It would be nice to see someone explaining why this thing is bullshit. I'm sure it it, but it would be good to have someone explain it.
Here's the scientific article in question. Continued cannabis use and risk of incidence and persistence of psychotic symptoms: 10 year follow-up cohort study -- Kuepper et al. 342 -- bmj.com I too would like to hear an explanation to this one.
It's just a blatant damn lie. That's all there is too it. They have nothing left to scare us with so there just making shit up now.
Most of this is actually pretty good if you look at the comments, obviously some of them are absolute bullshit. I find it funny how on most anti cannabis videos they disable the comments as us vigilant stoners start tearing shit up.
Yeah sure I'll believe them after they fooled half the world with the "marijuana kills brain cells" experiment in which monkeys were forced to enhale pure marijuana smoke without any oxygen for 5 minutes daily, obviously most of the monkeys died after 90 days and a big percentage of the monkeys brain cells died due to lack of oxygen. The conditions at which the experiment was performed were revealed after 10 years! This could be a lie again, they have the motives, there are billions of dollars rolling around marijuana.
I read in the paper today . . and it said not as many people, and I quote - "are abusing cannabis and cocaine". The cocaine I can understand, as it is an addictive, expensive, and dangerous substance if abused - but the weed? It's just WEED! How can you, well, abuse it exactly? Fuck this, I need to get outta here.
But it can't really, can it? Just think about it. People smoke daily on here, that's every single day . . and we believe that's fine - well it is fine. Would you call that abuse? I mean, I'd only call it abuse if they're high 24/7 - I.e. never sober. And, I've never heard of anyone being like that. It would just be, well, impossible. Packing bowls/rolling 24 hours a day, who would go through the trouble? Now, if you take coke on the other hand, it can lead to a life of crime to cover the expense, interfere with family life and living on a day-to-day basis. It can cause serious damage if not used in moderation, plus it's cut, and highly addictive. The media roped them both together, and said the words "abuse" - They didn't even take into account moderate users, apparently any use of cannabis is abuse. Bastards!
In my mind, it becomes abuse when it starts to interfere with your life negatively. I used to take coke from time to time, but it never affected my life, for some people, it clearly does. I used to be stoned 24/7, I still am sometimes, but it did start to affect my life, so I cut back on it. The difference between coke and weed is that it is much easier to cut back on weed than on coke. It's the same with anything; alcohol, gambling, shopping, porn, and the list goes on. Why those things are legal and weed is not, is a whole different debate. Agreed with hippie flip. Everything in moderation.
DUDE LOOK WHAT I FOUND do you think 2 people would both use dabble in their stories in this same manner: "I've now been on medication for most of my life and would advise people not to dabble in cannabis." - Jim Wilson, Aberdeen "I don't drink but I do take cannabis, however, I would tell children not to dabble - in the same way they shouldn't with other substances." - Dan, Bognor Regis Basically that whole article is false and all the stories look like their wrote by the same person.
*** My $0.02 and a bit of an explanation // PLEASE READ *** I know it's easy for readers who aren't familiar with cannabis to wholeheartedly agree with the article, but it's just as easy for regular tokers to pass it off as complete rubbish. First, let's be clear on one thing: to be "psychotic" doesn't necessarily mean that one goes around committing acts of violence. It's an umbrella term which encompasses a number of things, including delusions, auditory/visual hallucinations, confusion, erratic changes in mood, etc. The truth is that marijuana has been a huge problem for patients suffering from schizophrenia. It makes sense that the article was conducted over a decade, because SCZ begins with a long latent period before psychotic symptoms manifest. As the number of heavy (let's say daily) users has dramatically increased in the past few decades, it makes sense that only now are a lot of marijuana-induced psychoses being identified. If X percent of the population is predisposed to schizophrenia, and the number of heavy users increases, a greater number of cases are likely to be uncovered, thus explaining the statistic in the article. Here's the kicker (and also what the article doesn't mention): you're very unlikely to develop schizophrenia or any other psychotic disorder unless it runs in your family. In summation: Does marijuana cause schizophrenia or any other mental disorder? Unlikely if it's not in your genes (though sporadic cases have also been reported). Source: a class I'm in + loads of scientific publishings
the first time you eat a peanut it might make your face and throat swell up and you die, WHY AREN'T THESE TERRIBLE NUTS ILLEGAL!!!????
"I smoked cannabis for approximately 25 years and towards the end I felt like I was hanging onto sanity by my fingernails. Some of the worse symptoms included voices in the night, a constant dread of death, suicidal thoughts and intense mood swings. I never thought I would kick the habit until one day I was attacked by someone out side a supermarket due to my psychotic ramblings. This person probably saved my life or a least my sanity." Dominic, Luton, UK How much did the UK gov pay these goons to write this bullshit?? honestly THE MOST farfetched shit I've read to date. WOW.
Had a quick read through the news article and the abstract of the paper (I'll read the real thing when I've some time) For anyone who wants a quick summary of what the paper's about: They took a group of 2000 normal german adolescents (aged 14-24). Over the next 10 years they checked their cannabis use and any 'subthreshold' psychotic symptoms. They found that cannabis use for the first three and a half years of the study, led to higher rates of psychotic symtoms later on. This means they found those who used cannabis for the first three years were nearly twice as likely to suffer symptoms. Nerd moment, ignore at will: However, the lower boundary of the confidence interval (1.1) is of interest. Had that been 1.0 or below, then the results wouldn't have been significant. This line of information tells us that what they've found out about blazing up, has a 95% chance of being true or a 5% chance of being bollocks. Over 8 years they found that the 14% of the cannabis users had symptoms but only 8% of the non-users. My initial impression is that the stats seem a little borderline, this isn't like the relationship between cholesterol and heart disease. This isn't a coup by any stretch of the phrase. The biggest thing to note is that they didn't find a link between cannabis and actual psychotic disease. They admit that their findings only apply to transient symptoms of psychosis, rather than anything more long term. I'm curious as to why, it's hard to believe that they took no notice of the participants who developed major psychotic disorders. Assuming they did record long term psychosis as well as short, why didn't they include the results? Didn't they like the results and just kept them to themselves? Perhaps the rates of full blown psychosis were too small to draw any conclusion from. I'm also interested to see exactly what they were measuring. If I'm deep in a seshion lost in some music, sure I'd consider myself detached from reality. While that may satisfy their definition, in the real world it's hardly fair to refer to every time I've been in a good place as a psychotic episode. I'll read more and if anyone's interested, hopefully provide some insight into what they did and didn't do right. If none of that made any sense, and the grammar was crap, excuse me. I'm baked Orient