Weed

ch2008

robby^5 wrote: »

No no actually you're just assuming I haven't already read up about it, which I have... and the results of which were in fact laughable.

It's all about correlation.

Well done, thats a considered response. I agree.

Do people with psychosis develop drug problems easier than those without OR do people who take drugs develop pshychosis easier. Its very hard to prove either way , but I wouldn't say either argument is laughable. I dont work in the field nor have I read any medical research on the issue but those that I know who work in the sector believe that marijuana is a cause of psychosis. just sayin is all.

p.s. Maybe the thread should have been entitled "post here if your pro-marijuana"

CianRyan

ch2008 wrote: »

There is quite a substantial body of research that links Marijuana use with the development of psychosis.

Holland...
That's all i want to say.


What a kick ass country, great artists, great architecture, making some pretty ape shít cars...
All thanks to smoking loads of weed!!*



























*I know smoking loads of weed won't make you good at the thing's I've listed. If the talent is already there though, it make let your imagination run wild and you get some pretty sweet stuff. I have an A2 pad full of normal art and another full of stoned art.

galwayrush

Seriously, i let my wife weed the garden.

GrumPy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B91wki_jQf0

:pac:

Odysseus

My name is URL wrote: »

I'm sure it affects people that have underlying issues, but I doubt it causes it.

The same could be said for alcohol or eating too much sugar

Its often a case of chicken and egg, if the subject has no history of psychotic symptoms its very difficut to be 100% either way on it. Personally I don't care if people smoke it or not, however, it can be a very insidious drug and I seen some people struggle more in attempting stop it than with heroin. Then again some people use it with no problems and stop when they want.

Sofiztikated

My name is URL wrote: »

I'm sure it affects people that have underlying issues, but I doubt it causes it.

The same could be said for alcohol or eating too much sugar

If the weed naysayers actually read the research they so feverently throw up at every occasion, they'd see this.

If there is an underlying mental issue, THC can exacerbate it, but it is not known to cause it.

Like anything i choose to do,i do my research,and then make an informed decision on whether i want to do it or not.

robby^5

ch2008 wrote: »

Well done, thats a considered response. I agree.

Do people with psychosis develop drug problems easier than those without OR do people who take drugs develop pshychosis easier. Its very hard to prove either way , but I wouldn't say either argument is laughable. I dont work in the field nor have I read any medical research on the issue but those that I know who work in the sector believe that marijuana is a cause of psychosis. just sayin is all.

p.s. Maybe the thread should have been entitled "post here if your pro-marijuana"

I find the majority of these studies IN ANY FIELD laughable, because people take the results so seriously.

If marijuana is a cause of psychosis then there would most definitely have to be a predisposition in the subject to develop psychosis, otherwise we would have noticed a staggering trend what with the millions of cannabis users in the world.

The people you know are wrong or just very bad at what they do, anybody who would take the results of any of these research studies as concrete proof is cognitively impaired.

If a study came out saying Marijuana improved your health I would never use it as argument to use marijuana, because until it's been definitively proven then it means **** all in my eyes. Just so you understand I'm not just bashing these theories because I'm a marijuana user.

Odysseus wrote: »

Its often a case of chicken and egg, if the subject has no history of psychotic symptoms its very difficut to be 100% either way on it. Personally I don't care if people smoke it or not, however, it can be a very insidious drug and I seen some people struggle more in attempting stop it than with heroin. Then again some people use it with no problems and stop when they want.

Well being that marijuana isn't addictive these were obviously very weak-willed people, I know a few myself... they're wasters. People can become dependant on a lot of things, even besides drugs, to their own detriment.

ScumLord

I love weed, I'd smoke it everyday if it was available. Taking breaks when my tolerance gets to high. The smoke in this country is muck though. You can get good weed every now and again which means I don't smoke to regular anymore because I'm done paying for ****.

Just back from the dam though, they had this crazy water hash for €40 a gram two drags and your gone. Even the stuff that was €4 a gram was 100 times better than the soap in this country.

I've no smoke now though. :mad:

Odysseus

Sofiztikated wrote: »

If the weed naysayers actually read the research they so feverently throw up at every occasion, they'd see this.

If there is an underlying mental issue, THC can exacerbate it, but it is not known to cause it.

Like anything i choose to do,i do my research,and then make an informed decision on whether i want to do it or not.

Most doctors, psychiatrists and mental health workers I know disagree with that. It depends on what research you read, you will find research that agrees with both sides of the agrument, like anything else.

InkSlinger67

GrumPy wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B91wki_jQf0

:pac:

I can't tell if this is pro or anti-weed, maybe I should move away from this industrial estate (and all it's lovely fumes) next door

ch2008

robby^5 wrote: »

I find the majority of these studies IN ANY FIELD laughable, because people take the results so seriously.

If marijuana is a cause of psychosis then there would most definitely have to be a predisposition in the subject to develop psychosis, otherwise we would have noticed a staggering trend what with the millions of cannabis users in the world.

The people you know are wrong or just very bad at what they do, anybody who would take the results of any of these research studies as concrete proof is cognitively impaired.

If a study came out saying Marijuana improved your health I would never use it as argument to use marijuana, because until it's been definitively proven then it means **** all in my eyes. Just so you understand I'm not just bashing these theories because I'm a marijuana user.



Well being that marijuana isn't addictive these were obviously very weak-willed people, I know a few myself... they're wasters.

I think weed is making you angry

robby^5

ch2008 wrote: »

I think weed is making you angry

So much for intelligent debate.

ScumLord

Odysseus wrote: »

Most doctors, psychiatrists and mental health workers I know disagree with that. It depends on what research you read, you will find research that agrees with both sides of the agrument, like anything else.

Most GPs and mental health workers are working off a standard hymn sheet and are hardly experts. The standard line is it's bad for you, don't do it. They don't actually go putting in much research into it, they're busy enough dealing with real problems.

Any doctor that actually does put in the years of research will tell you weed isn't that bad for you and the cons certainly don't justify taking away someones freedom.

robby^5

Odysseus wrote: »

It depends on what research you read, you will find research that agrees with both sides of the agrument, like anything else.

Then don't you see how flawed the research is?

ch2008

robby^5 wrote: »

So much for intelligent debate.

Ah here, eh well look I think laughing at all research is a bit strange. Do you think all research should be stopped?

Odysseus

robby^5 wrote: »

Well being that marijuana isn't addictive these were obviously very weak-willed people, I know a few myself... they're wasters. People can become dependant on a lot of things, even besides drugs, to their own detriment.

Well I would beg to differ on that, as I have treated at least 100+ over the years for hash only and they certainly fitted the ICD-10 citeria for substance dependency, so from a professional viewpoint its real.

InkSlinger67

robby^5 wrote: »

So much for intelligent debate.

No such thing while on weed - They must be a secret stoner, rob.

If they come back with comments like "Man! I can't feel my face" and "anyone hungry right about now?", suspicion confirmed

mickos

I'd say I smoked my own body weight of the stuff back in the day. Rarely would now at all it doesn't seem to agree with me anymore. I'd sooner smoke hash now than weed if I was havin a toke. thats just coz its crap and barely gets ya stoned which suits me but people still buy it. oh man i'm so wasted on this schit!:D

Aard

Wertz wrote: »

Psychosis? Bring it on.

Are you being serious? Because being psychotic is not a nice place to be in.

Odysseus

ScumLord wrote: »

Most GPs and mental health workers are working off a standard hymn sheet and are hardly experts. The standard line is it's bad for you, don't do it. They don't actually go putting in much research into it, they're busy enough dealing with real problems.

Any doctor that actually does put in the years of research will tell you weed isn't that bad for you and the cons certainly don't justify taking away someones freedom.

I would disagree with that, and just to state again I'm not anti weed; however, its false to state that it does not affect some peoples mental health. What type of doctor or other professional would put years into researching just weed?

I work for the Addiction Services so whilst I believe nobody has access to the one and only truth, my co-workers have some sense of what we are talking about.

ch2008

Odysseus wrote: »

What type of doctor or other professional would put years into researching just weed?

Theres quite a few really. Its a huge field of study in forensic psychology AFAIK. Google it, some of its quite interesting

galwayrush

Aard wrote: »

Are you being serious? Because being psychotic is not a nice place to be in.

Oh feck, i was misled then.:(

mp3guy

Never.

Odysseus

ch2008 wrote: »

Theres quite a few really. Its a huge field of study in forensic psychology AFAIK. Google it, some of its quite interesting

But that's then a sub-field of forensics not just the effects of the drug if you get my point. I'm sure it is interesting I have a goggle later.

Odysseus

Odysseus wrote: »

But that's then a sub-field of forensics not just the effects of the drug if you get my point. I'm sure it is interesting I have a goggle later.

Just goggled it, one of the results but that it was quite balanced

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Psychology-2566/Marijuana-effects.htm

robby^5

Odysseus wrote: »

Well I would beg to differ on that, as I have treated at least 100+ over the years for hash only and they certainly fitted the ICD-10 citeria for substance dependency, so from a professional viewpoint its real.

Its real in the sense that the WHO says its real because they have defined what is and isn't real in your set of guidelines.

I recall reading the WHO's stance on marijuana once, the words "may be" followed by "associated" came up quite a lot.

ch2008

Odysseus wrote: »

But that's then a sub-field of forensics not just the effects of the drug if you get my point. I'm sure it is interesting I have a goggle later.

Thats a good point. Although a lot of the proffessionals that I've spoken to about this do see the link they always preface their opinions with the fact that it is ridiculously hard to prove.

Odysseus

robby^5 wrote: »

Its real in the sense that the WHO says its real because they have defined what is and isn't real in your set of guidelines.

I recall reading the WHO's stance on marijuana once, the words "may be" followed by "associated" came up quite a lot.

Its also real for those people who require treatment. Your spot on about the "may" and "associated", or "suggests". That why I stated earlier that nobody has access to the one and only truth. That's the one thing I hate about reading reseach papers, but that is all we have until someone can do some research that will be 100% correct for 100% of the population.
Don't hold your breath for that.

Odysseus

ch2008 wrote: »

Thats a good point. Although a lot of the proffessionals that I've spoken to about this do see the link they always preface their opinions with the fact that it is ridiculously hard to prove.

As above I don't think you can prove something like this for 100% of the population. However, clinical work has shown me that some people end up in a sh!t state because of weed. However, it must be noted that in those cases I only see the ones where it has gone bad, and for each case that goes bad there can be many others who have no problems and therefore no need for an intervention.

Aard

galwayrush wrote: »

Oh feck, i was misled then.:(

Maybe you're mistaking psychosis for tripping?