Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2012/06/19 23:55:36
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
LordofHats wrote:It is called Intelligence Quotient for a reason. I doubt anyone will claim its an end all be all, but how many geniuses have low IQ's?
Richard Feynman's was only 125. This is about half the average internet philosopher, and considerably lower than every BA idiot I've ever met.
Maybe you don't know what scale to use, but 125 is already pretty good. Twice that, and you enter the realm of soon-to-be-mad geniuses... (or actually autistic personnalities)
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/19 23:56:02
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/06/19 23:55:48
Subject: Re:"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Yeah, I can quote out of context too. In fact, I'll find a single thing you've said that I can find that's wrong, and use that to claim some over-arching point.
Clearly you're young, and you regard weed as cool. Sometime you'll find out why older people smoke it far less - it makes you lazy and stupid. You'll realise this in time.
Doesn't mean it should be criminalised though.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/19 23:55:58
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
2012/06/19 23:56:21
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
LordofHats wrote:It is called Intelligence Quotient for a reason. I doubt anyone will claim its an end all be all, but how many geniuses have low IQ's?
Richard Feynman's was only 125. This is about half the average internet philosopher, and considerably lower than every BA idiot I've ever met.
Maybe you don't know what scale to use, but 125 is already pretty good. Twice that, and you enter the realm of soon-to-be-mad geniuses...
Yep, 350 would be pretty clever.
2012/06/19 23:56:26
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
LordofHats wrote:It is called Intelligence Quotient for a reason. I doubt anyone will claim its an end all be all, but how many geniuses have low IQ's?
Richard Feynman's was only 125. This is about half the average internet philosopher, and considerably lower than every BA idiot I've ever met.
Maybe you don't know what scale to use, but 125 is already pretty good. Twice that, and you enter the realm of soon-to-be-mad geniuses... (or actually autistic personnalities)
Well it's lower than mine and I'm a dumbass.
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
2012/06/20 00:00:34
Subject: Re:"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Yeah, I can quote out of context too. In fact, I'll find a single thing you've said that I can find that's wrong, and use that to claim some over-arching point.
Clearly you're young, and you regard weed as cool. Sometime you'll find out why older people smoke it far less - it makes you lazy and stupid. You'll realise this in time.
Doesn't mean it should be criminalised though.
You claimed alcohol was harmless compared to weed, then when I showed otherwise, you said you never said that. I called you up on this, deal with it. And if you can find a quote I then claim to never have said please quote it.
I'm not young, i'm getting on for 30, I smoked weed every day for ten years, I don't anymore except very rarely. That wasn't because it made me stupid, it's because I was somewhat addicted and prices are astronomical.
2012/06/20 00:06:44
Subject: Re:"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Yeah, I can quote out of context too. In fact, I'll find a single thing you've said that I can find that's wrong, and use that to claim some over-arching point.
Clearly you're young, and you regard weed as cool. Sometime you'll find out why older people smoke it far less - it makes you lazy and stupid. You'll realise this in time.
Doesn't mean it should be criminalised though.
You claimed alcohol was harmless compared to weed, then when I showed otherwise, you said you never said that. I called you up on this, deal with it. And if you can find a quote I then claim to never have said please quote it.
I was referring to alcohol's impact on your ability to work/perform normal tasks. I stand by what I said. It's easier to work with a hangover than a, for lack of better word, mashover. One can be solved by a nice cup of tea and a cigarette, the other is a cancerous lech that prevents any thought or emotion whatsoever. I don't care about the consequences of 30 years time because I'll be dead. Don't let that stop you from making your own (easily refuted) interpretation of what I've said.
dæl wrote:
I'm not young, i'm getting on for 30, I smoked weed every day for ten years, I don't anymore except very rarely. That wasn't because it made me stupid, it's because I was somewhat addicted and prices are astronomical.
30 is young.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kovnik Obama wrote:
You regard IQ as a mark of intelligence. Based on that, I find it very hard to believe you have any intelligence at all...
It's a good measure if you take the tests with long intervals. I don't see what made you unable to avoid the insult, tho...
I apologise for the insult.
But IQ is nonsense. It has no purpose or use.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/20 00:07:45
Unnessesarily extravegant word of the week award goes to jcress410 for this:
jcress wrote:Seem super off topic to complain about epistemology on a thread about tactics.
2012/06/20 00:16:36
Subject: Re:"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Testify wrote:
I was referring to alcohol's impact on your ability to work/perform normal tasks. I stand by what I said. It's easier to work with a hangover than a, for lack of better word, mashover. One can be solved by a nice cup of tea and a cigarette, the other is a cancerous lech that prevents any thought or emotion whatsoever. I don't care about the consequences of 30 years time because I'll be dead. Don't let that stop you from making your own (easily refuted) interpretation of what I've said.
Some hangovers are awful, and a bacon sarnie and a cuppa isn't going to help there. But as I said, in my experience I am far more functional after a night of smoking than a night on the lash.
30 is young.
It's old enough to realise that weed isn't cool, and even if it were it wouldn't matter.
2012/06/20 00:19:28
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal? Why should weed be any different from alcohol in the case that it effects different people differently? Some people can handle their liquor way better than others. I'm willing to be some people can handle the herb a lot better than others too.
Also, hiring processes disagrees with Testify that IQ tests are useless :
According to Frank Schmidt and John Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is general mental ability."[67] The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6.[68] The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods were controlled for.[39] While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function,[69] IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations.[67] That said, for highly qualified activities (research, management) low IQ scores are more likely to be a barrier to adequate performance, whereas for minimally-skilled activities, athletic strength (manual strength, speed, stamina, and coordination) are more likely to influence performance.[67] It is largely mediated through the quicker acquisition of job-relevant knowledge that IQ predicts job performance.
-Wiki ; Intelligence Quotient, Job Performance
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/06/20 01:20:21
Subject: Re:"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Because cannabis is by far the safest and most socially prevalent. a large percentage of the population smoke it but don't pay any tax to.
Right, but the majority of the same arguments can be made for the other drugs. Why not bring in more tax?
You could make the case for ecstacy/mdma, but other stuff seem far more damaging.
The damage it causes doesn't really matter though. The people who will use it will use it, whether it is legal or not. By keeping it illegal you put all the money in the hands of criminals and increase risk to the user as there is not guarantee of purity.
So keeping it illegal accomplishes nothing but increasing the profits of drug cartels and results in more dead people who injected drain cleaner into their arm when they were trying to get a fix.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
2012/06/20 01:21:23
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
I can attest that I deal with weed hangovers far more easily than alcohol. All my co workers are the same, and some of them are high on the job.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
2012/06/20 01:29:40
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
dæl wrote:"A regulated market for illicit drugs would be the best way and we could reduce alcohol consumption by as much as 25% if we had the Dutch model of cannabis cafes," said Nutt, adding that he believed the police would rather deal with people who were stoned than drunk.
Doesn't that sounds like a bit of a made up number, as it is? I'm all for legalization of light drugs, and it really doesn't have to bring 'good' side effects to be justifiable... The simple fact that it's a personnal liberty should be enough...
In the eyes of many people, it isn't enough. They want a personal benefit before agreeing to it.
There's a similar issue to gay marriage. It is in some cases hard to get support not because people oppose it, but because for most people it doesn't effect them directly either way. So those who oppose it have far more influence than they would if you based it purely on popular support (the percent of the population that opposes gay marriage has in several polls slipped in to the thirties, while in most polls the percent of the population that supports it is in the fifties).
Sadly, in terms of populism and gathering the vote, personal liberty isn't really that important, at least in the US.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2012/06/20 01:34:31
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2012/06/20 01:43:04
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
dæl wrote:"A regulated market for illicit drugs would be the best way and we could reduce alcohol consumption by as much as 25% if we had the Dutch model of cannabis cafes," said Nutt, adding that he believed the police would rather deal with people who were stoned than drunk.
Doesn't that sounds like a bit of a made up number, as it is? I'm all for legalization of light drugs, and it really doesn't have to bring 'good' side effects to be justifiable... The simple fact that it's a personnal liberty should be enough...
In the eyes of many people, it isn't enough. They want a personal benefit before agreeing to it.
That's sad. But wouldn't the taxes be the obvious personal benefit?
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/06/20 01:59:24
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Taxation is an indirect benefit. We generally don't recognize what our taxes pay for consciously. Most people hear taxes and they think bad. What is being taxed is irrelevant, and how much money it can generate is a hypothetical number to them that means nothing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/20 01:59:47
LordofHats wrote:Taxation is an indirect benefit. We generally don't recognize what our taxes pay for consciously. Most people hear taxes and they think bad. What is being taxed is irrelevant, and how much money it can generate is a hypothetical number to them that means nothing.
Oh well. I tried.
On a completely unrelated note, I have just realized there's a name for something I've experienced my whole life : Exploding Head Syndrome. It's ridiculously benign, but the name freaks the living out of me.
I needed to share.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/06/20 02:05:03
[...] for conflict is the great teacher, and pain, the perfect educator.
2012/06/20 02:05:20
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
The proposal makes sense, although 25% is an odd figure. Like everything else involving cannabis legisaltion far too many people have been brainwashed into a 'drugs are bad' mentality after decades of usually baseless stigma for people to listen to reason.
Cannabis, while not benign, is far less dangerous than alcohol (which if introduced today would be a class A drug due to it its servere health risks). The main danager with cannabis is actually rspiratory problems as it is usually smoked.
Criminalising effectively safe drugs is a waste of time, money and resources that also criminalises a whole segment of society.
RegalPhantom wrote: If your fluff doesn't fit, change your fluff until it does
The prefect example of someone missing the point.
Do not underestimate the Squats. They survived for millenia cut off from the Imperium and assailed on all sides. Their determination and resilience is an example to us all.
-Leman Russ, Meditations on Imperial Command book XVI (AKA the RT era White Dwarf Commpendium).
Its just a shame that they couldn't fight off Andy Chambers.
Warzone Plog
2012/06/20 06:42:34
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Da Boss wrote:What the hell is he basing his figures on.
25%? Convenient figure.
Without doing any research at all, he probably directly compared rates of alcohol use in Holland with those in Britain.
LordofHats wrote:Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal? Why should weed be any different from alcohol in the case that it effects different people differently? Some people can handle their liquor way better than others. I'm willing to be some people can handle the herb a lot better than others too.
True, but the people that can't handle their herb don't end up the hospital getting their stomachs pumped (or dead), and THC withdrawal isn't potentially lethal.
People react differently to different drugs, but the negative reactions to pot are nowhere near as severe as the negative reactions to alcohol.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/06/20 06:48:00
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/06/20 06:50:16
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
So alcohol goes down by 25% and weed goes up by how much?
Personally I'm not a fan of drinking or smoking and so don't have a stake either way; both are harmful in different ways, in different amounts to different people. The overall indication is still that both are bad for you...
Testify wrote:
Over a period of decades, sure. Doesn't stop you showing up to work.
I see someone has never had a hangover.
Mr Hyena wrote:
If we legalize one, why not legalize them all?
That's an abysmal argument that you should be ashamed for making. You may as well ask "If we acquit one, why not acquit them all?" It presumes either guilt or innocence, which is just about the stupidest thing anyone can do.
Or, inversely, "That alcohol stuff is bad for, and its a liquid, therefore we must make all liquids illegal."
Mr Hyena wrote:
Liver yes but brain? I'm not sure about that.
Really? It is a well documented fact that heavy alcohol use causes brain damage.
Mr Hyena wrote:
If one is legal, they should all be, simply because any arguments against allowing the others falls flat.
Nonsense. Its about net effect on the body and society. Indeed, its been argued that Britain should ban booze because it seems to cause you lot so many social problems.
Mr Hyena wrote:
And that is where it falls flat. Like with pretty much everything.
Well, not really, because that effectively means all proposals for policy lack force; which is just nonsense.
Obviously the actual effect of any given decision cannot be 100% assured, right down to whether or not you're going to die if you take one more step. The point is either that we can arrive at a reasonable level of certainty that a given policy change will either improve conditions, or cause no change.
This message was edited 8 times. Last update was at 2012/06/20 07:04:05
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/06/20 07:05:50
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
Da Boss wrote:What the hell is he basing his figures on.
25%? Convenient figure.
Without doing any research at all, he probably directly compared rates of alcohol use in Holland with those in Britain.
It's unlikely, he's a Professor and an ex Drugs advisor to the government (was sacked after saying that horse riding is statistically more dangerous than ecstacy, which is an empirically proven fact btw), and he places a lot of importance on evidence, see his blog for example. Also he did say "up to 25%," it was reported as 25%, and I stuck it in the title to get people's attention, and because I pretty much copied the articles title.
SilverMK2 wrote:So alcohol goes down by 25% and weed goes up by how much?
Who cares, I'd rather have our streets filled with happy, philosophical, hungry people on a saturday night than the aggressive, loud, filling up A&E and police cells crowd we currently have.
2012/06/20 07:14:42
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
dæl wrote:
It's unlikely, he's a Professor and an ex Drugs advisor to the government (was sacked after saying that horse riding is statistically more dangerous than ecstacy, which is an empirically proven fact btw), and he places a lot of importance on evidence, see his blog for example. Also he did say "up to 25%," it was reported as 25%, and I stuck it in the title to get people's attention, and because I pretty much copied the articles title.
Simply being a professor doesn't absolve one from using weak evidence to support an argument, nor does criticizing the lack of evidence in another report indicate that one applies the same standard of evidence to one's own work.
One of the absolute easiest ways to attack something in academia is to cite weak evidence, especially where there is an attempt to establish causality. I know, I've done it myself numerous times.
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2012/06/20 07:19:21
Subject: "Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
dogma wrote:
Simply being a professor doesn't absolve one from using weak evidence to support an argument, nor does criticizing the lack of evidence in another report indicate that one applies the same standard of evidence to one's own work.
One of the absolute easiest ways to attack something in academia is to cite weak evidence, especially where there is an attempt to establish causality. I know, I've done it myself numerous times.
Absolutely everything I've heard from him has been backed up with evidence, one doesn't become Head of a Department at one of the top ten Universities in the country (Imperial College London), and probably one of the best in the world in your field, by making arguments based on faulty or incomplete evidence.
2012/06/20 09:17:38
Subject: Re:"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed" says Professor Nutt
dæl wrote:If we are going down the "very heavy" use route then alcohol is far worse.
Excessive alcohol intake is associated with impaired prospective memory. This impaired cognitive ability leads to increased failure to carry out an intended task at a later date, for example, forgetting to lock the door or to post a letter on time. The higher the volume of alcohol consumed and the longer consumed, the more severe the impairments.[93] One of the organs most sensitive to the toxic effects of chronic alcohol consumption is the brain. In France approximately 20% of admissions to mental health facilities are related to alcohol related cognitive impairment, most notably alcohol related dementia. Chronic excessive alcohol intake is also associated with serious cognitive decline and a range of neuropsychiatric complications.
out of me. 
