Ingesting cannabis generally has a more intense reaction than smoking or vaping it.
9 Likes
i found it much more difficult to titrate my dosage with edibles compared to smoking because of the extended onset time. it generally ended up with me either feeling i hadn’t taken enough or that i had taken too much. it reminded me of nasa sending instructions to the cassini probe in the vicinity of jupiter: it takes 30 minutes or so for the instructions to get there and then another 30 to see if it worked.
21 Likes
That guy is going to wake up with a terrible knot in.his neck muscles. Bad ergonomics.
3 Likes
Plus you’re also at incredible altitude
10 Likes
6 Likes
Ricketts is on to something but it’s not reefer that kills kids. It’s electing and empowering GOP politicians – no well documented for over forty years in power and, of course, with the party’s complete response to the pandemic.
3 Likes
Exactly. Although previously I’d eaten purchased edibles so I had a better idea of the potency.
3 Likes
Yeah, as the THC is converted by your liver to a much more psychedelic form, that plus the delayed onset can make for some rather interesting experiences.
2 Likes
Er, yeah. Here in The Netherlands, even in Amsterdam with its reputation, if you see somebody with a spliff on the street it is a tourist. (Often wandering around on bicycle paths wondering what traffic laws are…)
In general modern youth in most western countries do less drugs than their parents did, including pot.
10 Likes
And yet supply is, they say, increasing. It could be their parents making up the difference, which, although I’ve met some who would definitely seem to be trying, seems unlikely. Maybe it’s just that drugs are so ubiquitous and commonplace that the majority is taken by people who are successfully integrating them into their lives. It seems that if you don’t know anyone who takes drugs you have to ask yourself why your friends are lying to you.
2 Likes
Smoking anything will kill you. Stick with healthy organic edibles, kids.
2 Likes
I had a colleague in Public Health, and this was his area of research: casual users of drugs. These were people who held down successful jobs, had families, etc etc, and who would get home on Friday night and have a bit of heroin or meth or whatever. No negative effect on their professional careers or their everyday lives. No addiction or anything.
Almost impossible to get a grant to study this, because nobody wants to hear it.
10 Likes
“the established process we have to determine whether or not drugs are safe and effective” oh right your process. I guess he means the DEA scheduling. The scheduling system that ignored its own research findings.
The National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse issued a report on its findings in 1972 that called for the decriminalization of marijuana possession.
Funny thing about that, marijuana’s classification as Schedule 1 (Drug is not safe to use, even under medical supervision) When marijuana’s classification comes under review, its schedule 1 status is consistently maintained due to insufficient scientific evidence of its medical value. Classic catch 22 situation.
On a side note, funny thing about these dickheads, it’s a trope to have a wall of the grift all lined up behind these announcements. See look at all this support from these, prosecutors, police, p̶h̶a̶r̶m̶a̶c̶e̶u̶t̶i̶c̶a̶l̶ ̶c̶o̶m̶p̶a̶n̶i̶e̶s̶ doctors, prisons wardens. Look at South Carolina's Attorney General spout nonsense about marijuana | Boing Boing
4 Likes
I’ve never heard of a weekend warrior on injected opioids.
That sounds very strange to me. It sounds extremely unlikely to me.
Although you do hear about people who hold down jobs and are functional heroine addicts, I personally have never heard of people using stuff like heroine recreationally on weekends, and not quickly progressing into addiction.
It would certainly be very interrsting to look at that deeper. Do you know the org your friend works for? Maybe they have some papers published?
4 Likes
The flip side is the research that has been done on hardcore addicts and their ability to abstain and make decisions about usage. Dr. Carl Hart took crack addicts, kept them in a supervised ward and let them choose between smoking or taking a cash payment. The quality of the drugs was varied and the payouts were varied. The results were that the subjects were perfectly able to make rational decisions about whether to get high or not.
As best as I can tell, addiction has a serious self medication element, and having a higher average quality of life in society is the best way to curb destructive drug use.
10 Likes
Combined with lifelong dihydrogen monoxide exposure.
7 Likes
It helps with the cotton mouth 
10 Likes
I don’t know that they were injected. My understanding is that heroin, at least, can be snorted.
Not by my colleague, but here’s one study:
Here’s one that focuses on poor, rather than middle-class people:
6 Likes
Thanks!
2 Likes
Oliver Sacks was also famously a weekend warrior drug user, but I can’t remember if heroine was one of them.
Also, it’s less about broad data, but if you’re interested in the topic in general you might enjoy this book:
For each drug there’s a description of what it does, then 2 stories from users, one who kept it under control, the other, less so.
6 Likes
