Not necessarily. There’s always time for a little flavor in your ear.
I think the only source of government-approved marijuana is a farm in Mississippi and perhaps that’s what’s being used in the study. I read an article about medical marijuana where someone who had a government prescription complained of the poor quality of the product. So perhaps it’s much weaker than anything commercially available.
Wow. Imagine being paid by the US Government to smoke 50 joints a day of Uncle Sam’s legendary genetically engineered goodness.
Somehow, my high school guidance counselor failed to mention this career path.
Here’s a quote from Scientific American of December 2004 on the issue of government-issued marijuana:
And here’s a statement from an ACLU webpage, quoting someone who was given medical marijuana as part of a study:
Let’s see - 50 joints per day…getting up at 8 am, going to sleep at 10 pm…awake for 14 hours…smoking a joint every 20 minutes…42 joints…not counting time for eating, brushing teeth, trying to do anything else…finding time to smoke the other 8 joints…7 days a week… I think I have some questions about the methodology here. I know a guy named Ernie, who has friends who are stoned all day every day, and they don’t come near this level of use. He knows people who smoke several joints in a day, sometimes three or four, sometimes more. They’re pretty heavy users. But 50??? Every day??? This data doesn’t make sense. I also had no luck finding the original cite in the on line journal, Neurology. I think I believe some people did some looking at brain blood flow in heavy users, and found some differences between them and non-smokers. OK. We’ve got a way to go before this study gets accepted into the cannon of medically sound advice. 50. Sheesh.
It helps to put a question in the OP in this forum. Otherwise it might be mistaken for fodder for another forum. I’ll assume the question here is “Is this study likely to be valid and useful?”
bibliophage
moderator GQ
Plus these survey people must be independently wealthy, what with plowing through 4 ounces of weed per month, at roughly $350-$400 per ounce, with no free time to actually perform any sort of work to cover their expenses.
Or maybe they’re paid handsomely by the survey. I’d like to see that Craigslist posting. “Salary commensurate upon experience…”
…and let’s go ahead and assume the answer here is “not bloody likely.”
Ye gods, there is only so much pot you can smoke in a day before it makes you unable to resist going to bed for about 14 hours, or throw up, or both. I can’t imagine how stoned you would be if you tried to adhere to that schedule. I certainly couldn’t do it. Barring extremely unusual usage patterns, I don’t think most pot smokers set out to get as ripped as possible and stay that way. It would be insane, not to mention prohibitively expensive, to even try. And you’d never get anything done. Who wants to be incapacitated all day, every day? Nobody I know, or have ever known, and I have known a lot of pot smokers.
No, the people who smoke that much are a vanishingly small portion of the population. I am an every day smoker and I don’t go through even close to that. A heavy smoker will blow through about an ounce a week, maybe a little more.
Yikes, $400 an ounce? It better be spectacular at that price. I think you will find the average price in the NE US about half that.
Hmmm. Could this be one of those hired-propaganda thingies this administration is known for surreptitiously planting?
70 a week, 350 a week. Funny, they’re both divisible by 7 and 10. Slip a decimal and make a multiplication error…
1 joint a day would be 7 a week or 70 in 10 weeks, and might be called moderate.
5 joints a day would be 35 a week or 350 in 10 weeks, and might be called heavy.
Anyway, somebody didn’t do their reality checks. I’m not going to do it, but I’d love to see someone contact whoever reported this (and their editor) and ask for specific milligrams per day from the original report–hey, get a copy of the original report.
Who were the subjects of the experiment, anyway? What sane person would agree to smoke 50 joints a day for a week or more? And don’t tell me potheads, some might agree, but the experimenter would have to supervise them the whole time to make sure all 50 got smoked each day.
ummmmm.
what was I going to say?
what?
Humboldt brick, San Francisco prices.
According to my…uh…Google search. Yep. Google search.
The paper is found here. Anyone wanna pony up $20 to read it?
You can read the abstract, for a rough outline.
Google Scholar found it in a few more locations. I’m not sure if I can access this because I’m on the universities VPN or if it’s free but here’s a link. (pdf) (e-mail me otherwise)
Here’s the joint/blunt numbers:
Linky no worky.
Of course pot smokers could never be convinced it was bad, even if it is. Because, simply, they enjoy doing it.
- Originally posted by jimpatro*
In that connection I remember an item from Prevalence of Nonsense, a book published in 1970 and written by Ashley Montagu and Edward Darling. They told about someone to started drinking gasoline. (Imagine!)
He decided he liked it; this continued until the orthocresyl phosphate started softening his bones.
It took a while for him to recover.
Montagu and Darlking ended the articvle with “True, he liked it. But the gasoline wasn’t good for him.”
And Isaac Asimov once mentioned a compound calld the sugar of lead. It’s sweet, all right, but it’s a deadly poison as well.
Point: Just because you like it doesn’t override the risk you take–a point I would apply to tobacco too.