Top European Research facility: Super strong cannabis caused 1/4 new psychosis cases

a reply to: crazyewok

I want an answer to my question.

If Skunk with a 25% THC content is making people psychotic, then why isn't there a similar study with Marinol which is 100% THC?

Could it be because the pharmaceutical industry sells Marinol?

originally posted by: kamatty
As its illegal and unregulated most users have no choice about what they are buying, our country is poorly educated when it comes to drugs. drugs are BAD! drugs KILL! drugs RUIN! lives. legalize it, educate the people, give them choices, let the people grow!!

Exactly.

Being unregulated dealers can sell all sorts of crap.

Like boot leggers selling toxic moonshine in prohibition,


Legalise it and regulate it.

a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly.

I don't take cannabis or any other illegal drugs /legal highs in any form, though having worked in front line mental health services it seems obvious that the current street system of such drugs is not constructive to decent society.

There are legitimate medical uses for certain compounds of cannabis and other applications such as hemp as material and hemp seed oil.

It could easily be utilised as a crop and the specific non THC compounds extracted and sold as legally regulated, safe, controlled extracts, either medically or in less potent forms for recreation, but only after substantial research into the safety of such things being easily available and the removal of any potential psychologically altering aspects.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

though having worked in front line mental health services

That pretty much says it all....

In other words, you love pimpin out pills for Big Pharm, but your against an "individual" who is able to decide what works best for them?

Hmmmm, makes me wonder if you were my old psychiatrist who constantly preached to me how bad MJ was yet every 2 months sent me for blood tests because he had to cover his behind if the 2 or 3 meds he had me on were causing me bodily harm! He was very religious and I told him he was not only a hypocrite but evil! He was against a plant his Lord and Savior put on this planet, but yet he found it okay to pimp out poison made by pharmaceutical corporations....

Now I know why you are so against illegal drugs! It effects YOUR bottom line!

Odd how if you allow a person to speak long enough the truth finally comes out?

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: crazyewok

Exactly.

I don't take cannabis or any other illegal drugs /legal highs in any form, though having worked in front line mental health services it seems obvious that the current street system of such drugs is not constructive to decent society.

There are legitimate medical uses for certain compounds of cannabis and other applications such as hemp as material and hemp seed oil.

It could easily be utilised as a crop and the specific non THC compounds extracted and sold as legally regulated, safe, controlled extracts, either medically or in less potent forms for recreation, but only after substantial research into the safety of such things being easily available and the removal of any potential psychologically altering aspects.

So, let me get this right...

You dont partake in any highs of any kind?
But you feel the need to decide for everyone else who is perfectly grown up and educated for themselves, what they should or should not be allowed to do to themselves?
Interesting.
I find the busy bodies with no knowledge of something are the loudest of voices against it.
And more of a problem to society as a whole than smokers.
Who made you dictator? The fact you work in mental health?
Sorry, you can have your preconceptions and shove them where the sun doesnt shine.

a reply to: seeker1963

Actually your presumptions say more about you than me.

It was rehabilitation and housing of those people and also I do not agree to people being drugged by pharma either.

The best thing they could hope for was a detox facility.

And about illegal drugs, I do not agree to them as unregulated chemical intoxication is not constructive, same for alcohol etc as no doubt either you or some idiot would be throwing out that as excuse for denial of facts.

Go back and stop trying straw man arguments, you are only appearing foolish.

a reply to: seeker1963

Astounding leaps of logic and ridiculous presumption might get you stars from fools but in reality you are being stupid.

Go read ATS T&C and stop attacking posters.

Also stop wasting my time, you aren't worth responding to.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: seeker1963

Actually your presumptions say more about you than me.

It was rehabilitation and housing of those people and also I do not agree to people being drugged by pharma either.

The best thing they could hope for was a detox facility.

And about illegal drugs, I do not agree to them as unregulated chemical intoxication is not constructive, same for alcohol etc as no doubt either you or some idiot would be throwing out that as excuse for denial of facts.

Go back and stop trying straw man arguments, you are only appearing foolish.

Are you slyly calling me an idiot?

Losing the propaganda battle are you?

Odd how you are so against something "unregulated", yet you are blind enough to have faith in something a government agency says is fine?

Whatever, serve your masters! I hope your not expecting a reward, because you will finally understand what it is to feel like an idiot!

a reply to: seeker1963

Maybe you are paranoid or something but seriously, stop presuming things about me, you know nothing.

originally posted by: Aleister
There is another thread on this, which you acknowledge in your OP. The pro-cannabis bias that you mention was just people pointing out the errors, huge bias, and propaganda potential of this very flawed study.

Yea sure. Who doesn't know that someone under the influence of strong MJ is in an altered state? And that long periods of time, habitual use of same alters the personality.

And with millions to be made by "licensed" growers and sellers and the huge tax revenue potential is it any wonder at all that "folks" out there are not going to come down hard on a study like this? As we speak there are certainly shills above and beyond the useful idiots that would see a study like this as a great threat.

originally posted by: crazyewok

originally posted by: kamatty
As its illegal and unregulated most users have no choice about what they are buying, our country is poorly educated when it comes to drugs. drugs are BAD! drugs KILL! drugs RUIN! lives. legalize it, educate the people, give them choices, let the people grow!!

Exactly.

Being unregulated dealers can sell all sorts of crap.

Like boot leggers selling toxic moonshine in prohibition,


Legalise it and regulate it.

The fact is that the market for MJ has been cultivated and tended to for decades in a clandestine fashion. And while illegal there was more freedom in it than is no proposed by "legitimate" marketers. And now enter in the MJ capitalists who seek exclusivity in production and sales of an already established market that has managed over the years to regulate itself by customer demand and tastes. There is really no "moonshine" danger equivalency in the MJ market.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: seeker1963

Maybe you are paranoid or something

Is that a "professional" opinion?
Or just an opinion?

Maybe you are being paranoid by giving this anti cannabis propaganda any wings and riding with it?
Just a thought. I mean you seem its worthy grounds to get on your moral high horse and dictate to free society what freedoms we need to restrict next.
I want to ban people that want to ban things.

a reply to: OneManArmy

Yawn.

Leaps of logic are not worth my time replying to.

I posted valid professional research, if you don't like it go tell them that.

I gave my own opinion in a civilized manner about page 6 of the thread and not before, if you don't like it, tough.

Go throw your dummy out the pram elsewhere than at me.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: OneManArmy

Yawn.

Leaps of logic are not worth my time replying to.

I posted valid professional research, if you don't like it go tell them that.

I gave my own opinion in a civilized manner about page 6 of the thread and not before, if you don't like it, tough.

Go throw your dummy out the pram elsewhere than at me.

Is anybody worth time replying to?
I havent made leaps of logic, I asked questions, which you managed to answer a grand total of none.
So really who is it wasting time posting on this thread, you or me?

Do you only respond with people that dont ask "awkward" questions?

I havent had a dummy in 40 years. Im all grown up you know. And being all grown up I like to think for myself, and base my opinions on life experience and educating myself, not government propaganda pieces.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

You post a study about which several posters have valid concerns in another thread. When that posting was ill-received, you started your own thread in hopes that you might find a more receptive audience.

When those concerns are brought forth in this thread as well, you dismiss them without explaining why, you claim that any questions are "not worth your time", and you label every question directed toward you in an attempt to understand why you have posted biased information as a "personal attack." Conversely, every poster who agrees with you gets quoted and patted on the back for "contributing" to your thread.

You don't want a discussion, you want a bunch of people to agree with you. Disagreeing with someone's opinions does not constitute "personal attacks" and if you're that sensitive, you may want to refrain from posting topics like this on ATS.

You exhibit the behavior of someone who can not defend their position and would rather discredit the opposition instead of engaging in a proper debate. It's childish and annoying.

originally posted by: Answer
a reply to: theabsolutetruth



You post a study about which several posters have valid concerns in another thread. When that posting was ill-received, you started your own thread in hopes that you might find a more receptive audience.



When those concerns are brought forth in this thread as well, you dismiss them without explaining why, you claim that any questions are "not worth your time", and you label every question directed toward you in an attempt to understand why you have posted biased information as a "personal attack." Conversely, every poster who agrees with you gets quoted and patted on the back for "contributing" to your thread.



You don't want a discussion, you want a bunch of people to agree with you. Disagreeing with someone's opinions does not constitute "personal attacks" and if you're that sensitive, you may want to refrain from posting topics like this on ATS.



You exhibit the behavior of someone who can not defend their position and would rather discredit the opposition instead of engaging in a proper debate. It's childish and annoying.

Wow you just described perfectly an establishment progressive, that is, one that knows exactly what is good and bad, and therefore insists their view of everything is the only correct and worthy view.

Perfect identification of the views (and delusions) espoused by the OP.
And, a good diagnosis of the mental disorder I see in this thread (yes there are mental disorders that are not a result of drug intoxification...)
You must be a true mental health professional. A profound skill in identifying absolute truth.

Kudos and a star fer ya.

a reply to: Answer

Go back and read ATS T&C.

Firstly do not presume anything about me.

This thread is about the research so all the idiots and their irrational vitriolic attacks are just proving the research correct.

The thread isn't an 'opinion' thread it is about factual professional research. If you don't like the research, tough. If anyone doesn't agree to it then I suggest they go tell the researchers.

Either way I do not care for their opinion and won't bother replying to anything unless it is rational. So far, most comments have been nasty and spiteful, just for the fact that I posted this research, not my opinion, I didn't mention that until around page 6 of this thread, the vitriol was aimed at me for just posting research.

I posted this thread because I can and because I choose to, it isn't for ''support'' but because it is good research that is valid and important.

You are just another poster spouting irrational hatred at me for just making a thread that you do not like because you do not like the professional research on which is is based.

If you don't like the research or the fact that I think it is truly valid and worthy then I suggest you contact IoPP and The Lancet, I am sure they will find your unprofessional objections equally as irrational and unfounded.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Answer

Go back and read ATS T&C.

You keep telling people to read the T&C's.
Have you read them?
You call people stupid, because they disagree with you.
When people ask you questions, you dont even have the decency to respond.
SMH
I suppose vitriol and ad hominem is okay when you are doing it.
Why am I not surprised?

a reply to: OneManArmy

Verbal attacks, presumptions and accusations are not rational questions.

If anyone wants to question the research they should do so directly to the research facility. Simple.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth

If anyone wants to question the research they should do so directly to the research facility. Simple.

So why the thread then?
In fact, why the website?
Why the internet?
We just need to ask the "experts" that have lied to us repeatedly for hundreds of years.

No sadly its not "Simple". If you are going to make threads you should at least have the common decency to respond to questions. If you dont want a discussion then dont post topics, because you are wasting all our time.