Originally posted by inimalist
would you say anything that does meet one of these conditions should be made illegal?
It's degrees of meeting those conditions. Re: your demographic data from the UN, it is estimated based on sample groups. I am unaware of how the data was sampled. As we all often are with blanket data.
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
1) that it does not cause or increase mental health problems.
2) That it is not a gateway drug.
3) That it does not affect the loved ones around those taking it, psychologically, emotionally and financially ever.
First off, cigarettes:
1) Fails due to the numerous severally addictive qualities
2) most people who become addicted to hard drugs smoked cigarettes first. Fails.
3) well it certainly fails this. It is a huge financial burden and second hand smoke is a serious health risk. Not to mention the emotional stress caused by relatives w/ lung cancer.
Second, let's try caffeine:
1. Well it certainly fails this because it causes people to become much more irritable, is addictive, causes anxiety, insomnia, and more.
2. If I know my drug addicts they love their coffee. Fails.
3. I just talked to someone recently about how they had to spend almost all of their free money on "Starbucks". Couldn't go without it. Fails.
Well, geez, I guess I can do without those. Let's try good, wholesome food.
1. Well food plays a huge role in creating mental disorders like anorexia, so it fails here.
2. Every single drug addict on earth tried food before they moved to hard drugs.
3. I know families who have suffered horribly because of heart disease deaths in the family, obesity, not to mention that food is a bigger financial burden than all four of these!
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
It's degrees of meeting those conditions. Re: your demographic data from the UN, it is estimated based on sample groups. I am unaware of how the data was sampled. As we all often are with blanket data.
Originally posted by King Kandy
And that's why it would be better for us to take your own opinion as fact?
That's not what i'm saying. What i'm saying is the drug 'war' is failing, people are looking for an alternative. Having spoken to people near that alternative they do not believe it works either.
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
That's not what i'm saying. What i'm saying is the drug 'war' is failing, people are looking for an alternative. Having spoken to people near that alternative they do not believe it works either.
Originally posted by King Kandy
I'm going to examine a few things by this criteria.First off, cigarettes:
1) Fails due to the numerous severally addictive qualities
2) most people who become addicted to hard drugs smoked cigarettes first. Fails.
3) well it certainly fails this. It is a huge financial burden and second hand smoke is a serious health risk. Not to mention the emotional stress caused by relatives w/ lung cancer.Second, let's try caffeine:
1. Well it certainly fails this because it causes people to become much more irritable, is addictive, causes anxiety, insomnia, and more.
2. If I know my drug addicts they love their coffee. Fails.
3. I just talked to someone recently about how they had to spend almost all of their free money on "Starbucks". Couldn't go without it. Fails.Well, geez, I guess I can do without those. Let's try good, wholesome food.
1. Well food plays a huge role in creating mental disorders like anorexia, so it fails here.
2. Every single drug addict on earth tried food before they moved to hard drugs.
3. I know families who have suffered horribly because of heart disease deaths in the family, obesity, not to mention that food is a bigger financial burden than all four of these!
Like I said its degrees, far more people eat healthy food and drink coffee. Cigs are more stigmatised than beer or pot in many ways.
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
It's degrees of meeting those conditions. Re: your demographic data from the UN, it is estimated based on sample groups. I am unaware of how the data was sampled. As we all often are with blanket data.
you have better data?
to find the specific methods, you would have to find the studies the UN is using to get those numbers, many of which I'm sure are based on hospital visits
there is no perfect way to get data, if that is what you are saying. That being admitted, you have provided no evidence whatsoever, nor have you said you think the UN stats are in error... so w/e man... hand waving to the extreme
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
Like I said its degrees, far more people eat healthy food and drink coffee. Cigs are more stigmatised than beer or pot in many ways.
Remember, I said I wanted EXACTLY what you needed to be shown.
Originally posted by King Kandy
OK, so you need to tell me what degree is necesarry for you to admit it should be legalized.Remember, I said I wanted EXACTLY what you needed to be shown.
O.K. I need, a sample group which contains a significant number of people to give me a >1 standard deviation with an equal comparison of the criteria you offer say comparing mental health disorders amongst pot and non pot smokers.
Of course I can pull up shit like this.
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinfo/problems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabis.aspx
As can you
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
O.K. I need, a sample group which contains a significant number of people to give me a >1 standard deviation with an equal comparison of the criteria you offer say comparing mental health disorders amongst pot and non pot smokers.
LOL
self-medication confound 😉
EDIT: c'mon, whose research are you going to bring up, I want to know if its some of the studies I'm familiar with
also, 1 SD is nothing, standard significance testing is 3 SD [EDIT2: if we are doing a standard z or t-test at least, F, chi and other stuff works a little differently, especially with larger or smaller n sizes], silly
Originally posted by inimalist
LOLself-medication confound 😉
EDIT: c'mon, whose research are you going to bring up, I want to know if its some of the studies I'm familiar with
also, 1 SD is nothing, standard significance testing is 3 SD [EDIT2: if we are doing a standard z or t-test at least, F, chi and other stuff works a little differently, especially with larger or smaller n sizes], silly
Self medication is a red herring in my opinion.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080509105348.html
A greater than 1 significance is fine for this.
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
Self medication is a red herring in my opinion.
LOL
are you just trolling now?
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080509105348.html
just sends me to a search page....
Originally posted by Daemon Seed
A greater than 1 significance is fine for this.
how much stats background do you have?
and no, it isn't. It really isn't. Even in the most pilot of studies, an alpha of .1 is about the highest you would see. an alpha of .3 is no different from chance, like, laughably so
No
It shouldn't be a search page
My first degree was in a biological subject, I did units in it then. When I my first post grad studies, they were more humanities based as it was a professional qualification as well as being a post grad I did some more. In my last post grad qualification, which was quite a while ago, I did no stats at all as the focus was significantly different.