"Not Worth its own thread" Thread

[TedEH]

Some of the top medical schools think there is merit in psychedelics research for the use of mental health treatment.

Merit in research is miles away from starting with the conclusion and working backwards. I'm not in any way denying that there's merit in the research - but you have to do the research before making claims. I find it hard to believe both that more folks haven't encountered the "I watched Joe Rogan once and he said weed and micro-dosing cures everything" crowd, and that we're not at least a tiny bit skeptical that we're just throwing our favourite recreational drugs at all the studies, you know, just in case they cure something. I'm all for doing the research, but I remain unconvinced that a good chunk of people into that research aren't motivated by wanting to justify their existing habits. When it's definitively shown to have positive effects, I wouldn't contest that. Like, even the folks using weed as a painkiller - I was about to say I don't deny that helps people, I was pretty sure that was a thing until I googled it right now to confirm, and supposedly there's some evidence that it's at least in part a placebo effect. Googling "is weed a painkiller" gives you a "maybe". People claim it is. There's no proof that it's not helping them. But it's not solidly backed up yet either. Worth research? Absolutely. Convenient miracle cure? Certainly convenient, at least.

I dunno if I'm just hanging around very different stoners than y'all are, but the folks I know are, for lack of a nice way to put it, addicts. I spend a good amount of time with someone who had what looked like a case of that rare thing where daily smokers will start violently vomiting - and they refused to stop or slow down the smoking. They refused to consider the possibility that this was the problem. They humoured the doctor by taking a short break while actively vomiting, and then once they recovered, it was right back to smoking. Any time I'm critical of the substance, I have to withstand an earful of "don't you know how much stuff this cures?" Well, it's not curing YOU right now, is it? I'm not going to take the word of someone who "can totally stop at any time" but doesn't, even when it causes them violent discomfort. I have a vague idea of how much research is being done, but how much of that is definitive at this point? How much of that miracle cure isn't anecdotal? I'm sure someone could find a link to throw at me with a study showing it's incredibly promising, but then I'm sure you could also find a link to a study showing it does nothing at all.

 

[MFB]

This seems topical given the past few pages, but yeah, no one besides absolute fucking dolts is taking JRE seriously and are instead hate listening - same as 2 Bears, 1 Cave

 

[nightsprinter]

Merit in research is miles away from starting with the conclusion and working backwards. I'm not in any way denying that there's merit in the research - but you have to do the research before making claims. I find it hard to believe both that more folks haven't encountered the "I watched Joe Rogan once and he said weed and micro-dosing cures everything" crowd, and that we're not at least a tiny bit skeptical that we're just throwing our favourite recreational drugs at all the studies, you know, just in case they cure something. I'm all for doing the research, but I remain unconvinced that a good chunk of people into that research aren't motivated by wanting to justify their existing habits. When it's definitively shown to have positive effects, I wouldn't contest that. Like, even the folks using weed as a painkiller - I was about to say I don't deny that helps people, I was pretty sure that was a thing until I googled it right now to confirm, and supposedly there's some evidence that it's at least in part a placebo effect. Googling "is weed a painkiller" gives you a "maybe". People claim it is. There's no proof that it's not helping them. But it's not solidly backed up yet either. Worth research? Absolutely. Convenient miracle cure? Certainly convenient, at least.

I dunno if I'm just hanging around very different stoners than y'all are, but the folks I know are, for lack of a nice way to put it, addicts. I spend a good amount of time with someone who had what looked like a case of that rare thing where daily smokers will start violently vomiting - and they refused to stop or slow down the smoking. They refused to consider the possibility that this was the problem. They humoured the doctor by taking a short break while actively vomiting, and then once they recovered, it was right back to smoking. Any time I'm critical of the substance, I have to withstand an earful of "don't you know how much stuff this cures?" Well, it's not curing YOU right now, is it? I'm not going to take the word of someone who "can totally stop at any time" but doesn't, even when it causes them violent discomfort. I have a vague idea of how much research is being done, but how much of that is definitive at this point? How much of that miracle cure isn't anecdotal? I'm sure someone could find a link to throw at me with a study showing it's incredibly promising, but then I'm sure you could also find a link to a study showing it does nothing at all.

*shrugs* I don't care enough nor know enough to make any claims about anything from a scientific standpoint. Using weed as an example, I can tell you where I live, using weed is the norm. Totally legal and it was fairly normal even before it was legal. I know people who smoke for fun, people who smoke because they have a mental dependence on it, and a few people who have had their post traumatic stress disorder improve a lot with therapy as well as using cannabis which they claim has helped them- the entire range basically. My own therapist and medical doctor both are in the "if you feel it helps you, go right ahead. just don't vape it because vaping is bad and don't do it before or during the operation of a motor vehicle" camp. Many people in city government around here are big public advocates and partakers (and often personal growers) of cannabis products. So I guess the people I know who use it might be different than those you know, I don't know. I'm definitely never gonna claim it will cure anything for anybody. I think there are people who have personalities that are not at all conducive to using cannabis, and I think there are people who probably should absolutely be using it based on their personalities (lol)

All in all, I'm saying a bunch of nothing at this point and have nothing to debate really. I don't think it's a magic bean but I do see its potential value on a case by case basis.

 

[Crungy]

I don't think it's a magic bean but I do see its potential value on a case by case basis.

This is all I have to add

 

[nightsprinter]

This is all I have to add

View attachment 147669

Still in the hall of fame of funny movie scenes all these years later.

 

[crushingpetal]

Still in the hall of fame of funny movie scenes all these years later.

I'm my head I occasionally do the "fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, fuck you" bit.

 

[nightsprinter]

Legendary Willie Nelson cameo too

 

[Crungy]

The whole movie is gold.... The police horse Buttercup, guy on the couch, Bob Saget saying he sucked dick for coke/ I seen it, etc lol

 

[tedtan]

Merit in research is miles away from starting with the conclusion and working backwards. I'm not in any way denying that there's merit in the research - but you have to do the research before making claims. I find it hard to believe both that more folks haven't encountered the "I watched Joe Rogan once and he said weed and micro-dosing cures everything" crowd, and that we're not at least a tiny bit skeptical that we're just throwing our favourite recreational drugs at all the studies, you know, just in case they cure something. I'm all for doing the research, but I remain unconvinced that a good chunk of people into that research aren't motivated by wanting to justify their existing habits. When it's definitively shown to have positive effects, I wouldn't contest that. Like, even the folks using weed as a painkiller - I was about to say I don't deny that helps people, I was pretty sure that was a thing until I googled it right now to confirm, and supposedly there's some evidence that it's at least in part a placebo effect. Googling "is weed a painkiller" gives you a "maybe". People claim it is. There's no proof that it's not helping them. But it's not solidly backed up yet either. Worth research? Absolutely. Convenient miracle cure? Certainly convenient, at least.

I dunno if I'm just hanging around very different stoners than y'all are, but the folks I know are, for lack of a nice way to put it, addicts. I spend a good amount of time with someone who had what looked like a case of that rare thing where daily smokers will start violently vomiting - and they refused to stop or slow down the smoking. They refused to consider the possibility that this was the problem. They humoured the doctor by taking a short break while actively vomiting, and then once they recovered, it was right back to smoking. Any time I'm critical of the substance, I have to withstand an earful of "don't you know how much stuff this cures?" Well, it's not curing YOU right now, is it? I'm not going to take the word of someone who "can totally stop at any time" but doesn't, even when it causes them violent discomfort. I have a vague idea of how much research is being done, but how much of that is definitive at this point? How much of that miracle cure isn't anecdotal? I'm sure someone could find a link to throw at me with a study showing it's incredibly promising, but then I'm sure you could also find a link to a study showing it does nothing at all.

I tend to agree that it can be problematic for many people. And is it a miracle cure? No, of course not.

But it helps oncology patients with pain as well as those patients who aren’t eating due to chemotherapy and/or radiation treatments to the head and neck who tend to be lacking appetite, nauseous, and/or in too much pain to eat without it. So it does have it’s uses per the medical professionals working with this group of patients, though this is probably a different group than that you hang out with.

 

[BlackMastodon]

Merit in research is miles away from starting with the conclusion and working backwards. I'm not in any way denying that there's merit in the research - but you have to do the research before making claims. I find it hard to believe both that more folks haven't encountered the "I watched Joe Rogan once and he said weed and micro-dosing cures everything" crowd, and that we're not at least a tiny bit skeptical that we're just throwing our favourite recreational drugs at all the studies, you know, just in case they cure something. I'm all for doing the research, but I remain unconvinced that a good chunk of people into that research aren't motivated by wanting to justify their existing habits. When it's definitively shown to have positive effects, I wouldn't contest that. Like, even the folks using weed as a painkiller - I was about to say I don't deny that helps people, I was pretty sure that was a thing until I googled it right now to confirm, and supposedly there's some evidence that it's at least in part a placebo effect. Googling "is weed a painkiller" gives you a "maybe". People claim it is. There's no proof that it's not helping them. But it's not solidly backed up yet either. Worth research? Absolutely. Convenient miracle cure? Certainly convenient, at least.

I dunno if I'm just hanging around very different stoners than y'all are, but the folks I know are, for lack of a nice way to put it, addicts. I spend a good amount of time with someone who had what looked like a case of that rare thing where daily smokers will start violently vomiting - and they refused to stop or slow down the smoking. They refused to consider the possibility that this was the problem. They humoured the doctor by taking a short break while actively vomiting, and then once they recovered, it was right back to smoking. Any time I'm critical of the substance, I have to withstand an earful of "don't you know how much stuff this cures?" Well, it's not curing YOU right now, is it? I'm not going to take the word of someone who "can totally stop at any time" but doesn't, even when it causes them violent discomfort. I have a vague idea of how much research is being done, but how much of that is definitive at this point? How much of that miracle cure isn't anecdotal? I'm sure someone could find a link to throw at me with a study showing it's incredibly promising, but then I'm sure you could also find a link to a study showing it does nothing at all.

Taking the extreme case of an addict does thumb the scale a bit towards "this is ridiculous", though. Everything in moderation, like there's a vast divide between someone that microdoses shrooms once a month versus someone who's eating a handful every day.

 

[jaxadam]

The whole movie is gold.... The police horse Buttercup, guy on the couch, Bob Saget saying he sucked dick for coke/ I seen it, etc lol

I WANNA TALK TO SAMSON FLY ME TO THE MOON I GET LIFTED

 

[CanserDYI]

The 1990 Carvin catalogue liner had two typos in it and I'm angry 34 years later.

"Where did you HERE about Carvin?"

"Send a Catalog to a FREIND"

TERRIBLE.

 

[SalsaWood]

The people who are the reason Dust Off contains irritants are a lot more dangerous than any substance on its own will be. If we spent half the money from "the war on drugs" on simply educating people about drugs, without a ton of propaganda, the world would probably be a little less ridiculous right now.

 

[jaxadam]

The 1990 Carvin catalogue liner had two typos in it and I'm angry 34 years later.

"Where did you HERE about Carvin?"

"Send a Catalog to a FREIND"

TERRIBLE.

View attachment 147672

Microsoft AI voice to text translation.

 

[Demiurge]

The 1990 Carvin catalogue liner had two typos in it and I'm angry 34 years later.

"Where did you HERE about Carvin?"

"Send a Catalog to a FREIND"

TERRIBLE.

View attachment 147672

No time to spellcheck when so busy smashing-together tasteless customer orders and- it being Carvin in the 90s- putting an overt roundover on everything.

 

[crushingpetal]

The 1990 Carvin catalogue liner had two typos in it and I'm angry 34 years later.

"Where did you HERE about Carvin?"

"Send a Catalog to a FREIND"

TERRIBLE.

View attachment 147672

You should read a Bogner manual. Reinhold is a mad genius, but it is clear English is not his first language and no one else read it before he pressed "print 500 copies" (or however many amps he sells).

 

[KnightBrolaire]

Spaghetti Bolognese walked so Chili Mac could sprint

 

[Ordacleaphobia]

I just love the idea of these companies squirming as their profits sink.

Definitely a certified 'Everyone liked that' moment for sure. Especially from the fast food places. No idea how they managed to huff enough of their own farts to suffer the illusion that they could get away with charging close to sit-down restaurant pricing for the meals they produce that are technically food™.

Merit in research is miles away from starting with the conclusion and working backwards. I'm not in any way denying that there's merit in the research - but you have to do the research before making claims. I find it hard to believe both that more folks haven't encountered the "I watched Joe Rogan once and he said weed and micro-dosing cures everything" crowd, and that we're not at least a tiny bit skeptical that we're just throwing our favourite recreational drugs at all the studies, you know, just in case they cure something. I'm all for doing the research, but I remain unconvinced that a good chunk of people into that research aren't motivated by wanting to justify their existing habits. When it's definitively shown to have positive effects, I wouldn't contest that. Like, even the folks using weed as a painkiller - I was about to say I don't deny that helps people, I was pretty sure that was a thing until I googled it right now to confirm, and supposedly there's some evidence that it's at least in part a placebo effect. Googling "is weed a painkiller" gives you a "maybe". People claim it is. There's no proof that it's not helping them. But it's not solidly backed up yet either. Worth research? Absolutely. Convenient miracle cure? Certainly convenient, at least.

But realistically I don't think you're going to be able to do anything in that arena that isn't at least to some extent 'throwing your favorite recreational drug at all the studies just in case they cure something,' because by the time it becomes a 'recreational drug,' that's....sort of what happens. And as long as the methodology is sound, I don't see how the researcher's motivation really matters at all. I think you almost have to start at a conclusion and work backwards because if you don't, what are you going to do? What are you trying to prove? Isn't that the whole scientific method? Stating that you believe there's merit in pursuing a study is not the same as making claims before doing the research; that's just pitching a hypothesis that you believe is credible based off of what we already know because you think there's a good chance you can prove it with a proper study. idk. Maybe I missed your point

This seems topical given the past few pages, but yeah, no one besides absolute fucking dolts is taking JRE seriously and are instead hate listening - same as 2 Bears, 1 Cave

Aside from the people that just don't gel with his personality, I think this is the reason why people get miffed about his show. It's not a serious show. You're here to listen to a comedian goof off with his buddies and people he thinks are cool. If you go in there expecting high-level discourse and not verbal shitposting, you're absolutely doing it wrong. Even when he puts on his serious Joe voice with a guest that's supposed to be a serious person; he'd still probably be the first to tell you to remember that he's a bozo.

 

[TedEH]

I don't see how the researcher's motivation really matters at all.

I wasn't speaking to the motivation of the researcher, I was speaking to the motivation of the kind of recreational product enthusiast who would claim their vice of choice is a cure-all.

I think you almost have to start at a conclusion and work backwards because if you don't, what are you going to do? What are you trying to prove? Isn't that the whole scientific method?

Yes, if you're the scientist - but I wasn't talking about a scientist. I was talking about Joe Rogan, who is not a scientist.

 

[crushingpetal]

Just curious: has anyone's WTB post on this site actually worked out?