lemm.ee

3 points

2 months ago

“Someone’s asking for sources on wild claims, quick, let me google some correlations!”

If you look at the link between alcohol and mental health disorders, cannabis is way safer, and there’s not even a direct causal link to what would cause these correlated issues with cannabis use, unlike with alcohol, where there’s a clear causality.

report

tatterdemalion@programming.dev

[ - ]

-4 points

2 months ago

Someone’s asking for sources on wild claims, quick, let me google some correlations

You say that like it’s a bad thing. What else am I to do when someone asks for sources? I’ve read similar research in the past and went to find it again.

If you look at the link between alcohol and mental health disorders

That’s whataboutism.

report

[ - ]

1 point

2 months ago

I’ve read similar research in the past and went to find it again.

Correction, you’ve googled similar studies before. I’m pretty sure you haven’t read them. There’s literally nothing there except sampling bias and weak correlations.

You can do that for literally anything

That’s whataboutism

No, it isn’t. It’s not “what about alcohol” as in “let’s not talk about cannabis, but talk about alcohol instead”.

It’s a “you don’t understand the actual risks involved, you don’t understand that you’re linking things you think they prove something (even without reading them) that confirms the bias that has been programmed into you, so here’s some context to make it more understandable”

The context being objective science not having found any causality with mental health disorders and cannabis, and honestly, not even proper correlations.

If this was about the dangers to mental health, then those dangers would be objectified, and alcohol would be considered more dangerous and prohibited. If for some reason the prohibition of cannabis doesn’t come from objective science, but pure political shitcanery, then it wouldn’t care at all about the objective facts of any of the risks, but it would pretend to — even going so far as to completely make shit up

Which is exactly what is happening here, and you’re perpetuating it. Probably without realising it, but you are.

report

tatterdemalion@programming.dev

[ - ]

-2 points

2 months ago

There’s clearly no convincing you. By all means, continue to spread the myth that cannabis can do no harm to anyone, and eventually the wrong person will believe you.

report

[ - ]

0 points

2 months ago

Remember when you were talking about whataboutism, trying to discredit my entire comment?

Well, now you’re doing what’s called “a strawman.” At no point have I said or even implied that cannabis is literally harmless.

report

tatterdemalion@programming.dev

[ - ]

0 points

2 months ago

That’s probably because I’m trying to defend my initial statement, and I didn’t realize you were only taking issue with the sources I presented.

In light of that, excuse my accidental strawman. But also, I don’t really care to argue about the veracity of the research presented by the NIH.

report

[ - ]

0 points

2 months ago

But also, I don’t really care to argue about the veracity of the research presented by the NIH.

Aaand that’s sort of my point.

Yes, we should take the harms of any substances seriously, but to be frank, the risks in cannabis are comparable to caffeine, and on an objective level, even smaller. So my deeper point is that people should realise that attitudes can be deeply “programmed” by our environment (and I’m not talking about some malicious and purposeful propaganda, except at the very start of it, after which society just sort of did it’s thing), and we should realise to readjust our attitudes towards cannabis to be more like our attitudes towards coffee. For example, it’s not often you need to worry about someone’s caffeine consumption, but that too is a thing sometimes. The worst example I can think of is a middle-aged woman I worked with who made coffee 4x stronger than anyone else, no-one else would drink it (except for me as well, but with a lot of cream and sugar, and much much less than her). She was so caffeinated, it really did show up on her skin and definitely on her behaviour. She was very, very mildly psychotic, and I use that not in the colloquial, but clinical sense. In the sense that she was very mildly hypomanic and slightly confused at times, making a lot of mistakes in our work, to the point that she was prohibited from taking any of the orders that came from the government, because they didn’t want to pay for her constant fuck-ups. Other times it’s perhaps a young-ish person who is doing too many energy drinks, or it’s my 93-year old grandma who has anxiety and who’s hands shake, but who says she won’t stop drinking coffee. I’d say my worry for someone using too much cannabis has been much on the same level. It used to be bigger, when I was younger, and somehow believed the studies that only talk of these correlations, until I understood that none of them had any substance, always just “analysing” previous work and when you look into those, they’re more questionable than the newer ones.

We’ve accepted a work culture in which you can make jokes about how you “can’t even function before my first cup of coffee”, and that’s completely fine. But if I say “oh damn, I just can’t get to sleep without a good bowl full of indica”, a lot of people would instantly consider me an addict of some sort, while the other perhaps a not-so-funny character in an office sitcom.

Thank you for the apology, but there really was no need. Still, very mature of you, rare on online forums. tips fedora

edit Oh here, have an image as well.

report