| Author | Message | ||
     Sifo |
I do like this paragraph from your link however...
Bottom line is that people have known for a long time that stoners just don't seem as bright as the population at large. This study is just a step in the process of answering why. | ||
| Griffmeister |
Somebody's on something judging by how many times the(y) did not us(e) enough letters to form the right words.  | ||
| Drkside79 |
google crack spider watch the video. I promise its more fun than sifos. nevermind I'll do it for you in case you smoked pot and can no longer type. | ||
| Boogiman1981 |
You are reading a lot into things that just haven't been said. Huge amounts. You also refuse to answer simple direct questions. Why is that? No I’m not reading into things and even if I was that is a process known as interpretation. I’ve clearly answered the questions you’ve posed. I can't help that you don't like or agree with me. This is how things are sometimes done in science. You can't take a group of human beings and lock them into a lab where you feed them prescribed amounts of drugs. Instead you do studies like this and eliminate the variables the best you can. Science has a long history of doing these sorts of studies and they have methods to eliminate other variables. Just because ‘this is how things are done’ doesn’t make them right, verifiable or repeatable. Yes actually you can isolate study groups. Actually it indicates a link between regular use and lower IQ REGARDLESS of age. It's just worse for teens because the damage seems to be permanent. Why are you misrepresenting these findings? I’m not and don’t see how you could possibly think I am. Speaking of misstating the link i provided says:"Interestingly, people who picked up the habit as adults had no IQ drop, suggesting that marijuana may not be as harmful to the mature brain." that's odd given what you said, so who is misrepresenting what? How is the media treating this? Seems like fairly straightforward reporting from what I've seen. The study was published and some short articles are written explaining the facts in a readers digest version. That’s what you’ve seen. Good for you. No doubt. Most of the issues revolve around cultural issues where certain segments of the population just don't relate as expected by the designers of the tests. This is not an issue in what's being done in this study at all though. It compares the same person at various ages. It matters not how that person relates to the rest of the population. It is one of the central issues. The very test that they are using to attempt to prove a point is flawed and therefore any results that are produced will be flawed as well. Has policy and law been mentioned at all? Not that I've seen in this thread. Not that I've seen in posted articles either. Who funded this study? What was their motivation? Studies regarding drug use are widely used as points by law/policy makers to reshape and/or create policy. Why would this study be any different? If you think that this was just done from the bottom of their hearts I have news for you. Published studies are no more in a vacuum than anything else. There was a very positive correlation in this study (not the 5.2% you mentioned). In fact the 8 point drop is the average of the entire group of regular users. Do you really not see this as significant? Nope sure don’t. Given the margins of error for the IQ testing and the other factors that are completely out of the researchers hands that leads to a complete lack of confidence in their ‘findings’. Yes the 5.2% I mentioned… of the study group as a whole. If that’s what their ‘findings’ are based on the % is insignificant due to the margin of error. As for the avg 8pnt drop no that really doesn’t concern me either. Due to the fact that I know what IQ means and more importantly I know what it doesn’t mean. One measure of a man cannot predict his successes or failures in life. | ||
| Gunut75 |
It all depends on the individual. I used to do that sh1t when I was younger, and I have an IQ of 126.  | ||
| Pwnzor |
Pot makes people lazy. Lazy people don't study. Something, something, something Dark Side. | ||
| Sifo |
Boogiman, I can see this is going to deteriorate in to a worthless discussion. No you don't answer direct questions. You may respond, but that's not the same thing. I'll point to your last post as an example where I asked you how the media is treating this. It's a point you brought up, yet refuse to explain. Pointless. As far as the science aspect is involved, this sort of study is well accepted and can be well done and account for many variables, certainly the ones you object too. They are just way too obvious to ignore, and they say they have been accounted for. Your opinion that they haven't accounted for these things goes against the provided information and appears to be based on nothing but personal bias. At least you won't answer where your bias on this comes from. As for the effect on adults...
Yes, it drops their IQ, they just eventually can have their IQ rebound if they quite choomin'. As for the correlation between IQ and achievement, take a look at your wikipedia link...
That's a pretty strong correlation. This is also pointed out (without quantification) in the article I first posted. You IQ tests to be too flawed to be of value though. I can't change your opinion, but I can be smart enough to know better than you. The problem isn't mine. As for who funded this study, Duke University has their name on it. I guess they just sell their name to the highest bidder when it comes to their science department. That's good to know. Again, you make the claim that the study is flawed, but provide NOTHING to support that assertion. Awesome! Back to the 5.2% (that is derived from one incorrect number, and one number that you still haven't answered where it came from)... You claim it to be insignificant without even knowing the breakdown of the sample group. This is an opinion based on ignorance. Score one for you. They do break out the results for regular users though, and they don't do well. Of course you claim an 8 point drop in IQ doesn't mean anything though, so no worries. I am curious if you have ever actually taken an IQ test though. I don't want to get into posting our IQs on the internet, I'm just curious if you've ever been through the process. Given what you claim to understand about the tests, and how it relates to how the scores have been used here, it seems you have a flawed view of the results that are obtained. Great video Darkside! | ||
| Drkside79 |
>>> Something, something, something Dark Side. Damn it i don't get it. >>>>Great video Darkside! Lol yeah i also laughed. Crack Spidaz are gangsta | ||
| Xl1200r |
To be honest, not taking one side or another, I don't see this study proving anything. "At least 4 times a week" is a helluva lot if you ask me - if I got drunk at least 4 times a week, I'd expect similar, if not worse results. If you eat Big Macs 4 times a week, you're much more likely to be overweight. If you drink 4 times a week, you're much more likely to be hungover or in a car crash. If you go to work at least 4 times a week, you're more likely to be gainfully employed. What this study says if you do something that makes you "x", you're more likely to be "x". Shocking! Now, the correlation with the younger brains not recovering, that is interesting and not all that unexpected. We already know that the male brain is not fully developed to until the mid-20's at best and is the reason for more risky behavior (aggressive driving, etc). The recoverableness for adults is interesting, though - shows some fascinating things our brains are capable of. I'd be interested to see some other results pertaining to people who used it less than the "at least 4 times a week" they focused on, like people who use(d) 1-4 times a month, which I think is far more representitive of a larger portion of the population. And the spat at the end about "concern that in the US pot is seen as a safe alternative to cigarettes" is laughable at best. There is no one thinks that, haha. An alternative to alcohol, perhaps, but no way to cigarettes. | ||
| Boogiman1981 |
really? | ||
| 86129squids |
Everything in moderation- except methamphetamine, of course... I will say, seriously, that the medical benefits of smoking pot should be appreciated... I had a beloved aunt, who once worked as a RN, diagnosed with an aggressive cancer- she was prescribed Marinol, but in the pill form it just was too much for her. Arrangements were made to provide her with the proper thing she needed... | ||
| Gunut75 |
lol: squids (at the video, not your aunt). | ||
| Etennuly |
As a non toker I don't care if you do it or not, just as much as I don't care what your religion is. I don't see or feel the need for it. A glass of mountain spring water fits the occasional desire to kill of a few random brain cells for me. But I sure would not use it on a daily or weekly basis unless it was in the fuel tank of a race vehicle. I am wanting to see a law where when people legally retire from the work force, surrender their driver's license(or pilot, or train engineer, etc.) that they can smokem' if they got'em. | ||
| Sifo |
"At least 4 times a week" is a helluva lot if you ask me I kind of agree with you on that. Still, plenty of people make a daily habit out of it. I did myself for a few years. I'm glad I waited until I was in my 20s for that. I've mentioned here in the past that when I quit, I noticed that I had better mental faculties. My personal experience is exactly what is described in this study. A lot of people I hung with back then were daily users. A few of them still are. They have become the crack spider's bitches. | ||
| 86129squids |
Vern- have you forgotten the Ben-Gay aspect??   But I digress... | ||
| Kenm123t |
LOL this bunch probably mainlines Ben-Gay after a long ride! Legends usually have basis in fact distorted at times but Stoners are every where. Ozzie for example. The study is difficult to properly conduct since pot is illegal. Accurate information from the user is impossible a debit card record of Dorito and brownie purchases may be a better indicator of use than a users memory.  Carry On! | ||
| Ducxl |
I remember this EXACT discussion from last year Started by the exact same OP.What's with the crusade? Why not crusade against drunk drivers KILLING innocents? What a WASTE of bandwidth. | ||
| Etennuly |
It sounded familiar, but I could not seem to remember exactly.....Ben Gay for a brain massage.....  | ||
| Aesquire |
As I said, Be interesting to see a study of the drugs they crank up the kids with for ADD. Pot as a substitute for Cigarettes? Hah! for a few reasons. 1. Tobacco has a very different psychoactive effect. It does indeed calm you down, and increase your focus. ( also a vasoconstrictor... the reason it's BAD for you ) But the effects wear off rapidly, and most users run between 10-40 doses a day. so...2. If you did 10-40 doses of pot a day, you'd be pretty useless. And you'd be out of Oreos. As a substitute for alcohol? Not so much. In most ways it's superior, less aggression, nearly zero chance of overdose, ( NOT zero, but dang low ) but the effect persist longer than booze, and again, not the same effect. You can easily make a case for booze being far more dangerous. Overdoses alone make that argument. In college towns, locally, we have a few cases of frat house OD's, in one case the frat house had already been kicked off campus for having fatal OD's. Yet I do NOT advocate Prohibition. It didn't work last time for booze, it doesn't work now for all the illegal drugs. All it does is make evil people rich, increase violence, and make the drugs out there untested and unsafe. As far as "....wanting to see a law where when people legally retire from the work force, surrender their driver's license...." Why not just do as is now law and custom? If you get in an accident, car, boat, plane... you get tested for intoxication. If you are wasted, you should get the appropriate punishment. Driving drunk is wrong, stupid, and sadly understandable. The first thing that goes as you drink is the higher functions that tell you not to do stupid stuff. Like Drive. Other drugs, other shades of grey, but as a rule, you get judgment dumb before gross motor skills go away. Pity it's not the other way around. ( if you couldn't get into the car... you'd never drive drunk ) But it seems to shut down the brain in the reverse order of evolution. It gets down to social engineering. You have to make it unacceptable to drive wasted. Since Booze is way older than cars, ( horses usually got you home anyway... they are smarter than drunk people ) we have to deal with it... What's really annoying is when ( as has happened in NY...and I bet elsewhere ) a politician gets caught drunk driving and gets away with it like none of us would. In one case she was the head of the drunk driving committee! I keep expecting free pot to be on the list of free stuff for the "poor". It would reduce crime, violence, and ( this is why it's not done ) voting.... | ||
| Sifo |
I remember this EXACT discussion from last year Started by the exact same OP.What's with the crusade? Why not crusade against drunk drivers KILLING innocents? What a WASTE of bandwidth. No crusade here, other than for truth. That's in short supply all too often. For the record, last time we had this discussion it was from a different OP, from the "Otherside79". http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/4062/617817.html?1298489784 Just going for some truth here. Waste of bandwidth? Most of the internet is a waste of bandwidth. Of course what I see as a waste may differ from what you see. No biggie. I do find it very entertaining seeing those who's beliefs are so entrenched that they refuse to accept evidence that backs up what is plain to see. On pot use, I'm pretty nonjudgmental. At least as long as it doesn't affect me, such as driving stoned. I don't understand why people would choose to partake in something that clearly makes you stupid though. I understand it as a young and rebellious sort of thing, but not when you become a mature adult. Then again, the people I know who continue to smoke dope never did seem to make it the mature adult stage. Although one person I know did get there around age 45. The change in him was quite apparent. He sees it in himself too. Too bad it took 45 years to get there though.  | ||
| Pwnzor |
Andy, | ||
| Kenm123t |
Brewing wine etc was a benefit to society it did two thing killed the bugs in water and required heating water above 130f which helped sanitize the water. In wine yeast self limits to 15% alcohol alcohol being a waste product. Drunks are proof any thing good can be misused. Pot or smoking in general just plain stupid | ||
| Ducxl |
Mr Sifo.I can recall the interaction/w you on this TIRED subject once before.the thread you cite wasn't' it. This is a tired subject .talk about the KILLINGS related to drunk alcohol induced driving for a more SERIOUS subject.Over. and OUT.bye. | ||
| Sifo |
Perhaps you are thinking of this one from about 2 years ago. http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/406 2/601608.html?1288196160 Though I didn't start that one either. I can't find the one you claim I started. Not claiming it didn't happen, I just can't find it. | ||
| Danger_dave |
Ironic thread title, | ||
| Aesquire |
You caught that too? | ||
| Sifo |
Yep, titles last foreve  | ||
| Aesquire |
Good point on the intoxicated driving. Timing, prohibition, blue laws... Most places in the US have "last call" for alcohol. Why? To concentrate the drunks on the road when the normals are in bed... After midnight, 1/2 the drivers are drunk, I was told. ( by a NY State Trooper ) Listening to the police scanner while working Weekend Night Shift at an inconvenience store, ( the most dangerous Job in the World...! ) discovered that most of the people pulled over at 3AM, drunk, don't have a license anymore. 3 to 1 easy. Variable blue laws make it even more fun. Local last call is 2am. Buffalo 3am. The Bartenders at the Hotel I worked bar back often took off down the Thruway to grab last call in Buffalo. At 2:15.... ( leaving me to clean up... ) I can draw a bunch of analogies to that little health hazard. It's a factor worth knowing if you ride at night. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Pwn, Thanks. Seriously that was surprisingly awesome and I'm sober. lol | ||
| Slaughter |
Blaming pot for intelligence loss is silly. Problem is when "experiments" are "reviewed" by non-technical folks. Certain personality types are drawn to intoxicating substances - whatever they are. This is true with certain personalities being drawn to certain activities (high risk behaviors like motorsports, racing, combat, marathon/triathlon). There are certainly those users who don't have a genetic predisposition - but the marijuana-smoking population MAY be largely made up of CERTAIN types of folks from the get go. There is CORRELATION and there is CAUSE. There is a CORRELATION between large-busted women and their net financial worth. Women with silicone gel-filled bags implanted under their skin and muscle tissue tend to have slightly higher net financial worth. You can't necessarily say that the silicone bags cause their higher wealth. There MAY BE other factors at work. |
