Slashdot Mirror
Cannabis Smoking Makes Students Less Likely To Pass University Courses
Bruce66423 writes: A large scale European study shows that students who were unable to buy cannabis legally were 5% more likely to pass their University courses. Below-average students with no legal access to pot were 7.6% more likely to pass their courses, and the effect was five times more pronounced when dealing with courses involving math. One of the study's authors said, "We think this newfound effect on productivity from a change in legal access to cannabis is not negligible and should be, at least in the short run, politically relevant for any societal drug legalization and prohibition decision-making. In the bigger picture, our findings also indicate that soft drug consumption behavior is affected by their legal accessibility, which has not been causally demonstrated before. ... Considering the massive impact on cognitive performance high levels of THC have, I think it is reasonable to at least inform young users much more on consequences of consuming such products as compared with that of having a beer or pure vodka."
And say that availability of alcohol has a vastly higher effect than 5%.
Television, video games, beer, and anything else potentially distracting to poorly performing students should be illegal too!
Ok, what am I missing? I mean, this seems obvious.
Being stoned, just like being drunk, has kind of an obvious affect on your current cognitive abilities. For both drugs, you are looking a a time-frame of hours where you cannot study or work effectively. TFA even notes that the magnitude of the effect on grades is similar.
If you drink alcohol or smoke pot on nights when you need to be studying, your grades are going to suffer. If you restrict yourself to times when you really don't have any obligations, then there won't be a problem. Young adults being, well, young adults, they may not always have the necessary self-awareness and self-discipline - hence, their grade may suffer while they are learning this life lesson.
Make sure people are aware of the effects of the drugs. Encourage self-control and self-discipline. Prohibition is, and has always been, a non-solution.
Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
I find it quite surprising.
Sure being a pot head is going to have a detrimental effect on your grades.
But given my experiences with university in a place where marijuana was not legal I can't believe there are enough students who would not smoke when it is illegal but would when it is legal to swing the overall grade by 5%.
Society is ethically obligated to take care of its own, it's part of the social contract. So no, evolution won't take care of them, the tax payers will.
Interesting that this part of the "social contract" only applies to bans and prohibitions in the minds of the right but they suddenly become very vocal on "self reliance" and "personal responsibilities" when it comes to funding for college educations for underprivileged students.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Sure, just try and talk to them about a social contract to reduce the harm that comes from widespread ownership of firearms
Wherever You Go, There You Are
Smoking dope makes you stupid (at least while you are high). Drinking makes you stupid (at least while you are drunk). Etc, etc. If you can admit this and 'get stupid' occasionally, no problem. But when people start to justify some drug's use as being beneficial, mind opening concious raising, etc. that's the addiction talking. Time to stop and check into NA or AA.
Have gnu, will travel.
Sure, just try and talk to them about a social contract to reduce the harm that comes from widespread ownership of firearms
Widespread legal ownership of firearms isn't a problem. The problem come from illegal possession and misuse of firearms.
The spread of concealed carry laws shows that law abiding citizens aren't the issue. Incidents among citizens licensed for concealed carry of firearms are rare, contradicting the predictions of doom from some.
In your version of the social contract the strong can be predators while the old or infirm are defenseless. No thanks.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
Sure, just try and talk to them about a social contract to reduce the harm that comes from widespread ownership of firearms
You could replace 'firearms' with 'free speech' and find Great Powers (the PRC and Russia) that are sympathetic; somehow I doubt you'd be willing to emigrate there though. I also suspect that you'd be looking at a -1 mod right now, rather than +5, since your contribution to the discussion would be both offtopic and flamebait.
Even if I accepted your premise about the social cost of gun ownership (I don't, violent crime in the US has continued to drop for decades, even as gun laws have been largely liberalized) it would not change my opinion about firearms ownership. Self-defense is an inherent human right, one that can not be exercised effectively without weaponry that negates disparities in physical strength, numbers, or size. The right of self-defense is recognized in the United States by the 2nd Amendment, as well as Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
It may surprise you, this coming from a "leftie" (aka European citizen), but I am actually in favor of private gun ownership.
I just wish people who want to own one can spend a week with my old drill sarge. he sure knew a few things about safe gun handling and I'm glad he shared them with us.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.