So California Girl

[Trajan]

Umm CG might be correct Luissa. Think about the Palin phenomena, Tea Party, birthers, etc.

Palin comes from a community riddled with meth abusers. I have no doubt meth does cause permanent paranoid psychosis.

My guess is that Daddy's girl AKA CG.. tried pot once and it jarred her out of her comfortable version of reality. She no doubt blamed the fantasy crash on the evil weed and wanted no more part of any assault on "reality".

Chronic cannabis usage does lead to an uncomfortable comparison between a fundamentalist view of the world and one's own battle with sanity as the mind takes in contradictory information from the religious world view. Still there is no crazy any crazier than religious fundamentalism. I have tried most every drug in the 70's and have detected no permanent debilitating effects. It is easy to stay away from the symptoms associated with chemicals on the brain. Just stop using them. It seems the more permanent psychological disadvantages of existing in a fantasy reality provided by religious fundamentalism is more difficult to go cold turkey from with the constant peer pressure and threats of going to hell etc..

so you think the batshit crazies know they're batshit crazy?

damn

Elvira: Can't you see what we're becoming, Tony? We're losers. We're not winners, we're losers.
Tony : Go home. You stoned.
Elvira: I'm not stoned. You're stoned.

 

[Luissa]

I did get detained a bit one time for some weed that wasn't mine. I had even quit smoking some years previous. Man, was i peee-ahsed. Can laugh about it now though. Family...can't live with 'em, and its illegal to kick their ass.

Who would put you through such a thing?

 

[RadiomanATL]

I did get detained a bit one time for some weed that wasn't mine. I had even quit smoking some years previous. Man, was i peee-ahsed. Can laugh about it now though. Family...can't live with 'em, and its illegal to kick their ass.

Who would put you through such a thing?

You, shuddup.

 

[Luissa]

I am sure that family member was very grateful.

 

[The Gadfly]

You keep making the claim, but please explain to why there has not been an increase of psychosis? Marijuana use has increased but not psychosis?
If Marijuana causes psychosis as you claim, wouldn't the rate of people developing psychosis increase?

Psychosis - The Doctors Lounge(TM)

he fact that cannabis use has increased over the past few decades, whereas the rate of psychosis has not, suggests that a direct causal link is unlikely for all users.

Sounds to me like they have no clue.


And if you don't like that link I can find you a few more.










Thanks Editec

Cannabis is a mild hallucinogen, so I don't think I'd call it an "anti-psychotic" by any means; that said, I can't recall ever seeing anyone in a psychotic state solely on account of cannabis use.The other effects are well-documented, and while I'm sure at least some users can do some tasks well under the influence of it(writing , composing music, etc.), anything that requires normal reflexes and motor coordination is probably not such a good idea (operating machinery, driving a vehicle, etc.).

Pot in American society has functioned primarily as a societal irritant; I'm sure a lot of people who use it do so precisely because it's illegal; likewise, a lot of people despise it for the same reason. Neither response is entirely rational. I'm no great fan of prohibition; it didn't work with alcohol, and it isn't working so well with other substances either. Personally, I wouldn't use the stuff if it were legalized; i've had enough experience with second-hand pot smoke in a confined space, to know I don't care for the effect; what others may choose to do, so long as their intoxication does not endanger others, is their own affair. I find a small amount of alcohol (a beer, a glass of wine, or a shot of scotch) is about all the mood-altering I care for, myself.

 

[Si modo]

Oh, and by the way

Epidemiological evidence

Contemporary interest in this topic began with a longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts reported by Andreasson and his colleagues. 1 Their findings have been replicated and extended in a series of longitudinal studies 2 – 6 all of which have found increased rates of psychosis or psychotic symptoms in people using cannabis ( table ). Furthermore, these findings of longitudinal, case-control studies have been augmented by a series of cross-sectional studies of large populations 7 and high risk populations. 8 – 11 These studies produce the following suggestive evidence that supports the conclusion that the link between the use of cannabis and increased risks of psychosis is likely to be causal.

[Emphasis added]

Cannabis and psychosis -- Fergusson et al. 332 (7534): 172 -- bmj.com

 

[MikeK]

I would never hire a stoner. Those under the influence have garbage thinking and are nonproductive. And, sometimes they are outright dangerous on the job.

A "stoner" is to marijuana what an alcoholic is to booze, so what you've said is sensible. But do you believe that everyone who occasionally enjoys the effect of marijuana is a "stoner?"

And whether being under the influence of marijuana induces "garbage thinking" depends entirely on the individual. The moderate use of marijuana can have an extremely creative ("mind expanding") effect on some people.

 

[Si modo]

I would never hire a stoner. Those under the influence have garbage thinking and are nonproductive. And, sometimes they are outright dangerous on the job.

A "stoner" is to marijuana what an alcoholic is to booze, so what you've said is sensible. But do you believe that everyone who occasionally enjoys the effect of marijuana is a "stoner?"

If you let me know what you mean by 'ocassionally', I'll let you know my opinion on that.

I will say that when my safety and welfare depend on the judgments and actions of another, I have zero tolerance for any use. Been there and it was not a good outcome.

ETA your edit:

And whether being under the influence of marijuana induces "garbage thinking" depends entirely on the individual. The moderate use of marijuana can have an extremely creative ("mind expanding") effect on some people.

In my field, rationality based on reality leads to success. There is no room for mind expansion in safety in my field, either.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I see a causal link between the use of milk and psychosis, with or without the use of MJ.

 

[MikeK]

Actually, I don't believe much about anything folks under the influence tell me. And, those who use cannabis on a regular basis are not too credible in my book, either. But, that really doesn't matter too much, most of the private sector and all of the federal government will shitcan a stoner if s/he has a positive piss test.

But, those who use do have a choice.

My preference is not to have them anywhere near me when I work and thankfully, my employer makes sure they aren't.

It appears that you've been strongly influenced by Reefer Madness propaganda. Or is someone close to you a self-defeating "stoner?"

 

[Si modo]

Actually, I don't believe much about anything folks under the influence tell me. And, those who use cannabis on a regular basis are not too credible in my book, either. But, that really doesn't matter too much, most of the private sector and all of the federal government will shitcan a stoner if s/he has a positive piss test.

But, those who use do have a choice.

My preference is not to have them anywhere near me when I work and thankfully, my employer makes sure they aren't.

It appears that you've been strongly influenced by Reefer Madness propaganda. Or is someone close to you a self-defeating "stoner?"

Never watched it. I go on my own experience. No, the stoner was not close to me, just another worker whose entire career ended rather rapidly, for good reason.

 

[MikeK]

Stoners can flip my burger and make my fries, but I don't want them being the bus driver for my kid.

What is your definition of a "stoner?" Same as a "drunk?"

 

[del]

Oh, and by the way

Epidemiological evidence

Contemporary interest in this topic began with a longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts reported by Andreasson and his colleagues. 1 Their findings have been replicated and extended in a series of longitudinal studies 2 – 6 all of which have found increased rates of psychosis or psychotic symptoms in people using cannabis ( table ). Furthermore, these findings of longitudinal, case-control studies have been augmented by a series of cross-sectional studies of large populations 7 and high risk populations. 8 – 11 These studies produce the following suggestive evidence that supports the conclusion that the link between the use of cannabis and increased risks of psychosis is likely to be causal.

[Emphasis added]

Cannabis and psychosis -- Fergusson et al. 332 (7534): 172 -- bmj.com

it would be nice to see the actual data rather than the conclusions drawn from it. as someone said earlier, one could establish causality between milk and increased risk of psychosis.

i can only go by what i've seen. i've seen a lot of people smoke and unless falling asleep or eating are now classified as psychotic behaviors, i've never sen anyone behave psychotically.

anything's possible, i guess

 

[MikeK]

I smoked pot from the time I was about 18 till a few years ago when it made me too stupit with my extreme pain meds.
I was never fired from a job got promotions to jobs far above my education level and was always rated excellent or outstanding.

some just start out stupid and pot puts them over the edge.

What are you blaming the "stupit" effect on -- marijuana or the pain meds? If it's the combination of the two the blame can't be laid on the marijuana.

And are you quite sure you weren't overdoing the pot, which is very common. Most people who have a negative effect from marijuana have simply used too much. Just because you lit up a fatty doesn't mean you have to smoke the whole thing. Or just because you like the taste of brownies doesn't mean you should eat three or four when they are spiked. Or just because your pipe has a large bowl doesn't mean you should fill it.

Moderation.

 

[Si modo]

Oh, and by the way

Epidemiological evidence

Contemporary interest in this topic began with a longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts reported by Andreasson and his colleagues. 1 Their findings have been replicated and extended in a series of longitudinal studies 2 – 6 all of which have found increased rates of psychosis or psychotic symptoms in people using cannabis ( table ). Furthermore, these findings of longitudinal, case-control studies have been augmented by a series of cross-sectional studies of large populations 7 and high risk populations. 8 – 11 These studies produce the following suggestive evidence that supports the conclusion that the link between the use of cannabis and increased risks of psychosis is likely to be causal.

[Emphasis added]

Cannabis and psychosis -- Fergusson et al. 332 (7534): 172 -- bmj.com

it would be nice to see the actual data rather than the conclusions drawn from it. as someone said earlier, one could establish causality between milk and increased risk of psychosis.

i can only go by what i've seen. i've seen a lot of people smoke and unless falling asleep or eating are now classified as psychotic behaviors, i've never sen anyone behave psychotically.

anything's possible, i guess

First of all, one can see the data if they have a subscription. Secondly, showing causal relationship is a very straightforward analysis of the data based on a properly designed experiment. If you have a peer-reviewed paper showing a causal relationship between drinking milk and psychosis, I encourage you to post it. Thirdly, this is the British Medical Journal which is one of the most respected scientific journals in the world. I am sure that the paper was thoroughly peer-reviewed and if the analysis on a causal relationship was not robust and the experimental design was not proper, the paper would not have been published in that journal.

 

[Zona]

Naah open up a good doughnut and pastry shop.

I dont indulge, but dont they get like a salty muchy? More snacks than doughntut and sweets?

Don know.

 

[MikeK]

I agree, some shouldn't smoke pot, just like some shouldn't drink alcohol.

Marijuana should never be used in combination with another drug, including alcohol.

 

[Zona]

I would never hire a stoner. Those under the influence have garbage thinking and are nonproductive. And, sometimes they are outright dangerous on the job.

A "stoner" is to marijuana what an alcoholic is to booze, so what you've said is sensible. But do you believe that everyone who occasionally enjoys the effect of marijuana is a "stoner?"

And whether being under the influence of marijuana induces "garbage thinking" depends entirely on the individual. The moderate use of marijuana can have an extremely creative ("mind expanding") effect on some people.

But your good with a guy throwing back a couple and getting behind the wheel?

 

[del]

Oh, and by the way
[Emphasis added]

Cannabis and psychosis -- Fergusson et al. 332 (7534): 172 -- bmj.com

it would be nice to see the actual data rather than the conclusions drawn from it. as someone said earlier, one could establish causality between milk and increased risk of psychosis.

i can only go by what i've seen. i've seen a lot of people smoke and unless falling asleep or eating are now classified as psychotic behaviors, i've never sen anyone behave psychotically.

anything's possible, i guess

First of all, one can see the data if they have a subscription. Secondly, showing causal relationship is a very straightforward analysis of the data based on a properly designed experiment. If you have a peer-reviewed paper showing a causal relationship between drinking milk and psychosis, I encourage you to post it. Thirdly, this is the British Medical Journal which is one of the most respected scientific journals in the world. I am sure that the paper was thoroughly peer-reviewed and if the analysis on a causal relationship was not robust and the experimental design was not, the paper would not have been published.

blah, blah, blah

one doesn't have a subscription; one has no interest in getting a subscription and one can see from what is made available to the unwashed masses by the British Medical Journal that no claim is made of an increase in psychosis due to marijuana use but rather that the risk of psychosis *appears* to be increased by marijuana use.

that's a very different proposition than what you appear to be stating, and one would think much easier to float in the neverending parade of bullshit put forth by practitioners of the social *sciences*.

 

[Si modo]

it would be nice to see the actual data rather than the conclusions drawn from it. as someone said earlier, one could establish causality between milk and increased risk of psychosis.

i can only go by what i've seen. i've seen a lot of people smoke and unless falling asleep or eating are now classified as psychotic behaviors, i've never sen anyone behave psychotically.

anything's possible, i guess

First of all, one can see the data if they have a subscription. Secondly, showing causal relationship is a very straightforward analysis of the data based on a properly designed experiment. If you have a peer-reviewed paper showing a causal relationship between drinking milk and psychosis, I encourage you to post it. Thirdly, this is the British Medical Journal which is one of the most respected scientific journals in the world. I am sure that the paper was thoroughly peer-reviewed and if the analysis on a causal relationship was not robust and the experimental design was not, the paper would not have been published.

blah, blah, blah

one doesn't have a subscription; one has no interest in getting a subscription and one can see from what is made available to the unwashed masses from the British Medical Journal that no claim is made of an increase in psychosis due to marijuana use but rather that the risk of psychosis *appears* to be increased by marijuana use.

that's a very different proposition than what you appear to be stating, and one would think much easier to float in the neverending parade of bullshit put forth by practitioners of the social *sciences*.

I suppose you don't read many scientific pubs, then. Rarely does one state anything as if it were written in stone.

I'm wondering why you asked for the data if you had no interest in it.

What I appear to be stating is quoting from two separate papers [ETA: Nope, only quoted one of them. I can post another, if folks would like]. I've shown peer-reviewed work that links cannabis use to psychosis through a causal relationship, based on the science they did. There is always room for additional science that may further reinforce the current hypothesis, may make the hypothesis more limited and/or specific, or conflict with it. This is the way knowledge grows - by allowing for additional work on something not written in stone.

And, as far as I know, medicine is an applied science.