Topic: what's wrong with moderate drug use? - page 2. (Read 4003 times)

Well stop shitting up my neighborhood with yours then

I <3 the Silk Road. 

Spoken like true pot lovers. Nonetheless, your habit stinks.

So do SUVs and shitty perfume and cheap steaks your neighbors burn on the grill.


Best post on bitcointalk right now 

lawl. 

Pussy stinks too but I can live with it.

Pretty much anything will kill in large quantities. Marijuana sure does stink though. It's an unpleasant acrid odor that is just, well stinky and unpleasant. Much happiness to you for wanting to stink up your environment with your stinky habit.

I do not understand this statement.  Are you implying weed use leads to heroin use?  (This has been proven to be false, marijuana is NOT a gateway drug).  Or are you somehow suggesting weed and heroin are the same?


Of the 4 chemicals you've mentioned only one is safe to use.


Caffeine:
The median lethal dose (LD50) given orally, is 192 milligrams per kilogram in rats.

Heroin:
Even for a non-user, the LD50 can be placed above 350 mg though some sources give a figure of between 75 and 375 mg for a 75 kg person.

Sugar:
Table sugar is sucrose, whose LD50 is 29,700 mg/kg

Weed:
NONE.  There is no known dose of marijuana that will kill a mammal.  Marijuana is not poisonous.

I think it's fine to shoot up as long as it's no more than once or twice a week. I only do 8 balls on the weekend though. Here I am before I learned moderation.

Yeah I grew up recognizing the word "dope" to mean marijuana but later found out that its original meaning was heroin.
The term has multiple uses nowadays depending on the context it's being used it can mean weed, heroin or cool.

There's a difference between heroin and high fructose corn sizzurp? zomg!  

The problem is people think there is a difference between weed->heroin and coffee->corn_sugar

Nothing is wrong with moderate drug use. I'm particularly fond of opiates and opioids. I respect their power and am careful to use only in moderation, I think it improves my mood. 

Nothing to excess, everything in moderation.

Nothing is wrong with moderate usage. That's why it's called "moderate."

That said, it's a slippery slope. More or less depending on your substance and your own temperament, of course. As you say, you can make rational decisions about limiting dosages and intervals. But mind- and mood-altering drugs affect and alter the instrument with which you make those rational decisions, often causing people to err on the side of excess. Those errors may be small but over time can accumulate until your own best judgment is telling you something totally different from your original plan.

It's not necessarily about self-control but about the reorientation of goals attached to your nervous system's risk/reward systems. If the feeling of well-being previously associated with accomplishments can be short-circuited so that you get it by ingesting a substance, why go to the effort of accomplishing anything? Because you have such a high sense of self? If your self learns that it feels more successful by ingesting substances than by the messy process of actually trying to get something worthwhile done.

Slippery slope is really an apt metaphor. It's certainly possible to control one's use of nearly any drug, but it's very easy to underestimate the difficulty and precision it takes to have that control. And it may require such a high level of discipline to enjoy safely that it is no longer enjoyable. And for some people, if it isn't dangerous, it just isn't any fun anyhow.

If you think you can handle it, remember that that is what everyone that learned that they can't handle it thought too. I don't mean that to frighten you, but in my experience part of having self-discipline includes giving myself a safe margin of error. I'm not always right about everything so if there are too many variables I like to give myself room to make mistakes and still survive. Anyone who can walk a balance beam six inches off the ground probably has the skill to walk a tightrope 500 feet off the ground but the decision to walk the tightrope shouldn't be made as lightly as the decision to walk the balance beam.

First off I didn't ignore you. I just said that I could see why you get ignored so often.

Second, I posted a link that calls weed "dope", so I can handle the truth. I guess I'll admit that the truth is that both are called dope. But one is deadly. One isn't. It does not make sense to refer to both as dope. Should we call weed smack? Should we call it ice?

Thirdly, what does being young have to do with anything? How many times have you done heroin?

Edit:

"Go watch Reefer Madness"

You just lost all credibility, sorry. I'm not pressing ignore but I am going to ignore you in this thread.

People who ignore me can't handle the truth.  It would not surprise me if you chose to ignore me because you are clearly full of yourself thinking that a few links on the internet will reveal some great truth.  You are young and naive.




Edit:

Go watch reefer madness for the original popular use.

Reefer Madness (Tell Your Children) (Doped Youth) (1936)

The problem with modern culture is that kids think the internet holds the only answer.  Even when you saw that dope = weed you still want to fight because you have a preconceived notion.  Admit your error and move forward like a man.  Or ignore me like a cowardly child.

No wonder your ignore button is bright yellow.

What does being under 20 have to do with it? Last time I checked there's no minimum age to do either drug. I have never heard anyone who actually smokes weed call it dope unless it was in jest. Quite simply, because if you ask for "dope" you are asking for heroin.

See terminology: http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/heroin/heroin_basics.shtml

To be fair, the marijuana page does list "dope" as a terminology.

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

However, since one drug is potentially lethal and the other is harmless, it makes 0 sense to call weed "dope".

Jeez, we must be talking to a connoisseur here. :/