Your anecdote and needlessly aggressive comment do make a very compelling argument.

But in all seriousness: can you explain why you feel so strongly about this?

EDIT: the person I responded to edited their comment to make it 'milder'.

I hate seeing utter lies like this in any debate. It's propaganda and I react strongly to it. Claiming 50% of teenagers smoking weed, let alone lsd, will have problems is an utter, out-right lie.

I was never into drugs like friends, if that's what you're insinuating. I tried a few, but beer was my drug of choice, and nicotine for a while.

There are polls where something like 40-50% of UK teenagers (and probably US) had tried weed.

If this guy were even vaguely right we'd see an epidemic of metal health problems right now.

I don't disagree with you concerning OP's claims, so I'm mostly on your side, but I don't see how you're helping by 1) frothing at the mouth at a point of view that, however wrong it may be, is very common, and 2) making an equally unbalanced claim of the opposite based on anecdata.

There's plenty of evidence that pot smoking can at the very least exacerbate problems, which strikes me as blindingly obvious when it comes to any substance that has mood altering effects as strong as weed, and I have just as much anecdata to support that view.

That said, I guess I can understand the frustration. I don't know where you live and what the status of weed is, but as a Dutch person I do realize that I don't (often) have to deal with the 'weed is evil' argument, and consequently it's easier for me to not get too upset about it.

Yeah whatever you don't like is evil fearmongering. And they don't even say trying it will drive you nuts.

Quoting obviously nonsense statistics in this case seems like fear-mongering to me.

There is a reference to a study on the topic elsewhere on the thread, and in the article itself, if I'm not mistaken. Also AFAIK it's not required to be a medical doctor to talk about these issues here, and not everyone has a list of publications on every topic they discuss. If you think a view is wrong then answer it, but name-calling and accusations only undermine any such discussion. It's not like the opposer is citing the literature too.

>can you explain why you feel so strongly about this?

Because he doesn't like BS arguments?

And because "so strongly" is not based on some objective measurement, but what you could gauge from a random comment. Maybe he likes/is used to using strong language (e.g. like Linus is) without necessarily feeling that "strongly" about it.

> Because he doesn't like BS arguments?

I agree that they're BS, but they're common and pernicious, and as such worth a proper response, frustrating as that might be.

> And because "so strongly" is not based on some objective measurement, but what you could gauge from a random comment. Maybe he likes/is used to using strong language (e.g. like Linus is) without necessarily feeling that "strongly" about it.

Fair enough. I got that impression because of some other comments by the same person in this thread, but you're right, I might be reading into things.

Well, you might be right too (I haven't noticed that the parent had multiple comments about it).

Just that I find a question like "why do you feel so strongly about X" can be infuriating, and make the other indeed feel strongly (when they were just casually writing their opinion with some strong words before).

Kind of like "relax" can make someone angry ("I AM relax") when they were perfectly relaxed before.

Perhaps you are paranoid which is in no way related to weed.

Probably because he has a problem with fear mongering.

It’s not fear mongering. The Lancet published an article about continued and discontinued use of cannabis after psychosis.

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanpsy/article/PIIS2215-03...

But it states that there is a well established link between cannabis and psychosis.

Yeah but the numbers are far lower than OP suggested.

No, this is disingenuous fear mongering.

The article you linked examines psychosis outcomes after quitting marijuana. It does not show evidence that psychosis is caused by marijuana.

In fact, the article is similarly misleading, as it makes reference to two studies which show, in the article's words, a "link" between psychosis and cannibus use. However, the two articles cited for this assertion [0][1] similarly only discuss a correlative link between psychosis and marijuana.

While the correlative relationship between marijuana and psychosis is well established, there is anything but a consensus for the causal relationship between illness and marijuana.

As they say, correlation != causation.

Edit: furthermore, I encourage you to browse the wikipedia page [2], which supports my assertion with multiple sources: neither consensus nor causal link has been established. You are spreading potentially harmful misinformation.

[0]Arseneault, L, Cannon, M, Witton, J, and Murray, RM. Causal association between cannabis and psychosis: examination of the evidence. Br J Psychiatry. 2004; 184: 110–117

[1]Stepniak, B, Papiol, S, Hammer, C et al. Accumulated environmental risk determining age at schizophrenia onset: a deep phenotyping-based study. Lancet Psychiatry. 2014; 1: 444–453

[2]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_cannabi...

I’m hardly spreading potentially misleading information. There is actually a wide body of evidence that amongst certain people cannabis can cause psychosis. It’s far more harmful in that your sole reference is a fairly partisan Wikipedia article. Give me primary sources, don’t give me a tertiary source like Wikipedia.

I resent your being down voted, by a audience running out of arguments.

If something that attacks your lifestyle or a dependency of it and you can not bring arguments forth, this does not give you the right to silence the debate.

It's pretty par for the course really.

My brother got heavily into weed at a young age (15-16). He developed strong schizophrenia. Was medicated which helped him, but went off the meds, left his wife, and died falling off a train that he was graffiting.

And you attribute this development to the weed because correlation is causation?

Well... both. But you're right.

I'm not going to claim that weed has absolutely no downsides like some recreational use fanatics, but I'm going to suggest that he was predisposed to mental illness with or without the weed.

Though it did probably exacerbate it.

Or it was the schizophrenia that made him heavily addicted to weed?

Weed (THC) can trigger mental episodes in those with a propensity for it. Sorry to hear that.