AIBU to think cannabis mention shuts down critical thinking?

[PearlsAreHeavy]

AIBU to think people completely lose the ability to think critically the minute cannabis gets mentioned?

Inspired by another thread…

Before anyone gets confused about he point of my post…

This isn’t about county lines, gangs, trafficking, driving while high, smoking around kids or any of the other extremes people immediately wheel out whenever cannabis gets mentioned.

I don’t support any of that.

I’m talking about cannabis itself.

For transparency, I use prescribed medical cannabis. It’s prescribed by a specialist clinical team, my GP is supportive, it’s grown legally under licence and arrives from a pharmacy.
.
And before someone inevitably shouts “this was written by AI”… yes, I used ChatGPT to help organise my thoughts. I’m dyslexic and it stops me rambling and making mistakes. The opinions are mine. The punctuation is not. Feel free to debate the subject rather than the software. I’m not here to defend me using a language model for its intended purpose.

Cannabis has genuinely changed my life.
Under medical supervision I’ve reduced other medications that came with a whole shopping list of side effects, some of which then needed treating themselves. I sleep better. I function better. I’m more present. My family gets a better version of me.

I have a senior job, I own my home. I pay my mortgage, I pay my tax, don’t have debts, and I’ve never been arrested. I volunteer at the local animal shelter and I donate money to charity. I’m making those points so that people understand where I’m coming from - I consider myself a decent human being who happens to use prescribed cannabis.

Yet the second people hear the word cannabis, critical thinking seems to leave the building.
“It’s illegal.”
“It’s drugs.”
“It ruins lives.”
“Think of the children.”
“Druggie.”
Conversation over.

Why?

Every substance can be used responsibly.
Every substance can be abused.
Every substance can ruin lives.

Someone taking codeine after surgery isn’t the same as someone addicted to opioids.
Someone prescribed diazepam for anxiety isn’t the same as someone dependent on benzodiazepines.

Someone enjoying a couple of glasses of wine on a Friday isn’t the same as someone drinking a bottle of vodka every day.

Alcohol ruins lives.
Prescription medication ruins lives.
Gambling ruins lives.
Food ruins lives.
Social media ruins lives.

But mention cannabis…

Apparently the plant itself tells some people everything they need to know about your morals, your intelligence, your work ethic and your ability to parent.

Why?

And yes, before someone says it…
I know it’s illegal unless prescribed.
That’s a fact.

But since when did legality become everyone’s moral compass?

It’s technically illegal to be drunk in a pub.

It’s illegal to handle salmon in suspicious circumstances.

It’s illegal to wear armour in Parliament.

There are loads of weird, outdated laws that nobody uses as the basis for deciding whether someone’s a good person.

Yet cannabis seems to be the one subject where “it’s illegal” is treated as though that ends the discussion.

It doesn’t.
It tells me what the law says.

It doesn’t tell me why you think it’s wrong.
I’m not expecting everyone to agree with me.

I’m not even expecting everyone to like cannabis.

What I am interested in is hearing from people who’ve actually thought about why they believe what they believe.

If your entire contribution is “it’s illegal”, “drugs are bad” or “it ruins lives”, you’ve probably missed the point of the thread.

I’m asking why you think that.

And if your position is simply “I don’t drink, don’t smoke, don’t swear, don’t break the rules, therefore everyone else should live by my standards”… then honestly, please scroll on, I’m not having that debate.

Abstinence doesn’t automatically make someone morally superior. It just means you’ve made different choices.

I’m interested in hearing from people who can separate behaviour from stereotypes, evidence from stigma and legality from morality.

And one last thing…

I genuinely worry about the people who could benefit from medical cannabis but are too scared to even ask about it because of the stereotypes attached to it.

I know people in exactly that position.
They’re frightened of being judged and labelled a druggie.

Whether cannabis is right for someone should be a conversation between them and their clinician, based on evidence, not fear of social stigma

I agree with what you’ve written.

Personal experience on its own doesn’t establish causation, but nor is it irrelevant. As you say, collections of lived experience are often what lead researchers to ask questions in the first place.

Where I think we’ve crossed wires is that you’re answering a different question to the one I asked.

I didn’t start this thread to argue that cannabis is harmless. It isn’t, and I knew that before starting this thread. I’ve agreed it can contribute to dependency, worsen mental health problems, and isn’t suitable for everyone. I haven’t tried to shut that discussion down once.

The discussion I wanted to have was why, for some people, the conversation changes the moment cannabis is mentioned.

At what point does “this substance carries risks” become “this person must be an addict, a druggie, a pothead, workshy, irresponsible or morally suspect”?
That’s the leap I’ve been questioning from the start.

Ironically, I think this thread has demonstrated exactly what I was asking about. Some posters have discussed evidence, risk and their own experiences thoughtfully. Others have admitted they didn’t even read my replies because, in their words, “no point talking to an addict.”
Those are two very different discussions.
So I don’t think we’re actually disagreeing about the evidence around cannabis. I think we’re discussing different things.
You’re discussing the evidence around the substance.

I’ve been asking why the person using it is so often judged before anyone knows anything about them.

DH uses it to treat his incredibly painful back. I am fully supportive. I don’t care where he gets it, or whether it’s prescribed or not, I really don’t. I’m just glad it does the job. I know it works brilliantly for nerve pain. I have MS and am medicated for all the symptoms I have, including pain. The meds aren’t particularly effective though even at ‘top dose’. I have had a toke of dh’s joint from time to time - I think the last time was about 3 years ago, but I’m sure I’ll do it again at some point. He buys small amounts for personal use.

I think it would be sensible if cannabis were legalised, in fact all class C drugs were, sold through regulated shops and taxed.

What I’ve challenged is when those individual experiences become a judgement about every cannabis user. They’re not the same thing.

This is what I mean. Most people aren't saying that every cannabis user is a psychotic layabout. But your response to anyone relating their observations is "that isn't every cannabis user" thereby shutting down the conversation. You have acknowledged individual experiences and observations but refuse to let the conversation move on to connect those things with why people may have a negative opinion of canabis users. People have those strong negative opinions because of the reasons they are stating. The two can't be separated because you don't feel it fits for you.

My point about you claiming to be better when you use cannabis was simply that self reported data about any drug is likely to be skewed by the fact that the user wants to keep using the drug. I pointed out that I have met people who claim they are better when using cannabis but friends / family / colleagues would disagree.* *

I genuinely hope that you are one of the rare cases where cannabis has been positive, it hasn't shrunk your world, it is something that enhances your day but you could easily go without it and your relationships are as ful and rewarding for you and those around you. If that is the case congratulations.

I don't hate cannabis users, I don't hate people who use alcohol, I don't like people who go use exercise or work as a coping mechanism.

I think this is where we actually disagree.
You say that when I reply “that isn’t every cannabis user”, I’m shutting the discussion down. I don’t think I am. I’m questioning whether the conclusion follows from the evidence.

I completely accept that people’s experiences shape their opinions. I’d expect them to. But I think there’s a point where opinion becomes assumption about people you’ve never met.

If you’ve known ten people whose lives have been damaged by cannabis, I wouldn’t dream of arguing with your experience. But how do you get from there to “responsible cannabis users are rare”?
Isn’t it equally possible that the people whose cannabis use causes obvious problems are simply the ones you notice? The people quietly getting on with life have every reason to keep quiet, and I think this thread demonstrates exactly why.

I also don’t think I’m separating behaviour from identity because it “fits for me”. I think they’re different things. Someone can misuse cannabis. Someone can use it responsibly. Those are behaviours. Calling someone a “druggie”, “pothead” or “addict” is making a judgement about their character.

I didn’t stumble into this. I spent a long time researching cannabis before choosing this treatment pathway and felt informed enough to make that decision.
I’m not making claims about cannabis as a whole. I’m saying it has genuinely transformed my quality of life. Equally, I’m not wedded to it. If I, or the people closest to me, felt it was starting to have a negative impact on my health, relationships or ability to function, I’d review it and make another informed decision, just as I would with any other treatment.

.I think that’s probably the biggest difference between my approach and some of the replies on this thread. People seem quite comfortable drawing broader conclusions from the experiences they’ve had. I’m much more cautious about drawing conclusions about people I’ve never met based on one fact alone: that they use cannabis.

OP, I don’t know how to put this more plainly whilst being polite, so I’ll be blunt. Your attitude is part of the problem. Plenty of us are trying to explain, in good faith, why cannabis users get the reaction they do. It is because, for the vast majority of us, cannabis users are not good, productive members of society. For most of us, our experience is that they are (on average) boring wasters. Some posters have had lives of loved ones wrecked by the drug. These negative impacts and harms are what actually causes most people’s negative reactions. That isn’t a failure of critical thinking, it is a success in pattern recognition. One which you seem to be wholly blind to.

I found your opening interesting.

You say you don’t know how to put it more plainly whilst remaining polite, but I don’t think the issue is that I haven’t understood you.

I think you’re answering a different question to the one I asked.

You’re explaining why cannabis has a poor reputation. I understand that. I’ve agreed throughout this thread that it carries risks and causes harm. I’m not going to keep repeating myself.

I’ve been asking something different.
I’m asking when concern about a substance, in this case cannabis, becomes an assumption about the individual using it. And this same thinking is not applied so wholly to other substances.

Those aren’t the same discussion.
You say you’ve recognised a pattern, and I don’t doubt that’s been your experience, and many others.

Where we differ is what comes next.
To me, recognising a pattern and assuming that pattern applies to people you’ve never met are two different things.

Recognising that a substance can be harmful isn’t the same thing as believing you know the character of every person who uses it.

In fact, you’ve done exactly that in your own post:

“Cannabis users are not good, productive members of society.”

That’s precisely the leap I’ve been trying to explore throughout this thread. 🤷‍♀️

It's true that we pattern match and we use heuristics. One of those might be 'my experience of cannabis users is net negative' sure. But I'm pretty surprised that folks don't update their models when the rest of the pattern match says something like 'respectable professional with career who clearly has their shit together and is using this on a legal basis'.

I get that that those thing may appear to clash, but it's interesting to note those who stick to a negative view based on the first part and effectively discount the second part. To me that looks exactly like the departure from critical thinking that OP was questioning.

It would seem that the common denominator here for negative opinion on cannabis is the smoking, which OP does not do.

Radical solution could be legalised and medical cannabis available but only in forms that cannot be smoked/vaped.
No vile smells to piss us off, no stoners smoking morning, noon and night.

If you can smell it, it's illegal, and the police must deal with it. Job done.

Despite dh’s daily use of this (yes, smoking it, am to pm) he does EVERYTHING here. I am disabled by MS, often can’t even get out of bed, so when I say he does everything I mean it. Sometimes I can wash up without dropping/breaking things but it’s always a risk and one he would prefer I didn’t take. I do it when I’m confident that I won’t hurt anything, and if I think I can stand up long enough - not that often, then.

He’s my carer, cook, housekeeper, everything. I honestly don’t know what I’d do without him. He used to be borderline abusive but not for years. I don’t know what changed him, but he’s the man I first married, not the almost-monster her was for a few years.

I cannot express what he means to me and I love him.

But it's not wrong.

But there's no evidence it actually helps half the conditions it's now prescribed for. Like, it actually makes the executive dysfunction element of ADHD worse in terms of word recall/short-term memory/attention span etc. They've done studies which interestingly show that the user's assessment of it as helping them doesn't correlate with their actual performance.

In fact, habitual weed use can actually be mistaken for ADHD as the executive dysfunction symptoms are similar. That's why most service providers won't assess or prescribe if you're using weed.

The only thing it's proven to do is relax overstimulated minds in some people, but so generally does a few drinks, and three beers a night is apparently much less likely to cause an acute cardiovascular event than daily weed use which carries the same risk whether vaped/smoked/eaten (although obv there are additional lung risks if smoked).

I think it should be legal but let's not pretend it isn't terrible for you in terms of long term heart attack and stroke risks.

I don't doubt it, but as you say people have convinced themselves it is actually helping. I think removing the smoking option would make it less desirable to a lot of those who just want to get stoned. Hopefully make it unavailable to vulnerable teenagers too.

From Pub Med - Patients often seek medical consultations most commonly because of having intolerable chronic pain. Medications such as NSAIDs or opioids are being used to relieve such pain. However, long-term use of these medications can also cause adverse effects on health. Several studies have been done regarding cannabis as an alternative for chronic pain. Some patients were reported to get relief from cannabis consumption through various routes, and the use of it has been legalized, too, in some states in the USA and countries like Germany. Italy, the Netherlands, UK, Australia, Uruguay, Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Thailand, and Jamaica. Compared with opioids, studies show that cannabis use has lesser adverse effects, and it could even lessen opioid dependence. As clinicians, it is good to determine the primary purpose of using cannabis before prescribing it to patients to weigh the advantages and disadvantages that underlie it. Evaluating patients very well about the use of cannabis is important to decide whether to prescribe such medication or just sort to other alternative ways of managing pain to render the best possible patient care.

As someone who has regularly been prescribed opioids for pain I am willing to explore medical cannabis. It's not without risk but no medication is. I hate the way opioids make me feel and they don't address pain for me. Apparently about 60% of people get no relief from opioids.

A thoughtful perspective on separating medical use from stigma and stereotypes. It is important to recognise that prescribed treatment should be discussed based on evidence and individual circumstances. Open, respectful conversations can help reduce misconceptions and encourage more informed choices.

A thoughtful perspective on separating prescribed medical cannabis from the stigma often associated with recreational use. Evidence, individual circumstances and clinical guidance should be part of the conversation, rather than assumptions or stereotypes.

That’s kind of what you said 10 days ago

Problem is there's scant evidence it actually helps with most of the things it's prescribed for.

With ADHD, for example, habitual weed use mimics many of the executive dysfunction elements which can lead to a false diagnosis. So you're specifically told you need to be clean for diagnosis/titration etc.

When on ADHD meds it interacts with them to make them much stronger - meds block dopamine reuptake and THC floods the brain with dopamine. In several studies I've read the patients believed it helped them focus but they scored objectively worse in tasks relating to working memory, word recall, attention span, etc.

There seems to be a disconnect between the belief of the patient and the reality. And of course people tend to be unreliable narrators when it comes to substances with recreational potential. I firmly believe if all alcohol was banned but they could prescribe six cans of lager/a bottle of wine on a Friday night for anxiety we'd suddenly get a flood of people with medical alcohol scripts opining about the benefits to their quality of life.

As an ADHD sufferer who smoked it daily for over a decade I agree it helps with the overstimulation sometimes. But so does exercise and that benefits your heart rather than fucks it up. Edible users having the arterial function of a cigarette smoker despite not smoking is wild.

This must be the groundhog day thread. I've also basically rewritten my previous post without even remembering I'd written it. 😆

I think pain relief is one area where there seems to be genuine potential. People getting 4g a day for anxiety is ludicrous. If you need that much then that's a problem in itself.

😂

Demonstrating my memory issues lol.

I’ve got plenty of those myself. I only noticed the previous poster had repeated what they said because the two posts were next to each other!