Pothead Ph.D. - This is most definitely not a cautionary tale

That's good, because I didn't say that. I said that it's legal because tobacco farmers are a more established part of the economy; that it's legal for historical reasons.

Marijuana has a long history too. If it were legalized, the industry would be taxed just like tobacco.

If Marijuana were allowed to establish itself as an open industry, sure. But it hasn't, or rather, it hadn't at the time of the first drug laws against it. Which is the whole point. I don't know why you're having trouble with this.

Their crop kills thousands of people. Weed kills no one.

BS, smoking weed has the exact same effects on your health as smoking tobacco and plenty of people have died smoking weed.In terms of danger they are around the same. The difference in numbers has more to do with relative popularity and the openness people have with their habits.

* The debate whether alcoholism is a disease, a personality trait, or something else entirely is irrelevant here.

The health benefits of alcohol are an unusual case, also -- many of its benefits are related to other chemicals that frequently accompany it, such as polyphenols in red wine. This does not apply to "LSD/Cocaine/Heroine" (sic), though there are comparable benefits for coffee and tea (particularly green tea), mostly antioxidants.

Many doctors are reluctant to recommend moderate drinking for its health benefits because it is also addictive and impairs judgment, and in cases where people drink excessively, the health costs are severe. This doesn't apply to most things recommended for health (exercise, eating fruits and vegetables, getting enough sleep, nethack, green tea, pomegranate juice (or whatever the health craze of the moment is, ac,ai berries? peach fuzz?)), because most of those are less likely to be taken to excess, and would probably be several orders of magnitude less harmful even if they were.

I know, cause, um, a friend told me.

Thank you

But this sounds to me like the textbook definition of "kneejerk reaction."

Actually, it was anything but. I thought long and hard about my post and was curious what kind of reaction it would elicit. I guess I found out.

You could make a (calm!) argument that the author has chosen a poor coping method, but this?

I considered that, but obviously didn't. Let me explain...

I love this community. It's my virtual home. That's why I responded like I did.

In order to glean the signal from the noise, we put up with a lot here. Posts like "not hacker news", posts giving advice learned from a book somewhere, submissions about politics and religion, and unnecessary profanity. I have read most of them and usually chuckled and moved on. Not this time.

Lots of people come here, many young and impressionable, looking for all kinds of things. So what is the first thing they saw today? A post from someone who hasn't really accomplished anything important to hackers (as far as I could tell) and who chooses to resort to drugs to get through his day. And then brags about it.

I wanted to make it clear in no uncertain terms that there are people who disagree with him and this post has no business here at hn. I could have said the lame "not hacker news", but that hardly would have gotten my point across.

We are achievers. We work hard and find a way to produce value for other people, often taking the difficult road instead of the easy way out. This guy's post was IMHO the precise opposite of what I believe and what I hope others believe too. Making it through school using drugs is a smack in the face of those of us who work hard in the real world and assemble here to share it.

I simply don't care how anyone wants to live their life. If you want to get high, get drunk, jump out of airplanes, or just sit in front of the TV, go to it.

But if you come into my virtual home, I will respond just like I would in my physical home and say, "Take your drugs and get out."

I wanted to get people's attention. Do you think it worked?

No, this comment of yours says a lot more about you than it does about the article.

What does it say about me that my other 2,873 comments don't?

Marijuana modulates the way your short term memory works. It does not impair long term memory or recall. The effects of marijuana on short term memory may contribute to creativity by breaking down cognitive structures and creating a space for new concepts to plug into parts of the dissolving short term memories.

If drugs are so harmful, why are they winning the drug war?