"But Rachel also has another hobby, one that makes her a bit different from the other moms in her Texas suburb—not that she talks about it with them. Once a month or so, after she and her husband put the kids to bed, Rachel texts her in-laws—who live just down the street—to make sure they’re home and available in the event of an emergency.

“And then, Rachel takes a generous dose of magic mushrooms, or sometimes MDMA, and—there’s really no other way to say this— spends the next several hours tripping balls.”

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    You are denying that there’s any evidence for mortality being increased from any way of using cannabis. That’s the very strong implication you’re giving off here.

    You definitely didn’t even browse the studies I linked.

    I’m very disappointed. This is really hurting the respect I have for you.

    A popular method of using cannabis is smoking. Do you disagree?

    A very obvious consequence of smoking is an increased risk of mortality from an increased risk of cancer and cardiopulmonary disease. Do you disagree with this?

    If you don’t disagree with either, then you know where the figures came from, at least partly. I’m sure you can try to look them up for yourself if you have such a burning need to browse them in detail.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I am doing no such thing.

      I am asking where they got their figures from. You have no idea. Telling me “do your own research” will not tell me where they got their figures from.

      No matter how much you object to it, I’m not going to take a chart with no sources at face value.

      No one should.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Fine, be childish. I’ll do the work for you, so you can’t even use your asinine sealioning to get out of this one.

        https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/06/25/what-is-the-most-dangerous-drug

        So that’s the article I linked. It says:

        That question is the subject of a report published today by the Global Commission on Drug Policy, an independent group of 26 former presidents and other bigwigs.

        The study in question:

        http://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019Report_EN_web.pdf

        Which says:

        Mortality is defined as risk of lethal overdose (drug-specific), OR BY life shortened by factors other than overdose (drug-related)

        This graph is based on the scientific modelling made by David Nutt et al. (Drug harms in the UK: a multicriteria decision analysis, The Lancet, https://doi.org/10.1016/S6-61462(10)6736-0140), and their assessment of the various harms of drugs used for recreational purposes in the UK, using multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA)

        Huh. Other factors? No way we could know what mortality related factors there could be in using cannabis, seeing as the most popular method is burning it and inhaling the smoke? Geez. I wonder what we’ll find, right?

        Let’s see. You just copy the link from there. Select it, and then you can use a handy keyboard shortcut, just press “CTRL+C” while you have something selected, and the computer copies it to memory! Oh, the URL seems corrupted because of the formatting of the PDF. Just select the title mentioned there and paste it (CTRL+V), and you’ll find this: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21036393/ which has a functioning link: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(10)61462-6/abstract

        All the data is there. Satisfied, or still gonna just stomp your foot and yell “no no no no smoking cannabis magically makes it healthy and thus there’s zero increased mortality rate from anything related to cannabis, not even smoking and inhaling it”?

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Cool. But I asked you the source of the mortality numbers. You still haven’t given them to me.

          This was literally in that PDF:

          The UK government treats these as much more dangerous or desirable (from the consumer perspective) than those others already mentioned despite overwhelming evidence that psychedelics are very safe (almost no deaths) and are rarely abused. cannabis is also relatively safe having been a medicine in the UK until 1971

          From what I can tell just searching for the word ‘cannabis,’ something you did not do, this information all comes from a psychopharmacologist called David Nutt who seems to have a particular hard-on for talking about the dangers of cannabis.

          Without ever showing his sources on mortality.

          I know you didn’t read the entire report in the time it took you to reply, and neither did I. But it didn’t take me long to find that, which puts the whole mortality number thing under suspicion.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            “whole mortality number thing under suspicion”

            You’re acting as if you’re arguing this in good faith. That’s not the case anymore, since you’ve ignored half a dozen replies in I point out that there are two facts which I’m sure you can not disagree with. 1. Smoking is one of — if not the — most popular ways of consuming cannabis. 2. Smoking anything is unhealthy and causes an increased risk of cancer.

            There is a third fact as well. Namely that they clearly say “Mortality is defined as risk of lethal overdose (drug-specific), OR BY life shortened by factors other than overdose (drug-related)”

            If I were to ask you to name anything risky in relation to the usage of cannabis (not the substance itself), would you be able to name anything, or would you just stand there like a teenager who discovered pot, claiming nothing related to cannabis can ever be harmful?

            Just like with the crack v cocaine harm part of it, it’s not due to the pharmacological properties of the substance that the chart is like that. Smoking is more addictive than other methods of use (sometimes in some studies even more so than shooting up, depending on the substance). It’s also unhealthy.

            You’re treating this as some DARE propaganda. It’s well researched data, and I’m pro drug legalisation, and I’m sure you won’t argue the facts over smoke in your lungs being bad for you. So I genuinely don’t understand what you think you’re protesting here.

            I don’t think I’ve ever used this saying in such a suitable moment; you’re barking up the wrong tree.

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 hours ago

              None of that is the source for the mortality numbers either in that chart.

              I’m not why you can’t just admit you don’t know the source. You don’t. You simply don’t.

              Also, why are you even talking about cannabis overdoses now? Do you know the LD50 of THC?

              • Dasus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                There’s nothing that would satisfy your criteria for the “source”. I’ve literally pasted the DOI number of the study that the numbers are from. You’re sealioning, just like I said.

                I’m quoting the study where the numbers are from, and I still haven’t mentioned any “cannabis overdoses”. It literally says “Mortality is defined as risk of lethal overdose (drug-specific), OR BY life shortened by factors other than overdose (drug-related)”

                This means that the “mortality” bit of the chart isn’t even implying that cannabis has directly caused someone’s death. Not even remotely has anyone implied that, yet it’s all you keep going on about, while ignoring the facts.

                We know where the numbers are from. First off, we have the actual study, go ahead and read it. Secondly, (AND THIS IS THE PART YOU KEEP IGNORING), do you disagree with the following facts; first that smoking is a popular way of using cannabis and secondly that smoking causes cancer?