Good news, it looks like cannabis legalization did NOT lead to a statistically significant increase in psychosis as the Chicken Little prohibitionists liked to claim. And this new study was not done by hippy-dippy stoners, but by serious researchers at Stanford University, who published it in the esteemed Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).
Not even recreational retail store sales (i.e. cannabis commercialization) seemed to significantly move the needle in that regard, despite the obvious net increase in cannabis availabilty, convenience, and potency relative to not having such legal retail store sales, and the (eventual) net decrease in price per unit of THC.
And furthermore, when results were broken down by age, the results were totally in the "wrong" direction than the age-restrictionists would have predicted.
OOPS!
Looks like Alex Berenson was wrong about that, yet again. And looks like Reefer Madness 2.0 was ultimately a flop once again. Womp womp.
UPDATE: See also here and here as well for further studies that pour cold water on the Reefer Madness 2.0 fearmongering.
Exactly.
ReplyDeletePlease help me to keep saving lives and stopping addiction. Please don't let this get lost.
Deletehttps://www.livescience.com/43605-drinking-age-21-saves-lives.html
Case closed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24565317/
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708
https://madd.org/statistic/teen-alcohol-use-kills-4300-people-each-year-thats-more-than-all-illegal-drugs-combined/
Every single one of these claims has been debunked before, and/or is a red herring to the real issue at hand here. Troll.
DeleteAnd you seriously cited MADD in your comment? ROFLMAO.
DeleteOh, and the brain technically continues developing into the 30s and 40s, and perhaps even beyond that. So 21 or 25 are completely arbitrary.
Deletehttps://medicalxpress.com/news/2010-12-brain-fully-mature-30s-40s.html
One may argue "but it's no longer developing at a *fundamental* level", but guess what? That is also true at 18 as well, and perhaps even a bit before 18 as well.
QED
There is plenty of counter-evidence, frequently referenced on this blog, refuting every single one of your "public health" arguments. Miron and Tetelbaum (2009) and Asch and Levy (1987 and 1990), for example.
DeleteThis blog doesn't like to be challenged on its faulty principles and beliefs. To young people reading this: Censorship and accusations of trolling aren't how you deal with viewpoints you don't like. It's anti-American in nature and reeks of intellectual elitism. As if only one viewpoint is the morally superior position, *pfff* don't make me laugh, Ajax. You don't own the Internet.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that I keep on getting deleted means I win. Engage with controversial ideas or accept defeat.
We have already engaged with you repeatedly, Randy. We have debated over and over again and you keep shitposting junk science and logical fallacies ad nauseam. It is YOU that needs to accept defeat, but you won't because you are a sore loser.
DeleteGood riddance, troll!
There is overwhelming evidence to show the success story of age 21 laws that regulate public health. It has lowered drunk driving rates and tobacco and nicotine use among adolescents, which saves lives. There is no freedom for young people if they're dead.
ReplyDeleteI've worked at wellness centers for youth to see addiction problems firsthand. It's disheartening, and it robs them of their potential when they're in the absolute prime of their lives. Addiction is not freedom; it is not liberty. We have to protect young people until they reach the age of 21. Education without enforcement does not work. We must make choices for them until they're mature enough to do so independently. I won't apologize for this.
1) The plural of "anecdote" is NOT "data".
Delete2) Who the hell are you to deny someone liberty on the supposition that they *might* abuse it?
3) Who the hell are you to demand that adults be protected from themselves against their will?
4) Most alcohol consumption is not abuse or addiction.
5) There is plenty of counter-evidence, frequently referenced on this blog, refuting every single one of your "public health" arguments. Miron and Tetelbaum (2009) and Asch and Levy (1987 and 1990), for example.
6) The past three years have shown what happens when we allow "public health" to turn into fascism.
QED
Adolescents under 21? You can vote and enlist in the army at 18. 20-year-olds are no longer considered "teens". We have truly failed if 20 year old adults are grouped in with adolescents. You don't care about saving lives, you just want to control people. No one here wishes physical or mental harm on young adults. How is wanting young adults to be able to have full agency and self-determination harmful? Young adults are the future. However, this nanny state coddling cannot persist, it's just driving young people insane. We wonder why some of them have little self-advocacy skills and little to no resiliency with life's challenges. It's people like you. You need to stop.
ReplyDeleteYou keep getting deleted because your arguments are not made in good faith and your sources that you keep copy and pasting are not new, nor do they bring any new information to light. Please stop the incessant spamming. You're ruining it for those who may have salient points to contribute to the conversation. You can start your own blog or share your thoughts on Facebook about these matters. Shitposting isn't going to change things.
I've learned alot by reading this blog and have considered new perspectives over the past 2 1/2 years. Thank you Ajax for all the interesting and insightful blog posts!
DeleteYou're very welcome, Grant. Now, I must delete the troll. Again.
DeleteAmen to that!
DeleteOn second thought, I will leave the troll's comments up for a bit longer along with their replies so everyone can see just how much he has been defeated.
DeleteConversation has been closed. We will not feed trolls any longer here. Good riddance!
ReplyDelete