|
On January 01 2012 20:15 Swede wrote:
Weed is by far the worst drug to be taking at that age (out of alcohol, weed and nicotine) since it is known to hinder the development of the brain to some degree. Nicotine is pointless, and alcohol can be positive or negative depending on how you treat it.
I'd like to see a scientific paper on this. "Weed kills braincells" is an unproven myth while the dangers of alcohol and tobacco components are accepted and known. Where did you see that weed is the worst?
|
Smoking though... Why? This is worse than beer, this literally shortens your life and puts you at a risk of even getting cancer.
So does McDonalds.
|
You're too tightly wound. You'll end up hating everybody for every little thing if you keep this attitude up. You don't even have your facts right either. Weed is by far the worst drug to be taking at that age (out of alcohol, weed and nicotine) since it is known to hinder the development of the brain to some degree. Nicotine is pointless, and alcohol can be positive or negative depending on how you treat it.
You got your facts completely wrong. Alcohol is definitely the worst for kids that age, it has proven detrimental effects on the brain one of wich is stopping growth of the brain. I don't think there is any research out there that suggests weed does the same.
|
On January 02 2012 03:43 Kukaracha wrote:Show nested quote +On January 01 2012 20:15 Swede wrote:
Weed is by far the worst drug to be taking at that age (out of alcohol, weed and nicotine) since it is known to hinder the development of the brain to some degree. Nicotine is pointless, and alcohol can be positive or negative depending on how you treat it. I'd like to see a scientific paper on this. "Weed kills braincells" is an unproven myth while the dangers of alcohol and tobacco components are accepted and known. Where did you see that weed is the worst?
I don't have the exact paper on hand, but a PhD holding psych lecturer told me that marijuana has negative effects on the developing brain - note that I'm only talking about the developing brain and I'm only saying it's the worst of the three during that time, although I think alcohol and marijuana are similarly bad. No offense, but I trust him more than any of the overly-zealous defenders of weed on the internet, especially since he was willing to admit that marijuana is relatively innocuous besides that and a few other things.
Anyway, a quick Google shows a lot of results on marijuana and the developing brain, but rather than paste various links in here and take the OP far off topic I'll let you look into it if you're interested.
|
It's not about over-zealous defenders of cannabis, haven't seen any here. But about the absurdity of putting marijuana use before alcohol and nicotine as a dangerous substance for the developing brain.
Alcohol consumption for infants was common in certain areas, and studies have underlined how devastating it was, leading not to slight and hardly noticeable damage, but mental disabilities.
Nicotine, aside from the insane addictive effect printed on a young brain, is much more often used in high doses at a very high frequency. More smoke, more lung and throat damage, to say the least.
Weed is the less damaging of those three substances, by far. The fact that it can be damaging alone does not say much since both of the two other drugs are disastrous in regards of physical and mental health.
|
On January 02 2012 09:17 Kukaracha wrote:
It's not about over-zealous defenders of cannabis, haven't seen any here. But about the absurdity of putting marijuana use before alcohol and nicotine as a dangerous substance for the developing brain.
Alcohol consumption for infants was common in certain areas, and studies have underlined how devastating it was, leading not to slight and hardly noticeable damage, but mental disabilities.
Nicotine, aside from the insane addictive effect printed on a young brain, is much more often used in high doses at a very high frequency. More smoke, more lung and throat damage, to say the least.
Weed is the less damaging of those three substances, by far. The fact that it can be damaging alone does not say much since both of the two other drugs are disastrous in regards of physical and mental health.
I'm not talking about marijuana and infants. I'm talking about marijuana and teenagers, since that was the context of the OP.
But to be honest I'm not interested in trying to prove myself right nor prove you wrong. I don't have the time or energy to debate until conclusion whenever somebody disagrees with me on the internet, especially when this particular thread isn't about what we're discussing. I'm perfectly happy to agree to disagree, particularly since you admit that marijuana can be damaging to some degree, which is all I wanted to communicate to the OP in the first place.
|
Because they (except swearing) have positive, enjoyable experiences. They can also have negative consequences, but in the end you have to weigh those against the positives.
However, it sounds like you don't dislike such actions purely because of the negative experiences, but because you don't like those people. I wouldn't judge these people because in the end everyone has to assign their own personal values to the benefits and the consequences, you haven't evaluated the positives, and you don't know how other people value them. You can argue high school students don't properly value the negative consequences, but it's much harder to dislike people simply for that reason.
For example, I don't ski or ride motorcycles, because in the long term there's a convergent risk towards incapacitating injuries, and the cost of not being able to be active for a few months is very high to me, and I don't enjoy skiing and riding motorcycles nearly as much as being active in other ways. And obviously I don't dislike people ski or motorcycle, because they probably enjoy it a lot more than I do and don't mind being hurt as much.
Drinking:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/new-study-finds-college-binge-drinking-to-be-a-bla,763/
Most of the negative effects are the same for adults (recklessness, alcoholism, developing depression), but overall most adults of rational and sound mind enjoy it enough and can limit potential harm enough that they find it worth doing. You could argue that it's better for people to understand how to drink responsibility, rather than starting to binge drink the moment it's allowed.
The main reason underage people shouldn't is because of the risk of harming their developing brain. Again, it really matters how much you value your brain (to my understanding it's not the cognitive parts as much as emotional/anger/depression areas).
Smoking and drugs:
Enough people down the road have huge problems quitting, even though they become more aware of the long term damage. I would feel lucky that I don't have a smoking or drug addiction, and hope people who do smoke the best.
Swearing:
Swearing is regarded as vulgar. As in it is "classless" and has no place in situations with social graces. Of course if you're not in such a situation, it really doesn't matter and it might be a more succinct way of expressing yourself. If you are unable to function well in a situation that requires social graces, then it's a problem.
And I don't smoke, do drugs, and didn't drink until 21, so my defenses are purely rational. Let people handle their own problems, there's enough problems in life that there's no reason to pile on.
|
United States84 Posts
1. I don't know why you give a shit.
2. Kids really haven't changed, they might be more public about things, but I really don't think kids have changed at all. You're just noticing it now people you're older and are starting to observe people of a younger age.
|
Kids being kids, nothing more.
When you're a kid its all about what you have and pretending to be the 'big man', when you really have no idea what that means, so kids will often talk utter shite, my little brother is 14 and some of the conversations I've heard between his friends are hilarious (im 24), but I have no doubt I was the same at his age.
Also kids experiment, I believe there have been studies (too tired to link, find if you want) which showed that teenagers have an impaired ability to react to known consequences, from memory it was something along the lines of, a teenager will know something is stupid, something is bad for them etc but still do it, like driving too fast, smoking, jumping off high places etc
They are hard wired to be stupid and reckless, although the reason for that is unknown, it's believed to be a way of pushing people out of comfort zones they develop as kids and helping them be more independent.
What you get at the end is often a well rounded adult though, sure you lose a few on the way but I often meet people who were quite sheltered as kids and they are never as emphatic or understanding towards certain aspects of people or life in general.
Some people grow up a little quicker and some might not grow up till they're 30 and its a bit too late, but the overwhelming majority of people will, eventually.
|
christ you're tightly wound up
it appears like you're just judging people and saying ignorant things in this blog.just because the kids aren't like you don't mean they're rebels, thugs or outcasts. they're teenagers
have started to recognise that people were drinking alcohol. (This is at 14 years old) How is this possible? What kind of unresponsible parents/store clerks sell these things to teenagers? I just don't understand it.
i think you have to like.. get out of the rock you've been hiding under.
maybe it's just the liberal me speaking but i encourage experimenting as a teenager
the key is to make sure they experiment correctly instead of shielding them.
|
Which part of Nz are you in? I recently visited my cousins in Auckland. They have similar problems in their schools. They also like to poke at Maoris a lot. Care to explain more on this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
