[cpncrunch]

Thanks for doing this research, and for posting this...it's a very important field right now, considering that many countries/states are legalising Cannabis. I live in Canada and cannabis is in the process of being legalised.

I haven't read the full-text, but how well have you figured out the causation? The study seems to show that in women suicidal ideation causes cannabis use. In men it seems to be the other way around (cannabis use causes suicide ideation). However I'm wondering if even in men the desire to use cannabis is influenced by some kind of mental instability, which would have caused suicidal ideation even in the absence of cannabis. Perhaps you address this in the full-text.

Also, I'd suggest paying the $3k open-access fee to make this article available to everyone. It's a small price to pay for increased exposure, more citations, etc.

[nashke]

We can't show causation using this kind of methodology. Longitudinal association may suggest causation, but it does not imply it. In the discussion we offer some possible mechanisms for this association, not all of them causal in nature. We do know from previous studies that the endocannabinoid system is altered in suicidal individuals and that sex hormones both affect suicidality and have a reciprocal relationship with the endocannabinoid system. These suggest how and why intense cannabis use can affect suicidal behavior.

I've posted a link which should allow for full-text access for the next few weeks.

[chatmasta]

It's fucking nuts that you need to pay $3k for anyone to be able to read your work.

[cpncrunch]

Perhaps you should start up a peer-reviewed journal that doesn't charge anything. I wonder how you'd afford to pay your employees.

[cairo_x]

They don't pay their employees though -- if you count the people who generate the actual content as employees. Nor do they pay the academics who do the actual peer review.

They pay editorial staff and tech dudes. I guess a metric shit-ton.

[vacri]

Retail stores don't pay their employees either, if you count the people who manufacture the actual goods. Nor do they pay the truckers who actually get the goods to the store.

They pay janitorial staff and retail assistants. I guess a metric shit-ton.

Yes, it's an imperfect metaphor, but it's showing that you can still provide value without being the origin of the object.

[ajb]

You missed his point, which was NOT that the journal didn't originate the article.

[chatmasta]

Perhaps academic authors should boycott elitist journals and publish their research on their own websites. They could even ask their peers to review it before publishing.

[cpncrunch]

Yes, I've actually thought of that, as I recently paid a $600 open access fee myself. Perhaps something along the lines of wikipedia would work well. Wiki journal?

A lot of the time, wikipedia editors can do better peer review than the actual journals (although it's against wikipedia rules to do such original research). I can't count the number of times I've seen absolute shit science in the supposedly top journals.

[Shank]

Most public libraries and other institutions pay for database access and journal access. You can usually go in and request access to science material at no cost to you.

The barrier to entry is still quite high, unfortunately.

[lmmlzxx]

This applies to only a small fraction of people worldwide.

[the_duke]

There have to be peer relatively respecatable peer reviewed OA journals that cost considerably less then 3k, though, I'd think.