Slashdot Mirror
Pot Smokers Might Not Turn Into Dopes After All
ananyo writes "Back in August last year, we discussed a study reportedly showing heavy marijuana use in teenagers had been linked to a decline in IQ in later life. Now, a new analysis suggests that the study may have been flawed. Using the same data, the researchers found that they could explain the IQ drop by properly accounting for socioeconomic factors — such as individuals from poorer backgrounds being more likely to smoke cannabis as well as having reduced access to schooling."
Bam! They do more of it, and it isn't!
Who designed this religion anyway?
I realized this when i met someone who had smoked for about 2 years. He was border line retarded. Then I met someone else who had been smoking since he was 14, and he was an engineer. Different strokes for different folks. Dont blame the drugs.
I forgot what I was going to post !
Going on smoking the dope for about 15 years now. If anything, it assisted me with diving in to the world of UNIX with intense enthusiasm and concentration. I've worked in IT business solutions and web development this whole time and things progressively get better as long as you continue to work hard. Just like anything else, all it takes is being responsible. What you do after 5pm is none of my business as long as your work gets done on time and in a professional manner. If you spent all of your waking hours drunk on booze, high on dope, full on fast food, or anything else out of control, then you probably won't succeed very much at anything. Toke responsibly.
Randomly getting the first post yo. Thank you THC.
Failed first post attempt? Or subtle commentary on the effects of weed on the mind? You decide!
Miller Lite tastes like water that's somehow managed to rot.
How about whether high IQ folks are more likely to smoke pot or dumb ones? That would also be an interesting study. Does pot smoking have enough of a stigma attached to it that people who are considered "smarter" are less likely to smoke it. Also, how does it compare with alcohol ? I did not read TFA btw!
He's totally going to be first tomorrow, so GET OFF HIS BACK, MOM!
What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
You realized that there wasn't a statistically significant correlation based on a sample size of two?
What have you been smoking?
And most people will focus on the person in the above stories that confirm their bias.
Like pot? Then it'll make you an engineer!
Hate drugs? Then it makes you a retard!
My doctor likes to point out that many of these studies aren't randomized controled trials - RCT - because it's a bitch to do any study on "recreational" drugs in the US because of our Puritanical laws and this whole "War on Drugs" horseshit.
Of course, there aren't any studies of whether smoking pot causes the same instances of emphysema, cancer, and other diseases that can happen from smoking anything.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, there was a study years ago (not RCT either) that showed that there may be a link with smoking pot and slowing tumor growth.
It hasn't been repeated as far as I know so the results haven't been verfied.
Anyway, there are plenty of folks out there in the internet peanut gallery that cling to that one study and came to the conclusion that pot stops cancer.
Oy!
You smoke pot so we're kicking you out of school
You'll lose the opportunity to be educated and socialize normally with a mainstream peer group
We'll use your now sub-standard IQ and abnormal social skills to defend the prohibition on pot
-- Bill Hicks
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data".
"A friend with weed is a friend indeed"
"Dope will get you thru times of no money better then money will get you thru times of no dope."
both I learned from the Fabulous Furry Freak Brother comics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fabulous_Furry_Freak_Brothers
I'm really stoned right now and low or high IQ, this is the best I can do for this conversation.
Be seeing you...
I'll take your anecdote about your friend, and respond with my anecdote about how it has saved my life. Between my intense migraines that I suffered from for 20 years with no pharmacological relief, and my severe depression, I'm positive that I would have killed myself without it. It eases the depression and goes a long way to reduce the occurrence and intensity of my headaches.
Somehow your friend sounds like he had other problems that the weed just compounded. I'm sorry for him, but your anger is misplaced.
It's not really a question of "is pot harmful". It's a question of "how harmful is pot in comparison to other legal activities". Other people could provide similar anecdotes about the affects of alcohol, gambling, or online games - yet possession of any of those isn't illegal.
Our society is hypocritical. It needs to decide once and for all, whether citizens have the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness in a manner they choose, or whether the state abrogates to itself the right to decide for its citizens what level of risk they are allowed to take, and the adopt a consistent policy.
They won't, of course, because a consistent policy will either lead to a lessening of authority and money, as the privatised prison system is forced to downsize, and police authority curtailed, or to mass corruption and civil disobedience as briefly glimpsed in prohibition. So they'll remain happily hypocritical, not because it is the right thing to do, or backed by scientific evidence, but because it is the best way to retain the current balances of power - and that, after all, is what politics is all about.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
I don't think alcohol is harmless, yet I drink beer or wine a couple of times a week. With alcohol, some people handle it just fine and others fall off a cliff. From what I've seen, pot is the same way.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Not at all, because the statement is flawed. It should have said "individuals from poorer backgrounds being more likely to get caught and prosecuted for smoking cannabis as well as having reduced access to schooling, while individuals from power backgrounds are likely to smoke cannabis (Clinton/Obama), do cocaine (Bush), philander (Clinton/Kennedy), do a very dangerous drug called alcohol (Most of them throughout history?) and become president."
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
I mean, he used it (very documented) and enjoyed it, and he doesn't have to worry about being re-elected, so, when will he push for something that I'd guess a majority of his supporters and followers would support?
Mr. Obama, are you listening?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
For *decades*, we've been seeing Studies That Show The Dangers Of Weed (tm). And within the year, sometimes within the month, they're withdrawn, or debunked, or shown to be massively flawed.
Not *ONE* has ever overturned the conclusions of the LaGuardia study of 1941 (completed? '44) http colon //www.drugtext.org/Table/LaGuardia-Committee-Report/
The truth is that the prohibition was created thanks to Hearst's purchase of four very large wood pulp paper mills, and the last head of Prohibition, Anslinger, who wanted his job back, and it's been a useful tool to squash folks who might not agree with you in the ballot box.
And the moralists. (The definition, by a friend years back, is that moralists are TERRIFIED by the thought that Someone, Out There, might be having... FUN!)
mark
I'm not a pothead, I've never smoked pot (or anything else) and never been interested in doing so.
Here's my question: Your college buddy, did he ever hurt anybody? Did he ever punch or shoot someone that he otherwise wouldn't have? Did he have a hard time maintaining relationships with his family? Did he mistreat any significant others he had? Because the only drawback you've stated is that you didn't like him anymore, and that it changed him in some ways. You also said he graduated with a 4.0, which hardly sounds like he destroyed himself.
People change all the time, for all sorts of reasons. Alcohol, tobacco, heroin, cocaine, etc have easily documented harmful effects that far outweigh anything you've described, so if your friends' pot use is as serious a problem as you claim you should also be able to point to some actual impacts.
If we're putting laws in place, we should have a demonstrable harm that we're protecting the public from, and that harm should be greater than the harm of enforcing the law. On that basis, outlawing PCP makes total sense, because people on angel dust pose extreme risks to people around them, but outlawing pot has not been demonstrated to be useful.
I am officially gone from
"Not really a shining endorsement of pot smoking as a past time"
Doesn't really indicate anything negative about it either. Pot is chemically induced euphoria. Some people add artificial in there but your emotions are nothing more than a chemical state so there is nothing artificial about it. If your life isn't a joyful wonderland pot is a fairly effective and low cost way to make it one for a little while. Being poor sucks and being dumb sucks, why wouldn't you want cheap happiness. If you aren't dumb but merely lazy and making bad choices it seems that would tend be depressing as well so ditto on cheap happiness. If you are highly intelligent and can't help but realize just how fucked we are in this life then again bring on the happiness.
If you are rich, lazy, and dumb on the hand you don't have much to be unhappy about. You get handed degrees from the best schools, society is set up to ensure that the wealthy enjoy the most comfort and have the best of everything, and the opposite sex will throw themselves at you all day long.
Becasue there is more to worry about. Creating an issue that pubs hate will create ANOTHER pathetic excuse to be obstructionists.
Pay attentionh to a president first year. They try to probe what thye want and check for repson form congress. If an issue will stop a bigger issue from going through, they set it aside.
One of the big examples from Obama is gitmo. He worked on closing it, but the pubs dug their heals in and made pathetic excuse of why a supermax prison won't hold them. Once that became an issue that the pub would stop all activity over, it was set aside. The the pubs uses it against him..the vary same ones who wouldn't let it close.
Fact of the matter, you could put most of the remaining people at gitmo in a county prison, and it would be perfectly secure.
So, yes he is listening, but pubs would use it as an 'evil liburl' reason not to vote for democrats.
Same thing with Clinton.
What Obama did to was change the priority of who to go after, and frankly, that was a pretty big step and nearly amazing accomplishment he did it so well with this congress.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
10 years of medical marijuana hasn't produced any noticeable changes.
Yes it has, for many people. For example, many chronic pain sufferers have been able to live more normal lives because they haven't been as debilitated or addicted to opioids, some cancer patients have lived longer because their weed helped them tolerate the chemo treatments better, allowing them to complete regimens that many can not, folks who suffer sever anxiety and panic attacks can get out and live their lives without being overwhelmed by fear, people with glaucoma have maintained their sight without risky surgeries, and at least one person with epilepsy (who I personally know) no longer suffers from seizures as long as she "medicates" at least every 2-3 days.
It is very clear that there have been noticeable changes since medical marijuana became available in the U.S., and they have been overwhelmingly positive. Crime rates in medi-pot areas have NOT increased, cases of addiction to illegal drugs have not gotten out of control (busting the guess that weed is a "gateway" drug), there hasn't been a rise in cardio-pulmonary diseases among non-tobacco smokers, and courts in states like Colorado have not been clogged with minor, non-violent marijuana offenders.
Of course I do not advocate driving under the influence, use among minors, or puffing away all day like a stereotypical Rastafarian or flash in the pan, one hit wonder rapper, but informed use in moderation or under a physician's supervision should be possible in every state. I'd like to see it reach a level of acceptance where employers are not permitted to dictate how you live your life or choose to medicate yourself when you are not at work. If they do not specifically suspect that you are high at work, and have no evidence that you are, positive tests for THC should not warrant dismissal or exclusion from employment. But then I believe strongly in the American concepts of privacy and freedom, so I am certainly a bit biased.
And further, wait.... what?
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
Mr. Obama, are you listening?
No, he doesn't listen to idiots who refer to him as "the 'blessed' leader."
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
there was this one toker who graduated from this ivy league school, but instead of taking on big corporate job like his classmates just went into community organizer work on the bad side of Chicago. then he became a senator then president. beware the weed, kids...