I think that it certainly has potential for pain etc But I think in the public domain the impression is that it is a sort of panacea for all ills and thus there seems to be jumping ahead of the evidence.
Any substance that manipulates brain chemistry can have an adverse effect, there is no such thing as substance without negative effects at certain dosages. So I think people need to be a bit more critical about what are possible avenues of investigation without hyperbole.
I would certainly say in populations over a certain age weed may be recreational, not adverse as long as it doesn't impari social functioning. Medicinally there may certainly be some benefits but the studies are mixed and we need further research which is being done all the time.
We also need a safe dose guide, a measured amount which precludes the dangers of psychosis or any other negative side effect just as regular drugs have accompanying documentation.
I would also argue for decriminalisation. In the UK it is still illegal, despite high usage and this status is more damaging I think, and creates a necessary underworld in order for people to acquire it.
@Daniel Sumner So, great question is you applying psychology trick on you like pavlov experiment. Your way of thinking is cool.
I think I would educate people about abusing weed in a fun way. Like in Animated film way where teenagers are being taught about it in aesthetically pleasing way. Have you seen Gibli studios movies, I would like to make movie in that way.
@ayesha naymat No I've not seen those movies, but that sounds like a fantastic idea, I never thought of that approach. 😁 Given how popular Disney films are etc, it would be a great way to educate young ones.
Yeah I don't know anything about animation. But I love the skill of animators. 😁
Great question
I think that it certainly has potential for pain etc But I think in the public domain the impression is that it is a sort of panacea for all ills and thus there seems to be jumping ahead of the evidence.
Any substance that manipulates brain chemistry can have an adverse effect, there is no such thing as substance without negative effects at certain dosages. So I think people need to be a bit more critical about what are possible avenues of investigation without hyperbole.
I would certainly say in populations over a certain age weed may be recreational, not adverse as long as it doesn't impari social functioning. Medicinally there may certainly be some benefits but the studies are mixed and we need further research which is being done all the time.
We also need a safe dose guide, a measured amount which precludes the dangers of psychosis or any other negative side effect just as regular drugs have accompanying documentation.
I would also argue for decriminalisation. In the UK it is still illegal, despite high usage and this status is more damaging I think, and creates a necessary underworld in order for people to acquire it.