If you can solve the problem of "what degree of involvement/dependence towards an idea/substance/drug" is problematic and which is not, then go ahead. I will certainly read that book.
Personal anecdotes and hyperbolic stuff is everywhere: e.g. the study that opened this thread. Even if I take your opinions seriously: nobody here is claiming drugs are harmless, nobody has precise data on what "common usage" constitutes (if you have a link to worldwide study on this, with precise accounts of plant types, their chemical makeup, routes of administration, dosage, daily quantity consumed etc. please share), what constitutes recreational vs. "respectable" etc. If Jimmy Hendrix writes a song alone, having gotten stoned, and his royalties bring in millions to the family that inherits them afterwards... is this "respectable" or not? Branson having a great business idea? Sorry, drugs are harmless compared to (*) historically naturalized authoritarian governance intertwining with manipulated supply and demand of goods, weapons, and services through market forces => creates the need for false heroes, mediocre science, straw men, scapegoats => war on blacks, gays, drugs, sexuality, terror. This accounts only for tiny part of context touching the problematic drug use that you cite. Without them, common sense would dictate that people seek out, and research be dispatched to finding, drugs that are more euphoric, less toxic, and can thus be used more sustainably. Another non-anecdotal example, Prof. David Nutt has found a benzodiazepine that has dis-inhibition and euphoric qualities of alcohol, with only minimum of motor-skill loss. It is less toxic, more fun, impossible to overdose on because concentrations beyond certain limits in bloodstream do not further augment effect and LD-50 is huge. Not only this, he has found an antidote to it that will make you ready to drive in 30 minutes. I'm not claiming this as "cure for alcohol problem". Just stating that we are technologically ready to do these things and think we could engineer much better if we were a bit less addicted to money, power, + our own set of ideologies (the hardest most persistent drug of all, responsible for every intentional killing in history). Mind altering substances have always had a minority that abused them to self-destruction, and this will stay like this. What is left unsaid is that most people find their limits and survive. This gives a plausible reason for cautious optimism about human/machine condition. I don't see Cannabis users, "drugs" or any of the other scapegoats as real threats/problems. The context I sketch with many unfair reductions here (see*), that we have naturalized in our day-to-day affairs, in terms of law, justice, politics, economics creates the foundation for "problematic cannabis user smoking alone". I don't think she/he really exists, even though people I know could be described that way. I see them as victims of the kind of circumstances I point towards in this post. And yes, that is unnecessary and sad. But it is neither their fault, nor the fault of Cannabis. They are victims of parasites, bullies, and thieves that have informational advantage for historical reasons. m On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 7:10 PM, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 2012/8/29 Platonist Guitar Cowboy <multiplecit...@gmail.com> > >> Agreed. But abuse of anything... is simply abuse. >> > > Wel yes... but abuse is easy with cannabis, if you smoke *everyday* it is > abuse. > > And when you smoke everyday, you often smoke more than one... and that > condition *is not* rare among cannabis users. > > I think it's no more recreational when you start using it alone. > > You still can use it that way, but you have to stop pretending it is not > problematic (the well known, I can stop when I want... I'm not an addict). > And of all the cannabis users I know, well "recreational" only are the rare > types, not the common ones... > > I'm really not against a non abusive type of usage, but to say it's the > common usage is to have a beam in the eye... > > Quentin > > >> Talking about consciousness altering alternatives on a plant or chemical >> basis, I maintain that evidence, such as the harm assessment reports of >> Prof. David Nutt, NIDA studies, papers/sources cited in "The Emperor wears >> no clothes", suggest that Cannabis dangers and harms are, keeping >> perspective on the whole set of mind altering substances, minuscule and >> that the overall BENEFITS of the plant towards society are much greater >> than we realize. >> >> Clicking on the link for "emperor wears no clothes" PDF, can win you a >> 100 thousand dollars, if you can prove them wrong: >> >> >> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCkQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fb%2Fbd%2FJack_Herer_-_The_Emperor_Wears_No_Clothes.pdf&ei=ukY-UOSbBMyT0QXpzIGAAQ&usg=AFQjCNFAY1qMBV1jD6LDWyeA5QM_ERjcyg&sig2=saSV5VJJCh2MgiRD6bUm1Q >> >> (If you don't trust the link or it doesn't work, just google "emperor >> wears no clothes jack herrer PDF") >> >> Aside from the usual pothead cliché stuff, I find this book to be good >> honest work and that these questions/conclusions should be further queried. >> >> m >> >> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> As I said *it can* lead to that, when abusing, what cause the abuse is >>> outside the problem, but occulting the abuse is not good (as all abuse of >>> any drug legal or not). >>> >>> And surely it is easier to not abuse when you are rich and have less >>> living problem than if you're not. >>> >>> And anyway, abuse of cannabis leads to apathy. What cause the abuse is >>> certainly preexisting of the cannabis usage, but if you're subject to easy >>> addiction, you'll fall into it. >>> >>> I'm not saying smocking cannabis is wrong, nor I'm saying it's good, I'm >>> saying consommation must be controlled individually. I'm against >>> prohibition, but I'm also against saying you can use it with no danger. >>> >>> Quentin >>> >>> >>> 2012/8/29 Platonist Guitar Cowboy <multiplecit...@gmail.com> >>> >>>> People and science do not distinguish enough between smoking pure >>>> cannabis or hemp and smoking both cannabis and tobacco. >>>> >>>> The latter carries many more health concerns than the former. >>>> >>>> Also the causality: does cannabis lead to depression or is a life >>>> framed for depression at some point, and Cannabis is abused to hide, like >>>> alcohol or heroin etc.? >>>> >>>> Lester Grinspoon from Harvard sees smoking pure Cannabis as an >>>> "enhancer or amplifier" of existing circumstances and traits of user. If a >>>> life is lacking direction, where will cannabis lead? And if a life has >>>> direction, why would Cannabis undermine this? >>>> >>>> I don't think you can equate personal experience with effect of >>>> Cannabis. The logic is crap because of causality problem. Richard Branson >>>> recently asked for weed in the White House: "they didn't have any..." >>>> >>>> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74111.html >>>> >>>> This does not look like a depressed man, respecting your 15 years >>>> experience. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Quentin Anciaux <allco...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2012/8/29 Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 29 Aug 2012, at 12:37, Richard Ruquist wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I am of the opinion that recreational drugs should be the preserve of >>>>>> the retired folk. >>>>>> In fact in the USA with so many companies and the govt/military doing >>>>>> random testing >>>>>> you may as well wait until retirement. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't believe in drugs. >>>>>> >>>>>> A "drug" is just a product made illegal so that we can sell it 100 >>>>>> times its price, without quality controls, and by targetting mainly the >>>>>> kids, everywhere. >>>>>> >>>>>> There are no drug problem, only a prohibition problem. >>>>>> >>>>>> Drug addiction is nowadays easy to cure, with plant like salvia, or >>>>>> iboga, or even cannabis, which typically are not drugs, even if cannabis >>>>>> can lead some people to some habituation (but still not as grave as TV >>>>>> habituation). >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No, canabis can lead to real problematic addiction, grave depression, >>>>> and *is not* a drug to take lightly. You should not go the other way >>>>> around >>>>> as the lies you are fighting and thus lie yourself. >>>>> >>>>> I've smoked cannabis for 15 years I know what I'm talking about and >>>>> what problem it can cause. I'm not smoking anymore and hope I never will. >>>>> I'm against prohibition, I'm for prevention and good usage. But you must >>>>> know that "good" usage is not for everyone and a lot of persons will abuse >>>>> it and abuse is problematic, occulting that is a lie. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The case of cannabis is different for cannabis is just hemp, the >>>>>> plant that we have cultivated the most on this planet, and it has been >>>>>> made >>>>>> illegal just because it was a natural competitor to oil and forest. There >>>>>> is a big amount of literature on this, and the fact that cannabis is >>>>>> still >>>>>> illegal is a frightening witnessing that most governement are hostage of >>>>>> criminals. >>>>>> >>>>>> We know since 1974 that cannabis cures cancer, (american discovery >>>>>> hidden by Bush senior) but it is only since this has been rediscovered in >>>>>> Spain, that some media talk about it, but it does not yet make the >>>>>> headline. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well do you have reference of that ? And since cannabis as I was using >>>>> it consisted of smocking it, let me have a lot of doubts about that. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Quentin >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> How many people died of cancer since? I can give you tuns of >>>>>> references and links on this, but the same lies continue. >>>>>> >>>>>> The two most dangerous recreative "drug" are alcohol and tobacco. The >>>>>> bandits have tried to prohibit alcohol, but prohibition multiply a lot >>>>>> the >>>>>> dangerousness of the product, so they have to stop it. So now they make >>>>>> illegal innocuous product like cannabis, so this can last. The illegality >>>>>> of cannabis is a coup de genie. It deserves the Nobel prize in Crime. >>>>>> >>>>>> And prohibition leads to new drugs which copy the one forbidden, like >>>>>> "wood-alcohol, or brew" when alcohol was prohibited. In Russia they have >>>>>> made a severe campaign against heroin, and the result is the apparition >>>>>> of >>>>>> krokodil, a very nasty, highly addictive substance, which make you die in >>>>>> terrible pain. >>>>>> In my country, to prevent the spreading of AIDS, they have >>>>>> unofficially legalize heroin: the result has been a drastic diminution of >>>>>> heroin consumption. >>>>>> >>>>>> Prohibition is the problem, not "drugs". Black money is the problem, >>>>>> and worse, grey money, the investment of balck money in mundane finance, >>>>>> which is making the whole middle class, and the banks, into the hostage >>>>>> of >>>>>> the drugs mafia. Prohibition transforms the planet into a big Chicago. >>>>>> >>>>>> And I was used to separate the "war on drugs" from the "war on >>>>>> terror", but since Obama signed the NDAA bill, I am changing my mind on >>>>>> this. I begin to think that the war on terror is as fake as the war on >>>>>> drugs. Pure fear selling business. >>>>>> >>>>>> But thanks for the retired folk, Richard. >>>>>> Now, I can hardly imagine that a bar will ask your identity cart for >>>>>> a beer, and refuses because you are 74 years old: "sorry, but you are to >>>>>> much young, wait for "growing up"" a little bit :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Bruno >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be>wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Even Binet, who invented the IQ-tests, insisted that it can be used >>>>>>> only to separate debility and sanity, not to measure small differences. >>>>>>> The >>>>>>> paper is mute on the most difficult part to assess, like such a >>>>>>> difference. >>>>>>> I am not sure such comparision must be itself compared with other >>>>>>> "drug", >>>>>>> like making similar tests, assuminf they makes sense, which I doubt. How >>>>>>> evolve the IQ of people looking everyday at TV, and "sober" people, or >>>>>>> alcoholic? >>>>>>> To be sure I have not yet found the most typical error in statistics >>>>>>> in that field, so that paper might be less wrong than usual, but still >>>>>>> not >>>>>>> very convincing, especially in the conclusion. The policy does not make >>>>>>> sense, especially that we are systematically dis-informed about the real >>>>>>> outcomes of basically all medication/drugs, and this will last as long >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> people will accept the nonsensical prohibition (of food and drug) laws, >>>>>>> something known to be anticonstitutional in the US since the start. So >>>>>>> my >>>>>>> first feeling on that paper: crap. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bruno >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 28 Aug 2012, at 15:09, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Finally we have the whole story and truth: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Direct link to PDF in question: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDMQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Finfam.antville.org%2Ffiles%2Fpnas%2F&ei=A7o8UNPENsil0AWCh4CAAg&usg=AFQjCNEnTJj8p7H1m6w40c3PXKIOgjQgQA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Link to abstract: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/08/22/1206820109.abstract >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thank God Lewis Carroll, Victor Hugo and Alexander Dumas; such jazz >>>>>>> greats as Louis Armstrong, Cab Calloway, Duke Ellington and Gene Krupa; >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> the pattern continues right up to modern-day artists and musicians such >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, the Eagles, the Doobie Brothers, Bob >>>>>>> Marley, Jefferson Airplane, Willie Nelson, Buddy RIch, Country Joe & the >>>>>>> Fish, Joe Walsh, David Carradine, David Bowie, Iggy Pop, Lola Falana, >>>>>>> Hunter S. Thompson, Peter Tosh, the Grateful Dead, Cypress Hill, Sinead >>>>>>> O'Connor, Black Crowes, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course, smoking marijuana only enhances creativity for some and >>>>>>> not for others. But so glad to have proof, that they all had to pay for >>>>>>> their sins in terms of neuropsychological decline. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It makes you dumb. Science has spoken. Dumb, lazy pot smokers >>>>>>> under-performing in IQ-Tests. Nothing beats long-term evidence and a >>>>>>> sample >>>>>>> size of 1000. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> :) Good science. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>> everything-list@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>> everything-list@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com >>>>>> . >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com >>>>>> . >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Everything List" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
