“…evidence still points to the use of THC – the high-producing component of marijuana – as a culprit.” and “….around 10 percent reported exclusive use of nicotine-containing products, Schuchat said.”
If THC was the culprit, how could it also happen with “exclusive use of nicotine” products that don’t contain THC?
They want to supply ammunition to anti-marijuana hacks? The article even states it, I have no idea why they put that first part there. Additionally, this is very likely to be another article that a certain poster tries to use to decry the dangers of marijuana on public health. Meanwhile that same poster will cry about any argument against climate change for fear of the future potential damage. Might as well get my criticisms out in the forefront, since I’m genuinely surprised he hasn’t started whinging on here already.
I don’t feel the need to discount it, they literally contradicted themselves in the article. Or is this another article you didn’t read before yelling about the dangers of THC?
You are the one putting words in peoples’ mouths. None of us ever said “only one thing could be a culprit” we’re just negating your position that THC is the thing to blame. Because, you know, literal decades of experience of thousands and thousands of regular THC users. You DO know that vaping existed before these cartridges right?
I agree Craig, there are more than one additive to these solutions that are causing the illnesses and deaths. They have already found vitamin E acetate and hydrogen cyanide as 2 additives. If one wants to avoid the chance of becoming ill, he or she should stick to vaping flowers only or any other method of ingesting THC than by vape oils. Unfortunately for those who are vaping nicotine only, going back to the old ways isn’t an option. So, perhaps cessation all together is the only way, Nic gum? Patches? About the only safer alternatives.
Did you “honest” lefties happen to see the 60 Minutes piece on the black market for weed in California? (FYI – 60 Minutes isn’t Fox News, and is VERY liberal.)
Just confirmed everything I have been saying. Ain’t going away. It’s getting bigger.
And CBD sales are largely based on false claims. (The kind you lefties would be SO upset about if coming from a major corporation. But coming from other lefties? Who cares, right boys?) Tell Grandma it will cure her arthritis and take her cash. 60 Minutes found lots of “CBD only” products with THC in it. Whatever, right?
Untrue actually. For someone calling themselves Common Sense you show a severe lack of that. I can’t speak for Rosenblatt, but I make it a point to only argue with Craig on the things he’s spreading blatant misinformation or lies about. As noted on multiple boards, this is an activity he engages in regularly. Such as claiming that THC causes psychosis and schizophrenia (it doesn’t) or claiming that 26/27 of the last mass murderers were fatherless (untrue) or that air conditioners were the biggest cause of CO2 emissions (they’re not). You’re defending a liar, Common Sense. What exactly is common sense about that?
The liar is you, Jon. Everyone on this board knows it, even the 2 liberals who sometimes join you in upvoting yourself.
I have linked to many reputable sources about THC and psychosis and schizophrenia. You choose to lie about it.
Your “source” on the number of shooters without fathers in the home was the totally discredited, leftist “fact checker” Snopes. And if you read their article, they were speculating based on remote facts that ‘only’ 19 of the 27 were without fathers in the home. Their “proof” confirmed the connection (even when they lie!).
Air conditioners were called the number one contributor by the NY Times. Prove me wrong, dipstick.
You call people names like a child, a third grader.
One last thing: To your nonsense claim that snopes is a leftist, discredited fact checker: mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/ seems a lot less biased than the garbage you’ve tried to pass off as “fact” on here. Pathetic.
October 30, 2019 at 10:26 pm
Jon says:
Like or Dislike:
3
4
LOL okay so my post where I pointed out the multiple ways you’re actually a liar got deleted: I can go again. You have linked to many reputable sources about THC and psychosis and schizophrenia, yes. These sources all reference the same study that concluded that there is a CORRELATION between THC use and psychosis or schizophrenia. They have NOT discovered causation. You keep implying and or outright stating that THC causes schizophrenia and psychosis. This is what we call a LIE.
You also stated over and over that 26/27 of the last mass murderers were fatherless. This was debunked by snopes. You then claimed it was still 19/27 even though that wasn’t confirmed instead of admitting to the lie. The article in question was from a severely biased right wing opinion site. Snopes, as noted below, is not a “discredited leftist” anything. This is ANOTHER LIE.
Air conditioners were you CLAIM called the number one contributor to CO2 by the NY times, but that article is behind a paywall. I have linked numerous articles that claim otherwise. Air conditioners don’t actually emit CO2. This is YET ANOTHER LIE.
I don’t call people names very often, but I call you a liar. That’s because that’s the word in the english language for people who lie. You lie, Craig. Would you prefer I call you a not-truth-teller, snowflake?
November 1, 2019 at 11:13 am
Illegal ImPolareach Bear says:
Like or Dislike:
3
3
Stoning long time and psychosis has been studied exhaustively. The conclusions are credible.
November 1, 2019 at 12:19 pm
Jon says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
Okay, then prove it. Or are you just going to link to the same articles that point to the same studies that do not show causation in any way? That’s what I thought. Just because you say something doesn’t make it true, and you jokers don’t have real evidence to back your totally false claims. Glad to know there are two liars on this board though, Yogi.
November 4, 2019 at 2:21 pm
craig cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
ht tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC512A recent review on the subject was published in the highly respected journal, Biological Psychiatry. According to this article, there have now been 10 research studies that have examined the long-term association between cannabis and psychotic disorders. None of the studies were perfect and all of them looked at the question a little bit differently, which is one reason why it is so easy for people on either side of the issue to cherry pick studies that support one’s prior opinions. Seven of the 10 studies found a statistically significant link between cannabis use and later psychotic symptoms and disorders.
Putting all 10 studies together, a 40% increase risk of psychosis was found comparing people who had used cannabis to people who have never used it. These odds tend to increase in studies that examine people who use cannabis more heavily.
Putting all of this together, the authors concluded that “there is a strong body of epidemiologic evidence to support the view that regular or heavy cannabis use increases the risk of developing psychotic disorders….”
3717/
November 4, 2019 at 2:43 pm
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
2
1
Craig,
You have been posting that link on a few articles now, but that link is not real. It is broken and brings up a page saying the page is not found. Please share the actual link to the study.
If you cannot post the actual link , then it is assumed you paragraph you are posting is your own opinion that holds no scientific merit.
So, do you have the real link to the study?
November 4, 2019 at 5:02 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
helpingout, stop sealioning. I found the link. It was easy.
November 5, 2019 at 9:34 am
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Maybe like any reasonable person you should check your links. It does not exsist, confused has pointed it out, smooth has, jon has, and captain has.
It does not exist. Please link a credible study as again you often misrepresent what you are discussing and frame it in a more favorable position.
It is something simple I am asking as you brought in the link to back yourself.
November 5, 2019 at 9:34 am
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
exist* darn phone.
November 5, 2019 at 9:42 am
helpingout says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Just so you know I tried looking it up, I tried googling and binging those quotes and nothing came up. I also went to the website you linked and typed in PCM 512A and that is a study about a gene regarding heart and skeletal muscles. This has nothing to do with Psychosis. As you are using the link to defend your stance, please share the proper link so we know you aren’t just passing off your opinion as a scientific consensus.
Thanks bud.
October 31, 2019 at 12:46 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
3
Jon,
Common Sense is Agent rebooted, so take that with however many grains of salt you wish. Agent knows he, Polar, and Craig will do the same thing he is suggesting you and Rosenblatt do.
These illnesses will continue to occur indefinitely and even after MJ is legal nationwide. People haven’t stopped dying from alcohol poisoning. And, people won’t stop dying from whatever they are doing to their liquor in places like The Dominican, either. If people want to partake and not become part of these statistics, they should choose alternatives to the oil vaping products.
IJ legalized nationally is about as probable as man significantly affecting global climates.
October 30, 2019 at 12:18 pm
Jon says:
Like or Dislike:
4
4
No, I don’t watch 60 minutes because I’m not over 50. I’m interested in what the piece said though, mostly because I’m sure you’re going to use it to jump to false conclusions, since you do that on just about every bit of information released regarding marijuana. Going to tell us that THC absolutely causes schizophrenia again because one study determined that there may be a correlation link?
We’re well aware that lots of CBD products contain THC. This is because the industry requires more regulation, which would be a lot easier if it were federally legal. As of right now the rigorous testing done in California doesn’t happen elsewhere. If it were legal, these issues would start to disappear, just as they did with Alcohol. Far fewer people went blind from black market moonshine once alcohol was legal and regulated everywhere. Use some common sense and logical thinking to this problem instead of just throwing out fear and disinformation.
Craig – I know Jon said CA does rigorous testing, but you’re claiming there is none. So I genuinely and non-threateningly am asking you: what would you consider “rigorous” testing? Because right now…
“a licensed testing laboratory must test samples for potency, foreign materials, heavy metals, microbial impurities, mycotoxins, residual pesticides, and residual solvents and processing chemicals.”
hey Craig, where’s your evidence that “so many products sold in retail stores” contain THC or other contaminants in California specifically? Go ahead, prove it.
You also told us THC causes psychosis – it doesnt. You have linked numerous articles as evidence and lied about their content. Your general claim that “60 minutes” verifies your story is garbage. if you can’t provide evidence, you can’t provide evidence, coward.
Craig – once again, you’re not reading the post before responding.
I asked you to tell me what OTHER tests you want them to do before you think it qualifies as “rigorous.” Nowhere in my post did I hint that you deny any testing is happening.
Let’s reset and I’ll be more clear.
We all agree CA requires testing. I think the tests they conduct could be considered rigorous, but you do not.
What additional tests do you want them do which would meet your definition of rigorous?
Listen, Rosenblatt. You like many lefties live in a land of ideals where most conservatives live in a land of reality.
In a land of ideals, testing would be rigorous. In the real world, it will never be rigorous because: 1. Liberals in California have no appetite for it. 2. They don’t want to take tax money from pot and use it for costly testing. Of you lived here, you would see CBD products EVERYWHERE. Stores, gyms, gas stations, drug stores. Everywhere. 3. They (the Jons of the world) keep telling us CBD and THC are safe.
Why test at all? Will never happen on the scale needed to catch all the bad product out there.
The solution is to use the tax money to advertise the product that is tested and safe and warn people away from anything else. (But oh, the gnashing of teeth from the Jons of the world if liberals suddenly demonize the wonder weed.)
The feature on 60 Minutes spoke to the fact that due to the bureaucracy, there aren’t enough licensed dispensaries and therefore, the growers do not have a large enough marketplace so they either sit on a large stockpile of product OR they sell it to the black market. They talked to a licensed dispensary and the representative said her largest demographic is actually the 60+ year olds. I found that surprising.
I was talking with an agent the other day who knows a grower in CA. He has the problem I am noting above. He, too, sells to the black market. It’s going to continue to be that way until there are more dispensaries and/or hefty penalties for selling to the illegal marketplace, such as repossessing the farms.
The delivery method is clearly the issue at hand… For thousands of years, the cannabis/thc community did not see a fatality. Now that we have “evolved” into vaping, we have rushed to market without consideration of the health exposures, relying on assumption that the product was pure or void of contaminants like fertilizers, pesticides and other preservatives. Combine that with a steam (liquid base) being introduced into the lungs – you have the necessary components of pneumonia. The article is pointing at THC; when in reality its the other stuff being put into the product. Imagine pouring rat poison in your cheerios and blaming General Mills
These two comments seem contradictory:
“…evidence still points to the use of THC – the high-producing component of marijuana – as a culprit.” and “….around 10 percent reported exclusive use of nicotine-containing products, Schuchat said.”
If THC was the culprit, how could it also happen with “exclusive use of nicotine” products that don’t contain THC?
They want to supply ammunition to anti-marijuana hacks? The article even states it, I have no idea why they put that first part there. Additionally, this is very likely to be another article that a certain poster tries to use to decry the dangers of marijuana on public health. Meanwhile that same poster will cry about any argument against climate change for fear of the future potential damage. Might as well get my criticisms out in the forefront, since I’m genuinely surprised he hasn’t started whinging on here already.
Because maybe, just maybe more than one thing is making people sick. Duh. Maybe people are suffering from different types of illness. Hello?
(P.S. Love how the THC pushers want to discount the connection. “Hacks”? Got that right.)
I don’t feel the need to discount it, they literally contradicted themselves in the article. Or is this another article you didn’t read before yelling about the dangers of THC?
Can’t reply without making the first insult? But apparently you never do that, according to you. That also seems contradictory to me.
You are the one jumping to the conclusion that only one thing could be a culprit . . .
Even if that’s what I did, you could’ve found a way to write your reply without the “Duh” and “Hello?” insult.
You are the one putting words in peoples’ mouths. None of us ever said “only one thing could be a culprit” we’re just negating your position that THC is the thing to blame. Because, you know, literal decades of experience of thousands and thousands of regular THC users. You DO know that vaping existed before these cartridges right?
I agree Craig, there are more than one additive to these solutions that are causing the illnesses and deaths. They have already found vitamin E acetate and hydrogen cyanide as 2 additives. If one wants to avoid the chance of becoming ill, he or she should stick to vaping flowers only or any other method of ingesting THC than by vape oils. Unfortunately for those who are vaping nicotine only, going back to the old ways isn’t an option. So, perhaps cessation all together is the only way, Nic gum? Patches? About the only safer alternatives.
Did you “honest” lefties happen to see the 60 Minutes piece on the black market for weed in California? (FYI – 60 Minutes isn’t Fox News, and is VERY liberal.)
Just confirmed everything I have been saying. Ain’t going away. It’s getting bigger.
And CBD sales are largely based on false claims. (The kind you lefties would be SO upset about if coming from a major corporation. But coming from other lefties? Who cares, right boys?) Tell Grandma it will cure her arthritis and take her cash. 60 Minutes found lots of “CBD only” products with THC in it. Whatever, right?
Craig, Rosenblatt and Jon will argue with you about anything and everything no matter how untenable their position is. That is what Progressives do.
Untrue actually. For someone calling themselves Common Sense you show a severe lack of that. I can’t speak for Rosenblatt, but I make it a point to only argue with Craig on the things he’s spreading blatant misinformation or lies about. As noted on multiple boards, this is an activity he engages in regularly. Such as claiming that THC causes psychosis and schizophrenia (it doesn’t) or claiming that 26/27 of the last mass murderers were fatherless (untrue) or that air conditioners were the biggest cause of CO2 emissions (they’re not). You’re defending a liar, Common Sense. What exactly is common sense about that?
The liar is you, Jon. Everyone on this board knows it, even the 2 liberals who sometimes join you in upvoting yourself.
I have linked to many reputable sources about THC and psychosis and schizophrenia. You choose to lie about it.
Your “source” on the number of shooters without fathers in the home was the totally discredited, leftist “fact checker” Snopes. And if you read their article, they were speculating based on remote facts that ‘only’ 19 of the 27 were without fathers in the home. Their “proof” confirmed the connection (even when they lie!).
Air conditioners were called the number one contributor by the NY Times. Prove me wrong, dipstick.
You call people names like a child, a third grader.
One last thing: To your nonsense claim that snopes is a leftist, discredited fact checker: mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/ seems a lot less biased than the garbage you’ve tried to pass off as “fact” on here. Pathetic.
LOL okay so my post where I pointed out the multiple ways you’re actually a liar got deleted: I can go again. You have linked to many reputable sources about THC and psychosis and schizophrenia, yes. These sources all reference the same study that concluded that there is a CORRELATION between THC use and psychosis or schizophrenia. They have NOT discovered causation. You keep implying and or outright stating that THC causes schizophrenia and psychosis. This is what we call a LIE.
You also stated over and over that 26/27 of the last mass murderers were fatherless. This was debunked by snopes. You then claimed it was still 19/27 even though that wasn’t confirmed instead of admitting to the lie. The article in question was from a severely biased right wing opinion site. Snopes, as noted below, is not a “discredited leftist” anything. This is ANOTHER LIE.
Air conditioners were you CLAIM called the number one contributor to CO2 by the NY times, but that article is behind a paywall. I have linked numerous articles that claim otherwise. Air conditioners don’t actually emit CO2. This is YET ANOTHER LIE.
I don’t call people names very often, but I call you a liar. That’s because that’s the word in the english language for people who lie. You lie, Craig. Would you prefer I call you a not-truth-teller, snowflake?
Stoning long time and psychosis has been studied exhaustively. The conclusions are credible.
Okay, then prove it. Or are you just going to link to the same articles that point to the same studies that do not show causation in any way? That’s what I thought. Just because you say something doesn’t make it true, and you jokers don’t have real evidence to back your totally false claims. Glad to know there are two liars on this board though, Yogi.
ht tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC512A recent review on the subject was published in the highly respected journal, Biological Psychiatry. According to this article, there have now been 10 research studies that have examined the long-term association between cannabis and psychotic disorders. None of the studies were perfect and all of them looked at the question a little bit differently, which is one reason why it is so easy for people on either side of the issue to cherry pick studies that support one’s prior opinions. Seven of the 10 studies found a statistically significant link between cannabis use and later psychotic symptoms and disorders.
Putting all 10 studies together, a 40% increase risk of psychosis was found comparing people who had used cannabis to people who have never used it. These odds tend to increase in studies that examine people who use cannabis more heavily.
Putting all of this together, the authors concluded that “there is a strong body of epidemiologic evidence to support the view that regular or heavy cannabis use increases the risk of developing psychotic disorders….”
3717/
Craig,
You have been posting that link on a few articles now, but that link is not real. It is broken and brings up a page saying the page is not found. Please share the actual link to the study.
If you cannot post the actual link , then it is assumed you paragraph you are posting is your own opinion that holds no scientific merit.
So, do you have the real link to the study?
helpingout, stop sealioning. I found the link. It was easy.
Maybe like any reasonable person you should check your links. It does not exsist, confused has pointed it out, smooth has, jon has, and captain has.
It does not exist. Please link a credible study as again you often misrepresent what you are discussing and frame it in a more favorable position.
It is something simple I am asking as you brought in the link to back yourself.
exist* darn phone.
Just so you know I tried looking it up, I tried googling and binging those quotes and nothing came up. I also went to the website you linked and typed in PCM 512A and that is a study about a gene regarding heart and skeletal muscles. This has nothing to do with Psychosis. As you are using the link to defend your stance, please share the proper link so we know you aren’t just passing off your opinion as a scientific consensus.
Thanks bud.
Jon,
Common Sense is Agent rebooted, so take that with however many grains of salt you wish. Agent knows he, Polar, and Craig will do the same thing he is suggesting you and Rosenblatt do.
These illnesses will continue to occur indefinitely and even after MJ is legal nationwide. People haven’t stopped dying from alcohol poisoning. And, people won’t stop dying from whatever they are doing to their liquor in places like The Dominican, either. If people want to partake and not become part of these statistics, they should choose alternatives to the oil vaping products.
IJ legalized nationally is about as probable as man significantly affecting global climates.
No, I don’t watch 60 minutes because I’m not over 50. I’m interested in what the piece said though, mostly because I’m sure you’re going to use it to jump to false conclusions, since you do that on just about every bit of information released regarding marijuana. Going to tell us that THC absolutely causes schizophrenia again because one study determined that there may be a correlation link?
We’re well aware that lots of CBD products contain THC. This is because the industry requires more regulation, which would be a lot easier if it were federally legal. As of right now the rigorous testing done in California doesn’t happen elsewhere. If it were legal, these issues would start to disappear, just as they did with Alcohol. Far fewer people went blind from black market moonshine once alcohol was legal and regulated everywhere. Use some common sense and logical thinking to this problem instead of just throwing out fear and disinformation.
Craig – I know Jon said CA does rigorous testing, but you’re claiming there is none. So I genuinely and non-threateningly am asking you: what would you consider “rigorous” testing? Because right now…
“a licensed testing laboratory must test samples for potency, foreign materials, heavy metals, microbial impurities, mycotoxins, residual pesticides, and residual solvents and processing chemicals.”
https://www.bcc.ca.gov/about_us/your_questions_answered.html
What additional tests would you like them to do before you consider their testing to be “rigorous”?
Please do your best to answer without attacks or insults.
0% chance of him doing so without attacks or insults, it’s all he knows. Another angry conservative boomer who can’t admit he’s wrong, shock.
At least give him a chance to reply, man. If he can’t help himself and insults and attacks, then feel free to get on his case about it….not before.
Key word: “rigorous”. The regulation isn’t rigorous. That’s why so many products sold in retail stores contain THC or other contaminants.
I didn’t say there was “no” regulation. Admit you put words in my mouth.
hey Craig, where’s your evidence that “so many products sold in retail stores” contain THC or other contaminants in California specifically? Go ahead, prove it.
You also told us THC causes psychosis – it doesnt. You have linked numerous articles as evidence and lied about their content. Your general claim that “60 minutes” verifies your story is garbage. if you can’t provide evidence, you can’t provide evidence, coward.
Craig – once again, you’re not reading the post before responding.
I asked you to tell me what OTHER tests you want them to do before you think it qualifies as “rigorous.” Nowhere in my post did I hint that you deny any testing is happening.
Let’s reset and I’ll be more clear.
We all agree CA requires testing. I think the tests they conduct could be considered rigorous, but you do not.
What additional tests do you want them do which would meet your definition of rigorous?
My mistake.
I reread my post and I do see “you claim there is none.” That was not what I meant to say. I meant to say “you claim the testing is not rigorous.”
I could have phrased that better and I apologise for saying it that way then wrongly claiming you didn’t read my post correctly. I was wrong.
That said, my question stands – what other tests do you want them to do so you could say they’re doing rigorous tests?
Listen, Rosenblatt. You like many lefties live in a land of ideals where most conservatives live in a land of reality.
In a land of ideals, testing would be rigorous. In the real world, it will never be rigorous because: 1. Liberals in California have no appetite for it. 2. They don’t want to take tax money from pot and use it for costly testing. Of you lived here, you would see CBD products EVERYWHERE. Stores, gyms, gas stations, drug stores. Everywhere. 3. They (the Jons of the world) keep telling us CBD and THC are safe.
Why test at all? Will never happen on the scale needed to catch all the bad product out there.
The solution is to use the tax money to advertise the product that is tested and safe and warn people away from anything else. (But oh, the gnashing of teeth from the Jons of the world if liberals suddenly demonize the wonder weed.)
The feature on 60 Minutes spoke to the fact that due to the bureaucracy, there aren’t enough licensed dispensaries and therefore, the growers do not have a large enough marketplace so they either sit on a large stockpile of product OR they sell it to the black market. They talked to a licensed dispensary and the representative said her largest demographic is actually the 60+ year olds. I found that surprising.
I was talking with an agent the other day who knows a grower in CA. He has the problem I am noting above. He, too, sells to the black market. It’s going to continue to be that way until there are more dispensaries and/or hefty penalties for selling to the illegal marketplace, such as repossessing the farms.
The delivery method is clearly the issue at hand… For thousands of years, the cannabis/thc community did not see a fatality. Now that we have “evolved” into vaping, we have rushed to market without consideration of the health exposures, relying on assumption that the product was pure or void of contaminants like fertilizers, pesticides and other preservatives. Combine that with a steam (liquid base) being introduced into the lungs – you have the necessary components of pneumonia. The article is pointing at THC; when in reality its the other stuff being put into the product. Imagine pouring rat poison in your cheerios and blaming General Mills
Exactly, Brett. They’ve discovered issues with the vitamin E acetate and hydrogen cyanide, which is poison. It’s the additives, not the THC.
All the more reason to put all the Vaping companies out of business.