3 ms·

Testing for impairment from THC is not as simple as testing for impairment from alcohol. It's a molecule that is similar to normal endogenous chemicals, and the

Testing for impairment from THC is not as simple as testing for impairment from alcohol. It's a molecule that is similar to normal endogenous chemicals, and the human body is good at building tolerance to it. Here is a video (timestamped to the relevant content) of an expert explaining to Huberman why it is so difficult to assess impairment from blood levels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jouFvyRZntk&t=6072s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jouFvyRZntk&t=6072s The study in TFA may just be finding that nearly half of drivers in Ohio are habitual cannabis users, or used cannabis in the past few days.

IAmBroom 1y ago
I am always amused when I drive by a PSA billboard in my city that reads, "A little high is too high to drive." I mentally add, "... because we can't even test for it when we pull you over, so... please don't."
- nekusar 1y ago
  > I mentally add, "... because we can't even test for it when we pull you over, so... please don't." Thats not entirely true. I knew 2 people who loved to drive high. Evidently it feels great (their words, not mine). Now, being incapacitated or inebriated with any substance is illegal. Even prescription drugs. And basic roadside sobriety tests like "walk in straight line", can be an easy fail if you cant stand up. Now weirdly, ive never heard of anyone ticketed or pulled for driving sick or very tired. Even though both of those conditions can also be just as dangerous.
  - mothballed 1y ago
    The roadside test is basically a test to see if you are a moron dumb enough to consent to it. If you perform an FST good luck doing it in a way that can't be used against you. In my state you're only required to submit to chemical testing, which the courts have ruled the little portable breathalizer machine isn't, and even if you refuse all they can do is suspend your license and then try to get a warrant.
    - stronglikedan 1y ago
      > The roadside test is basically a test to see if you are a moron dumb enough to consent to it. Only a moron would not consent to it, lest they lose their license for a year regardless of the outcome of their DUI charge, since it's a separate charge that cannot be fought (you either did the FST or you didn't). (Of course, every state is different, but I was just matching your matter-of-factness as incorrect-in-general as it was.)
      - mothballed 1y ago
        I'm not aware of any state that suspends your license for not doing the FST. Mine only suspends for not doing chemical testing, and the PBT doesn't count (and is inadmissible).
      - quickthrowman 1y ago
        Field sobriety tests are not mandatory in Minnesota, only chemical testing. I’d refuse field sobriety tests every time, they’re subjective. There’s no reason to comply and open yourself up to legal risk in states where it isn’t required.
    - mschuster91 1y ago
      > The roadside test is basically a test to see if you are a moron dumb enough to consent to it. It's "voluntary" in Germany as well both for alcohol and other drugs, but if you refuse it the cops can and will use every avenue they can to make your life absolutely fucking miserable, and there are a looooot of ways they can abuse. Especially if you are in the proximity of a highway or important federal road, they can pull off the full "border control checkpoint" under Schengen laws.
      - mothballed 1y ago
        If they are going to use every avenue against you, the FST only gives them more ammo. The test is way more subjective than chemical testing.
        1y ago
  - quickthrowman 1y ago
    The roadside tests can be declined with no penalty in my state. So, if I was driving high on THC I’d say “I refuse field sobriety tests but will consent to chemical blood testing, which I am obligated to comply with or lose my driving privileges.” I’d test positive and then say “Good luck proving I was intoxicated while driving!” and then the DA would refuse to file charges, because there is no way to prove that with THC if you refuse roadside tests.
  - mock-possum 1y ago
    It does feel great, and honestly it’s a shame I can’t figure out a way to do so safely. The risk kills my enjoyment. Best I can come up with is VR/videogames
    - nekusar 1y ago
      Well, you definitely can, in a safer and legal manner. 1. Get crossfaded (cannabis and alcohol to do both drunk and high). Sit in comfy chair. Close eyes, imagine a roller coaster. Yeah, that works. 2. Get in car, PASSENGERS seat. Someone else not inebriated drives. Enjoy the ride! 3. You can do on the sly cannabis vapes before going on a roller coaster at a theme park. Obviously harder to do. Again, you get strapped in, and enjoy the ride.
  - kotaKat 1y ago
    Managed to get pulled over by a State Trooper on a highway because I failed to dim my brights going by a couple cars and I was just a hair over the speed limit (63/55). I was tired and it was ten more miles to the house after a long maintenance window at the hospital overnight. I was given a warning and some mercy after a quick records check. Not a drop of booze or a single puff that night.
temp0826 1y ago
What's considered habitual? THC notoriously stays detectable in the body for very long time
- alphazard 1y ago
  I was using intentionally vague language to make the point that the study doesn't show us much. The video I linked is pretty comprehensive. If you skip around, you can find them talking about usage patterns, and how long THC stays in your system, etc.
sethammons 1y ago
> or used cannabis in the past few days Two weeks. If used at any time in that past two weeks, THC can show up. Imagine if we could detect a drink of alcohol two weeks later. Nearly every accident would be classified as having alcohol involved.
- stronglikedan 1y ago
  > Two weeks. If used at any time in that past two weeks, THC can show up. It's so much more nuanced than that.
- losvedir 1y ago
  > Nearly every accident would be classified as having alcohol involved. You might be surprised to know that only something like 50-60% of Americans drink alcohol at all.
  - sethammons 1y ago
    I am surprised to learn that, thanks! The conditional probability would suggest, if evenly distributed among accidents, to be similar then. So about half of accidents would be included, not the majority
    - lm28469 1y ago
      And a minority of drinker drinks the bulk of it. > 10% of drinkers consume over half of all alcohol consumed in Australia https://www.ias.org.uk/2024/01/23/10-of-drinkers-consume-over-half-of-all-alcohol-consumed-in-australia/ https://www.ias.org.uk/2024/01/23/10-of-drinkers-consume-ove...

IAmBroom 1y ago

I am always amused when I drive by a PSA billboard in my city that reads, "A little high is too high to drive." I mentally add, "... because we can't even test for it when we pull you over, so... please don't."

nekusar 1y ago
> I mentally add, "... because we can't even test for it when we pull you over, so... please don't." Thats not entirely true. I knew 2 people who loved to drive high. Evidently it feels great (their words, not mine). Now, being incapacitated or inebriated with any substance is illegal. Even prescription drugs. And basic roadside sobriety tests like "walk in straight line", can be an easy fail if you cant stand up. Now weirdly, ive never heard of anyone ticketed or pulled for driving sick or very tired. Even though both of those conditions can also be just as dangerous.
- mothballed 1y ago
  The roadside test is basically a test to see if you are a moron dumb enough to consent to it. If you perform an FST good luck doing it in a way that can't be used against you. In my state you're only required to submit to chemical testing, which the courts have ruled the little portable breathalizer machine isn't, and even if you refuse all they can do is suspend your license and then try to get a warrant.
  - stronglikedan 1y ago
    > The roadside test is basically a test to see if you are a moron dumb enough to consent to it. Only a moron would not consent to it, lest they lose their license for a year regardless of the outcome of their DUI charge, since it's a separate charge that cannot be fought (you either did the FST or you didn't). (Of course, every state is different, but I was just matching your matter-of-factness as incorrect-in-general as it was.)
    - mothballed 1y ago
      I'm not aware of any state that suspends your license for not doing the FST. Mine only suspends for not doing chemical testing, and the PBT doesn't count (and is inadmissible).
    - quickthrowman 1y ago
      Field sobriety tests are not mandatory in Minnesota, only chemical testing. I’d refuse field sobriety tests every time, they’re subjective. There’s no reason to comply and open yourself up to legal risk in states where it isn’t required.
  - mschuster91 1y ago
    > The roadside test is basically a test to see if you are a moron dumb enough to consent to it. It's "voluntary" in Germany as well both for alcohol and other drugs, but if you refuse it the cops can and will use every avenue they can to make your life absolutely fucking miserable, and there are a looooot of ways they can abuse. Especially if you are in the proximity of a highway or important federal road, they can pull off the full "border control checkpoint" under Schengen laws.
    - mothballed 1y ago
      If they are going to use every avenue against you, the FST only gives them more ammo. The test is way more subjective than chemical testing.
      - 1y ago
- quickthrowman 1y ago
  The roadside tests can be declined with no penalty in my state. So, if I was driving high on THC I’d say “I refuse field sobriety tests but will consent to chemical blood testing, which I am obligated to comply with or lose my driving privileges.” I’d test positive and then say “Good luck proving I was intoxicated while driving!” and then the DA would refuse to file charges, because there is no way to prove that with THC if you refuse roadside tests.
- mock-possum 1y ago
  It does feel great, and honestly it’s a shame I can’t figure out a way to do so safely. The risk kills my enjoyment. Best I can come up with is VR/videogames
  - nekusar 1y ago
    Well, you definitely can, in a safer and legal manner. 1. Get crossfaded (cannabis and alcohol to do both drunk and high). Sit in comfy chair. Close eyes, imagine a roller coaster. Yeah, that works. 2. Get in car, PASSENGERS seat. Someone else not inebriated drives. Enjoy the ride! 3. You can do on the sly cannabis vapes before going on a roller coaster at a theme park. Obviously harder to do. Again, you get strapped in, and enjoy the ride.
- kotaKat 1y ago
  Managed to get pulled over by a State Trooper on a highway because I failed to dim my brights going by a couple cars and I was just a hair over the speed limit (63/55). I was tired and it was ten more miles to the house after a long maintenance window at the hospital overnight. I was given a warning and some mercy after a quick records check. Not a drop of booze or a single puff that night.

temp0826 1y ago

What's considered habitual? THC notoriously stays detectable in the body for very long time

alphazard 1y ago
I was using intentionally vague language to make the point that the study doesn't show us much. The video I linked is pretty comprehensive. If you skip around, you can find them talking about usage patterns, and how long THC stays in your system, etc.

sethammons 1y ago

> or used cannabis in the past few days Two weeks. If used at any time in that past two weeks, THC can show up. Imagine if we could detect a drink of alcohol two weeks later. Nearly every accident would be classified as having alcohol involved.

stronglikedan 1y ago
> Two weeks. If used at any time in that past two weeks, THC can show up. It's so much more nuanced than that.
losvedir 1y ago
> Nearly every accident would be classified as having alcohol involved. You might be surprised to know that only something like 50-60% of Americans drink alcohol at all.
- sethammons 1y ago
  I am surprised to learn that, thanks! The conditional probability would suggest, if evenly distributed among accidents, to be similar then. So about half of accidents would be included, not the majority
  - lm28469 1y ago
    And a minority of drinker drinks the bulk of it. > 10% of drinkers consume over half of all alcohol consumed in Australia https://www.ias.org.uk/2024/01/23/10-of-drinkers-consume-over-half-of-all-alcohol-consumed-in-australia/ https://www.ias.org.uk/2024/01/23/10-of-drinkers-consume-ove...