3 ms·

Tolerance is not addiction. And government health recommendations are not medical research. (And, uh, historically not at all trustworthy in this area!) The in

Tolerance is not addiction. And government health recommendations are not medical research. (And, uh, historically not at all trustworthy in this area!) The ingestion of carrots causes a distinct biological reaction. Carrots are absolutely a drug, or a cocktail of drugs. Lettuce is basically water and cellulose, so I'll mostly give you that one. Chocolate? Absolutely a drug. Sugar? Yep. Coffee? Yep. ...for any meaningful definition of "drug". > Marijuana appears to be as bad for you as alcohol, tobacco, or excess sugar consumption You made that up. The personal and social harm index for alcohol is absurdly high and well beyond the rest. Tobacco is mostly personal harm, and reasonable to compare to smoked cannabis (so don't smoke cannabis). Sugar is an active area of research, but yeah it looks bad. Cannabis (ingested) would index well below any of the above.

pclmulqdq 2y ago
> And government health recommendations are not medical research. (And, uh, historically not at all trustworthy in this area!) You can literally Google this and find studies on it. You can also look at the sources the Canadian health department linked to. My guess is that you did neither. The scholarship on this is actually mostly recent, so if your reading on the subject happened more than 5 years ago, you are behind the times. Also, Canada is pretty good on the subject of drugs - the US health department is hopelessly biased. More broadly, this tactic of trying to demand higher and higher levels of proof is called "sealioning" and is a classic form of bad-faith argument. I understand it's common on the internet, but it's really a bad practice if you want to convince people of things. > You made that up. The personal and social harm index for alcohol is absurdly high and well beyond the rest. Tobacco is mostly personal harm, and reasonable to compare to smoked cannabis (so don't smoke cannabis). Sugar is an active area of research, but yeah it looks bad. You made all this up, too, especially the "comparative" nature of personal and social harms. Let's not forget the made-up fact that carrots are a drug, too. Who is to say that the loss of intellect that is well-documented to follow long-term cannabis use isn't a "social" harm?
- quesera 2y ago
  It's probably true that we're both finding supporting evidence of our preexisting or intuitive beliefs. But "food as drug" is not really controversial. What is a drug, except a substance that promotes a specific set of biological and biochemical reactions? Some drugs are psychoactive (chocolate), some are exclusively active on the physical plane (aspirin). Not all drugs, and not even all illegal drugs, have "standard downsides", which was your assertion which I challenged. As for comparative harm, I'm drawing from the results of a study summarized here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_drug_use#Drug_harmfulness And specifically graphed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HarmCausedByDrugsTable.svg Which corresponds to my (extensive and broad) experience with the community. Note that the chart does not discriminate between inhaled and ingested cannabis.
  - pclmulqdq 2y ago
    Ah yes, Wikipedia is well-known for its accuracy, especially on controversial topics.
    - quesera 2y ago
      Wikipedia is not the original source of the information, just the most convenient link. Is that all ya got?
      - pclmulqdq 2y ago
        Wait, so the chart and study that are cited there indicate that cannabis is a lot more harmful than ketamine, but somehow that makes it free and clear in your book because it's half as bad as alcohol? Or is your explanation that smoked cannabis is somehow where all the harm comes from (even the social harm which has nothing to do with ingestion method)? I don't see chocolate or sugar on that chart at all, so they must not be "drugs" or they must not be harmful anywhere near the scale of cannabis. The source you are citing actually makes my point for me. This is a drug that has negative effects on the user and on others around the user, and no, those effects are not just about smoking of the drug - taking a mind-altering substance in edible form still alters your mind. In terms of "harm to others" on that chart, your drug of choice rates worse than cocaine! That harm, by the way, is not about secondary smoke and does not magically go away when you eat the substance instead of inhaling it. I'm honestly confused because the chart you are citing does not support your point at all. Drugs do have different scales of harm, but you can't honestly say that this study (or any evidence) shows that cannabis and carrots are both in the same universe of being "drugs." You aren't even showing that cannabis and sugar are on the same scale. I'm sure you would agree that anything whose impact on yourself and others is comparable to cocaine has the "standard" downsides of drug use.

pclmulqdq 2y ago

> And government health recommendations are not medical research. (And, uh, historically not at all trustworthy in this area!) You can literally Google this and find studies on it. You can also look at the sources the Canadian health department linked to. My guess is that you did neither. The scholarship on this is actually mostly recent, so if your reading on the subject happened more than 5 years ago, you are behind the times. Also, Canada is pretty good on the subject of drugs - the US health department is hopelessly biased. More broadly, this tactic of trying to demand higher and higher levels of proof is called "sealioning" and is a classic form of bad-faith argument. I understand it's common on the internet, but it's really a bad practice if you want to convince people of things. > You made that up. The personal and social harm index for alcohol is absurdly high and well beyond the rest. Tobacco is mostly personal harm, and reasonable to compare to smoked cannabis (so don't smoke cannabis). Sugar is an active area of research, but yeah it looks bad. You made all this up, too, especially the "comparative" nature of personal and social harms. Let's not forget the made-up fact that carrots are a drug, too. Who is to say that the loss of intellect that is well-documented to follow long-term cannabis use isn't a "social" harm?

quesera 2y ago
It's probably true that we're both finding supporting evidence of our preexisting or intuitive beliefs. But "food as drug" is not really controversial. What is a drug, except a substance that promotes a specific set of biological and biochemical reactions? Some drugs are psychoactive (chocolate), some are exclusively active on the physical plane (aspirin). Not all drugs, and not even all illegal drugs, have "standard downsides", which was your assertion which I challenged. As for comparative harm, I'm drawing from the results of a study summarized here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_drug_use#Drug_harmfulness And specifically graphed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:HarmCausedByDrugsTable.svg Which corresponds to my (extensive and broad) experience with the community. Note that the chart does not discriminate between inhaled and ingested cannabis.
- pclmulqdq 2y ago
  Ah yes, Wikipedia is well-known for its accuracy, especially on controversial topics.
  - quesera 2y ago
    Wikipedia is not the original source of the information, just the most convenient link. Is that all ya got?
    - pclmulqdq 2y ago
      Wait, so the chart and study that are cited there indicate that cannabis is a lot more harmful than ketamine, but somehow that makes it free and clear in your book because it's half as bad as alcohol? Or is your explanation that smoked cannabis is somehow where all the harm comes from (even the social harm which has nothing to do with ingestion method)? I don't see chocolate or sugar on that chart at all, so they must not be "drugs" or they must not be harmful anywhere near the scale of cannabis. The source you are citing actually makes my point for me. This is a drug that has negative effects on the user and on others around the user, and no, those effects are not just about smoking of the drug - taking a mind-altering substance in edible form still alters your mind. In terms of "harm to others" on that chart, your drug of choice rates worse than cocaine! That harm, by the way, is not about secondary smoke and does not magically go away when you eat the substance instead of inhaling it. I'm honestly confused because the chart you are citing does not support your point at all. Drugs do have different scales of harm, but you can't honestly say that this study (or any evidence) shows that cannabis and carrots are both in the same universe of being "drugs." You aren't even showing that cannabis and sugar are on the same scale. I'm sure you would agree that anything whose impact on yourself and others is comparable to cocaine has the "standard" downsides of drug use.