Canada legalises recreational cannabis use • Hacker News Board

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#411

Post by 33degrees » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 10:35 PM UTC

schrectacular wrote: post #324

chx wrote: post #294

I have a very simple world view which, I guess, could be considered a radically liberal one: everyone can do as they please as long as it doesn't tread on the same rights of another person. You want to inject, snort or sniff something? Go ahead! It's your body, after all. Neither I, nor any government should have anything to say about this. Obviously, you should not operate a vehicle while intoxicated and we need to…

Isn't there some friction here with regards to nationalized health care? Society at large will pay for the poor health decisions of individual citizens.

In principle, it’s mostly other consumers of canabis who will pay, via a “sin tax”. That’s already the case with cigarettes and alcohol.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#412

Post by Koshkin » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 10:52 PM UTC

chx wrote: post #294

I have a very simple world view which, I guess, could be considered a radically liberal one: everyone can do as they please as long as it doesn't tread on the same rights of another person. You want to inject, snort or sniff something? Go ahead! It's your body, after all. Neither I, nor any government should have anything to say about this. Obviously, you should not operate a vehicle while intoxicated and we need to…

> you should not

But (what if) there's a correlation...

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#413

Post by Koshkin » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 10:58 PM UTC

_ugfj wrote: post #402

olalonde wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's also typically the libertarian position (e.g. there shouldn't be victimless crimes).

If you mean Ayn Rand style libertarianism I refuse that. I also believe we should have a society that works together and helps the less fortunate.

> we should

This has nothing to do with libertarianism, most likely the opposite.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#414

Post by mmt » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 11:27 PM UTC

GuB-42 wrote: post #234

mmt wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I dont understand this part. The potential for overdose on alcohol is high as well. I think that the point about GHB that most people miss is the concept of therapeutic index, a term borrowed from the medical world (I've also seen it called "safety ratio" in the context of recreational drugs, especially since they're not being used therapeutically). That is, the amount of GHB required to get the desired effect is v…

AFAIK, the biggest problem with GHB is its synergy with alcohol. Most GHB related deaths also involve alcohol. GHB therapeutic index (8) is just slightly lower than alcohol (10). However, being an illegal substance, you don't really know how potent your stuff is. Ketamine is rather high (38). And BTW, THC (cannabis) as a therapeutic index over 9000. LSD and psylocibin (magic mushrooms) are at 1000, which also makes t…

> AFAIK, the biggest problem with GHB is its synergy with alcohol. Most GHB related deaths also involve alcohol.

That's a good point. I had forgotten that base assumption in the club scene, though it was generally much less of an issue in the rave scene, at least during the 90s.

> GHB therapeutic index (8)

Thanks. Do you have a reference for that? How does that number change with two standard drinks on board?

> is just slightly lower than alcohol (10).

One of the other properties of alcohol that could make it more difficult to reach a lethal OD, which I already mentioned, is that a symptom of a toxic does is vomiting, which can help prevent it turning into a lethal dose.

This is somewhat enabled by the tendency to consume it over time (although "binge" drinking does happen, of course). Can the same be said for GHB? Presumably not, given your next comment.

> However, being an illegal substance, you don't really know how potent your stuff is.

I think that's an issue for any illegal drug, but it's, arguably, even an issue for alcohol. How many people look at a label to determine proof/%ABV? They're not likely offered the chance with a mixed drink at a bar.

> Ketamine is rather high (38).

Is that medical or recreational? My understanding (possibly incorrect) is that the recreational dose is generally much higher, or at least less spread out over time, which can significantly affect the ratio. Is there any synergy with alcohol here that affects it?

Reading more about "safety ratio", it seems that even just the use of the 50th percentile may not be appropriate to have informed decisions on the relative danger of recreational drugs that are likely to be mixed. ED99/LD1 seems extreme, but maybe not ED80/LD20.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#415

Post by mmt » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 11:33 PM UTC

digianarchist wrote: post #384

mmt wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I dont understand this part. The potential for overdose on alcohol is high as well. I think that the point about GHB that most people miss is the concept of therapeutic index, a term borrowed from the medical world (I've also seen it called "safety ratio" in the context of recreational drugs, especially since they're not being used therapeutically). That is, the amount of GHB required to get the desired effect is v…

It's hard to kill yourself on GHB. GHB combined with alcohol or another suppressant is very very dangerous though.

That explains the very strong anti-GHB messaging at alcohol-serving establishments, such as clubs.

So, let's assume, for the sake of argument, that we're considering OD risk of recreational drugs, not on their own in a controlled, clinical environment, but, rather, at a club or party, where a sufficient number of people have at least 1 drink already in them and 1 more on the way plus a few cigarettes' worth of nicotine, that we can generalize that to "everyone".

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#416

Post by mmt » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 12:06 AM UTC

gwerbret wrote: post #409

mmt wrote: post #142

One of the topics that hasn't yet been mentioned (which surprises me, especially for HN), which I believe I saw originally when this legalization was still merely being proposed was how it would affect medical/pharmaceutical research. With such national legalization, an entire developed nation (with relatively diverse genetic backgrounds, even) will be open to clinical trials. Besides finally providing ammunition to…

It turns out that cannabis is, and has been, extensively researched for years, in Canada and elsewhere (researchers could apply for special access). Thanks to this work, we know that there is one, exactly one robust, reliable clinical application of a cannabis chemical that stands out: to treat otherwise hard-to-treat childhood epilepsies. The chemical responsible for this is cannabidiol, which is the most abundant n…

> (researchers could apply for special access)

I'm aware of the special access, and I'm even aware that it has resulted in actual pharmaceuticals.

The problem with special access is that it has a huge chilling effect. I suspect only the very most motivated (and funded? or just politically protected?) would attempt it.

What about semi-synthetics? I have to imagine it's easier to experiment with synthesis if there's a robust, commercial market for the raw materials, instead of just the special government hothouse (or however it works in the particular jurisdiction).

> not better than the standard of care

I don't think I'd characterize that as a failure, if it's approximatey as good. Even if it's worse but significantly better than placebo, that doesn't seem like anything approaching a research dead-end.

Besides semi-synthetics, which would be a long and hard road, there's also adjunct therapy, or did those studies actually include using cannabis chemicals in addition to the standard ones?

> very variable and low quality clinical data from multiple trials

Any possibility that this was affected by actual or perceived stigma surrounding the source of the chemical being studied? Participants worrying about failing a drug test? (Does this law address that at all?)

> I think we'll find out in a few years that most of the hype around cannabis is just, well, hype.

That's an easy prediction to make about any hype, and I certainly agree. I just think there's more to learn, even if it confirms the null hypothesis, and this will take the foot off the brake in Canada.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#417

Post by mmt » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 12:09 AM UTC

thanatropism wrote: post #341

mmt wrote: post #142

One of the topics that hasn't yet been mentioned (which surprises me, especially for HN), which I believe I saw originally when this legalization was still merely being proposed was how it would affect medical/pharmaceutical research. With such national legalization, an entire developed nation (with relatively diverse genetic backgrounds, even) will be open to clinical trials. Besides finally providing ammunition to…

The sheer number of miraculous properties currently being attributed to cannabis leaves me skeptic. It went too quickly from "an anti-emetic/anti-nausea to combat side-effects of cancer treatment" to the secret of vitality and longevity.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not ascribing any benefits to it at all.

I'm merely saying that it's under-studied, considering how common it is, due to its legal status and that can now start to change.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#418

Post by JPKab » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 12:40 AM UTC

dmix wrote: post #331

moistoreos wrote: post #318

Canada now has a huge head start in the West for business to develop legitimate markets that will have a strong hold for decades. I wonder how many U.S. businesses will move because of this. We all know where the money will be.

This is a great and underrated point. We were handed a huge economic advantage over the US and other western countries in terms of developing the talent and infrastructure to support weed sales. I know someone involved in the industry in Canada and they flew to Uruguay, the first country to legalise it, to learn from them and create connections. This role will be pioneered by Canada in many ways and it's much differe…

I live in Colorado. We've had fully legal weed for 4 years.

Plus, our govt doesn't restrict sales to govt run stores.

California, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Maryland all beat Canada to this. Hilarious that you seem to be oblivious to this.

BTW, California alone has a higher population than all of Canada.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#419

Post by bitcoinisqueen » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 4:37 AM UTC

philipov wrote: post #346

eumenides1 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Canadian side is relatively developed (vs american side) and an economic engine (tourism, jobs, wines). Your parent commenter's point I believe is that the federal/state/local government has failed the local people in investing and developing a local economy in the area. Both sides have essentially the same resources (the falls), but one side is doing better (economically) than the other.

And the point made by (now) parent is that a preference for less resource exploitation and economic development can be a lifestyle decision, not a failure of governance. Not everyone wants to turn their town into a tourist hub.

There's that word "exploitation".

Another way to phrase it is "utilization".

Some people like chocolate, some like vanilla flavored ice cream instead.

The fact remains that:

- More people have stable/larger incomes on Canada side fue to tourism

- More choices of foods and cuisines to eat

- More recreational and leisure options

- More cashflow and more working capital to invest

- More income diverted into improved sanitation, infrastructure and utilities

If you want "nice park like setting"... then why not just walk up a couple of miles away from the traffic and all that sweet sweet entertainment and good food and have a picnic further up?

There's nothing wrong with developing urban centers for people to live in and enjoy.

Re: Canada legalises recreational cannabis use

#420

Post by bitcoinisqueen » Thu, Jun 21, 2018, 4:43 AM UTC

elif wrote: post #330

schrectacular wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't there some friction here with regards to nationalized health care? Society at large will pay for the poor health decisions of individual citizens.

If cannabis use results in higher health costs. However, the preponderance of research suggests a null hypothesis at worst and a reduction in cancer rates and opiate dependency at best.

Higher health costs matter insofar as the gov't steals at gunpoint your income (via taxation) and redistributes it.

Remove coerced theft (taxes) then the healthcare cost argument is not a problem. In fact, it will be a good thing if people screw up their bodies and die prematurely because it means they will acquire less assets and basically are socializing their future potential into the ones that are not so dumb to ruin their bodies.