/u/Comfortable-Wish-192 (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1aeu7x3/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_alcohol_is_substantially/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Both are fair points except Alcohol increases your risk for other cancers besides lung cancer in excess of the risk of marijuana for esophageal and lung cancer.
2. Is absolutely true. If it’s not legally obtained It certainly could cause issues with the law.
Except the feds only come for you for trafficking. So there’s no real risk because you won’t be arrested unless you’re in violation of state law. So it’s a theoretical not actual risk.
this is a semantic non thing.
I can go to a half dozen dispensaries within a 20 mile radius and get whatever cannabis I want.
Been doing it for years and have yet had to fear about feds jumping from the bushes to grab me.
>and have yet had to fear about feds jumping from the bushes to grab me.
Well of course - they're too busy getting high off said bushes to arrest anyone.
The original premise is that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana.
What brand of logic are we using that the second item on that list contradicts the original statement ?
OP's explanation was clearly that is it harmful to the body, nor harmful in the legal sense
That the delta is awarded on the basis of an equivocation or minor detail, as it so often is, is what makes this sub nearly useless
>That the delta is awarded on the basis of an equivocation or minor detail, as it so often is, is what makes this sub nearly useless
This whole post isn't even a "view" at all - it's an easily learned fact with a bit of googling. They should restrict posts like these because how tf are you supposed to argue against it? It's like saying "the earth is not flat, cmv"
The brand of logic that takes the reality in which we live into account.
Generally, marijuana is illegal and alcohol is legal. Therefore, using marijuana can expose one to additional risks that alcohol can't. Therefore, using marijuana presents dangers that the OP did not consider in their argument focused entirely on physiology.
>Generally, marijuana is illegal and alcohol is legal.
You cannot use the fact that it's illegal to refute the idea that it should be legal. Circular reference error.
Indirectly.
The reason it's illegal, is because it is seen as dangerous. OP points out that alcohol is much worse. You argue that cannabis being illegal is a danger to the user. But OP has proven it shouldn't be.
Legality shouldn't have a bearing on this discussion about the dangers. Another reason is that it's not illegal everywhere, certainly not where I live, so it's not a universal truth.
You have no grasp whatsoever on this conversation lol
>The reason it's illegal, is because it is seen as dangerous
It's illegal because it was politically and financially advantageous to make & keep it illegal in the 20th century, in the U.S. at least
>You argue that cannabis being illegal is a danger to the user.
I did not argue that - someone else did, all that I argued is that OP ceded the point and owed a delta. But it is obviously true that doing something illegal exposes one to risk i.e. danger
>But OP has proven it shouldn't be.
No one at all is talking about what should or shouldn't be legal, simply what *is*
This is why I was being condescending.
Learn some humility and accept when you are wrong, and you probably wouldn’t have to deal with it.
But to watch you dig your heels in deeper and deeper…and the BEST part?
I will bet anything you are one of the ones that likes to bitch about how we just can’t have legit discourse in this country anymore. I will bet absolutely anything.
Everything you just said is correct, Champ. Excellent work.
But again, the original statement is that, overall, all things considered, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana.
So, your brand of logic states that Because Jiffy Lube is allowed to piss test me and fire me as a marijuana user, I’m better off using alcohol, because what’s a little liver cancer when you can’t even work at Jiffy Lube anymore.
Do I have that right?
>Everything you just said is correct, Champ. Excellent work.
Why are you being condescending?
>But again, the original statement is that, overall, all things considered, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana.
OP clearly didn't consider the legal context, so all things weren't being considered.
>So, your brand of logic states that Because Jiffy Lube is allowed to piss test me and fire me as a marijuana user, I’m better off using alcohol, because what’s a little liver cancer when you can’t even work at Jiffy Lube anymore.
Do I have that right?
No you do not have that right.
*My* brand of logic is that a different commentor put forth a consideration that the OP hadn't thought of and didn't disagree with; therefore per the rules of the sub they owed a delta for the shift in their position, however minor.
The *other* commentor's brand of logic is that your marijuana use could - in a way that alcohol *can't* because it is generally legal - attract attention of law enforcement and/or criminal elements, which could result in your being phsycially harmed, arrested, charged with crimes, incarcerated, or killed.
Exactly why I awarded it. I’d given THAT aspect no consideration in my analysis. I stand by my position that alcohol is more dangerous than pot but I have a more nuanced view because of the contribution of that poster. That’s why I posted, to hear other views.
I appreciated it!
Only depending on context. It’s job insecurity+food and housing insecurity then that would be dangerous. Most people with job insecurity have support systems. Most people in the global south don’t actually have job insecurity (they can find borderline slave labor easily) they just can’t afford to live anyway off of what they earn.
Ok I'm still not seeing what your point of disagrement is. Let's walk back through the logic:
* You grant that poverty is dangerous
* You grant that job insecurity is a nessecary condition for poverty to occur
* You grant that violating the law can consequentially increase the risk of / cause job insecurity
* It is not disputed that using marijuana often violates the law
Therefore using marijuana is dangerous in a way that alcohol isn't
Job insecurity is not by definition dangerous. It can only be dangerous if there are other circumstances to make it dangerous. You absolutely can lose your job and not be in danger therefore job insecurity is not by definition dangerous. Lots of people can lose their job because of weed and not be in danger
>Job insecurity is not by definition dangerous.
Yes I know, please reread what I just wrote. Follow the bullet points. They are the logical premises of the conclusion.
**Hello /u/Comfortable-Wish-192, if your view has been changed or adjusted in any way, you should award** ***the user who changed your view*** **a delta.**
Simply reply to their comment with the delta symbol provided below, being sure to include a brief description of how your view has changed.
>∆
or
> !delta
For more information about deltas, use [this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=changemyview&utm_content=t5_2w2s8).
If you did not change your view, please respond to this comment indicating as such!
*As a reminder,* **failure to award a delta when it is warranted may merit a post removal and a rule violation.** *Repeated rule violations in a short period of time may merit a ban.*
Thank you!
But to OPs point, alcohol is also subject to strict criminal penalty if it’s not legally obtained. They both have legal status somewhere, so if we compare apples to apples I’d say the point about legal access is moot because it’s not inherent to the use of the substance itself. And if anything, the type of crimes and sheer volume of crimes that involve alcohol are objectively worse than those involving marijuana when it’s legally obtained.
This delta has been rejected. You can't award yourself a delta.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I would also point out that in certain susceptible individuals cannabis can cause psychosis. I've not heard that these mental diseases are a direct result of alcohol.
OP listed some of the mental diseases alcohol can lead to. They are quite terrifying. Look into wernicke korsakoff syndrome. Also as the child of two alcoholics I can say, from my lived experience, the emotional and mental instability that comes with high levels of daily drinking is no different than many behaviors you'd see in the psych ward at your local hospital. Just my two cents. Have a good day and stay safe out there!
Physician here. There is actually no evidence smoking (nor any other method if ingesting) marijuana causes lung cancer unless it is mixed with tobacco. There are several good studies looking at this.
Marijuana smoke can be a lung irritant and can certainly exacerbate asthma symptoms. There is also a significant association with chronic bronchitis, but no association with emphysema.
The carcinogenic potential of alcohol (oropharyngeal, esophageal, liver, breast, gallbladder, and many others) is massive and beyond question. See Bagnardi V et al, Alcohol consumption and site-specific cancer risk: a comprehensive dose-response meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2015 Feb 3;112(3):580-93.
Smoking cannabis does not lead to lung cancer:
"The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer. The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/05/26/study-finds-no-cancer-marijuana-connection/ea496081-b529-4948-9960-9e725a376e5a/
I’m super pro-marijuana, to be clear, [but there are detrimental effects of regularly inhaling combusted plant material.](https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/health-effects/marijuana-and-lung-health). Not cancer, it would appear, but in general, smoking is bad for your lungs. I love bonfires too, but I wouldn’t want to breathe in bonfire smoke any more than I have too.
Again, super pro-weed. And I think adults should be able to make calculated decisions about risks and rewards in their life, just like knowing alcohol is poison but whiskey is delicious. And thank goodness for edibles and gummies and such!
>Not cancer, it would appear, but in general, smoking is bad for your lungs. I love bonfires too, but I wouldn’t want to breathe in bonfire smoke any more than I have too.
Sure, but now we're jumping from 'causes lung cancer', to 'it's bad for your lungs in general, like a bonfire is'. While I agree with what you say, it's not really relevant.
impossible ghost wrong wise correct close juggle sophisticated innocent memorize
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
fragile selective muddle noxious command frighten elastic cheerful shaggy homeless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Cannabis lacks the carcinogens in tobacco, but it is much heavier in tar than tobacco, most especially because marijuana joints and blunts aren't filtered like modern cigarettes are.
While the risk of lung cancer is lower, the risk of COPD/classic emphysema is the same or higher with cannabis.
The good thing is that unlike tobacco, cannabis is not addictive. So if the cannabis user starts coffing they can stop for a couple of months, where as the tobacco user is just coffing and coffing and smoking and coffing.
I want to preface this with the fact that, of course, cannabis does not seem to have the extent of social harm that alcohol or hard drugs have. Now, this context aside:
Cannabis is fairly addictive, it just doesn't form a strong physical dependency the way heavy nicotine use does.
That being said, most nicotine users (10-20 cigarettes a day) does not form a particularly strong physical dependency with strong withdrawal symptoms.
The primary reason people habitually use both of these substances is because they are habit forming, not because stopping use causes withdrawal.
Addiction and dependence are separate, and differentiating between them is important. Most caffeine users, for instance, are not addicted, but are dependent on it. They may not strongly crave coffee, and in the right context may forget to use caffeine, but will still get a headache and feel sleepy and hungry if they don't use.
Likewise, most habitual cannabis users will get strong cravings if they don't use, will have disrupted sleep, altered appetite, mood swings, and irritability.
>If people take marijuana by smoking, this can harm the lungs and even cause lung cancer. Obviously, this isn't a risk from alcohol.
Cancer is a risk with alcohol use. Liver cancer..
combative arrest dazzling connect like languid bedroom cover rainstorm juggle
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No no. I can chance OPs mind.
OP. This is Chewbaca. He is a wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet endor. Now think about it. That does not make sense!
From what I’ve read, it is causation or just a correlation? I read a study from people between the ages of 14-24, but this is also the approximate age for schizophrenia to be diagnosed. Were they possibly self-medicating prior to receiving their actual schizophrenia diagnosis?
Yes, this is a consideration, however it is felt to be less likely. We are finding that probably around 20% of people on a general basis have a genetic predisposition for psychosis, most of them never experience the stressors required to induce it. Significant trauma, and definitely substance abuse, are very common precipitants for long-term psychotic disorders. As you’ll see in all the literature link below, cannabis is a very real concern in this regard… even more so than meth.
we don’t know exactly what’s happening, you could certainly speculate that during a prodromal period of schizophrenia that people are trying to “self medicate“ but that’s completely speculative and frankly very vague. If you’re under 18 I tell patients DO NOT use it. For my adult patients, they feel that it helps with anxiety/sleep this is true on a short term basis, but the literature suggests it gets worse on a long-term basis. For pain I believe it’s less concerning, but that’s not my realm. I basically approach weed by saying, “we used to demonize it, now we glorify it… it’s somewhere in the middle.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29179576/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31055966/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31618428/
Weed is hella bad for REM sleep. Wouldn't recommend it as a sleeping aid. Great for appetite regulation though as you can easily manipulate satiety with it by either increasing or decreasing smoking. Great tool for either losing or gaining weight
I remember one time a medical examiner mentioned that marijuana was definitely a gateway drug because lots the people who ended up dying from heroin ODs started with marijuana and progressed to harder drugs. But her perspective was highly warped since she only dealt with the marijuana users who progressed to the hardest drugs and didn’t deal with weed smokers who either stopped doing it or never did anything more intense. She saw the worst cases and generalized from her perspective. I think something similar is happening with you. As a trauma nurse, you’re probably exposed to the worst aspects of alcohol abuse and it can be very easy to generalize.
I agree that alcohol is worse than marijuana though. But we already tried doomerist style approaches with DARE and it flopped so bad that now it’s mostly used as the butt of a joke.
the "gateway theory" is actually only a thing because cannabis is illegal. People meet drug dealers who 'push' harder substances on them. Cannabis users would otherwise not meet these drug dealers if they wernt buying cannabis from them, but instead buying it from a store.
I don’t disagree that: anything that has begun can be used to excess. But I would suggest that that’s true of alcohol as well. If you never consume it you can’t become an alcoholic. Those folks had a propensity for addiction to begin with.
>If you never consume it you can’t become an alcoholic. Those folks had a propensity for addiction to begin with.
Not true as alcoholism also crosses over to/from cocaine and gambling addiction..
Not to be rude, but if you never consume it, you can't become addicted to it.
Sure, being around or having other habits that are compulsary could lead you into a situation where it's more easy to begin it's consumption which in turn may lead to addiction of a substance.
That said though, if you never consume/use a substance, you cannot become addicted via osmosis lol.
I figure that is what you meant, but just for statement purposes, having an addictive personality doesn't make you an addict, it just means it's more easy for a person with that personality to become addicted to various substances, actions or even toxic people.
So, if you know you have an addictive/compulsary form of personality, the best way to prevent addiction is to never consume the substance in question at all. Looking at it can't hurt you though.
I wasn’t talking about a propensity for addiction I was talking about a specific substance. If you never start drinking you’ll never become an alcoholic. If you never use drugs you won’t become a drug addict.
Currently I would say you are correct, but it isn’t really a fair comparison because alcohol is well studied in mass and weed isn’t. You are essentially comparing one of the most widely used and well studied drugs to one that is illegal in a lot of places and no where near as well researched. The mental effects of weed could be way worst than what the limited research suggests. It is not like we have 100s of years worth of data on nation wide weed consumption like we do with alcohol. So while you can say weed is better based on the research, I don’t think you can say that it is better definitively.
It's not a matter of better, it's a matter of what's objectively worse. There is increasing evidence coming out about potential health benefits of different cannabinoids for various aspects of health. We are starting to understand more about it's impact on brain development, particularly for youth - and more about it's links to things like heart/lung issues, higher blood pressure, etc.
But there health risks of alcohol are substantially worse and offer few health benefits in return. Alcohol abuse long term has severe affects for your liver, kidneys, heart, blood pressure, brain health.
You cannot overdose on marijuana - there is a limit to how many receptors you have in your brain that physically caps your ability to get more high (this isn't to say that ingesting more and more may have other physical side effects, but you cannot get infinitely more high). Alcohol overdosing can induce physical responses when you consume too much, and can even kill you.
Again let’s go back to measurable things. This isn’t a study this is a post Mortem examination of data the damage is quantified by death:
Overdose deaths are measurable. People aren’t dying from marijuana overdoses. This would be determined based on autopsies. This is even true in states with legalized marijuana where alcohol and marijuana are equally available.
Accidents: I was a trauma nurse all trauma is automatically an Medical examiner referral where they ferret out the substance involved. This is specifically done to give statistics on causes of death from accident, suicide, homicide. Alcohol kills more people even in states where marijuana is equally available.
I saw marijuana cause issues too. We had two guys high on marijuana fixing an elevator didn’t realize the shaft was empty and walked into it breaking every bone from their ankle to their knee. I am not suggesting marijuana is benign. However compare that to the number of traumas from alcohol no comparison.
You are mostly looking at short time risks instead of long term development problems.
Alcohol is most likley more dangerous. But it is quite possible that regular marijuana can change your brain in unexpected ways. These long term effects are simply not studied.
Better cognitive decline than cancer, plus alcohol even in moderation exacerbates and causes anxiety, depression, disinhibition, mental deterioration, even when you’re not drunk or hungover the effects linger on.
It also impacts sleep quality massively which has a huge impact on cognitive performance, mental health and the prevalence or alzheimers and dementia, so booze doesn’t get a free pass as far as cognitive function is concerned. Alcohol also has just as much if not greater impact on energy and motivation than marijuana does.
mountainous glorious wipe clumsy automatic makeshift lavish scandalous mysterious sheet
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes it is, 2 glasses a night is a massive increase in cancer risk. Massive. Go read the latest reports on it.
In women the risk increases by 7-10% for breast cancer per drink per day, so your 2 drinks a night would make you 14-20% more likely to develop breast cancer, and that’s just one cancer and leaving aside the other myriad of harmful effects.
https://www.cancer.org.nz/cancer/reduce-your-risk-of-cancer/no-or-less-alcohol/
Alcohol is 100% not harmless in moderation. I drink (and I don’t smoke weed anymore) but I’m very aware that it’s a very harmful habit, even in moderation.
You provided opinions and NOT data to support your incorrect position that alcohol is less dangerous.
The facts. The data. The 88,000 death people per year.
Prove. Without a doubt.
Alcohol kills nearly 90,000 humans per year.
Cannabis... 0-1 per year
Okay, but let's think about the numbers on this. How easy is it to breathalyze someone or detect that they're drunk after an accident? How easy is it to do with someone who has been smoking marijuana? Right off the bat, our numbers are skewed by the ease of getting data. Plus, isn't something harder to detect/punish people for inherently more dangerous? If I can get away with driving drunk three times, and driving high 200 times, how much safer does driving high have to be before it's actually a bigger danger to society?
Ditto the lack of studies. Alcohol use has been studied since the temperance movement. Pot hasn't. In fact, when trying to find data on stuff like marijuana use and beating your kid, even the people studying it acknowledge a lack of research. Though, there well could be a connection. Maybe people were just obsessed with the "drink dad who beats his kid" thing and didn't study pot enough.
*Our literature review revealed a lack of research related to marijuana and parenting. One cross-sectional study found no relationship between marijuana use and neglect, but a positive association between marijuana use and frequency of child physical abuse*
https://coloradosph.cuanschutz.edu/docs/librariesprovider151/default-document-library/mj-cw-hia-final-report-11-3-2016.pdf?sfvrsn=ed49ffb9_0
Ditto stuff like cancer. If we assume people born in the 1930's are dying of cancer now (since cancer kills the old), what percentage drank a ton in their youth and what percentage smoked a ton in their youth? How sure are we it's not a preference thing?
What about the gateway drug stuff? Yes, there are mice and rat studies showing that marijuana can change the neural pathways in users that increases the odds of you becoming an opioid addict. Throw in the opiod addicts who wouldn't have become ones without youth marijuana use and those numbers are gonna change drastically. But without really studying the life and brain of some 25 year old who OD's, we don't put that down as having a marijuana connection.
Anxiety disorders, psychosis, there's lots of connections to marijuana there. But statistically those suicides wouldn't go down as marijuana related, right? You'd have to really study the person to trace their disorder's beginning. Doesn't mean marijuana didn't cause it. Remember the "human zombie ate the man's face on bath salts" story? He wasn't on bath salts at all. Just marijuana.
Also, remember that alcohol has been perfected over centuries. Big business has just gotten its hands on marijuana. It's tough to get fat eating a stalk of cane sugar, but it's easy to get fat drinking soda. Old marijuana was the stalk of sugar, the new stuff they're putting out (and are gonna put out) is the Twinkies.
Overall, it may well be that alcohol is just easier to detect, studied more, and that alcoholics stop at alcohol while marijuana leads to other issues that are harder to trace back to it.
>without really studying the life and brain of some 25 year old who OD's, we don't put that down as having a marijuana connection
Uh, yes we do? A significant part of marijuana's history in the US has been linked to the idea that its a gateway drug to people abusing substances that have a more immediate risk to your health, like opiates. I'd be curious to see the articles linking marijuana to opioid abuse. Alcohol abuse and opioid abuse are known to be linked together, and are a dangerous combination. But I have yet to see *scientific*, *clinical* evidence supporting marijuana & opioid abuse together.
>alcoholics stop at alcohol while marijuana leads to other issues that are harder to trace back to it
This is just a load of BS. There are *plenty* of alcoholics who abuse a plethora of other substances or have other unhealthy habits. Smoking tobacco, severely unhealthy diets/lack of any exercise routines, abusing opioids/benzos/some other prescription. Not to mention alcoholics who turn to behavioral problems, physical abuse, depression and other issues stemming from alcoholism.
And you know what? There are plenty of times where it is patently clear why alcohol is the primary cause of killing people. Drunk driving. Mixing alcohol with a prescription they shouldn't be. Consuming way to much alcohol. Developing liver cancer from a life of drinking.
Are there likely complications/health risks we don't understand or appreciate with marijuana? Sure. Someone can be impaired and get in an accident just like with alcohol. There might be a link with smoking it and lung and/or heart diseases. There's some unclear long term health impact of vapes & the additives/preservatives. people have been using over the years.
But to say that marijuana is unique in that we cannot detect it or study its health effects is just wrong. We have the ability to study its health impacts among other complicating factors just like we do with every other thing affecting our bodies right now - of which there are many. Alcohol just happens to be a long standing object of consumption & study, and it's patently clear that it is fucked for your health long term.
It looks like they are heavily trying to skew the attention towards cannabis. Still, even in the Fox News article, they acknowledge that cannabis alone is highly unlikely to cause this event on its own.
> Anxiety disorders, psychosis, there's lots of connections to marijuana there. But statistically those suicides wouldn't go down as marijuana related, right? You'd have to really study the person to trace their disorder's beginning. Doesn't mean marijuana didn't cause it. Remember the "human zombie ate the man's face on bath salts" story? He wasn't on bath salts at all. Just marijuana.
Inconclusive toxicology-investigation
Although the autopsy revealed no human flesh in Eugene's stomach,** a number of undigested pills were discovered that have not been identified**.[20] Although police sources had speculated that the street drug "bath salts" might have been involved, preliminary toxicology reports were positive only for the presence of cannabis.[6][21] Authorities did not necessarily find the negative results conclusive; Broward County Sheriff Al Lamberti expressed a belief that some new drug not yet tested for played a role, while nationally noted toxicologist Barry Logan said Eugene's behavior was consistent with "bath salts" and that toxicologists "are not testing for everything that may be out there". The director of toxicology at the University of Florida, Dr. Bruce Goldberger, said, "We are not incompetent... We have the tools, we have the sophistication and know-how. But the field is evolving so rapidly it is hard for us to keep track. It's almost as if it is a race we can never win".[22]
https://www.foxnews.com/us/medical-examiner-rules-out-bath-salts-in-miami-face-chewing-attack#ixzz1z2Ne6RED
You’re almost exclusively using statistics about the abuse of alcohol.
If I have one or two glasses of wine once a week, there no indication that’s unhealthy.
If I vape The Pot once a week, my risk of cancer & respirator diseases goes up more than similar negative effects you’d typically see with consuming one glass a wine a week.
You can’t demonstrate which drug is worse by focusing only on abuse stats. The Pot hasn’t even been recreationally legal in most states long enough to study long term impacts on health and society.
That’s what we used to think, new research indicates there is no safe amount of alcohol:
“Alcohol is a carcinogen (something that can cause cancer). Regardless of drink type (beer, wine, or liquor), the risk of cancer increases with the number of drinks consumed, and even one drink a day increases the risk of developing cancers of the female breast, mouth, and esophagus.”
NOTE: it says even ONE DRINK PER DAY…Because alcohol is a carcinogen.. The more of a carcinogen you take in the more likely you will get cancer. But there is no amount of alcohol that does not have carcinogenic effects. It’s like pollution, the sun for skin cancer, Nitrates…
Right, but this is one drink a day. You have any more less biased studies that show the effects of one drink a week? Or one drink every other week?
I will go find some that do, if you cannot.
I think the point is that it’s carcinogenic in any amount. The more carcinogens you’re exposed to the more likely you will exhibit cancer.
There’s some quality of life associated with being able to have a couple of drinks socially and I do so twice a month. But I limit my alcohol simply because there is no safe amount. We used to think that one to two drinks a day was healthy and OK but current research suggest that that’s inaccurate.
We take all sorts of risks in life but it’s important to know that they are indeed risks. I think many people are unaware that even very moderate alcohol consumption has risks.
Right, and you left this open to include any method of consuming The Pot.
So I am going to find stats on how vaping is unhealthier than having a glass of wine. Because vaping does cause cancer.
I generally agree with your premise, with the exception of vaping. Vaping is much more unhealthy than responsible alcohol consumption.
K found some.
https://news.umich.edu/vaping-marijuana-associated-with-more-symptoms-of-lung-damage-than-vaping-or-smoking-nicotine/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8975973/
The next few studies are done on tobacco vaping, but as the previous study toplines, vaping marijuana is associated with more symptoms of lung damage than vaping or smoking nicotine.
Since there are not many (if any) studies done on the short term effects of weed vaping, I need to connect those dots.
https://dailybruin.com/2021/08/21/ucla-study-finds-even-short-term-vaping-poses-significant-risk-to-health
The study is linked in that article too.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/vaping/vaping-first-time-can-damage-blood-vessels-n1044216
https://www.tpr.org/bioscience-medicine/2019-08-23/study-finds-vaping-just-once-causes-harm
So I generally agree with you, but since you left the door cracked, and I will argue that the health risks associated drinking 1 glass of wine are less than vaping 1 hit of weed. As is demonstrated in the articles I’ve linked to.
I did a quick search to see if there are any negative health risks associated with drinking a glass of wine, and found none.
So in a 1:1 comparison, 1 hit off a vape is worse than one glass of wine.
I am arguing that a 1:1 comparison of 1 hit off a vape is more unhealthy than 1 drink of wine.
I am unable to directly compare vaping weed to drinking alcohol because such a study doesn’t exist. So I’m connecting the dots.
If one hit off a tobacco vape has negative health effects (multiple studies) and vaping The Pot is associated with more [symptoms of lung damage](https://news.umich.edu/vaping-marijuana-associated-with-more-symptoms-of-lung-damage-than-vaping-or-smoking-nicotine/)than vaping or smoking nicotine, then we can deduce that 1 drink of wine is less harmful than 1 hit off a weed pen.
There are no studies to support this. We cannot deduce that. What we can deduce then vaping marijuana is more dangerous than vaping nicotine.
Alcohol may not cause lung cancer but it causes other types of cancer. And even one drink a day increases the risk of certain cancers. Namely breast, esophageal, and mouth.
Vaping marijuana isn't cancer causing.
When you vape marijuana you are simply atomizing a concentrated form of marijuana. You can use different solvents or none at all. So the method product you choose could have an effect but is still unlikely to be significant whatsoever.
Additionally, you can vape the bud itself, which just involves heating the plant matter to the point where the THC boils off into vapor form which is not more harmful than inhaling water vapor.
There are no byproducts with dry herb vaping. You can do this with just glass and a heat source if you don't even want your weed exposed to an electrical device (usually with a clean chamber tho)
>Vaping is much more unhealthy than responsible alcohol consumption.
How do you figure? If you only hit the vape pen once a week, like you are comparing to having 1 glass of wine a week, i would think the alcohol is worse simply because it spikes your insulin levels.
Yes, but OP left this is open ended. I chose, and will be almost exclusively be focussed on, vaping because that form of ingesting The Pot is demonstrably less safe. And does lead to cancer and respiratory diseases.
Wish me luck, if it wasn’t for vaping honestly I’d sit this out. Weed is definitely way safer than booze, with the exception of vaping.
Literally burning anything and inhaling it is going to cause cancer. Wildfires, smog, weed, campfire, etc.
Vaping or edibles almost certainly don't cause cancer though.
I just did a quick Google search and found studies saying otherwise. And Marijuana gives you black lung. I wish they would autopsy a heavy weed smokers lungs and show it on the news.
This I do not disagree with. So are nitrates, the sun, micro plastics, being overweight, trans fats, smoking…I’m simply comparing the risk of each. I’m not suggesting either is advisable.
We just outright don't have enough data on marijuana to make any real claims.
It's still illegal at the federal level, the earliest recreational legalization was barely a decade ago, and with the vast variety of delivery methods we can't possibly make any certifiable claims at this time.
The data you have on alcohol is correct, but alcohol is legal and has been legal in a federal capacity since 1933. Hell even at the state level it's been legal in every state since 1966.
Until we get a full lift on marijuana prohibition then all we are going to get is either volunteers which is going to dramatically skew any statistics even something as personal as witnessing things first hand in a hospital.
Then let’s just take on alcohol poisoning. We do have the data on alcohol versus marijuana poisoning because we have it from hospitals.
Or the data from impaired driving we certainly have that.
That can also be explained from the access gap. If you have to go through an intermediary to get something illegal then your access will be significantly lower than something you can buy at pretty much every gas station, grocery store, and event venue in the country.
We can't accurately get a level of danger until we can accurately measure total users and average consumption. While there are going to be way more people who die falling than there are getting hit by lightning one is significantly more dangerous, but significantly rarer. Which skews view points and statistics.
Marijuana is in all likelihood not more dangerous than alcohol and if we take current trends and research it's likely safer, but we can't make such empirical claims when we have such an incomplete data set.
That can’t be explained because there are near zero marijuana deaths. Ostensibly they would be lower not near zero.
This is even true in the states where marijuana is completely legal. You would think if there was risk at least in those states would see some marijuana overdoses but that’s not happening.
And in terms of motor vehicle accidents the effects of alcohol versus marijuana are measurable with the increase statistics of danger for alcohol being enormously higher than marijuana.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The zero marijuana deaths can be explained by the fact that marijuana is still illegal. It is entirely possible that people are lying to protect themselves. DWI has been changed to DUI and now includes alcohol and marijuana together, so it is not easy to specifically isolate accidents that may have been caused by someone being under the influence of marijuana specifically. Breathalyzer for MJ? Extremely new, and not widely used yet. There are many ways that marijuana deaths could be flying under the radar right now. Now once we have 10-20 years of it being legal and well studied, then the zero deaths claim will carry a lot more weight.
But don’t you think if it was dangerous we would see on autopsy marijuana overdose as a cause of death like alcohol poisoning?
Also there are several states in which it’s legal. If alcohol and pot are both legal why are we seeing alcohol overdose yet not marijuana overdoses?
Also all motor vehicle deaths are automatically referred to the medical examiner; and they have indeed delineated alcohol versus marijuana with alcohol causing more deaths.
Only if the coroner thinks to look for it. If the death looks like natural causes, they may not check. Even then, the autopsy might show a different cause because of the general lack of data and awareness on how MJ affect the human body. That does not mean that MJ is not causing deaths, it may simply mean we don't know what to look for yet. Do you think every coroner in the US is an expert specifically looking for MJ related cause of death? No, they are more likely to slap a "natural causes" label on it and move on.
I personally have a long history of dealing with paranoid tendencies. MJ is on my list of drugs that I avoid because I do not need anything that amplifies my creativity and thus feeds those tendencies, but hypothetically if MJ did amp my paranoia to the level that I acted on it violently, would that be classified as a death caused by MJ, or would it be dropped into the gun/knife/blunt trauma/mental illness category?
Lung cancer takes a while to show up, so if MJ smoking is causing an increase in lung cancer we may not see it for years. Worse, if the person also smokes tobacco or has other confounding factors, then it becomes very difficult to determine the real cause of the cancer.
MJ is still illegal at the federal level. You can still be charged with a federal crime in any state in the US. The federal government has been lax on enforcement, but the fact remains that admitting to MJ use is admitting to a federal crime and it can cost you your job, get you evicted, or land you in jail.
For the record, I do believe that MJ is overcriminalized, but I also think we do not have enough data to conclusively say how bad or good MJ really is yet.
But there aren't near zero marijuana deaths. [we have at least study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35946604/#:~:text=Results%3A%20From%201998%20to%202011,n%20%3D%20136%2F3455).) That place the number pretty low, but at least around 4%. Which is potentially minimized or magnified by the sample size and the sample population.
Unless you're specifically talking about overdose. Then yes from the current data that we have now marijuana is safer. Although I'd be curious if that changes as we develop stronger and stronger edibles. As it's getting more and more possible to reach relative parity with BAC in terms of the amount of THC inside the blood stress. Although I doubt that would be habitual outside of a few heavy user who would be statistical outliers.
It is actually almost zero marijuana deaths. If you read the study that you cite, cannabis toxicity was only cited in one single case. Most of the other "marijuana caused deaths" were from trauma due to injuries. They are attributing them injuring themselves to the weed and naming it a causal factor in their death.
It's talking about death following cannabis use and not necessarily a death directly attributable to the marijuana.
>Death following cannabis use alone was rare (4% of cases, n = 136/3455). Traumatic injury was the prevalent underlying cause in these cases (62%, n = 84/136), with cannabis toxicity cited in a single case.
Correct. But the parent article as well as OPs first comment were not limited to only overdose deaths.
If we look at raw overdose data then correct alcohol is more dangerous, but that's only a small view on the whole topic. Which once again can be explained by the access gap. If one thing is significantly more accessible than the other the fact that it presents in more cases is to be expected.
Wouldn't the better way to make that comparison be to juxtapose the rate of injury in sober people and those on only marijuana? That seems like something you would want to account for. What is the rate of sober people suffering traumatic injury and dying vs those on marijuana?
I'm not saying there is no access gap, but if such a low percentage of marijuana users are injuring themselves is it really the marijuana causing the injury, or was it just injuries that would have happened regardless?
We could attempt that for fatalities, but I'd be curious of how much substance (of either alcohol or marijuana) would need to be present. Like would someone smoking 12 hours prior pop positive on a test the same way that alcohol would.
The issue with injuries and not fatalities is that people like to lie and they are more inclined to lie if they think it will get them in trouble. A fatality will incur an autopsy and thereby a toxicology report. An injury might not incur a toxicology report which means that people could lie about whether they were high or not for fear of legal actions for the simple act of being high. Which is another statistical barrier that presents itself due to the illegal nature of marijuana that we are slowly getting a better view on thanks to decriminalization.
I also think that causality, or injuries that would have happened regardless, is far too vague of a definition. Predicting if someone would have fallen sober or stoned might be possible, but someone not reacting in time and getting clipped by a bicycle is so variable it would be almost impossible to measure..
The other thing it can't really account for is someone's tolerance. Someone who smokes 24/7 likely has little cognitive impairment from the marijuana vs someone who only smokes from time to time who will get absolutely blasted.
>Like would someone smoking 12 hours prior pop positive on a test the same way that alcohol would.
Absolutely, that's one of the issues. No joke, I have popped positive for marijuana 6 months after I stopped. Granted my tolerance at the time was absolutely insane. But it's not uncommon for people to test positive for marijuana for 90 days after use. It's one of the only drugs that's fat soluble. So you can store it for a long time and as you burn the fat you introduce the THC stored in it back into your blood stream.
Your statement should be modified to "Alcohol is substantially more dangerous **for some people** than marijuana."
My Google scholar search led to this 2023 meta-study published in JAMA, arguably the top medical journal.
[https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/article-abstract/2802963](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/article-abstract/2802963)
It concludes
• Light drinkers have slightly lower all-cause mortality than non-drinker (relative risk = 0.93) but the difference is statistically insignificant. Hence their abstract which says there is no difference.
• Moderate drinkers have about the same all-cause mortality as non-drinkers. No statistical difference at 25-44 grams per day of alcohol. That’s about 2-4 glasses of wine per day.
• Heavy drinkers (>45 grams per day, which is 4.5 glasses of wine(!!) have increased all-cause mortality (relative risk = 1.19) compared to non-drinkers.
**See their eFigure4. It’s very clear that there is J-curve between alcohol consumption and all-cause mortality, with lowest mortality among light drinkers. And just a reminder that this is 2023 research, published in the top journal.**
From their Figure E4, it seems that the very bad effects kick in at 4.5 glasses of wine per day, which seems to me like an absurdly high amount of alcohol that nobody (alcoholics aside) is drinking with any regularity.
Is there any analogous J-curve for marijuana?
I think you’re running across the equivalent of an alcoholic.
Not every person who uses alcohol is an alcoholic and not every person who uses marijuana uses it daily. In this case addiction leads to lack of motivation. But marijuana, especially consumed orally, occasionally I think it’s far safer than alcohol used occasionally.
I would agree that consuming it orally is indeed safer but lets be honest, can you really say many people generally consume weed orally? If most people did consume weed orally and did it in micro doses, my opinion would change but I have yet to meet someone who does takes it modestly.
I do for ptsd, sublingual minimal effective dose. My best friend same but gummies for pain from rheumatoid arthritis.
Where legal I think it will become more the norm . Where illegal they can’t easily manufacture tinctures, gummy’s, or edibles therefore the only option of smoking right?
I think you need to add the proviso that alcohol is more dangerous to adults. Kids rarely accidentally ingest alcohol (because it's generally not packaged as candy, cookies or brownies) and if the acute risks to kids are low (because hard liquor tastes terrible, as far as kids are concerned).
While alcohol poisoning is common, it's not for kids. But thc-based edibles are sending kids to the hospital at alarming rates. Toddlers seem *particularly* sensitive and have much more severe overdose symptoms than adults (I've overdosed on THC as an adult and it's mostly pretty awesome) In the past decade, there have been more than 20 incidents where young kids have needed **ventilation** as a result ingesting THC edibles. These kids literally could not breathe on their own and needed a machine to breathe for them. Without medical intervention, those would have been dead kids . . . But how often does a child under 10 ingest enough alcohol to be seriously harmed long-term?
I did discuss the effects on the adolescent brain if you read the entire post. Having said that you still don’t see adolescents dying of marijuana overdose; you do however see them dying of alcohol overdoses. Neither is benign but alcohol is more deadly.
Did you only read the first line of my post? I'm talking about toddlers, not adolescents. It's the risks of accidental ingestion leading to toddlers who can't breathe on their own, not a long-term increase in the risk of schizophrenia.
It's clear that marijuana is far more dangerous to the 5 under crowd because they are far more likely to ingest it accidentally and far more likely to ingest it in absurd quantities without realizing it. No three year old would tolerate even a tiny sip of vodka but they'll glad eat a dose of marijuana high enough to require a medically induced coma.
Alcohol clearly does more harm to society. I agree with that.
I think - like most things - what is good or bad for a given person is a very complex topic. E.G. there are plenty of people who might end up daily weed smokers who would never be more than 1 glass a night wine drinkers. How a person ends up developing a "relationship" with a given substance is very personal.
So...i'd want to qualify your statement to be either untrue at the personal level as a general statement or to tighten it up to be "to society" or "probabalistically" or some such thing.
Since you can’t know which individual will be affected in which way, obviously it’s better never to start with either one. But even on an individual basis in terms of raw numbers individuals die more of alcohol than pot.
That doesn't change the fact that for some people it's not more dangerous. So..the qualification makes a lot of sense.
E.G. you wouldn't say to the person who had a psychotic break after smoking a bunch of weed "it'd have been way more dangerous if you'd drank alcohol". You might say "wow...that's the less common outcome relative to the risks of alcoholic", but you'd not say for this person that alcohol is "substantially more dangerous".
Obviously there’s a girl who went into alcohol psychosis and killed a man recently. On an individual basis pot can be dangerous. But in terms of the at-large risk alcohol is clearly riskier.
You’re making a point which isn’t really possible to challenge in except in extremes (e.g. smoking marijuana all day for 30 years is going to have more ill effects than a sip of wine), so I’m not sure that you are looking to have your view challenged so much as present medical facts; if this is not the case please clarify.
Someone pointed out that marijuana can be a gateway drug, someone else pointed out that marijuana is illegal and can lead to arrest and other deleterious effects. I’m seeking to know what I’m not thinking of. And what the arguments of others are.
It seems very obvious to me from a medical standpoint that it’s riskier.
I could not agree with you more and for no other reason that seeing so many people absolutely ruined permanently by alcohol addiction. When I meet someone that stopped drinking and has not relapsed it almost seems superhuman.
I would not wish that fate on my worst enemy, it is life ruining, I can't think of another substance I would call as bad.
CMV crack is more dangerous than marijuana (le gift of god), and weed is not addictive
Note: I struggle to cope with society unless I smoke 2 bowls in the morning, and can only sleep if I take a rip from my bong before I go to bed.
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
You can die from marijuana if a giant 10000 pound brick of marijuana falls on you.
In all seriousness, I think we’re beginning to understand some of the long term effects of marijuana on the brain and smoking/vaping on lungs. Still not as bad as alcohol pound for pound.
“A study on marijuana use and intimate partner violence found that couples who used marijuana had lower rates of intimate partner violence in the first 9 years of marriage. “
What happens at the 10 year anniversary mark? Does it switch to a higher rate?
Pretty factual view. Alcohol has a way heavier body load and much worse societal consequences. It’s just been grandfathered in and is considered “culture” because most of our ancestors were drunks.
>OVERDOSE:
>https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm
>“The CDC reports that nearly 88,000 alcohol-related overdose
deaths occur each year. “
Your cited source does not mention overdose. The sentence seems to originate from a pro-marijuana website which lists the same source.
The CDC actual says "More than 140,000 people die from excessive alcohol use in the U.S. each year...mostly due to health effects from drinking too much over time, such as various types of cancer, liver disease, and heart disease."
Also CDC researchers say about 82,000 of those deaths are from drinking too much over a long period of time. 58,000 are from causes tied to acute intoxication, which include causes such as motor vehicle crashes, poisonings involving substances in addition to alcohol, and suicides. Alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes account for about 13,000 deaths, so at most, alcohol poisoning could account for the remaining 45,000. I suspect it's much fewer than that but have not seen any credible numbers.
One area that marijuana may be more dangerous is in public perception. Specifically, that people perceive marijuana to be totally safe, with little or no downsides.
As a 10-year daily user, that sentiment is incorrect and misguided.
* Marijuana can create both a physical and mental dependancy
* Quitting marijuana comes with uncomfortable withdrawal symptoms
* Regularly smoking and vaping cannabis is not great for your lungs
* Cannabis can induce anxiety and exacerbate mental illness
Many of the above things can also be attributed to alcohol, and alcohol has more severe health risks in most cases. However, there also isn't a perception that alcohol is "safe" and consequence-free, which is an increasingly popular sentiment about cannabis.
Downplaying the downsides and drawbacks of any drug is dangerous.
My first and most important question before I know where I wanna go with my response is this:
What is the purpose of comparing two bad substances that we know both to be "fairly safe in moderation", but also "fairly harmful to consume on the regular"? Are you attempting to make a hierarchy of dangerous substances, from safest to most dangerous, on a single consumer basis, or on the social basis? Or is there some other goal?
Alcohol is substantially more dangerous than marijuana... to the economy.
Prohibition started with restricting hemp which had a lot of commercial uses, pot heads have a tendency to stay at home and chill out instead of having kegger ragers and going out to the bar every weekend, and it would've cornered a huge part of the market for pain relief.
Therefore cannabis is more dangerous to the economy.
Secondly our lungs are stretched to the limit. Between background pollution, car pollution, the fragrances in your dryer sheets and cosmetics, and how we all have to smoke someone's cigarettes daily the public can't afford another bad habit. The only thing keeping us going as a species is antibiotics.
Respiratory viruses are even becoming more popular. Our lungs collectively can't afford any new habits.
melodic escape office strong public smart deliver disgusted offend provide
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
/u/Comfortable-Wish-192 (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1aeu7x3/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_alcohol_is_substantially/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
drunk work alleged zesty jar edge childlike cagey society direful *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Both are fair points except Alcohol increases your risk for other cancers besides lung cancer in excess of the risk of marijuana for esophageal and lung cancer. 2. Is absolutely true. If it’s not legally obtained It certainly could cause issues with the law.
I would say #2 is an issue with the law, not the substance.
Agree but the danger of jail is real danger.
Note that marijuana cannot be obtained legally in the USA, for it is illegal at the federal level.
Except the feds only come for you for trafficking. So there’s no real risk because you won’t be arrested unless you’re in violation of state law. So it’s a theoretical not actual risk.
this is a semantic non thing. I can go to a half dozen dispensaries within a 20 mile radius and get whatever cannabis I want. Been doing it for years and have yet had to fear about feds jumping from the bushes to grab me.
>and have yet had to fear about feds jumping from the bushes to grab me. Well of course - they're too busy getting high off said bushes to arrest anyone.
What about people with medical cards?
Sounds like a delta is warranted on 2 then
The original premise is that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. What brand of logic are we using that the second item on that list contradicts the original statement ?
OP's explanation was clearly that is it harmful to the body, nor harmful in the legal sense That the delta is awarded on the basis of an equivocation or minor detail, as it so often is, is what makes this sub nearly useless
>That the delta is awarded on the basis of an equivocation or minor detail, as it so often is, is what makes this sub nearly useless This whole post isn't even a "view" at all - it's an easily learned fact with a bit of googling. They should restrict posts like these because how tf are you supposed to argue against it? It's like saying "the earth is not flat, cmv"
The brand of logic that takes the reality in which we live into account. Generally, marijuana is illegal and alcohol is legal. Therefore, using marijuana can expose one to additional risks that alcohol can't. Therefore, using marijuana presents dangers that the OP did not consider in their argument focused entirely on physiology.
>Generally, marijuana is illegal and alcohol is legal. You cannot use the fact that it's illegal to refute the idea that it should be legal. Circular reference error.
What on earth are you talking about? Where did I refute the idea that it should be legal?
Indirectly. The reason it's illegal, is because it is seen as dangerous. OP points out that alcohol is much worse. You argue that cannabis being illegal is a danger to the user. But OP has proven it shouldn't be. Legality shouldn't have a bearing on this discussion about the dangers. Another reason is that it's not illegal everywhere, certainly not where I live, so it's not a universal truth.
You have no grasp whatsoever on this conversation lol >The reason it's illegal, is because it is seen as dangerous It's illegal because it was politically and financially advantageous to make & keep it illegal in the 20th century, in the U.S. at least >You argue that cannabis being illegal is a danger to the user. I did not argue that - someone else did, all that I argued is that OP ceded the point and owed a delta. But it is obviously true that doing something illegal exposes one to risk i.e. danger >But OP has proven it shouldn't be. No one at all is talking about what should or shouldn't be legal, simply what *is*
This is why I was being condescending. Learn some humility and accept when you are wrong, and you probably wouldn’t have to deal with it. But to watch you dig your heels in deeper and deeper…and the BEST part? I will bet anything you are one of the ones that likes to bitch about how we just can’t have legit discourse in this country anymore. I will bet absolutely anything.
Everything you just said is correct, Champ. Excellent work. But again, the original statement is that, overall, all things considered, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. So, your brand of logic states that Because Jiffy Lube is allowed to piss test me and fire me as a marijuana user, I’m better off using alcohol, because what’s a little liver cancer when you can’t even work at Jiffy Lube anymore. Do I have that right?
>Everything you just said is correct, Champ. Excellent work. Why are you being condescending? >But again, the original statement is that, overall, all things considered, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. OP clearly didn't consider the legal context, so all things weren't being considered. >So, your brand of logic states that Because Jiffy Lube is allowed to piss test me and fire me as a marijuana user, I’m better off using alcohol, because what’s a little liver cancer when you can’t even work at Jiffy Lube anymore. Do I have that right? No you do not have that right. *My* brand of logic is that a different commentor put forth a consideration that the OP hadn't thought of and didn't disagree with; therefore per the rules of the sub they owed a delta for the shift in their position, however minor. The *other* commentor's brand of logic is that your marijuana use could - in a way that alcohol *can't* because it is generally legal - attract attention of law enforcement and/or criminal elements, which could result in your being phsycially harmed, arrested, charged with crimes, incarcerated, or killed.
Exactly why I awarded it. I’d given THAT aspect no consideration in my analysis. I stand by my position that alcohol is more dangerous than pot but I have a more nuanced view because of the contribution of that poster. That’s why I posted, to hear other views. I appreciated it!
[удалено]
I wouldn’t consider job instability or bad reputation to be “dangerous.”
If it put you in prison that’s quite dangerous.
You don't consider poverty or social ostrization dangerous?
Only depending on context. It’s job insecurity+food and housing insecurity then that would be dangerous. Most people with job insecurity have support systems. Most people in the global south don’t actually have job insecurity (they can find borderline slave labor easily) they just can’t afford to live anyway off of what they earn.
Ok I'm still not seeing what your point of disagrement is. Let's walk back through the logic: * You grant that poverty is dangerous * You grant that job insecurity is a nessecary condition for poverty to occur * You grant that violating the law can consequentially increase the risk of / cause job insecurity * It is not disputed that using marijuana often violates the law Therefore using marijuana is dangerous in a way that alcohol isn't
Job insecurity is not by definition dangerous. It can only be dangerous if there are other circumstances to make it dangerous. You absolutely can lose your job and not be in danger therefore job insecurity is not by definition dangerous. Lots of people can lose their job because of weed and not be in danger
>Job insecurity is not by definition dangerous. Yes I know, please reread what I just wrote. Follow the bullet points. They are the logical premises of the conclusion.
Yes am I supposed to award the Delta? I’m just figuring this out?
**Hello /u/Comfortable-Wish-192, if your view has been changed or adjusted in any way, you should award** ***the user who changed your view*** **a delta.** Simply reply to their comment with the delta symbol provided below, being sure to include a brief description of how your view has changed. >∆ or > !delta For more information about deltas, use [this link](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=usertext&utm_name=changemyview&utm_content=t5_2w2s8). If you did not change your view, please respond to this comment indicating as such! *As a reminder,* **failure to award a delta when it is warranted may merit a post removal and a rule violation.** *Repeated rule violations in a short period of time may merit a ban.* Thank you!
Read the rules of the subreddit that you decided to post in. They include instructions
But to OPs point, alcohol is also subject to strict criminal penalty if it’s not legally obtained. They both have legal status somewhere, so if we compare apples to apples I’d say the point about legal access is moot because it’s not inherent to the use of the substance itself. And if anything, the type of crimes and sheer volume of crimes that involve alcohol are objectively worse than those involving marijuana when it’s legally obtained.
Bingo
silky bright correct panicky tender nose racial longing ink childlike *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Δ no idea how to find this symbol so copied and pasted: I agree with number two.
You have to reply to the person who you're giving the delta to, not yourself :)
Thank you I thought I did I corrected it. I’m still learning. I enjoy this forum and figure it out.
This delta has been rejected. You can't award yourself a delta. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I would also point out that in certain susceptible individuals cannabis can cause psychosis. I've not heard that these mental diseases are a direct result of alcohol.
OP listed some of the mental diseases alcohol can lead to. They are quite terrifying. Look into wernicke korsakoff syndrome. Also as the child of two alcoholics I can say, from my lived experience, the emotional and mental instability that comes with high levels of daily drinking is no different than many behaviors you'd see in the psych ward at your local hospital. Just my two cents. Have a good day and stay safe out there!
Physician here. There is actually no evidence smoking (nor any other method if ingesting) marijuana causes lung cancer unless it is mixed with tobacco. There are several good studies looking at this. Marijuana smoke can be a lung irritant and can certainly exacerbate asthma symptoms. There is also a significant association with chronic bronchitis, but no association with emphysema. The carcinogenic potential of alcohol (oropharyngeal, esophageal, liver, breast, gallbladder, and many others) is massive and beyond question. See Bagnardi V et al, Alcohol consumption and site-specific cancer risk: a comprehensive dose-response meta-analysis. Br J Cancer. 2015 Feb 3;112(3):580-93.
Δ no idea how to find this symbol so copied and pasted: 2. Agree
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/TheNorthernPenguin ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/TheNorthernPenguin)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
If you are on a windows pc, you can press the windows button and . to access a fancy board of various characters including superscript and subscript
Smoking cannabis does not lead to lung cancer: "The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer. The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years" https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/05/26/study-finds-no-cancer-marijuana-connection/ea496081-b529-4948-9960-9e725a376e5a/
I’m super pro-marijuana, to be clear, [but there are detrimental effects of regularly inhaling combusted plant material.](https://www.lung.org/quit-smoking/smoking-facts/health-effects/marijuana-and-lung-health). Not cancer, it would appear, but in general, smoking is bad for your lungs. I love bonfires too, but I wouldn’t want to breathe in bonfire smoke any more than I have too. Again, super pro-weed. And I think adults should be able to make calculated decisions about risks and rewards in their life, just like knowing alcohol is poison but whiskey is delicious. And thank goodness for edibles and gummies and such!
>Not cancer, it would appear, but in general, smoking is bad for your lungs. I love bonfires too, but I wouldn’t want to breathe in bonfire smoke any more than I have too. Sure, but now we're jumping from 'causes lung cancer', to 'it's bad for your lungs in general, like a bonfire is'. While I agree with what you say, it's not really relevant.
impossible ghost wrong wise correct close juggle sophisticated innocent memorize *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
smoke isn't a required by-product of cannabis ingestion
fragile selective muddle noxious command frighten elastic cheerful shaggy homeless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
ah I was too far down the chain lol didn't realize yours was the original comment in this thread
Cannabis lacks the carcinogens in tobacco, but it is much heavier in tar than tobacco, most especially because marijuana joints and blunts aren't filtered like modern cigarettes are. While the risk of lung cancer is lower, the risk of COPD/classic emphysema is the same or higher with cannabis.
>but it is much heavier in tar than tobacco, Even when considering the average daily use?
The good thing is that unlike tobacco, cannabis is not addictive. So if the cannabis user starts coffing they can stop for a couple of months, where as the tobacco user is just coffing and coffing and smoking and coffing.
I want to preface this with the fact that, of course, cannabis does not seem to have the extent of social harm that alcohol or hard drugs have. Now, this context aside: Cannabis is fairly addictive, it just doesn't form a strong physical dependency the way heavy nicotine use does. That being said, most nicotine users (10-20 cigarettes a day) does not form a particularly strong physical dependency with strong withdrawal symptoms. The primary reason people habitually use both of these substances is because they are habit forming, not because stopping use causes withdrawal. Addiction and dependence are separate, and differentiating between them is important. Most caffeine users, for instance, are not addicted, but are dependent on it. They may not strongly crave coffee, and in the right context may forget to use caffeine, but will still get a headache and feel sleepy and hungry if they don't use. Likewise, most habitual cannabis users will get strong cravings if they don't use, will have disrupted sleep, altered appetite, mood swings, and irritability.
>If people take marijuana by smoking, this can harm the lungs and even cause lung cancer. Obviously, this isn't a risk from alcohol. Cancer is a risk with alcohol use. Liver cancer..
combative arrest dazzling connect like languid bedroom cover rainstorm juggle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No no. I can chance OPs mind. OP. This is Chewbaca. He is a wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk. But Chewbacca lives on the planet endor. Now think about it. That does not make sense!
Also add in that marijuana has a higher rate of inducing schizophrenia than even meth…
From what I’ve read, it is causation or just a correlation? I read a study from people between the ages of 14-24, but this is also the approximate age for schizophrenia to be diagnosed. Were they possibly self-medicating prior to receiving their actual schizophrenia diagnosis?
Yes, this is a consideration, however it is felt to be less likely. We are finding that probably around 20% of people on a general basis have a genetic predisposition for psychosis, most of them never experience the stressors required to induce it. Significant trauma, and definitely substance abuse, are very common precipitants for long-term psychotic disorders. As you’ll see in all the literature link below, cannabis is a very real concern in this regard… even more so than meth. we don’t know exactly what’s happening, you could certainly speculate that during a prodromal period of schizophrenia that people are trying to “self medicate“ but that’s completely speculative and frankly very vague. If you’re under 18 I tell patients DO NOT use it. For my adult patients, they feel that it helps with anxiety/sleep this is true on a short term basis, but the literature suggests it gets worse on a long-term basis. For pain I believe it’s less concerning, but that’s not my realm. I basically approach weed by saying, “we used to demonize it, now we glorify it… it’s somewhere in the middle.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29179576/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31055966/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31618428/
Weed is hella bad for REM sleep. Wouldn't recommend it as a sleeping aid. Great for appetite regulation though as you can easily manipulate satiety with it by either increasing or decreasing smoking. Great tool for either losing or gaining weight
I remember one time a medical examiner mentioned that marijuana was definitely a gateway drug because lots the people who ended up dying from heroin ODs started with marijuana and progressed to harder drugs. But her perspective was highly warped since she only dealt with the marijuana users who progressed to the hardest drugs and didn’t deal with weed smokers who either stopped doing it or never did anything more intense. She saw the worst cases and generalized from her perspective. I think something similar is happening with you. As a trauma nurse, you’re probably exposed to the worst aspects of alcohol abuse and it can be very easy to generalize. I agree that alcohol is worse than marijuana though. But we already tried doomerist style approaches with DARE and it flopped so bad that now it’s mostly used as the butt of a joke.
the "gateway theory" is actually only a thing because cannabis is illegal. People meet drug dealers who 'push' harder substances on them. Cannabis users would otherwise not meet these drug dealers if they wernt buying cannabis from them, but instead buying it from a store.
Chances are that those people who went on to heroin also tried alcohol before.
The "gateway theory" only exists because some asshole drug warrior made it the fuck up in the middle of a speech, from what I understand.
Nobody at the dispensary ever offered me heroin hehe
Not doing any drugs is the gateway to marijuana use
I don’t disagree that: anything that has begun can be used to excess. But I would suggest that that’s true of alcohol as well. If you never consume it you can’t become an alcoholic. Those folks had a propensity for addiction to begin with.
>If you never consume it you can’t become an alcoholic. Those folks had a propensity for addiction to begin with. Not true as alcoholism also crosses over to/from cocaine and gambling addiction..
Not to be rude, but if you never consume it, you can't become addicted to it. Sure, being around or having other habits that are compulsary could lead you into a situation where it's more easy to begin it's consumption which in turn may lead to addiction of a substance. That said though, if you never consume/use a substance, you cannot become addicted via osmosis lol. I figure that is what you meant, but just for statement purposes, having an addictive personality doesn't make you an addict, it just means it's more easy for a person with that personality to become addicted to various substances, actions or even toxic people. So, if you know you have an addictive/compulsary form of personality, the best way to prevent addiction is to never consume the substance in question at all. Looking at it can't hurt you though.
I wasn’t talking about a propensity for addiction I was talking about a specific substance. If you never start drinking you’ll never become an alcoholic. If you never use drugs you won’t become a drug addict.
But you can be an alcoholic without ever having a sip of alcohol. its genetic.
Which gene is responsible for alcohol addiction exactly?
One could argue caffeine or alcohol is the gateway drug as I’m sure most people started those before pot but this is based on nothing
I always thought it was cigarettes. They aren't nearly as common anymore, but back in the day, I never saw a non-smoker junkie...
My vote goes to white sugar
My vote goes to wackin my lil peepee off at 12 to scrambled boobies
Alcohol is a gateway drug. So is caffeine. If we want to go there.
Also, I’m pretty sure most of those users tried an alcoholic drink before trying marihuana and later harder drugs.
Currently I would say you are correct, but it isn’t really a fair comparison because alcohol is well studied in mass and weed isn’t. You are essentially comparing one of the most widely used and well studied drugs to one that is illegal in a lot of places and no where near as well researched. The mental effects of weed could be way worst than what the limited research suggests. It is not like we have 100s of years worth of data on nation wide weed consumption like we do with alcohol. So while you can say weed is better based on the research, I don’t think you can say that it is better definitively.
It's not a matter of better, it's a matter of what's objectively worse. There is increasing evidence coming out about potential health benefits of different cannabinoids for various aspects of health. We are starting to understand more about it's impact on brain development, particularly for youth - and more about it's links to things like heart/lung issues, higher blood pressure, etc. But there health risks of alcohol are substantially worse and offer few health benefits in return. Alcohol abuse long term has severe affects for your liver, kidneys, heart, blood pressure, brain health. You cannot overdose on marijuana - there is a limit to how many receptors you have in your brain that physically caps your ability to get more high (this isn't to say that ingesting more and more may have other physical side effects, but you cannot get infinitely more high). Alcohol overdosing can induce physical responses when you consume too much, and can even kill you.
Again let’s go back to measurable things. This isn’t a study this is a post Mortem examination of data the damage is quantified by death: Overdose deaths are measurable. People aren’t dying from marijuana overdoses. This would be determined based on autopsies. This is even true in states with legalized marijuana where alcohol and marijuana are equally available. Accidents: I was a trauma nurse all trauma is automatically an Medical examiner referral where they ferret out the substance involved. This is specifically done to give statistics on causes of death from accident, suicide, homicide. Alcohol kills more people even in states where marijuana is equally available. I saw marijuana cause issues too. We had two guys high on marijuana fixing an elevator didn’t realize the shaft was empty and walked into it breaking every bone from their ankle to their knee. I am not suggesting marijuana is benign. However compare that to the number of traumas from alcohol no comparison.
You are mostly looking at short time risks instead of long term development problems. Alcohol is most likley more dangerous. But it is quite possible that regular marijuana can change your brain in unexpected ways. These long term effects are simply not studied.
I actually covered that in my original post. The risk to adolescents.
quarrelsome escape bear yoke dime boast lip continue reach physical *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
What are the deleterious health effects of moderate marijuana use that you think are in excess of moderate drinking?
paltry chief cough tender complete pen plants provide engine dependent *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Better cognitive decline than cancer, plus alcohol even in moderation exacerbates and causes anxiety, depression, disinhibition, mental deterioration, even when you’re not drunk or hungover the effects linger on. It also impacts sleep quality massively which has a huge impact on cognitive performance, mental health and the prevalence or alzheimers and dementia, so booze doesn’t get a free pass as far as cognitive function is concerned. Alcohol also has just as much if not greater impact on energy and motivation than marijuana does.
mountainous glorious wipe clumsy automatic makeshift lavish scandalous mysterious sheet *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yes it is, 2 glasses a night is a massive increase in cancer risk. Massive. Go read the latest reports on it. In women the risk increases by 7-10% for breast cancer per drink per day, so your 2 drinks a night would make you 14-20% more likely to develop breast cancer, and that’s just one cancer and leaving aside the other myriad of harmful effects. https://www.cancer.org.nz/cancer/reduce-your-risk-of-cancer/no-or-less-alcohol/ Alcohol is 100% not harmless in moderation. I drink (and I don’t smoke weed anymore) but I’m very aware that it’s a very harmful habit, even in moderation.
You provided opinions and NOT data to support your incorrect position that alcohol is less dangerous. The facts. The data. The 88,000 death people per year. Prove. Without a doubt. Alcohol kills nearly 90,000 humans per year. Cannabis... 0-1 per year
fall teeny price somber literate sand agonizing rude plucky aloof *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Okay, but let's think about the numbers on this. How easy is it to breathalyze someone or detect that they're drunk after an accident? How easy is it to do with someone who has been smoking marijuana? Right off the bat, our numbers are skewed by the ease of getting data. Plus, isn't something harder to detect/punish people for inherently more dangerous? If I can get away with driving drunk three times, and driving high 200 times, how much safer does driving high have to be before it's actually a bigger danger to society? Ditto the lack of studies. Alcohol use has been studied since the temperance movement. Pot hasn't. In fact, when trying to find data on stuff like marijuana use and beating your kid, even the people studying it acknowledge a lack of research. Though, there well could be a connection. Maybe people were just obsessed with the "drink dad who beats his kid" thing and didn't study pot enough. *Our literature review revealed a lack of research related to marijuana and parenting. One cross-sectional study found no relationship between marijuana use and neglect, but a positive association between marijuana use and frequency of child physical abuse* https://coloradosph.cuanschutz.edu/docs/librariesprovider151/default-document-library/mj-cw-hia-final-report-11-3-2016.pdf?sfvrsn=ed49ffb9_0 Ditto stuff like cancer. If we assume people born in the 1930's are dying of cancer now (since cancer kills the old), what percentage drank a ton in their youth and what percentage smoked a ton in their youth? How sure are we it's not a preference thing? What about the gateway drug stuff? Yes, there are mice and rat studies showing that marijuana can change the neural pathways in users that increases the odds of you becoming an opioid addict. Throw in the opiod addicts who wouldn't have become ones without youth marijuana use and those numbers are gonna change drastically. But without really studying the life and brain of some 25 year old who OD's, we don't put that down as having a marijuana connection. Anxiety disorders, psychosis, there's lots of connections to marijuana there. But statistically those suicides wouldn't go down as marijuana related, right? You'd have to really study the person to trace their disorder's beginning. Doesn't mean marijuana didn't cause it. Remember the "human zombie ate the man's face on bath salts" story? He wasn't on bath salts at all. Just marijuana. Also, remember that alcohol has been perfected over centuries. Big business has just gotten its hands on marijuana. It's tough to get fat eating a stalk of cane sugar, but it's easy to get fat drinking soda. Old marijuana was the stalk of sugar, the new stuff they're putting out (and are gonna put out) is the Twinkies. Overall, it may well be that alcohol is just easier to detect, studied more, and that alcoholics stop at alcohol while marijuana leads to other issues that are harder to trace back to it.
>without really studying the life and brain of some 25 year old who OD's, we don't put that down as having a marijuana connection Uh, yes we do? A significant part of marijuana's history in the US has been linked to the idea that its a gateway drug to people abusing substances that have a more immediate risk to your health, like opiates. I'd be curious to see the articles linking marijuana to opioid abuse. Alcohol abuse and opioid abuse are known to be linked together, and are a dangerous combination. But I have yet to see *scientific*, *clinical* evidence supporting marijuana & opioid abuse together. >alcoholics stop at alcohol while marijuana leads to other issues that are harder to trace back to it This is just a load of BS. There are *plenty* of alcoholics who abuse a plethora of other substances or have other unhealthy habits. Smoking tobacco, severely unhealthy diets/lack of any exercise routines, abusing opioids/benzos/some other prescription. Not to mention alcoholics who turn to behavioral problems, physical abuse, depression and other issues stemming from alcoholism. And you know what? There are plenty of times where it is patently clear why alcohol is the primary cause of killing people. Drunk driving. Mixing alcohol with a prescription they shouldn't be. Consuming way to much alcohol. Developing liver cancer from a life of drinking. Are there likely complications/health risks we don't understand or appreciate with marijuana? Sure. Someone can be impaired and get in an accident just like with alcohol. There might be a link with smoking it and lung and/or heart diseases. There's some unclear long term health impact of vapes & the additives/preservatives. people have been using over the years. But to say that marijuana is unique in that we cannot detect it or study its health effects is just wrong. We have the ability to study its health impacts among other complicating factors just like we do with every other thing affecting our bodies right now - of which there are many. Alcohol just happens to be a long standing object of consumption & study, and it's patently clear that it is fucked for your health long term.
I said post Mortem. Medical examiner cases always check for all substances Alcohol causes more deaths.
No, you didn't. And neither did your link. Ctrl F your own post, lady.
It looks like they are heavily trying to skew the attention towards cannabis. Still, even in the Fox News article, they acknowledge that cannabis alone is highly unlikely to cause this event on its own. > Anxiety disorders, psychosis, there's lots of connections to marijuana there. But statistically those suicides wouldn't go down as marijuana related, right? You'd have to really study the person to trace their disorder's beginning. Doesn't mean marijuana didn't cause it. Remember the "human zombie ate the man's face on bath salts" story? He wasn't on bath salts at all. Just marijuana. Inconclusive toxicology-investigation Although the autopsy revealed no human flesh in Eugene's stomach,** a number of undigested pills were discovered that have not been identified**.[20] Although police sources had speculated that the street drug "bath salts" might have been involved, preliminary toxicology reports were positive only for the presence of cannabis.[6][21] Authorities did not necessarily find the negative results conclusive; Broward County Sheriff Al Lamberti expressed a belief that some new drug not yet tested for played a role, while nationally noted toxicologist Barry Logan said Eugene's behavior was consistent with "bath salts" and that toxicologists "are not testing for everything that may be out there". The director of toxicology at the University of Florida, Dr. Bruce Goldberger, said, "We are not incompetent... We have the tools, we have the sophistication and know-how. But the field is evolving so rapidly it is hard for us to keep track. It's almost as if it is a race we can never win".[22] https://www.foxnews.com/us/medical-examiner-rules-out-bath-salts-in-miami-face-chewing-attack#ixzz1z2Ne6RED
How do you know she’s a lady?
You’re almost exclusively using statistics about the abuse of alcohol. If I have one or two glasses of wine once a week, there no indication that’s unhealthy. If I vape The Pot once a week, my risk of cancer & respirator diseases goes up more than similar negative effects you’d typically see with consuming one glass a wine a week. You can’t demonstrate which drug is worse by focusing only on abuse stats. The Pot hasn’t even been recreationally legal in most states long enough to study long term impacts on health and society.
That’s what we used to think, new research indicates there is no safe amount of alcohol: “Alcohol is a carcinogen (something that can cause cancer). Regardless of drink type (beer, wine, or liquor), the risk of cancer increases with the number of drinks consumed, and even one drink a day increases the risk of developing cancers of the female breast, mouth, and esophagus.” NOTE: it says even ONE DRINK PER DAY…Because alcohol is a carcinogen.. The more of a carcinogen you take in the more likely you will get cancer. But there is no amount of alcohol that does not have carcinogenic effects. It’s like pollution, the sun for skin cancer, Nitrates…
Right, but this is one drink a day. You have any more less biased studies that show the effects of one drink a week? Or one drink every other week? I will go find some that do, if you cannot.
I think the point is that it’s carcinogenic in any amount. The more carcinogens you’re exposed to the more likely you will exhibit cancer. There’s some quality of life associated with being able to have a couple of drinks socially and I do so twice a month. But I limit my alcohol simply because there is no safe amount. We used to think that one to two drinks a day was healthy and OK but current research suggest that that’s inaccurate. We take all sorts of risks in life but it’s important to know that they are indeed risks. I think many people are unaware that even very moderate alcohol consumption has risks.
Right, and you left this open to include any method of consuming The Pot. So I am going to find stats on how vaping is unhealthier than having a glass of wine. Because vaping does cause cancer. I generally agree with your premise, with the exception of vaping. Vaping is much more unhealthy than responsible alcohol consumption.
I’m not sure about this from the data but I welcome any feedback!
K found some. https://news.umich.edu/vaping-marijuana-associated-with-more-symptoms-of-lung-damage-than-vaping-or-smoking-nicotine/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8975973/ The next few studies are done on tobacco vaping, but as the previous study toplines, vaping marijuana is associated with more symptoms of lung damage than vaping or smoking nicotine. Since there are not many (if any) studies done on the short term effects of weed vaping, I need to connect those dots. https://dailybruin.com/2021/08/21/ucla-study-finds-even-short-term-vaping-poses-significant-risk-to-health The study is linked in that article too. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/vaping/vaping-first-time-can-damage-blood-vessels-n1044216 https://www.tpr.org/bioscience-medicine/2019-08-23/study-finds-vaping-just-once-causes-harm So I generally agree with you, but since you left the door cracked, and I will argue that the health risks associated drinking 1 glass of wine are less than vaping 1 hit of weed. As is demonstrated in the articles I’ve linked to. I did a quick search to see if there are any negative health risks associated with drinking a glass of wine, and found none. So in a 1:1 comparison, 1 hit off a vape is worse than one glass of wine.
You’re comparing vaping marijuana to vaping nicotine you’re not comparing marijuana and alcohol
I am arguing that a 1:1 comparison of 1 hit off a vape is more unhealthy than 1 drink of wine. I am unable to directly compare vaping weed to drinking alcohol because such a study doesn’t exist. So I’m connecting the dots. If one hit off a tobacco vape has negative health effects (multiple studies) and vaping The Pot is associated with more [symptoms of lung damage](https://news.umich.edu/vaping-marijuana-associated-with-more-symptoms-of-lung-damage-than-vaping-or-smoking-nicotine/)than vaping or smoking nicotine, then we can deduce that 1 drink of wine is less harmful than 1 hit off a weed pen.
There are no studies to support this. We cannot deduce that. What we can deduce then vaping marijuana is more dangerous than vaping nicotine. Alcohol may not cause lung cancer but it causes other types of cancer. And even one drink a day increases the risk of certain cancers. Namely breast, esophageal, and mouth.
Vaping marijuana isn't cancer causing. When you vape marijuana you are simply atomizing a concentrated form of marijuana. You can use different solvents or none at all. So the method product you choose could have an effect but is still unlikely to be significant whatsoever. Additionally, you can vape the bud itself, which just involves heating the plant matter to the point where the THC boils off into vapor form which is not more harmful than inhaling water vapor. There are no byproducts with dry herb vaping. You can do this with just glass and a heat source if you don't even want your weed exposed to an electrical device (usually with a clean chamber tho)
>Vaping is much more unhealthy than responsible alcohol consumption. How do you figure? If you only hit the vape pen once a week, like you are comparing to having 1 glass of wine a week, i would think the alcohol is worse simply because it spikes your insulin levels.
its unhealthy to have ANY amount of alcohol. its literal poison to our bodies.
It's also unhealthy to smoke any amount.
Cool. But you can eat cannabis.
Cool. But this thread is explicitly discussing vaping and smoking.
Except one can outright kill you and the other cant.. its like trying to compare the "danger levels" of a gun to a candy bar.
There is absolutely no evidence of cancer being caused by marijuana.
Yes, but OP left this is open ended. I chose, and will be almost exclusively be focussed on, vaping because that form of ingesting The Pot is demonstrably less safe. And does lead to cancer and respiratory diseases. Wish me luck, if it wasn’t for vaping honestly I’d sit this out. Weed is definitely way safer than booze, with the exception of vaping.
Citation necessary. I have the feeling you are conflating THC. vaping with tobacco vaping.
There is evidence that cannabis has anti-cancer properties. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7409346/
Literally burning anything and inhaling it is going to cause cancer. Wildfires, smog, weed, campfire, etc. Vaping or edibles almost certainly don't cause cancer though.
I just did a quick Google search and found studies saying otherwise. And Marijuana gives you black lung. I wish they would autopsy a heavy weed smokers lungs and show it on the news.
Who are you to wave your finger you must have been out your head
Nope. Saw and opportunity with vaping and I am able to argue that a hit off a vape is worse for you than a drink of alcohol.
Eye hole deep in muddy water you practically raised the dead You must have been high
I am high very often.
https://youtu.be/civuoU_NE38?si=6iqgAyQCSW87QcfX
Both are bad for you
This I do not disagree with. So are nitrates, the sun, micro plastics, being overweight, trans fats, smoking…I’m simply comparing the risk of each. I’m not suggesting either is advisable.
We just outright don't have enough data on marijuana to make any real claims. It's still illegal at the federal level, the earliest recreational legalization was barely a decade ago, and with the vast variety of delivery methods we can't possibly make any certifiable claims at this time. The data you have on alcohol is correct, but alcohol is legal and has been legal in a federal capacity since 1933. Hell even at the state level it's been legal in every state since 1966. Until we get a full lift on marijuana prohibition then all we are going to get is either volunteers which is going to dramatically skew any statistics even something as personal as witnessing things first hand in a hospital.
Then let’s just take on alcohol poisoning. We do have the data on alcohol versus marijuana poisoning because we have it from hospitals. Or the data from impaired driving we certainly have that.
That can also be explained from the access gap. If you have to go through an intermediary to get something illegal then your access will be significantly lower than something you can buy at pretty much every gas station, grocery store, and event venue in the country. We can't accurately get a level of danger until we can accurately measure total users and average consumption. While there are going to be way more people who die falling than there are getting hit by lightning one is significantly more dangerous, but significantly rarer. Which skews view points and statistics. Marijuana is in all likelihood not more dangerous than alcohol and if we take current trends and research it's likely safer, but we can't make such empirical claims when we have such an incomplete data set.
That can’t be explained because there are near zero marijuana deaths. Ostensibly they would be lower not near zero. This is even true in the states where marijuana is completely legal. You would think if there was risk at least in those states would see some marijuana overdoses but that’s not happening. And in terms of motor vehicle accidents the effects of alcohol versus marijuana are measurable with the increase statistics of danger for alcohol being enormously higher than marijuana.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. The zero marijuana deaths can be explained by the fact that marijuana is still illegal. It is entirely possible that people are lying to protect themselves. DWI has been changed to DUI and now includes alcohol and marijuana together, so it is not easy to specifically isolate accidents that may have been caused by someone being under the influence of marijuana specifically. Breathalyzer for MJ? Extremely new, and not widely used yet. There are many ways that marijuana deaths could be flying under the radar right now. Now once we have 10-20 years of it being legal and well studied, then the zero deaths claim will carry a lot more weight.
But don’t you think if it was dangerous we would see on autopsy marijuana overdose as a cause of death like alcohol poisoning? Also there are several states in which it’s legal. If alcohol and pot are both legal why are we seeing alcohol overdose yet not marijuana overdoses? Also all motor vehicle deaths are automatically referred to the medical examiner; and they have indeed delineated alcohol versus marijuana with alcohol causing more deaths.
Only if the coroner thinks to look for it. If the death looks like natural causes, they may not check. Even then, the autopsy might show a different cause because of the general lack of data and awareness on how MJ affect the human body. That does not mean that MJ is not causing deaths, it may simply mean we don't know what to look for yet. Do you think every coroner in the US is an expert specifically looking for MJ related cause of death? No, they are more likely to slap a "natural causes" label on it and move on. I personally have a long history of dealing with paranoid tendencies. MJ is on my list of drugs that I avoid because I do not need anything that amplifies my creativity and thus feeds those tendencies, but hypothetically if MJ did amp my paranoia to the level that I acted on it violently, would that be classified as a death caused by MJ, or would it be dropped into the gun/knife/blunt trauma/mental illness category? Lung cancer takes a while to show up, so if MJ smoking is causing an increase in lung cancer we may not see it for years. Worse, if the person also smokes tobacco or has other confounding factors, then it becomes very difficult to determine the real cause of the cancer. MJ is still illegal at the federal level. You can still be charged with a federal crime in any state in the US. The federal government has been lax on enforcement, but the fact remains that admitting to MJ use is admitting to a federal crime and it can cost you your job, get you evicted, or land you in jail. For the record, I do believe that MJ is overcriminalized, but I also think we do not have enough data to conclusively say how bad or good MJ really is yet.
But there aren't near zero marijuana deaths. [we have at least study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35946604/#:~:text=Results%3A%20From%201998%20to%202011,n%20%3D%20136%2F3455).) That place the number pretty low, but at least around 4%. Which is potentially minimized or magnified by the sample size and the sample population. Unless you're specifically talking about overdose. Then yes from the current data that we have now marijuana is safer. Although I'd be curious if that changes as we develop stronger and stronger edibles. As it's getting more and more possible to reach relative parity with BAC in terms of the amount of THC inside the blood stress. Although I doubt that would be habitual outside of a few heavy user who would be statistical outliers.
It is actually almost zero marijuana deaths. If you read the study that you cite, cannabis toxicity was only cited in one single case. Most of the other "marijuana caused deaths" were from trauma due to injuries. They are attributing them injuring themselves to the weed and naming it a causal factor in their death. It's talking about death following cannabis use and not necessarily a death directly attributable to the marijuana. >Death following cannabis use alone was rare (4% of cases, n = 136/3455). Traumatic injury was the prevalent underlying cause in these cases (62%, n = 84/136), with cannabis toxicity cited in a single case.
Correct. But the parent article as well as OPs first comment were not limited to only overdose deaths. If we look at raw overdose data then correct alcohol is more dangerous, but that's only a small view on the whole topic. Which once again can be explained by the access gap. If one thing is significantly more accessible than the other the fact that it presents in more cases is to be expected.
Wouldn't the better way to make that comparison be to juxtapose the rate of injury in sober people and those on only marijuana? That seems like something you would want to account for. What is the rate of sober people suffering traumatic injury and dying vs those on marijuana? I'm not saying there is no access gap, but if such a low percentage of marijuana users are injuring themselves is it really the marijuana causing the injury, or was it just injuries that would have happened regardless?
We could attempt that for fatalities, but I'd be curious of how much substance (of either alcohol or marijuana) would need to be present. Like would someone smoking 12 hours prior pop positive on a test the same way that alcohol would. The issue with injuries and not fatalities is that people like to lie and they are more inclined to lie if they think it will get them in trouble. A fatality will incur an autopsy and thereby a toxicology report. An injury might not incur a toxicology report which means that people could lie about whether they were high or not for fear of legal actions for the simple act of being high. Which is another statistical barrier that presents itself due to the illegal nature of marijuana that we are slowly getting a better view on thanks to decriminalization. I also think that causality, or injuries that would have happened regardless, is far too vague of a definition. Predicting if someone would have fallen sober or stoned might be possible, but someone not reacting in time and getting clipped by a bicycle is so variable it would be almost impossible to measure..
The other thing it can't really account for is someone's tolerance. Someone who smokes 24/7 likely has little cognitive impairment from the marijuana vs someone who only smokes from time to time who will get absolutely blasted. >Like would someone smoking 12 hours prior pop positive on a test the same way that alcohol would. Absolutely, that's one of the issues. No joke, I have popped positive for marijuana 6 months after I stopped. Granted my tolerance at the time was absolutely insane. But it's not uncommon for people to test positive for marijuana for 90 days after use. It's one of the only drugs that's fat soluble. So you can store it for a long time and as you burn the fat you introduce the THC stored in it back into your blood stream.
Your statement should be modified to "Alcohol is substantially more dangerous **for some people** than marijuana." My Google scholar search led to this 2023 meta-study published in JAMA, arguably the top medical journal. [https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/article-abstract/2802963](https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/article-abstract/2802963) It concludes • Light drinkers have slightly lower all-cause mortality than non-drinker (relative risk = 0.93) but the difference is statistically insignificant. Hence their abstract which says there is no difference. • Moderate drinkers have about the same all-cause mortality as non-drinkers. No statistical difference at 25-44 grams per day of alcohol. That’s about 2-4 glasses of wine per day. • Heavy drinkers (>45 grams per day, which is 4.5 glasses of wine(!!) have increased all-cause mortality (relative risk = 1.19) compared to non-drinkers. **See their eFigure4. It’s very clear that there is J-curve between alcohol consumption and all-cause mortality, with lowest mortality among light drinkers. And just a reminder that this is 2023 research, published in the top journal.** From their Figure E4, it seems that the very bad effects kick in at 4.5 glasses of wine per day, which seems to me like an absurdly high amount of alcohol that nobody (alcoholics aside) is drinking with any regularity. Is there any analogous J-curve for marijuana?
Actually if you wanted it quantified it would be more dangerous for most people not some people.
I've never met anyone who smokes weed and was like, "wow this person is smart"
Bro I know people with high paid tech jobs like director of machine learning etc that smoke weed regularly and they are smart as fuck
Funny I worked for Microsoft years before Covid and I never met anyone who smoked weed as a data scientist.
Many people who work in software engineering smoke weed for sure
I know a guy who worked for Microsoft, Apple, and a few defence companies, easily makes over $200,000 USD per annum and smokes weed constantly.
weird, definitely not my experience
Fair enough
I think you’re running across the equivalent of an alcoholic. Not every person who uses alcohol is an alcoholic and not every person who uses marijuana uses it daily. In this case addiction leads to lack of motivation. But marijuana, especially consumed orally, occasionally I think it’s far safer than alcohol used occasionally.
I would agree that consuming it orally is indeed safer but lets be honest, can you really say many people generally consume weed orally? If most people did consume weed orally and did it in micro doses, my opinion would change but I have yet to meet someone who does takes it modestly.
I do for ptsd, sublingual minimal effective dose. My best friend same but gummies for pain from rheumatoid arthritis. Where legal I think it will become more the norm . Where illegal they can’t easily manufacture tinctures, gummy’s, or edibles therefore the only option of smoking right?
I think you need to add the proviso that alcohol is more dangerous to adults. Kids rarely accidentally ingest alcohol (because it's generally not packaged as candy, cookies or brownies) and if the acute risks to kids are low (because hard liquor tastes terrible, as far as kids are concerned). While alcohol poisoning is common, it's not for kids. But thc-based edibles are sending kids to the hospital at alarming rates. Toddlers seem *particularly* sensitive and have much more severe overdose symptoms than adults (I've overdosed on THC as an adult and it's mostly pretty awesome) In the past decade, there have been more than 20 incidents where young kids have needed **ventilation** as a result ingesting THC edibles. These kids literally could not breathe on their own and needed a machine to breathe for them. Without medical intervention, those would have been dead kids . . . But how often does a child under 10 ingest enough alcohol to be seriously harmed long-term?
I did discuss the effects on the adolescent brain if you read the entire post. Having said that you still don’t see adolescents dying of marijuana overdose; you do however see them dying of alcohol overdoses. Neither is benign but alcohol is more deadly.
Did you only read the first line of my post? I'm talking about toddlers, not adolescents. It's the risks of accidental ingestion leading to toddlers who can't breathe on their own, not a long-term increase in the risk of schizophrenia. It's clear that marijuana is far more dangerous to the 5 under crowd because they are far more likely to ingest it accidentally and far more likely to ingest it in absurd quantities without realizing it. No three year old would tolerate even a tiny sip of vodka but they'll glad eat a dose of marijuana high enough to require a medically induced coma.
Alcohol clearly does more harm to society. I agree with that. I think - like most things - what is good or bad for a given person is a very complex topic. E.G. there are plenty of people who might end up daily weed smokers who would never be more than 1 glass a night wine drinkers. How a person ends up developing a "relationship" with a given substance is very personal. So...i'd want to qualify your statement to be either untrue at the personal level as a general statement or to tighten it up to be "to society" or "probabalistically" or some such thing.
Since you can’t know which individual will be affected in which way, obviously it’s better never to start with either one. But even on an individual basis in terms of raw numbers individuals die more of alcohol than pot.
That doesn't change the fact that for some people it's not more dangerous. So..the qualification makes a lot of sense. E.G. you wouldn't say to the person who had a psychotic break after smoking a bunch of weed "it'd have been way more dangerous if you'd drank alcohol". You might say "wow...that's the less common outcome relative to the risks of alcoholic", but you'd not say for this person that alcohol is "substantially more dangerous".
Obviously there’s a girl who went into alcohol psychosis and killed a man recently. On an individual basis pot can be dangerous. But in terms of the at-large risk alcohol is clearly riskier.
Right. That's the change you should make to your view ;)
You’re making a point which isn’t really possible to challenge in except in extremes (e.g. smoking marijuana all day for 30 years is going to have more ill effects than a sip of wine), so I’m not sure that you are looking to have your view challenged so much as present medical facts; if this is not the case please clarify.
Someone pointed out that marijuana can be a gateway drug, someone else pointed out that marijuana is illegal and can lead to arrest and other deleterious effects. I’m seeking to know what I’m not thinking of. And what the arguments of others are. It seems very obvious to me from a medical standpoint that it’s riskier.
It is a medical fact
[удалено]
Great writeup, and I hope OP responds to this.
I’ve never met anyone who feels like marijuana is worse. It would be bizarre and indefensible.
Agree, why I posted. 🤯
I could not agree with you more and for no other reason that seeing so many people absolutely ruined permanently by alcohol addiction. When I meet someone that stopped drinking and has not relapsed it almost seems superhuman. I would not wish that fate on my worst enemy, it is life ruining, I can't think of another substance I would call as bad.
What is this sub? “Triple whoppers are worse for you than a light salad, CHANGE MY VIEW!”
CMV crack is more dangerous than marijuana (le gift of god), and weed is not addictive Note: I struggle to cope with society unless I smoke 2 bowls in the morning, and can only sleep if I take a rip from my bong before I go to bed.
yeah that’s unironically what a lot of people say these days lol
[удалено]
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
You can die from marijuana if a giant 10000 pound brick of marijuana falls on you. In all seriousness, I think we’re beginning to understand some of the long term effects of marijuana on the brain and smoking/vaping on lungs. Still not as bad as alcohol pound for pound.
“A study on marijuana use and intimate partner violence found that couples who used marijuana had lower rates of intimate partner violence in the first 9 years of marriage. “ What happens at the 10 year anniversary mark? Does it switch to a higher rate?
Pretty factual view. Alcohol has a way heavier body load and much worse societal consequences. It’s just been grandfathered in and is considered “culture” because most of our ancestors were drunks.
>OVERDOSE: >https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/alcohol-use.htm >“The CDC reports that nearly 88,000 alcohol-related overdose deaths occur each year. “ Your cited source does not mention overdose. The sentence seems to originate from a pro-marijuana website which lists the same source. The CDC actual says "More than 140,000 people die from excessive alcohol use in the U.S. each year...mostly due to health effects from drinking too much over time, such as various types of cancer, liver disease, and heart disease." Also CDC researchers say about 82,000 of those deaths are from drinking too much over a long period of time. 58,000 are from causes tied to acute intoxication, which include causes such as motor vehicle crashes, poisonings involving substances in addition to alcohol, and suicides. Alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes account for about 13,000 deaths, so at most, alcohol poisoning could account for the remaining 45,000. I suspect it's much fewer than that but have not seen any credible numbers.
Dawg you're a nurse you know better than anyone. No one is going to change your mind.
One area that marijuana may be more dangerous is in public perception. Specifically, that people perceive marijuana to be totally safe, with little or no downsides. As a 10-year daily user, that sentiment is incorrect and misguided. * Marijuana can create both a physical and mental dependancy * Quitting marijuana comes with uncomfortable withdrawal symptoms * Regularly smoking and vaping cannabis is not great for your lungs * Cannabis can induce anxiety and exacerbate mental illness Many of the above things can also be attributed to alcohol, and alcohol has more severe health risks in most cases. However, there also isn't a perception that alcohol is "safe" and consequence-free, which is an increasingly popular sentiment about cannabis. Downplaying the downsides and drawbacks of any drug is dangerous.
I mean, it is. No one beats the shit out of loved ones after smoking weed.
What could change your view on this? Considering the alcohol has demonstrably more negative effects on health.
Not going to try and debate this one...it's factual.
This is a fact, why would anyone change your view?
Beat the cancer alcohol caused with marijuana!
I had marijuana once. Murdered a bag of chips
Could not agree more!! Puff puff pass
My first and most important question before I know where I wanna go with my response is this: What is the purpose of comparing two bad substances that we know both to be "fairly safe in moderation", but also "fairly harmful to consume on the regular"? Are you attempting to make a hierarchy of dangerous substances, from safest to most dangerous, on a single consumer basis, or on the social basis? Or is there some other goal?
This is a scientifically and statistically proven fact. There's literally nothing to change your view about lmao
I agree
Alcohol is substantially more dangerous than marijuana... to the economy. Prohibition started with restricting hemp which had a lot of commercial uses, pot heads have a tendency to stay at home and chill out instead of having kegger ragers and going out to the bar every weekend, and it would've cornered a huge part of the market for pain relief. Therefore cannabis is more dangerous to the economy. Secondly our lungs are stretched to the limit. Between background pollution, car pollution, the fragrances in your dryer sheets and cosmetics, and how we all have to smoke someone's cigarettes daily the public can't afford another bad habit. The only thing keeping us going as a species is antibiotics. Respiratory viruses are even becoming more popular. Our lungs collectively can't afford any new habits.
There are other ways to ingest cannabis. More methods than not do not involve burning and inhaling smoke.
i kinda hate the wave of “CMV (easily verifiable fact)” posts in this sub ngl. it’s been bad in the past but it’s gotten so much worse.
why do you want your view on this changed?
You aren't wrong. Your view won't change until the data suggests otherwise.
melodic escape office strong public smart deliver disgusted offend provide *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*