Age of Marijuana Use and Psychosis

[Tgo01]

But still just one person, right? Do you have the toxicology report from his autopsy?

I don't have the report like in my hands, no, but according to the report they only found marijuana in his system. Also his friends said he started acting crazy after he ate the two marijuana cookies.

How does this compare to previous years?

Well according to the link I posted earlier the number of cases of children being taken to the hospital for marijuana in 2008 was zero and has slowly risen since then, 2014 being the worst year. There are also some personal accounts in that story from people who thought "Hey, eating a whole THC infused tootsie roll sounds safe" but it turns out he was only supposed to eat an 8th of that.

Were any of them on anything else at the time?

I have no idea. I'm going to go ahead and guess the children under the age of 10 weren't on any heavy doses of pain killers or anything though.

What percentage of the population is 70?

Does it matter? Motor vehicle accidents involving alcohol weren't even 1/100th of a percent in Colorado last year; should we stop trying to get that number closer to zero?

I did, actually. It was one dude. That's what the "wow" was for. One out of millions is an acceptable risk to me.

Except that's a straw man because it wasn't just the "one dude", it was the two dudes I listed plus the 70 people I cited that got sick and those were just the numbers I cited. As you can see from the link I provided a little while ago there are even more cases of people overdosing on marijuana.

[Androidpk]

The kids and edibles thing is the primary reason I think it's dumb and unnessecary for weed to come in candy form. I don't get why it's necessary at all. You want to eat your weed that's fine. Why does it need to come in a cookie? Can anyone give me a reason why you can't just eat a regular cookie after ingesting in pill form or whatever? And don't give me the flavored alcohol thing. It's not analogous.

Should alcohol come in pill form too?

[Warriorbird]

It may shock you but a large number of my students drink underage. Some of them even get alcohol poisoning.

[Jeril]

From time to time I make the claim that everyone is religious, because what it means to be religious is not belief in a Christian God but a division of the world into sacred and profane. Sacred: that at which thou shalt not laugh. Sacred: that which thou shalt not question. I make the objectively mild claim that marijuana should remain illegal, and I am accused of being a Nazi, a closet Nazi, and as bad as a Nazi (or worse) in the same thread. These are objectively unreasonable responses. Where, then, do they come from? Those who trespass the sacred are the worst, by definition.

I laugh at everything.

[Fallen]

For medical use I can definitely see the appeal of pills, but for recreational use, why shouldn't there be good tasting edibles? There are already steps in place to make the packaging resistant to children and the packaging unlike other known food products. You can say it isn't analogous to point to flavored alcohol, but it doesn't make it true. Else everyone would drink non-flavored vodka. Hell, certain types of malt beverages were deemed too appealing for children, so they made it more difficult to buy. Edibles are already far more difficult to buy than alcohol, and recently had even more precautions put into place.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/13/us...tml?fta=y&_r=0

I hate beer, when I was underage and now, but I love me some bitch drinks.

[Latrinsorm]

Let's think about your take a little bit. If this were a position you held, you'd already claim it was accurate. When you go to seek out information for a particular goal, you're doing it wrong, to be honest.

I sought out information in response to people raising justified criticisms of the information I had already obtained, as the OP in this thread demonstrates. Should I have just ignored them? Or accepted them without question? Neither sounds very scientific to me. You find it very easy to criticize what I would hypothetically do, and yet all my claims are backed with quotes and citations. You have yet to even detail what Dr. Jensen said, only that it makes me wrong somehow about everything.

I did a bunch of reading. You were somewhat right. I changed my take on the matter. When do we get to the point where you actually read anything but stuff that directly supports your theory? It'll never happen.

The problem isn't that I don't read your (general) information, the problem is that I read all of it. For example, Fallen links a source that says in part that drug courts are good, but in other parts it says they are bad. I politely point out the latter, and I'm accused of not reading his source. Fallen links a source that says CBD has acceptable side effects during use. I politely point out that the source makes only an offhand comment about withdrawal, and I'm accused of not reading his source. I quote your own sources back to you, and I'm accused of not reading them. How does that make sense?

It doesn't take us, even if it did, from the sociological hell that you and your like unleash on American society. I'm glad that in this small regard you're losing.

You can just call me a Nazi too. Get it over with.

It would be amazing if some of you redirected this level of energy and aimed it at the drug companies that pump chemicals into you and your loved ones. They give disclaimers, alright. It takes 2 minutes for them to get through the 'most common' ones on TV ads. There is a giant pamphlet on each one and their toxic effects on the body. Pop another Tylenol for your headache like it's a tic-tac and don't worry about the cumulative effect on your liver, then you can get back to typing again how 1/5 of a cannabis medible is going to kill someone.

Marijuana is made of chemicals, just like tobacco, just like Xanax, just like orange juice. "Chemicals vs. natural" is a very tantalizing distinction, but it is a totally false one. I am glad your personal experience has seen people become healthy through non traditional means. That does not indicate that those means had a causal impact. I have the testimony of a hundred thousand people, rigorously controlled and recorded. You have your own. Why shouldn't I go with the hundred thousand? How does this make me the person thinking in a tiny box, or you the person relying on "real science"?

I laugh at everything.

Psychosis.

You keep bringing up alcohol but do you think alcohol laws were what they are today right at the onset? I think the current .08% blood content was as recent as 1992 or 1998, well past the repeal of prohibition.

I researched this when Thondalar brought it up, and the history really is quite interesting. The Breathalyzer as we understand it wasn't invented until 1954. Congress forced states to reduce their acceptable BAC levels from .15 to .10 in the 80s (probably 1982), drunk driving went down for about ten years, then stayed constant. Congress forced states to reduce their levels from .10 to .08 in 2000, drunk driving went down for about ten years, and is now leveling off. Congress is rumbling about reducing the limit to .05, when it happens drunk driving will go down again.

Bottom line: laws change, and laws work.

[Wrathbringer]

I sought out information in response to people raising justified criticisms of the information I had already obtained, as the OP in this thread demonstrates. Should I have just ignored them? Or accepted them without question? Neither sounds very scientific to me. You find it very easy to criticize what I would hypothetically do, and yet all my claims are backed with quotes and citations. You have yet to even detail what Dr. Jensen said, only that it makes me wrong somehow about everything.The problem isn't that I don't read your (general) information, the problem is that I read all of it. For example, Fallen links a source that says in part that drug courts are good, but in other parts it says they are bad. I politely point out the latter, and I'm accused of not reading his source. Fallen links a source that says CBD has acceptable side effects during use. I politely point out that the source makes only an offhand comment about withdrawal, and I'm accused of not reading his source. I quote your own sources back to you, and I'm accused of not reading them. How does that make sense?You can just call me a Nazi too. Get it over with. Marijuana is made of chemicals, just like tobacco, just like Xanax, just like orange juice. "Chemicals vs. natural" is a very tantalizing distinction, but it is a totally false one. I am glad your personal experience has seen people become healthy through non traditional means. That does not indicate that those means had a causal impact. I have the testimony of a hundred thousand people, rigorously controlled and recorded. You have your own. Why shouldn't I go with the hundred thousand? How does this make me the person thinking in a tiny box, or you the person relying on "real science"?Psychosis.I researched this when Thondalar brought it up, and the history really is quite interesting. The Breathalyzer as we understand it wasn't invented until 1954. Congress forced states to reduce their acceptable BAC levels from .15 to .10 in the 80s (probably 1982), drunk driving went down for about ten years, then stayed constant. Congress forced states to reduce their levels from .10 to .08 in 2000, drunk driving went down for about ten years, and is now leveling off. Congress is rumbling about reducing the limit to .05, when it happens drunk driving will go down again.

Bottom line: laws change, and laws work.

Your genius is wasted here.

[leifastagsweed]

Marijuana is made of chemicals, just like tobacco, just like Xanax, just like orange juice. "Chemicals vs. natural" is a very tantalizing distinction, but it is a totally false one. I am glad your personal experience has seen people become healthy through non traditional means. That does not indicate that those means had a causal impact. I have the testimony of a hundred thousand people, rigorously controlled and recorded. You have your own. Why shouldn't I go with the hundred thousand? How does this make me the person thinking in a tiny box, or you the person relying on "real science"?

Gotta call you on this one, mister details! 'Made of' is absolutely incorrect and you know that, silly. You probably meant 'treated with.' I am not kidding myself on that, either. Pesticides and chemicals are errywhere.

My personal experience does actually include a bit more than just 'I smoke' or 'I purchase legally.' For example, I have seen first hand mass grow operations with a personal tour from the owner. From observation, participation, and education of hydroponics, I have at least a basic understanding of the process. I am looking into traveling south for some hands-on experiential learning to make oil extractions. I am really interested in making time for this educational opportunity where I would be put to work and paid and learn from people who have done this for 70 years. I could go on and on and bore you with more experiences I've had with other natural modalities that have led me to this belief system, but tl;dr is real and I'll try to stay on topic. If you ever want to chat about these, though, you can messenger me and I am happy to discuss further! Otherwise, reasons.

I have already acquiesced and shared my belief that for ALL OF US, it's OUR OWN RESPONSIBILITY to consider what we put in our bodies. Physical, mental, emotional, spiritual health are all part of the holistic approach that I subscribe to. It's MY body so this is my belief system and I am living thusly. Yours is yours and you live it thusly, with no obstruction from me. I respect your choice to live it the way you want and I believe our government should, as well. I respect a healthy debate and feel no animosity that your belief system differs from mine.

Ultimately, I do believe that most of us, myself included, are our own worst enemies when it comes to choices we make for our own bodies.

[waywardgs]

He is talking about matter when he says all that stuff is made of chemicals. Molecules. He's also right about that.

[leifastagsweed]

He is talking about matter when he says all that stuff is made of chemicals. Molecules. He's also right about that.

AHAHAHA. Okay. I GIVE UP HERE.