Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

nih.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 384 posts

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#311

Post by PointlessLogin »

Auracle wrote: post #267
taberiand wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But surely no one has been saying that cannabis isn't a risk for pregnant women, let alone that it could be beneficial to smoke it, right?

Nearly 70% of dispensaries in Colorado recommended cannabis for morning sickness: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5970054/

Question: Are US cannabis dispensaries run by independent qualified medical professionals, or are they simply businesses interested in flogging cannabis to everybody to make as much profit as they can [1]?

Given the (bonkers IMHO) profit motive of the US medical industry, I suspect the latter, though I'd be interested to hear from those with experience.

[1] Given some of the stuff I've read online, I'm pretty sure they would prescribe cannabis for an ingrowing toenail if you asked.

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#312

Post by vintermann »

Bakary wrote: post #248
sammalloy wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I need alcohol to be sociable I always laugh when I see this. Alcohol turns me into an introvert.

We assume that the loss of inhibition will automatically make people more likely to interact. But what if a person would like to interact less in the moment, but feels compelled to do so via social rules? In this case, being less inhibited would make them less sociable, not more.

The loss of inhibition is culturally learned, not biochemical. You can relax and let loose because society judges you less harshly when drunk (and, if you have internalized it, you judge yourself less harshly too). In some cultures it's not present at all, and even in some you may visit it's much weaker. Be aware of this if you get drunk as a tourist.

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#313

Post by PointlessLogin »

ok_dad wrote: post #58
irrational wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s still a DUI if you drive on it. The week after it was legalized in my state, a person managed to put their car through the second story of a home. The toxicology report showed the only thing in their system was cannabis.

Cannibis can be in your system for weeks or months, so take the authority reports that the accident was caused by cannabis intoxication with a grain of salt, and assume that absent other evidence it might be that the user in this case wasn’t high at the time. I’m not saying this to say no accidents has been caused by cannibis, but that there’s currently no way to tell current level of cannabis intoxication. Authoriti…

> Cannibis can be in your system for weeks or months

No.

You are confusing the tests for cannabis metabolites (that can tell if you smoked weeks ago) to tests for THC, the substance that gets you stoned and leaves the bloodstream as you sober up.

A driving impairment test will test for THC, not metabolites. Nobody cares if you smoked last week, only if you are under the influence when driving.

In the UK, having 2ug / litre of THC in the blood is a drug-driving offence. At a minimum you will loose your licence for 1 year.

https://www.majlaw.co.uk/offences/drug-driving/cannabis/

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#314

Post by dubeye »

moomoo11 wrote: post #101

Is this really surprising? Any time I had used cannabis I felt like my IQ dropped 20-30 points and I would lose hours of my day where it was difficult for me to learn. It made doing household chores not terrible, but brought out a lot of panic inducing moments and erratic behavior. I was thinking about a 100k other things while doing one thing. Later on I realized I wasn't even doing that one thing so well. Anything…

It's a lesser of evils in my case. If you can give up weed and everything else too, great. But for me personally, I tend to drink a bit more when I have no weed, not hugely more, but I'd be very surprised if having no weed around is better for my health, vs increased alcohol consumption.

Obivously no drugs at would be the ideal. But often this kind of health stuff is about compromises.

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#315

Post by dumpsterdiver »

PointlessLogin wrote: post #310
pjc50 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People cannot cope with even the slightest gray area, so they end up saying and doing ridiculous things. Everything has to be 100% good or 100% bad. The political environment makes this worse: if you concede anything at all, it will simply be used as a weapon against you. Of course, it took decades to get people to acknowledge that the harms of some drugs were far less than the harm caused by policing them, and that…

> People cannot cope with even the slightest gray area, so they end up saying and doing ridiculous things. Everything has to be 100% good or 100% bad. I suggest this binary positioning is a very American phenomenon; the cultural reasons for which I'm unable to suggest a reason for.

So you're making a suggestion but you don't know why? Uh... thanks?

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#316

Post by SamPatt »

andsoitis wrote: post #190
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try explaining to an average person how they can identify which food products at the supermarket have noble-gas-fat-products in them and which don't.

> which food products If it comes in a tin or a box, it is probably not good for you. Not all cases, but it is a good rule of thumb.

Sardines are a tasty exception

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#317

Post by PointlessLogin »

dumpsterdiver wrote: post #315
PointlessLogin wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People cannot cope with even the slightest gray area, so they end up saying and doing ridiculous things. Everything has to be 100% good or 100% bad. I suggest this binary positioning is a very American phenomenon; the cultural reasons for which I'm unable to suggest a reason for.

So you're making a suggestion but you don't know why? Uh... thanks?

sigh

It is possible to observe behaviour without knowing what causes it.

"I suggest drinking heavily is a very British phenomenon; the cultural reasons for which I'm unable to suggest a reason for either."

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#318

Post by d3fault »

PointlessLogin wrote: post #310
pjc50 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People cannot cope with even the slightest gray area, so they end up saying and doing ridiculous things. Everything has to be 100% good or 100% bad. The political environment makes this worse: if you concede anything at all, it will simply be used as a weapon against you. Of course, it took decades to get people to acknowledge that the harms of some drugs were far less than the harm caused by policing them, and that…

> People cannot cope with even the slightest gray area, so they end up saying and doing ridiculous things. Everything has to be 100% good or 100% bad. I suggest this binary positioning is a very American phenomenon; the cultural reasons for which I'm unable to suggest a reason for.

> I suggest this binary positioning is a very American phenomenon

I really don't think so. Binary thinking is something I've personally noticed and thought about for a while, and I think it stems from the human brain just trying to simplify things. In most scenarios, it is far easier (and time efficient) to only consider the 2 extreme options rather than the entire spectrum of possible options, even if those two extremes are far worse than the alternatives.

Plus, I've seen Europeans do the same thing all the time [0]. Remember, polarization (which is really just an extension of tribalism imo) isn't an American condition, it's a human condition.

[0] I've lived in both the US and Europe

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#319

Post by Maursault »

tristor wrote: post #251
Maursault wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we're talking about doing scientific research While the article concerns a study, I responded to the OP of this thread, which is scrutinizing, "Why are pregnant women smoking weed to begin with?" Now you have just advanced a straw man argument, as the topic of this thread is not research nor your defense of opinions, but rather, scrutinizing pregnant women.

It’s exactly what I said it is and you are engaged in politically motivated reasoning as evidenced by other subthreads and not making good faith assertions. The only one straw manning others is you.

Your argument is as unsound as your confusion is deep.

Do not judge. Let the wicked be wicked.

Don't you read your Bible, child?

Re: Prenatal cannabis exposure associated with mental disorders in children

#320

Post by Maursault »

_-david-_ wrote: post #250
Maursault wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't people you're talking about, it is only men. The issue is only men are giving their opinion, which they feel very strongly about, and it is a circumstance they, biologically speaking, can never experience. So please take the advice of another man: whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent . A woman's right to do as she pleases with her body is as absolute as a man's right to do as he pleases with…

Should men not tell women not to drink alcohol while pregnant? Men can't understand what it is like to be pregnant. What right does a man have to control a women's body?

Under what circumstances will you tolerate being told what to do? Right! Never.
Post reply on HN