Recreational Cannabis Impairs Driving Even When Driver Not High: Harvard Research

January 16, 2020

  • January 16, 2020 at 12:16 pm
    Captain Planet says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 31
    Thumb down 17

    Hmm, not really surprising at all. Anyone who is going to risk using any drug heavily is likely to take other risks, such as those behind the wheel. I’d bet you’d find a similar sample size willing to risk having unprotected sex, too. If one does not care about personal consequences of his/her actions, then he/she will be willing to take on more risk. Pretty obvious.

    • January 16, 2020 at 12:44 pm
      Jon says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 22
      Thumb down 19

      Totally agree. The line from the article is pretty telling:

      “Research has consistently shown that early substance use, including the use of cannabis, is associated with poorer cognitive performance.”

      Yeah, if you’re pursuing drugs before 16 you probably have some other issues to deal with. Interesting article though. Hoping the right doesn’t latch on and try to start making ridiculous claims once again, Craig is back after all.

      • January 17, 2020 at 11:53 am
        JaxAgent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 10
        Thumb down 2

        “Hoping the right doesn’t latch on” Always left or right. Republican or Democrat. Your side or my side.

        What if am on the right, but I agree with you ? What shall we be called ?

        • January 17, 2020 at 1:36 pm
          Jon says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 14

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    • January 16, 2020 at 1:31 pm
      craig cornell says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 16
      Thumb down 25

      Wow. That is one desperate attempt to defend your beloved THC: “It’s not the pot, it’s the person.”

      Pretty obvious indeed.

      • January 16, 2020 at 1:42 pm
        Jon says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 12
        Thumb down 21

        A “desperate attempt to defend” that’s just actually posting a quote from the article? You’re really stretching to try and be contrary on this one, Craig. What do you know, my concern that you’d try and latch on and make ridiculous claims was founded, how about that! Predictable and boring as usual :)

        • January 16, 2020 at 2:02 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 17
          Thumb down 12

          Ho hum. I was replying to CP, not you if you follow the thread. But nice of you to throw in some misdirected invective and hate for no reason at all.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:05 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 22

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:11 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 14
            Thumb down 11

            Yes. Unprotected sex causes car crashes. Relationship to THC consumption? None. CP just making it up. It’s like saying drunk driving doesn’t cause car crashes, only the “reckless” people who drink and drive.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:20 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 18

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:42 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 11

            C’mon, Jon. You can be more succinct! Let me edit your last comment:

            “expect you to be too simple” “Boomer” “propaganda”

            I am so hurt. Please just go to the invective and leave out the filler. Save us all some time.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:51 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 17

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • January 16, 2020 at 4:25 pm
        Boomer"ang" says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 1
        Thumb down 12

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • January 16, 2020 at 7:04 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 7
          Thumb down 12

          Ask the BOT-users how to do so.

          • January 17, 2020 at 8:47 am
            rob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 7

            yogi–

            Repeat after me: NO BOTS HAVE BEEN USED ON THE IJ TO CENSOR CONSERVATIVE VOICES! NONE! NUNCA. NADA. ZERO. ZIP. ZILCH NIL.

            seriously, man…you need to stop. You’re obviously an above average intelligent bear, but when you spread the conspiracy theories about BOTs, it seriously damages your credibility

            Andrew–can you PLEASE explain to Yogi that NO BOTS have ever been used to downvote conservatives, that it was just a glitch that allowed multiple mouse clicks and has since been remedied? I’m not sure it will help, but it’s a start.

          • January 21, 2020 at 7:04 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 4

            @Rob; if you want something you say to be repeated on this site, you know how to do it. Hint: it begins with a ‘B’.

          • January 21, 2020 at 7:27 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 3

            Hot & Getting Hotter. Re-wording miscue. Bear culpa.

          • January 21, 2020 at 8:57 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 2

            “I specifically refer to those who cause conflict on these comment pages”

            You mean when posters reply to on-topic non-emotional questions by making ad-hominem attacks and insulting people by calling them names, such as Trollsenblatt? I too wish Andrew could fix that glitch.

  • January 16, 2020 at 1:20 pm
    Jack says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 36
    Thumb down 9

    Everything in the article applies to on the job performance as well. Take it from an ex-stoner, nothing good comes from habitually smoking weed. Anyone claiming otherwise is proving the point of poorer cognitive performance.

    • January 16, 2020 at 1:43 pm
      Jon says:
      Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 13
      Thumb down 25

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • January 16, 2020 at 1:51 pm
        FFA says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 24
        Thumb down 4

        Been there done that counts for something Jon.

        • January 16, 2020 at 1:55 pm
          Jon says:
          Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 11
          Thumb down 24

          Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

  • January 16, 2020 at 1:24 pm
    Craig Cornell says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 15
    Thumb down 16

    I remember not so long ago when several people posting on IJ comments included arguments that there was no evidence of more car accidents in states that legalized pot for fun. Oh, those were the days. (Where did all those people go who made those comments? Hello?)

    From the article, unrelated to youth consumption:

    “Other findings of the study:

    Cannabis users had more accidents, drove at higher speeds, and drove through more red lights than non-users.”

    • January 16, 2020 at 1:34 pm
      CommLinesAgent says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 19
      Thumb down 5

      “I remember not so long ago when several people posting on IJ comments included arguments that there was no evidence of more car accidents in states that legalized pot for fun. Oh, those were the days. ”

      That was being reported by the scientific community at one point. It is natural to quote what is currently accepted as scientific evidence. See, science keeps working and discovering new things. That’s how it works. With new discoveries comes new claims, peer reviews and sources to quote.

      • January 16, 2020 at 2:14 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 10
        Thumb down 12

        Ah, yes. The “scientific community”. A vague term meaning nothing at all, because there was no one saying THC did NOT cause car crashes and certainly not scientists. And when I pointed to the links to the data that backed up the connection, you and others simply denied the data. Which was produced by, you know, statistics.

        • January 16, 2020 at 2:21 pm
          Jon says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 9
          Thumb down 13

          reason.com/2015/02/09/landmark-study-finds-marijuana-is-not-li/

          Quick google search shows in 2015 that was reported. So your claim is false, once again. Nothing new there, you like making false claims we all know. We just, you know, read.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:44 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 9

            Ah, yes. The “scientific community”. That study was not performed by scientists and it was in 2015, when states first started to legalize pot for fun. Try to stay on point.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:52 pm
            Jon says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 16

            LOL okay boomer, continue to try and discredit anything you don’t want to believe in. The facts are out there and stand in direct opposition to the nonsense you regularly spout on here. Can you go on another “vacation”?

    • January 16, 2020 at 1:53 pm
      Jon says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 9
      Thumb down 18

      Speaking of memories, I remember not so long ago when you wouldn’t stop claiming that marijuana caused THC and schizophrenia. Or when you kept trying to imply that the THC was responsible for the vaping lung disease of recent times, and wouldn’t stop implying that on the boards even as more evidence to the contrary came to light (including the fact that people had been safely vaping marijuana for years before vaping cartridges became a thing). What about when you claimed that marijuana was linked to lower IQ (debunked)?

      You really want to go down this road again of trying to pretend you know anything about the subject when it’s been pointed out many, many times that you have a clear personal bias and are willing to spread misinformation on this subject? Because I remember all those things from not so long ago, do you?

      • January 16, 2020 at 1:53 pm
        Jon says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 6
        Thumb down 17

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • January 16, 2020 at 1:55 pm
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 20
          Thumb down 12

          Having trouble concentrating?

          • January 16, 2020 at 1:57 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 19

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • January 16, 2020 at 1:58 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 14
            Thumb down 14

            Having trouble admitting you’re in denial?

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:00 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 14
            Thumb down 10

            Perhaps now is the time to quickly post vicious and vile comments so as to force IJ Administrators to REMOVE ALL OF THESE COMMENTS, which include many you do not anyone to see?

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:03 pm
            Jon says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 11
            Thumb down 17

            Polar, have you ever admitted anything? Like when you posted a bogus claim about a yougov poll from “january” that was actually january 2016? Or when you claimed soros funded bots were downvoting your posts. Or when you claimed I was being paid to post anti-right wing rhetoric. Or when you got caught posting a conspiracy theory website and claiming it as fact? I’ve admitted to being wrong in the past, you’ve just been cowardly and ghosted the conversation. We’re in total agreement though, the off–topic comments SHOULD be removed. Primarily yours, since I’ve managed to post on-topic several times, you haven’t.

          • January 16, 2020 at 4:32 pm
            perplexed says:
            Hot debate. What do you think?
            Thumb up 15
            Thumb down 9

            I think he’s a “heavy user”. No one HATES quite like Jon.

          • January 16, 2020 at 4:45 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 17

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • January 16, 2020 at 2:06 pm
        Craig Cornell says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 11
        Thumb down 13

        I never once claimed that THC was the cause of the problems from vaping. I simply reported that the CDC hadn’t ruled it out AT THAT TIME, which is called the truth. But I won’t expect a correction and apology from you. No one would.

        And yes, THC does cause psychosis and schizophrenia. The other Pot Fans on this thread have given up arguing it does not. But you keep on fighting facts, Jon. It is what we all expect.

        • January 16, 2020 at 2:24 pm
          Jon says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 8
          Thumb down 15

          My comment: “Or when you kept trying to imply” has your reading comprehension also depreciated in your recent leave from this forum? Because I never said you claimed THC was the cause of the problems, I said you implied it. Which is exactly what you were trying to do by pointing out that the CDC hadn’t ruled it out at the time. It’s truth, sure, but it’s also the same time of fear-mongering tactic your beloved fox news is a fan of. “Which thing in your house MIGHT kill you?!” style reporting.

          We’ve been down this road, you have no clear causation evidence of THC causing psychosis and schizophrenia. You have correlation evidence. It is baffling that you still can’t comprehend this, but I guess cognitive ability was never really your strong suit.

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:46 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 10

            “trying to imply” means you are a mind reader. I never implied anything. “your reading comprehension” “fear-mongering” “fox news” “still can’t comprehend” “cognitive ability was never really your strong suit”

          • January 16, 2020 at 2:54 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 17

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

      • January 21, 2020 at 10:59 am
        agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 9
        Thumb down 2

        Jon, can you quit using the term ‘boomers’ like it is something bad? I find I agree with you a lot of the time, but I think people are more likely to dismiss you if you have to insult others. Thank you.

  • January 16, 2020 at 1:27 pm
    Angela Iseli says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 16
    Thumb down 9

    Interesting article. I agree with Jon and CP that anyone who develops substance abuse before 16 probably has additional issues. The scientific literature on cannabis/THC/CBD use is very incomplete with many conflicting study outcomes (I posted some articles in the comments section of a previous IJ article some weeks back to illustrate this). The FDA needs to reclassify cannabis and its derivatives and then encourage large, well-planned impartial studies. Cannabis contains a bunch of different bio-active compounds and we need to better understand their effects and interactions, especially as more states permit medicinal or recreational use.

    • January 16, 2020 at 1:53 pm
      FFA says:
      Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 12
      Thumb down 1

      People been smoking pot forever. There should be more then enough data to get to any conclusion your desire.

      • January 16, 2020 at 2:01 pm
        Jon says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 7
        Thumb down 15

        There is useful knowledge in the history of pot smoking, but there’s a breakdown of communication and personal experience between long term users and actual controlled studies. The DEA has restricted most study of cannabis for decades unfortunately, so all we have to go on are subjective personal experiences for the most part. Thankfully this is changing, but we also shouldn’t ignore that experience as we move forward.

        There are situations where fearful right-wing posters on this board have been unwilling to consider personal experience at all, such as the vaping lung epidemic of recent. People had been vaping marijuana for decades, but posters on this board refused to stop trying to imply that marijuana itself could have been responsible for the disease. It’s the type of fear-mongering typical of the right, but thankfully enough information eventually came to light to squash that particular bug. It’s unfortunate that that’s a battle we have to have regularly unfortunately.

        • January 17, 2020 at 12:39 pm
          FFA says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 1

          Jon, Do you suppose there is a break down of communication due to short term memory issues related to smoking?
          I’m sure there is enough data to support both signed when mined correctly. Lookig for your opinion, not a link to sme study.
          I guess a good tell all would be to see how many people with dementia & alzheimer were smokers prior to their demise.
          My wife smokes for pain reasons – I dont believe RX pain killers exist in the state of Wisconsin. Since she has gone in that direction, I do notice her forgetting things.

          • January 17, 2020 at 1:15 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 7

            While I will admit yes there is some short term memory loss associated with marijuana use, forgetfulness if you will, I don’t think that’s the reason for the breakdown. I believe it truly is that the DEA has worked actively to suppress any positive studying on marijuana for years, I mean that’s something you can find evident from a few google searches. I think now that we are opening that door finally it’s just slow-going, but hopefully these data collectors will realize the wealth of information available and start to utilize those long-term smokers for research purposes.

          • January 19, 2020 at 9:14 am
            knowall says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 0

            I have been around some very intelligent professionals when they smoke dope a memory problem immediately surfaces. I guess that is why they smoke it

      • January 16, 2020 at 3:37 pm
        Common Sense says:
        Hot debate. What do you think?
        Thumb up 9
        Thumb down 17

        FFA, Stoners are LOSER’S.

        • January 16, 2020 at 4:04 pm
          Jon says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 7
          Thumb down 15

          Pathetic old man yells things: Agent’s life.

        • January 16, 2020 at 4:06 pm
          Jon says:
          Hot debate. What do you think?
          Thumb up 9
          Thumb down 15

          Also, weren’t you trying to claim you were a boss or owner of your agency the other day? I don’t know if I would trust a business owner who can’t figure out how to punctuate a four word sentence LOL

        • January 17, 2020 at 1:01 pm
          FFA says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 10
          Thumb down 1

          I’ve encountered plenty of burned out stoners. Obvious when the brain is fried.
          But, they do seem happy and spending life happy is a good thing I guess…
          For you youngsters that dont think it happens, think again. Unfortunately, it will be too late when you finally do. ….
          If you choose to ignore the evidence or just plain dont care and choose that life style, have a ball….

          • January 17, 2020 at 1:16 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 8

            That is definitely a thing, but you get that with any substance. Alcoholics who don’t ever get sober anymore, meth addicts who are always on. It’s an unfortunate side effect of the addictive personality disorder, more than the marijuana itself I would agree.

          • January 17, 2020 at 1:47 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 1

            Jon, I have had plenty of experience with Alcoholics. A brain fried because of too much pot is a lot different then a brain fried from too much booze. Booze brains become angry / vindictive / hateful / many violent. . Brains fried from pot are generally happy about everything.
            If I had the choice,I would take a pot head every time over an alcoholic.
            I would also disagree that marijuana by itself is addicting. Habit forming, absolutely. Break the physical habit and your done. Not like nicotine at all.
            Never had experience with Meth Heads, so I cant comment.

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:05 pm
            craig cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 7

            Mind blowing logic. “I would prefer one addiction to another.”

            How about common sense: BOTH are bad. (And yes, THC is addictive, according to virtually every respected medical and psychiatric association, as well as the American Academy of Science.)

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:10 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 7

            Once again, false, Craig. Marijuana is not addictive in the way we perceive modern addiction. No one robs their family to fund a pot addiction. No one commits sexual favors for their marijuana addiction. To use the term addictive is misleading, and you’re aware of this. You once again really enjoy spreading misinformation on this subject at any given chance. I’m not sure why my post to FFA was deleted, but I agree with him. Habit forming, certainly. And yes, any substance can be abused. That has more to do with the person than the substance, in this case.

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:13 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 0

            Craig, I agree… My personal circumstances did not allow for that choice.
            If I had to choose the lesser of two evils, Smoke Up Johnny! Sometime they got so high they “forgot” to drink.
            Not long ago, that was a good day for me…
            In 2020, I am on a personal mission to purge that negativity out of my life.

          • January 20, 2020 at 8:50 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 5

            With compassion for your struggle. I have had addiction directly and negatively impact my life and so I know what you are going through.

            But respectfully, no one “chooses” booze over THC or vice versa. The chemicals are different and so are the characteristics of the addiction (as with addiction to gambling, sex, heroin, etc. etc.)

            To say one is “better” than the other ignores how many people mess up their life with THC and would never do so with anything else.

          • January 21, 2020 at 12:30 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 4

            I was not referring to my son. Stop being so ridiculous. Addiction is different for everyone. Some who get addicted to pot would never get addicted to booze or gambling or sex or food.

            With more people consuming pot, there will be more addicts. It isn’t even worth debating. It is just math.

            Now apologize for bringing up my son.

          • January 21, 2020 at 12:48 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 6

            Your claim that people would be addicted to pot that would “never” be addicted to other things is as ridiculous as your claim that there are marijuana addicts. Spoken like a true clueless boomer.

            I will do no such thing. You have brought up your son time and time again when pressed into a corner about your ridiculous beliefs. It is clear to everyone on this board and probably you that you blame marijuana for your son’s death. That’s a tragedy that your son died, Craig. But pointing fingers and trying to play the blame game does no one any good, including you. Your posts on here show intense anger at life in general aimed at anyone who disagrees with your political opinions. You might benefit from actually admitting to what your issue is instead of just channeling all of your energy into a pointless crusade against a plant that people like to smoke harmlessly. It is far less worse than alcohol and yet you make no claims to try and crusade against alcohol, this is all personal bias, Craig.

          • January 21, 2020 at 1:46 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 1

            Okay, then. Let’s talk about your mom . . .

          • January 21, 2020 at 2:18 pm
            FFA says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 0

            Craig, I feel your pain. I ve come to the point where I cant let it consume me any more. Told him to tattoo my phone number on his ass so when someone finds him dead, I can go claim the body. Sad day when you have come to that point.
            Hardest thing. Best thing.

          • January 21, 2020 at 3:45 pm
            helpingout says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 4

            Craig,

            While I don’t agree with Jon’s tactics with debating at times, I also do not agree with the following people since I want to point this out first: Polar, you, perplexed, and Jax. All 5 of you use similar tactics.

            Now that is established, I disagree with the way your logic is working on this. It is true and documented on this site you have brought up family instances multiple times. I used another family instance and you asked the same question about my mother, if one person is not discussing these things with you relating to private matters, they are choosing not to disclose these things. You have discussed your family here multiple times on multiple articles. You haven’t done so since we all pushed you to stop bringing it up if you did not want others to discuss the subject.

            Again overall, Jon has not brought his personal life into a debate where he has named someone in his life, you wanting to discuss his mother is unnecessary.

            Again, I wish you the best, and I know this is not insurance related, but many of your posts on this thread are not insurance related, and I cannot stand when you do this to people when you want to dig into their personal lives. Just stop it.

          • January 21, 2020 at 3:53 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 5

            Craig, if you genuinely want to have a conversation about loss and growing from it I’d be happy to. She was a great lady and it took about two years for me to not cry thinking about her passing. You clearly are dealing with things, as am I. We don’t yell at each other about things we can’t change on the internet because we’re happy. I on some level get what you do, we’re just on opposite ends of the spectrum. You won’t be happy while you’re not willing to let go of this anger though. Is the anger all that’s left at this point?

          • January 21, 2020 at 5:45 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 4

            Stop thinking you know what I think and feel. My son did not die from pot. He died from CTE from football.

            So shut up about “bias” already.

          • January 21, 2020 at 6:48 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 5

            Also, not to push, but I could have sworn you’d mentioned your son’s death specifically with substances. Isn’t that how you brought it up in the first place? You tried to use it in an argument once I vaguely remember.

    • January 16, 2020 at 1:57 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 11
      Thumb down 8

      “Previous studies have demonstrated that cannabis use is associated with impaired driving performance, but thus far, research has primarily focused on the effects of acute intoxication.”

  • January 16, 2020 at 1:30 pm
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Hot debate. What do you think?
    Thumb up 12
    Thumb down 16

    Hey, Denier Stoners! Here’s your rebuttal premise:

    ” The researchers said the findings may be “reflective of increased impulsivity in those who initiate substance use during adolescence” and recommend further research to explore this association. ”

    Note some of the words/ phrases used above:
    ‘may be’
    ‘recommend further research’

    For the first qualifier above, simply say that “these results are likely restricted to the study group, which is insignificant because I am not a heavy, long-time user. I just use it on the weekend, and like William Jefferson Clinton, I don’t inhale.”

    For the second qualifier above, challenge the credibility of the study, because some people are too lazy to review the specific article. But, here it is!: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0376871619305484

    Finally, pray that other readers of these comments do not access the above link for the actual study, and find the following comment:

    “Previous studies have demonstrated that cannabis use is associated with impaired driving performance, but thus far, research has primarily focused on the effects of acute intoxication.”

    If all the above fails, resort back to your old reliable methods by recruiting help to censor by ‘WMD’ (Weapons of Mass Downvoting) the conservatives who discuss the uncomfortable (to stoners) results of the article/ study.

    • January 16, 2020 at 2:07 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 4

      5 stars on that one, Polar. Accurate and funny at the same time. Bulls eye.

      • January 16, 2020 at 2:25 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 2

        LOL it’s so pathetic when you right-wing cronies try to high5 each other on this board. You know we all think you’re a joke, right?

  • January 16, 2020 at 2:06 pm
    Capt. Renault says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 4

    I’m shocked! Shocked, I tell you that the IJ editors allowed posting of an article that is critical of marijuana use!

    • January 17, 2020 at 7:08 am
      Capt. Renault says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 2

      I’m shocked. Shocked, I tell you that more people didn’t believe this fact from the article:

      Previous studies have demonstrated that cannabis use is associated with impaired driving performance

  • January 16, 2020 at 2:06 pm
    rob says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 3

    cue THIS comments section being shut down in 3…2…1…

    C’mon guys, either play nice or don’t play at all. We’re all adults here, eh? None of you even personally know each other but you delight in insulting each other. I just don’t get that mentality.

    • January 16, 2020 at 2:15 pm
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Hot debate. What do you think?
      Thumb up 14
      Thumb down 9

      Notice which specific poster is responsible for nearly all personal attacks and snide remarks, and who continues to argue like the John Cleese character in Monty Pythons’ Argument Clinic sketch? I do.

      • January 16, 2020 at 2:26 pm
        rob says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 17
        Thumb down 2

        so be better than that “specific poster” if they get under your skin. Don’t engage. You can’t have a fight if one side refuses to participate. We all know that no amount of arguing by you, Craig, Agent, etc will change Jon’s mind, and nothing Jon says will change any of your minds. What’s the point, then?

        Points for the Python reference, though

      • January 16, 2020 at 2:27 pm
        Jon says:
        Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 17

        Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

        • January 16, 2020 at 4:51 pm
          Perplexed says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 13
          Thumb down 4

          You are one sad little man, Jon.

          • January 16, 2020 at 5:13 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 15

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • January 16, 2020 at 7:21 pm
            Jon says:
            Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 14

            Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

          • January 17, 2020 at 12:07 pm
            JaxAgent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 3

            Hey ! Who you calling a ‘man’ ?

          • January 21, 2020 at 10:16 am
            Perplexed says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 3

            Jon, I’ve read your comments but you’re so jaded with hate against a single generation I don’t pay any attention to them nor do I feel like I need to respond. I don’t feel compelled to answer your every little snide comment. I am sickened by your constant whining about how bad you have it in life and all caused by a generation of people that worked hard to have what they may have and didn’t expect the government to pay their way nor arrange life so that things weren’t so “hard”. You will die “mad” not me.

          • January 21, 2020 at 11:11 am
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 9

            Lol another boomer who sticks their fingers in their ears and covers their eyes when confronted by their own hypocrisy? SHOCK LOL

      • January 17, 2020 at 12:04 pm
        JaxAgent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 9
        Thumb down 4

        Polar, you left out, “and absolutely must have the last word”. Not to mention being the down vote queen ! LOL.

  • January 16, 2020 at 3:24 pm
    The Voice of Reason says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 8

    Post hoc ergo propter hoc.

    Or they proved people that regularly smoke weed are more likely to be bad drivers.

    • January 16, 2020 at 4:47 pm
      craig cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 10
      Thumb down 6

      Right. The pot had nothing to do with their bad driving. Voice of What?

      Same logic applies to drunk driving. It ain’t the booze. It’s the driver.

      • January 16, 2020 at 5:25 pm
        The Voice of Reason says:
        Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 14
        Thumb down 4

        I was just pointing out a flaw in the study. But it’s actually both. There are lots of people that drive while intoxicated that don’t crash.

        Giving a window-licker a joint does not mean he is now licking the window because of the joint.

        • January 16, 2020 at 5:40 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 12

          Man that is the best Aphex Twin song though.

        • January 16, 2020 at 5:43 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 10
          Thumb down 7

          “There are lots of people that drive while intoxicated that don’t crash.”

          How is that a flaw in the study? Does it mean what you said at first, that “they proved people that regularly smoke weed are more likely to be bad drivers”? Not at all.

          Wouldn’t the exact same thing apply to alcohol? By golly, yes. But no one would say they are just bad drivers.

          • January 16, 2020 at 6:06 pm
            The Voice of Reason says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 12

            Wow; you’re a crotchety old fart aren’t you? Clearly, the concept I am trying to convey is a bit too advanced for you.

            If someone crashes their car while drunk, how do you know the reason they crashed was because they were drunk? Maybe they were playing with their phone and would have crashed whether drunk or sober. Boggles the mind…

          • January 16, 2020 at 6:26 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 13
            Thumb down 5

            Wow, you are one illogical young punk. No one in the world would make the case that driving drunk doesn’t cause car crashes. Except you.

          • January 16, 2020 at 7:20 pm
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 5

            The correlation isn’t perfect, but the fact someone crashed their car while drunk but didn’t crash their car while sober is prima facia evidence of the effect of alcohol-induced motor-skill and judgement impairment.

          • January 16, 2020 at 7:22 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 13

            Hey Polar, while you’re posting here, why don’t you respond to the hypocrisy of claiming I do nothing but insult and derail while you had four insulting posts on this very board? Or what about your false YouGov poll from “january” want to respond to that? Or just more cowardice?

          • January 17, 2020 at 11:38 am
            helpingout says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 10

            Craig and Polar,

            These concepts that voice is discussing escapes you frequently. They are pointing out an issue with the study and why it might not mean the end goal they were hoping for (bias and restriction of variables).

            Polar, you are very intelligent, but you misinterpret studies all the time. Once this gets done with a bigger sample size, and with more restrictions to cut down on exactly what voice is discussing then it will be found to be true.

            Another issue I see with all of you discussing this article is that it really discusses that the bad drives are those who began using at or before the age of 16 so it doesn’t mean that anyone who smokes has a higher risk even habitual users if they began at the legal age (weird concept that you don’t grasp with cannabis and that goes for Craig and Polar). The same was found for alcohol so where is your push for that?

          • January 17, 2020 at 1:00 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 5

            helpingout, you really should try to be more open minded. The evidence this research found is bad news for consumers of THC, including older users, if you read the actual article.

            Those who consume can be dangerous drivers even after coming down from the high. Yes, people will die as a result of these car accidents. Try to have some compassion too.

            The fact that booze is bad doesn’t get THC off the hook. The more research being done, the more bad news comes out for THC. That is just a fact.

          • January 17, 2020 at 1:19 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 10

            LOL once again Craig you really like to draw conclusions based off of headlines, not reality.

            If you actually let your bias fall away, you’d realize half of what you’re saying is nonsense and ignores common sense. How are you in insurance when you completely lack in ability to critically analyze a situation?

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:11 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 10

            “LOL once again Craig you really like to draw conclusions based off of headlines, not reality.”

            You have done this on this forum multiple times. You have neglected to read articles and drawn conclusions based off the headline. Where is there a lack of fact here?

            I asked how you’re in insurance when you show zero critical thinking ability on this subject and that stands. You don’t critically think about this subject, you let your personal bias cloud your judgement on this subject again and again. It’s sad and boring, Craig. We’ve all argued these same points over and over with you, you just want to spread misinformation because you personally don’t like marijuana and can’t stand that adults are doing something they’re allowed to do. The majority of people want marijuana, grow up.

          • January 17, 2020 at 3:24 pm
            helpingout says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 8

            Craig,

            How do these facts escape you so frequently that you need to push a false narrative of those that disagree with you on this subject.

            I am using facts from the actual study and not an article that generalized the results. I think that is the issue with our different views on this. I never said that accidents wouldn’t go up because people are smoking, I have agreed, but I make the caveat that the same thing happened when prohibition ended. The issue is you see these as two separate and not equal substances that we are discussing. I disagree with you on that point as again you use your personal opinion and interpretations of studies rather than the studies themselves. Jon is not lying when he points out how you have misrepresented articles before (we used to argue last year all the time about you needing to learn how to interpret these studies and why you need to remove your personal bias).

            Have a good weekend Craig, and I would read pieces from all perspectives, not just what you agree with. I find that helpful in determining the overall issues and valid points that are being made.

  • January 17, 2020 at 7:43 am
    Jeff Spicoli says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 3

    [driving stoned] People on ‘ludes should not drive.

  • January 17, 2020 at 8:14 am
    David says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 6

    This is simply not true. I have been using marijuana since I was 15. I am 45 now. I have never had an accident that was my fault, and the last accident I was in (someone made an illegal left into me) was 10 years ago. I have many other friends who smoke marijuana as much as I do with similar records. In fact, most of the marijuana smokers I know have had far fewer accidents then people who do not smoke marijuana that I know

    • January 17, 2020 at 9:33 am
      Jeff Spicoli says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 3

      Awesome, dude! I wish I could say the same.

    • January 17, 2020 at 12:38 pm
      sak74 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 4
      Thumb down 2

      Well the article did say it wasn’t the case for ALL drivers that smoked, just a good majority of their study group…….

    • January 17, 2020 at 12:55 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 7

      Well, I have been drinking booze since I was 20 and I have never had an accident while drunk. So there!

      (Dude: that kind of logic is what the movie Spicoli might say. It is as statistically pointless as what I just said. You might want to refrain from repeating it.)

  • January 17, 2020 at 12:42 pm
    sak74 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 7
    Thumb down 2

    It would be interesting to see a study done of heavy pot smokers in simulated driving scenarios while sober compared to heavy drinks while sober. I wonder if they would find the same in those that drink heavily as those that smoke pot heavily.

    If they do more research and find significant correlation between sober driving ability of pot smokers vs. non-smokers, can auto insurers then ask the question “do you regularily smoke pot” on an application and adjust rates accordingly based on the increased likelyhood for accidents?

    I thought it was an interesting article and makes me wonder how further research could impact insurance when it comes to pot smokers in states where legal.

    • January 17, 2020 at 12:56 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 8
      Thumb down 5

      A very sensible comment. The trend certainly is not looking good for Pot Fans. The more research being done, the more harmful THC seems to be.

      • January 17, 2020 at 1:20 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 10

        I like how you agreed that Sak’s post was very sensible, and then doubled down on your nonsensical “THC is harmful!” propaganda. You really like making bald-faced lie statements, don’t you Craig?

        • January 17, 2020 at 2:13 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 3

          You clearly didn’t read the article, maybe you should actually read it Craig. Here are some handy quotes, since you don’t appear able to do so.

          Research has consistently shown that early substance use, including the use of cannabis, is associated with poorer cognitive performance.”

          You see how it’s linked to early substance abuse, not just marijuana?

          Also: there may be an impact on driving, but certainly not everyone demonstrates impairment simply as a function of exposure to cannabis

          Where exactly does it say THC is harmful, specifically? That’s what I thought.

        • January 17, 2020 at 2:50 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 3

          “poorer cognitive performance”

          Unrelated to age at which started:

          “Other findings of the study:

          Cannabis users had more accidents, drove at higher speeds, and drove through more red lights than non-users.”

          Sounds pretty harmful to most people. But not you. It’s all good!

        • January 17, 2020 at 3:43 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 2

          QUOTE THE ARTICLE CORRECTLY CRAIG!

          You wrote “Cannabis users had more accidents, drove at higher speeds, and drove through more red lights than non-users.”

          You ended the sentence there, but THAT WAS NOT THE END OF THE SENTENCE IN THE ARTICLE.

          It ended with “…the researchers linked earlier onset of marijuana use (under age 16) to worse performance.”

          So you’re selectively quoting the article, leaving out the age piece, then trying to argue it’s “unrelated to age.”

          Just because you ignore part of the sentence does not prove you’re right. It simply proves you’re cherry picking and being dishonest.

          IF YOU’RE GOING TO CITE SOMETHING, CITE IT CORRECTLY!!

        • January 17, 2020 at 3:45 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 3

          Hey Craig, I can take parts of your posts out too to form what I want!

          Craig Cornell says:
          LIKE OR DISLIKE:
          Thumb up 1Thumb down 1
          i e a t g e e s e”

          Great what a bizarre position you’ve taken!

          That’s exactly what you did. You took out the bit about early substance abuse and then claimed it was unrelated to age. That’s nonsense arguing, Craig. Sounds like maybe you should stop trying to twist everything into your narrative, your bias affects your ability to critically think about this subject.
          Cannabis users had more accidents, drove at higher speeds, and drove through more red lights than non-users.”

          Sounds pretty harmful to most people. But not you. It’s all good!

        • January 17, 2020 at 5:54 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 3

          the words “in addition” mean there are two separate things. From the opening of the article (speaking of not reading);

          ” . . .in addition to chronic, heavy, recreational cannabis use being associated with poorer driving performance in non-intoxicated individuals compared to non-users, the researchers linked earlier onset of marijuana use (under age 16) to worse performance.”

    • January 17, 2020 at 1:39 pm
      sak74 says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 6
      Thumb down 3

      My comment/question wasn’t meant to take one side over the other simply asking a question as I am unaware of a study like that being done. On the flip side it would be interesting to see the same study done with heavy drinkers and sober driver vs. healthy non-drinkers. I would imagine heavy/long term use of any intoxicant would have some type of effect on the majority of those using said substance.

      As more research is done into these scenarios it will be interesting to see how the insurance industry responds. If it can be determined that heavy/long term use of substances (legal intoxicants for argument sake) causes significant changes in peoples driving habits/patterns can the industry then question people on usage and then rate/charge accordingly.

      • January 17, 2020 at 1:59 pm
        craig cornell says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 8
        Thumb down 4

        Not sure what that would prove and I am sure someone has studied it at this point. Would that make it okay for people to die in accidents from THC consumers who weren’t high when they caused the accident?

        • January 17, 2020 at 2:28 pm
          Rosenblatt says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 9

          You don’t know what that would prove? Sak laid it out pretty clearly….

          (1) I would imagine heavy/long term use of any intoxicant would have some type of effect on the majority of those using said substance.

          which was directed back to insurance as

          (2) …can the industry then question people on usage and then rate/charge accordingly.

          As for your comment about people dying in accidents – nobody here, at any time, in any way shape or form, no matter how you try to spin it, is saying it’s okay for people to die.

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:39 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 9
            Thumb down 4

            Did you know people on some medications can become drowsy and cause car accidents?

            Relevance to this article? None. Relevance of well-known-for- decades dangers of drunk driving to this NEW information on the dangers of THC? None.

            The reason you and others bring up drunk driving? To distract from the NEW bad news on THC. No Other Reason.

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:49 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 7

            Deflect much? You asked what Sak’s analysis would prove, and I answered it with what he previously said. You brought up some nonsense wondering if it’s “okay for people to die in accidents” and I replied to it.

            Since you’re now hung up on ‘decades of dangers of drunk driving’, it seems you’re missing Sak’s point, so let me repost it here for you…

            “On the flip side it would be interesting to see the same study done with heavy drinkers and sober driver vs. healthy non-drinkers.”

            Note how he’s not asking for a study of drunk drivers and seeing how dangerous they are?

            He’s asking for a study of sober drivers who are heavy drinkers (but are not actually drunk behind the wheel for this study) to compare them to sober drivers who don’t drink.

            HE DID NOT BRING UP DRUNK DRIVERS like your straw man argument claims.

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:53 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 10

            How is that “NEW information on the dangers of THC” that it might make you sleepy? Are you trying to imply that it’s new information that you shouldn’t drive on THC? You’re not actually making a point, you’re just using more words to obfuscate the truth so you can yell THC IS DANGEROUS GUYS it’s no more dangerous than any other substance, you just have a personal vendetta and it’s old, Craig. Spout your lies elsewhere, we’ve already proven you wrong on marijuana time and time again.

          • January 17, 2020 at 2:54 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 10
            Thumb down 4

            “Sleepy”. That’s why they speed more. Sleepy.

          • January 17, 2020 at 3:10 pm
            Sleepy says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 7

            i was so sleepy the other day while driving i missed the speed limit changed from 40 to 25. yes you can speed while being sleepy

        • January 21, 2020 at 12:55 pm
          sak74 says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 6
          Thumb down 3

          It is never ok for someone to die, whether intoxication is a factor or not. I REALLY try hard to stay out of the political back and forth on topics because they get so far out of the insurance realm it is amazing…….I had an honest question BASED on the article that pertains to the insurance industry.

          Craig, you are correct that some medications can interfere with a person’s abilities. I have been on some in the past myself. MOST people on such types of medications (please note I said MOST not ALL) are on them for brief time periods, that does not indicate long term use as I was discussing with alcohol and THC (or any other substance that can cause intoxication). As far as your claims my question(s) / comment(s) have no relevance to the article at hand is laughable…..both you and a few others have gone back and forth at length over things NOT PERTAINING TO THIS ARTICLE AT ALL in this comment section. Driving under the influence of ANY substance is wrong and should be considered illegal and those doing so should have to face consequences no matter if the intoxicant is legal, illegal, prescribed, etc. Make a dumb choice and face the consequences…….my musings were simply that wondering if the same study had been done on long term drinkers when they are SOBER. I don’t like my words or meanings being twisted by those on this board who want to purposely start arguments.

          Oh and Rosenblatt I would be a She not a He :-) lol

          • January 21, 2020 at 1:06 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 4

            Roger that, Sak. Sorry about using the wrong pronoun and thanks for correcting me. I’ll try to remember that next time I reply to you (or reference one of your comments)!

          • January 21, 2020 at 1:31 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 8
            Thumb down 4

            Two wrongs don’t make a right. The fact others make irrelevant points doesn’t make it okay for you to do so to.

            The spreading consumption of THC will result in more addicts. Period. The vast majority will NOT be trading alcoholism for pot addiction.

            I know the Administrator of one of the largest rehabilitation facilities in California. She said that about 30% of the people coming to her have THC as their only problem.

          • January 21, 2020 at 1:45 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 6

            “The fact others make irrelevant points doesn’t make it okay for you to do so to.”

            100% agree with you Craig, but I don’t understand why you’re getting on Sak’s case for this … it was painfully clear her question was on-topic and completely related to insurance.

            Is there a reason you’d rather harp on irrelevant comments (addicts! rehab!) than respond to her on-topic insurance-based question?

          • January 21, 2020 at 1:51 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 3

            And my comment about people impaired by prescription medications was on-point as well, right RB, because you know . . . insurance!

          • January 21, 2020 at 2:13 pm
            sak74 says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 3

            Rosenblatt….no worries…..it was more or less a little funny on my end, filling out insurance forms and having to declare what I am over and over……lol

            Craig, how were my comments and questions irrelevant. They were in direct relation to the article and study (that was published in the Drug & Alcohol Dependence Journal) that was referenced. I was not arguing with any points in the study, nor was I agreeing with any (not my area of expertise and I did not read the actual full study). I was simply taking their findings and wondering if the same correlation has been or could be made with heavy users of alcohol in the same manner as was done with THC. I would say that absolutely pertains to this article. Also I think my actually trying to tie the article to an actual insurance topic is still on point. I never once said people would trade one substance for another. I never made any correlation about addiction. My original postings never even mentioned actual drunk or drugged driving. My whole point was how long term, heavy use of either THC and/or alcohol can impact someone’s ability even if they are legally sober. Then I pondered how that could potentially impact auto insurance and questions carriers can ask in order to rate for any exposures there may be. Also I DID reference your point on prescription medications and they affect they can have on people, however that really doesn’t pertain to this article because the article is about heavy users of THC that were tested while sober NOT under the influence. Your example would pertain to people currently under the influence of their prescribed medication after taking it which would put them in an intoxicated/altered state and NOT sober.

          • January 21, 2020 at 4:48 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 3

            You said I mentioned things not pertaining to this article. Man up and tell me what I mentioned that was less relevant than wondering about alcohol in an article about pot.

          • January 21, 2020 at 4:50 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 7

            ONce again, these calls to “man up” and yet you have NEVER answered any such call. You’ve been caught lying or spreading false information multiple times and each time you’ve doubled down on those lies, never once admitting to being wrong about a single thing, Craig. It is laughable for you to tell anyone else to “man up” when you are such a child yourself.

          • January 21, 2020 at 5:26 pm
            sak74 says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 5
            Thumb down 5

            Well Craig, how about I “woman up” as I am of the female gender…..what did you talk about that was irrelevant…..in my brief scan of the 120+ comments……here is my list…..

            01. responding to a comment about unprotected sex
            02. referring to former articles on IJ in reference to pot/THC that
            have NOTHING to do with this study or the fact they are talking
            about SOBER drivers
            03. discussing vaping
            04. bringing up pot causing psychosis and schizophrenia
            05. addictivness of pot/THC
            06. choosing addition (pot vs. alcohol) and how chemicals are
            different and affect people differently

            Now my comments specifically referred to the study findings of heavy THC users driving while SOBER and wondering if results would be comparable to heavy users of alcohol users while driving SOBER and how this could potentially impact auto rating factors/questions by insurance carriers…….and guess what the article was about the impact of heavy THC use on SOBER drivers and how it affects their driving……..yeah I am WAY off topic…….

            I have called out Jon a lot on his comments and he asks why I don’t call out those on the differing side of his argument…..well Jon, here goes…..Craig, you are a bully and just argue to argue. Guess what there are several times you have made certain and specific points and I completely agree with them, however the way you choose to deliver those points and how you talk to people is horrible. Yes others talk to you the same you. Be an adult and the bigger person and choose to not sink to that level……make your point in a respectful manner and if there are those that disagree then acknowledge and move on…..when folks get nasty ignore and move on……I am fed up with the majority of these boards getting taken over by a few commentors and the topic gets totally off base and just plain nasty. The few times I have chosen to comment and stick to the actual article and topic of insurance it still gets sidetracked by the few of you. I truly don’t know why I even bother……

          • January 21, 2020 at 6:22 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 5

            Yikes! You listed my responses to people addressing ME on subjects that weren’t relevant . . . and tried to say I was the one bringing in irrelevant issues.

            (Okay, sorry about the “Man up”. I know how you folks like to be offended at anything and my guess proved correct. But please don’t call me a bully. I am so offended!)

  • January 21, 2020 at 11:59 am
    JA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 4

    Are you bleeping kidding me! All of the test subjects had not consumed any marijuana in over 12-hours, of course they would be driving faster and less relaxed. For the heavy long term consumer, in particular for medicinal purposes going 12-hours without it is worse than being at a properly medicated dosage level.
    At the right level the heavy user could possibly prove to be a safer driver than most! More relaxed and focused on details of the road. I speak from experience…will admit to being a bit jaded as I have been investigating auto accidents for over 25-years but still believe that when at the right level of “intoxication” I am one of the safest drivers on the road.
    Go stand on any freeway overpass and count the number of drivers you spot partaking…I suspect that the number of drivers is way up that are driving after use or while using marijuana. So if so many more drivers are driving “high” then why are accident numbers not going through the roof! I would prefer to have a stoner tailgate me than a distracted soccer mom juggling errands or some kid texting!

    • January 21, 2020 at 1:37 pm
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 6
      Thumb down 4

      And there you have it. A personal anecdote to offset Harvard.

      Dude. The statistics coming in from states that legalized recre-pot are ALL showing a spike in traffic deaths while adjacent states that did not legalize pot for fun are seeing drops in traffic deaths.

      Cops in states that legalized are reporting much higher numbers of suspected THC-high drivers than before. You think this is a surprise, since adult consumption numbers are way up in those states? You truly think THC consumption makes people BETTER drivers?

      Do yourself a favor. Don’t ever say that again.

      • January 21, 2020 at 3:56 pm
        Jon says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 8

        Cops trying to spread anger about THC? Shock. They directly benefited from the system that put people in prison for smoking marijuana. You’re going to have to excuse me if I call BS on any reporting from the police, what about a police oversight committee? That I’d trust.

        You TRULY think marijuana creates addiction? Do yourself a favor: Educate yourself before you spread more ignorance.

        • January 22, 2020 at 6:26 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 1

          Probably the same reason I’m not surprised you ghost an article as soon as your hypocrisies are pointed out on one of these articles. You’re somewhat observant! Cowardly and hypocritical, but observant! Though you seem mighty selective in what you observe, since you mostly keep your eyes shut and fingers in your ears regarding anyone who agrees with you politically. Like how you tried to chide me about an insulting comment in an article earlier 20 minutes after ignoring Polar doing the same thing. Remember?

        • January 22, 2020 at 6:54 pm
          Jon says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 0

          Here’s the post where you were clearly displaying a hypocritical bias, just FYI since you seem to have forgotten that you posted there!

          https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2020/01/22/555479.htm/?comments

      • January 29, 2020 at 10:52 am
        Common Sense says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 1

        Good one Craig. It is well known that Recre-pot causes a myriad of problems. This is only one of them. Jon can scromit all he wants and he won’t make any sense.

  • January 22, 2020 at 8:14 am
    David says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 8

    This is utter BS. I have been a heavy pot user for over 25 years. I have been in 1 accident during that time, and the other driver was cited for it.

    • January 22, 2020 at 10:28 am
      PolarBeaRepeal says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 3

      Of course, aberrations from the norm are possible…. and expected in low volumes.

      • January 22, 2020 at 10:42 am
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 5

        Dude, there were only 44 participants in the study … is that not considered “low volume” too Polar?

    • January 22, 2020 at 2:00 pm
      JaxAgent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 2

      Hey David, man……..that’s cool that the other driver was cited man. Were they turned on too when this happened……?
      Dude, man……………………I forgot what I was going to say man.

      You gonna eat the rest of that ?



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*