Drug prohibition
-
@Rhywden I said hard drugs in a generality. Yes there are exceptions.
-
@pie_flavor said in Drug prohibition:
@Rhywden I said hard drugs in a generality. Yes there are exceptions.
The prevalence of alcohol throughout our society makes any comparison by way of "speed of addiction" pointless due to the sheer ubiquity. It's a fool's errand to try to compare drugs in such a way in order to justify the cognitive dissonance inherent in the war on drugs.
-
@Rhywden you expect things a society does to make sense?
-
@Gribnit I mean, we live in a society, no?
-
@pie_flavor said in Drug prohibition:
@Gribnit I mean, we live in a society, no?
I'm gonna go ahead and sort of cautiously agree on that in a de-facto kind of a way.
-
@Gribnit hey, you and @boomzilla finally have something in common.
-
@Jaloopa said in Drug prohibition:
@HardwareGeek I have proof by contradiction that that's not universal. I took cocaine once, 7 years ago, and have never felt any particular desire to try it again
Same here. I even tried again just in case it was shit the first time around (when you live in Latin America and meet regular people running around with 5g in their pocket …) but still. It's pretty awesome for having sex, I'll give it that, but as a party drug, not even for free.
-
@pie_flavor said in Drug prohibition:
@Rhywden I said hard drugs in a generality. Yes there are exceptions.
Never go full @Gąska
-
@LaoC what, you mean never admit I don't know something? Because for the record I didn't do that.
-
@pie_flavor said in Drug prohibition:
@LaoC what, you mean never admit I don't know something? Because for the record I didn't do that.
For the record, this sentence is not as unambiguous as you think it is
-
The researchers found substance use to be linked to low cognitive functioning, a finding that could be indicative of an underlying common vulnerability. Cannabis use was linked to impairments in working memory and inhibitory control, which is required for self-control. Cannabis use was also linked to deficits in memory recall and perceptual reasoning. Alcohol use was not linked to impairments in these cognitive functions, suggesting cannabis could have more long-term effects than alcohol.
...
Interestingly, Dr. Laviolette's team found that administration of drugs that restore normal PFC function in early adulthood could reverse the effects of adolescent THC exposure.
-
@boomzilla said in Drug prohibition:
suggesting cannabis could have more long-term effects than alcohol.
how much time did this study lasted?
Students were assessed annually for 4 years on alcohol and cannabis use
IOW, they compared short-term effects and extrapolated
Did they, at least, look at long-term effect of alcohol?
from https://americanaddictioncenters.org/alcoholism-treatment/mental-effects
Confession: I manually added the last item
-
@TimeBandit Their definition of “occasional drinker” must be different to mine if they say that blackouts are a consequence.
-
-
@Carnage said in Drug prohibition:
Alcohol withdrawal can be fatal in cases of severe abuse.
Indeed, it is one of the few drugs for which withdrawal can be fatal.
-
-
Ooooooo...an algorithm, you say?
-
@boomzilla said in Drug prohibition:
Ooooooo...an algorithm, you say?
Breaking News!!! Cook County courtrooms remain empty as all suspects are released due to no charges existing in the computer system.
-
@dcon That's one way to reduce crime statistcs in Chicago.
-
-
I thought this was stupid at first, but I think it's actually genius. Every cop in America is going to need one.
-
The researchers estimated that men who were long term cannabis users were 36% more likely to be diagnosed with the potentially fatal cancer than non-cannabis users.
Meh...pretty wishy washy numbers for an observational study. Does California already label marijuana?
-
@boomzilla said in Drug prohibition:
Does California already label marijuana?
Just assume we already labeled it under Prop 65.
-
@dcon I haven't seen Prop 65 labels on, e.g., strawberries or tomatoes at the grocery store, but if you want to grow your own and go to Home Depot to get live plants, they have Prop 65 labels.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Drug prohibition:
Prop 65 labels
Do they have to label the labels if the labels use an ink/color that is known to cause cancer in California?
Filed under: Recursive labelling!
-
@HardwareGeek said in Drug prohibition:
@dcon That's
onethe most common way to reduce crime statistics in Chicago.FTFY
-
In the fourth quarter of 2018, legal marijuana represented only 21% of total consumption in Canada, despite weed becoming lawful on Oct. 17 of that year. Fast-forward to the first quarter of 2020 and cannabis is now a C$2.2 billion ($1.7 billion) retail industry, yet legal consumption is still just 46% of the total, according to data from Statistics Canada.
-
Why is that? Did they set the taxes so high it's a lot more expensive? Or the licensing restrictions so severe that most people can't actually find a shop to buy it in legally?
Normally illegal drugs - even smuggled ones that would otherwise be legal, but imported/grown illegally to avoid tax - are expensive enough (due to the overheads of avoiding law enforcement/losses to enforcement) that there's plenty of space in the market for high taxes. Most people will pay even a bit more for legitimate goods, because you know it's been quality controlled and so on. For example here in the UK we have much higher taxes on tobacco and alcohol than several European countries, but the level of black market cigarettes and Polish vodka is low (around 10-15% of the market from a quick Google - though weirdly still 30% for rolling tobacco).
You do need targeted enforcement to make that happen though - smuggled tobacco was a much bigger problem then,
-
@bobjanova It's probably some combination of retail locations being limited by a license lottery, and the medical marijuana debacle from a few years before recreational legalization
-
@bobjanova said in Drug prohibition:
weirdly still 30% for rolling tobacco
It might depend on the profile of the people using rolling tobacco; it's uncommon enough that such effects start to matter.
-
@boomzilla I'm not convinced it's really a failure, maybe it's just too soon to tell. I mean, the share doubled in a year and a half, so maybe in a couple more years it will be up to
1000%a large majority? I mean, I know that probably proponents (activists, government...) said that everything would magically change in one day, and that by today's standards something is a failure if it is not an immediate success, but on a longer view that still looks like an on-going transition from illegal to legal stuff, so... meh?(total asspull: in addition to what TFA says about prices and shops etc., there may be an difficult-to-compress transition time, in that people who already had well-established dealers circuits might stay with them, because of if nothing else, so the transition might be in part driven by new users? Based on what I saw in high school/uni (yes, I know... ), people tended to consume rather intensively for a few years, and much less or not at all as they settled into adult life, so maybe the proportion of legal buyers largely reflects "newcomers" while "old timers" still go illegal and are slowly being phased out...)
-
@remi said in Drug prohibition:
I'm not convinced it's really a failure, maybe it's just too soon to tell.
Yeah, I have no idea. Just interesting to watch it. But definitely not the "tax revenue utopia" that proponents claimed (not that I think anyone is very surprised).
-
-
@Jaloopa said in Drug prohibition:
@UndergroundCode said in Drug prohibition:
People going to jail, doing all sorts of things to avoid the police to avoid going to jail, dealing with sketchy dealers and people who know they have to avoid the police, dealing with unknown quality and purity. People who need treatment being afraid to get it, or getting the wrong treatment, because they're afraid of going to jail and getting a criminal record.
Also stealing to support a habit, which could be hugely reduced by providing drugs on prescription to addicts
Yes, for a good documentary on the subject, watch Claws.
-
@boomzilla Did they compare it with smokers in general? I bet it's the smoking that lowers the fertility not THC.
-
@dangeRuss The tobacco smokers couldn't participate because they were too busy with their kids
-
@dangeRuss I only RTFA. But it wouldn't surprise me even a little bit that we start finding out that smoking marijuana has many of the same risks as tobacco.
-
@hungrier said in Drug prohibition:
@dangeRuss The tobacco smokers couldn't participate because they were too busy with their kids
I can imagine. Don't know how they get anything done needing to step out for a smoke break every 2 minutes.
-
@boomzilla said in Drug prohibition:
The researchers estimated that men who were long term cannabis users were 36% more likely to be diagnosed with the potentially fatal cancer than non-cannabis users.
Meh...pretty wishy washy numbers for an observational study. Does California already label marijuana?
Suck down enough PAH from any source, and unless you've got a protective adaptation like schizophrenia, you'll get you some cancer.
-
@dangeRuss said in Drug prohibition:
@boomzilla Did they compare it with smokers in general? I bet it's the smoking that lowers the fertility not THC.
It seems like something you could control for, since you can consume THC without smoking.
-
@error said in Drug prohibition:
@dangeRuss said in Drug prohibition:
@boomzilla Did they compare it with smokers in general? I bet it's the smoking that lowers the fertility not THC.
It seems like something you could control for, since you can consume THC without smoking.
The PAH is cancer risk, the phytoestrogens more likely affect the nuts. Phytoestrogen is probably more present in vapor than smoke, but extractions can avoid it.
-
-
@error said in Drug prohibition:
Also, another way to say
phytoestrogen
isfree steroids
. It's an entertainingly misleading way. But I can't exclude Willy Nelson being, just completely jacked.
-
@Gribnit said in Drug prohibition:
Also, another way to say phytoestrogen is free steroids. It's an entertainingly misleading way. But I can't exclude Willy Nelson being, just completely jacked.
Free steroids don't have that effect, otherwise you'd have to pay for em
-
Anyone have this on their bingo card?
-
@boomzilla said in Drug prohibition:
Anyone have this on their bingo card?
Old news. My dog who passed away last year was (in)famous for finding them. I spent probably around $2000 in vet bills (starting in 2014) before I recognized what was happening. (it was still scary, but I knew how to handle it - if he had ingested a higher quantity and acted differently, I would have quickly made (another) emergency vet visit)
-
@boomzilla said in Drug prohibition:
@remi said in Drug prohibition:
I'm not convinced it's really a failure, maybe it's just too soon to tell.
Yeah, I have no idea. Just interesting to watch it. But definitely not the "tax revenue utopia" that proponents claimed (not that I think anyone is very surprised).
There should be a different word for taxes on a product that more than double the price of what the product would cost without taxes.
If the taxes on something like this are too high, such that the price is higher than the black market price, you're not going to get the benefits of deflating organized crime, it might as well continue to be illegal.
-
Very interesting.
-
Once OMB signs off, the DEA will take public comment on the plan to move marijuana from its current classification as a Schedule I drug, alongside heroin and LSD. It moves pot to Schedule III, alongside ketamine and some anabolic steroids, following a recommendation from the federal Health and Human Services Department.
-
@boomzilla about fucking time! Almost every state had some flavor of pot-permission laws, and it's a crying shame that marijuana remained on the "there is no possible medical benefit" list in the DEA. I'd be interested in watching a documentary of why it remained Schedule I for so long. Was some specific leader an anti-pot person? Was it bureaucratic inertia? DEA putting pressure on the FDA so it could keep doing civil forfeiture?