71–80 of 285 posts
Some of the comments are assuming that all those who smoke pot are irresponsible or unable to do a job if they do smoke pot (this includes people who may only smoke at weekends/parties btw)
Some of the smartest people I have worked with smoked pot daily and before work. one is a head of engineering at netflix, another a head of IT at a big firm... some of the highest performers I have ever worked with, and pot was a daily for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a drug is a drug, my dear friend Surely then, there’s no difference between ibuprofen and fentanyl. After all, a drug is a drug.
yeap, that is why they specifically say: > Ibuprofen can cause blurred vision, drowsiness, and dizziness. Do not drive or operate heavy machinery until you know how ibuprofen affects you
As marijuana becomes increasingly legalized, I'm not sure why any company would continue to test for it, other than maybe using saliva tests to make sure workers aren't getting high on the job.
From a safety point of view, it’s difficult to test for marijuana intoxication. There’s a simple test any employer could do to test whether their forklift driver is drunk right now. The best a marijuana simple marijuana test can do is whether you’ve had it in the past few days.
Some of the comments are assuming that all those who smoke pot are irresponsible or unable to do a job if they do smoke pot (this includes people who may only smoke at weekends/parties btw)
We don't regulate alcohol use, and it's quite a lot more destructive for some. I don't get the specific puritanism for pot. Edit: Regulate as in drug testing for past use in an employment context, like what the story is talking about.
And I don't know if companies do it but I know that monitoring Gamma GT levels of suspected alcoholics is a thing. It is a problem for those who have naturally elevated levels btw.
What is unfortunate is that we don't have a good test for cannabis-related impairment. It is quite reliable for alcohol BAC is easy to test and correlates with impairment, but for cannabis, you don't really know if a person is completely stoned or if he has sobered up.
But yeah, cannabis use is less tolerated than alcohol use, cultural reasons I guess. Plus, it is really difficult to control alcohol since pretty much anyone can turn staple food into alcohol at home.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True. Once things become 'cultural facts' they're hard to change. Another is explaining remote work to older generations, a lot of them just can't equate it to 'real work'
One more is explaining age discrimination to youngsters. Especially over the damn zoom time video since they don’t show up for work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We don't regulate alcohol use, and it's quite a lot more destructive for some. I don't get the specific puritanism for pot. Edit: Regulate as in drug testing for past use in an employment context, like what the story is talking about.
Breathalyzers tests are a thing you know. And I don't know if companies do it but I know that monitoring Gamma GT levels of suspected alcoholics is a thing. It is a problem for those who have naturally elevated levels btw. What is unfortunate is that we don't have a good test for cannabis-related impairment. It is quite reliable for alcohol BAC is easy to test and correlates with impairment, but for cannabis, you don…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True. But some part of that propaganda is from pot smokers themselves. Some enjoy the image of the laid-back happy carefree pothead. Their cult leaders (used to be) Cheech and Chong. Maybe they've just bought in to someone elses' worldview. But I don't think so.
There are a lot more people that do or have smoked pot, than those who base their identity on it. The cults were always a minority. It's like the difference between a commuter on bike here in the Netherlands (more than 30% of all trips) vs the handful of cyclists in spandex with some fragile unsafe bike wanking about how light their bike is. One is a cult, where it becomes part of someone's identity, one is just pers…
I’m also willing to bet that Cheech & Chong et al. are manifestations of a similarly forced meme, with many industries funding the various ”lazy brainless stoners”.
The exact same pattern can be found from nicotine vapes (the entire ”vape nation” annoyance meme was definitely a graft), and probably a lot of other things.
The point seems to be to control people socially by associating their habits with annoying qualities and fictional negative outcomes, superficially supported by anecdotes represented as scientific truth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From a safety point of view, it’s difficult to test for marijuana intoxication. There’s a simple test any employer could do to test whether their forklift driver is drunk right now. The best a marijuana simple marijuana test can do is whether you’ve had it in the past few days.
You make a decent point. This is why I mentioned a saliva test, but in truth I'm not sure how effective it is. Anecdotally, I can tell you I once smoked at night before bed and passed a saliva test the next morning.
BAC is a well understood thing to measure, but marijuana testing seems pretty unreliable to me. I’ve read conflicting reports about how strongly TCH found on a saliva swap correlates to actual intoxication, and I don’t believe there’s been much scientific investigation done to determine what levels of intoxication are safe for what activities. As the primary customers of these products are law enforcement, and private sector “rules enforcement”, I’ll remain skeptical of them until somebody manages to convince me otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Maybe” alcohol has health consequences? Like 95,000 deaths per year?
Absolutely, i more made reference to how when somebody mention health impact of weed somebody else say "whatabout alcohol unhealthiness" as though it is relevant.
I also believe such a paradigm shift would largely eradicate domestic violence.