As weed gets more potent, teens are getting sick
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Despite the name, it also works for Firefox.
It's not BTW, its been around for a bit
ctrl+shift+p (firefox) or ctrl+shift+n (chrome/edge)
ctrl+c link
ctrl+v in private window
hax
You can also create a bunch of containers in firefox labelled 'Paywall Bypass 1, Paywall Bypass 2" etc
It's more updated, and it removes Google Analytics and other shady stuff from the original extension.
https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean
Hint: you can use it in Firefox Nightly on Android by defining your own extension collection:
https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2020/09/29/expanded-extensio...
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/behind-the-overlay...
The use case: you load a news article, hit a "you've used up all your free articles this month" overlay, so you click the "Open Page in Private Window" toolbar button to view the article in a private tab.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/open-page-in-...
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...
But really, you want:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/bypass-paywal...
The danger is simply that you will like it, you'll end up using it every day, all different times of the day, and it won't really hurt your health as much as it will make you live your life in a somewhat dopey, detached, less-intelligent way. As time goes on it won't feel "fun" it'll just feel "normal". And you just won't get as much out of your life as you could get, won't achieve as much relationship success, professional success, or personal fulfillment.
Saying that there are successful daily cannabis users and therefore chronic cannabis use doesn't have negative effects on one's brain, is similar to saying that you're holding a snowball and therefore global warming doesn't exist.
Yeah, exactly. Either way it proves nothing about a person or their life.
Interepting it that way just always casts judgement on the user.
That's not how that works. The existence of both successes and failures in weed users does not prevent a comparison of the rates of successes and failures between weed users and non-weed-users.
Making the above comparison and noting that successes per capita are lower in weed users of an otherwise identical demographic doesn't cast judgement on anyone.
Not for as long of a duration. Apples to oranges.
I also slightly doubt casual cocaine won't catch up with you eventually, might take years. Stimulants are generally work friendly anyway, see coffee/adderall.
But overwhelming personal observation indicates that in the vast majority of cases -- it blunts your game (and if you pick up the habit in your teenage years, and don't manage to put it behind you -- it can derail your chances at completing your education, or maintaining successful relationships entirely).
Again, not from the toxicity - but simply from what it does.
A 100$/day habit for a wealthy person is nothing and, unlike cocaine, that addiction will not ramp up into a 1000$/day habit. But for the not-rich that 100$/day is devastating.
At least for the vast majority of casual users, this isn't anything remotely close to a $100/day habit. Common sense should inform us of that, even if we aren't intimately familiar with how much pot actually costs.
$5-10 a day is closer to the reality for most users.
In the past this might hold true but no longer.
That's pretty extreme, even for heavy smokers, but far from impossible.
I realize I'm being pretty pedantic here, you're right that spend $100/day requires massive usage plus buying moderately expensive weed. But it's not, technically, impossible.
And yeah, definitely not a sustainable or healthy habit...I'm ok now, but my career took a permanent hit. Oh well.
Who the duck is smoking that much in one day???? I don't know a single one of my massively addicted stoner friends who do even a third of that in a day...
Like, why deal with life (which involves risk and rejection, and ick, work) when you can just blast trippy movies through your head all day? (Fun though these movies can be, for a while).
Can't exactly tell whether it was better before or now.
I don't. It's just an observation. That doesn't mean I care.
What I don't care about is [sic] "other people do or don’t want to deal with your version of life?"
What facts did you state during this debate? You just asserted your opinion that cannabis causes people to stop caring and only watch movies.
Huh what facts were in your post?
For example: "The Immoral Design of Diablo Immortal" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o17lBUZgjTs
Also isn't the "video games rotting people's brain" complaint always laughed at in circles like HN? Is that really the parallel you want to make? Plus people generally only say that in relation to kids. I'm not advocating for kids (or anyone) to use pot. I am saying the personal productivity angle is a weak line of argument and is usually masking some other objection to pot since the same argument is not used in other discussions in which it is equally applicable.
Definitely not the exact same kind of threat, since video games don't make you dumber like pot, but there is a real risk that a person substitutes accomplishing things in real life in favor of accomplishing things in a video game.
Your comment is kind of whataboutism. You're not really refuting what he's saying, just bringing up a separate topic
Using weed is a recreation activity. Most recreation activities will have a negative impact on your life if they are not done in moderation. I don't think that is necessarily a problem and the fact that this generally isn't discussed in other contexts might indicate that people are subconsciously using this an excuse when their true objections to weed originate somewhere else.
Weed may be unique in allowing such a constant level of intoxication with relatively mild side-effects. I think that's how it gets people. Such addiction is not that uncommon and I've watched legalization in Canada with a mix of appreciation (I still do believe it should be legally available) and apprehension (I think we're about to see a small but significant % of an entire generation end up in the same place I've been for the last ~10 years.)
Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome
Didn't China do almost exactly that?
Weed bros get real touchy when anybody suggests something bad about it. Inb4 "alcohol is worse". I'm still for legalization but people need to stop getting so defensive.
Your framing of the situation is just remarkably wrong considering the entire legal history of marijuana in the US.
1. Putting people in prison for using it causes more harm than the actual usage of it does.
2. The threat of state force being used to strip people of their freedoms is not an effective deterrent. The war on drugs is an objective failure.
3. The war on drugs was nonsensical to begin with. You are legally free to drink bleach. You can legally drink yourself to death on alcohol. You can legally consume enough caffeine to give yourself a heart attack and die on the spot. You can legally smoke 100 packs of highly addictive and harmful cigarettes a day. But you can't legally consume cannabis, which remains a schedule 1 drug?
Legalisation is of utmost importance not because cannabis is good and we ought to encourage consumption, but because the alternative (criminalisation) is irrational, morally reprehensible, and a costly waste of taxpayer resources.
There is no good that comes from criminalisation, only more harm, more waste, and more people being stripped of basic human rights for no justifiable reason.
Again, it's not about wanting to encourage the sale of it, it's that the alternative (criminalisation) causes more harm than good.
To your point, I'm all for having a surgeon general's warning on cannabis products, restricting the sale to age 25+ (when the prefrontal cortex is much closer to finishing development), and other measures that may reduce harm, rather than increasing it.
Circa 2005, a non-trivial percent of students sat in the back of lecture halls playing WoW during classes.
Games have gotten terrifyingly more addictive since then, though you don't hear so much about games ruining lives anymore in the news. Maybe it just isn't newsworthy anymore?
Weed has non-acute negative effects on cognition for 7 hours to 3 weeks after use, dropping off most significantly after 72 hours of abstinence.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abst...
But yeah, we should educate people so they notice if this happen due to view games, or Facebook too.
My experiences of marijuna is that it can loosen the societal conditioning on "productivity", and reveal the lack of purpose and meaning in one's life. It's liberating to realize the a lot of the conditioning don't matter as much as it seems.
It's at this point, that it's tempting to continue and just have fun. Here though, is the space in which one can discover one's purpose from within, with societal and external expectations muted. It's paradoxically that here, connecting with that purpose, brings life and joy outside of the mental states that marijuana can bring. When one makes conscious contact with that inner, unconditioned purpose, marijuna is something that is fun that one can occasionally enjoy, but not as a substitute for purposefully living.
>And you just won't get as much out of your life as you could get, won't achieve as much relationship success, professional success, or personal fulfillment.
This applies to being 100 pounds overweight too.
Hell, it can be argued if you cut out beer and switch to cannabis your health will improve.
The real issue I'm having with it is that I'm using pretty much every night. I come from the gym, take a shower, and grab the vape pen and sit on the couch. It just makes me so lazy.
I stopped cooking and just eat pizza and ice cream nearly every night. Thankfully my weight hasn't taken a hit. But it creates this cycle of not cooking, so I don't buy groceries, so I can't cook, so I just order in.
I don't really know the best way to kick the habit or to reduce it. It seems like different things work for different people. Maybe it would help to pick one week to go no-cannabis and see if you can do it. Good luck with whatever strategy you decide to go with....
I am starting to realize it's not laziness that's holding me back. It's full-blown burnout, stress, and anxiety. I have realized that I am actively avoiding doing anything to make my life better. Upon further inspection, I was doing this before I touched cannabis (about 1.5 years ago). If anything, cannabis just dulls my feelings down enough that I can keep my head above water while going to my dead-end and toxic job that I've been at for almost 6 years.
I know what I need to do and I cannot bring myself to do it. I am still trying to figure out why. Again, this existed prior to my cannabis usage too.
As someone who was in that exact situation previously in life - discovering new cooking techniques and finding small local grocers and ethnic food stores around me was eye opening. Local farms (or farmers markets if you're in a city) will have fresh, high quality nutritious products that you can work into ordinarily boring meals. Hell, even a BLT with locally butchered bacon, fresh lettuce and heirloom tomatoes is miles above anything you could get delivered or find at a chain store.
After that look into meal prep (doing bulk prep for multiple meals which saves loads of time), more ambitious recipes that require planning, and upgrading your kitchen tools and skills. Weed isn't that bad in the big picture, but going through life eating sub-par delivery food is no way to live.
Sometimes that means quitting for one week, feeling good and going back. But it has helped me quit for good and so much happier in life.
That italic "if" reeks of a certain sort of sensitivity.
I spent my whole 20s severely addicted to it without even realizing, and when I had to stop I felt like I was going crazy. Couldn't sleep, couldn't think, couldn't eat. It's really better to nip it in the bud.
Crucially, I used relatively small amounts of pure sativa. I wasn’t stuck on the couch while I used it. Still, this to me suggests self control is more important than abstinence.
I meant most people can do cocaine once, or at an infrequent irregular frequency without getting addicted to it and becoming dependent.
FWIW most means > 50%
Of course they're using quids, if they were injectors of pure cocaine the situation would be less rosy. But you didn't specify the route and concentration.
This isn't a gotcha, it's a habit of daily use by millions, all of whom are basically fine.
For cocaine and most "hard drugs" probably neither is true. For coffee it seems both are true. For alcohol 1 is true and 2 is tricky.
most people cannot do cocaine every day without trouble. Coffee? every day is fine
different drugs have different danger
/r/nootropics, common thread is as follows:
OP: "Help, I have bad anxiety every day, what should I take for it?"
re: "Do you drink coffee?"
OP: "Yes, about 4 cups a day."
re: "Stop drinking coffee and come back in a week and tell us how you are doing."
1 week later.
OP: "My anxiety is gone!!"
Caffeine has negative side effects. For some people those side effects are really bad.
Also caffeine messes up sleep cycles. After seeing sleep study results, I won't touch the stuff after 10am or so, if even that late.
Alcohol is even worse in this regard, it will just ruin your sleep cycles at night.
Edit: Let me emphasis this for anyone reading:
YOU WILL NOT GET DEEP SLEEP IF YOU HAVE A NIGHTCAP.
Yes, you will get drowsy, drink enough and you will pass out. The restorative quality of the sleep you get that night will NOT be good. I've seen first hand the sleep study results from this. The effect is so obvious that even the questionable sleep quality results that wrist based wearables give you can easily and consistently show this effect.
It's an important distinction to make in this discussion, which largely boils down to "off label use", whether we're talking about drinking simply too much coffee or people with developing brains getting too much thc.
Caffeine has negative side effects. It is an addictive psychoactive drug. Its effects are mild, but, to repeat, it is an addictive psychoactive drug.
Even moderate use can cause sever anxiety in some people. L-theanine is a great counter to this. Green tea naturally has L-theanine in it and that is likely why people who drink green tea do not report anxiety (at least in significant numbers) while coffee drinkers do.
FWIW Matcha has even more L-theanine that green tea.
From personal experience, it caused my medications to stop working.
Now that I did not know. Given that l-theanine is a natural constituent of green tea (though I don't know offhand in what amount) I figure there would be more mention of this! A casual search doesn't reveal much, and even examine.com (https://examine.com/supplements/theanine/research/#pharmacol...) doesn't have anything listed. Ugh.
Then again almost no one mentions that 5-HTP can cause horrible things to happen to your heart. :/
I just quit cold turkey three days ago and suffered through two days of horrible headaches. I don't want to ever get hooked again.
I think the most universal things everyone should be doing are: get more exercise, and get more sleep.
I wonder how people will look back on coffee hundreds of years from now. "Almost everyone used to constantly drink an addictive stimulant. Shops on every block sold it. People stated that they couldn't function (or even talk) in the morning until they had consumed the stimulant. At work, people needed to take constant stimulant breaks. If someone went a day without it, they often suffered debilitating headaches." It sounds like dystopian science fiction.
(To be clear, I'm not opposed to coffee. It's just one of those things that seems strange if you think about it from a distant perspective.)
I hate what caffeine does to me, but I like the taste of black coffee.
https://livesandlegaciesblog.org/2017/05/24/coffee-a-revolut... https://blog.publicgoods.com/a-brief-history-of-coffee-in-am...
Check on the section on WW2, "An average of 20 pounds of coffee were consumed a year per adult. ... This amount was cut in half to 10 pounds a year, as one pound of coffee was allotted to each person over 15 years old every five weeks."
In fact some of the biggest names in tech and other industries are definately using drugs, its very possible to be a high achiever and be on drugs. in fact, it seems to be, that we really don't even call it addiction until it ruins your live, otherwise its just called "recreational". strange to me.
And to your point, yes life is not just about success, it's about so much more like friends and family.
That's why I hate weed. It turned my friends who were creative, thoughtful and caring, into people who just wanted to smoke and do nothing when they had time off.
I’m not saying people should smoke or vape. But I do want to say that with care and self control it can be a habit that doesn’t cause serious problems. Though ultimately I feel much better having quit.
Maybe the next four years are going to be the most successful four years of your career. Good luck!
Follow-on question: have you had similar success in your relationships and personal life in the last 4 years?
I was a great student stoned, and a decent heads-down coworker. I became a detached boyfriend and family member and even more detached friend. I made my world smaller, so I could "focus" on work. My time on creative/non-passive hobbies fell to zero. I didn't lose friends but I didn't keep up with them.
I genuinely hope your experience has not been so asymmetrical.
My creative passions exploded. Personal design projects (3D printing, circuit board design, robotics, programming) all were off the charts high, as I reduced the number of hours I worked at my regular job to under 30 hours a week. It was the most productive hobby time of my life.
I think it makes a huge difference that I smoked relatively small amounts of pure sativa, and nothing else.
Biggest issue I think was how it affected my sleep. I would stay up late getting stoned and designing robots, going to sleep around 4 or 5am. I’d wake up at 12 or 1. Made it hard to visit my Dad for lunch since he lives a ways away. Now without weed I go to bed at midnight and wake up at 8. I like that! Much easier to make plans with my Dad and my new partner (who is GREAT).
“Well, Stan, the truth is marijuana probably isn't gonna make you kill people, and ...it most likely isn't gonna fund terrorists, but... Well son, pot makes you feel fine with being bored and... It's when you're bored that you should be learning some new skill or discovering some new science or... being creative. If you smoke pot you may grow up to find out that you aren't good at anything.” [0]
To be clear, I don’t wholly agree, I know too many talented and hard-working stoners, but it does sum up the passive danger of cannabis rather nicely I think.
[0] https://southpark.fandom.com/wiki/My_Future_Self_n%27_Me/Scr...
Sometimes "do nothing" is exactly what we need in this crazy, hectic, busy world. Sometimes it's good to be bored. But keep it in check. Also, I have no problem with adults partaking, but kids with their developing brains ~ that's another story in my mind.
A few years ago, I used the word "Schmuck", and someone asked me if I was Jewish (I'm not). I didn't realize that "Schmuck" was also a Yiddish word until then. I looked it up, and I didn't realize that some Yiddish speaking people consider it to be obscene profanity! So now I use a little more sparingly.
It's why there was a moral panic in the 1800s over Jane Austen style fiction, in the 1930s over radio, and so on.
Being addicted to cannabis is not really any different to playing computer games 12 hours a day, doing endless marathons, watching sports, investing, or many similar activities.
It is doing that for decades which messes you up eventually.
But my point is that you can run reasonably fast in races with fairly low running mileage. Do most of the base and tempo workouts cross training on an elliptical machine or something, and save the running for interval workouts.
True enough. I too have read "Born to Run", and would suggest that most modern humans aren't adapted to it (certain populations certainly, but most not). Although I have hit reasonably good times, I don't count myself among that population. In high school and in my 30's, I certainly was in the 90th percentile of runners, just by the numbers. Individual races, definitely higher. I love to look at the form and economy of top tier runners, and frankly, I'm not built like that; I could never perform like that. I'm bound to break down eventually, and I'm pretty good at running.
> on an elliptical machine or something
This is not running. This is training for running by not-running. Dress it up how you like, but it's how people like me save the damaging work for races.
I played it twice, and do not regret it.
Hard drugs, alcohol, gambling, duels; a lot of this stuff is if not banned then at least restricted and regulated.
Are we not tired of that story? So what if humanity does not go to Mars? Is dad going to be unhappy about our efforts when everyone is dead?
Our culture is a joke of wishful thinking and emotional abuse to achieve someone else’s goals disguised as essential application of agency.
How terrible if humans lived a completely different agency than kowtowing to yesteryears industrial necessity to rebuild the world after humanity destroyed it.
Grigori Perelman has achieved more of note than any of us; I know about his accomplishments and none of yours. He did it all with paper and pencil. IMO our low effort consumerism and industrialist slog is destroying our imaginations and keeping us from better ideas.
Based on what it's doing to your lungs and circulatory system, I'd put it more in the "it rocks, until it doesn't" category.
People claim these systems dont shut down as you are still digesting body fat, but they for the most part do shut down and somewhere in doing that they heal very quickly. I have done it a few times (for NSAIDs and other pain killers having done damage to gut and stomach and when i get glutened giving me ulcers in my gut).
A benefit is that things like food dont rub against the ulcers which are basically like little cuts and that helps too heal too during the fast. You can go on having pain for months or years trying to deal with them in another way. Remember to dose some losalt for potassium and sodium ( your electrolytes ) while you fast to limit the dizzyness and fatigue. Im not sure magnesium powder would be a good idea due to it being tough on the stomach normally... it would stop the muscle cramps you will get... but it might stop the whole thing working ... i never used it while healing ulcers and lining damage .... but i have more recently when fasting to lose weight and it does make it easier .. magnesium tablets or capsules would be a terrible idea though those are really tough on the stomach and have a lot of added ingredients in the fillers and capsule depending on the company. Smaller fasts would also help. Good luck.
you can do something else while you listen to the radio or smoke pot (e.g., clean your house, hang out with friends or family, with weed you can even read or program)
phones and books both consume your attention, but a book at least demands a bit of effort to follow and might introduce you to new ideas or vocabulary, even if you're reading pulp fiction
on the other hand you can scroll twitter or insta or watch tiktok absolutely mindlessly, and doing so will tend to become a habit all while it chips away at your attention span and your willpower
weed can make boredom feel ok too, and can certainly affect attention, willpower and memory, but if used in moderation it can also magnify your curiosity and sense of wonder, help you introspect, etc
cannabis is a powerful entheogen and it deserves far more respect and restraint than it currently receives
smartphones give us enormous powers but they can also exert massive power over our minds and actions, they too should be treated with caution and used with far more restraint
cannabis might make you lazy or suggestible, and it can even be dangerous for some people or if used irresponsibly, but it won't spoon feed you mind-melting pablum or ads or propaganda or spy on you
Books, TV, the internet, cell phones all have the potential to benefit you. They often don't, but it's not the medium that's the problem, it's our own choices - except the spying on you bit. That's 100% a problem with TV, the internet, cell phones and now even books.
But the idea that the media forms and platforms play no causal role and it's all on us and our choices is nearly indefensible imo
Some do make it a lot harder to make beneficial choices than others for sure! Some are specifically designed for it.
Yesterday I saw a TV ad for Meta suggesting that with VR you will be able to stand in a small conversational circle with Socrates.
Yea, it will be educational.
But skepticism aside, with a personal instance of AI some benefits could be significant. Just having a personal AI critic to read your writing and give feedback could be a huge benefit -- or if not your writing, your thought process.
Queue the spying on you part.
So yeah, targeted ads and spooky tv sets are annoying at the least but the poing is that the infrastructure could easily support 1984 style monitors.
Regardless of the purpose of current usage, this is infrastructure for a surveillance society. That is the issue. The infrastructure is not going to go away unless we rip it down [down to and including transport layer] and rebuild with privacy and other human rights protections as a primary requirement of ubiquitous networking. DARPA was not concerned about these matters so all these fall under the 'operators discretion'.
I want to start by saying this isn't your Cold War sheen propaganda. This is Harmonious Society, "river crab" propaganda. This method can belie and camouflage the salient points of persuasion, sure. But it's not only intended to stream a deluge of coercive media. The purpose is to dominate the aesthetic discourse around topics, learning as much about you as they can, while ingratiating their clusters of community norms at the same time. There isn't a monolithic identity either. It's about picking the winners of our long form cultural evolution. Country to country data definitely shows varying preferences, but aside from the initial exposure to determine what clusters you associate with, these feeds are tailored heavily by user interaction.
The public description of their process divulges the use of object and character recognition, along with audio/tag keywords, to all items in a video. So even on a virtual machine with no app permissions, this site is making an incredibly detailed profile of your media consumption habits. For example, when you stop watching a video at a certain point, TikTok records what items were in it up to that point making you stay, and what audio/objects occurred at the point of losing interest. This catalog culminates as a set of meticulous preferences that end up correlating to all sorts of useful suggestion information; preferences for video formats(do you like dance videos, rants, or documentary content?), types of speech(language and culture obviously, but also intonation, volume, frequency of use, monologue vs dialogue), length and pacing, even framing of the camera, its all logged and associated with your device and you. Along with this, topics and community clusters are accrued.
This goes way beyond blanket brainwashing or disinformation propaganda in it's effectiveness. It's like if a personal interrogator was assigned to billions of people to know every minute detail of their personal media narratives. And at the same time, became a congenial friend who is coaxing all of them to subtlety shift their identities and preferences. Mass media always takes this trend to some degree, but TikTok isolates the individual's identity. (I didn’t write this lol)
If a store thinks I make more money than you, I might for example be told they've got a return policy that is much more generous than what they'll tell you. There are places where you will wait longer on hold, getting repeatedly bumped back to make room for people who have a better "consumer score" than you do.
The data is handed over to the state and locked away until it's useful to them. It's can get you arrested or questioned by police when you've committed no crime. It can get you sued for things which should not be crimes but are. It's used by politicians who carve out the borders of their districts specifically to limit the ability for your vote to make any difference.
That data is used to target you with lies and misinformation. It allows you to be targeted by extremist groups. It can be used to decide if you get hired or not. You could be turned down for housing because of it. There are millions of things that might prejudice another person against you. Your lifestyle, your politics, your religion, the people you associate with, your sexual history, your medical conditions, etc. You can't know who is accessing your information or for what reason, or know how accurate that data is, or know if/how it is being protected.
It's a gross violation of your rights, which yes, sometimes is used to manipulate you into buying something you might not have bought otherwise, but increasingly is used for much much more and once the intimate details of your life have been taken from you, you can never take them back or prevent them from spreading.
However much you enjoy the products that are spying you, you can't ever say if the benefits outweigh the costs. You aren't even allowed to know what the costs are or when you are paying for them, and there will never come a time when you have paid in full and it can no longer cost you something else.
https://vigilantcitizen.com/latestnews/hello-barbie-the-cree...
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/nov/26/hackers-c...
The book looks good btw! And I'm checking out her TED talk. If you're secretly an AI book ad pushing algorithm you just got me...
Paraphrasing, one of the best quotes in Turkle's book: ~We have evolved voices over millions of years to convey information, feeling and nuance. But [young people, who won't answer the phone] want to text instead.~
If your insurance rates go up next year, you won't be told that it was because people in your area spent more on fast food over the last 6 months than last year. you just get the highe4r bill.
What I fear is that we'll end up with a digital caste system where people are treated very differently based on hidden scores that follow them everywhere.
In general, with a more open system, you might also have more hope to redeem yourself, or at least evaluate effective options.
I want to start by saying this isn't your Cold War sheen propaganda. This is Harmonious Society, "river crab" propaganda. This method can belie and camouflage the salient points of persuasion, sure. But it's not only intended to stream a deluge of coercive media. The purpose is to dominate the aesthetic discourse around topics, learning as much about you as they can, while ingratiating their clusters of community norms at the same time. There isn't a monolithic identity either. It's about picking the winners of our long form cultural evolution. Country to country data definitely shows varying preferences, but aside from the initial exposure to determine what clusters you associate with, these feeds are tailored heavily by user interaction.
The public description of their process divulges the use of object and character recognition, along with audio/tag keywords, to all items in a video. So even on a virtual machine with no app permissions, this site is making an incredibly detailed profile of your media consumption habits. For example, when you stop watching a video at a certain point, TikTok records what items were in it up to that point making you stay, and what audio/objects occurred at the point of losing interest. This catalog culminates as a set of meticulous preferences that end up correlating to all sorts of useful suggestion information; preferences for video formats(do you like dance videos, rants, or documentary content?), types of speech(language and culture obviously, but also intonation, volume, frequency of use, monologue vs dialogue), length and pacing, even framing of the camera, its all logged and associated with your device and you. Along with this, topics and community clusters are accrued.
This goes way beyond blanket brainwashing or disinformation propaganda in it's effectiveness. It's like if a personal interrogator was assigned to billions of people to know every minute detail of their personal media narratives. And at the same time, became a congenial friend who is coaxing all of them to subtlety shift their identities and preferences. Mass media always takes this trend to some degree, but TikTok isolates the individual's identity. (I didn’t write this lol)
I mean tech is a double edged sword but I'm guessing the positive like police having a job beating people up without being filmed by some phone outweigh stuff like your roomba uploading your floor plan.
Of course, human nature and corporate greed don't change. The difference is scale. In the past stores had to know you were rich to treat you better. They weren't checking your bank account balance at the door. Now they can and increasing do exactly that.
Same with real spying. Maybe you in 1980s china you had to watch what you said around your neighbors. Today you have to watch what you say while alone in your own home. It's just even just what you say today either, but everything you've said or written over decades that can be mined. You don't have to go to the other side of the globe to see historical examples of how this would have been abused either, Joseph McCarthy would have loved to have this data.
Again, the tech isn't the problem. It's great that was can film police abuses. It's great that we have GPS. What we don't have are regulations that prevent the abuse of our data which is collected and disseminated at an unprecedented scale and never goes away. there exists a permanent record of what you've said, what you've done, and everywhere you've been. We're going to see it used to hurt people more and more often. There are already plans to use this data to attack people who have gotten abortions. It could very soon be used against those in homosexual or interracial relationships as those too are now at risk of becoming crimes.
On a psychological level, perhaps. But it is pretty obviously not so when it comes to physical risk (if one smokes in whichever form).
I'd argue that the chemical withdrawal effects of marijuana, are nothing compared to habitual smoking, alcohol or other "hard" drug use. But there are still some chemical withdrawal effects.
Personally I've had Minor irritability after not having an edible for a few days if I've been consistently having them nearly daily for few days. But I've also realized this, and moderate use more to only once or twice a week, and only 5-10mg at a time. I've grown to like the feel of 5mg in the evening overall. Accounting for the blah feeling the next morning/day.
I've heard professors say something to the effect of "students a decade or two ago used to be more productive". I don't have trouble believing that; so would I (I think) without the potency of modern entertainment. It's harder to do stuff while eating such good electric lotuses. :p
Hah, that's easily done without smoking pot
After all, there's a passive danger in many things we do or neglect to do.
Exercising a "little discipline" doesn't really work for addictive substances. In my experience, high-functioning people with tons of impulse control often don't appreciate that others around them have more limited capacity for that. Despite drinking a lot in grad school, I just stopped after my daughter was born. Not out of any problem functioning, I was a social drinker and was just too busy with a job and baby. But it would be foolish of me to assume that everyone can just exercise "a little discipline" and go from 5+ drinks a night to nothing just like that.
In this episode Randy didn’t have Substance abuse disorder. He took the kids for a drive after drinking. He was caught and the court ordered him to undergo treatment despite there not being any proof that he was an alcoholic.
This mentality that anyone that does something dumb or illegal while drunk has a problem does no service for either those that actually have substance abuse disorder, nor for criminal justice. You should be responsible for your own actions, and if you are sick you need treatment. But ordering people to undergo treatment after a crime despite no evidence of a disorder is just plain bad. mkay.
I've known people that were fine smoking a cigarette every 3rd day. I'm not one and that would put me on a path of relapse in a hurry.
I'll agree that avoiding addiction takes discipline, but once addicted, it depends to what, and who you are whether you need to focus on recurring abstinence or if more moderation is the ticket.
Two of my kids use THC pretty regularly and they seem content with a life that is paying the bills but not really leading anywhere.
The third does not (AFAIK) and is on a much higher trajectory.
All had pretty much the same upbringing, rules, experiences, and discipline.
I've never used it, so don't have personal experience.
Billions across the world would be incredibly happy with their kids getting to do something like this.
If you aren’t happy with a content child, sounds like you had children for all of the wrong reasons & would be a horrible, potentially abusive parent.
I'm not here to psychoanalyze you, but food for thought.
We forget that a job where you get free food and a low wage for simple work is (historically speaking) extremely luxurious.
As we all know (and frequently discussed here on HN), a minimal wage job results in limited housing options, limited healthcare options, limited educational options, etc. As a parent, it is my responsibility to prepare my children to become self sufficient beyond the minimum wage job. For the sake of themselves and their children.
Millions of people will never rise above minmim wage jobs.
Why fix that for one person ,and not for all?
A Taco Bell worker probably has more free energy and intrest for tackling big problems like protesting against the oligarchs.
Just met a guy last month that spent 5 years working at a carwash at minimum wage. He saved up money the entire time. Got himself a van decked for mobile cleaning. He still works hard, but is making some serious money now.
Seen far more that just collect welfare checks, smoke pot and play videos or watch tv for 16 hours a day, while blaming "whomever" for their situation.
And, the comment that millions of people will never rise above minimum wage jobs is laughable. With the amount of free/low-cost education (community college, free on-line classes, military GI Bill), and the huge shortage of skilled trade workers [0], anyone in the US can do better than minimum wage. It just takes effort.
[0] https://resources.skillwork.com/why-is-there-a-shortage-of-s...
It's only a problem if they aren't actually content. I've known tons of people working minimum wage who sneer at "elites", don't seek higher things, and get high all the time, but really resent the fact that they never did anything with their lives. They don't build their hobbies, they don't seek higher levels of employment or skill, and they constantly talk about how they want to do great things that they never do.
There will always be an infinite amount of achievement that you never accomplished. There will always be an infinite number of things you never did. The best thing you can do is prioritize, accomplish the things that you really want to accomplish, and try to do your best to be happy with what you are able to do. Live your life happily, and make the people around you happy.
I honestly don't know how anyone (good person or not) can properly take care of themselves on a Taco Bell hourly salary.
Really dumb take.
That said, I think the argument of “stepping stone” job salaries is less crazy in the context of people who are dépendants of other adults. If you’re a teen and you live with parents who provide food and housing and basics like that, you’re needs from the wages are different. Plenty of jobs make sense as “silly shit teens do for spending money” that would also be considered “awful life for full time adult worker”. Some of these jobs only exist because there are short term employees willing to do it for low pay. It’s fine IMO that they exist but it’d be wrong to assume that an adult should have to live of it.
I think we should push for livable wages and ensure everyone can be happy and healthy from their salary. I don’t know if it’s even possible to protect the adults in “low skill” jobs without making it hard to have “stupid summer part time jobs” for teens. If it is possible, then we should allow those teens to have their dumb low pay jobs and not raise too much of a fuss.
Why not just limit some jobs or minimum wages to teens who can demonstrate that they're already financially supported? Most people earning minimum wage are adults, but we could require companies to pay adults or teens supporting themselves higher wages. We could also set age limits on certain types of work, but then you run the risk of not having enough kids looking for work with everything else they've got going on.
35 million Americans are on snap. 53 million Americans used a food pantry in 2021 (thesev groups don't always intersect)
Whether it's urban, rural, or suburban (high percentage shift since 2008), the percent of Americans that have parents that can provide food, shelter - much less plan for education and their own retirement is not a very high number for this phrasing.
Imagine if the expectation was that a part time fast food job could pay even half of college expenses.
Those same jobs definitely only operate outside of school hours, to help promote their employees growth, right?
I'd be happy for them. I wouldn't be proud. An infinite amount of possible achievements is no excuse not to strive for anything.
If they're striving for happiness and they are happy, mission accomplished right? I assume they'd still have their own goals and hobbies outside of work or things which bring in money. Why assume those things don't matter?
I can't even imagine what a life of passive, mindless, consumption without any creative outlet would even be like. It's frankly depressing to think about!
The harder the achievement, the harder it is to automate that achievement, the prouder I will be.
Working at Taco Bell is not that hard to obtain and may very well not exist in 10 years.
I mean, you can certainly argue that the meaning of life is entirely arbitrary, and there is indeed nothing wrong with that if that's what someone wants to do. But I feel like the world is generally a better place when people in it strive for more than mere contentment. And for me personally, a couple of the key things that give life positive meaning are building relationships with other people, and striving to better myself—learning things, building skills, etc. I'm glad I do these things, rather than living an alternate life where I was equally (or maybe even if I were somehow more) subjectively happy, but less active.
I feel like there's a strong argument to be made that the person working at Taco Bell and is satisfied with their life is better off than a random cube dweller slowly losing their soul in the name of material comforts.
The best part frankly was that there was so little I actually needed to do. I filled out a few forms, I walked the whole site X times of Y period (usually once every 1-2 hours, but depended on the site). Beyond that I was largely just expected to be at my post, reasonably alert and professional looking. My time was my own to do homework, study, read, program, or whatever. I realize that a job without anything to do is a nightmare for some people, but I've never had a problem filling my own time.
Other pros:
* I knew my regular sites almost like my home. Sure during they day there were tons of people, but by the night/weekend when I took over, I was basically the only person in the building and it felt like it was mine.
* Eating lunch on the roof overlooking the city.
* Some of the chillest co-workers I've ever met, from the maintenance crew to the other guards.
* 12-hours shifts meant I was usually only working 3 days a week.
* On holidays me and the maintenance guy would have private movie showings in the building auditorium.
Cons:
* 99% boring, but when things get exciting they get real exciting. Only time I've had guns pointed in my direction, and they were cops.
* I think getting off work and going to bed a 7 a.m. for years has permanently kind of borked my sleep.
Nowadays software development is so meeting heavy that nothing gets done but you're "working" all the time.
I say this as someone with at least a little experience, not to be judgmental.
There are moments in later life where everyone feels that way.
Statistically, some paths might be show up in studies as more reliable in terms of late life contentment, but on an individual level, we all end up noticing that we left a lot of doors unopened, and can find ourselves stuck wishing we made different choices or had different opportunities.
Innumerable careerists and dedicated parents and globe-trotters find themselves stuck discontent, bitter, or resentful. And innumerable people of all paths look back, wonder what could have been different, and reconcile themselves to contentment again. And heck — some people just die before reaching their goals at all.
There’s no point speculating whether the chill dude at the Taco Bell is doing it right. They know themselves better than any of us do, and may easily end up more durably content than any of us.
I agree, but I think there is value in speculating whether the contentment we feel on weed is really just distraction from discontent. This applies to far more than just weed, of course, but my own experience is that weed is particularly tricky in this regard.
I don't have the insight to guess whether George should prefer to be skinnier and hornier but too depressed to meet his career goals, any more than it's my business to guess that Jane should put down the blunts and be more tuned in with all the drama in the news.
I'm busy enough trying to make those choices for myself.
old Successful Career guy: should have spent more time with family and friends <starts sobbing>
old Poor Artist guy: should have worked harder and more conservative then I could have afforded a house, now I have to rent <gets all whiney>
--
the question is the mental state developed. are you somebody who regrets everything and is never happy with what you have because you alwaya need more? or are you able to be grateful and enjoy calmly small things and accept how life is?
That's a big rabbit hole right there. Ancient wisdom says that there's nothing in the material world which can give you true happiness/contentment/satisfaction. The world is transient and so is the happiness you get from it. Moksha/Nirvana/Samadhi is the only way to become truly happy, forever.
Weed invariably leads you to such questions. No wonder it's the gateway drug to spirituality.
I'm reminded every day that my decision to never work with my hands again was a good one. Nobody respects people who provide for you, that's slave's work, mother's work(, teacher's work, nurse's work.) The ultimate CEO-guru would lie on a cushion all day, being washed and shaved by his VPs, periodically emitting syllables in an unknown language that would be interpreted by other VPs as commands to direct the people who actually do the work.
If the answer to all of those questions - especially the first - is yes, then I am happy. Of course I will push them to strive for more than that, but what they do with their lives when they leave the house is up to them, and at a bare minimum, I just want them to be happy with whatever they choose.
That's the whole point of the matter though, isn't it, that if you don't have ambition, then you voluntarily get yourself stuck in a rut of your making. "I'm content in that my life is shitty in X or Y way, but cannot do anything about it".
There was a time when I found comfort in thinking that I would grow up to be "comfortably middle class". My parents disabused me of that notion, and now that I am at that stage, I feel as though there is so much more I can learn and do, instead of clocking in and out day after day.
But hey, if you find happiness in working at a gas station or something, maybe you are more enlightened than I am.
What is “shitty” in this context?
Discounting the counter productive condescension required to be the one putting the other guy down, we should all be honest with a simple fact: any typical software dev (just talking about what I know) can succeed at a gas station job while the reverse is not true. This obviously does not afford the software dev the right to be a jerk to anybody (up or down the ladder).
Intelligence is only one of the many variables needed to succeed in certain occupations.
Although you have zero supporting evidence for this fatuous assertion, you're perfectly fine with passing it off as empirical data. If you actually took the time to speak to your average software dev particularly in America, you would find that it's more likely that they've worked customer facing retail when they were younger. These are pretty much the only types of jobs that are available during high school. I myself have worked at Walmart, Blockbuster video, Chick-fil-A, and as a landscaper during the summers. None of it was particularly taxing - although it was extremely tedious at times and often boring.
And while we're on the subject of anecdotal data I would say on the order of at least 60 to 70% of software devs that I've worked with in the past were actually in relatively good shape physically and usually were very conscientious about their diet and maintaining regular exercise.
We really need to be filtering people back to Reddit.
But I do think the world is a better place with more "CEOs" running independent taco joints, and less Tacobells.
Nothing wrong with working for someone, that wasn't my claim.
It is much easier to accomplish a universal perspective when you have much less 'self' to suppress. That's been the nature of monks of all variety for all of human history. I don't think it's a coincidence or disadvantage that cannabis enthusiasts have a less-selfish mentality.
Depends on one's definition of higher, I guess.
Who know, maybe I’m not meeting my full potential but I really do enjoy life and cannabis helps.
I’ve struggle with anxiety and insomnia my whole life and medical cannabis allows me to “turn off” in a way that a lot less damaging than other medications I’ve taken.
I've come up with some really great stuff while moderately stoned, and while I don't consume it on a daily anymore, I can't understate the importance of having some way of recording those thoughts as soon as you come up with them be it a notepad, notepad.exe or even a voice recorder if logging things on paper or text isn't your thing because it tends to mess with your short term memory enough to forget whatever interesting point of view you've arrived on within a minute or so. I think I learned this from comedians actually, George Carlin used to work like this. I bet there's plenty of writers on South Park and may other comedy shows who do, too.
Obviously taking it on a wake-and-bake basis throughout the day is going to give you problems though. Don't use it like that unless you're trying to manage serious illness like to keep your chemotherapy meds down or arthritis or whatever. Hell I don't even drink caffeine on a daily anymore because I find WAY more utility out of it once every couple of weeks or so. Oh yeah and if I'm going to agree with anything in this article it's that extracts are kinda too turbo, but I've also tried them in small amounts in drinks (Around 5-10mg) and that was pretty amazing compared to smoking in terms of lack of side effects from inhaling crap.
That said since it does have a thought-scattering thing going for it that if you don't bother to try and focus on getting those scattered thoughts on to something which records them, it's kind of a waste of time if we're talking about using it for purely utilitarian reasons.
completely agree with the op in general though. def not good of for kids who should be working on establishing themselves.
Afghanistan?
More than I can say for the food I eat.
But yes, Randy Marsh was absolutely right. I've had periods of my life where I've abused it and I regret every one of those days.
I think I am starting to wake up to this. I do find enjoyment in it, and there is such a sunk cost fallacy I keep factoring in too.
I mean do I take occasional breaks, but probably not enough. It had definitely helped me lower my inhibitions enough to introspectively identity some issues that were deeply hidden under the surface of my everyday life. However, it's killed my motivation and in some ways it's starting to negatively affect other areas of my life. Regardless of my dependence, I am thankful to not feel clinically addicted or anything.
I will say, it wasn't my first choice of treatment. I tried the mental/medical health professional route. I'm still on that train, and it's been 8 years. Nothing has really improved, so I am not sure what else to do and where else to go. I adopted cannabis around the age of 29 with very limited experience prior. The kind I use is not like the variety in this article either. I use 1:1 THC:CBD hemp because high thc products are illegal in my area. So maybe the damage isn't "as bad."
If all the medical/mental health treatments I tried work as well as the medical research and doctors claim then I probably wouldn't have ever began to use cannabis in the first place. But like I said, what else am I to do? It's exhausting and stressful trying to force yourself to be a way your body naturally fights against.
It's apparent that I cannot function well without some sort of chemical assistance. I guess the only difference is where I get it from (doctor vs. plant), the side-effects, and the societal views that accompany said chemicals.
I've been trying to do some soul searching to find out what I truly want, but I've chalked it up to, "I'll know it when I see it." And till then, I must keep searching.
Unfortunately I smoked my first joint at 13, I'm pretty certain it damaged my short term memory. I think had it been legal I wouldn't have got hold of it until much older plus it would have lost some of its cool factor.
It was mostly hash in my day, I actually never liked weed , it was all super skunk loaded with thc that caused paranoia.
Alcohol, cocaine and mdma are rough drugs too but there's something about weed/hash that makes me think it's overall mental effects might be worse. It's odd that it's written off as harmless quite often. (Btw I think all drugs should be legal, but I also now think they are all horrible and have nothing to do with them , well apart from beer and wine!)
Sure, “surprise, doing drugs at 13 is bad,” but I don’t know a lot of teenage drinkers who stopped at drinking (vs further in) in the same bad spot as the teenage smokers I knew (who stopped at smoking).
The difference of smoking at 13 vs 30 is likely different, but idk if I really buy starting in adulthood and trending towards habitual is meaningfully immune from its bad impacts I’ve seen peers deal who stuck with it.
The whitey that people experience, usually first time users or infrequent users, is a release of glutathione, and obviously its messing with the endocannabinoid system.
Its also got a very potent memory wiping effect, which makes it useful for criminals doing stuff to you, like raping you in your sleep if you have been spiked with prescription sleeping pills and/or off the shelf anti histamines sold to aid sleep.
Its a very nasty combination of drugs, when that sort of stuff has been done to you in your sleep, and criminals never tell you what they plan to do to you!
Dont make it easy for them, the legal system wont help you!
He said: "OK, motivation."
If you want to be a daily user, or already are, do try to still feel the need to do something when there's nothing to do and consume it responsibly. You probably will be fine health-wise but remember that doing-nothing-is-ok is not ok especially when it's become routine.
That said, sometimes a little dab is enough to throw things off — fun story: I was practicing the Filipino Martial Arts and my teacher had a hit off a blunt some fellows practicing kinda-wushu in the same park were passing around. His ability to count out our drills went to hell, but in generally all other ways he was fine. It was very humorous at the time.
This feels sad to me, and sounds like another angle on the same issue raised above.
You should be able to enjoy/engage with culture while sober; I'd describe needing to be high to connect with art as a dependency and a problem.
Is it a bad sign that I heard that in David Gilmour's and Richard Wright's voices?
Other ubiquitous drugs like caffeine or alcohol are easier for me to balance because their drawbacks (dependence, hangovers, weight gain) are more obvious.
But cannabis doesn't have those to nearly the same extent, so it's easy to rationalize frequent use: on an average night without anything planned, it always sounds enjoyable without any downsides. But then frequent use eventually adds up and starts to cause small issues, like being a little lazier and having a slightly worse memory.
Thanks for sharing your wisdom.
Anecdotally, I've known people who were prescribed pharmaceutical anti-anxiety meds and done far worse with that feeling of weightlessness and removal of stakes, like you're just wandering around in the Matrix until something bad happens like a car accident. I mean yes that happens on weed (again, anecdotally) but we have no controlled studies about it, and it absolutely should be studied.
So yes, valid point, but it's the tip of a much deeper iceberg.
I was never the type of smoker which was "active". I would smoke socially and began to hate that I could never remember people's names or conversations. It made me fairly quiet and anti-social compared to without.
Now I really can't enjoy marijuana, even when buying low THC high CBD bud and vaping it, it's still very easy for me to overshoot and get into a state I hate. Marijuana turns me into a complete idiot and creates a sort of cerebral haze I can't stand.
I really dislike the lack of education surrounding marijuana. People, especially young people, seem to disregard the impact of excessive consumption. You can argue with me all day it's safer than alcohol or tobacco, and I agree if we're talking equivalent amounts, but I'm not saying you should drink daily or multiple times a day for years.
Everybody is different, my experience isn't necessarily everyone else's. For those that do fall into the trap of spending too much money, time, and failing to understand how weed might be holding them back, better education, regulation, and support should net society a bunch of happy well informed people living their best lives.
Some of the more pleasant times are when I mix up ABV (already vaped weed) into edibles. Those I can get weak enough and with only the more stony compounds remaining where it can be pleasant, but it still turns me into a drooling idiot with absolutely horrific munchies.
It's like telling an alcoholic to try switching from vodka to tequila, because vodka makes you angry and depressed but tequila makes you a fun drunk. THC is THC, and any difference is psychosomatic.
> The research shows that genetically it is impossible to prove whether a cannabis plant is an Indica or Sativa. There is no difference in the genes.
> The overall chemical profile, like the genetics, shows no apparent difference between the labels.
Whether the Indica/Sativa marketing labels correlate with that chemical profile or not is besides the point. We know that different batches of the same strain can have different concentrations and ratios of all the of the relevant compounds because most legalized states require testing every batch. I don't know of any high quality research that studies how the subjective experience correlates with different doses and ratios but given that at least one of the most common compounds in cannabis is FDA approved to treat epilepsy (Epidiolex) and all the anecdotal evidence, it's really not a stretch to see how different strains produce different highs in different people.
If you think all weed produces the same effects then you first need to understand it's not all about thc.
First lesson Terpes: https://www.amazon.ca/Primary-Terpenes-Cannabis-Marijuana-In...
Next lessons: thc vs thca vs cbd
I can only enjoy THC as a sleep aid for the reasons you’ve highlighted above. For me, it feels like mj is underclocking my brain. I am aware of it and I hate being slow. It’s a terrible feeling. I enjoy alcohol much more even though mj is safer overall.
The real danger of marijuana is that for a small portion of the population it can induce schizophrenia, but it only affects a very small segment of the population since I believe you have to be in your early 20s or younger and be genetically prone to it
Fast forward a few decades. I now have chronic insomnia due to things like on-call and anxiety. My brain will not shut down enough for sleep. I had tried Ambien, melatonin, blah, blah. Nothing really worked. I went to a party, they had green brownies. I was on the verge of a migraine, so I had a couple. Out on the couch in half an hour. I woke up without the migraine.
So now I use THC/CBD to deal with migraines and insomnia. I can get a good night's sleep if I take a nice, measured dose gummy just before bed. I wake up slightly before my alarm, alert and refreshed. This is a big change from before. If I feel a migraine coming on I put stuff on hold, take a big dose of CBD and some THC and sleep it off. I wake up without the post-migraine stupids that Imitrex causes.
Used responsibly, in moderation, it can have a life-changing benefit - just like other drugs. If it's abused... well, alcohol abuse will kill you too.
And yeah, the schizophrenia risk would make me think twice about it if that ran in my family. Though I'm now at an age where that wouldn't matter (schizophrenia almost always manifest by your 30s which I cleared a while back).
That's funny. I like it because it underclocks my brain. It's not as needed these days now that I have meds for ADHD, but before I was diagnosed my brain felt like I was constantly thinking too fast. While I enjoy that I make connections quickly and that I retrain and recall information quickly, it's a depressing burden when it's out of control. So before the meds weed was the only thing that kept me feeling calm, focused and in control
I’m still in favor of legalization, but cannabis needs some of the regulations we apply to tobacco. Producers shouldn’t be able to make packaging that looks like a bag of skittles or a candy bar. There needs to be warnings on the packaging, informed consent when purchasing it, possibly even hotlines or pamphlets given out to help young people avoid addiction.
I don't know of any place that allows selling to minors or even allowing them in the store. What good is changing wrappers when kids don't shop in those places?
Cannabis has stronger laws compared to tobacco already. Plenty of medical and church related pamphlets exist. What do you think is missing?
The truth is you grew up and turned into your parents.. it happens to many who have kids.
Yes and no.
Yes. Kids sometimes find parents/adult things and think it’s candy and eat it. Parents should be careful blah blah blah. Parents make mistakes. Kids are crafty at rifling though cabinets. Making something look like candy increases the odds kids eat it by mistake.
But also by making things taste good (esp addictive or habit forming things) you’ll increase the ease at building the habit. Ask Juul how that’s going. That’s the whole idea behind menthol cigarettes and mango vapes. Make the habit easier. Even for adults.
Cannabis has stronger laws around distribution and dosing… tobacco has way stronger packaging and advertising laws. You can’t make nicotine candies, you can’t use shiny flashy colors, you can’t make fun ads etc. You can do that with cannabis.
> The truth is you grew up and turned into your parents
Sometimes you grow up and find out adults knew a few things about the world.
You can think cannabis and drugs should be legal without thinking it shouldn’t have basic regulation to protect people from themselves and from the product. We have plenty of other laws for other products to prevent bad advertisement or to include warning labels.
For what it’s worth, I personally think we should require things like edibles to be low dosage and packaged with warnings but I think we should still allow candies and fun packaging. But I’m a sucker for a cool package and maybe that’s the point…
Of course, everyone drinking moonshine is also going to lead to more alcoholics than people just having a glass of wine socially.
I use to be able to smoke once a month and not even think about it the next day. Any modern strain I wake up the next day thinking "I should smoke more weed!". Just crazy.
You can form a bad relationship with literally anything. Social media, television, video games.
The smartest and most passionate developer I have ever known smoked weed literally every day.
There are many musicians who use marijuana regularly. They perform, practice, and achieve at a level I can only IMAGINE.
What you are really talking about here is something nefarious: Self medication. Personally, I self medicate because I have a very busy mind and I need something to slow my brain down at the end of the day.
Other people self medicate due to depression. This IS bad. It is a way to escape reality because you are unhappy.
Anecdote: I smoked weed in high school pretty frequently. Then, I left for college, was super busy, didn't have any money, so I didn't smoke weed for almost a decade.
Eventually I moved to a state that has legal weed, and I bought a joint, and I smoked it. And I found something: It wasn't just youthful rebellion, I enjoy being a little stoned! So now I do it occasionally.
I know it's an imperfect solution to myriad problems, but it helps me greatly,but I very much realize I am self medicating.
When I quit smoking weed it takes me about a year to get back to full 'normal'. But I'm also miserable. I can't sleep, I wake in the night in the middle of thoughts that are making me anxious or whatever. I eat too much, I have less energy. I simply become better at hiding my issues.
It is a pretty safe, minor, and not intense anxiety medication that I hear has a bit of a funky/fun edge to it.
I was gonna start on it next month to try it out.
I had a friend get a permanent twitch from it, too, but of the people that I know that take it (that I know of), those are the only bad side effects I've really heard of.
On top of that it can still be very physically addictive and hard to wean off of.
I do thank you greatly, I had been pretty excited to try it. I hope it works out for you, I just seem to catch nasty side effects.
May it work for you and your days be peaceful!
I'm taking this a bit out of context but this is the biggest benefit for me.
While sativa can make my mind rush with ideas, it also helps slow things down, especially if I'm learning something. It gives me the patience to do things at the right pace rather than try to rush to get results. This holds for things as varied as learning kubernetes (e.g. going back and forth between documents to make sure everything makes sense rather than only going forward even where there are bits that I don't fully grasp) or making sure I have the proper form during weight lifting (e.g. using lower weights when I notice a discomfort somewhere – I'm much more sensitive to these things while stoned – instead of powering through a too-high load and injuring myself, thus setting my progress back).
So, like being addicted to an Internet connected, social media infested smartphone?
Yeah there's the general state of the world, economic precarity among families, the effects of social media, the education system and society in general deprioritizing developing resilience and coping skills as part of children's upbringings, etc. I'm sure they all contribute, but I have a hard time believing the weed is helping.
In most cultural practices that revolve around psychoactive substances it's typical to embed them in sort of a ritual context. Alcohol is pretty obvious, but even things like tea ceremonies or ritual practices around use of hallucinogens match. The modern "clinical" approach of just focusing on consuming the substance without any social or cultural thing around it is probably the wrong way to go about things. We do this with alcohol, for example, where we have some socially understood norms about healthy and unhealthy ways of using it, in particular not drinking alone as a habit.
There is something to be said for turning off the part of the brain that worries about being productive all the time.
Claiming a few 4 hour blocks over the course of a week as your own time to "zone out" and do whatever activity you like is not a bad thing. For some people cannabis helps them get in that zone.
My problem with sleeping was trying to turn off my geek brain long enough to get to sleep and stay 5that way. Weed helps with that.
I have given up smoking for long periods at several points in my life. Sometimes I filled the time productively, sometimes I filled it with TV, video games, the internet, etc. The modern world afford people many ways to be happy doing nothing, weed just happens to be one of several that are very good at the job.
I could not have relationships or work at all without medicinal cannabis, and there is really no difference between it and recreational cannabis in terms of efficacy, as long as the strain matches somewhat closely.
I don't feel "dopey and less intelligent" when I smoke weed at all times of the day. It actually has very little impact on me. But it does help me deal with my chronic anxiety issues.
I take breaks regularly. Sometimes I get into a place where I can't operate in my day to day life because of intrusive thoughts. When I smoke I'm able to break out of cycles of repetitive thought and make real progress in my life. I achieve so much more and get so much more out of life. I'm able to engage with the people in my life better and improve my relationships.
You speak with false authority on a matter you cannot possibly understand, because you do not share the life experience of myself or people like me. It's irresponsible and you should desist. If you have relevant experiences, share them and explain that this is your conclusion. If you don't have relevant experiences, don't include yourself in the conversation. Don't speak in generalizations about other people's lives.
Also agree that the op shouldn’t speak in generalizations around this.
But having said that, I know a lot of people who have lives I consider dull but never use cannabis. So it might be nothing to do with the drug at all. After all, I was still able to quit easily. It wasn't like a heroin addiction or something.
Had a really large 3 day psychosis (including blabbering on Facebook for all to see), and ended up being locked into "involuntary mental health" ward in hospital for 2 weeks, 6 months of recovery with a nurse and 6 years of putting my life back together. Started smoking when I was 18 and had the breakdown just after 21st birthday.
I feel like weed did help me get me out of my shell at the start, but looking back now, I was in a bad place and what I needed was a bigger perspective on life. Being high and browsing the internet / playing games with friends helped that perspective, but it could've came gently.
Now I've got a degree, a good job, a wife and kid :) - not many people I knew from the era still talk to me though, me going nuts was the last impression they got.
It started after a period of habitual smoking and got progressively worse anytime I smoked. Mental health ward twice (once in a country where I didn't speak the language, but that's another story). Haven't had any problems since I cleaned up my lifestyle and fully ditched weed many years ago. These days I'm also happily married with kids (three), a house and a decent career.
You can give someone a hamburger and some people will abuse it til they are obese. It's a personality thing.
To me, the most alarming trend I see among people nowadays is cell phones - people are checking notifications all day like its crack.
However, I've gotten stoned almost every night for the past ~15 years and I think it's been pretty positive. I actually get a low-level pleasant and productive anxiety to create shit. Like don't get me wrong I can get stoned and play a game or watch TV, but usually it just makes me want to go harder on something I'm working on and makes the work more fun. For certain types of work (writing product stuff, making music, css polish) I find it correlates with small creative bursts or insights. My current rule of thumb... only vape [0] in situations where I don't have to deal with strangers or kids (only at night these days). Like food, alcohol, coffee, being alone, or being social, moderation is key.
My point is just that it depends on the person and setting. It's not necessarily good or bad, more like a power tool for your mind. No panacea.
THC users like to downplay them.
This study implies that it's not really true: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1516648113#sec-5
>THC users like to downplay them.
What would you have us do then? There are minimum legal ages for using legal cannabis as well as alcohol and tobacco.
That doesn't stop teens from trying it out, nor has it ever done so.
Archaeologists have documented the use of mind altering substances by humans going back at least 8-10,000 years, and it's very likely that such usage goes back much, much farther (e.g., our distant ancestors getting drunk from eating fermenting fruit millions of years ago).
The issue isn't whether or not people should use mind alterng substances, we have done so and we will continue to do so.
The advice I gave to those in the younger generation of my family is that "we've been using mind altering substances pretty much forever. And most people handle it just fine. But if using such substances interferes with your goals and/or functioning as a person in society, there's likely a problem."
Which is why I believe all "drugs" should be legal, with purity and dosages regulated.
From an economic standpoint, it makes a lot of sense. We could spend a fraction of what we spend on "interdiction," "enforcement," incarceration and lost economic output (the result of incarceration and bias against those who have been incarcerated) on treatment programs for the tiny proportion of us for whom using mind altering substances keep us from functioning normally in society.
That makes much more sense to me. Trying to stop folks from doing stuff we've been doing since before we were us (humans), is a fool's errand.
Let's help those who have issues and leave everyone else the hell alone.
I also think we better get used to the consequences of an increasingly psychotic teen population.
I heard you say absolutely nothing of any semantic value, and certainly nothing that added to the conversation.
That may be true for the majority of users, but the increase in people having significant negative reactions to high-dose THC is a real phenomenon.
This new era of extremely potent THC concentrates and other high-dose products has opened the door to some people using far more THC than previous generations could easily consume. Many of these high-dose users are discovering that the old narrative that weed isn’t “physically addictive” isn’t actually true and prolonged high-dose usage can produce significant physical and mental withdrawal effects. It won’t kill you like extreme alcohol withdrawal can, but the deep impulse to redose and inability to quit easily catches a lot of these high-dose users unprepared after they’ve been told that weed is harmless for so long.
Psychosis among high-dose users is also on the rise, though harder to pinpoint because the connection is very hard to make and quantify in studies. Again, this isn’t something people were taught to watch out for so you see some of these users believing that marijuana is a treatment for their psychosis rather than a cause and they spiral further and further until quitting.
The old street knowledge about marijuana’s biggest downside being laziness doesn’t really apply to people engaging in the more extreme doses and uses heavily processed and concentrated products.
As a general rule, I don't disagree, although there could be other important variables in place here as well.
An alternative outcome is that one spends their time thinking about intelligent and important things (that few other people think about), except they may not have an easy route to monetization (professional success) for various reasons that are not the fault of drugs, and in some cases arguably due to a lack of more widespread drug usage, or simple diversity in thinking and discussion.
I still struggle with motivational problems (ADHDish issues), but I think I've been lucky. I have friends that will probably never achieve anything meaningful in life and that is despite having had access to the best education available (private schools), parents that were MORE than okay, welp being privileged you know... Now some of them cannot stand normalcy (i.e.: working).
There is a world of difference between starting weed when you're 25 and smoking a little bit VS getting HIGH almost everyday from 13-15 onwards.
When we were young we convinced ourselves that weed was not dangerous at all...fools.
I'm about to be a dad, I'll make sure my kids know what's up.
if weed makes someone feel fulfilled, then they can farm a lot more feelings of fulfillment by using it than the old fashioned way of actually accomplishing things. I think trying to shame people away from it is silly. People who use it will very quickly realize it isnt bad, and then they dismiss everything they heard about it.
There is a monkey paw warning in that it wears off. It wears off in short and long terms; it is less effective the more you use it over time. So be aware that the spectrum for its effects is along the lines of "kind of cool for a little bit" to "everything you love slowly being ripped from your hands". the latter extreme probably being pretty rare and more applicable to heroin.
Otherwise you could make the same 'danger' argument about video games, porn, social media, reading books, painting, co-dependent relationships, etc. Anything that people use to dump their attention / time into rather than deal with anything uncomfortable in their life. The vessels people use are a matter of preference, and tangential to the underlying problem.
There is always an issue with trying to use 1 tool to fix every problem. obsession. Weed usage requires nuance and an understanding of what it is you are trying to accomplish with it. same as any other drug, same as any other tool.
Honestly, if someone wants to do nothing with their life than smoke weed.. who cares? I certainly dont. They might be one of the last people I offer any sort of charity to, but that's about me not them.
Only when her finance had a psychotic breakdown and tried to kill everyone from it did she finally get off of it. Was 2 months before he didn't sound like an anime villain who was going to take over the world.
She keeps commenting at much more energy and less depressed she is, how she isn't always irritated at everything. She had no idea it was affecting her like that. For us we have our sweet loving and caring daughter back.
https://www.brightquest.com/cannabis-induced-psychosis/psych....
Bottom line, he can never touch weed again. They can't be around people that do. They've lost most of their friends. Friends didn't agree about them giving up weed. They are starting to make new friends.
They are doing far better now.
I like bourbon and gin, but I don't drink both everyday.
As they say, "everything in moderation."
Chicken vs. the Egg.
Perhaps many are drawn to cannabis due to the inability to achieve such goals due to whatever individual or societal issues/reasons one may have.
It’s like anything else; confusing and obtuse then you learn to live with it
No one learns to code before writing bad code. Some of my best and simplest ideas came to me while high af simply because other routine daily thoughts were out of the way
Kindly stop peddling tropes from a place of ignorance and actually figure it out subjectively for yourself. Other peoples tolerances are not the same as yours. Like everything else it’s gradients, ranges, and distributions
Edit: my only non-typical stoner trope is I did not smoke until I was 27. I had life experience behind me. A non-trivial detail. I am 43 now
PS Love your work on AutoTempest; the top ten lists I found with some clicking (maybe a partner thing) were really enjoyable.
And thanks, I definitely got lucky kind of accidentally finding a viable business niche with searchtempest and then autotempest, and building on that. It's a fun way to earn a living for sure.
But experts say today’s high-THC cannabis products — vastly different than the joints smoked decades ago — are poisoning some heavy users, including teenagers.
The issue is that people adjust their consumption accordingly, just as with alcohol - drinking one liter of beer, everyone knows, is not the same as drinking one liter of vodka. Concentrated hash products were also widely available in past eras. Imagine a headline like "Concentrated alcohol products cause vomiting in teenagers! It's not your parent's booze!"
Regardless, THC negatively impairs learning, as does alcohol, particular when it comes to memory and retention. People who choose to use such substances recreationally should really moderate their intake and not engage in daily use.
This doesn't apply to people who use cannabis for legitimate medical uses, such as an adjunct to opiates to manage serious chronic pain without crossing the addictive threshold with opiates (i.e. avoiding opiate tolerance, which leads to opiate addiction).
Eh, I don't believe that. Especially with weed there is not much to indicate dosage and the addiction is often to tobacco too which motivates people to smoke another joint. It is true that plants got more potent too. At least this is the case in Europe where weed is a bit different than in the US.
But I guess the most immediate danger is that drugs are increasingly being laced with other stuff.
I'd also like to ask GP whether they think 1.5-3g a day is a low, moderate, or high quantity in a day, in their opinion.
To put it in monetary terms (error +/-50%) this is about $20/$40/$80 / day, respectfully.
I don't intend to change your opinion on this, just sharing my perspective.
I'm also surprised you think 1/4 oz a day is unbelievable. A smoker with a 2 pack a day habit can easily smoke through a 1/4 oz by just replacing half a 0.5g cigarette with cannabis (40 cigs x 0.5 gram => 10g cannabis + 10g tobacco). When I was using concentrates heavily and pressing my own rosin, I was easily using up to an ounce of flower on my worst days (with 15-25% yields by mass).
It's definitely a very fuzzy and subjective scale. Personal experience plays a big part and I suspect heavy smokers anchor around their most common daily average - I suspect you smoked 1.5-3g a day?
I don’t really appreciate the outta my league comment, but I’ll take it as a joke. I just am surprised to see these numbers normalized in a discussion. I think we’re just using different definitions. All good,
I'm not arguing that people need or should monitor their use like mine; my monitoring is for budgeting reasons anyways not managing my use.
Sure an inexperienced user can experience a distressing reaction when consuming something too potent, but the original article is about daily users.
Now, I consume at most 1-1.5g a day. And that's a high all day kind of day for me.
I'd say my tolerance is down because I don't consume regularly or nearly as much but the main difference is in the 90s I only had access to mexican brick (low THC) and now I wouldn't touch that stuff if you paid me. Oddly, I do miss the act of just having a long smoking session but there's no way at current potency I can even justify rolling a joint when 2-3 hits sit me down. So there's definitely some substance to the potency being a self regulator.
For a time, I grew hydroponically and if anything is making people sick, my bet or first inclination would be to see if it's the nutrients not being properly flushed before harvest. I'm not sure if there are any regs on that stuff yet?
Also, I find it really obvious when I've gotten more high than usual, and I find it pretty easy to avoid doing that. I can't imagine that's that unusual.
During the Gin Craze, sure:
> It is with the deepest concern your committee observe the strong Inclination of the inferior Sort of People to these destructive Liquors, and how surprisingly this Infection has spread within these few Years ... it is scarce possible for Persons in low Life to go anywhere or to be anywhere, without being drawn in to taste, and, by Degrees, to like and approve of this pernicious Liquor.
It's easy to tell by looking at it that vodka is not beer. In fact you can often tell how alcoholic a beverage is just by sniffing it. Is the same true for different intensities of cannabis? In any case, hard liquor is certainly far more dangerous than beer (when you hear about college kids who died of alcohol poisoning, it's always from liquor - the physical limits of the stomach generally prevent you from getting worse than a night of vomiting and a hangover from beer). So I'm not sure that the analogy to alcohol is helpful to cannabis.
I think the difference is more in the consumption. It is hard to drink a lot of hard alcohol at once. You usually get more drunk over your consumption period. And—barring any behavior disorders—you can cease consumption. With weed it is easy to smoke a lot of really strong weed not realizing until too late that you’ve had more than you wanted.
When non-American parents allow their teenagers to drink usually its beer/wine only.
I also think that the weed culture is hostile against suggestions of problems. Almost every time I have spoken about possible dangers of weed, even when presenting peer reviewed articles or meta analysis, I have been angrily shouted down. Unfortunately weed users have been prosecuted for so long that they take a dogmatic view about its benefits.
Just give up the idea of joints. You don't have to conform to weed culture or tradition (or marketing) to smoke weed. As an act, smoking isn't particularly pleasurable (although I have to admit that smoke is mildly entertaining.) How about taking 2-3 hits from a water pipe, vape, or just an old-school pipe, and spending the rest of the night drinking something you enjoy? Have some tea instead of smoking more pot. Popcorn is very good, and fairly low-calorie.
But anyway I like joints and so do a lot of people, I don’t see this as a solution
That was definitely not true in my case. I used to consume pretty high-% THC hash throughout the day. At first it was strong and I did it once every day or two. But you get tolerant and can handle a lot more. Eventually I was smoking hash several times a day and I ended up with a lot of the symptoms described in this article (though I am in my 30s). I realized I needed to quit, and the off-ramp was terribly long and frightening; I was very hooked both physically and emotionally and I haven't touched any form of THC since, though it did take me close to a year to feel normal again.
Interesting to me that sharing my experience with THC addiction has deserved downvotes. Sigh.
1) That line has been trotted out continuously because weed potency has been going up continuously. In the late 90s, good weed was anything above 4-5% THC; the store near my house currently has nothing below 23%. For your beer/liquor analogy to work, you'd have to live somewhere where the bottle shop only sells triple IPAs and fortified wine, and Coors is in the soft drink section.
2) I don't believe there was anywhere in the US where hash products were "widely available" before legalization. And believe me, I was looking! Back then, using hash every day was an expensive and exotic thing to do, like owning an albino tiger. Today it's commonplace and costs less than a dollar a day.
3) You're ignoring the entire point of the article, which is people getting sick. I don't think cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome existed a generation ago. If you'd told me in 1999 that you knew a daily pot smoker who accidentally smoked too much and had to go to the ER, I would've said no way, physically not possible. Today, totally plausible. If everyone just "adjusted their consumption" this would not be true.
2) If people want low-concentration cannabis (though why anyone would want to fill their lungs with soot and ash is beyond my comprehension), it's easy enough to grow your own and cure the leaf material for the purpose instead of the flower material - the cannabis shops simply don't find this profitable, nor do the growers.
3) Back in the 1980s and 1990s, there were definitely cases of people getting sick and having to go to the ER, although then it was from eating too many pot brownies. It was definitely a fairly common occurence, just the source was not gummies or resin from cannabis shops.
Personally I don't think alcohol or cannabis have many positives, and I like having a nice clear memory and a fog-free thinking process so I avoid them more and more as I get older, but these kind of articles are just so reminiscent of Nancy Reagan's 'think of the children' pearl-clutching nonsense. If people's kids are so pressured that they turn to drugs and alcohol for relief as teenagers, that's more of a symptom of bad parenting (typically too much high-pressure expectation nonsense, if not actual abuse) than anything else.
I don't believe this for a second. I mean, maybe it was "widely available" compared to uranium-238, but not compared to concentrated hash today (which is what we're discussing). THC oil today is cheap enough and ubiquitous enough for minimum wage/homeless people to use daily, there's no way that was true before legalization.
> the strength of locally grown strains then was little different than it is today
First off, this contradicts every source I can find, as well as common sense (have all of the industry's attempts to breed more potent strains over the past three decades been abysmal failures?). But I did some research just for fun to confirm that; here are my results:
2013: Most potent strain ever tested in the history of the High Times Cannabis Cup was 28.35% (according to https://hightimes.com/grow/25-greatest-strains-of-all-time/ )
2022: Most potent strain I found by picking a random midwestern city (Ypsilanti, MI) and clicking on the first weed shop in the search results: 33.07% (according to https://menu.theflowerpot.us/stores/the-flower-pot/products/... )
Second, supposing they were growing 33% bud in Humboldt in the 80s, surely you would agree that most US pot smokers weren't able to get it. Today they can, which supports the assertion of the article.
> these kind of articles are just so reminiscent of Nancy Reagan's 'think of the children' pearl-clutching nonsense.
It's seductive but erroneous to assume that everything an idiot says is false.
Kids get their stomachs pumped from alcohol poisoning all the time.
Hardly ever is it from beer. It's almost always from liquor.
Drugs have a delayed response. You won't adjust until you start responding - which can be too late.
There are no volume issues with pot. You can smoke an enormous amount of weak pot or a tiny amount of strong pot, and it will take up exactly the same amount of space in your lungs: none, unless you forget to exhale.
You feel the effect of smoking weed pretty much right away. As a consequence, it's easier to get sick with alcohol than when smoking weed.
> Adjusted consumption is interesting.
Reasonable people do adjust their consumption if they want to. You can tell when something is very potent before it harms you, whether it's inhaled weed or alcohol.
Now teens don't always behave as reasonable adults. The best thing to do is to educate them on the topic of drugs.
While there definitely was a crescendo of potency, it largely peaked. The plants simply won't grow beyond about 33% THC. But 25% was available eight years ago. One review says that seedless marijuana ("sin semilla") averaged 11.5% THC as of 1997:
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00213-002-1349-y
Still, I've got to figure it's an advantage in terms of health to take three hits from a glass bowl instead of two dozen pulls on a joint. There's no real disadvantage to drinking beer instead of whisky like there is with weed.
I can't speak to hash. I don't like it.
Lower ABV products generally have more calories per unit of alcohol. Getting drunk off of beer every day will give you a beer gut. Whisky might not.
Seltzers change this equation somewhat, as most of them are essentially vodka sodas with some flavor and artificial sweetener.
I only know this because I built a stupid android app one afternoon in college that let you look up different drinks to see how to get drunk without getting fat. (It was named "ThinWasted," which I thought was very clever.)
CBD is a very effective antipsychotic that occurs naturally alongside the THC: https://academic.oup.com/schizbullopen/article/3/1/sgab053/6...
What percent of products sold for recreational use in dispensaries have a 1:1 or greater ratio of CBD?
So no, there actually is a confirmable mechanism by which the legal product being sold today is significantly less safe in terms of psychosis related side effects than the illegal products from years ago.
And everyone is still so sensitive to regulatory overreach from those years ago that they are stubbornly turning a blind eye to the underlying pharmacological evidence for that danger.
10mg of THC alone and 10mg of THC with 10-20mg of CBD will have very similar euphoric effects. But the latter will be much less likely to result in delusional side effects, for which constant daily use can build up into a full-blown psychotic episode as in the case mentioned in the article.
Not to mention the vast difference between what it says on the label and what you may actually be consuming -- the testing and labeling processes are rather notorious for being inaccurate. Even for an avid smoker, it's virtually impossible to consume the exact appropriate dosage, if there even were such a thing. There's also social pressures which encourage people to consume larger amounts. The list goes on and on.
So, what you're suggesting as being the obvious negator of the expert opinions of medical professionals, simply has no foundation in reality.
This is true, and I believed it without caveat until I was in my 30s, and met a very productive programmer who smoked when they studied. Learning under the influence of cannabis is just something that has to be practiced, and since people rarely study stoned, they rarely get to that point. After you've realized this, cannabis just allows you to study longer and more imaginatively.
I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't had the example, and the practice that I used was playing the game minesweeper under the influence. I do feel that I might have ruined some of the joy in being stoned, I never feel as out of control or confused as I could feel before, but I'm now of the belief that this was weird cultural baggage. When you're intoxicated, society gives you permission to be out of control, so you feel that.
I've always known people who drank for the impunity. The kind of people who start saying and doing unforgivable shit and slurring their speech after the first can of O'Doul's.
If I take half of one of those (75 mg) it is a strong intoxication, pretty consistently a good time, and I can go for a walk, do the dishes and otherwise be able to do most things.
The local health department had complained about very strong products being for sale and I've talked with this guy a few times about it. He'd say that people can always cut them in half but I'd say that a lot of people don't know what they are doing, will take the whole thing, and probably have a bad time when they could have had a good time and become repeat customers.
Despite the unit economics being worse he's recently come out with a 75 mg product.
Just give consumers choice
It's a nightmare. I'm a medical cannabis patient, so unfortunately, proper symptom management means my usage ends up being quite high. My tolerance got so high that I barely felt anything from 350mg+ in edibles or RSO[0]. Taking a tolerance break from that is an awful experience; my psychiatrist actually had to prescribe benzos (Klonopin) to make it doable.
[0] https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis-101/what-is-rick-simpso...
People who want a stronger buzz could always just take two..
I think setting national standards around this would be just one benefit of legalizing recreational use at the federal level.
We don't have anything that high in California
also edibles are practically a different drug after being processed by the liver, we should study them completely separately
we should have high quality studies for specific use cases, just like corporate designer drugs that go through the FDA
but we currently have... whatever this is.
As someone who smokes a good amount of weed, my recommendation to people it to always stick to just flower. I've tried it all, vaping, vaporizers (different than vaping, you're superheating flower rather than using an extract), edibles, and regular pot.
From my personal experience, edibles last the longest but don't hit right away, takes about an hour for it to pass through to your liver and from there I noticed that it was a "low grade" high for a few hours.
Vaping is the polar opposite, the stuff hits you almost instantly. You also have to be careful and not puff to much, a monster hit will send you to another universe. I've also noticed that because of the high THC content (sometimes 90-100%) and virtually no CBD content, this is the easiest way to have a bad high. This also gives you the shortest high, seems to wear off quickest.
Finally you have good ol' flower. This is what I usually smoke because it slots somewhere between vaping and edibles in terms of how high you get. I almost always smoke flower because I get consistent results. If I vape I might have a panic attack, if I have an edible it might last too long, but with plain weed I know how long I'm going to be up, what the experience will be, etc.
Also this is complete pseudoscience but there's something that makes me feel better about smoking flower vs the other stuff. Vaping and all that other stuff is cool, but there's a certain safety in knowing the only modification a flower had was trimming the leaves away, no lab equipment, extractions, chemicals or any of that.
Honestly, that is common sense not pseudoscience. There has been way too much shady shit going on especially in vaping [1].
[1] https://www.vox.com/2019/10/28/20936888/vaping-lung-illness-...
I don't think it's very good for the lungs either.
And getting it directly from the flower means that I can cut it with high CBD flower depending on what experience I'm looking for.
With any form of smoking or vaping I have no idea how high I'm going to get. I hate the smoke, the coughing, the throat burning and just about everything else. I also hate going from sober to high in less that a minute, the come up is my favorite part.
I'm not trying to discount your opinion at all. I just found it fascinating to have such polar opposite experiences with the same thing. I also assumed smoking was so popular just because it was the only convenient way to use when it was illegal. Now that it's legal I just assumed most have formed a habit they haven't really considered or realized.
EDIT: Also just for context, my range varies from 3mg - 15mg depending on if I'm going for a little buzz or completely stoned
Second, stress causes cancer. If one is using just a little bit to wean off the stress that'd work out. Also pollution causes cancer. I don't see anyone banning cars, not even having some regulations for large diesel trucks which leave a humongous trail of smoke...
That is quite a statement.
> Some people wonder whether stress causes breast cancer. But overall, the evidence for this has been poor. And a large study of over 100,000 women in the UK in 2016 showed no consistent evidence between stress and breast cancer.
There are plenty of other articles around summarizing studies like this.
Edibles in low doses are great, but flower seems to be the most natural and safe way to consume it in a predictably moderate dose (vs. a huge dose from edibles, or wax, etc.)
As an aside, I tried vapes again recently and they did almost nothing for me. Compared to a year ago when I tried one and got put on my ass quickly.
Your 10mg is not the same as my 10mg.
Except for widespread pesticides when growing flower in many places, often without much regulation.
Once retail stores opened where I lived, I started buying weed with 10-15% THC instead of the standard 20-30%. It can feel like the difference between having a couple beers or 5 shots of tequila. Most of us can enjoy a few beers almost anytime, but rarely want to get shit-faced drunk. The black market, driven by heavy users, has been forcing us all to get far too high on weed because dosing a hit of weed at 25% THC is almost impossible. And we think this is normal.
Most of the weed in retail stores is still too strong for me, but at least now I have options, which for me has been the biggest boon of legalization. I can finally enjoy weed again! But this same story plays out across many drugs, with consumers facing far more danger and uncertainty than is necessary because of our spectacularly ineffective drug laws.
You probably know this but just in case, some vapes are better for microdosing than others and will work with just a pinch.
> Unfortunately finding the low-dose stuff seems to be very difficult.
What I've been doing is buying CBD flower online (usually <$75 per/ounce) and mixing it with a small amount of THC flower. I can pack my vape full, still get big clouds, but have a tame effect, the only downside is that the flavor isn't quite as good.
Is this account's history that bad that I should've mentioned that in the negative? ha
For your case you can also cut your high dose stuff with a cbd only strain right in your grinder to whatever ratio you want. The ground up weed would be no different at all from a low dose strain and certainly a lot more accessible.
Plus, a lot of casual smokers think they're supposed to smoke the way they see in movies, or how they did in high school, which is usually not a single, carefully measure toke and then wait 20 minutes.
Weed on average is getting stronger.
There's trouble when the marketing and availability of legal cannabis in dispensaries is the equivalent to a situation where you go to a liquor store or grocery store and you are only able to buy 80+proof and the attitude is "well, consumers are smart, they'll just water it down at home", and there's probably some of that happening.
That said, I've also seen a recent resurgence in THC/CBD mixed blends being advertised, specifically, like lawnmower beers are -- so certainly there's consumer desire for something that won't make you totally zooted, just kind of relaxed. Low-dose and mixed-dose gummies and edibles also seem very popular: 5mg THC/5mg CBD candies, for example.
Hopefully the market notices.
> lawnmower beers
> totally zooted
Oh I like you.
Are there people who get sick from being stupid and smoking half a dozen pure blunts in a row? For sure. I once almost hit two totally greened out Asian tourists who were vomiting onto the bicycle path in Amsterdam, and I've seen people just blacking out for a few seconds in the coffeeshops after smoking one blunt after another for hours on end. Teens in their endless, hormone-guided stupidity are probably getting sick from time to time too, and the higher potency very likely does not help, neither does having zero tolerance and not being advised about the strength at hand.
However, I definitely beg to differ, and to not conclude that potency equals sickness. Stupidity or naivety does, and potency is definitely not a "public health risk". You probably wouldn't call Scotch a public health risk either simply for it being stronger than beer. The user determines the risk, education and controlled dispensing help mitigate it and even the most insane ultra-potent strain will not kill you, only deliver you a 1-2 hour lesson in personal responsibility.
I don't smoke much any more, but I still like to visit every new coffeeshop I see and haven't been at before, so I have probably seen and smoked over a hundred different strains by now. They all have more or less different effects, flavours, potential medical applications, benefits and disadvantages, but exactly nil of them have/had a "making sick" property by default. In fact, with most of them, you only have to inhale one or two puffs to immediately notice how and how strongly they will affect you, and the only way to ever get sick is by ignoring common sense and forcing it.
IF there is weed you can actually get dangerously sick from these days, it is unregulated and adulterated street weed, which is absolutely flooding Europe these days and people are consistently dying left and right from smoking it, but even that has nothing to do with the weed itself.
> sourced from god knows where
Well, that's the illegal part, isn't it? ;-)
It's always illegal until it lands in the coffeeshop! It's almost like a game of tag really. I wish Dutch politicians would properly legalize it, but the way I sometimes hear them talk about drugs is way too out of touch for that ever to happen.
> sourced from god knows where
> Well, that's the illegal part, isn't it? ;-)
Ahh, I was referring to certain coffeeshops that carry rare strains that have been sourced from very remote places. But you're absolutely right as well of course. Not a fan of this setup either.
My home country, Germany, is apparently planning on fully legalising cannabis - if you thought Dutch politicians are out of touch with reality and cannabis, allow me to tell you that they seem like the most mentally stable and rational humans on earth compared to German politicians (maybe you've heard about the drug commissioner over there calling cannabis "broccoli" and explaining that "cannabis is illegal because its forbidden") - so you can probably imagine how absolutely insane it seems for them to be discussing and actually planning this.
I have high hopes that neighbouring legalisation will push the Dutch, but realistically I think the worst part about all of this here is really only the lack of logic. Users aren't getting punished, police and prosecution don't have to deal with it, the coffeeshops pay taxes, and so on. That's already a day and night difference to our direct neighbours.
When I moved here, it was like my brain errored out into a bootloop - I was standing outside in the park smoking a joint, and could not stop looking around and getting paranoid about cops showing up, then remembering it's okay and feeling like tons of weight and anxiety had been lifted, then 5 seconds later getting paranoid again, then remembering again, and so on. To this day, I sometimes feel a weird sense of unease and.. I guess you could call it internalised shame? Living in prohibition really sticks with you.
Whenever I smoke I feel as safe as drinking alcohol: i.e. nothing to fear from law enforcement if you don't go overboard with it.
I smoke once every 2 months or so, on average, 1 to 4 puffs, always in social settings. I'm 30+ years of age. My family has a history of drug addiction (all of them). What I've learned is that drugs can be healthily managed. If it couldn't I'd have gone down the gutter at the age of 28 since I started to experiment at 27.
My addictions at the moment are: YouTube, WhatsApp (friends), coffee, HN (to some extent)
So I'm not without my flaws, but the way society criminalizes drugs is beyond me. This is especially after having tried all the big names and realizing it's always a combination of: having a shitty life + having a social circle that heavily enables it + thinking you'll be fine and won't get addicted (I'm well aware of how all of them lull me into a false sense of security) + starting it at a very young age (all family members started around 14 years old with at least alcohol, less information means less protection).
One other way for me to not get addicted to them is to realize two things: (1) how being sober is awesome and being able to not be anxious; (2) how to use techniques like: meditation, exercise, Wim Hof Method, intensely listening to music, and dreaming in order to more or less recreate all the drug experiences I've had.
Guess what I started at a young age? Gaming and learning a lot of stuff at school. No wonder I love watching edutainment stuff at YouTube to the point where it is unhealthy.
My only police encounter was something to remember, too. I was sitting in the park at night (because I mostly work at night), smoking a doobie and settling in to go to bed soon, when suddenly a Politie car came shooting up the bicycle path straight towards me. You can probably imagine I almost shit my pants.
They asked super nicely if I need any help because they got worried about me sitting there alone at night and wanted to check on my well-being.
No weed that night helped come to terms with the mindfuck.
> So I'm not without my flaws, but the way society criminalizes drugs is beyond me. This is especially after having tried all the big names and realizing it's always a combination of: having a shitty life + having a social circle that heavily enables it + thinking you'll be fine and won't get addicted (I'm well aware of how all of them lull me into a false sense of security) + starting it at a very young age (all family members started around 14 years old with at least alcohol, less information means less protection).
EXACTLY this. If you ask me, the drug epidemic in the US is a perfect example, and when Americans argue about prohibition and regulation they almost always do it with a completely unconscious bias and not seeing the true reasons.
Awesome
> when Americans argue about prohibition and regulation they almost always do it with a completely unconscious bias and not seeing the true reasons.
Haha, I've seen it with some Dutch people who never tried drugs but who have seen some people go under because of it. I get where they're coming from. I've seen it too. I've seen it too many times. And yet, here I am. It can be done in a healthy way. It took a very intelligent someone to show me how to do it responsibly. I'd have rejected such a showcase from almost anyone else, which I have done countless of times.
Also, exotic strains you the average user has never heard about is a function of a growing market. A proper cannasseur would know where the strains (cultivars) are from - who bred them, what their lineage is, how they were grown, how long they were cured (not fermented), etc.
Completely agree with your point though that out of hundreds of strains that I have tried, nil have a “making sick” property by default. It only arises when users incorrectly scope the risk.
If anyone reading this experiences cannabis hyperemesis syndrome, stuff like fresh air, chewing peppercorns, or a dose of CBD sublingually can help.
Very curious to hear more about the adulterated, unregulated, non coffee shop world over there! Thanks for your comment.
Source - Recently Certified Ganjier.
I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that I am clearly not one of them. I, too, start showing symptoms of hyperemesis if I'm being stupid and smoke way too much, and I have never met or smoked with anyone who was resistant to it and had unlimited tolerance. Sure, there might definitely be a distinction between less and more sensitive to it, but saying "Hyperemesis effects only some users" is like saying only some users get blackout drunk from drinking alcohol.
With that in mind, in any case - I can still not understand the logic of associating this phenomenon with "teens getting sick".
Also, if you cannot handle smoking weed chronically, maybe you should just stop. Personal responsibility again..
> Very hot baths and showers help suppressing the nausea.
For whatever it's worth, that is also applicable to acute overdose.
Many places tax liquor more than beer, and restrict sales to approved liquor stores while beer and wine are sold broadly.
But this behaviour is an outlier - even these people (typically young 'uns, often at college/uni) don't do this kind of thing on a daily basis.
Stupidity is also a risk factor. Risks multiply. Product safety is often about managing tails, not the mode. You only need to die once.
Back to the original comment - the thing about weed is that it basically impossible to kill (or even directly injure) yourself with o/d. By that measure, even "super-weed" is much safer than whiskey.
This is literally something my cat learned by himself as a kitten. He was a stray, raised without a momcat, and very food insecure when he arrived. When we started feeding him full meals, he'd promptly eat as much as he could and about 10 minutes later barf it all out. He learned to not do that and not eat everything he could find on all plates very quickly.
Any not-completely-stupid person could do the same. Sheesh
While I agree with you and am a casual user myself, there are some problems that need to be discussed. Underage smoking can stunt brain growth and we'd end up in a dumber society than what we already have. Just talking about it may have some positive effects.
And that getting sick from foolish use is pretty irrelevant to the brain growth effects you raise, which are truly far more important.
Why didn't they write about that instead?
I speak from experience because I developed the cannabis hyperemesis syndrome. It happened when I switched to dry herb vaporization and the smoothness of the vapor made me unconsciously and insidiously increase the amount of cannabis I consumed per puff until I reach the ridiculous amount of .25g per puff. I know it was the syndrome and not some adulterated weed because applying capsaicin cream on my abdomen stopped the nausea.¹
When you are affected by that syndrome abstinence is the only permanent solution. So if someone like to indulge in cannabis, they should avoid to consume frequent concentrated doses.
Last I read this was a very rare phenomenon happening mostly in chronic users of concentrates. I still fail to see how that is valid reasoning for anything else in this article..
Just read your comment again, but substitute cannabis with alcohol. You would be dead by now with these dosages, and if you go a step further the article would be correlating end stage liver disease with teens drinking a beer.
I thought it was common sense that too much of anything is a bad idea. A rare phenomenon that mostly happens to the utter top quantile of chronic heavy users is absolutely invalid to use in that kind of generalization.
Allow me to quote directly from the article linked to by you,
> Patients between the ages of 18-49 years who reported smoking marijuana at least 20 days per month. Among 2127 patients approached for participation, 155 met inclusion criteria as smoking 20 or more days per month. Among those surveyed, 32.9% (95% CI, 25.5-40.3%) met our criteria for having experienced CHS
This puts the initial prevalence at around 2.3%, not 7%, but the dataset is also very small. Also, the dataset is likely biased because it consists of patients already presenting to the ER. There is no further mention as to why they presented to the emergency room either.
> Patients were classified as experiencing a phenomenon consistent with CHS if they reported smoking marijuana at least 20 days per month and also rated 'hot showers' as five or more on the ten-point symptom relief method Likert scale for nausea and vomiting.
These conditions are very broad and symptoms of CHS match closely the symptoms of regular overdose, and most of the relief methods are also directly applicable to regular overdoses.
I would be extremely surprised if the actual prevalence is any higher than 0.5-1% of consumers, and in any case this has pretty much only proven my point now. I may have little knowledge on some rare edge-case condition, but at least I know how statistics work.
For whatever it's worth, the prevalence of CHS seems to be lower than the prevalence of allergic reactions to alcohol.......
"If this is extractable to the general population, approximately 2.75 million (2.13-3.38 million) Americans may suffer annually from a phenomenon similar to CHS."
There are approximately 35,000,000 regular smokers. 2.75m / 35m is 7.8%.
> Also, the dataset is likely biased because it consists of patients already presenting to the ER.
That's not how bias works. In fact, you're introducing your own concocted bias, because you've limited the dataset to the ER visits and not the population. Your 2.3% number only represents the number of undiagnosed vomiting cases that could be attributed to CHS, which has no relevance to the number of smokers who experience vomiting. You don't have any understanding of statistics.
> These conditions are very broad and symptoms of CHS match closely the symptoms of regular overdose, and most of the relief methods are also directly applicable to regular overdoses.
You're now suggesting that these situations aren't actually marjiuana-related at all, but instead some other drug overdose that the ER staff totally missed. So, not only do you purport to understand statistics better than everyone else, but your medical expertise apparently surpasses that of ER doctors. Your trolling is outrageous.
> "If this is extractable to the general population, approximately 2.75 million (2.13-3.38 million) Americans may suffer annually from a phenomenon similar to CHS."
Well, it is most definitely not extractable, that's why they also wrote "if". The dataset is abysmally small, biased and the filters/conditions applied not nearly strict or valid enough to come to these conclusions.
They are also, at exactly this point, completely contradicting their own research and rationale, as well as your claims:
> 2127 patients approached for participation, 155 met inclusion criteria as smoking 20 or more days per month.
2127 patients that are already in the ER, for various possible reasons. Invalid dataset.
> 155 met inclusion criteria as smoking 20 or more days per month. Among those surveyed, 32.9% (95% CI, 25.5-40.3%) met our criteria for having experienced CHS
This would mean, by their and/or your logic:
- that out of a "general population" dataset, 7% smoke >= 20 days a month, which on a side note absolutely conflicts with other statistics on weed consumption
- even if that was the case, there is absolutely no way to infer from ER patients back to the general population
- even if that was a valid line of thinking, it would imply that: Out of 35 million cannabis smokers, there are 23 million that smoke weed more than 20 days a month (right..), and since they claim that 33% of them seem to have experienced CHS, this would imply that around 7.5 million of 35 million smokers have potentially experienced CHS.
You know what that is? 21% of all cannabis consumers. I don't think so. Their logic is flawed. ER patients are not a neutral slice of the population. You have absolutely no way of inferring back to the general population without knowing how and how much the dataset is skewed. This also shows very clearly that even if the dataset is at least somewhat valid, their pre-selection and applied conditions are absolutely bogus and not suitable.
> In fact, you're introducing your own concocted bias, because you've limited the dataset to the ER visits and not the population.
The dataset IS limited to a group of patients in the ER, you knucklehead. That's what was used to generate the dataset in the first place. A subset of people they found in an ER. Exclusively. That's a bias that almost certainly invalidates the whole calculation. You also have no way of inferring back to the population from it.
> You're now suggesting that these situations aren't actually marjiuana-related at all, but instead some other drug overdose that the ER staff totally missed.
Because I wrote "overdose", and not "THC overdose" or "cannabis overdose"? Sorry man, but.. if anyone is trolling here, it must be you.
> 2127 patients that are already in the ER, for various possible reasons. Invalid dataset.
You keep mistakenly using this number for all of your calculations, but 2,127 is completely irrelevant to anything at all, because it includes 1,972 people who didn't participate. This should be obvious, but people who don't participate in a study aren't part of the study -- whereas what you're suggesting is the exact opposite of scientific methodology. The actual dataset is 155 participants, of whom 51 experienced CHS symptoms within the previous 6 months and 104 didn't.
> This would mean, by their and/or your logic: that out of a "general population" dataset, 7% smoke >= 20 days a month, which on a side note absolutely conflicts with other statistics on weed consumption [...] even if that was a valid line of thinking, it would imply that: Out of 35 million cannabis smokers, there are 23 million that smoke weed more than 20 days a month [...] You know what that is? 21% of all cannabis consumers. I don't think so. Their logic is flawed.
All of the available data[1] says that the number of daily marijuana smokers is between 6-8% of the total population, and between 15-25% of the marijuana smoking population. So, their logic[2] was both very accurate and entirely debunks all of your claims -- making it rather despicable that you're asserting yourself as intellectually superior to multiple teams of scientists.
> The dataset IS limited to a group of patients in the ER, you knucklehead. That's what was used to generate the dataset in the first place. A subset of people they found in an ER. Exclusively. That's a bias that almost certainly invalidates the whole calculation. You also have no way of inferring back to the population from it.
What's especially ridiculous about these assertions (besides the childishness), is that you don't even realize you're arguing against yourself. If it were strictly CHS-presenting patients, then that sample would be only those sick enough to require medical attention, meaning the actual number of CHS cases would be higher across the entire population, as most CHS cases don't actually lead to hospitalizations. That number can't magically be less. It could only be higher.
But it's specifically not CHS-presenting patients. It's an inclusion of 155 daily smokers from a random sampling of 2,127 approached (versus ~28,000 total) visitors to a specific location over the course of 71 days. That it's an ER doesn't actually matter, because the reporting was based on 6 months of usage, meaning their visit doesn't necessarily have anything to do with marijuana or vomiting -- and in fact, anyone presenting with abdominal pain or vomiting was excluded[3] from the study.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6461328/
[1] "But the number of Americans who use cannabis heavily is soaring. In 2006, about 3 million Americans reported using the drug at least 300 times a year, the standard for daily use. By 2017, that number had increased to 8 million—approaching the 12 million Americans who drank every day. Put another way, only one in 15 drinkers consumed alcohol daily; about one in five marijuana users used cannabis that often."
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcpt.12962
[2] "In this survey cohort of ED patients, 32.9% of self-reported frequent marijuana users met our definition of CHS. Extrapolating on a reported 8.364 million near-daily or daily marijuana smokers in the United States in 2014, we estimate between 2,130,000 to 3,380,000 individuals have suffered from CHS symptoms in the United States. This prevalence estimation was generated using data up to 2014, suggesting the true prevalence of CHS may be higher today given current trends in increased marijuana usage."
[3] "This convenience sample included all patients between the ages of 18 and 49 years able to consent who did not currently complain of nausea, vomiting or abdominal pain. Patients presenting with nausea, vomiting or abdominal pain were excluded to avoid confounding conditions and, thus, an overestimate of CHS prevalence."
However, the article is about teens vaping concentrate that can contains as much as 90% THC. The title on HN is misleading, the article is not about teens smoking a few joints per week.
To reuse your alcohol analogy, the article would be about teens drinking undiluted alcohol (94%) and the title on HN would be "Teens drinking beer are frequently found dead"
> Christina Caron is a reporter for the Well section at The New York Times, covering mental health and the intersection of culture and health care.
Weird - because I've gone back over years of her articles and she doesn't talk about the biggest issues affecting mental health. It's all fluff. Yet she found the time to do three veiled hit-pieces on cannabis so far this year.
If you ever wondered why the impressionable don't talk about systemic racism, violence, propaganda, exploitation and poverty as being major mental health issues, instead blaming cannabis (a great boon to mental health, overall!), or blaming themselves, it's because writers like this are given such a major platform.
When I was a teen I watched my friends having contest to see who could take the biggest bong hits and "press" them the longest without coughing. I always declined to participate in those contests. I was well known to be a "lightweight", but that moniker never bothered me.
Those who called me that were the same kids who'd chug whiskey they stole from their parents and then hug toilets while puking until they passed out on the bathroom floor.
Edibles are akin to taking pills. You don't know how hard they're going to hit you until they do, and if it's too hard you're stuck with it until it wears off.
Vapes are akin to big bong hits. When I was a teen I saw teens puke after taking a few too many giant bong hits. They were having bong hit competitions.
It's very easy to regulate the effects of weed by taking a tiny puff and putting it down for a few minutes.
So, it's not that weed is more potent. It's easy to sip a bit of whiskey too, but you can get just as puking drunk guzzling beer as slamming shots.
There’s also a sense that something about cannabis turns people’s imagination against themselves. Long-term use. At first it seems to free up the imagination and enhance the sense of meaningful experiences and emotion. Then that slowly turns to fog and people tend towards these little micro-jumps to conclusions, conclusions which are trite and shallow. I speak from experience btw. (My own!) I found the world to be stupid. People were stupid. It was just my lack of imagination and impeded generation of solutions to life, which I imagined to apply to everything but me. It’s funny and super lame and quite sad imo.
Seen it happen time and time again.
If you increase the concentration of THC, users can achieve equivalent levels of intoxication with substantially less smoke inhalation. 30 years ago, THC concentrations were 5% or less. Today, legal cannabis tends to average around 25%. That's an 80% reduction in smoke-related damage.
Teens are getting zooted because they are using concentrate pens, which are essentially e-cigarrette's but replace PG/VG with distillate.
People with mental health issues are more likely to use cannabis because it helps them with those issues. And people with mental health issues are of course at higher risk of developing psychosis, so it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
One of many. I have a close family member who developed cannabis-induced psychotic disorder in teenage years. It is a well known phenomenon. I agree that it can be a chicken-and-egg question in some cases but it doesn’t change the fact that cannabis is generally bad for your mind.
“Results: Consistent evidence, both from observational and experimental studies, has confirmed the important role of cannabis use in the initiation and persistence of psychotic disorders. The size of the effect is related to the extent of cannabis use, with greater risk for early cannabis use and use of high-potency varieties and synthetic cannabinoids. Accumulating evidence suggests that frequent cannabis use also increases the risk for mania as well as for suicide.”
From the math in the rest of your post, I think you meant to say that "Low-concentration cannabis is a significant health risk". (I don't think the term "huge" applies in any case to a substance whose intake, after all, is optional).
Interesting.
CBD is a natural antipsychotic.
There's some very promising research on it alone as a treatment for schizophrenia even: https://academic.oup.com/schizbullopen/article/3/1/sgab053/6...
And a large body of research on how it reduces the potential psychotic side effects of THC.
But go into a dispensary and ask for a 1:1 or even a 1:2 THC:CBD product, and they will look at you like you have two heads.
The plant naturally contains an antagonistic for the psychotic effects, we're selecting to eliminate that antagonistic from the products, and then have a surprised Pikachu face when an increasing number of users have psychotic effects.
It's almost impossible to get cannabis products with a nice mix of CBD alongside THC unless explicitly asking for it and possibly needing to hit up multiple dispensaries to find it. That's really not ideal.
And all too often ratio products dilute the THC per volume according to the ratio, which further discourages recreational users from selecting for the ratio products. If the THC only product has 10mg per serving, the 1:1 and 1:2 should also have 10mg THC per serving, with an additional 10 or 20mg CBD alongside it. Not 5mg or 3.3mg THC.
This is a merchandising issue.
The market controlling genetics in plant propagation has consistently lead to favoring bigger, more uniform, more shelf-stable, and this has always lead to less nutrition, over-consumption, and more waste.
The same thing is happening with BOTH drug cannabis and industrial (CBD) hemp. The low threshold of .3% THC for hemp to be legal for any grower in the US is an arbitrary ass number, so by breeding to it who knows what’s getting lost in the genetic dustbin.
Growing your own is liberating, if not still legally dubious in the US. Repealing the prohibition against growing would likely get more people inquiring about their cannabis, just like when you go to a farmers market and enjoy substantially better quality vegetables. You can learn what went into it.
Of course the dispensary business is on the verge of becoming an entrenched lobby, and would likely rebuff any effort to legalize growing.
I'm on medicinal 19% THC flowers (190mg daily) and I'm doing my best to make it "extended release"[1] by baking edibles[2] instead of taking huge bong hits.
Daily irritation of the reward system is a no-no.
Something equivalent is happening in the cannabis industry. Cannabis is a mixture of THC and various other compounds which potentiate it. Without those other compounds, the THC doesn't have the same psychoactive effects. Cannabis producers are growing high THC breeds, extracting the THC, and then adding in then extracting the other compounds from other breeds, other foods, or synthetic sources. The result: dirt cheap drugs that are more enticing to consumers.
About 20 years ago, in the Netherlands, two people from my small town. Both were heavy users. They would visit a coffee shop (our term for a weed shop) twice a day and stay for some 2 hours or longer each time.
Dutch weed was already known to be strong back then, but I have no idea how strong. Probably still less strong compared to what is described in the article. I would estimate they smoked up to 4 full joints each day.
Both developed a psychosis.
One would start random fights with people. I saw him get arrested and in the police car kept bumping his own head to the door with full force. He lost his job and ultimately ended up in a mental facility. He had regular paranoia attacks about being followed and being hacked, and would ask random people to check his phone. He's been bouncing between the mental facility, the police and back again ever since. Already at the age of 25, he was a lost cause, as he had ruined every single aspect of his life. The truly sad part is that life goes on in this miserable state probably for several decades.
As for prior conditions: I had known him for a long while before his detour. Had a steady job, full of life energy, never any aggression, no criminal record, clean as can be.
The other guy started to attend the same prostitute, daily, whom he actually believed to be Madonna. The vast majority of his time though he spent driving between two specific dutch cities as a way to discharge excess electricity he believed to be in his car.
I once was in his home where he picked up one of his mom's books. It was a cheesy doctor romance story. He starts reading out loud from the book but rather than literally reading the text, somehow this text got warped and transformed into his mind, and the output was some bizarre prophecy. As if he was effortlessly producing a brand new Bible on the spot. One of the strangest things I've ever seen anyone do.
I don't know what happened to him, we lost touch.
So yes, getting "sick" doesn't even begin to describe what weed can do when not taking care of dosage.
Anyone who wants to look at their personal unproblematic weed use and conclude that it's totally, universally impossible for today's weed concentrates to be a problem for anyone really isn't thinking straight. There is a difference between concentrates and flower. Once you're habitually using something that's 50%+ THC, "normal" weed just doesn't cut it anymore. You need to start upping the ante just to feel high at all. People call this "tolerance" but IMO that word obscures what's actually happening. Namely, you can only put so many feel-good chemicals in the human brain before you hit diminishing returns. Trying to keep the good times rolling may cause you to blow past your body's ability to metabolize the chemicals away without consequences. I've been a stoner for 12+ years and have had to learn my limits the hard way. I really feel for the girl in this article, and anyone else who's struggling with their weed use in a culture that repeatedly insists there is "no unsafe dose."
If only some research was done on the long term affects before legalizing it. Instead now we're doing a population wide experiment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid_hyperemesis_syndro...
> After several stays at mental hospitals, the doctors determined that Johnny had a severe case of THC abuse, Ms. Stack said. He was prescribed an anti-psychotic medication, which helped — but then he stopped taking it. In 2019, Johnny died after jumping from a six-story building. He was 19. A few days before his death, Ms. Stack said, Johnny had apologized to her, saying that weed had ruined his mind and his life, adding, “I’m sorry, and I love you.”
Dry herb vaporizing is the optimal way to consume. You can pick the strain and set the exact temperature with far less ambiguity. You can even control the supply by growing it yourself.
It is changing the federal schedule is the best course of action. We are not benefitting by flying blind, and consumption won't go down simply because people would prefer it.
Well no shit. I'm an adult that has smoked weed for 15 years now and even in my late 30's I can't handle more than a few hits of concentrated wax/oils.
How is this any different from 15 year olds sneaking their parents everclear to make some strong punch?
Is it the drugs fault or the fact that we suck at keeping substances out of the hands of minors.
If the drug causes negative effects on a large subset of the people who use them, that is a problem with the drug.
Realistically its a lack of drug education. It isn't hard to understand high powered versions of a substance will be much stronger in effect. We see the same issue with people chugging down energy drinks with 350mg+ of caffeine and complaining of the end result.
At some point people have to learn.
Legalize it (just don't saddle it with heavy taxes California-style) and regulate it. 90% products should not so be easy to come by.
If we're going to continue this charade of pretending it's medicine, then the FDA should be involved to verify the claims and improve quality assurance for dosage.
I consider them fun! I think edibles have their own audience, and the "experienced users" think their tolerance is in one place because of the low quality crap they simply used a lot off the street, but its really in a totally different place. (With other drugs, people often overdose for the same reason like they use a scale that was relevant 5 years ago and then OD because their tolerance changed and the drug concentration changed.)
Edibles are also basically a different drug after it gets processed by the liver, I think some additional consumer protection should be done
I am also 100% in agreement that FDA-level studies should exist, and that it is pathetic we just have random experiences from random jurisdictions.
Most of the people here don't realize that the majority of the cognitive impairment from weed is from the oxygen deprivation and nasty chemicals in smoke. Vaping or eating it has almost no impact on cognitive function once you have some level of tolerance.
It basically turns into less nasty cigarettes for habitual users. You probably don't know when a lot of people are high around you, even if you think you do.
In fact, cannabis is an excellent treatment for alcohol hangovers.
Maybe they should think to mention the millions of people on cannabis prescriptions who have had massive benefits.
Both can be (and almost certainly are) true at the same time.
Articles like this which only focus on negatives of cannabis help perpetuate the even greater harms of cannabis prohibition.
> Articles like this which only focus on negatives of cannabis help perpetuate the even greater harms of cannabis prohibition.
Knee-jerking against articles like this is perpetuate harm by keeping people in the dark about the very real drawbacks of the drug. You can't make an informed decision about using it without actually know the pros and cons.
Tell that to the people who continue to be put in prison every day for a plant that is far less harmful than sugar and alcohol
>Knee-jerking against articles like this is perpetuate harm by keeping people in the dark about the very real drawbacks of the drug. You can't make an informed decision about using it without actually know the pros and cons.
Even worse than that, you can't make an informed decision about cannabis when the government, scientists, and the media have been lying to everyone for decades, implicitly and explicitly, in telling them that cannabis is more harmful, addictive, and sickening than sugar and alcohol.
Correcting those lies and adding relative comparative context is not "knee-jerking", its promoting science which can save lives.
Why does that upset you so greatly? I'm not saying people shouldnt be informed about how/how not to use cannabis
Nice to see an article on it. Definitely needs more awareness.
I guess kids are just more sanitary these days, but I would go like a month between cleaning my bongs in college. And I certainly wasn't waking up at such an early hour as 8am.
> This was not your average weed. The oil and waxes she bought from dealers were typically about 90 percent THC, the psychoactive component in marijuana.
referred to later as "THC concentrates".
BTW, the authorities have been saying for decades that level of THC in weed is much higher than it used to be, I believe as a way to convince older adults that their personal experience with cannabis is not trustworthy.
For example, "Many people who have voted for legalization thought they were talking about the marijuana of the 1960s to 1980s when the THC content was less than 2%." from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6312155/ .
But as https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/03/was-m... points out, "incomplete government data encourages a pervasive pot myth." ... "it's difficult if not impossible to classify average potency in a way that can be tracked meaningfully over time. So while there's almost certainly more super-strong pot available today—if only by the fact that it's now legal to buy in multiple states—it doesn't mean that all marijuana is ultra-potent today, which is how the narrative about potency is often framed."
> But there is little evidence to suggest these specific levels are somehow safer.
Likely because of the illegality of carrying out those tests.
> A recent study found that people who used marijuana had a greater likelihood of suicidal ideation, plan and attempt than those who did not use the drug at all.
As the underlying paper at https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle... points out, "Future research is needed to examine the increase in suicidality and to determine whether it is cannabis use or overlapping risk factors that increase risks for both.".
Eg, people experiencing suicidal ideation could be self-medicating with marijuana, and w/o that option would self-medicate with alcohol and have a higher risk of suicide.
And here I thought I was being bold ordering 5% CBD oils...
Weed isn't an issue and it never has been.
Gone are the days of finding a smelly bong in the back of the closet, this could be in their pocket or purse at all times.
The side effects of weed could be found in every sober teen. Hungrier, more emotional, more distant from parents, etc. Are good parents supposed to treat their children like criminals until they no longer show signs of puberty?
the finest day i ever had was when i learned to cry on demand