50+% of states have enacted some kind of legislation that legalizes or decriminalizes marijuana, many of them using purported medical benefits as justification
@thatguyoverthere The twisted pretzel of controlled substances having no medicinal value. >You can't have this. It has no medicinal value and high abuse and harm potential. "Okay, we'd like to test a few things because there's a ton of anecdotal reports of X and we'd like to set the record straight and either prevent harm (e.g. discourage someone doing a 'cancer therapy' that demonstrably doesn't work) or possibly show medicinal benefit so that we can help reduce harm." >Sorry, as an AI language model I am programmed to tell you this has no medicinal value and high abuse and harm potential and you cannot run tests on this. :pika:
I do believe there's medicinal use for it. I don't believe the average user understands the risks and dosage. When government policy is explicitly "hold position and disregard new findings and arguments", it's not surprising that people think it's harmless as a sort of reactionary belief. Even if the only thing weed did was make people not care as much about feeling like garbage with chronic pain (I think there's quite a bit more stuff than that, but for argument sake), that's significantly better than long-term opiate usage.
@BowsacNoodle meanwhile substances dreamed up in a lab 6 months ago are going to save your life, and any hesitance to accept this as science is akin to killing grandma and being a racist at the same time.
@Xenophon@BowsacNoodle I don't agree. The people who want to do coke still do it. I've literally never met anyone that said "Man if cocaine was legal...". The biggest difference is now they might get some other shit mixed in.
It's also totally acceptable for people to be on all kinds of mood altering substances just so long as they come from a doctor with a script.
I don't know what medical benefits are real and which ones are bunk as far as what people say weed can do. I also think it's pretty harmless for most adults. Alcohol has worse effects on the body and the brain, but it's acceptable to get absolutely shitty just so long as you don't drive. Alcohol is one of the only drugs you can't just quit without risking your life if you have used it long enough.
Marijuana probably doesn't "cure" anything, but I believe it helps with certain kinds of pain, and it makes sense that it can help terminal patients regain an appetite.
Kids and teens shouldn't consume the weed IMO (there is evidence that it might slow or alter development), but adults are their own people and should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as that doesn't mean hurting anyone else.
@Xenophon@thatguyoverthere It still is, as far as I'm aware. It has strong local analgesic effects. I'm hardly a libertarian on drugs, but I am a pragmatist. The 90s and early 00s fear of police randomly ruining an innocent kid over a single joint is propaganda, as is the totally harmless cancer-curing anti-aging superpower-mega-plant created by God specifically to fix all the worlds problems dudeweedLMAO POV. Far better to not use it if you don't need it, but that goes for all psychoactives. I am 100% certain of the anxiolytic benefits of CBD from mechanistic perspective and deductive reasoning, although I don't like the recent status as meme chemical de jure.
I think we are on the same page. There are plenty of other examples as well of things that work and have no drawback but are also illegal. I dont think we should stop people from helping their bodies. I also dont want a bunch of stoners running around claiming >muh miracle leaf As a justification for their addiction
@BroDrillard@Xenophon@BowsacNoodle that's not marijuana, and clearly the legal status hasn't had the intended effect. Opioid addiction is much worse than any addiction to marijuana will ever be. Most of shit causing the problems in cities is actually black market (and sometimes perfectly legal) pharmaceuticals like fentanyl and xanax.
Also, you can make the behaviors that harm others illegal without making the behaviors that *sometimes* lead to them illegal also. You can say for example it's illegal to steal. If a person is addicted to something and then steals, punish them for stealing. One of the problems some cities are facing is that they've stopped with equal application of the law.
I feel the same way about "hate" crimes being somehow more egregious. It's bad to hit someone, but hit them and call them a fag and you could be looking at serious time.
>adults are their own people and should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as that doesn't mean hurting anyone else.
The problem with this is that it's not without externalities. Some/many become addicts and a burden on society. Just look at what goes on in pretty much every major US city.
@thatguyoverthere@Xenophon There's newer evidence that it does increase schizophrenia and other psychotic illnesses. It appears it's more like a multiplier on one's existing susceptibility than a flat out inducer. The unfortunate complication is that those with a natural draw to seek out and use weed frequently at a young age possibly (as in, it appears but is uncertain) have a higher than average risk factor for issues.
> There's newer evidence that it does increase schizophrenia and other psychotic illnesses
I am aware, but I remain skeptical. For one thing I think it's very hard to believe that when the laws were harder there weren't more people that smoked weed and just lied and said they didn't. Now that it's more accepted it makes sense there might be more people developing these conditions that admittedly smoke weed. The legal status may also have led people who were on the fence about it to try it and some of them may go on to develop psychotic illnesses (with or without the herbs). With that said, I do also think that developing brains could be altered in subtle ways when using marijuana so whether it is legal or not, I still think people under the age of 25 or so probably should not use it.
@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon This is where I see marijuana as a potential benefit. It is actually a substitute drug for opiate addiction. It doesn't scratch the same itch, so I'm told, but those who are addicted to opiates often settle for and stay users of marijuana if it's available. I go back to my prior statement here of "don't take psychoactives you don't need", but I'd much rather see a person doze off in the afternoon eating Doritos than dead in a ditch from a fent OD. Better to be in control of oneself, but far better to abuse the objectively less lethal option.
I also don't particularly have an issue with adults using it recreationally for home use or for random person hitting a joint at a concert. I'd prefer if people knew the potential risks of regular use though, and the meme about weed being stronger today is actually true. "Ditch weed" has a higher level of CBD and other antipsychotic tertiary compounds in it compared to hydroponic fancy stuff people grow from cloned specialty strains.
@BowsacNoodle@BroDrillard@Xenophon yeah I will add on that the reason people have sought higher and higher concentrations is at least partially because moving lower concentrations in a black market is higher risk. The same thing happened in the prohibition era with spirits vs beer.
Rather than seeing a hyper commercialized legal marijuana, I would prefer a world where everyone who wants to use it can grow a few plants in their garden. The plant does have some pretty amazing qualities (outside of just getting you high), and if we selected plants that checked more boxes than just high thc content some of those qualities could be enjoyed by more people.
@thatguyoverthere@Xenophon I wouldn't be surprised. This is the paradox created by the weird scheduling laws and cultural schizophrenic view of marijuana (pun intended) where it's treated as this thing that is normal and done by a ton of people but also dangerous and not to be touched. I do think the availability and increased potency, particularly the tilted concentrations towards higher THC and lower CBD, are contributing factors. CBD has a substantially longer half-life than THC, and it directly mitigates the psychotic effects. This is one of the reasons the "smoke weed errday" crowd can handle a ton more than the once a year guy. You don't know if you're getting the equivalent of high proof liquor or a light beer when you use random marijuana. Of course the average person is going to be fine either way with whichever option it is, but it is an issue.
@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon This I fully agree with. I have no issues with people growing or responsibly using "glass of wine" type weed. But by and large, I am disinterested in it for myself because I have too much going on and need to be clear-headed whenever possible.
@BowsacNoodle@Xenophon I think it could be argued that opium was less harmful than heroin, and the same is true of marijuana, especially when you start getting into extracts instead of whole plant use which are very popular these days. The potency can get very high (>90%) which I think can lead to more serious addiction issues that just aren't possible for someone using flowers of a natural strain grown using more traditional methods.
@BowsacNoodle@BroDrillard@Xenophon I am glad people perceive an improvement in their lives using aderall. I think it's weird to pretend that prescriptions are automatically safe though. Most pharmaceutical drugs seem to have more side effects than intended ones.
Before it was made illegal, cocaine was used to increase productivity. I used to have a friend that did real estate for a in the early 2000s. Turned out that the whole office basically operated on cocaine.
@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon Literally yes. You can get actual methamphetamine prescriptions. There is a large difference between “Jim bob’s garage meth” and pharmaceutical grade, in addition to the dosages which are small and controlled. Adderall isn’t meth, but it’s still not fair to compare insulfination of some eyeballed amount of unknown purity and unknown contaminates taken out of a lightbulb for fun to a prescribed medicine.
@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon The whole of global finance operates on adderall and booze, and cocaine for the higher up players. As for cocaine in general, the reason medical residents have to work 80 hours is because one of the founders of John's Hopkins was a habitual coke user and found no problems with alertness or focus going 80 hours a week. Big think 🤔... >William Stewart Halsted developed a novel residency training program at Johns Hopkins Hospital that, with some modifications, became the model for surgical and medical residency training in North America. While performing anesthesia research early in his career, Halsted became addicted to cocaine and morphine.
@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon Adderall's safety is fairly well documented due to its length of use. Provided dosage stays as low as necessary and the medication isn't abused, it's not much worse than a coffee habit for the heart and appears similarly for the brain. But again, my prior statement on unnecessary psychoactives still holds.
@BowsacNoodle@BroDrillard@Xenophon yeah I didn't mean to suggest that adderall side effects specifically were unsafe, just that generally speaking saying it's a prescription doesn't really do much to quiet my concerns on safety or efficacy for most pharmaceuticals.
There's a peptide called bpc. it's amazing. It would cure most peoples ligament and tendon issues in a matter of weeks. life long chronic issues cured seemingly overnight.
It's illegal and WADA banned it, even though they state in their own words "there is no evidence it works." Why ban somethin that doesn't work? 🙄
@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon Understood. I feel the same TBH. Simple compounds that came about during the golden age of chemistry are generally good to look at, as they have the track record of usage and safety. I wouldn't be surprised if there's latent issues with adderall, but amphetamines have been so well studied by military scientists globally, where the ethical constraints of normal use aren't really a huge concern. I wasn't too keen on trusting pharmaceutical companies before COVID, and today I look at them and laugh. Half the new amazing medicines advertised during Dick Wolf police procedurals are pulled from the market within a decade for major issues.
@Frondeur@thatguyoverthere@BroDrillard@Xenophon IDK. I'll have to look into it. Autism and trooning out have a high comorbidity, and autism and ADHD do as well. Almost like autism is the new catch all for "something is up but we don't totally know what?" and that lends itself towards weird Frankensteinian experimentation and biohacking 🙄. Normal users of it shouldn't be "skinny" unless they already were. Unless you're talking about 🍟 gang definition of skinny. When I took it years ago, I only lost a few pounds. I was meticulous about not abusing it though, because I didn't want to be some weird meth guy stealing speaker wire for scrap money.
@Xenophon@BroDrillard@thatguyoverthere Looks interesting. I have a feeling it's used with anabolic cycles based on the blood flow and connective tissue recovery claims. Sometimes they ban that type of stuff even if there's plenty of normal use cases. Just my gut instincts though.
>As of January 1, 2022, the experimental peptide BPC-157 is prohibited under the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List.
Looks like regular people got fucked out of a potentially helpful medication because of muh sports. Playing baseball or soccer with friends in the local league is fine, but fuck professional sports, seriously.