[LrnByTeach]

>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.

[thecatspaw]

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.

[smileysteve]

> 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.

[thecatspaw]

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.

[smileysteve]

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.

[DougN7]

> 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.

[toyg]

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.