TeenHelp
Support Forums Today's Posts

Get Advice Connect with TeenHelp Resources
HelpLINK Facebook     Twitter     Tumblr     Instagram    Hotlines    Safety Zone    Alternatives

You are not registered or have not logged in

Hello guest! (Not a guest? Log in above!)

As a guest on TeenHelp you are only able to use some of our site's features. By registering an account you will be able to enjoy unlimited access to our site, and will be able to:

  • Connect with thousands of teenagers worldwide by actively taking part in our Support Forums and Chat Room.
  • Find others with similar interests in our Social Groups.
  • Express yourself through our Blogs, Picture Albums and User Profiles.
  • And much much more!

Signing up is free, anonymous and will only take a few moments, so click here to register now!


Current Events and Debates For discussions and friendly debates about politics and current events, check out this forum.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
  (#1 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Above the Influence bullshit? - February 25th 2009, 02:43 AM

Well, I'm always hearing the potheads ranting about "above the influence bullshit" (referring to those commericials on TV and such)... just wondering, where do this kiddos get their information that that stuff is false and that their own information HAS to be right? Do they have the facts? Or are they just avoiding all possible negatives about the drug because they are so consumed with their own obsession and dare not endanger it? I don't want to be swarmed with your little statistics here, all I'm saying is that no matter how many numbers you look up on the internet on how pot's okay, there'll be just as many saying it's not. So how do you know you're right?

In fact, what word seems better? The voice of an obvious user consumed by weed off the street? Or the voice of the news casts, paper and televisions?

I'm not saying everything the media says is true. All I'm saying is that just because you don't WANT weed to be bad doesn't mean it isn't. Potsmoker says pot isn't bad. Murderer says killing isn't bad.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#2 (permalink)) Old
punk rocker with attitude
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Pessimistic Panda's Avatar
 
Name: Jennifer
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Location: Three rivers Mi

Posts: 914
Blog Entries: 5
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 25th 2009, 03:05 AM

Of course it's all a personal belief in ones eyes if pot is right or wrong. In my opinion I say, it's fine within moderation, not in an addictive case. It's a lot safer than a ton of those other drugs like meth and crack. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to end up doing it. I feel like it isn't the route for me


You can't live a positive life with a negative mind and if you have a positive outcome you have a positive income and just to have more positivity and just to kind of laugh it off. ~ Miley Cyrus




  Send a message via MSN to Pessimistic Panda Send a message via Yahoo to Pessimistic Panda  
  (#3 (permalink)) Old
allikuja Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
allikuja's Avatar
 
Age: 30

Posts: 67
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 25th 2009, 03:04 PM

Ever think maybe that some of the stoners you're talking to have done independant research? For example, take that Above the Influence commercial with all the kids saying the weird stuff like "I stole from my sister, I got all D's, I let people write on me, etc"

I have never stolen from anybody just to get weed, My grades are good, and the writing on me thing is a stupid party joke where the first person to fall asleep at the party gets written on by everybody else. That part isn't even a weed-related thing! Just a stupid highschool/college teenager party gag.

I find most of the Above the Influence commercials to be really stupid. I'd much prefer that they say "weed has these chemicals in it, does this to your brain and body, etc etc etc."

Also, a lot of stoners disagree with what the media says because the media tends to overdamatize the effects of smoking weed. Then when people smoke weed and find out it isn't nearly as bad as they thought, they begin to distrust the people who told them weed was so bad.

Legally, weed is under the same schedule as cocaine. I smoked weed and it wasn't that bad, so does that mean cocaine isn't that bad? I just find the media/gov'ts way of discouraging drug use is totally ineffective, if not counter-productive.
   
  (#4 (permalink)) Old
allikuja Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
allikuja's Avatar
 
Age: 30

Posts: 67
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 25th 2009, 03:08 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
In fact, what word seems better? The voice of an obvious user consumed by weed off the street? Or the voice of the news casts, paper and televisions?
In fact, what word seems better? The voice of a person who's used the drugs and knows personally the effects it has upon them? Or the voice of media, who may have never used the drug and is being payed to talk about it from a biased standpoint?

I forget which president it was, pretty sure it was Nixon, but they paid a bunch of scientists to study marijuana and the scientists ended up with results that basically said weed was a mild intoxicant, no worse than alcohol, practically harmless. Nixon read the results and threw away the commission and had all other printed versions of it burned because the SCIENTIFIC RESULTS disagreed with his PERSONAL BELIEFS.

Believe what you want, I'm gonna side with science.
   
  (#5 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 25th 2009, 07:24 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by allikuja View Post
In fact, what word seems better? The voice of a person who's used the drugs and knows personally the effects it has upon them? Or the voice of media, who may have never used the drug and is being payed to talk about it from a biased standpoint?

I forget which president it was, pretty sure it was Nixon, but they paid a bunch of scientists to study marijuana and the scientists ended up with results that basically said weed was a mild intoxicant, no worse than alcohol, practically harmless. Nixon read the results and threw away the commission and had all other printed versions of it burned because the SCIENTIFIC RESULTS disagreed with his PERSONAL BELIEFS.

Believe what you want, I'm gonna side with science.
To your first post, I already answered that. Even if the druggie had done independant research, if they're so sure the research saying it's bad is wrong how can they be so sure the reasearch saying it's good is right?

Personal experience being that all they want is weed and it doesn't matter anything about it, because in their own mind they want so badly for it to be good. It's a way of self justifying. A murderer experienced killing someone. Does that give them a voice in saying killing people is alright to do? If the media's portraying it that way, perhaps there's a reason whether it be health effects or anything else. Just saying.

A bunch of scientists. Want to give evidence of this research?

'Science' also just theorised that you'll get testicular cancer from long term use of marijuana, which is just as valid is 'science' theorising that there's no health effects. But what of health effects? What about everything else?

You're getting pretty defencive, and I Just want you to know I honestly do not care whether one does weed or not. It's not my problem. I don't do it myself because I feel my mind to be above the need for any stimulants, I can have fun with my own true personality. All I'm saying is that that 'above the influence' is just as bullshit as 'above the influence is bullshit'... No one knows.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#6 (permalink)) Old
peaceSRC Offline
Member
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
peaceSRC's Avatar
 
Age: 30
Gender: Female

Posts: 211
Join Date: February 11th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 12:54 AM

No, and I don't appreciate you acting as if that's all potheads preach about. It's not just the people who smoke weed. The Government tries to scare people into not smoking marijuana, because quite honestly, it's not going to hurt you if you smoke it a couple times a week. Marijuana is neither good nor bad for you. What it boiled down to when illegalizing the drug was personal belief over fact. This probably isn't a great example, but it had a good point. Watch the opening of Pineapple Express and you might get what i'm talking about.

Not everyone is clueless. They do their research. It's really not cool to have such a reserved attitude towards people who have opinions differing from yours. I know you're saying that you don't know what's right or wrong, but you keep using these ridiculous terms such as "druggie" or "pothead" to describe who indulge in bud and you're just generalizing. And correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems that you're the one being defensive about this topic and you aren't that educated on it in the first place. And you're wrong in your last statement. There are people out there who do real research and know what to look for. It's quite easy really and they do experiments and generate statistics. I think you're the one who doesn't really know much about this topic which is why i'm telling you to go out and do research that is completely unbiased.

Science did not prove in anyway, shape or form that Marijuana causes testicular cancer. They had a small group of men who all got testicular cancer and just happened to be linked to smoking marijuana. Being linked and being proven are two different things.

You have the mind of a weed smoker completely backwards. You're basing your statements on something you've observed but never experienced, something you've heard but never seen for yourself. Something you've assumed but never proved. There is truth and fact out there that will tell you smoking weed on occasion does not hurt you. And how can you possibly make the comparison of smoking marijuana to killing someone? That's a totally ridiculous analogy. I don't know what research you've been looking at, but I highly doubt there's any scientists out there who've researched greatly on pot and came back to conclude that there are no health effects from either long or short term smoking. That person probably isn't a very credible scientist then.

Last edited by peaceSRC; February 26th 2009 at 03:21 AM.
   
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#7 (permalink)) Old
MetaIce Offline
Member
Average Joe
***
 
MetaIce's Avatar
 
Age: 27
Gender: Male

Posts: 162
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 01:34 PM

Again, moving to Debates as it's becoming one.

Anyone else feel free to move.
   
  (#8 (permalink)) Old
R.K. Offline
Sweet Lord of the Rings!
Experienced TeenHelper
******
 
R.K.'s Avatar
 
Age: 32
Gender: Male

Posts: 649
Join Date: January 12th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 01:42 PM

Quote:
The voice of an obvious user consumed by weed off the street? Or the voice of the news casts, paper and televisions?
Um... I'd be careful of both almost equally... cause the media nowadays is... I'd rather try researching actual serious medical studies for the facts.


  Send a message via Skype™ to R.K. 
  (#9 (permalink)) Old
allikuja Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
allikuja's Avatar
 
Age: 30

Posts: 67
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 03:26 PM

That commission I was talking about, It's called the "Shafer Commission." Also, turns out it was Nixon, go me!

And you're assuming just because I smoke pot, I "need" it to be good. You fail to realize that there was a point in time before I'd ever tried it. I didn't smoke weed because I thought it was cool, I tried it because I was completely on the fence about it and felt like the best way to find out whether or not it really was as bad as the media says or as good as some friends say, was by trying it myself. I tried it and liked it, and based my opinion on my personal experience, rather than on biased opinions of others.

Also, I don't "need" weed, and it doesn't change my personality. I can have plenty of fun with and without it.

Weed isn't always good. It can trigger early-onset of schizophrenia (But ONLY in people who were going to get schizophrenia anyways, it doesn't *CAUSE* Schizophrenia itself, it just can lead to early-onset). It can make you paranoid, can cause irregular heartbeat, temporarily affects short-term memory...etc. Also, it can induce hunger (good for ED people and cancer patients), it can help with chronic pain and nausea, as well as some sleep disorders. Marijuana (not the kind you smoke, but the kind that's ALSO illegal) can be used in making many forms of clothing, industrial materials, food, fuel, etc.


Also, the point of doing research isn't finding "good" sources or "bad" sources, it's finding UNBIASED sources, such as the shafer commission, which was a government funded study of marijuana that found positive results that the government chose to hide/lie about.

Lastly, the "above the influence" commercials are total bull shit. Like I said earlier, if you're going to make a PSA about how bad a drug is, tell me what it *ACTUALLY* does to me, like other drug commercials that say "may cause headache, nausea, etc," not this bull shit about how it'll make me drop out of school, get a mohawk, etc.
   
1 user(s) liked this post or found it helpful.
  (#10 (permalink)) Old
A Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
A's Avatar
 

Posts: 97
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 04:02 PM

I get my information from Erowid, because it is a source which presents factual information with no strange bias injected because someone appears to have indoctrinated the authors into an "ALL DRUGS ARE BAD, DO NOT TOUCH OR EXPERIENCE" mindset whereby being open minded is an impossibility. It's also very detailed.

http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis.shtml

Additionally, I just perused an "Above The Influence" advert and found that one of the things it implies (that cannabis causes hallucinations) is wrong.
The video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&f...&v=jgJdVEoVbgg
National Health Service information page about cannabis:
http://www.nhsborders.org.uk/view_it...?item_id=16550

I trust the National Health Service to be reliable, and not biased. Do you accept that something the Above The Influence campaign has said has been declared wrong (not mentioned as an effect) by the health system of the United Kingdom? That's not cannabis smokers saying that, it's doctors and nurses. That must knock some of Above The Influence's credibility, it makes them less trustworthy, it brings down anything they have said to a less reputable because they seem to have lied about something important.

In my opinion it is excessively foolish to believe the media about the majority of what it says. First of all: Nearly all media is biased. Some is less biased than others, but it's mostly biased. Newspapers are either liberal or conservative, some are tabloids which employ sensationalism to endorse their newspaper. You cannot trust media one hundred per cent, and to say their reports are more reliable than a random cannabis smoker who is just bound to be high because they recreationally use cannabis is laughable.

I know that you wanted to be hypocritical and ignore "little statistics" (read: facts) with regard to cannabis, but, I just want to state that the evidence says that cannabis really isn't that bad:-
- No one has ever died from cannabis, lots of people die from alcohol poisoning - but a lot of people say it's fine in moderation so it doesn't get banned. A bit like cannabis, for the former, not the latter.
- The Netherlands, a country where cannabis is legal when supplied by registered coffee shops, has no problems which can be related to the allowance of cannabis. In fact, it has less problems in general than the majority of countries which have laws against cannabis.
- There is no cannabis addiction, only psychological dependence on cannabis. There aren't withdrawal symptoms from stopping its usage, the inability to stop using cannabis is simply a symptom of a weak personality.

And to finish, I want to say that your comparison of a cannabis user and a murderer is dreadful. A murderer ruins a person's life by killing them, it's elimination of their life for what ever reason; very permanent and severe. Conversely, cannabis users generally use cannabis by themselves or with a group which consented to using it - they are not killing anyone or impacting anyone else's life. It's their choice, a person who is murdered would probably never consent to it. So, really, your comparison is blown out of proportion and therefore invalid.

It's no one's place to ban cannabis, because it doesn't impact anyone but the user. To ban it is to introduce a nanny-state which takes away the choice of people to do what they want with their own bodies.

Last edited by A; February 27th 2009 at 07:18 AM.
   
  (#11 (permalink)) Old
Lorelei Offline
Resident Nerd
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Lorelei's Avatar
 
Name: Laura
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: in my own thoughts

Posts: 801
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 04:27 PM

Bleh. People can do what they want with their lives, and if they want to fry their brains on weed it's none of my business. Honestly, no matter how true the commercials might be, no one will listen to them anyway.


"How dare I? Because it is the truth." -Jane Eyre

"You do what you love, and f#%* the rest." -Little Miss Sunshine
   
  (#12 (permalink)) Old
A Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
A's Avatar
 

Posts: 97
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 05:25 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorelei View Post
Honestly, no matter how true the commercials might be
More like false, they have no truth in them:

Quote:
Originally Posted by A View Post
Additionally, I just perused an "Above The Influence" advert and found that one of the things it implies (that cannabis causes hallucinations) is wrong.
The video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=GB&f...&v=jgJdVEoVbgg
National Health Service information page about cannabis:
http://www.nhsborders.org.uk/view_it...?item_id=16550
And I can present you with other examples if you require.
   
  (#13 (permalink)) Old
Lorelei Offline
Resident Nerd
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Lorelei's Avatar
 
Name: Laura
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: in my own thoughts

Posts: 801
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 05:28 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by A View Post
More like false, they have no truth in them:
I said how true they might be. I really don't know that much about the chemical properties of cannabis. I'm just making the statement that even if the commercials were saying nothing but the truth, no one would listen anyway.


"How dare I? Because it is the truth." -Jane Eyre

"You do what you love, and f#%* the rest." -Little Miss Sunshine
   
  (#14 (permalink)) Old
A Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
A's Avatar
 

Posts: 97
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 05:44 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorelei View Post
I said how true they might be. I really don't know that much about the chemical properties of cannabis. I'm just making the statement that even if the commercials were saying nothing but the truth, no one would listen anyway.
"might be" could mean that you are supporting their declarations or mean that you are unsure of their reliability - if it's the latter then I think making you aware that all that they say is false is perfectly fine.
   
  (#15 (permalink)) Old
Pending...Work in progess
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Work_In_Progress's Avatar
 
Name: Matt
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Location: Canada, New Brunswick

Posts: 759
Blog Entries: 2
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 11:14 PM

When I did it, I used to do it everyday to at least every week for the last 7 years, at the end I did notice that my speech was very incoherent and that my intelligence was diminishing. The fact is that I was also using cocaine, acid, shrooms and liquor at the same time. Now I will admit when a pot smoker is trying to tell me the benefits, or that there are no negative effects, I will not listen, because where I live, the pot smokers AREN'T educated in anyway shape or form and that I smelled the pot off them a mile away.

Actual people that make research and do smoke pot even if it is once a week/month, they will have to have damm good research in order to be taken seriously, because yes they will be discriminated against, because most likely they will just say 'weed is good because..' since they might be(most likely where I live) the type who can't live without getting impaired everyday.
   
  (#16 (permalink)) Old
Gram Negative Offline
Student
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Gram Negative's Avatar
 
Age: 33
Gender: Male

Posts: 219
Join Date: February 1st 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 11:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
Well, I'm always hearing the potheads ranting about "above the influence bullshit" (referring to those commericials on TV and such)... just wondering, where do this kiddos get their information that that stuff is false and that their own information HAS to be right? Do they have the facts? Or are they just avoiding all possible negatives about the drug because they are so consumed with their own obsession and dare not endanger it? I don't want to be swarmed with your little statistics here, all I'm saying is that no matter how many numbers you look up on the internet on how pot's okay, there'll be just as many saying it's not. So how do you know you're right?

In fact, what word seems better? The voice of an obvious user consumed by weed off the street? Or the voice of the news casts, paper and televisions?

I'm not saying everything the media says is true. All I'm saying is that just because you don't WANT weed to be bad doesn't mean it isn't. Potsmoker says pot isn't bad. Murderer says killing isn't bad.
Go to peer reviewed journals, not DARE websites. There are still people saying that weed causes cancer, sorry, total bs. Go look at a peer reviewed journal or just go to WebMD.

How are you comparing potsmoking to murdering? Am I hurting people when I smoke weed? You better say the same thing about people that drink alcohol. I have as much as respect for people that are against weed being legal as I have for people that though it was a good idea to ban alcohol. AKA NO Respect, at all, whatsoever. However, it is kool how those people literally helped the Mafia make a living, lol. Same goes for the Columbian, Mexican, etc. cartels. The more you are against weed, the more money THEY make. They love you for making things illegal. If weed was legal then they couldn't make as much as money as they can now.

I have probably smoked more weed than anyone on this site. I have a free ride to a state university, dean's list every semester, already doing job in biochem/biotech, gonna go to grad school. Sorry but weed does not affect those that are not stupid/ignorant/uneducated/unmotivated, etc. The funny thing is that I was a C average student before weed... so yea... any1 that says weed makes people stupid is just that... stupid.

And yes I've smoked enough weed that I've puked my guts out a few times, but that was prolly CO poisoning after ripping a ROOR.

Last edited by Gram Negative; February 26th 2009 at 11:33 PM.
  Send a message via AIM to Gram Negative  
  (#17 (permalink)) Old
Adean Offline
Almost 4000 posts.
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
Adean's Avatar
 
Name: Mary
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: Columbus, Ga

Posts: 392
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 11:30 PM

No one has ever died from an overdose on weed except for one guy and that was a shaky diagnosis.


Beware of the cats.
   
  (#18 (permalink)) Old
udontno Offline
</3?
I can't get enough
*********
 
udontno's Avatar
 
Name: Amanda Kate
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: VA, USA

Posts: 3,039
Blog Entries: 24
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 11:49 PM

I like to think that anyone who needs to be watching the "Above the Influence" commercials are out smoking right now.

To be honest, I think kids need to do their own research and not just trust what their friend Sally Sue tells them or what the TV is blaring at them.


--A

Last edited by udontno; February 27th 2009 at 12:55 AM. Reason: because my grammar was off. :P
   
  (#19 (permalink)) Old
peaceSRC Offline
Member
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
peaceSRC's Avatar
 
Age: 30
Gender: Female

Posts: 211
Join Date: February 11th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 26th 2009, 11:58 PM

Cannibus doesn't fry your brain unless you've been smoking it for like years straight.

I totally agree with udontno, although I didn't understand your first statement lol.

Last edited by peaceSRC; February 27th 2009 at 12:14 AM.
   
  (#20 (permalink)) Old
Lorelei Offline
Resident Nerd
Senior TeenHelper
*******
 
Lorelei's Avatar
 
Name: Laura
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: in my own thoughts

Posts: 801
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 27th 2009, 05:57 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by udontno View Post
I like to think that anyone who needs to be watching the "Above the Influence" commercials are out smoking right now.

To be honest, I think kids need to do their own research and not just trust what their friend Sally Sue tells them or what the TV is blaring at them.
Agreed. Too bad most people don't do that.


"How dare I? Because it is the truth." -Jane Eyre

"You do what you love, and f#%* the rest." -Little Miss Sunshine
   
  (#21 (permalink)) Old
primus diddy Offline
Member
Average Joe
***
 
primus diddy's Avatar
 
Name: Mike
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Location: Maine

Posts: 141
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 27th 2009, 07:07 PM

Nobody will ever convince me that smoking pot isn't bad for you. One reason is that it's absolutely impossible to prove a negative. Otherwise...you're inhaling smoke then holding it there for a period of time. Can't be good for you no matter how you slice it.

To be honest, I smoke pot when it's offered to me. I don't feel the need to preach about how it isn't "that bad" for you. I don't think public health is the issue. There's enough evidence that it's probably no worse for you than smoking tobacco that it would have been legalized by now if that were the only reason it was illegal for recreational use. I wouldn't bat an eye if all the pot in the world somehow disappeared.

Does anybody else find it strange that most of the people you see running around with petitions about strengthening medicinal marijuana laws are young people without credibility or association with the diseases it's reputed to help are young recreational pot smokers?

I think most of my issues with marijuana stem from people I know or have met that smoke it regularly. A lot of people are really obsessed with it. Not in a way you'd see with an addict. Just an annoying way. Posters of pot leaves, tie dye everything, dancing bears all over everything, jewelry, tattoos, etc. It's just a plant that you pick the buds off and smoke.

It's a personal choice for me not to smoke any more than is offered to me because there are too many ways to alter my perception of the world without any kind of drug. To me you're a fool to do drugs (yes, pot is a drug by literal and my personal definition) when you're young and a fool not to do drugs when you're old.
   
  (#22 (permalink)) Old
allikuja Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
allikuja's Avatar
 
Age: 30

Posts: 67
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 27th 2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by primus diddy View Post
Does anybody else find it strange that most of the people you see running around with petitions about strengthening medicinal marijuana laws are young people without credibility or association with the diseases it's reputed to help are young recreational pot smokers?
You've never met the happy hemptress (major medical marijuana activist in ohio, she gets around in a wheelchair as best as she can)

Which is another part of my point, the people who are sick are too busy being sick. They also don't want their meds taken away by the federal government who, despite the individual state laws allowing medical usage, will bust them anyways.

Just because I smoke pot for fun, doesn't mean I don't sympathize with those who use it for medication. And heck, who knows whether or not I'll develop cancer or something later on in life.
   
  (#23 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 27th 2009, 08:40 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by peaceSRC View Post

Not everyone is clueless. They do their research. It's really not cool to have such a reserved attitude towards people who have opinions differing from yours. I know you're saying that you don't know what's right or wrong, but you keep using these ridiculous terms such as "druggie" or "pothead" to describe who indulge in bud and you're just generalizing. And correct me if i'm wrong, but it seems that you're the one being defensive about this topic and you aren't that educated on it in the first place. And you're wrong in your last statement. There are people out there who do real research and know what to look for. It's quite easy really and they do experiments and generate statistics. I think you're the one who doesn't really know much about this topic which is why i'm telling you to go out and do research that is completely unbiased.
See, this is where you are completely missing the point of my post. The point of my post is just asking the question that if one can render all the statistics saying it's bad null, then how is it that automatically that means every bit of research saying it's good is right? Research. It goes both ways. You can find just as much saying it's good or bad or neutral. All I'm saying is that the pothead cannot say that the other research is bullshit, and blindly follow their own, just as clean person can't automatically say it's bad and disregard the other research. Following?


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#24 (permalink)) Old
Adean Offline
Almost 4000 posts.
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
Adean's Avatar
 
Name: Mary
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Location: Columbus, Ga

Posts: 392
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 12:04 AM

It depends on how the research was conducted. The gateway drug story is bullshit and many people know it. Also, there is barely any studies done on marijuana because the companies won't profit off of it. It won't become legal anytime soon and often it's expensive to get.

The thing is, a lot of stuff is bad for you in some way but have excellent applications for treating or preventing another illness. Marijuana is wonderful for helping to reduce brain inflammation that causes brain problems later on in life.

Also, if I was smoking marijuana for medical reasons, I'd keep it to myself.


Beware of the cats.
   
  (#25 (permalink)) Old
peaceSRC Offline
Member
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
peaceSRC's Avatar
 
Age: 30
Gender: Female

Posts: 211
Join Date: February 11th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 12:12 AM

Because you aren't looking in the right places. You don't know what to look for. That's what you aren't getting. The places that you're saying have just as much information on how bad it is, aren't always right. That's why ...God I feel like a broken record. Research peer journals, unbiased websites. Not governmentally funded websites. It's not just internet research either. Once you learn how to do proper research on the topic, you'll understand marijuana and it's effects better. I, along with the other posters can't sit here and spoon feed you through this. You need to make your own judgments and do it wisely. It's obvious that you don't know what to look for because you argued someone's point in a previous post about science and how it says that pot causes testicular cancer, when in that article you read, it never once said it was proven. Know what to look for, and read carefully.

You seem to be the one who doesn't understand that you're stereotyping people who smoke pot. Not all of them are "potheads" and follow their own information blindly. I have no idea where you're getting this bullshit. The only stoners I know who disprove negative effects of marijuana are the kids who are new to it, (rarely) addicted to it, or just plain ignorant.

Instead of arguing everyone else's points, soak in the information being provided to you. Remember, you were the one who asked and needed help. We came here to help you out, not debate and that's what you're heading towards. Nothing will get solved around here or help you if you don't take it and keep arguing everyone else's useful information.

Quote:
Nobody will ever convince me that smoking pot isn't bad for you. One reason is that it's absolutely impossible to prove a negative. Otherwise...you're inhaling smoke then holding it there for a period of time. Can't be good for you no matter how you slice it.
I don't recall anybody ever saying that marijuana isn't bad for you. It certainly has both beneficial effects and negative effects, but I would argue that it has more beneficial effects for me atleast than negative. Especially if you're smoking it in a clean way by the means of a bong which gives you 78% of the THC in the marijuana or a vaporizer which gives you about 92% of the THC in the marijuana. It all depends on the user, their knowledge, the type of bud they get and how often they smoke and why.

Last edited by peaceSRC; February 28th 2009 at 12:20 AM.
   
  (#26 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 01:44 AM

Samantha, how do you know your independant research is correct? Are you, yourself, performing experiments on people?


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#27 (permalink)) Old
peaceSRC Offline
Member
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
peaceSRC's Avatar
 
Age: 30
Gender: Female

Posts: 211
Join Date: February 11th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 04:34 AM

No. And i don't need to be a rock scientist to know any of this. You've learned how to do research and analysis in school haven't you? You're completely avoiding everything everyone just said. This isn't about me. This is about something you started and it's painfully obvious you're just debating on this with people whose intentions were to give you tips on what good sources to look for. If you aren't going to consider anyone's advice on here, why did you even bother creating this thread? I'm kinda confused now. You ask for help and now you're getting defensive about everything being said. If you want to keep spewing out irrevelant things to prove some kind of point, you should have worded your post differently because your intentions don't seem at all like you wanted to know what research to do. You may as well close it if you are just going to interrogate everyone instead of fulfilling your so called purpose in the first place.
   
  (#28 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 03:21 PM

The point of my thread was merely to state that they cannot call other research bullshit, while following only exactly what they want to hear. Even if independent research is viewed, they cannot be sure which is correct. My question was how do they possibly know their own research is right and can render anything they don't want to hear wrong? Your answer has been just merely "oh independent research, independent research" clearly avoiding the question of how do you know that research is right?


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#29 (permalink)) Old
Gram Negative Offline
Student
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Gram Negative's Avatar
 
Age: 33
Gender: Male

Posts: 219
Join Date: February 1st 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 04:22 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
The point of my thread was merely to state that they cannot call other research bullshit, while following only exactly what they want to hear. Even if independent research is viewed, they cannot be sure which is correct.
But you can be sure which one is more credible. A government website is not credible when compared to a top university.
  Send a message via AIM to Gram Negative  
  (#30 (permalink)) Old
sushi_error Offline
Member
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
sushi_error's Avatar
 
Age: 27
Gender: Female
Location: US

Posts: 443
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 06:59 PM

Ultimately, it is a person's decision whether or not to smoke marijuana or do other things.


Check out my blog: White-Out Blots

How did Mandela get the will to surpass the everyday,
When injustice had him caged and trapped in every way,
How did Ghandi ever withstand the hunger strikes and all,
Didn't do it to gain power or money if I recall,
It's to give; I guess I'll pass it on

- Take a Minute, K'naan
   
  (#31 (permalink)) Old
peaceSRC Offline
Member
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
peaceSRC's Avatar
 
Age: 30
Gender: Female

Posts: 211
Join Date: February 11th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - February 28th 2009, 11:31 PM

Yes because that's my POINT. Independent research. Do it if you want to get results. Honestly, if you can't pick out the good research from the bad research, you need to go back to class because this isn't a tough thing to comprehend. I suggest you go back and actually read everyone's posts on this thread because your questions were answered a long time ago. I'm not going to dumb this entire thing down anymore for you because it seems that you don't understand this topic at all.
   
  (#32 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 1st 2009, 03:23 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by peaceSRC View Post
Yes because that's my POINT. Independent research. Do it if you want to get results. Honestly, if you can't pick out the good research from the bad research, you need to go back to class because this isn't a tough thing to comprehend. I suggest you go back and actually read everyone's posts on this thread because your questions were answered a long time ago. I'm not going to dumb this entire thing down anymore for you because it seems that you don't understand this topic at all.
And once one turns to petty insults they immediately lose credibility in the debate. I did not start this thread to be antagonised by you. Your defensiveness merely proves my point more that all you believe is exactly what you want to believe.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#33 (permalink)) Old
Gram Negative Offline
Student
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Gram Negative's Avatar
 
Age: 33
Gender: Male

Posts: 219
Join Date: February 1st 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 1st 2009, 04:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
And once one turns to petty insults they immediately lose credibility in the debate. I did not start this thread to be antagonised by you. Your defensiveness merely proves my point more that all you believe is exactly what you want to believe.
Why would you expect anyone to respect you when you don't understand the basics of research sources? You pretty much ignored everything people told you about how THERE ARE independent and credible sources.
  Send a message via AIM to Gram Negative  
  (#34 (permalink)) Old
Hdjdjdjduvieg Offline
Wandering Wayfarer
I've been here a while
********
 
Hdjdjdjduvieg's Avatar
 
Name: no

Posts: 1,127
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 1st 2009, 06:50 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gram Negative View Post
Why would you expect anyone to respect you when you don't understand the basics of research sources? You pretty much ignored everything people told you about how THERE ARE independent and credible sources.
That go both ways. You people are the ones not understanding that just because research is what you want to hear, doesn't mean it's the only credible source out there.


I love the name of honour more than I fear death.
   
  (#35 (permalink)) Old
Gram Negative Offline
Student
Junior TeenHelper
****
 
Gram Negative's Avatar
 
Age: 33
Gender: Male

Posts: 219
Join Date: February 1st 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 1st 2009, 07:15 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
That go both ways. You people are the ones not understanding that just because research is what you want to hear, doesn't mean it's the only credible source out there.
Of course there are other credible sources of information but have you actually covered this in school? I am a biochem/biotech major and I HAVE to find credible research for all of my biology, chemistry, etc. classes.

For example: There are still websites that say that weed causes lung cancer. Except the researchers from TOP universities have refuted that point. Thus all the old studies have been refuted but many people like yourself do not care. Oh and I have sifted through tons of bs websites that depend on out dated research... Outdated... such as the bs about cancer, breast, becoming a criminal, etc.

Here's a quiz for you: A new research article shows that there is no evidence that cigarettes cause lung cancer. How do you find out if it is a credible source?

Also considering the fact that a lot of the opposition to weed comes from religious morons... well, you can't really expect them to be credible since their beliefs are not based on evidence.

Last edited by Gram Negative; March 1st 2009 at 07:25 PM.
  Send a message via AIM to Gram Negative  
  (#36 (permalink)) Old
Dasha Offline
Dude......woah.
Regular TeenHelper
*****
 
Dasha's Avatar
 
Name: Dasha
Gender: Female
Location: South-East Longways

Posts: 409
Join Date: January 7th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 1st 2009, 11:13 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
That go both ways. You people are the ones not understanding that just because research is what you want to hear, doesn't mean it's the only credible source out there.
How do you know the research is just what we want to hear? You are doing the same exact thing here only believing what YOU want to. Just because a person or organization(above the influence) has money to make a commercial DOES NOT make them credible. There are more sources online listing BOTH benefits and downsides to weed(with more good points), and then you have Above the Influence only saying the bad points(and even making up some points), shouldn't that say something? If there is lots of research done that disputes Above the Influence, then of course people have a right to say its bullshit.


Oh and one more thing I've never smoked weed and don't plan to in the immediate future, BUT I have a friend who does and he is a pretty smart kid, his brain is not fried, and he is not a zombie.


"For is it not death nor dying that I fear. But lack of life and purpose."
-----------
Love what is mortal; hold it against your bones knowing your own life depends on it; and, when the time comes to let it go, let it go.
-Mary Oliver
  Send a message via AIM to Dasha Send a message via Yahoo to Dasha Send a message via Skype™ to Dasha 
  (#37 (permalink)) Old
Member
I can't get enough
*********
 
InSovietRussiaORGASMGotU's Avatar
 

Posts: 2,088
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 2nd 2009, 12:33 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
The point of my thread was merely to state that they cannot call other research bullshit, while following only exactly what they want to hear. Even if independent research is viewed, they cannot be sure which is correct. My question was how do they possibly know their own research is right and can render anything they don't want to hear wrong? Your answer has been just merely "oh independent research, independent research" clearly avoiding the question of how do you know that research is right?
You don't always know it's right. If it's from credible sources and performed by a prestigious university or research institution, and others who also have the same or more credibility, who did the same experiments, and got the same results, one can suggest that they're correct. But, seeing as how we don't know everything, we cannot know for sure that the research is correct. If some results are completely off and proposed mechanisms are utter bullshit by conflicting with well-known laws and theories, then one can suggest that the weird thing is wrong.

There's a difference between not wanting to hear something because it's different or because it seems to be wrong. There was a paper, written by Bradford Hill in the 1970s-1980s, where he discussed 9 concepts to help prove causation, and in effect, if something is right. These 9 things cannot be applied to every research project, however, for the ones that most of them can, if they all check out to be proper, then you can assume it's more correct than something else.

If you don't want to hear something because it is different yet the proposed mechanisms and such are credible, plausible, etc..., and you're turning away because it may make you seem wrong, then you're just being ignorant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout
That go both ways. You people are the ones not understanding that just because research is what you want to hear, doesn't mean it's the only credible source out there.
If someone is going to make a claim, then they need some evidence to support it. If you want to compare some random website made by a highschool dropout versus the report from an indepedent researcher, I'm probably going to side with the research as he probably has more credibility. Researcher typically will be the credible resource. You can compare various claims by whoever but ultimately they should have some objective evidence to back it up, something that is credible. True, research isn't the only one but it definately is the top one.

You are also being hypocritical. You call some people out on saying research is only what they want to hear and nothing else, then you turn around and do the exact opposite, believing exactly what you want to believe, hearing only what you want to hear.
   
  (#38 (permalink)) Old
allikuja Offline
Member
Not a n00b
**
 
allikuja's Avatar
 
Age: 30

Posts: 67
Join Date: January 8th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 3rd 2009, 03:10 PM

So:
~Above the Influence commercials are bullshit.
~People need to learn how to distinguish between reliable and unreliable research/sources.
~Weed isn't as bad as the TV says, but it does have con's with its pro's.

~The end.

(somebody can close this thread now)
   
  (#39 (permalink)) Old
udontno Offline
</3?
I can't get enough
*********
 
udontno's Avatar
 
Name: Amanda Kate
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Location: VA, USA

Posts: 3,039
Blog Entries: 24
Join Date: January 5th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 3rd 2009, 08:52 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by allikuja View Post
So:
~Above the Influence commercials are bullshit.
~People need to learn how to distinguish between reliable and unreliable research/sources.
~Weed isn't as bad as the TV says, but it does have con's with its pro's.

~The end.

(somebody can close this thread now)
Not all of those commercials are "bullshit". I'd like to think that at least some of them are backed by facts or studies.

Why would we close this thread? Even if it seems as if we have came to a conclusion, that doesn't mean that someone won't stumble along and have something else to add to this.


--A
   
  (#40 (permalink)) Old
Marvin Offline
Member
I've been here a while
********
 
Marvin's Avatar
 
Name: Marvin
Gender: Male
Location: USA

Posts: 1,576
Blog Entries: 1
Join Date: January 6th 2009

Re: Above the Influence bullshit? - March 4th 2009, 04:48 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
Well, I'm always hearing the potheads ranting about "above the influence bullshit" (referring to those commericials on TV and such)... just wondering, where do this kiddos get their information that that stuff is false and that their own information HAS to be right? Do they have the facts? Or are they just avoiding all possible negatives about the drug because they are so consumed with their own obsession and dare not endanger it? I don't want to be swarmed with your little statistics here, all I'm saying is that no matter how many numbers you look up on the internet on how pot's okay, there'll be just as many saying it's not. So how do you know you're right?

In fact, what word seems better? The voice of an obvious user consumed by weed off the street? Or the voice of the news casts, paper and televisions?

I'm not saying everything the media says is true. All I'm saying is that just because you don't WANT weed to be bad doesn't mean it isn't. Potsmoker says pot isn't bad. Murderer says killing isn't bad.
Murder/pot analogy just does work. Sorry.

Consumed? Obsession? How many potheads do you even know. I go to one of the top unis in the UK. It seems at least 50% of people I know smoke pot, and at least 25% regularly smoke it. They aren't consumed by it, its recretional thing, like how we use alcohol. Very few people are 'consumed' by it as its not physically addictive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phillips_Screwdriver View Post
When I did it, I used to do it everyday to at least every week for the last 7 years, at the end I did notice that my speech was very incoherent and that my intelligence was diminishing. The fact is that I was also using cocaine, acid, shrooms and liquor at the same time. Now I will admit when a pot smoker is trying to tell me the benefits, or that there are no negative effects, I will not listen, because where I live, the pot smokers AREN'T educated in anyway shape or form and that I smelled the pot off them a mile away.
See above statement about top university. Its more about the person then the drug.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gram Negative View Post
I have probably smoked more weed than anyone on this site.
mildly persumptious there lol.

Quote:
And yes I've smoked enough weed that I've puked my guts out a few times, but that was prolly CO poisoning after ripping a ROOR.
Apparently throwing up from smoking pot can be due to blood sugar levels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by peaceSRC View Post
Cannibus doesn't fry your brain unless you've been smoking it for like years straight.
and even then it doesnt really fry your brains. One of my high achieving uni friends has smoke an ounce a week for a good couple of years, and has been smoking pot since she was 13.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scout View Post
See, this is where you are completely missing the point of my post. The point of my post is just asking the question that if one can render all the statistics saying it's bad null, then how is it that automatically that means every bit of research saying it's good is right? Research. It goes both ways. You can find just as much saying it's good or bad or neutral. All I'm saying is that the pothead cannot say that the other research is bullshit, and blindly follow their own, just as clean person can't automatically say it's bad and disregard the other research. Following?
You look at the sources, and you look at the study, and you evaluate it. As a degree student, we have to learn about how to do this all.
   
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
bullshit, influence

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




All material copyright 1998-2019, TeenHelp.
Terms | Legal | Privacy | Conduct | Complaints

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000-2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search engine optimization by vBSEO.
Theme developed in association with vBStyles.