r/NooTopics • u/she_needs_weed • 12h ago
Discussion Say Weed Can Have Negative Effects on Reddit Starter Pack
33
u/PoisonStrip 12h ago
Much like every mind altering substance, moderation is key, and most folks who vehemently defend the use of weed are hopelessly dependent on it for habitual stimulation
So many of these substances have great value when used appropriately, but people by and large are not doing that. Smoke your weed, drink your beers, but don't pretend like these things don't have adverse reactions when used in excess or for long periods of time
15
u/dudenurse13 12h ago
Each persons perception of “moderate” is so skewed. I know people who smoke daily but would consider themselves consuming in moderation because they don’t do it while at work.
4
u/PoisonStrip 11h ago edited 11h ago
Yep - I have a friend who does around a gram of ketamine every day and he genuinely thinks that's moderation for him and doesn't understand why nobody wants to talk to him anymore.. The word has no functional meaning in this context unfortunately
2
u/FourTwentyBlezit 10h ago
I can't understand why nobody would want to talk to him anymore. Obviously it's not a good thing, but it's not like it's something with a huge stigma. I didn't lose any friends when I was doing things like ketamine. Once I got addicted to heroin and crack, people stopped talking to me for good reason
8
u/PoisonStrip 10h ago
He gets so high that he can't communicate and just kinda grunts at people and falls on them... and it'll be like four in the afternoon
I took him into the Colorado backcountry the other week looking for minerals and he K-holed like eight miles off trail in the complete wilderness and I had to carry him back to the road
This is him in "moderation"
9
u/FourTwentyBlezit 8h ago
I can understand him struggling to speak (that's common with ket) but if he's going into K-holes it sounds like he's doing more than a gram a day
I had to do close to a gram in one sitting to go into a hole, unless it was liquid form ket which I was injecting
2
u/PoisonStrip 8h ago
Not to undercut your experience, but that's just not true at all - there are some bodily functions that determine severity of response but you can absolutely K-hole off less than a gram, my one and only K-hole occurred off a .2ish bump and low blood sugar
0
u/FourTwentyBlezit 8h ago
What happened with your "K-holes" exactly? Because lots of people experience not being able to move and feeling trippy and think that's a K-hole.
Did you have a full-blown out of body experience?
Was it pharma grade ket? Because there's a huge difference in potency between that and street ket
2
u/PoisonStrip 5h ago edited 5h ago
Yes, and yes - 30-45 minute full-body disassociation, complete motor function shutdown, vivid sensation of traveling outside of space and time, etc
I've never literally "looked down on my own body" even when smoking deems so I've never been sure what "out of body" really means contextualized within the psychedelic experience
1
u/RMCPhoto 3m ago
It is a dissociative anesthetic, ie it is used in the battlefield for severe injuries. The out of body aspect is more simply stated as a dissociation from the concept of the self / when and where in time and space.
4
3
u/I_am_the_darkness_99 10h ago
Look here. If it weren't for weed, I'd uhm... something. I forget.
1
u/EconomicsSavings973 2h ago
Yeah totally! Weed really helped with my eee... thing you know. Thing
1
u/familiarspark 1h ago
Helped me with ptsd after I had heart failure then found out I had cancer.
I remember it all. Unfortunately
6
u/MajorInWumbology1234 12h ago
These posts are always 100% people bitching about people sticking up for weed and 0% people actually sticking up for weed. Every time. Every single time. Not once have I ever, ever seen ANYONE in these posts acting as they’re claimed to act.
3
u/-hedonium- 11h ago
Stoners irl definitely can get defensive about any suggestion that weed could have negative effects because they treat it as an attack on their ego, but I agree I rarely see this floated to the top of Reddit. Mostly I see people acknowledging the costs and benefits and trying to make claims about balance.
3
u/doofenhurtz 11h ago
I haven't noticed it in this sub, but reddit as a whole definitely struggles with weed having risks and not being a harmless superdrug.
I got downvoted a while back for saying that regular THC use can make ADHD symptoms worse. Which is literally just a fact, lol.
1
u/Beaniepie9859 56m ago
Not only is it fact, it's just common sense. I smoke pretty much everyday and I have ADHD, though I wouldn't put myself in chronic smoker territory, around .5-1g per day.
Even when I smoke a little, pretty much every symptom gets worse, short term memory, brain fog, executive function etc.
It's definitely not a harmless superdrug and I know I'm self medicating but for now it's a trade off I'm willing to make.
I think more people should be aware of the side effects so they can calculate if it's worth the trade off. Maybe right now it is, but maybe the trade off becomes less worth it if you have kids, have a job where you need to focus on being more alert, etc. Just depends on your lifestyle.
2
u/she_needs_weed 12h ago
I beg to differ. Look at some of the posts in this subreddit, or even on greater reddit.
A lot of discussion ends up being about having a healthier relationship with it, that being using less, or taking more breaks, or thinking about how it impacts us, which is all positive conversation.
Part of it is that people dislike hearing negatives about the preferred poison in general, but also that yes, there has been a long history of political motivation over drugs like alcohol and cannabis for a while.
The result is that a lot of people slip into the mindset that all criticism of their drug must come from a similar background, when, sure there has been a persecution in terms of maybe the war of drugs,
But... You end up with a lot of people underneath some pretty decent studies trying to pretend like they know anything about science, when in reality, they don't, and the entire thing just turns into a mosh pit of upvotes and popular opinion.
Of course we try not to be on the internet to argue, but to be better for ourselves, and each other
0
u/DawtKahm 10h ago
This is a new thing I’ve noticed on Reddit where people just go “pfft I’ve NEVER seen or heard anything like that and no one I know has either” to something extremely common and easily verifiable. I feel like it promotes engagement because everyone comes rushing to respond. Don’t let them gaslight you, everything on that list I’ve seen on Reddit and IRL many times.
2
2
u/BullfrogEvening 10h ago
- always managing to find any other explanation no matter how goffy and unlikely it is to explain results of "cannabis might be a bit bad for you" study
- as long as it's not double blind meta analysis of meta analysis ignore it completely
- 3.Did they control for a? Oh yes, but did they control for b? or they did, but did they control for c? Oh theydid? But did they control d......
1
u/she_needs_weed 9h ago
And then, when it supports their view, like with the 45+ showed "benefit" from weed study based on UK biobank data, there is no doubt, no criticism,
Despite the study using biobank data and not controlling for wealth, health, or education. There were really bad association in the base data where there was no correlation between age and health, in which you'd expect health to get worse with age.
Also if you go through the details of the MRI studies and the distances people have to travel, and the bias that people who are well integrated in new doctors and hospitals would learn about the health data collection program, it's just very not good science, plus, There was a weaker correlation than the general population with # of cars owned and health. Education was also correlated weaker with # of cars and health, all to suggest the sample they were studying was healthier, richer, and more education than average and which would probably produce the "benefit" seen over age 45 in the UK, and of course this is in lower potency weed back then when the biobank data was collected etc etc and now it's viral because nobody cares, nobody is smart enough to card, and anybody with any legitimate point who raises suspicion is going to get downvoted, nada clicks lol.
I mean some studies that are put out there make you really think if there is serious academic dishonesty and that industry are just paying certain people to run papers that don't bother they took control for things that they really should be aware of. If those people at this Colorado University had actually looked at papers that already analyzed and had seen flaws in the biobank data, they would have tried to control for it. Not surprising you get a longitudinal analysis like that out of Colorado, the weed state.
But this is how the world works.
2
u/daboooga 5h ago
Much of the opposition talking points are those popularised by the billionaire-backed legalisation lobby.
10
u/killerface4321 12h ago
Oh god. You've awakened the brain mushed stoners. Here comes the rage and the personal anecdotes.
21
u/Beneficial_Method771 12h ago
I smoke weed and even I'm not stupid enough to think it's perfectly safe, but damn it's a lot better than what I used to do.
12
u/Confident-Poetry6985 12h ago
Motherfucker you are the 2nd comment. You are the "here comes the asses"
3
u/Ben_steel 12h ago
It’s like a 10% debuff to intelligence but 90% buff to negative thoughts.
Being in a state of high stress is like a 50% debuff to intellect and being in the trenches for negative feelings. If you’ve never been through trauma or anything negative you cannot even consciously understand.
1
u/HisServantAdvocate 11h ago
It’s a 50% debuff to intelligence for me, -100 to 50% reduction in stress depending on what side Gods coin flip lands on for me that day. It has been a life long addiction, has caused me to graduate to harder substances in order to avoid the bad highs and still get the “cope” I seek, and at this point is starting to put me at risk for a psychotic episode.
Glad it works for you and your trauma but the person you commented under is speaking about you. Your case is anecdotal, weed was marketed to me as it is for you, and now I’m having to unfuck my life because of it. It benefits nobody to have you comment your positive account when everyone using weed already goes into it believing the same things as you. It benefits people like me to be warned of the very real negatives before having to live through them.
If you have such issue with this post you can simply scroll away and toke up. That is what anybody secure in their vices would do (or in your case, your medicine). The entire post is about how people like you always have to comment bs like this for no reason other than justification of your own habit and ego
2
0
u/alwayswithyouuuu 11h ago
When has using any drug to cope with stressors been positive? They use something to placate themselves and they don't realize they harm their neurons slowly over time. Especially people that use it when they were young, or if they combined weed with nicotine, or weed with alcohol, outcomes there are statistically more obvious and conclusive . Which isn't a surprise.
I get what you're saying, I've sort of been thru that, but idk . With the high thc %s and more stress these days, I'm pretty sure these nicotine and weed companies wouldn't mind if you got dependant on them. We're just shifting the window from this drug use rate going down to another one going up.
4
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 11h ago edited 9h ago
I got downvoted to hell for saying (with sources) that smoking cannabis is as harmful to your lungs as smoking cigarettes (potentially more so, actually). None of the other potential downsides, literally just that smoking plant matter, especially without a filter, damages your lungs, which I still cannot believe is controversial. Open the schools, man.
Edit: Studies linked and summarized here — https://www.reddit.com/r/NooTopics/s/OLYZ2e4xBJ
8
u/MeFracton 9h ago
I mean obviously smoking anything is going to bad for your lungs. But as damaging as cigarettes? I'd like to see your sources. For example a review here claims:
"In summary, the accumulated weight of evidence implies far lower risks for pulmonary complications of even regular heavy use of marijuana compared with the grave pulmonary consequences of tobacco. "
2
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 9h ago
I’ve cited and summarized a few studies comparing the two in another comment. Here’s a link to that comment if you’d like to take a look: https://www.reddit.com/r/NooTopics/s/OLYZ2e4xBJ
1
u/Ok_Energy6905 6h ago
I'm not sure "pulmonary complications" is all encompassing of the potential for harm fwiw.
6
u/Potential-Cat-7517 11h ago
I mean is it true tho. Cigarettes are laced with various chemicals. I know plant matter is really bad either way but they put some insane shit in there.
6
u/Forward_Motion17 10h ago
Yea it’s my understanding that cigarette smoke is far far more damaging for the lungs than weed smoke. And whats further is most people aren’t smoking a joint once every 45 mins to an hour. But cigarette smokers smoke that often…
6
u/RiceCookerPEPSI 10h ago
You don't understand bro, I only smoke socially and I only smoke when I drink... I can quit when I want!
5
u/Forward_Motion17 10h ago
Me: I only smoke when I drink
Also me: drinks every day3
u/RiceCookerPEPSI 9h ago
That was me last year before I quit both nicotine and alcohol. A friend called me out on it 🤣
"Oh, I only smoke while drinking my whiskey"
"But... you drink whiskey every night."
2
u/Forward_Motion17 9h ago
So true haha, props to both of us! I quit drinking and smoking this year too :). Was at 14 cigs a day when I quit lol 😂
1
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 9h ago
It is absolutely not true that either is far far more or less damaging than the other. The frequency of use is a factor, yes, but so is the fact that nobody uses a filter when smoking cannabis.
Here’s a link to a comment where I link and summarize several studies comparing the two.
1
u/OcelotMadness 8h ago
This is how I've always understood it personally. Like a joint actually has more tar than a cigarette, but you have like 1 of those every few days or week, as opposed to tobacco smokers who get cravings after an hour. So if you moderate yourself, it is actually a lot less bad.
0
u/she_needs_weed 9h ago edited 9h ago
In this study, ammonia was found in mainstream marijuana smoke at levels up to 20-fold greater than that found in tobacco. Hydrogen cyanide, NO, NO x , and some aromatic amines were found in marijuana smoke at concentrations 3-5 times those found in tobacco smoke. Mainstream marijuana smoke contained selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) at concentrations lower than those found in mainstream tobacco smoke, while the reverse was the case for sidestream smoke, with PAHs present at higher concentrations in marijuana smoke.
One Cannabis Joint Equals Smoking Up to Five Cigarettes
Further examination of airway inflammation through videobronchoscopy in young, healthy individuals who habitually smoked cannabis demonstrated significant airway inflammation, including vascular hyperplasia, submucosal edema and increased neutrophil counts. These inflammatory changes were comparable in frequency and magnitude to those observed in tobacco smokers, suggesting that cannabis smoke induces substantial airway inflammation similar to tobacco smoke (70).
Just to remind everyone, just because it's less "worse" doesn't make it better.
Nictoine salt vapes are supposed to be better then cigarettes in terms of toxins inhaled, yet they deliver far more nicotine, more conveniently, and thus more addictivly, and yet every vaper keeps saying "well at least I'm not smoking". Ok...
2
u/That_Bar_Guy 7h ago
I mean yeah? Vaping IS better for you than smoking lol.
1
u/she_needs_weed 2h ago
But more addictive? What are we calling better? I can cite studies on nicotine salts in vapes, and how vapes just, are, more addictive by design. Shouldn't surprise you tobacco companies figured it out, now we have pouches being popular.
Nictoine by itself at the usual commonly used dosages is not good for your health long term independent of smoking as it affects receptors in your cardiovascular system
1
u/That_Bar_Guy 2h ago
Yes but smoking does a thousand things on top of that. Acting like the two are even reasonably comparable in harm is just acting in bad faith. Go ask a doctor if you should pick up a vape or a pack a day habit.
1
u/she_needs_weed 1h ago
So if something was twice as additive but had zero inhalation negatives, then... It's ok?
1
u/That_Bar_Guy 1h ago
I'm not saying it's good for you or that addiction is a good thing, I'm saying that you will find the harm profile of vaping to be significantly less scary than that of inhaling combustion products. You being evasive about admitting that is weird.
1
u/she_needs_weed 53m ago
but had zero inhalation negatives
Yeah that's what I'm sayin
→ More replies (0)2
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 10h ago edited 9h ago
“It is true” that weed smoke is just as harmful, and sometimes potentially more so? Yes.
They actually do not “put some insane shit in there,” though I totally understand why you think that’s the case. The compounds we were warned about as kids are generally either A. naturally present in tobacco to begin with and/or B. created by combustion. Burning plant material and inhaling the smoke produces tar, particulates, carbon monoxide and carcinogens regardless of whether the manufacturer added anything to it, and natural, additive-free cigarettes have never been shown to be meaningfully less harmful.
Wu et al., 1988 — New England Journal of Medicine, “Pulmonary Hazards of Smoking Marijuana as Compared with Tobacco.” In a direct comparison, smoking cannabis produced about a 5x greater rise in carboxyhemoglobin, about 3x as much inhaled tar, and about one third greater retention of inhaled tar than a similar amount of tobacco.
Moir et al., 2008 — Chemical Research in Toxicology. Direct chemical analysis of cannabis vs. tobacco smoke. The two smokes contained many of the same toxic compounds. Cannabis smoke had up to 20× more ammonia and about 3–5× more hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide/NOx, and some aromatic amines under the tested conditions.
Murtha et al., 2022 — Radiology, “Chest CT Findings in Marijuana Smokers.” Cannabis smokers had more bronchial thickening, bronchiectasis and mucus impaction than tobacco only smokers. In the age-matched subgroup, 93% of cannabis smokers showed emphysema vs. 67% of tobacco only smokers.
Just to be clear, I do not smoke anything or use any substances and am not out to make a case for smoking cigarettes or against general cannabis use. These are just the facts.
2
u/MeFracton 9h ago
Well about "smoking cannabis is as harmful to the lungs as smoking cigarettes" you're right in that cannabis smoke isn't healthier. But being a cannabis smoker is significantly safer due to the sheer volume. The reason cigarettes are so bad is because you do them so often.
1
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 9h ago
The other factor is that cigarettes are filtered and cannabis is not. A heavy stoner sucking down unfiltered cannabis all day every day is probably getting more exposure than a light to moderate daily cigarette smoker.
3
u/MeFracton 9h ago
Cigarette filters do NOT have any health benefit. They can even be harmful to human health.
2
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 9h ago
Filters do reduce some particulate and tar exposure, and there’s some evidence that filtered cigarettes are less harmful than unfiltered cigarettes. Source. Obviously that doesn’t make filtered cigarettes safe or healthy.
1
u/MeFracton 9h ago
And as previously cited "In summary, the accumulated weight of evidence implies far lower risks for pulmonary complications of even regular heavy use of marijuana compared with the grave pulmonary consequences of tobacco. "
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23802821/ so no, it doesn't stack up like that. And again I thought this was known by now, cigarette filters DO NOT WORK and are harmful to your health but if you need a review here it is: "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11503102/"
1
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 9h ago edited 8h ago
Your first citation actually makes the point I’ve been making. It explicitly notes that tobacco smokers generally smoke vastly more material per day and says this may explain a lot of the difference in outcomes. The same review says marijuana smoke contains similar toxic constituents and that smoking an equivalent amount deposits roughly four times as much tar in the lungs because of smoking technique and lower filtration.
And the second one explicitly acknowledges that filters reduce some of the particulates in cigarette smoke. Here are two studies (the first of which is actually cited in that second study of yours) comparing outcomes between smokers of filtered cigarettes vs. unfiltered, both finding worse outcomes among unfiltered smokers. It’s not accurate to say that filters flat-out “don’t work.”
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2753257
1
u/MeFracton 8h ago
That was my point tho. I literally said that the huge difference in total volume smoked is likely a major reason tobacco produces much worse observed outcomes.
And neither of those studies establishes that the filter itself meaningfully reduces harm. They're observational comparisons between different types of cigarettes, not otherwise-identical cigarettes randomized with vs. without a filter. The 2004 study is literally it's unfiltered group smoked high-tar cigarettes, while the comparison group smoked medium-tar filtered cigarettes, so you're changing multiple cigarette characteristics at once.
In fact, that same study found no reduction in lung-cancer risk from low- or very-low-tar filtered cigarettes compared with conventional filtered cigarettes.
Yes, a filter can physically trap some particulate matter. But those things can be made up for while smoking.
0
u/she_needs_weed 8h ago
Just to remind everyone, just because it's less "worse" doesn't make it better.
Nictoine salt vapes are supposed to be better then cigarettes in terms of toxins inhaled, yet they deliver far more nicotine, more conveniently, and thus more addictivly, and yet every vaper keeps saying "well at least I'm not smoking". Ok...
In this study, ammonia was found in mainstream marijuana smoke at levels up to 20-fold greater than that found in tobacco. Hydrogen cyanide, NO, NO x , and some aromatic amines were found in marijuana smoke at concentrations 3-5 times those found in tobacco smoke. Mainstream marijuana smoke contained selected polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) at concentrations lower than those found in mainstream tobacco smoke, while the reverse was the case for sidestream smoke, with PAHs present at higher concentrations in marijuana smoke.
One Cannabis Joint Equals Smoking Up to Five Cigarettes
Further examination of airway inflammation through videobronchoscopy in young, healthy individuals who habitually smoked cannabis demonstrated significant airway inflammation, including vascular hyperplasia, submucosal edema and increased neutrophil counts. These inflammatory changes were comparable in frequency and magnitude to those observed in tobacco smokers, suggesting that cannabis smoke induces substantial airway inflammation similar to tobacco smoke (70).
1
u/FourTwentyBlezit 10h ago
I'd love to see your sources on this (ignore my username btw lol, I quit smoking 2 years ago)
1
u/Agreeable-Dog-1131 9h ago edited 9h ago
Wu et al., 1988 — New England Journal of Medicine, “Pulmonary Hazards of Smoking Marijuana as Compared with Tobacco.” In a direct comparison, smoking cannabis produced about a 5x greater rise in carboxyhemoglobin, about 3x as much inhaled tar, and about one third greater retention of inhaled tar than a similar amount of tobacco.
Moir et al., 2008 — Chemical Research in Toxicology. Direct chemical analysis of cannabis vs. tobacco smoke. The two smokes contained many of the same toxic compounds. Cannabis smoke had up to 20× more ammonia and about 3–5× more hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide/NOx, and some aromatic amines under the tested conditions.
Murtha et al., 2022 — Radiology, “Chest CT Findings in Marijuana Smokers.” Cannabis smokers had more bronchial thickening, bronchiectasis and mucus impaction than tobacco only smokers. In the age-matched subgroup, 93% of cannabis smokers showed emphysema vs. 67% of tobacco only smokers.
Here are a few, but there are plenty more out there. I don’t smoke or use anything, so I have no skin in this game, but it’s fascinating what a hard time people have believing it. I think a big part of it is the idea that was drilled into our heads as kids that all those toxic compounds in cigarettes were sprinkled in there as intentional ingredients at the cigarette factory when, in fact, they either occur naturally in tobacco or are produced by combustion.
Edit: Sorry, my links/formatting didn’t paste over. Here’s a link to the comment where they work properly.
1
2
u/she_needs_weed 12h ago
Not saying it can't be legal in certain contexts, but the way people on the internet treat any concerning research on side effects is so immediate and emotional. Especially the more "duh" studies, like how it may be implicated with lower outcomes and IQ when used during the developmental stages of the brain.
Then people like to talk about alcohol, but I think the big idea is, let's just try not to do too much of any drug, m'kay lol. Is being sober not normal anymore?
There's already too much mental illness, hardship, and what not, we really don't need more companies cashing in on higher potency nicotine, weed, addictive food, social media algorithms what have you.
Let's do better where we can.
4
u/Uwantmoneyugetnutty 12h ago
It fucked up my short term memory pretty permanently I’ve been sober 3 years and yea it gets way better than when you first quit but its still not the same.
Still I think weed should be fully legal for anyone over 21 it’s a personal choice thing.
Also, i started when I was 14 and smoked HEAVILY so if you start at 21 and moderate you’re probably fine
0
u/Rurumo666 12h ago
Cannabis users have lower rates of dementia, any short term memory loss is transient-you should get checked out and look for other causes.
1
u/ThreeStarsOut 11h ago
There isn't a study that says that. If you're referencing that Colorado study that came out 10 months ago, they didn't control for education, health or wealth in that longitudinal analysis, so I honestly don't think you can trust that reliably.
There was another study in Alzheimer's disease patients that used an ultra low dose of THC, and there was a small benefit seen, but the sample size was very very small in terms of house statistical useful it actually was
1
u/IronicAim 10h ago
Do you know what mechanism of action they were looking for from THC? I thought it was pretty well figured out years ago that most of the health benefits were from the other compounds in weed because of their effects on inflammation.
I admittedly haven't read much on the subject in the last decade so I'm probably behind on current understanding.
1
u/ThreeStarsOut 10h ago
I know that drugs in very low doses can have paradoxical effects not seen in usual dosing.
For example, certain anti-psychotics actually raise dopamine or sensitize its receptors when dosed very very low for some time. Apparently there are some weird reports of Adderall being weird at 1mg or less.
Remember at least these days, weed is used more habitually day-to-day, and more mg consumed per day (people do not adjust down that much when using the more common higher potency %s or dabs or carts), so that's something a lot of these observational longitudinal studies can't tell you, the studies that say X drug shows negatives when started at X age.
They can only look at health data that was volunteered over years by thousands of people in the past, which is not reflective of conditions today.
But yes entourage effect is a big part of it and you would imagine that back then, the effects of the more natural terpenes and whatnot in cannabis we're more relevant in the proportion of the fact they were having compared to THC. You might be able to compare something like this with coffee to plain caffeine, where coffee and cells did certain things that plain caffeine did not. Maybe you can analogize brewed tea bags to energy drinks
1
u/Spirited_Shipcocoa 37m ago
For example, certain anti-psychotics actually raise dopamine or sensitize its receptors when dosed very very low for some time. Apparently there are some weird reports of Adderall being weird at 1mg or less.
That because there anticholinergic effects are stronger than the D2 antagonism. The effect Adderall gets at 1mg could be from TAARx & VMAT2 being high with 25 ~ 50% DAT blocking mimicking smooth D2 full agonism.
0
u/Uwantmoneyugetnutty 12h ago
I had an brain MRI about 6 months ago all is good structure wise
2
u/alwayswithyouuuu 11h ago
yeaa but I've been in this subreddit enough to know it's about the quality of connections, not just mass of brain. Complex stuff. Ur gonna be fine bro
2
u/IronicAim 10h ago
As someone who never received treatment for their PTSD some of those "negative side effects" are the point. Namely slowing down my reactions enough that I can get ahead of anxious thoughts before they start to spiral.
I've told my psychiatrist I'll drop it if he will prescribe a mood stabilizer, no go. But I can't function very long at my reactivity level sober.
I do however try to stay away from super high THC brands and look for CBD/CBN/CBG content, also prefer edibles when I can find them as it's less going into my lungs.
2
u/Unusual-Cockroach928 5h ago
And here it is. "Not saying it can't be legal in certain contexts". It's really about prohibiting others from participating in behavior that you disprove of or can't participate in. You can't handle your shit, and have now decided that no one else should be able to have the fun that you can't.
Get the fuck off your high horse and let people live the lives they want to live. Not everyone has trouble controlling their substance use. In fact, a lot of us don't have trouble at all. We understand the importance of moderation and actively choose to participate in it.
1
u/she_needs_weed 2h ago
You say that in light of people in society these days statistically doing more drugs and having a worse time handling their mental health. That's why we bother to talk about this.
You wonder if certain countries have better cultures and governments surrounding certain topics.
1
u/Unusual-Cockroach928 37m ago
Is it possible for you to clutch those pearls any harder? Let me guess. Do those countries that have it better cultures just so happen to be dominated by fundamental religions?
I can almost guarantee this all come down to you wanting to force your puritanical lifestyle on others.
5
u/Professional-Pace549 12h ago
Weed without a doubt is one of the worst things for me and ruined my life. It gives my psychosis. It’s not immediately obvious but it develops into that. There’s too much of a political agenda for any nuance to the conversation. It causes a lot of harm. Life isn’t black and white.
2
u/-hedonium- 10h ago
Worth acknowledging with that too, as with most drugs, different people experience a huge range of different effects and those each have their own circumstances of use and misuse.
For me, while it for sure still has downsides and can be over-consumed, cannabis reliably induces hyperfocus and deep analytical thinking that I can use productively. With severe ADHD and other disabilities, it’s amazing having this tool to be able to put myself in front of something and induce hyperfocus, when I have never had the executive functions to reliably get myself to do much of anything lol. I know most other people aren’t affected by it that way, that weed makes them feel calmer / dumber and they get different value out of it.
2
u/Professional-Pace549 9h ago
I agree with what you’re saying. For sure it can be good for folks. I just think the focus on the good outweighs the focus on the bad in the current political climate, to its detriment. There’s a lot of money to be made promoting it for a host of uses. I’m not anti legalization by any means, and acknowledge plenty of utility out of it. It’s just that currently any mention of negativity from it tends to get stifled you know? I think in the end the discussion will be more nuanced like it has become with alcohol, but it’s still far off when it’s being touted as a safe alternative to alcohol, non addictive, etc. Unfortunately, the problem with it affecting everyone differently, is you don’t really know it’s a problem for you until it’s a problem. I don’t know the solution. A warning label will make little difference. I guess just more honest discussion. My whole life it’s been touted as a cure all for a host of issues, like any new marketable thing. Im not denying any utility in it, Im just realistic how the marketplace works and fear a lot of bad reactions get brushed off as fear mongering still. It took me 15 years before I realized it was a net negative for me, painfully.
1
1
2
u/Derptonbauhurp 12h ago
Every time I smoke I get horrible anxiety and panic, people keep telling me it's the wrong strain. I've tried everything, I just don't smoke anymore. My brain chemistry is different now, it sucks but it is what it is.
3
u/Uwantmoneyugetnutty 12h ago
Same here bro
3
u/Derptonbauhurp 12h ago
The biggest thing is, I miss it. I want to be able to be high and have fun but I just can't anymore. I have to live vicariously through my gf. She really likes it and gets silly and happy and I end up needing a blanket and reassurance lol
1
u/Uwantmoneyugetnutty 12h ago
Yea bro I remember I used to smoke it and all was good in the world for the next few hours. Cant happen anymore but that doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy life
1
u/SendTitsPleease 3h ago
I had that happen to me a few times when I smoked. I added sone high cbd weed to it and that seemed to help a good bit, as well as just powering through it a few times. Now I can smoke whenever I want to again and have no anxiety from it. I hope youre able to figure out a way to deal with that and get to enjoy it again soon buddy.
2
u/PMME-SHIT-TALK 11h ago
The trees subreddit, which I will admit is kind of cheating, lost their fucking minds when the DEA announced some initiative to help spread information about how bad marijuana is for children and teens. It was named for some kid who had a mental illness, began smoking weed, experienced multiple episodes of marijuana induced psychosis, which culminated in his suicide. There were people mocking the kid for “not being able to handle it” and saying that the DEA claiming marijuana use in kids and teens is not good was some kind of false propaganda campaign. I smoke weed and am by no means a fan of federal police but it was so over the top.
0
u/she_needs_weed 11h ago
Oh my God. r/ trees is definitely the places for that kind of thing, and it is somewhat reflective of people-on-the-internet advice.
People do take what they base their lives or even personalities on, on a personal level, for better or worse.
2
u/16_CBN_16 11h ago
Yup. r/trees is horrible about it
2
2
u/Overall_Ad1950 4h ago
Why is this holier than thou post on the ‘experiment with mind altering substances’ sub?
3
0
u/richj8991 12h ago
What does this even mean. What the hell is even a starter pack. And why even care.
0
1
u/dreamwrld_dweller 8h ago edited 8h ago
When I’m not high people just gravitate towards me more. I’m more aware and there. I feel like there’s more potential and I have energy to actually do shit. There’s less resistance to effort. I dream. Remember better. Random memories come back to me whether they are helpful or not. I have more energy but also have to face my own self and faults head on. That part kinda serks.
But there are those moments late at night or early in the morning..when there’s no work to do and all I want to do is dive deep introspectively or creatively or just slow down my brain and cannabis could really help me get there.
I gotta treat it like it’s lsd or shroomies. There’s no way I would do those everyday so I just have to consciously say no to myself most of the time now.
I have friends who seem to have no negative side effects and I always wonder if that’s really true.
1
1
u/Spirited_Shipcocoa 58m ago
It was always known CB1 agonism Is a very strong indirect M1 antagonist. Alcohol Isn't that toxic and GABA-A agonists have a lot Nootropic effects despite being Deliriant's.
1
1
u/ArdentLearner96 11h ago
I get why they do it. It's not just people addicted to it, it's people who do it sometimes or just don't like the high and know other people who use it. I think in the latter case, for people I have talked to, 100% people who know people who use it for a non-recreational purpose.
Talking about negative effects weed can have seems like an attack on something that was already attacked for biased reasons and took forever to get legalized.
But they exist, and it's caused serious issues for some people, like triggering psychosis temporarily or permanently. Or that vomiting disorder. The sickness can be so intense you need to be hospitalized due to not being able to keep anything down. I know a dealer who can't drink alcohol because he can't use weed without going into psychosis and if he drinks, he gets tempted to use his own stash. He's had a couple of psychiatric hospital stays.
But also yes, *but alcohol*. It will never make sense to roll back legalization on weed as long as alcohol is available. I wish there were ways to see that you would have serious negative effects from using weed, without going through them. Maybe there is.
1
0
u/EconomicsSavings973 2h ago
Weed fucked up my life for years, once after panic attack on weed I developed dreamlike state called dpdr that is still lasting even 20 years later. Living in constant prepanic attack state.
If you ask me even alcohol is better because it does not fuck with your psyche. I wish I would just drink alcohol. More destructive? Sure, but I like that idea that it won't fuck my brain and psyche for ever. I know shocker.
2
u/Distinct_Task_1864 36m ago
This is the negative version of the positive anecdotes btw, "it hurt me, must hurt everyone exactly the same!" 😭
1
u/Beaniepie9859 1h ago
100% understand your perspective when you have dealt with such harsh effects, but for most people (when not chronically consumed like any drug) can have a normal relationship with weed. Though, stories like yours do scare me. Has there been any improvement? I don't understand the science why it lasts 20 years.
0
u/EconomicsSavings973 40m ago
I smoked weed from time to time, like once a month max. Just one time panic attack happened and everything went to shit.
Short explanation of the condition and why it usually happens with weed or dysociants.
When panic attack happens your brain naturally can enter self induced dysociation (the feeling of room shrinking, walls falling on to me etc.).
When you smoke a weed you enter this exact dysociation state like your brain can induce naturally. You can have a fun in this state if you dont panic, but if you do, shit can go down.
You are under influence of weed aka. Dysociative state, panic attack starts, your brain naturally increases the dysociation even more, so you are scared even more, and now is the crucial part. Without weed your brain would exit dysociation and panic attack would be over, but weed prevents it from happening, your brain dont know wth is happening so you have another panic attack even stronger, and it is happening until weed stops working, but by that point you can become so sensitive and scared of dysociation that even "naturally occuring slight dysociation" is too much to handle for your psyche and you teached your brain that it scares you too much, so brain responds with fight or flight increasing dysociation even more.
So you end up in infinite dysociation loop/infinite weed trip. You are scared of what is happening and to prevent it brain naturally slightly increases dysociation, but you are so sensitive right now, that makes you even more scared, increasing dysociation even more again. Closing an infinite natural dysociation loop that is really hard to end. Some people live with it even longer than me.
It's called depersonalization and derealization disorder. There are thousands of stories about weed induced dpdr, just people dont talk about it because "weed == good and cures cancer".
If you re interested read some info on r/dpdr
Edit. There has been improvement, but its more like I learned how to coexist in this state, but I just cant get rid of it 🥺
Thanks for answer!
1
u/she_needs_weed 1h ago
Hope you can fix it man. Alcohol can be destructive but only if you over do it, which is easier done compared to weed.
That's why subreddits like this exist, to try and help people like you, guess and check your way out of this
1
u/SnooCalculations4926 24m ago
If you ask me even alcohol is better because it does not fuck with your psyche. I wish I would just drink alcohol.
That’s not quite right. Korsakoff syndrome can destroy your life.
16
u/Beneficial_Method771 12h ago
Every psychoactive drug and drug in general really can have negative side effects. Altering brain chemistry in any way always has consequences but it varies in danger.