If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sun Sentinel)   Synthetic marijuana and bath salts are still easily obtained despite a police crackdown, according to a reporter who did some field research   (sun-sentinel.com) divider line 106
    More: Florida, field research, synthetic marijuana, poison control center, Nova Southeastern University, memory losses, Controlled Substances Act, Pembroke Pines, South Florida  
•       •       •

5109 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Jan 2013 at 12:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



106 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-27 12:53:43 PM  

TsukasaK: orbister: Never underestimate the denial and self-delusion of those who use drugs.

Never underestimate the self-righteous furor of those who not only don't use drugs, but make a huge point to let everyone else know they don't use drugs.


You'll have read the bit where I said I don't care what other people do as long as it doesn't adversely affect me.

orbister: See, for example the outrage which erupts here if ever scientific research suggests that marijuana could have any detrimental effects ("Typical shills in the pay of big pharma, tobacco companies and the fascist pigs in BATF, man")

Trying to render the legitimate problem of biased research by those who want something to stay illegal, illegitimate by making fun of it, is kind of a dick move.


Thank you for illustrating my point. All we need now is for someone to come along with some paranoia about how big financial interests are suppressing pot and ... wait, wait, we have incoming.

The only reason that cannabis isn't legal for everyone right now is that there are some powerful monied interests that want it to stay that way.

I thank you. Point proved, I think.
 
2013-01-27 12:54:27 PM  

born_yesterday: Twunt? That's a great way to make a point.


I wasn't trying to make a point, sport. I was outright mocking you for being so oversensitive as to what other people choose to do with their lives.

born_yesterday: But seeing as how you are utterly ignorant of that fact, and feel fine throwing around insults, I'll just say get bent, dickhead.


Tap 4, kicked:

i79.photobucket.com
 
2013-01-27 12:55:57 PM  

orbister: I thank you. Point proved, I think.


Well that's great and all, but you didn't really address my point.

Are you saying that we don't have legalized pot because of some other reason?

Please explain.
 
2013-01-27 12:56:01 PM  

orbister: Mazzic518: I used a ton of ecstacy in my 20's and im not much worse for wear.

That's nice. Leah Betts, on the other hand, died after taking her first ever ecstasy tablet.

Anecdotes, eh?


FTFL: "After her death, the media focused on the putative fact that it was the first time she had taken the drug.[13] It arose later - though it was much less publicised - that she had taken the drug at least three times previously.[6]"

And as someone already pointed out, it was the water that killed her.
 
2013-01-27 12:56:05 PM  

Cast: That applies equally well to cheeseburgers, alcohol, and oxygen. It is a logical fallacy to call those things "safe" as well.


It's not a logical fallacy; it's just meaningless unless you define "safe", just as saying that ecstasy is fairly safe for most people used sparingly is meaningless unless you define "fairly", "most" and "sparingly".
 
2013-01-27 12:57:10 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: orbister: At parties which don't depend on drug use to give the illusion of a good time, I'm a hoot. Drunks and stoners are incredibly boring if one is neither drunk nor stoned.

How is the view from your tower?


A damn sight more enjoyable than the one from the gutter, thanks.
 
2013-01-27 12:58:05 PM  

Mazzic518: @orbisterA subsequent inquest determined that her death was actually not directly due to MDMA consumption, but rather the result of the large quantity of water she had consumedDerp


Indeed. And remind us, will you, why she had drunk so much.
 
2013-01-27 12:58:19 PM  

TsukasaK: orbister: That's a whole bundle of equivocation there

Most any chemical has the ability to react in different ways based, upon other things, dosage, biological makeup, age, mental state...

The effects of MDMA are well documented at this point though.

So yes. Fairly safe (a bit more care is required regarding hydration and exertion, there's also the problem of the drug being adulterated by unscrupulous dealers)
for most people (barring those who would be allergic, or otherwise have a bad trip - not every chemical is for everyone. As fun as cannabis is, there are some people who legitimately don't like it!)
used sparingly (MDMA's primary function is to dump all of your feel-good neurochemicals at once. Doing this often isn't good for your health, and ruins the effect of the drug anyways.)


It's almost like, instead of immediately trying to dismiss and belittle me, you read and understood the sentence I wrote!
 
2013-01-27 12:58:41 PM  
The only time I've ever been truly scared that I've gone too far on drugs was when I did MXE,MXE is a analogue of ketamine, and synthetic pot together. Holy shiat everything shrank,got bigger and my whole body was buzzing. It was uncomfortable and overwhelming. I mean I've felt like that on DXM but holy shiat it hit soooo fast. That was also the last time I did MXE and synthetic pot. Hell the only reason I had the synthetic crap was cause a friend of mine smoked a whole bag of the crap in one go,freaked the fark out on it and gave the rest to me.

Cuthbert Allgood: this thread makes me want to shroom in the mojave...


Hehe I'm soooo excited for next month cause while I won't be in the Mojave I will be eating mushrooms though I'm kinda scared of having a full on freak out.
 
2013-01-27 01:00:03 PM  

A Terrible Human: The only time I've ever been truly scared that I've gone too far on drugs was when I did MXE,MXE is a analogue of ketamine, and synthetic pot together. Holy shiat everything shrank,got bigger and my whole body was buzzing. It was uncomfortable and overwhelming. I mean I've felt like that on DXM but holy shiat it hit soooo fast. That was also the last time I did MXE and synthetic pot. Hell the only reason I had the synthetic crap was cause a friend of mine smoked a whole bag of the crap in one go,freaked the fark out on it and gave the rest to me.

Cuthbert Allgood: this thread makes me want to shroom in the mojave...

Hehe I'm soooo excited for next month cause while I won't be in the Mojave I will be eating mushrooms though I'm kinda scared of having a full on freak out.


you smoke poop?
 
2013-01-27 01:00:29 PM  

orbister: Communist_Manifesto: orbister: At parties which don't depend on drug use to give the illusion of a good time, I'm a hoot. Drunks and stoners are incredibly boring if one is neither drunk nor stoned.

How is the view from your tower?

A damn sight more enjoyable than the one from the gutter, thanks.


Are you implying my life is in the gutter because I use substances to alter my state of consciousness?
 
2013-01-27 01:01:13 PM  

orbister: Indeed. And remind us, will you, why she had drunk so much.


You'd make an excellent state prosecutor.

A common problem with MDMA is that people are advised to hydrate themselves ahead of time (by their friends, dealers, etc), and then they take that advice way too far. Obviously this is a bigger issue with newbies.

You might say that water is fairly safe for most people when used sparingly.

Speaking of which:

www.rave.ca

Is this defined enough for you?
 
2013-01-27 01:01:44 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: orbister: Communist_Manifesto: orbister: At parties which don't depend on drug use to give the illusion of a good time, I'm a hoot. Drunks and stoners are incredibly boring if one is neither drunk nor stoned.

How is the view from your tower?

A damn sight more enjoyable than the one from the gutter, thanks.

Are you implying my life is in the gutter because I use substances to alter my state of consciousness?


correct
 
2013-01-27 01:03:00 PM  

orbister: Mazzic518: I used a ton of ecstacy in my 20's and im not much worse for wear.

That's nice. Leah Betts, on the other hand, died after taking her first ever ecstasy tablet.

Anecdotes, eh?


jesus dude. from the very article you linked . "A subsequent inquest determined that her death was actually not directly due to MDMA consumption, but rather the result of the large quantity of water she had consumed"

This debate about whats safe or unsafe is meaningless. Anything can be used the wrong way and lead to negative consequences. The entire point of all of this is whether its dangerous enough to warrant the government banning it. Since we have regulated alcohol to a generally socially acceptable point, the argument is that drugs like, marijuana, ecstasy, mushrooms, lsd, can be safely regulated to Adults as well.
 
2013-01-27 01:03:06 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: It's almost like, instead of immediately trying to dismiss and belittle me, you read and understood the sentence I wrote!


Uhh.. either you quoted the wrong person here, or you signed into the wrong alt.
 
2013-01-27 01:03:30 PM  

Jon iz teh kewl: Communist_Manifesto: orbister: Communist_Manifesto: orbister: At parties which don't depend on drug use to give the illusion of a good time, I'm a hoot. Drunks and stoners are incredibly boring if one is neither drunk nor stoned.

How is the view from your tower?

A damn sight more enjoyable than the one from the gutter, thanks.

Are you implying my life is in the gutter because I use substances to alter my state of consciousness?

correct


Ever feel really good after eating a big meal?
 
2013-01-27 01:04:00 PM  

TsukasaK: So yes. Fairly safe (a bit more care is required regarding hydration and exertion, there's also the problem of the drug being adulterated by unscrupulous dealers)
for most people (barring those who would be allergic, or otherwise have a bad trip - not every chemical is for everyone. As fun as cannabis is, there are some people who legitimately don't like it!)
used sparingly (MDMA's primary function is to dump all of your feel-good neurochemicals at once. Doing this often isn't good for your health, and ruins the effect of the drug anyways.)


Can you put figures on those? Are we talking 75% of ecstasy tablets safe for 75% of the population if used once a month, or 99% of tablets safe for 99% of the population if used daily?

There was some interesting research work done at a major UK hospital a few years ago to find out what staff meant by terms like "fairly safe" or "quite likely". One result was that "this is quite likely to cause side effects" could, depending on which doctor you were talking to, mean anything between "5% of the time" and "95% of the time".
 
2013-01-27 01:04:13 PM  

Jon iz teh kewl: you smoke poop?


Only if I'm reenacting the first Cheech and Chong movie. I call synthetic pot crap because well that's what I think of it. It's garbage compared to real pot. Oh also nice to see you in another drug thread. :D
 
2013-01-27 01:05:20 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: Are you implying my life is in the gutter because I use substances to alter my state of consciousness?


From my tower it is hard to distinguish between "sprawled on the pavement" and "lying in the gutter".
 
2013-01-27 01:05:53 PM  

TsukasaK: Communist_Manifesto: It's almost like, instead of immediately trying to dismiss and belittle me, you read and understood the sentence I wrote!

Uhh.. either you quoted the wrong person here, or you signed into the wrong alt.


No I meant to quote you because you replied to orbisters idiocy about me saying that for most people ecstasy was fairly safe.
 
2013-01-27 01:06:35 PM  
Most of our most celebrated musicians, poets, novelists, and celebrities have been addicted to one or more illicit substances.

You want to be great? Do drugs.

You wanna be a good little worker drone who dies in obscurity? Go to bed early and drink your Ovaltine.

You live until you die. Its the life you lead that matters.
 
2013-01-27 01:07:52 PM  

TsukasaK: Is this defined enough for you?


A graph with unexplained and possibly arbitrary scales? No, not very well defined. But by golly it's going to upset the stoners when they see that cannabis appears on the "dependence" scale.
 
2013-01-27 01:09:05 PM  

orbister: Communist_Manifesto: Are you implying my life is in the gutter because I use substances to alter my state of consciousness?

From my tower it is hard to distinguish between "sprawled on the pavement" and "lying in the gutter".


So in your view it is 100% black and white. People choosing to use a mind altering substance are automatically throwing their lives away and will end up in the gutter? You're either trolling or you had someone very close to you wrong you greatly for drugs. If it's the latter I'm sorry that happened but you shouldn't let it color your perceptions of such a large group of people.
 
2013-01-27 01:10:43 PM  

sift: jesus dude. from the very article you linked . "A subsequent inquest determined that her death was actually not directly due to MDMA consumption, but rather the result of the large quantity of water she had consumed"


Yes, but she took the water because she had taken ecstasy. People have died of heat stroke as a result of taking ecstasy, too. All I was doing was pointing out that saying "I've taken ecstasy for years and nothing nasty has happened to me yet" is on a par with saying "I've smoked forty (tobacco cigarettes) a day for twenty years and I haven't had lung cancer yet."
 
2013-01-27 01:11:27 PM  

orbister: A graph with unexplained and possibly arbitrary scales? No, not very well defined. But by golly it's going to upset the stoners when they see that cannabis appears on the "dependence" scale.


Me thinks you don't understand the word "scale"
 
2013-01-27 01:11:50 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: So in your view it is 100% black and white. People choosing to use a mind altering substance are automatically throwing their lives away and will end up in the gutter?


How did you get that from my statement that I don't find parties full of drunks and/or stoners much fun? They probably don't find me much fun, either.
 
2013-01-27 01:12:54 PM  

orbister: Can you put figures on those?


0% of MDMA tablets are safe for any part of the population if used daily. You obviously didn't even read my post.

Most reports I've read from people who actually use it suggest that you need a cooling off period of about a month or greater before attempting to use it again. Since you're using a metric farkton of your neurochemical reserves when you take MDMA, you need to allow time for them to replenish.

MDMA is also infamous for having a not-fun hangover the next day, for exactly the same reason.

In any case, you're attempting to put numbers where they simply don't exist yet.

If you go to a rave and find someone selling MDMA, you can do a couple of simple tests to find out if it's adulterated or not (reports I've read seem to indicate this is the cause of most negative experiences) - there's even a group out there called DanceSafe that will test your tabs on the spot and are actually set up at some larger events.

Once you've ascertained it's reasonably pure, you've removed a great deal of the risk from taking MDMA. Any risk that remains boils down to allergic reactions (which are quite rare, and another reason to start at a /small/ dose), your set and setting (your mindset and where you plan on tripping), the dose you take (any psychoactive will be unpleasant past a certain point, some even dangerous, and MDMA is one of them), and your actions while under the influence (don't down a whole case of bottled water or have sex with some random because you think it'll feel good).
 
2013-01-27 01:13:53 PM  

orbister: TsukasaK: Is this defined enough for you?

A graph with unexplained and possibly arbitrary scales? No, not very well defined. But by golly it's going to upset the stoners when they see that cannabis appears on the "dependence" scale.


Do you know the difference between dependence and addiction? Because all of the stoners I know are well aware of the fact that pot can be habitualizing and can lead to dependence.
 
2013-01-27 01:16:05 PM  

Cuthbert Allgood: Me thinks you don't understand the word "scale"


Methinks you don't understand the word "arbitrary". What is putting cannabis at "dependence 1.5, harm 1.0" intended to mean? How precisely has "dependence" been measured?
 
2013-01-27 01:16:07 PM  

orbister: sift: jesus dude. from the very article you linked . "A subsequent inquest determined that her death was actually not directly due to MDMA consumption, but rather the result of the large quantity of water she had consumed"

Yes, but she took the water because she had taken ecstasy. People have died of heat stroke as a result of taking ecstasy, too. All I was doing was pointing out that saying "I've taken ecstasy for years and nothing nasty has happened to me yet" is on a par with saying "I've smoked forty (tobacco cigarettes) a day for twenty years and I haven't had lung cancer yet."


Okay so whats your point? No one is saying drugs are good for you. There are risk to taking the substances, sure, but not to the level where we should ban them.
 
2013-01-27 01:19:54 PM  
Sorry, but

orbister: Communist_Manifesto: So in your view it is 100% black and white. People choosing to use a mind altering substance are automatically throwing their lives away and will end up in the gutter?

How did you get that from my statement that I don't find parties full of drunks and/or stoners much fun? They probably don't find me much fun, either.


I have plenty of friends who don't use drugs and we both find one another very fun. You've made some fairly blanket statements about "drunks and/or stoners" about what they find fun and what their lives are like (you're the one who implied my life was in the gutter or I was sprawled out on the pavement). The reason I said that is because that's how I view you. At no point did you leave room for nuance in your view, you seemed very all or nothing. Now I know that you purport to not care what people do as long as it doesn't affect you, but it seems like no matter what I said to you or who I was you wouldn't get along with me because I smoke pot and that's just seems like a lame way to go through life. I get that it's easier to just use the heuristic shortcut of drug use=bad but it's a pretty shortsighted view.
 
2013-01-27 01:20:26 PM  

TsukasaK: orbister: Indeed. And remind us, will you, why she had drunk so much.

You'd make an excellent state prosecutor.

A common problem with MDMA is that people are advised to hydrate themselves ahead of time (by their friends, dealers, etc), and then they take that advice way too far. Obviously this is a bigger issue with newbies.

You might say that water is fairly safe for most people when used sparingly.

Speaking of which:

[www.rave.ca image 564x600]

Is this defined enough for you?


All that proves is that charts can be completely untrue. Heroin more damaging than amphetamines? LSD more harmful than ecstasy? Barbituates twice as harmful as "solvents?" This kind of misinformation makes kids doubt real information.
 
2013-01-27 01:20:40 PM  

orbister: But by golly it's going to upset the stoners when they see that cannabis appears on the "dependence" scale.


Cannabis dependency is psychological, not chemical. It's psychological in that it's something you find enjoyable and want to do again.

Chemical dependence is another issue, like what you would run into with alcoholics or opiate abusers. Alcohol starts out psychologically dependent if you enjoy being drunk, because hey, it's damn fun, but then as you drink more and more, your brain chemistry adapts and you start becoming not quite right unless you are under the influence.

This is where the "sparingly" bit of your oft-maligned trio comes in. Any chemical, overused, will at the very least be unpleasant, and kill you at worst. Up to and including water.

The problem is, this line will be different for every person, and usually finding out where it is involves nothing short of jumping in with both feet.

(This is why I'll never try meth or cocaine - I know I have an addictive personality and that it probably won't end well.)

Also, that graph was relative, hence the unlabeled axes. Relatively, alcohol and tobacco are more harmful, and carry more dependence issues, than cannabis. With cannabis, you still have a nonzero addiction potential (because of the psychological aspect), as well as nonzero harm because most users smoke it. Smoking /anything/ is a terribly unhealthy way to get a chemical into your system.
 
2013-01-27 01:20:45 PM  

TsukasaK:
0% of MDMA tablets are safe for any part of the population if used daily. You obviously didn't even read my post.


That would be the post in which you wrote "So yes. Fairly safe (a bit more care is required regarding hydration and exertion, there's also the problem of the drug being adulterated by unscrupulous dealers)
for most people (barring those who would be allergic, or otherwise have a bad trip - not every chemical is for everyone. As fun as cannabis is, there are some people who legitimately don't like it!)
used sparingly (MDMA's primary function is to dump all of your feel-good neurochemicals at once. Doing this often isn't good for your health, and ruins the effect of the drug anyways.)"

Because I can't see the word "daily", there. I can see the word "sparingly", and that might mean "only one a day" or "only twice a year" depending on who is talking.

Most reports I've read from people who actually use it suggest that you need a cooling off period of about a month or greater before attempting to use it again. Since you're using a metric farkton of your neurochemical reserves when you take MDMA, you need to allow time for them to replenish.

Thanks. That's what I was trying to find out.
 
2013-01-27 01:22:42 PM  

Billy Bathsalt: Heroin more damaging than amphetamines?


Amphetamines != Methamphetamines.

LSD more harmful than ecstasy?

Barely.

Again, relative differences.
 
2013-01-27 01:23:09 PM  

sift: Okay so whats your point? No one is saying drugs are good for you. There are risk to taking the substances, sure, but not to the level where we should ban them.


My point is that an anecdote saying "Ecstasy is safe. I've been taking it for years" is as meaningless as an anecdote saying "Ecstasy is dangerous. That poor girls took one tablet and died."

In general, drug users who are capable of posting to Fark will not be wholly representative of all drug users.
 
2013-01-27 01:24:48 PM  

orbister: Thanks. That's what I was trying to find out.


If you're really interested in finding out about this kind of information, I'd suggest checking out Erowid. They maintain a large database of various psychoactives and people's experiences on them, legal issues, scientific reports - it's a great resource.
 
2013-01-27 01:26:00 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: The reason I said that is because that's how I view you. At no point did you leave room for nuance in your view, you seemed very all or nothing.


Isn't the suggestion that I can't be much fun at parties (with the implication that only parties involving drug use are fun) a bit all or nothing?

Now I know that you purport to not care what people do as long as it doesn't affect you, but it seems like no matter what I said to you or who I was you wouldn't get along with me because I smoke pot and that's just seems like a lame way to go through life.

If you think it's a lame way to go through life, why do it?
 
2013-01-27 01:30:18 PM  

orbister: sift: Okay so whats your point? No one is saying drugs are good for you. There are risk to taking the substances, sure, but not to the level where we should ban them.

My point is that an anecdote saying "Ecstasy is safe. I've been taking it for years" is as meaningless as an anecdote saying "Ecstasy is dangerous. That poor girls took one tablet and died."

In general, drug users who are capable of posting to Fark will not be wholly representative of all drug users.


Damn it dude, taking drugs doesn't render you a moron who can't log in to fark. Stop saying stuff like that, it doesn't help your cause. Are there people who use drugs who are colossal fark ups? Undoubtedly, but there are also totally sober people who are colossal fark ups. Most of the drug users I know now are all very successful people. I also know that most of the ones I knew in high school were fark ups. I've seen both sides of the coin, drug use knows no intelligence level, income level, education level, sex, creed etc.
 
2013-01-27 01:32:14 PM  

orbister: sift: Okay so whats your point? No one is saying drugs are good for you. There are risk to taking the substances, sure, but not to the level where we should ban them.

My point is that an anecdote saying "Ecstasy is safe. I've been taking it for years" is as meaningless as an anecdote saying "Ecstasy is dangerous. That poor girls took one tablet and died."

In general, drug users who are capable of posting to Fark will not be wholly representative of all drug users.


Yes, but the vast majority of people who use these substances carry on normal lives and go to work/school/church whatever. Your acting like most drug users are junkies and drunks.
 
2013-01-27 01:34:38 PM  

orbister: Communist_Manifesto: The reason I said that is because that's how I view you. At no point did you leave room for nuance in your view, you seemed very all or nothing.

Isn't the suggestion that I can't be much fun at parties (with the implication that only parties involving drug use are fun) a bit all or nothing?

Now I know that you purport to not care what people do as long as it doesn't affect you, but it seems like no matter what I said to you or who I was you wouldn't get along with me because I smoke pot and that's just seems like a lame way to go through life.

If you think it's a lame way to go through life, why do it?


I've been to parties with no drugs before and had fun, I was more implying you simply couldn't have fun there because you would be too busy judging people. As for the second part, if you're just going to try and misconstrue my meaning to somehow try and belittle me once again we can stop having a conversation.
 
2013-01-27 01:39:20 PM  

BronyMedic: Cuthbert Allgood: BronyMedic: and that long term heavy ectasy use basically fries the chemoceptors in your brain linked with emotions.

Wait, what qulifies as "long term heavy ectasy use"?

//citation needed

Citation Given.

It's a safe drug with occasional recreational use. Using it every day, on the other hand, will burn out Serotonin Receptors.


That wasn't a citation.

And neither NIH nor NIDA have any credibility on this subject. It's hardly surprising that some "researchers" reach the conclusions their funding source want them to.
 
2013-01-27 01:49:15 PM  

AndreMA: BronyMedic: Cuthbert Allgood: BronyMedic: and that long term heavy ectasy use basically fries the chemoceptors in your brain linked with emotions.

Wait, what qulifies as "long term heavy ectasy use"?

//citation needed

Citation Given.

It's a safe drug with occasional recreational use. Using it every day, on the other hand, will burn out Serotonin Receptors.

That wasn't a citation.

And neither NIH nor NIDA have any credibility on this subject. It's hardly surprising that some "researchers" reach the conclusions their funding source want them to.

 
2013-01-27 01:50:22 PM  
I miss good paper.

/gooney birds
 
2013-01-27 02:07:40 PM  

AndreMA: That wasn't a citation.

And neither NIH nor NIDA have any credibility on this subject. It's hardly surprising that some "researchers" reach the conclusions their funding source want them to.


Well, if your blog says so.
 
2013-01-27 03:37:50 PM  

Communist_Manifesto: Jon iz teh kewl: Communist_Manifesto: orbister: Communist_Manifesto: orbister: At parties which don't depend on drug use to give the illusion of a good time, I'm a hoot. Drunks and stoners are incredibly boring if one is neither drunk nor stoned.

How is the view from your tower?

A damn sight more enjoyable than the one from the gutter, thanks.

Are you implying my life is in the gutter because I use substances to alter my state of consciousness?

correct

Ever feel really good after eating a big meal?


yeah i'm unemployed
cause i eat
 
2013-01-27 04:03:10 PM  
I wonder if anyone is still trying to sell fake pot in Washington or Colorado, I mean besides jr. high school students sellng oregono as a joke.

and though I think weed is disgusting, I still feel smug about living in Washington.
 
2013-01-27 04:14:44 PM  
img10.imageshack.us

^ What real, FDA approved synthetic marijuana may look like.
 
2013-01-27 04:33:34 PM  

MrEricSir: [img10.imageshack.us image 344x299]

^ What real, FDA approved synthetic marijuana may look like.


looks like hell. i prefer weed
 
2013-01-27 04:56:18 PM  

BronyMedic: AndreMA: That wasn't a citation.

And neither NIH nor NIDA have any credibility on this subject. It's hardly surprising that some "researchers" reach the conclusions their funding source want them to.

Well, if your blog says so.


Do you realize that you just called a 501(c)(3) non-profit with income of over $7,000,000 a year a blog? Or that you're implying that the observation that people tend to design studies to match the biases of prospective funding organizations is somehow a "conspiracy theory"?

/probably not
 
Displayed 50 of 106 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report