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

It was actually a GP who told me that 🤷🏻‍♀️

Have you considered that people who have schizophrenia are actually using cannabis to self medicate? I know a lot of people with ADHD who use it for that very reason.
Cannabis itself doesn't cause psychosis in people who aren't susceptible but heavy manufactured strains like skunk can.

That's why it should be legalised. It takes the heavily manufactured strains that cause problems out of the equation.

Naive to think there wouldn’t still be a black market for those strains though.

GPs aren't all knowing oracles. They can still be wrong. I studied neuroscience for 4 years, but what do I know?

As if all the bad stuff would just disappear..?! LOL, no. The poorest people will still be smoking it. Look at America. I can go in a dispensary and buy nice stuff in there all packaged up pretty. The people on the streets aren't smoking that. They aren't even allowed in! They are still on the street stuff.

I was attending a NHS pain clinic and I asked about medical cannabis for pain. The initial response from the person running the clinic was to say they work with pain consultants who have said they have some patients with severe pain and the only thing that works for them is medical cannabis (not prescribed on nhs).

They then seemed to realise they had endorsed the use of cannabis and quickly rowed back and started talking about the cost and how people can try mindfulness etc... They also explained how most prescribed painkillers don't work for majority of people. There is a disconnect there - they prescribe many painkillers which have several side effects and for most people they don't work.

I was more interested in the efficacy of medical cannabis but couldn't have that conversation.

It is prescribed on NHS for a couple of conditions e.g. a form of epilepsy.

The self-medication thing has actually been looked at. They tracked people for years, checked who already had symptoms at the start, and cannabis STILL predicted who developed psychosis later. If it was just people medicating something they already had, that wouldn't happen.

And the risk goes up the stronger and more often you use. That's not really what self-medicating looks like, is it?

ADHD is a totally different thing btw, that doesn't tell us anything about psychosis either way!

Nope. Absolute nonsense. A 5 minutes search will completely dispel this myth.

Like I said, addicts will do, say or pretend to believe anything.

I find cannabis screws with my short term memory.

Plus, it's not good for my short term memory.

I think it’s two different arenas, medicinal use v recreational

every objection people have is correct you know this. It is you who is trying to shut down critical thinking sd you don’t like the message.

ive two friends who use it recreationally. Both middle aged. Both have now got to the stage they can’t function without it, and both now suffer anxiety, a known side effect. Severe anxiety, don’t want to leave my local area anxiety. What started as fun, is now a necessity. That is negatively impacting their lives and those of their family.

for many it’s also a gateway drug, and does lead to escalation.

it is ok to say you use it for a specific reason but it is hugely problematic in society due to all the reasons you listed.

For the addicts (this information is agreed upon and widely distributed) it doesn't matter how you take it, it's the THC that causes the addiction. But you already know this really:

"The main psychoactive ingredient, THC, is responsible for marijuana’s reinforcing properties and a primary contributor to marijuana addiction.10,11 Results from empirical studies have shown that THC stimulates neurons in the reward system to release the signaling chemical (neurotransmitter) dopamine at levels higher than typically observed in response to natural rewarding stimuli. Alterations in dopamine signaling or levels of dopamine are generally associated with other drugs of addiction.10

In 2020, approximately 14.2 million people aged 12 or older met the diagnostic criteria for a cannabis use disorder within the past year.1 It is estimated that 1 in 10 adults who use marijuana will develop a cannabis use disorder, with a higher risk for people who begin using marijuana before the age of 18.5,7 Marijuana accounts for nearly half of admissions into substance use treatment for youth between the ages of 12 to 17.7

From https://americanaddictioncenters.org/marijuana-rehab/is-it-addictive

it could trigger psychosis in people who were already susceptible to psychosis.
Cannabis won't give you psychosis if that's not the case.

“In both samples, lifetime frequent cannabis use was associated with increased likelihood of psychosis and this was highest among those who were daily users of high potency cannabis. High potency cannabis was defined as having Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of 10 per cent or more. This relationship remained the same when researchers accounted for the PRS [Polygenic risk scores] for schizophrenia, suggesting that the environmental risk from cannabis use for psychosis is independent from the genetic risk.”

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/cannabis-use-increases-risk-of-psychosis-independently-from-genetic-predisposition

I actually think you’ve misunderstood.

You say I’m shutting down critical thinking because I don’t like the message.
But I’ve repeatedly acknowledged the message.

I’ve agreed cannabis carries risks. I’ve agreed it can contribute to dependency. I’ve agreed it can trigger or worsen mental health problems in some people. I’ve agreed smell is antisocial. I’ve agreed young people are particularly vulnerable. I’m grateful to posters who’ve challenged my thinking because that’s the whole reason I started the thread.

So where exactly have I shut that discussion down?

My point has never been “cannabis is harmless.” It has been that, for some people, the word cannabis seems to become the entire discussion
.
The thread that prompted me to start this one is a perfect example. The OP asked whether she was being unreasonable to be annoyed with her husband because he’d smoked before realising he might need to collect their son.
Within a few posts he was a “druggie”. People were saying they “wouldn’t be married to someone who takes drugs”. Others assumed he was neglecting his children, and made sweeping judgements about his character, despite knowing virtually nothing about him.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5557655-annoyed-with-dh?page=4&reply=153725648

My point is that for many posters , they saw weed being mentioned and thats where they went straight to, Not the actual issue of miscommunication between spouses

That one and ma y many others, and personal experiences of listening to people trot out these same lines. what made me start this thread.

Your two friends sound like they’ve had a genuinely awful experience, and I’m not questioning that for a second. But that’s exactly my point. They’re your two friends. They are not every cannabis user.

Some of the replies on this thread have described anyone who talks about benefits as “delusional”, said “addicts will try anything to argue for their addiction”, called people “potheads”, “druggies”, “wasters” and “losers”. Others have assumed that because I use cannabis, I must be defending addiction, organised crime and drug culture.

@Tinks2026 starts her post above ‘for the addicts’ This is my point.

That’s the leap I’m questioning.
I’m not asking anyone to like cannabis. I’m asking why, for some people, the moment it’s mentioned, the individual disappears and the stereotype takes over.

No, I didn't say that. Not my quote. And I didn't read the rest of your comment, no point talking to an addict.

My comments were correct and still stand.

“For the addicts (this information is agreed upon and widely distributed) it doesn't matter how you take it, it's the THC that causes the addiction. But you already know this really:”

That is the start of your post above is it not?

Bit rude!

'Skunk' is just slang. It's always either indica, sativa, or a mix. Well, actually I think there's a rare third type which nobody uses as it's very low yield/low potency or something like that.

Not being an arse. It's just that your comment is like saying "not all alcohol is booze. It can be beer, cider, spirits, etc".

There is actually a strain called Skunk tbf. However, much like "a hoover" means a vacuum cleaner it's now mainly used to describe anything that is high THC, strong, and smelly. "Weed" when used to describe a specific type would probs be something like Thai/Chocolate Thai or Purple Haze. Stuff that comes in blocks with loads of twigs rather than big stinky green buds.

"Correlation isn’t the same as causation, and that’s exactly the sort of nuance I wanted to discuss."

By that same metric we can't blame any other durg or alcohol for societal / individual ill-effects, the user of whatever they are using were led there by whatever events have happened in their lives.

But that isn't true, is it?

Many people have terrible things happen and choose healthy coping mechanisms and many people choose unhealthy coping mechanisms.

You haven't really responded to any points on drug driving, I'm curious of your thoughts there given the huge leap in drug driving offences and repeat offences (stats quoted upthread).

I'm not judging people who choose to use medicinal cannabis, I have a chronic pain condition and know how desperate it can feel when nothing is working. I wouldn't want to take the risk with MC personally having worked in a sector where I have seen too many lives ruined both mental and physical health of users and their loved ones. I have also seen a lot of families ruined by parents smoking cannabis and the kids being either neglected or just on the cusp of neglect.

It does lead to dependency, any arguments otherwise are an act of self delusion. This has been stated again and again upthread.

Also, even the 'holding down a job' users in my experience tend to be very boring. Again, you could argue they were always boring bastards and cannabis just exacerbated an existing trait. I guess we will never know.

I think that the deflection to "why aren't people talking about alcohol or people doing lines of coke" are constantly fusing in a thread where you have asked to talk about cannabis. If the thread was i tended to be a compare and contrast of all forms of self abuse then that should have been stated.

The “it was pre-existing” answer to every harm is delusional tbh. When lots and lots of people are recounting stories of psychosis, MH problems, lack of drive / ambition, addictive behaviour etc it’s very easy to say “correlation isn’t causation”. And that is true sometimes so it is important not to assume. But, actually, often things correlate because one does indeed cause the other.

Look at it through another lens. Smoking and lung cancer correlate too. My gran (smoked 2 packs a day) was adamant smoking was fine. Both her parents had smoked all their lives and neither got lung cancer. She’d have said “correlation isn’t causation” if the phrase were well known in her time. But she was an addict justifying her choices.

I also used to smoke, btw. I was addicted so I’m not judging people who get addicted to harmful substances. It’s the pretence that is daft.

I'm still yet to see an answer to how the clinics assist you in weaning off MC once the ailment is resolved (maybe a successful knee operation or resolution of anxiety through counselling etc).

Until Sir Richard Doll’s research, the best predictor of developing lung cancer was being a working class male. Or so I’ve read.

YANBU.

Online discussions reward black-and-white thinking. Everything has to be good or evil, legal or banned, rather than acknowledging that adults can make different choices and that some issues are genuinely nuanced.

That's why the average MN response is 'ban it', or if illegal 'ban it again, double ban it'.

If taking cannabis helps your condition crack on and ignore them. Plenty of people won't judge you for it. If it was renamed bisacann and came from a pharmacy they would be none the wiser.

I wonder how many people realise that although medicinal cannabis is rarely used in this country, we actually grow it and export it to other countries for medicinal purposes?

If taking cannabis helps your condition crack on and ignore them
But nobody would know what medication they used if they didn’t tell everyone about it.

I knew that and think it's such a double standard. If it's safer than many drugs I don't see why gps can't prescribe it. I was in such pain waiting for double hip surgery I was having to take omeprazole because other painkillers wreck your stomach.

A friend is on Mounjaro. She gets a monthly appointment to check on her health with her GP. If we do it for weight loss why not arthritis fibromyalgia and other painful diseases.

I’ve seen what it can do to people, which is why I’m against any attempt to legalise it.

I think a GP wouldn't be prescribing more than necessary, would monitor carefully. Personal experience isn't really relevant. I was given some new medication last week. Bad side effects. Which are mentioned in the leaflet, so I stopped taking it on their advice.