Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by LrnByTeach 2784 days ago
Let us say there are 100 teens in your neighborhood, 65 of them tried eating peanuts and 20 of them liked very much and started eating multiple times a week on a regular basis.

Now 5 of those 20 started developing health/mental problems which are noticeable by parents, teachers & doctors.

What are the chances of the majority of those 5 stop eating peanuts, It is very high.

Now, what are the chances of similar 5 teens stop using weed for health/mental problems?

4 comments

>Now, what are the chances of similar 5 teens stop using weed for health/mental problems?

I did. I recognized immediately on the first episode that something was wrong, I had a serious trip at the age of 18 where I was experiencing extremely high paranoia and psychosis to the point where I tried to get to the hospital, made worse by the fact it was illegal at the time so my friends stopped me, increasing the paranoia. It took me another bad experience to realise it was me, not the drug because my friends were fine. I didn't smoke for 20 years and only very carefully started again and now I can, but very very small doses and only when I'm out doing something. I'm a woman and what I went through wasn't so rare for my other friends, women and men. It didn't have any rhyme nor reason who it struck. But most of us stopped eventually, then we went on to our successful lives.

Now, what are the chances of similar 5 teens stop using weed for health/mental problems?

Probably good with actual education that makes sure folks know the actual risks and what sorts of things to look out for. We should do this in a better manner than we do with alcohol now. We should be very careful not to lie to folks lest folks cast aside all that we try to teach.

A few folks won't listen, just like a few folks will eat peanuts nonetheless.

The same?

You can rationalize peanuts beeing unhealthy for you exactly the same way you can rationalize away health issues due to marijuana.

"All other people eating it are fine"

"I've been eating peanuts for 5 years, and look, Im still alive"

People harmed by peanuts generally aren't interested in eating peanuts and don't do it except by accident. That's not true for drugs.
Every drug is not heroin or meth. In fact, with the exception of cocaine, the overwhelming majority of recreational drug use (weed, MDMA, LSD, even ketamine) is relatively low risk for addiction.
>The same?

It is not the same. Look at the opioid epidemic in teens across USA, talk to health care providers in that area, there is very well recorded evidence "a BIG percentage" of kids who personally noticed "Learning problems and other mental problems" are UNABLE to STOP using weed.

Vs.

There is recorded clinical data evidence throughout USA hospitals. Millions of kids across the country were found having various kinds of food allergies and advised by the doctors to stop eating those foods and the vast majority DID STOP eating them.

Yes, but a food allergy is something you can feel. You feel sick, you might have to go to the hospital once or twice if you ate something which contained peanuts. It is a much tighter feedback loop. Eat some peanuts -> feel sick -> go to hospital. As far as I am aware this loop is very quick. If you extend this feedback loop to span multiple years, the connection between trigger and result is a lot more blurry, and it leaves more room for rationalization.

The comparision is "If you eat this, you will probably die if you do not get immediate treatment" versus "If you smoke this, in some time in the future you might have mental health issues. Or you might be totally fine"

Peanuts are also not (mentally) addictive, and neither do they alter your mental state.

People like to take chances, and hope that its not gonna be them who get mentally ill.

> Peanuts are also not (mentally) addictive, and neither do they alter your mental state

Yes, they are? Anecdotally, if i put a bowl of peanuts on my desk, I'll eat them without knowing it, and speed up eating them when nervous, thinking, or bored. Any habit a human does enough can be mentally addictive.

Importantly, neither are physiologically addictive.

True, they can be mentally addictive as well.

Your example isnt about addiction though. its that most likely you are kinda hungry, want to do something with your hands while you are thinking, or a nervous tick.

mariam webster defines addiction as follows

> : compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (such as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal

> broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful

personally I would not even require the substance beeing harmfull. So yes, you can imho be addicted to peanuts, but finishing the bowl on your desk is not that.

My point in emphasizing is that there are no known physiological addictive components of canabis.

Presumably, the op knows the same, hence specified mentally addictive, but is confused because they don't think peanuts have the same, but they do. Mentally addictive only means you like the way it makes you feel so you keep doing it, not that your receptors actually need it or stop functioning without it (chemical dependence)

Cannabinoids have similar addiction pathways (dopamine receptors) as sex, sugar, and, for this example, salt.

> Peanuts are also not (mentally) addictive, and neither do they alter your mental state.

That is exactly why weed and peanuts should be treated differently.

Millions of people are told to stop smoking every day and they don't do it. That's because humans are bad at judging the likelihood of long-term effects, whereas food allergies have immediate and very painful ones.

This has nothing to do with the substance. If weed stopped you from breathing and made your tongue swell, people would drop it right away.

1 of those 100 peanut eaters would have had to have paramedics immediately, another would have required a benedryl.