content was a mid-level intensity. In reality it's at the top end.
- olyjohn 3y ago
  Then look for high-CBD strains. The weed plant that produces lots of CBD will not produce much THC. The inverse is also true. I see CBD strains all the time that are as low as 1% THC.
  - teaearlgraycold 3y ago
    High CBD strains, in my experience, are made to have almost no THC. 1% is too low IMO. And often they have even closer to 0%.
- thaumasiotes 3y ago
artur_makly 3y ago
how much better is your sleep? and did it improve almost overnight?
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  My sleep is a lot better. There were about two weeks were it was... inconsistent. I would be exhausted most of the time which helped me get to sleep but also more often anxious and irritable which would keep me up. The anxiety and irritability wore off after about two weeks, and the energy came back to what feels normal-ish at about three weeks. I do have ongoing problems with sleep, but it's become apparent that this is due to some bad sleep habits which I wasn't as conscious of when I was drinking coffee because I could just drink a bit extra the day after to make up for staying up late--i.e. I was covering up my bad sleep habits. When I actually discipline myself and follow good sleep hygiene habits, I sleep well, which wasn't the case when I was drinking coffee, even if I drank it only early in the day.
ericmcer 3y ago
Good point. You can expand this to every issue facing society, view it through the lens of a politician trying to grab as many votes as possible and our current state makes sense.
shams93 3y ago
Exactly, booze is legal, some people get addicted but prohibition does more harm than good. Cigarettes are even worse they really have no benefit of any kind to anyone, its pure, deadly addiction and totally level for adults.
- paiute 3y ago
  Your attitude to cigarettes sounds awfully similar to what people said about mj 20 years ago. Someone i know actually thinks there’s a link between a crack down on smoking and mass shootings. Just a pet theory, but some folks just need to chill out with a cig behind the maintenance shed.
  - tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
    [flagged]
- e_i_pi_2 3y ago
  Alcohol addition rates are also (slightly) higher than marijuana addiction rates (14% and 9% last time I saw), so it's a great comparison
- dionidium 3y ago
  > prohibition does more harm than good. According to our shared oral mythology about bootlegging gangsters, yes. According to all available crime and health data from the time it was an incredible success. Crime fell. People got healthier. There was less domestic abuse (people forget that temperance was first and foremost a women's movement). None of this was outweighed by the increase in organized crime. Prohibition was a "failure" in the sense that people like alcohol and do not wish it to be illegal. It was not a failure by any other definition (boogeyman stories about "organized crime" notwithstanding). This is easier to see if your baseline is, "excessive alcohol consumption is a societal disaster" (which is the correct baseline). Prohibition would have to generate a staggering level of harm to match the existing harms of consumption.
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  > Cigarettes are even worse they really have no benefit of any kind to anyone No benefit of any kind to anyone? Jesus, the arrogance of this guy. What makes you think you can make such blanket statements about everyone's experience like this? Cigarettes are great for getting a boost of energy, or for having an excuse to talk to a stranger. And sure, both of those are things that we shouldn't need in a perfect society because we should all have enough time and calm to sleep and mental health care to get over our social anxieties. But that's not the society we live in--we live in a society where we can't be arsed to provide insulin for type 1 diabetics or school lunches for children. Giving nurses reasonable hours or high school students realistic dating advice aren't things in our society. So you'll have to excuse people for using the fucked up solutions that are available rather than the perfect solutions that aren't. I'm not even a cigarette smoker, I just have a basic sense of empathy.
jokethrowaway 3y ago
Caffeine is addictive, marijuana is not. Unless you're one of those morons who can't tell apart psychological symptoms from physiological ones. You won't get flu-like withdrawal symptoms after quitting cannabis, but, if you became psychologically dependant on it (eg. as a way to cope with depression), you will experience anxiety. I genuinely hate this redefining words just to please today's political direction.
- bill_joy_fanboy 3y ago
  You don't get flu-like symptoms from quitting gambling. Is gambling not addictive? Addiction has nothing to do with physical symptoms. It is an urge to engage in a behavior that is damaging. I think you need to get your definitions straight.
- dionidium 3y ago
  > Unless you're one of those morons who can't tell apart psychological symptoms from physiological ones. You're about 30 years out of date with the addiction literature. Basically every modern addiction organization defines addiction as a brain disorder characterized by, "continued use in spite of harmful consequences." Here's the American Society of Addiction Medicine: > What is the definition of addiction? Addiction is a treatable, chronic medical disease involving complex interactions among brain circuits, genetics, the environment, and an individual’s life experiences. People with addiction use substances or engage in behaviors that become compulsive and often continue despite harmful consequences. Here is the National Institute on Drug Abuse: > Addiction is defined as a chronic, relapsing disorder characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use despite adverse consequences.† It is considered a brain disorder, because it involves functional changes to brain circuits involved in reward, stress, and self-control.
xattt 3y ago
Hello, fellow quitter. I notice that routine caffeine consumption brings about subtle personality changes, like tendency towards aggression and neurosis. It doesn’t kick in right away, but more over the course of a couple of weeks. Not sure if this is a direct effect, or whether this is compounded by lack of sleep.
buzzert 3y ago
When questioning whether or not to make something legal, I believe it helps to frame the question as, "should someone be allowed to profit off of yet another addictive substance?" The companies selling this stuff (yes, companies) are the real winners in Marijuana legalization. I wouldn't say the same for the "users."
forever_spring 3y ago
I don't fully agree with the approach of legalizing something because something equivalently dangerous is already legal. If carrying around hand guns are legal, would you allow SMGs? If you genuinely think existing drugs are dangerous and you were severely addicted to it, shouldn't you call for regulations to prevent that from happening for others?

rayiner 3y ago

> marijuana is addictive to some people, but making it illegal doesn't solve that problem--it should be legal. But it's apparent that's too much nuance for the average politician. By your logic, it's futile to ban harmful products, which is a weird take. Making something illegal influences social norms. It signals that something is "bad" and for "bad people." Not everyone will abide by that social signal, but most people will. Banning something where the rest of the culture is trying to normalize it probably is futile. But that doesn't mean that banning things doesn't work, or that legalizing things won't make the problem worse. It's hard to ignore that marijuana seems to be much more prevalent now that it's been legalized in many places.

JPws_Prntr_Fngr 3y ago
Great thinking! Surely this will work for alcohol too - let's do that one next.
- rayiner 3y ago
  Banning alcohol works fine in Muslim countries where there’s not a 2,000 year religious tradition of alcohol use.
croes 3y ago
It's weird that alcohol is legal when marijuana isn't. The damage by alcohol is much higher. Banning alcohol didn't work.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  The damage from alcohol was higher, when it was legal and cannibas was not. It remains to be seen if that stays the case.
  - TylerE 3y ago
    No it doesn’t. This is very very very settled science. Billions of people hVe been smoking the reefer for Millenia. Withdrawing from alcohol has well documented, and extremely dangerous physical side effects (this is why it’s done in a hospital when possible). cami is does not.
    - femiagbabiaka 3y ago
      Weed is stronger and more available now than ever. I've seen people get constipated, get night terrors, cold sweats, etc. from marijuana withdrawals. So I think GP is right, it's left to be seen.
      - mcpackieh 3y ago
        > get night terrors [...] from marijuana withdrawals This one can be really bad, although it only lasts for about a week. Dreams so vivid it's terrifying, even when the content of the dreams seems mundane. If somebody were already marijuana as an emotional crutch, I think the bad dreams could have them running back to marijuana immediately.
        mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        I think you're undwrestimating it quite severely. I've had vivid nightmares every single night for months at a time after quitting weed(really heavy user). And hyperhidrosis for several weeks at least.
gloryjulio 3y ago
> By your logic, it's futile to ban harmful products, which is a weird take. How is that weird? Maybe try ban cigarette and alcohol first see if it works? I personally don't take any substances except coffee. Really wondering all those ppl who r advocating for banning weed smoke or drink alcohol personally?
femiagbabiaka 3y ago
But.. banning things doesn't work. People use illegal drugs anyways, and they do it openly. Legalizing weed alone didn't make the problem worse, the shift of the marijuana industry to mass production did. And that shift was caused by states granting business licenses to dispensaries. After that companies decided (just like alcohol until recently by the way) that the only metric to compete on was strength.
dragonwriter 3y ago
> By your logic, it's futile to ban harmful products, which is a weird take. You are engaging in the fallacy of composition: the argument was that it does not work for marijuana. Not that it does not work for harmful products. It is not generally valid to conclude from “X does not work for Y” and “Y is a Z” that “X does not work for any Z”.
kerkeslager 3y ago
> It signals that something is "bad" and for "bad people." Given the absurd disconnect between US law and anything resembling ethics, I doubt this is true. If you're on the left, you're as likely to see law enforcement as bad people, and if you're on the right, substitute guns for marijuana and you're likely to have very different views. While some people might think this way at a surface level, I suspect the number of people who base their view of morality on laws is vanishingly small compared to the number of people who base their view of laws on their morality. > Banning something where the rest of the culture is trying to normalize it probably is futile. Good thing there's no cultural movement to normalize the substance we're talking about. > It's hard to ignore that marijuana seems to be much more prevalent now that it's been legalized in many places. Hard to ignore, but easy to explain with explanations other than "it made things worse". Does it occur to you that maybe people just aren't hiding their use now that it's legal?
- overrun11 3y ago
  > Does it occur to you that maybe people just aren't hiding their use now that it's legal? But we know for a fact this isn't true because there's data on it. This isn't something we need to speculate about.
adolph 3y ago
> Making something illegal influences social norms. It signals that something is "bad" and for "bad people." This is often used by totalitarian governments. It leads to "Preference Falsification," an idea developed by Timur Kuran. Making something illegal for social reasons also degrades each person's sense of autonomy and self-governance. It invites jurisdiction within one's private sphere by removing each person's duty of "Obedience to the Unenforceable." Below is a key description from John Fletcher Moulton's article about it and links to an excellent Econtalk podcast discussing the idea. Preference falsification is the act of misrepresenting a preference under perceived public pressures. It involves the selection of a publicly expressed preference that differs from the underlying privately held preference (or simply, a public preference at odds with one’s private preference). People frequently convey to each other preferences that differ from what they would communicate privately under credible cover of anonymity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preference_falsification Follow me in examining the three great domains of Human Action. First comes the domain of Positive Law, where our actions are prescribed by laws binding upon us, which must be obeyed. Next comes the domain of Free Choice, which includes all those actions as to which we claim and enjoy complete freedom. But between these two there is a third large and important domain in which there rules neither Positive Law nor Absolute Freedom. In that domain there is no law which inexorably determines our course of action, and yet we feel that we are not free to choose as we would. The degree of this sense of a lack of complete freedom in this domain varies in every case. . . . it is the domain of Obedience to the Unenforceable. The obedience is the obedience of a man to that which he cannot be forced to obey. He is the enforcer of the law upon himself . . . https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-obedience-to-the-unenforceable/ https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-obedience-to-the-... https://aleteia.org/2016/04/11/how-an-expert-in-blowing-things-up-decided-he-had-seen-enough/ https://aleteia.org/2016/04/11/how-an-expert-in-blowing-thin... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fletcher_Moulton,_Baron_Moulton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fletcher_Moulton,_Baron_M... https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ362/hallam/NewspaperArticles/LawandManners.pdf https://www2.econ.iastate.edu/classes/econ362/hallam/Newspap...

matrix_overload 3y ago

Interesting. Always had exactly the opposite with caffeine. Could never tell any effects except for the nice refreshing taste. Normally have 2 cups with breakfast, but can't tell any difference if I skip it (e.g. when travelling).

reaperman 3y ago
I can't drink any caffeine either. I'm a fairly large guy, but even 1/4th cup of coffee at 6:00AM causes the same problems - my Apple Watch starts complaining that I have high HR, I get anxiety that blocks me from doing productive work, and my sleep schedule gets completely screwed up.
- colechristensen 3y ago
  For me I strongly believe it is other alkaloids in coffee and similar plant products which I’m particularly sensitive to. Artificially caffeinated beverages have much less of a negative effect than coffee. And coffee preparation method makes a significant difference as well. Espresso is better than drip coffee which is better than cold brew.
  - kerkeslager 3y ago
    > For me I strongly believe it is other alkaloids in coffee and similar plant products which I’m particularly sensitive to. This does seem to match my experience. Yerba mate doesn't produce the same reaction in me as coffee, despite having more caffeine (and no L-theanine, which could be a confounding factor when comparing with tea).

slibhb 3y ago

> This isn't complicated: marijuana is addictive to some people, but making it illegal doesn't solve that problem--it should be legal. But it's apparent that's too much nuance for the average politician. If weed is illegal and the law is enforced then fewer people will use it and fewer will become addicted. That might not "solve" the problem but it helps. I'm not arguing that weed should be illegal, only that making something illegal reduces its use.

tehjoker 3y ago
There's something to that, but I think that there have also been studies that show that regardless of policy, about the same percentage of the population uses drugs and can switch to different drugs when one gets too difficult to acquire. Not an expert on this by any means tho.
croes 3y ago
Prohibition didn't really work out for alcohol.
- edgyquant 3y ago
  We aren’t talking about alcohol though.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    It didn’t work out well for marijuana, either, which isn’t surprising because alcohol has much more of the features the pro-prohibition argument relies on and yet alcohol prohibition was a disaster.
- steve_adams_86 3y ago
  You’re being voted down at the moment, but I’m not sure why. I think we should view alcohol and cannabis very similarly. Both are potentially addictive and both can seriously harm a person’s life and family. Both require us to address the same question: how do we handle addictive substances in society? If made legal, then how do we navigate the normalization of a substance which can quite literally ruin a life? It prohibited, how do you manage the safety concerns and crime we know will stem from the ceaseless demand for drugs which are unregulated? How do we manage education in either case? In this sense, alcohol and cannabis are the same thing with the same problems attached.

_yb2s 3y ago

I've had the same experience with caffeine- I am very addicted and without it the withdrawal includes a bad headache, serious fatigue, and not being able to think about much else except wanting caffeine. Yet lots of people have told me with a straight face that I am "wrong" and caffeine is not addictive. Interesting, I also have the same symptoms as you, including insomnia even if I limit coffee to early AM. I think these effects are characteristic of "slow caffeine metabolizers," e.g. people for whom caffeine has an unusually long half life. My hypothesis is that for these people blood caffeine levels stay relatively high 24/7, so the body never gets to adapt to functioning without it, making addiction more likely. It's weird to me that people seem adverse to the idea that peoples bodies and genetics vary, and one persons experience isn't going to be the same as another.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mcpackieh 3y ago
If you want to kick caffeine, I recommend switching to caffeine pills and continue using as many of them as you need to feel normal, then start ramping down the dose. Since pills are discrete it's hard to cheat. When I do this I usually start at 400mg (sometimes 600mg) a day then over the next month ramp down to 100mg a day until finally going to zero. It takes me about a month before I can function normal with no caffeine. ...then a few months later I decide to start again. Oh well. I've done the above about half a dozen times. It's fairly easy to defeat the chemical addiction which I experience as you describe (really awful headaches, fatigue, lack of concentration, etc), but eventually I'll pick it back up to get a little extra edge.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  Something I used to do is make a big pot of coffee and sip on it throughout the day, which was very hard to regulate (and it was also just too much caffeiene). Now I make a single cup of coffee in the aeropress and I use 16 grams of beans which i weigh manually. And I only have one cup of coffee in the morning instead of multiples throughout the day. Point is, weighing beans and using the aeropress helps me keep my dosage consistent so I don't go overboard.

treeman79 3y ago

“I’m not addicted, it doesn’t affect me.” Every addict I know. Seen a number of people slowly change from it until they are no longer who they are. Never in a good way. Seen some who got off it. One because her husband has such a bad reaction (after several years of use) that he can’t ever touch it again. She became her old self again. Not quite as bright as she once was, but personality improved to the loving person I once knew.

samstave 3y ago

>"Boil Water?! What am I, a Chemist?!" - This may be a long one, but Ill start with simple and see what you think -- The addiction problem is really a dopamine (co)injection problem based on the pychological aspects of earlier experience which created the gates of dopamine/seratonin/melatonin/neural transports desires that affect behavior as you mature. The pathways that are made for each within the brain structure early form bonds, and then its layers of bonds that keep coming, but just like snow on branches, the growth is bigger, the WEIGHT is bigger on the earlier formed branches... (The pathways are formed by an experience that triggers the neurons to neuron (network) and as they do so, if firing patterns keep happening, certain pathways get higher bandwidth, and these pathways "trigger" behaviour due to high bandwidth and thats how we get/devlop/inherit/build AND CHANGE our "PERSON"-ality. So when you're traumatised at an early age - whatever triggers in the neuro-pathways are triggered will be stronger growing up - such that if its a dopamine trauma - you'll go after that largely as you mature... Its reversable, because your biological and physical brain is self aware (conscious, a toroid) - and so you can change your behavior of which neurals get stronger, but will power (desire) has to be the strongest thread. (But this is how BGP was born through LSD) (look at Ciscos comments re hoffmans 100)

teaearlgraycold 3y ago

I feel like something that could help would be a limit to the potency. I like weed - but I really just want a 5-10% THC flower with some CBD in there for good measure (still not convinced the CBD isn't a placebo, but it's there naturally so no harm in having it). But most shops near me don't sell anything less than 20% THC. WTF? Occasionally I can get something 10-15%. And if I'm lucky I can get something less than 10%.

projectazorian 3y ago
Mids are easier to get on the illegal market, ironically.
asadotzler 3y ago
So do less of it. The concentration is meaningless, the ingested and metabolized amount is what matters.
- teaearlgraycold 3y ago
  Yes that's usually what I do. But I think in general the average potency at stores encourages people to do too much. It did for me when I first moved to a legal state. I had no idea what I would enjoy and just expected that the average THC content was a mid-level intensity. In reality it's at the top end.
olyjohn 3y ago
Then look for high-CBD strains. The weed plant that produces lots of CBD will not produce much THC. The inverse is also true. I see CBD strains all the time that are as low as 1% THC.
- teaearlgraycold 3y ago
  High CBD strains, in my experience, are made to have almost no THC. 1% is too low IMO. And often they have even closer to 0%.
thaumasiotes 3y ago

artur_makly 3y ago

how much better is your sleep? and did it improve almost overnight?

kerkeslager 3y ago
My sleep is a lot better. There were about two weeks were it was... inconsistent. I would be exhausted most of the time which helped me get to sleep but also more often anxious and irritable which would keep me up. The anxiety and irritability wore off after about two weeks, and the energy came back to what feels normal-ish at about three weeks. I do have ongoing problems with sleep, but it's become apparent that this is due to some bad sleep habits which I wasn't as conscious of when I was drinking coffee because I could just drink a bit extra the day after to make up for staying up late--i.e. I was covering up my bad sleep habits. When I actually discipline myself and follow good sleep hygiene habits, I sleep well, which wasn't the case when I was drinking coffee, even if I drank it only early in the day.

ericmcer 3y ago

Good point. You can expand this to every issue facing society, view it through the lens of a politician trying to grab as many votes as possible and our current state makes sense.

shams93 3y ago

Exactly, booze is legal, some people get addicted but prohibition does more harm than good. Cigarettes are even worse they really have no benefit of any kind to anyone, its pure, deadly addiction and totally level for adults.

paiute 3y ago
Your attitude to cigarettes sounds awfully similar to what people said about mj 20 years ago. Someone i know actually thinks there’s a link between a crack down on smoking and mass shootings. Just a pet theory, but some folks just need to chill out with a cig behind the maintenance shed.
- tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
  [flagged]
e_i_pi_2 3y ago
Alcohol addition rates are also (slightly) higher than marijuana addiction rates (14% and 9% last time I saw), so it's a great comparison
dionidium 3y ago
> prohibition does more harm than good. According to our shared oral mythology about bootlegging gangsters, yes. According to all available crime and health data from the time it was an incredible success. Crime fell. People got healthier. There was less domestic abuse (people forget that temperance was first and foremost a women's movement). None of this was outweighed by the increase in organized crime. Prohibition was a "failure" in the sense that people like alcohol and do not wish it to be illegal. It was not a failure by any other definition (boogeyman stories about "organized crime" notwithstanding). This is easier to see if your baseline is, "excessive alcohol consumption is a societal disaster" (which is the correct baseline). Prohibition would have to generate a staggering level of harm to match the existing harms of consumption.
kerkeslager 3y ago
> Cigarettes are even worse they really have no benefit of any kind to anyone No benefit of any kind to anyone? Jesus, the arrogance of this guy. What makes you think you can make such blanket statements about everyone's experience like this? Cigarettes are great for getting a boost of energy, or for having an excuse to talk to a stranger. And sure, both of those are things that we shouldn't need in a perfect society because we should all have enough time and calm to sleep and mental health care to get over our social anxieties. But that's not the society we live in--we live in a society where we can't be arsed to provide insulin for type 1 diabetics or school lunches for children. Giving nurses reasonable hours or high school students realistic dating advice aren't things in our society. So you'll have to excuse people for using the fucked up solutions that are available rather than the perfect solutions that aren't. I'm not even a cigarette smoker, I just have a basic sense of empathy.

jokethrowaway 3y ago

Caffeine is addictive, marijuana is not. Unless you're one of those morons who can't tell apart psychological symptoms from physiological ones. You won't get flu-like withdrawal symptoms after quitting cannabis, but, if you became psychologically dependant on it (eg. as a way to cope with depression), you will experience anxiety. I genuinely hate this redefining words just to please today's political direction.

bill_joy_fanboy 3y ago
You don't get flu-like symptoms from quitting gambling. Is gambling not addictive? Addiction has nothing to do with physical symptoms. It is an urge to engage in a behavior that is damaging. I think you need to get your definitions straight.
dionidium 3y ago
> Unless you're one of those morons who can't tell apart psychological symptoms from physiological ones. You're about 30 years out of date with the addiction literature. Basically every modern addiction organization defines addiction as a brain disorder characterized by, "continued use in spite of harmful consequences." Here's the American Society of Addiction Medicine: > What is the definition of addiction? Addiction is a treatable, chronic medical disease involving complex interactions among brain circuits, genetics, the environment, and an individual’s life experiences. People with addiction use substances or engage in behaviors that become compulsive and often continue despite harmful consequences. Here is the National Institute on Drug Abuse: > Addiction is defined as a chronic, relapsing disorder characterized by compulsive drug seeking and use despite adverse consequences.† It is considered a brain disorder, because it involves functional changes to brain circuits involved in reward, stress, and self-control.

xattt 3y ago

Hello, fellow quitter. I notice that routine caffeine consumption brings about subtle personality changes, like tendency towards aggression and neurosis. It doesn’t kick in right away, but more over the course of a couple of weeks. Not sure if this is a direct effect, or whether this is compounded by lack of sleep.

buzzert 3y ago

When questioning whether or not to make something legal, I believe it helps to frame the question as, "should someone be allowed to profit off of yet another addictive substance?" The companies selling this stuff (yes, companies) are the real winners in Marijuana legalization. I wouldn't say the same for the "users."

forever_spring 3y ago

I don't fully agree with the approach of legalizing something because something equivalently dangerous is already legal. If carrying around hand guns are legal, would you allow SMGs? If you genuinely think existing drugs are dangerous and you were severely addicted to it, shouldn't you call for regulations to prevent that from happening for others?