A 20-Year Study on Marijuana Use Yields 5 Surprising Finds

[mukuku]

I know opiates users (not heavy but recreationnal time to time) that tell me cannabis is more psychologicaly addictive for them than opiates !

 

[Beta Test Team]

Here's that "devil's advocate" thing in action....

Yea, I wouldn't agree with the whole IQ thing, either...(I've been smoking every day since I was about 14 years old.)

I don't know one way or the other on that one, but how would you know either way? Did you get a professionally administered IQ test before you started smoking and several others along the way to determine that your IQ has not changed or are you just assuming that this is the case? Not attacking, asking for clarification.

Yes, I have gotten IQ tests over time, because IQ changes over time (generally lower as we grow older).

My point was that I smoke every day, and have been for over 20 years, and my IQ is well above 100. Hell, I work with Ph.D. scientists all the time, they're my peers (even though I don't have a Ph.D.). If Cannabis reduced IQ as a rule, I wouldn't be half as smart as I am (and I'm very smart).

 

[CareStaker]

Many of these 'findings' do not align with my personal experience in the real world.

Of course, when this happens, I must question the source - and their agenda.

 

[jd4083]

Yes, I have gotten IQ tests over time, because IQ changes over time (generally lower as we grow older).

My point was that I smoke every day, and have been for over 20 years, and my IQ is well above 100. Hell, I work with Ph.D. scientists all the time, they're my peers (even though I don't have a Ph.D.). If Cannabis reduced IQ as a rule, I wouldn't be half as smart as I am (and I'm very smart).

With all respect and no offense intended whatsoever, none of this really qualifies as a valid argument one way or another. Anecdotal at best, particularly as you didn't specify what sort of IQ tests you have been been having administered over the years nor the scale used. If you have actual data to support your statements I would be interested to see it. If you did actually receive multiple IQ tests over the years you should have plenty of detailed info to draw from that might make your argument more viable.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[Beta Test Team]

With all respect and no offense intended whatsoever, none of this really qualifies as a valid argument one way or another. Anecdotal at best, particularly as you didn't specify what sort of IQ tests you have been been having administered over the years nor the scale used. If you have actual data to support your statements I would be interested to see it. If you did actually receive multiple IQ tests over the years you should have plenty of detailed info to draw from that might make your argument more viable.

I'm not about to look for records from years past (high school and Uni.), nor do I care to boast here, so take what I wrote or not, it's up to you. I don't care if you believe me or not.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[VerdantGreen]

You can't just sum it up with cannabis will reduce your ability to drive safely. First off too many variables involved. People are all different and so are strains effects. Also if you compare alcohole related accidents to cannabis related accidents it's like non existent. I can name 1 million people who have been driving high for a long time and never had an accident. I think people have car accidents more when they are not smoking. What does that tell you? Human error.

cannabis reduces your reaction times, fact. driving whilst on cannabis is therefore more dangerous than driving straight (but alcohol is worse)
the effects of cannabis on reaction times are slightly mitigated by those drivers who realise that their reaction times are impared and thus drive more slowly and carefully, but that doesnt really help when something unexpected happens, because your reaction times are impaired. your comment about alcohol is irrelevant because many, many more people use alcohol than use cannabis, so of course there will be more acccidents related to alcohol, and alcohol is much more easy to detect. under the influence of cannabis you are also much more easily distracted.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives....eme3/cannabisanddrivingareviewoft4764?page=12

reality check for those in denial:- if you drive under the influence of cannabis you are being irresponsible. end of story. if you drive under the influence of cannabis and think you are not impaired by it you are being an incredibly irresponsible illogical tw*t.

That's because you don't know the actual chemical make up of the cannabis plant down to the tee. Tobacco is a congestant a brown tar. In fact it's not in the cause of of cancer, it's uranium they used as fertilizer that stuck to your lungs. No chemmed up tobacco is way less harmful.

Cannabis is the opposite. A decongestant that builds of a green/brown tar that builds up yes but then dislodges it like an expectorant hence the green tar. No only that cannabis smoke contains anti cancer fighting properties. The air outside is probably harming your lungs more but I see no ban on fossil fuels.

smoke contains many particulates and carcinogens. particulates are bad for your lungs and carcinogens give you cancer. THC itself is not a carcinogen but smoke is. THC and some of its terpenes has many health benefits possibly even anti-cancer. smoke does not have any health benefits. it is bad for your lungs. wake up and smell the addictive coffee

 

[jd4083]

oh for christ's sake, it's the "green tar argument again"

I wasted an entire afternoon of my life trying to convince this guy that any sort of smoke is carcinogenic regardless of whatever mitigating effects the substance that is burning may or may not have. Best of luck to you.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[jd4083]

It's a fact that it is a lie. Too many variables again. I can't convince you though knower of all so we will just leave it at that.

Disagree to agree.


What. Sure buddy. Seems like you are getting angry. I suggest you go take a vape hit. Oh yea you are wrong again.


I am a broken record. Did you read that cannabis has anti cancer fighting properties in the smoke. Tobacco smoke and cannabis smoke is not the same thing. Not only that this is not organic grown tobacco you are comparing. This is uranium spiked commercial chem fertilized poison.

Yeah, we've been over this about 25 different times and at this point I can't tell if you are mentally disabled or just obnoxious and contrary. You're not going to suck me into this again. Good luck trapping VerdantGreen in a circular argument, though...but I think he might be too wily for you.


Gotta love willful ignorance...not only that, but proud of it too. You live in a world of drug-addled delusion.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[jd4083]

To be honest. I have no idea what you are talking about. I thought this was just a friendly discussion. I am trapping no one. He is the one listing false evidence and I am debating it and he does not like it.

Debating requires factual information and the ability of both parties to use critical thinking and examine their belief systems when presented with evidence to the contrary. You are piecing together barely lucid stream of consciousness crap that helps no one and only serves to illustrate how out of touch with reality you are. You are helping no one and actively holding our community back.


An example is how you have consistently and actively gone out of your way to either not understand or totally ignore the FACT that ALL smoke, regardless of its source and regardless of whatever mitigating anti-carcinogenic effects the substance that is on fire MAY or MAY NOT have, is carcinogenic by nature. This is not debatable. The fact that you are trying to argue to the contrary is, again, indicative of nothing more than your own delusional worldview and lack of critical thinking ability.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[jd4083]

Somebody shoot me in the head.


Last I checked you don't smoke Rick Simpson's oil and they weren't blowing shotguns to the mice. I'm done, you're beyond hope.

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[armedoldhippy]

erm, cannabis is a mind altering/psychoactive drug, all the comparisons you mention are not mind altering drugs. wanting to take a drug every day is the very definition of addiction. give up all cannabis for a few weeks and tell me how easy you found it. i just did that for the first time in years and it was quite hard, especially if you always have weed to hand in the house, which i do.

p.S. NEGT1 - most people in the world are addicted to caffeine, including myself. caffeine is also a drug, at times it's even been illegal.

VG

I am going without right now. I have not smoked in over two months, but I look forward to starting again because I find it enjoyable. it is everywhere I go, everyone that I know smokes. folks push their bag under my nose & ask "what do you think?" I go months at a time & don't smoke, ditto smoking daily. for me, weed is like salt & butter on mashed potatoes. it's nice, but not necessary. but then, I am not dependence prone. I have had friends that were alcoholics, that were addicted to pills, etc. but I myself have drank right along with them, eaten the same pills, smoked crack & snorted heroin. dependent? no. addicted? no again. but I can only speak for myself, as others here do. it is true that different people face different realities, and we should all accept that with an open mind...

 

[VerdantGreen]

armedoldhippy, what i said was that if you smoke weed every day then you are a weed addict, from what you say you dont smoke weed every day, if you are taking regular breaks and dont find it difficult then what i said wouldnt really apply to you!

myself, i smoke every day. not all day just in the evenings. i have done this for years, and i prefer to acknowledge that i am an addict because that is the reality of the situation. being addicted to something isnt necessarily that terrible - its how you live your life that matters. if you never get up off the couch and never do anything or achieve anything because of your addiction then that is bad. i have done ok, i have my own house, a beautiful wife, 2 kids and a good active fulfilling life so im happy with that. its not perfect but then what is?

Also verdant green: You are a good grower and a cool dude. It was nothing personal. Maybe someone will come on here and dispute what you have said and listed above better than I could.

thanks for the kind words, what i have said in this thread is not opinion, it is fact, backed up by scientific evidence. just because THC may have some anti cancer properties, that doesnt mean that smoking weed is good for your lungs. that is the reality of the situation. i smoke weed, but i dont pretend it isnt bad for my lungs because i prefer to live in reality.
it surprises me how people can delude themselves so much about things that really are proven beyond any reasonable doubt, but then i guess thats the way some people deal with things.

VG

 

[WaittillIdie]

.

 

[jd4083]

for fuck's sake