291–300 of 330 posts
"Cannabis Use Disorder", not "Cannabis use". The appropriate title is "Cannabis Use Disorder and Subsequent Risk of Psychotic and Nonpsychotic Unipolar Depression and Bipolar Disorder".
Have you ever met someone with schizophrenia? I would never engage in any activity that increases the likelihood of a permanent life ruining mental illness!
Source: my own family.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
there's tons of self-guided resources online that are amazing at helping with mental illness that don't require you to submit to some person or organization that could report you. we need to stop seeing "talking to a therapist" as the only way to define getting mentally healthy.
Care to share a few?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For cars, it’s actually even more cartoonish than that. Read The Power Broker; auto-centric urban planning is basically entirely the result of Robert Moses’ insane power and influence (in the same way that the reason everyone has smartphones is basically solely because of Steve Jobs).
This is exactly what I’m talking about. That is too cartoonish to be real. I’m not denying that whichever person lobbied or propagandized in whatever way, but it is extremely unlikely to have been the main cause. A more plausible explanation is that there is an emergent phenomenon where the use of cars drastically reduced the degree of coordination required to develop usable residential property. People are generally…
Robert Moses was so influential in reshaping the urban fabric of the US to prioritize cars that everything else is basically a footnote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m continuously, fascinated by how many commentators on HN are actually having a background in psychiatry and psychology. I took one or two psych classes in college, but I never got the feeling there was any overlap with tech really at all. probably things have changed now but—-This likely sounds dismissive of psychologist and psychiatrist with regards to technology and I’m sorry for that it’s not what I mean. I’m j…
In my case it was pretty straightforward. I wasn't a psychologist or psychiatrist, I was a Hospital Corpsman in the Navy (medical, kind of like a nurse), I went to what is called "C" school for training in psychiatry, and worked on a few different in-patient psych wards. The closest civilian equivalent would be somewhere between a psych tech and a psychiatric nurse. As for how I got into that - I sort of fell into it…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a few issues with what you're saying. 1. Weed has a mostly benign image right now. It has good PR. 2. It's much harder to realize that you're addicted to weed - unlike alcohol. Alcohol addiction is obvious to people around you as well. Not weed. Many weed addicts do not have the self awareness. 3. Weed can be significantly cheaper than alcohol per session - thus consuming more is economical for many. A few…
Alcohol addiction is not immediately obvious for many people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Obviously this is not a real argument against what you said, but the same thing happened with smoking. They showed the link between smoking and cancer with a mountain of empirical evidence, including tests on mice. https://www.mskcc.org/news/how-do-cigarettes-cause-cancer > Cannabis is federally illegal in the United States Nobody cares anymore. > I'd highly advise you to consider only the known benefits of using c…
> Nobody cares anymore. This really depends on the context. Note the various news articles currently going around that highlight the increased scrutiny Musk faced when he smoked weed publicly on a podcast. It’s still federally illegal and that can still come with very real consequences.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Federal drug war was architected by specific men with an agenda effecting specific laws that cracked down severely on drug use. Not all popular opinion was pro drug-use, but the public weren't writing laws and pushing the agenda, and there wasn't broad popular support for mass long-tern incarceration of drug users. Nixon was one of the architects along with his cabinet, you can read their internal discussions - t…
> mass long-tern incarceration of drug users This is different from the ban overall, which is what the GP post was discussing. I don't dispute that sentencing lengths for a crime could be or were determined by specific individuals. I dispute that the ban broadly can be attributed to this, and that, by implication, the public opinion at the time was caused by some sort of propaganda brainwashing. Also just want to add…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not convinced. Look at Singapore. I doubt they would care what the US does. Anyway, after the US legalizes everything for “freedom”, I’m not sure that many countries will follow suit.
You're wrong about that. Every non-theocratic/ hyper-conservative country will legalize it sooner or later
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Untrue. A minority of people are opposed to abusing substances that cause a loss of control, which is why alcohol is the most popular psychoactive drug.
The majority of people used to be against marijuana, but there is a time delay in opinion changing and law changing (unless you live in a dictatorship and the dictator shares the opinion). I am not personally against marijuana at all, I just like to understand the perspective of people I disagree with.
The war on drugs isn't an abstract topic, and the architects of who promoted and effected it did so out of openly racist and malicious motives which they were recorded as saying. If you actually tried to understand them by listening to them, you'd find that they really were malicious. To truly understand their perspective you'd need to acknowledge when they held malicious and racist perspectives, otherwise you're actually actively working to not understand.