Doing their best for your best interests

[Anonymous]

in this analogy, L.S.D is like watching reality television, or the discovery channel, or surfing the net.

Apparently you've never had real acid.

 :rofl:

[Antigen]

Are you opposed to a drug free America?

C'mon, tell me you don't think it's healthy for people to take drugs?  :-?

C'mon, tell me you actually believe DFAF has ever done anything to actually reduce drug use or abuse. I know of a few thousand people who's drug habits were made problematic or who's drug problems were exacerbated by the activities of DFAF.

[Anonymous]

Frankly I don't care for pot

 :cry:

[Antigen]

...
Watching the media cover marijuana is fascinating, offering deep insight into conventional wisdom, bias and failure to properly place science in context. The coverage of a new study claiming that marijuana increases the risk of later psychotic illnesses like schizophrenia by 40% displays many of these flaws.

What are the key questions reporters writing about such a study needs to ask? First, can the research prove causality? Most of the reporting here, to its credit, establishes at some point that it cannot, though you have to read pretty far down in some of it to understand this.

Second -- and this is where virtually all of the coverage falls flat -- if marijuana produces what seems like such a large jump in risk for schizophrenia, have schizophrenia rates increased in line with marijuana use rates? A quick search of Medline shows that this is not the case -- in fact, as I noted here earlier, some experts think they may actually have fallen. Around the world, roughly 1% of the population has schizophrenia (and another 2% or so have other psychotic disorders), and this proportion doesn't seem to change much. It is not correlated with population use rates of marijuana.

...

Complete article w/ 177 comments

[TheWho]

...
Watching the media cover marijuana is fascinating, offering deep insight into conventional wisdom, bias and failure to properly place science in context. The coverage of a new study claiming that marijuana increases the risk of later psychotic illnesses like schizophrenia by 40% displays many of these flaws.

What are the key questions reporters writing about such a study needs to ask? First, can the research prove causality? Most of the reporting here, to its credit, establishes at some point that it cannot, though you have to read pretty far down in some of it to understand this.

Second -- and this is where virtually all of the coverage falls flat -- if marijuana produces what seems like such a large jump in risk for schizophrenia, have schizophrenia rates increased in line with marijuana use rates? A quick search of Medline shows that this is not the case -- in fact, as I noted here earlier, some experts think they may actually have fallen. Around the world, roughly 1% of the population has schizophrenia (and another 2% or so have other psychotic disorders), and this proportion doesn't seem to change much. It is not correlated with population use rates of marijuana.

...

Complete article w/ 177 comments

great closing line:

"Perhaps covering the marijuana beat makes you crazy."

[Anonymous]

i'm confused, what happened to thewho? i thought he was a right-winger.....does is he truly see able to see beyond the propaganda, or is he just pretending so he doesnt make a fuss? or is he pretending to gain credibility with us?

i hope he is for real...thewho has seen the light!

[psy]

i'm confused, what happened to thewho? i thought he was a right-winger.....does is he truly see able to see beyond the propaganda, or is he just pretending so he doesnt make a fuss? or is he pretending to gain credibility with us?

i hope he is for real...thewho has seen the light!

Um.  He sees the light but this particular species  of vampire (*bow's politely to TheWho*) doesn't seem to mind sunlight.  His daugher he sent to program is now astranged.  He's basically the program parents from hell.

It is also my opinion that his job is what's commonly referred to as "bullshit marketing".  It is also my opinion that he has "customers" in the industry.  He's in damage control.

Money probably doesn't make it easy.  Money takes away power over self.  Whether the Who is sincerely just a mindlessly brainwashed program parent from hell, or simply a greedy bastard who doesn't care about kids is up to debate; since his stories about helping out orphanages in Romania seemed to be true and detailed, i have to conclude the guy does have a heart...  somewhere, but as I said. Money:

Having regular customers means building up a dependency on that income.  Given the amount of time TheWho spends on Fornits that leads me to the conclusion that TheWho is very much dependent on certain members of this industry.  When that dependency conflicts with personal ethics, what wins?  What's more important?

People change over time.  Some grow wiser, some decide to compromise.  The taste of power corrupts.  Basic solution: make sure your work doesn't conflict with your personal ethics, or you'll wind up a soulless slave to greed.

[Anonymous]

People change over time.  Some grow wiser, some decide to compromise.  The taste of power corrupts.  Basic solution: make sure your work doesn't conflict with your personal ethics, or you'll wind up a soulless slave to greed.

thats one of the key principles i live my life by. i've seen too many good people become ruthless workaholic "bussinessmen" (more like conquistadors), too many great bands make shit music in the name of money, and too many good counselors get tied up in the wrong system/ideology. i've seen it happen over, and over, and over. the only thing that comes close to the decent into greed is the downward spiral of cocaine oblivion.....and i've vowed to never let that happen to me. I dont think many people who ever attened a program would ever let that happen to themselves - one of the few benifits of a benifitless system.

[Anonymous]

I dont think many people who ever attened a program would ever let that happen to themselves

Well, it happens. There was a girl who attended some Aspen program, ASR I think it was, that spent six months in there and immediately started using cocaine as soon as she got out.