[legitster]

I think there's a ton of self deception when it comes to marijuana use. I mean, look with your own eyes and you can clearly see lots of long-term negative effects on users. The studies are only proving what we all really already know.

The same thing was true for cigarettes - even before all of the major studies came out lots of people were able to put together the obvious connection between smoking and lung problems.

[iLoveOncall]

> I think there's a ton of self deception when it comes to marijuana use.

Indeed, as is evidenced by the many comments in this very post claiming the study is bullshit or there's no proof of causality, or whatever else they can come up with.

[kilgnad]

Before legalization in many states, even on HN even the suggestion that cannabis was unhealthy could get you voted down. People refused to believe it.

Now that it's legal peoples' objectives have shifted and it's now ok to talk about it. It's a literal example of the stupidity in human psychology.

People don't use logic to make conclusions about the world, they use logic to justify their conclusions so they can fulfill their objectives.

Very hard to find a person who does cannabis on a daily basis and is also fully on board with the fact that cannabis causes cognitive decline.

[legitster]

*Very hard to find a young person. But you find enough people after 10-15 years of using who will tell you they have noticed some effects.

I think it's important to point out that marijuana is certainly less dangerous than alcohol and cigarettes. But it's weird how people try to argue that there shouldn't be any sort of moderation when it comes to weed. Like, even alcoholics won't argue that they shouldn't be drunk all of the time.

[clbrmbr]

The longer duration and fat solubility of canabinoids makes the alcohol comparison difficult. Many people have a glass of red wine with dinner daily, and are not drunk in the daytime, but even very light cannabis consumption nightly seems to result in a permanent low-level stonnedness.

[gaganyaan]

Do you have a source for permanent low level stonedness? TBH that sounds completely made up.

[clbrmbr]

I did not intend that as an empirical observation but rather a mathematical pharmacokinetic result of fat-solubility rather than water-solubility. THC is fat-soluble and so has a higher volume of distribution which drives a longer half-life.

(See Shulgin “The Nature of Drugs” pg 132)

And “constant” would be a better word than “permanent”, as certainly it should go away after some weeks of abstinence.

[broast]

I use cannabis daily, and I also follow all the studies suggesting cognitive decline, alzheimers, and heart issues, etc. However, having not started till I was in my mid 20's, I do find that maybe I benefited from that cognitive decline with decreased anxiety, more physical energy, and more success in life. But now that I'm in a better place, I do intend to stop for a decade or two though, for the sake of my longevity.

[starkd]

The study didn't mention anything about THC levels of the marijuana, but I would think that would make a big difference. As a general rule, dependence on any substance probably always entails a certain sacrifice to health. Even reliance on a pill to sleep at night has deleterious effects.

[kilgnad]

>and more success in life.

There's merit in the idea that stupidity correlates with success. Anecdotally you see the correlation among academia and celebrities. Celebrities are richer and happier then academics who are poorer but smarter. Therefore doing something that contributes to your stupidity could possibly increase your success and happiness.

What anecdotally makes you think that cognitive decline contributed individually to your success? I'm curious.

I too value my happiness and wealth over my intelligence, and I would gladly take a stupid pill if such a pill made the trade off between the two attributes.

[starkd]

this is a good argument for its legalisation. The more you try to ban it, the more the allure is. But legalisation should be coupled with early childhood education warning about the harms. It is particulary bad for the developing brain to use it. I fear this has been overlooked, and we are going to see a generational lapse in achievement.

[kilgnad]

This is true. Banning does work though when coupled with extreme capital punishment. See Singapore.

There is also the argument of whether usage reduction is the objective goal though.