Teen Forums - Teen Chat, Teen Help, Teen Advice & Support

I am Against Drugs , But i am not the one to talk since i drink lots of Alcohol ... So i would just be an ass if i had a go at Drugs (which i had in the past ) bad Boy ! xD

But yeah ... oh well

@Jam
Not everyone's bodies acts the same. Period. You can take a "vast" number of people to test on, but everyone is different, and so are their reactions to different substances.

I think you should listen to experiences rather than some bs scientific study.
But then again, if you dont have the brains to think in the first place that drugs are drugs, and drugs are fuckin bad, no matter if its alcohol or weed or heroin, then you should go with a gut feeling and completely stay away from them(yes, i didnt have that brain when i started, i was a fool).
If you are getting caught up in such a bullshit media-hyped subject which is twisting your ability to think morally and logically, that drugs fuck you up, then i dont know whats there to be done, except sit and wait for you to learn your lesson like everyone else.
Good luck to ya'll

And this precisely is one of the many reasons that we should trust scientific studies over our own and other's anecdotal evidence: they test far more people and so their results can be generalised much more accurately. They are also statistically analysed specifically to see how likely it is that the results are due to individual differences and "randomness" rather than the manipulated conditions

Of course I'd listen to my own experiences over "bs scientific" studies. Fortunately, I have no reason to believe that the studies I mentioned are bs, and so I am quite happy to give them more weighting than personal observations.


And upon what basis do you make the assertion that "[all] drugs are fuckin bad"?

Define "drug".


Again, please substantiate your assertion that "drugs fuck you up". Sure, some drugs do... but that's not the point. We're specifically talking about cannabis. Can you provide reliable evidence that cannabisis likely to fuck one up?

Odd you should mention the media... they are the exact reason the drug laws are so backwards in this country: they are determined not by scientific understanding but by the media. I was under the impression that the media (if such a generalisation can be made) was against drug legalisation in most circumstances.

"Much more accurately". As long as it is not 100% accurate i wouldnt trust it, and to be 100% it needs to be tested on 7 billion people.

Amazing. You obviously havent been with a smoker before. If you had, you would know that scientific studies are bs.

Im talkin about drugs bro. From nicotine/caffeine to morphine.
Stop acting like you dont know wtf im talking about.

Yes i can provide proof. I just shared mine and my friends experiences with weed and you, like i said before, are ignoring me, even tough everything i said is truth and provide you guys with reality. Yet you trust some graph paper more than what a guy says that has experience with weed and has experienced fucked up things.
You choose scientific studies over life lessons. You, myfriend need a reality check.
Just because what i posted its not pleasing to the eye, it doesnt mean its false.
Again my friend, like i said in my other post, listen to the bad consequences as well, open your eyes bro.


And im not even sure if you have even smoked before or you are in this debate just for the fuck of it and dont know what the fuck he is talking about but instead takes links from random sites and posts them here and believes everything he reads.

I'm not too fond of his debate style either, but that's still no reason to insult him.

If this is your belief, how on earth do you rely more on anecdotal evidence? Your expectations of trust are far too high. You have to take what you are given, which in this case is anecdotal evidence or more thorough scientific evidence.

I used to be a smoker, used to be friends with smokers, and use to spend countless weekends with other smokers. I have the advantage of personal evidence, and yet still believe both forms of evidence. Would you like to know why? Because not every single human is the exact same, or responds in the exact same manner to experiments.

Basic Marijuana Information [nida.nih.gov]

Notice how there are words such as usually, can, may, and percentages given within a set range. This is because not every human reacts in the same way towards a test. The results for person A may be far different than the results for person B. Because of this, they average all evidence received from the tests.


Do you have any idea where this world would be today without drugs? You need to be more specific, because when you say drugs I'm assuming you mean every drug from Tylenol to Vicodin to penicillin to heroin.
This goes back to my last paragraph about how drugs are different for every person. For example, penicillin is a miracle drug for many.

http://www.botany.hawaii.edu/faculty...35/lect21b.htm

http://herbarium.usu.edu/fungi/funfacts/penicillin.htm

http://www.fda.gov/drugs/emergencypr.../ucm131015.htm

But for some, it isn't. I'm allergic to it.

Your own personal experiences aren't proof for everyone else, just for you. Unless you apply the factors of an experiment, you know, the things you learned about in 7th grade science class, there are far too many variables. The life lessons for some only apply to a select amount of people, not everyone.

Open your eyes first, brother.
Every human being is different. Bad consequences for some are good for others.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_368246.html

There's so many situations like this spreading around the world, I just picked the first link. Go to Google, type in "weed saving a life," and feel free to click on the thousands of links where someone talks about how marijuana saved either their life or the life of someone they knew. Are all of these 100% true? Of course not. It's your choice whether to believe some of these stories or not, given the evidence provided.

You don't have to have personal experiences in the topic of the debate to participate in it. It may give you a better feel in the debate, but it most certainly is not a requirement.

To move on is to grow, yet we can barely accomplish either on our own. We know the way to go, yet we follow those with their eyes closed.

@FromDownAbove
What you said ^

What i said:




I just said that he should take in account what happened to me&others, and he shouldnt just believe in scientific studies. To listen to the bad consequences as well . He is so keen on all those scientific studies, posting like 15 different links on how good weed is, and in reality its not all that good.


im going to repeat myself:

And im not even sure if you have even smoked before or you are in this debate just for the fuck of it and dont know what the fuck he is talking about but instead takes links from random sites and posts them here and believes everything he reads.
And plus, if i know what drugs do to people, ive seen it first hand, and i know what i does to me and others, and say its bad. How can you, who doesnt know what it feels like, who hasnt seen people in real life, and what weed can do to them, come and say its a good thing? Scientific facts are just tests and dont prove the true impact weed can have upon your body, something like you said . Period.


Weed is a drug, and you HAVE to take in account the risks to your life/health. If you base your knowledge on something just by looking over positive scientific studies and only looking at what/how marijuana helped people, without taking in account the bad consequences, its not really too valid.


L.E.:
He didnt say for everyone, he said show some proof that weed can fuck one up, and i told him already about my friend.
If you want, i can surely check on google, over the millions of scientific studies, at least one that proves weed can cause serious and permanent fuck up for the person.
Would you then believe me?

I think you need to read more carefully over the posts.

Sorry for the double post but couldnt edit the last post anymore.

Well if a scientific study its just an avarage, then its not too reliable now is it. So basically anything can happen to you(like i said).
Which brings to the conclusion that scientific studies should not be used as proof for proving that weed is good for A person.
It can be good for X, but not for Y(im guessing thats what you meant by saying far different). So therefore scientific studies are bullshit, and they are not trustworthy, again, because ANYTHING can happen to you. Just because nothing happened to those 100ppl that got tested, it doesnt mean its good for a fact. There are scientific studies which prove marijuana aint really that good, now what would you say about that?
Its an avarage vs avarage which its fuckin stupid thing to compare, so i would listen to real life experience rather than what good things, by chance, happened to some people smoking weed.

If you tell me to write on google and read what people said about weed helping them, i tell you go on google and write how weed destroyed peoples lives.
So we can both counter eachother with links, real-life experiences, and we aint gonna get anywhere and im out

Scientific studies are what happens to others. Many others actually. That way, it will compare and contrast the difference of effects between more than just one person.


I took both sides into account. It can help, or it can destroy. The reason why my last post was revolved around the fact it can help, is because your last post revolved around how it only hurts. If you want to talk about invalidity, your anecdotal evidence covers it.

The link I posted, which I'll post again just to make sure we are talking of the same link, WEED INFORMATION [nida.nih.gov] [nida.nih.gov], lists several factors that are not good when talking of marijuana.


You must not understand. I'm not for legalization of weed. I know it damages, that's why I quit it a long time ago. But what I was trying to get you to comprehend was that with some people, it is a positive factor of health improvement.


I think you need to quit assuming everything.

Well if you talk only about personal experiences and experiences of a friend, it's not too reliable is it? Especially since there is no proof, no constants, no factors being measured properly in the study. Just two biased people smoking weed assuming motives.

The reason why it is an average is because if you study one person only on such a broad subject, it's a waste of a study.

How in the hell did you even come across that conclusion? The study shows average RESULTS because of so many people being tested. They also show individual results. Most studies, yes I know, not all, cover everything in this type of experiment. When this is compared to your own personal experiences, your own personal experiences don't add up to anything.


That's exactly what I said actually. "The results for person A may be far different than the results for person B."

So therefore, your way of personal experience, is bullshit. You are testing one person, oh I'm sorry, two people including your friends. Whereas the study is testing hundreds of thousands over many years.
Yeah, ANYTHING can happen to you, that's why they apply EVERYTHING when testing in studies.

Quit smiling.
Just because it happened to you, doesn't mean it's bad for a fact.
I'm not really understanding how you are even arguing over this. This is just stupid. I know there are studies that prove it is bad. No shit. I know there are studies that prove it can help some individuals. Its different for everyone. It's not bad for every damn human being on this planet.

There is no average versus average comparison. Let me break this down for you in the stupidest way imaginable so you can comprehend what I'm saying.

Scientific Study
1000 people in study. 900 have lung problems similar to tobacco smokers. 960 have increased heart rate. 480 receive relief from back pain.

It averages the results to 90% of TESTED SUBJECTS have lung issues. 96% of TESTED SUBJECTS have increased heart rate. 48% of TESTED SUBJECTS have back pain relief.

There. Understand yet? No? Didn't think so. This is a study to show how it hurts, and how it helps, meaning it won't hurt/help every damn person that uses it.

Your method of study
I got a headache. Everyone who smokes weed will have a headache.

Already done it. Once again, I know it can be bad. I'm just simply trying to get you to understand not everyone is going to see it as being bad because of their own experiences show no bad effects. Get it yet?

To move on is to grow, yet we can barely accomplish either on our own. We know the way to go, yet we follow those with their eyes closed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don "Much more accurately". As long as it is not 100% accurate i wouldnt trust it, and to be 100% it needs to be tested on 7 billion people.

If you require 100% accuracy to believe something, then you leave yourself unable to hold any belief whatsoever - you will never get 100% accuracy. The accuracy of scientific studies is far greater than the accuracy of anyone's personal experiences, and that's the point that I've been making.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Amazing. You obviously havent been with a smoker before. If you had, you would know that scientific studies are bs.

Nice speculation, but you're wrong. I've had ah... a fair amount more experience of cannabis than your average person.

Please, share your reasoning- how could personal experiences demonstrate that "scientific studies are bs."

Out of interest, did you read any of the links I posted?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Im talkin about drugs bro. From nicotine/caffeine to morphine.

Are you only talking about recreational drugs, then? And don't you think it's absurd in the highest degree to treat all drugs in the same way when their effects and dangers are blatantly so massively diverse?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Yes i can provide proof. I just shared mine and my friends experiences with weed

Would you care to explain exactly how your personal experiences support the hypothesis that cannabis "fucks people up"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don you, like i said before, are ignoring me,

Explaining why I believe that you are wrong is not the same as ignoring you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don even tough everything i said is truth

If you wish for me to believe that you speak the truth, then you must demonstrate beyond a certain degree of doubt that you do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Yet you trust some graph paper more than what a guy says that has experience with weed and has experienced fucked up things.

-->"Yet I trust several people who have all devoted their lives to studying the effects of cannabis and have observed and noted thousands and thousands of different people's experiences with cannabis (as well as the specific pharmacology of cannabis itself) and statistically analysed the results to test for significance over a young person who has never studied hypothesis testing and has only (necessarily) extremely limited and biased experiences of cannabis."

Fixed that for you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don You choose scientific studies over life lessons. You, myfriend need a reality check.

I have spent the last post and a half explaining why I value scientific studies over personal experiences (i.e. life lessons), and you have yet to address any of the reasons and arguments that I posted. Why should I value "life lessons" over scientific studies?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Just because what i posted its not pleasing to the eye, it doesnt mean its false. Again my friend, like i said in my other post, listen to the bad consequences as well, open your eyes bro.

I'm not saying that you are wrong; I am saying you have yet to demonstrate that you are right and that I will therefore not believe what you say until you do so. There is a subtle but very important distinction there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don And im not even sure if you have even smoked before or you are in this debate just for the fuck of it and dont know what the fuck he is talking about but instead takes links from random sites and posts them here and believes everything he reads.

All the text that I posted was written by myself, but yes it was from a different forum... So what? It most certainly wasn't random and you have yet to address anything I said there.

The links I posted were also not from "random sites", but from scientific and reputable journals that are extremely relevant to the topic we are discussing. They weren't actually addressed to you; I posted them simply for other users' reference. My apologies if I didn't make that clear enough.

Upon what basis do you make the assumption that I believe everything that I read? Clearly I do not, as I have read your posts and do not believe your conclusions. Do you have reason to suppose that the studies I posted (and that I would guess from your posts that you have yet to read) are false?

For the record, I have never smoke cannabis first-hand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Scientific facts are just tests and dont prove the true impact weed can have upon your body, something like you said . Period.

You are neglecting to address the fact that exactly the same is true of any personal observations, except that personal observations are far less likely to be accurate. I have explained this several times.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makaveli_the_Don Weed is a drug, and you HAVE to take in account the risks to your life/health. If you base your knowledge on something just by looking over positive scientific studies and only looking at what/how marijuana helped people, without taking in account the bad consequences, its not really too valid.

In that post I only referenced studies that you perceive to be "in support" of cannabis (but are not necessarily so; several of them show cannabis to be addictive and a cause of cognitive impairment) - sure... But in another post in this very thread (see page 3) I talked specifically about cannabis use causing more lung problems than tobacco and the fact that use can lead to psychotic episodes or schizophrenia. Please don't misrepresent what I'm saying.

/contribution