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

Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 208 posts

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#181

Post by mod »

eloff wrote: post #69
guelo wrote: post #13

As a programmer I'm very protective of my higher level brain functions. Marijuana's effects on short term memory are especially concerning to me. Do any of you long term smokers feels like it has affected your programming skills for the worse or better?

A lot of the science that says it drops your IQ seems to have been poorly done. Smokers are dumber in general, but that may well say more about their socioeconomic backgrounds. However, I personally wouldn't risk it. Do you know what I would pay to raise my IQ by a half-dozen points? I seriously considered taking Ritalin at one point, to see if it might give me a boost (actually I still haven't ruled it out, just she…

What's the risk?

I mean, it's not going to permanently lower your IQ, or reduce your ambition, correct? And if it does, what's the benefit you get in return? Does lowering your ambition make you happier, for instance?

Why did you shelve ritalin? Does it have risks as well?

Do you know why you prefer not to risk iq/ambition but you're potentially okay with risking whatever ritalin can be a detriment to?

I ask all this as a curious non-user of anything but a daily multi-vitamin, forced by a loved one...

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#182

Post by Raphmedia »

anigbrowl wrote: post #175
Raphmedia wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaporization.

I was going to include that but I don't really know whether or not it's safer - inhaling cleaner but hotter vapor also strikes me as potentially problematic.

It is safer. When you vaporize, you (hopefully) only vaporize the molecules that you want. The machine should be set at a temperature that is low enough to vaporize only the THC and CBD. No carbon, no icky tar, no lighter fluid. It is even better if you can vaporize an extract.

You begin with the plant, extract the molecules that you want, and then vaporize said extract. Filter this vaporization through water since the molecules that you want aren't water soluble. This also cools down the vapours.

It is a lot safer than blindly setting a plant on fire.

The downside is that you will pay a premium in order to get quality medicinal extracts and you will need to invest money ($500+) in order to get a decent vaporizer.

Source: I am no expert, but I have family members that use cannabis as a legal medication.

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#183

Post by mariodiana »

lkbm wrote: post #167
mariodiana wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A BAC of 0.08 is not high at all. "Consider the 2000 federal law that pressured states to lower their BAC standards to 0.08 from 0.10. At the time, the average BAC in alcohol-related fatal accidents was 0.17, and two-thirds of such accidents involved drivers with BACs of 0.14 or higher." http://reason.com/archives/2010/10/11/abolish-drunk-driving-...

Percentage of people in accidents at a given BAC is the wrong stat to look at. You need to look at _chance of accident_ at a given BAC, v. at 0 BAC. And at 0.08, you're chance of accident is 393% of that when sober. 0.07 is 322%.[1] 1. http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/nti/pdf/812117-Drug_and_Alc... (Table 8)

Why? Ratios mean nothing out-of-context. So, you look at Table 8 and tell me what are the chances of having an accident at BAC 0.00 in hard numbers. Because if the chance of an accident is infinitesimal, then I'm not worried so much about infinitesimal-times-four.

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#184

Post by drzaiusapelord »

jMyles wrote: post #94
drzaiusapelord wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>After smoking fairly consistently for 13 years, I seem to be blessed by having no negative effects of which I am aware. Well, that's the problem with cognitive faults, we usually aren't aware of them.

I'm sorry - did you just change the predicate of your comment from "Except, apparently, your prose skill" to "Well, that's the problem with cognitive faults, we usually aren't aware of them" after we had responded to it? Are you serious?

No, that was someone else's comment.

Mine stands as originally posted - its tough, if not impossible, to make your own self-assessment on cognitive issues. That's why double-blind studies are the norm in biology and medicine.

I have stoner friends who make the same argument and, frankly, they're completely unaware at how slow they are from a cognitive perspective and seem overly forgetful. I can't just pin this on aging as we're all the same age. It just seems that those who took drugs seriously, even just pot, in their 20s, are paying a price for it much later in life. That's something people should be warned about. No amount of diet changes, meditation, or fish oil is going to get help here. They have permanently altered their brain.

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#185

Post by mod »

madaxe_again wrote: post #15

Decided to feed the rage centres of my brain and read the most replied to comments in the article. Apparently every joint smoked causes four pregnancies. By this math, everyone please, give me a pat on the back, I've repopulated a small city. I suppose my lowered testosterone and enhanced aggression have made me super-virile, and I'm causing parthenogenesis all over without trying. Thing is, I don't know how you can…

I have to actively avoid comment sections on most of the internet. HN is my safe-haven, although I still try to avoid politic-centric discussions here.

It's appalling the level of discourse of the average person, even in my normal friend/family circles (my facebook feeds).

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#186

Post by mod »

LordKano wrote: post #82

I don't smoke but I don't care if you do. Because of my field of work, I am subject to drug testing and I like my job so I don't partake but it really doesn't matter to me if someone else wants to. It doesn't make any sense to me to spend billions of dollars every year to try to stop people from obtaining and ingesting a plant. Even if it were a deadly poison, it still wouldn't make sense to me. For example, if drink…

Well, the most-touted argument that I experience is, in a nutshell, that the danger of marijuana that people care about is the danger to others (driving impairment).

Nobody seems to care that alcohol is legal.

Honestly, though, I don't encounter any die-hard anti-marijuana people anymore. Most people don't care. I don't, either. My father says he doesn't, but says he'll vote against it anyway. Go figure.

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#187

Post by mod »

ecdavis wrote: post #180
mod wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's my estimate, as a non-user, that someone would drive much better under the influence of marijuana than alcohol, especially at the extremes. It's also my estimate that many drivers at .08 BAC or under the influence of marijuana are far superior drivers than some other drivers who are 100% sober. So why isn't the line drawn based on driving ability or driving performance rather than mental state? I can see some ob…

Driving under the influence is dangerous because it affects your judgement and your reaction times - much like driving while tired. The danger is not as present in familiar, safe conditions, but when something unexpected happens that puts you in a potentially dangerous situation. If you are driving under the influence your decision-making is impaired and you are more likely to make the wrong decision and be involved…

Okay, so rephrase my post to this:

I'm sure there's some segment of the population (A) that is so bad at reacting to dangerous situations that the people who are best at it (B) still outperform (A), despite (B) being under the influence.

You just shifted "driving" to "reacting to dangerous situations." The point holds.

Reckless / careless driving is a seldom-issued traffic violation, probably often in conjunction with DUI. It does not cover "the old man who can't pass a sobriety test when sober."

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#188

Post by imgabe »

mycroft-holmes wrote: post #85
ska wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone, regardless of their own take on the issues, would argue that current drug policy in the U.S. is internally consistent.

True. I wasn't necessarily trying to imply that anybody does. It was more to illustrate that we live in one of those countries now. In most of the US, you could get thrown into jail but it's fine as long as you're where all the politicians are.

Unless you mean local DC politicians, that doesn't make sense. The Congressmen/women are the ones who are trying to keep it illegal in DC. Pot legalization in DC has nothing to do with it being where "the politicians" are.

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#189

Post by mod »

nedwin wrote: post #177
mod wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's plenty of roadblocks in the US. It's often argued they violate the constitution--that police are stopping every car for no reason. Police get around that by calling it a "safety check." There's plenty of videos about how to "beat" them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLmKl60VrWM You can see from this video that the cops are clearly violating rights, and someone who knows what their rights are can stand up fo…

I've done a fair bit of driving (mostly in California) and never been through a roadblock. I've also never seen any booze busses or similar. I've seen those videos too - are you saying it's unconstitutional to stop drivers to do a breathalyser?

I'm not saying it is or isn't, I'm saying it's argued that it is.

It's my personal belief that it's a rights violation to stop anyone without a reason if you intend to arrest them if they meet some criteria.

In particular, I believe it would be a major rights violation to force everyone to do a breathalyzer at a dui checkpoint. Fortunately, they're not that extreme yet--the have to smell alcohol or suspect impairment afaik.

I've been stopped in approximately 8 DUI checkpoints in my ~15 years of driving. I drive significantly less miles per year than the national average here in America, if that counts for anything.

Re: Marijuana may be even safer than previously thought, researchers say

#190

Post by forgotpasswd3x »

mod wrote: post #174
ufmace wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm American, and I think it's neither. It's more that in almost all of the country, the alternatives to drinking and driving work so badly that it's a better option, even with the risks. I think we're positively pathological about it in a way - we're all about punishment and stricter penalties, but nobody cares about making the alternatives suck less. I drink pretty frequently, and I go to a lot of effort to never d…

As an American, I don't drive drunk, and I don't find it painful. Drink somewhere close to home, call a cab. If I can get drunk at a bar, which will costs me $50+, I can certainly afford a $5-10 cab ride. That said, I've heard that in Japan, it's the bar's responsibility to get you home safely. They take it very seriously, but you pay extra at the club to account for it.

Most of America doesn't have cab service available though, however things like Uber and Lyft are changing that.
Post reply on HN