How bad is Weed?

[LAwLz]

4 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

And yes, you might be able to get these same outcomes via other sources, such as grapes. Sure. So what? That doesn't take away the fact that alcoholic beverages consumed in small daily amounts (1-2 drinks per day) seem to have more benefits than risks.

Wait a minute, "more benefits than risks" is not the conclusion I got from that video. The conclusion of the video was that a moderate assumption of alcohol is safe, and that it may be healthy for many (but not all).

Like he says in the video:

1) The evidence is not all that conclusive. Or in his words, "not a slam dunk". There are quite a few contradicting studies and it's hard to determine which ones are actually correct, if any. Or maybe the subject is so complex it is hard to make generalized statements at all. If your risk of liver diseases goes up but your risk of hearth diseases goes down, is that a good or bad thing?

 

2) It highly depends on what beverage you're talking about. Beer for example is very calorie dense, and not something you should recommend drinking even if we assume the alcohol in it has benefits (see point 1). And yes, I know beer also contains some nutrients, but overall it is not a particularly good thing to drink compared to a lot of other things.

 

3) When the studies are talking about drinking moderately, they are talking about fairly low amounts of alcohol. For example the "changes in alcohol intake and morality" study found that people who drink 1-6 servings of an alcoholic beverage a week has the lowest overall morality rate. The serving portion of wine is defined as 5 ounces (or roughly 15 cl in the metric system). That is to say, if you do take an alcoholic drink almost everyday (which is when you potentially get the health benefits), you should not drink enough for it to be your only drink for the meal (unless it's something with very little alcohol on it, like light beer).

A lot of people who think they drink in moderation, don't.

 

3) As the video says, alcohol can be very, very harmful when abused. So harmful that you should not recommend people start drinking. Conclusions of studies are rarely "you should drink alcohol" no matter how positive the results may be, and doctors do not recommend it. 22.7% of all people who try alcohol becomes dependent on it, which is higher than those who try cocaine (20.9%).

 

 

At the end of the day, you should not try to justify drinking beer and smoking weed because "it's good for you". It's not. If there are health benefits they are rather minuscule compared to let's say taking a jog rather than drinking a glass of wine.

If you want to justify drinking (moderately) then do so by saying you like it. I can find evidence that suggests eating cake is healthy too, but I won't try and justify eating cake by saying there are health benefits to eating cake. I will justify it by saying I like the taste and you have to enjoy life a little, just like I would justify taking a drink every now and again if someone questioned me about it.

 

 

By the way, the person who made that video has pretty good article regarding alcohol vs marijuana. I highly recommend reading it but here is the conclusion for those interested:

Quote

None of these arguments I’ve presented are “pro pot” in the sense that I’m saying that adolescents should go use marijuana without worrying about consequences. There’s little question that marijuana carries with it risks to people who use it, as well as to the nation. The number of people who will be hurt from it, will hurt others because of it, begin to abuse it, and suffer negative consequences from it are certainly greater than zero. But looking only at those dangers, and refusing to grapple with them in the context of our society’s implicit consent for alcohol use in young adults, is irrational.

 

When someone asks me whether I’d rather my children use pot or alcohol, after sifting through all the studies and all the data, I still say “neither.” Usually, I say it more than once. But if I’m forced to make a choice, the answer is “marijuana.”

 

[Bhav]

The vast majority of people who start drinking alcohol are able to drink it responsibly throughout the rest of their lives.

 

If everyone that ever took a sip of beer ended up being addicted and being drunk all the time, the whole of every society would collapse.

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Wait a minute, "more benefits than risks" is not the conclusion I got from that video. The conclusion of the video was that a moderate assumption of alcohol is safe, and that it may be healthy for many (but not all).

Like he says in the video:

1) The evidence is not all that conclusive. Or in his words, "not a slam dunk". There are quite a few contradicting studies and it's hard to determine which ones are actually correct, if any. Or maybe the subject is so complex it is hard to make generalized statements at all. If your risk of liver diseases goes up but your risk of hearth diseases goes down, is that a good or bad thing?

 

2) It highly depends on what beverage you're talking about. Beer for example is very calorie dense, and not something you should recommend drinking even if we assume the alcohol in it has benefits (see point 1). And yes, I know beer also contains some nutrients, but overall it is not a particularly good thing to drink compared to a lot of other things.

 

3) When the studies are talking about drinking moderately, they are talking about fairly low amounts of alcohol. For example the "changes in alcohol intake and morality" study found that people who drink 1-6 servings of an alcoholic beverage a week has the lowest overall morality rate. The serving portion of wine is defined as 5 ounces (or roughly 15 cl in the metric system). That is to say, if you do take an alcoholic drink almost everyday (which is when you potentially get the health benefits), you should not drink enough for it to be your only drink for the meal (unless it's something with very little alcohol on it, like light beer).

 

3) As the video says, alcohol can be very, very harmful when abused. So harmful that you should not recommend people start drinking. Conclusions of studies are rarely "you should drink alcohol" no matter how positive the results may be, and doctors do not recommend it. 22.7% of all people who try alcohol becomes dependent on it, which is higher than those who try cocaine (20.9%).

 

 

At the end of the day, you should not try to justify drinking beer and smoking weed because "it's good for you". It's not. If there are health benefits they are rather minuscule compared to let's say taking a jog rather than drinking a glass of wine.

If you want to justify drinking (moderately) then do so by saying you like it. I can find evidence that suggests eating cake is healthy too, but I won't try and justify eating cake by saying there are health benefits to eating cake. I will justify it by saying I like the taste and you have to enjoy life a little, just like I would justify taking a drink every now and again.

 

 

By the way, the person who made that video has pretty good article regarding alcohol vs marijuana. I highly recommend reading it but here is the conclusion for those interested:

 

I'll stand by my statement. He said that the research indicated that the negatives (increases in Cancers, etc) were less significant than the benefits (decrease in heart disease, and decrease in death from "all outcomes").

 

No, it's not a slam dunk. I'l agree there.

 

But the rest? Yes, everyone, including myself, knows that if you abuse alcohol, it's OH MY GOD SO MASSIVELY WORSE than almost anything that humans consume regularly. Binge drinking, alcoholism, etc, are all very serious, and very deadly.

 

But if someone wants to drink (and currently doesn't), and they are:

1. Of legal age

2. A responsible adult

3. Has no prior history of addiction problems

4. Has no increased risk of addiction due to genetic/hereditary factors

I have no problems with them starting.

 

I'm not justifying drinking by saying you SHOULD drink because it's "good for you". I'm saying that if you want to drink, and you're a smart person who will be responsible? Just fucking do it. The harms are extremely minor, and there are potential health benefits.

 

Don't do it because of the health benefits. Those are just a bonus.

 

Others might try to justify drinking or smoking weed because "it's good for you", but I certainly didn't. Any potential health benefits are simply a bonus, for doing something you enjoy doing.

[Bhav]

4 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

The problem is that, with alcohol, you have more people using health benefits as an excuse to drink more.  Yes, there are people who do drink in moderations, but there are more people using it as an excuse.  Very common one, "I can drink all the wine I want because it is good for my heart."  That the problem with addictive substances.

I have zero experiences of ever meeting any such person, and 99.9% of people I've met drink alcohol.

 

I also don't agree with the basic idea that 'alcohol is an addictive substance'.

 

For it to get addictive, you need to already be abusing it for years. It has zero properties that make it immediately addicting or dependency inducing at the recommended weekly limits.

[dalekphalm]

4 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

The problem is that, with alcohol, you have more people using health benefits as an excuse to drink more.  Yes, there are people who do drink in moderations, but there are more people using it as an excuse.  Very common one, "I can drink all the wine I want because it is good for my heart."  That the problem with addictive substances.

This would be another example of a dumbass extremist (alcoholic) who uses "science" (incorrectly) to assert their position to drink as much as they want.

 

Science research is extremely clear about the fact that you need to drink small amounts to get the health benefits, while reducing the risks. If you start to drink a lot, the risks start to massively outweigh the benefits.

 

As always, addiction does terrible things, and alcohol can be extremely addictive.

[MadyTehWolfie]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

I bought a G-Pen (dried herb version), and found it to be pretty crap. Used it a few times, and stuck it on a shelf after that. And I wouldn't want to shell out $300+ for a proper Volcano type vape.

 

The resin/oil version is probably a lot more effective, but it's a lot less convenient to get resin/oil - at least for now.

I got mine for 20 bucks from a friend so it didn't cost me much but they are totally worth it in my opinion.

[Bhav]

4 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

The problem is that someone using an addictive substance of any kind aren't exactly a reliable source on if they're an addict or not, let alone the people close to them, because an addict is very unlikely to claim that they are an addict.  It's the same thing with an insane person.  They won't see themselves that way when they really are.  I'm not saying these people are or aren't drunks I'm just saying they're unlikely to view it from an unbiased viewpoint let alone people who know them.  You also don't need to be abusing it for years for it to be addictive as there are many other factors that contradict that.

Exactly

Likewise people who dont take addictive substances of any kind arent exactly a reliable source of information on addictive substances as they have zero experience of them, and they are mostly brainwashed into the anti drug hysteria by the media.

 

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, Bhav said:

Likewise people who dont take addictive substances of any kind arent exactly a reliable source of information on addictive substances as they have zero experience of them, and they are mostly brainwashed into the anti drug hysteria by the media.

You're only partially correct. Yes, having personal experience with some of these substances does have merit. But we can all look at peer reviewed research (assuming said research exists) to come to concrete conclusions.

 

Unfortunately, many of these substances lacks good quality research.

[Bhav]

Just now, dalekphalm said:

You're only partially correct. Yes, having personal experience with some of these substances does have merit. But we can all look at peer reviewed research (assuming said research exists) to come to concrete conclusions.

 

Unfortunately, many of these substances lacks good quality research.

But youre still only partially correct about your partial part.

 

9/10 anti druggos aren't reading any such material and are just jumping to conclusions based on the latest alcoholic to feature in the daily mail.

[xXxAdamxXx]

47 minutes ago, Bhav said:

The vast majority of people who start drinking alcohol are able to drink it responsibly throughout the rest of their lives.

 

If everyone that ever took a sip of beer ended up being addicted and being drunk all the time, the whole of every society would collapse.

I feel like laws relaxing the prohibitions on marijuana will make it less addictive if that makes any sense, the constant threat of something being taken away makes people work a lot harder to get it all the time at least that's the way it was when I was in college 14 years ago.

[kokakolia]

1 hour ago, valdyrgramr said:

The problem is that there are plenty of stoners out there making bs claims about how the oils and pot are this cure to everything, and yes there are plenty of people who are anti-marijuana and oil people for various reasons, making bs claims.  Not many from either side look at the research they're promoting either.

The thing is, I would rather stand in a room full of stoned people than a room full of drunk people. Alcohol is so bad for your health, it is one of the worst drugs out there. And it makes people extremely violent. 

 

I am willing to bet that crime will drop dramatically if people made the switch from alcohol to weed. 

[Bhav]

17 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Honestly, I would rather not be in a room full of either.  But, from experience, Stoners aren't as bad as alcoholics.  So, I can agree on that point.

And I wouldn't want to be in a room full of anyone unless I was on drugs to make other people more bearable.

[LAwLz]

1 hour ago, Bhav said:

Likewise people who dont take addictive substances of any kind arent exactly a reliable source of information on addictive substances as they have zero experience of them, and they are mostly brainwashed into the anti drug hysteria by the media.

No, you do not need to have experience with something to be educated about the subject.

 

 

1 hour ago, Bhav said:

But youre still only partially correct about your partial part.

 

9/10 anti druggos aren't reading any such material and are just jumping to conclusions based on the latest alcoholic to feature in the daily mail.

People in general aren't reading research papers, and even those who think they are "educated" about subjects have not researched it properly. That goes for both sides.

For example they might have a predefined conclusion and then search for evidence that supports that theory. Examples of this would be searching on Google for "benefits of marijuana" or "marijuana is bad because", both of which will result in very slanted articles appearing. In other cases they might not even read scientific journals for themselves, but rather rely on someone's interpretation of a study. Someone who might have an agenda of their own.

 

Confirmation bias is very real, and very powerful.

[kokakolia]

18 minutes ago, Bhav said:

And I wouldn't want to be in a room full of anyone unless I was on drugs to make other people more bearable.

Sounds like you’ve been to too many awful parties

[Egg-Roll]

3 hours ago, Bhav said:

Healthy eating takes far more effort than most people are willing to put into it to, the point however was that dismissing the idea that small amounts of alcohol are simply and always still bad for you.

 

Also if youre not going to trust anything without sources, in that case then wheres your legitimate source on why you simply shouldn't start drinking if you already dont, and what are the (valid) reasons not to?

If healthy eating is more effort than buying canned/frozen fruit in juice (for cans), bananas and a bag of apples, then booze up by all means as far as I'm concerned you don't actually take much consideration towards your health anyways. I also never dismissed small amount of wine is bad, but the issues with beer vs the benefits are something I can't tell someone to take it up for, ever. For other drinks I know a few have benefits but to me they are too pricey to justify vs other sources. Seriously is it that hard to throw in frozen berries, mangos peaches or other fruits into a blender then throwing that blender into a dishwasher?

 

Any reputable media source would at least attempt to put their sources or at least the agency who did them... Anything less than that to me is either unreliable possibly misleading or at the very least downright sloppy journalism. I don't need legitimate sources as to why I shouldn't start drinking, because no legitimate source will be dumb enough to encourage people to drink. This is because people are stupid, they will skip lines possibly going so as to go out buy a 12 pack and consume the whole thing then drive home possibly killing someone (or many) in the process.

 

You go find me a source from a reputable agency USA/EU/Canada that states those over 25 should drink to promote health because there is no other source.

 

1 hour ago, kokakolia said:

Sounds like you’ve been to too many awful parties

Or maybe not enough to become used to it yet.

[kokakolia]

22 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

If healthy eating is more effort than buying canned/frozen fruit in juice (for cans), bananas and a bag of apples, then booze up by all means as far as I'm concerned you don't actually take much consideration towards your health anyways. I also never dismissed small amount of wine is bad, but the issues with beer vs the benefits are something I can't tell someone to take it up for, ever. For other drinks I know a few have benefits but to me they are too pricey to justify vs other sources. Seriously is it that hard to throw in frozen berries, mangos peaches or other fruits into a blender then throwing that blender into a dishwasher?

 

Any reputable media source would at least attempt to put their sources or at least the agency who did them... Anything less than that to me is either unreliable possibly misleading or at the very least downright sloppy journalism. I don't need legitimate sources as to why I shouldn't start drinking, because no legitimate source will be dumb enough to encourage people to drink. This is because people are stupid, they will skip lines possibly going so as to go out buy a 12 pack and consume the whole thing then drive home possibly killing someone (or many) in the process.

 

You go find me a source from a reputable agency USA/EU/Canada that states those over 25 should drink to promote health because there is no other source.

 

Or maybe not enough to become used to it yet.

The problem is cultural, not scientific. Scientifically, alcohol has benefits in very small doses. However, consuming alcohol in such doses would seem rather strange. You’d be drinking by the teaspoon (so to speak). One can of beer is already excess (for some people). To make things worse, binge drinking is a mainstay in North American culture. 

 

Personally, Weed >> Alcohol. 

 

- takes less space, it literally fits in your pocket

- less harmful for the same buzz

- cheaper than alcohol for the same buzz

- no hangovers!!! 

- makes you less angry/violent

- doesn’t make your poop runny and explosive 

 

The only thing that really sucks with weed is that it is a gateway drug for cigarettes. (I know you expected me to say meth or something far more dangerous)

[dalekphalm]

1 minute ago, kokakolia said:

- doesn’t make your poop runny and explosive

Depends on what you eat when munchies take over

[greaves1111]

you eat alot more funions. Also makes videogames fun

[kokakolia]

1 minute ago, greaves1111 said:

you eat alot more funions. Also makes videogames fun

And it makes music, cartoons and sex so much better <3

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, kokakolia said:

The problem is cultural, not scientific. Scientifically, alcohol has benefits in very small doses. However, consuming alcohol in such doses would seem rather strange. You’d be drinking by the teaspoon (so to speak). One can of beer is already excess (for some people). To make things worse, binge drinking is a mainstay in North American culture. 

 

Personally, Weed >> Alcohol. 

 

-snip-

 

The only thing that really sucks with weed is that it is a gateway drug for cigarettes. (I know you expected me to say meth or something far more dangerous)

 

Don't take me to a bar then, I'll embarrass you (I've done it). But yes drinking like other drugs are mostly social caused...

 

Yes and no, depending on the users take on weed it can, esp if financially speaking they are having issues buying their weeking stash. Tho that's when E-Cigs come in handy, not that I support them moreover cigs, but they are "technically" safer than switching to normal ones.

 

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

Depends on what you eat when munchies take over

If the munchies happen when you're high, I'd be that person to slip 2 packs (400 grams+) of Twizzlers and bet $20 they couldn't eat them all  Let the mineral oil flow within 

[dalekphalm]

2 minutes ago, Egg-Roll said:

 

Don't take me to a bar then, I'll embarrass you (I've done it). But yes drinking like other drugs are mostly social caused...

 

Yes and no, depending on the users take on weed it can, esp if financially speaking they are having issues buying their weeking stash. Tho that's when E-Cigs come in handy, not that I support them moreover cigs, but they are "technically" safer than switching to normal ones.

 

If the munchies happen when you're high, I'd be that person to slip 2 packs (400 grams+) of Twizzlers and bet $20 they couldn't eat them all  Let the mineral oil flow within 

I could do one pack of twizzlers, but 2 packs might be a bit much.

 

But I wouldn't even want to eat that many, even if I were stoned.

[Mio85]

On 6/8/2018 at 10:01 PM, BuckGup said:

I personally have never and plan on never using it but others around me do and I just want some feedback. If someone does it every 6 months how bad is it compared to someone who does it every other day? I know personally I can see the life decisions being made between the two but what about health risks? Try and be a little serious plz

Smoking anything is bad for you, but Marijuana has no lasting negative effects. Especially if taken as edibles.

The worst thing that happens is if you use weed too often (daily for 2 weeks or so) you might start feeling depressed when you aren't high due to your body stopping dopamine production. But, just take a break from smoking for two days and you'll feel better.

[Egg-Roll]

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

I could do one pack of twizzlers, but 2 packs might be a bit much.

 

But I wouldn't even want to eat that many, even if I were stoned.

True, but it depends on how the drug affects the person, and how many they have had. They might not even remember who gave them the packs.

 

I've had to work with a drunk that the company refused to do anything with. So depending on the day sober workers could have a little fun with that person , they were mostly however annoying.

 

Depending on what I just ate the day of or will be eating I can pack down 1 package no problems, but the second one... I think 2 packs is generally overkill for most peoples systems but small enough to not destroy their digestive tract.

[kokakolia]

7 minutes ago, Mio85 said:

Smoking anything is bad for you, but Marijuana has no lasting negative effects. Especially if taken as edibles.

The worst thing that happens is if you use weed too often (daily for 2 weeks or so) you might start feeling depressed when you aren't high due to your body stopping dopamine production. But, just take a break from smoking for two days and you'll feel better.

Yeah, about that...If you’re feeling sad or worried about something weed will only make things worse. But it’s different for different people. 

 

IMO, it’s important to be in a good mood.

[Mio85]

2 minutes ago, kokakolia said:

Yeah, about that...If you’re feeling sad or worried about something weed will only make things worse. But it’s different for different people. 

 

IMO, it’s important to be in a good mood.

I don't have depression or anything, I'm simply stating my experience. But yeah, Weed isn't a substitute for actual happiness.