The more cannabis you smoke, the more likely you are to be a loser

[Khadgar]

International research has revealed that the more cannabis you smoke, the more likely you are to be lower paid and have relationship difficulties.

The study followed children from birth up to the age of 38 and found people who smoked cannabis four or more days a week over many years ended up in a lower social class than their parents.

It also found that regular and persistent users ended up with lower-paying, less skilled and less prestigious jobs than those who were not regular cannabis smokers.

Financial, work-related and relationship difficulties were further experienced by those taking the drug, which worsened as the number of years of regular cannabis use progressed.

The study, conducted by a team of researchers led by Magdalena Cerda at the University of California and Avshalom Caspi and Terrie Moffitt at Duke University, appeared in the journal Clinical Psychological Science.

'Our research does not support arguments for or against cannabis legalization,' said Cerda. 'But it does show that cannabis was not safe for the long-term users tracked in our study.

'Our study found that regular cannabis users experienced downward social mobility and more financial problems such as troubles with debt and cash flow than those who did not report such persistent use.

'Regular long-term users also had more antisocial behaviors at work, such as stealing money or lying to get a job, and experienced more relationship problems, such as intimate partner violence and controlling abuse.'

'Even among cannabis users who were never convicted for a cannabis offense, we found that persistent and regular cannabis use was linked to economic and social problems.'

While both heavy alcohol and cannabis use were similarly associated with declines, the authors found that those dependent on cannabis experienced more financial difficulties.

'Cannabis may be safer than alcohol for your health, but not for your finances,' said Moffitt.

For the study, 947 participants who had completed at least three of the five adult cannabis assessments from ages 18 through 38.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...nal-study.html

[Belize]

Being a 'loser' is now empirical data?

Well fuck me sideways. The Daily Mail truly is a fantastic source of peer reviewed scientific papers.

[THE Bigzoman]

Being a 'loser' is now empirical data?

Well fuck me sideways. The Daily Mail truly is a fantastic source of peer reviewed scientific papers.

To be fair, they cite off the qualifers of being a loser.

Not suprised. Frequent use is probably a good sign that moderation isn't a value within the person.

[Deleted]

The vast majority of drug users both hardcore, soft-core and even pill addicts in medical fields fail at life. How is this news?

[Tuesdays]

The vast majority of drug users both hardcore, soft-core and even pill addicts in medical fields fail at life. How is this news?

It's always news to those who have a short memory.

[Sting]

VapeNation

[Mistame]

Not going to lie. I initially read it as "cannibals".

[Swizzington]

I know one guy that smokes weed daily, and frankly yeah, he's a fucking loser, with no ambition, just plays games all day and always has money problems. So my anecdotal evidence from one person definitely supports this data.

[Independent voter]

There's a tipping point somewhere. If you stay high all your waking hours and when you're not high you're looking for more weed, yeah your life is being wasted.

I have a good friend I've known for years, he even spends money on weed that should be going to care for his kids.

[Auxora]

A very good example of how people can sometimes use data to reach an incorrect cause as the result of the data. In this case the logic is flawed. They are concluding (wrongly) that cannabis smoking must be the cause of someone having a lower income. That argument is so wrong in fact that it's like 1920's Reefer Madness wrong. The actual cause of the data lining up that way is simply employer's drug tests. People who are unemployed or have a lower income job, the "losers" the article refers to, just do not have much to lose if they smoke so there is no disincentive to. For people with careers and higher paying jobs, the vast majority today of employers do drug testing and they don't want to risk losing a job by smoking. It's been proven for many years for alcohol to be far worse than cannabis for health and certainly doesn't cause people to have lower income. Plenty of financially well-off people smoke and especially those who are self-employed, that are retired, or that run their own business and don't have to worry about drug tests, so there's no correlation there to cannabis and low income. Make pot legal and remove it from the list of things employers test for and the data will drastically change.

This report is like if someone did a study and said that data showed people who don't lock their doors are less likely to be robbed, and then argues we shouldn't lock our doors. Except it would neglect to account for the fact that people who don't lock their doors are usually in suburban high-cost homes in neighborhoods without much crime...

[Deleted]

Shocker.

Of course it's not good for you to consume drugs. Just because it's not a particularly bad one, doesn't mean it's not bad for you.

You wouldn't get drunk 4-5 times a week, would you?

[Vyxn]

everything in excess is bad for you
but it does more damage to society having weed illegal then it does making it legal

[Shadowferal]

Hmm...

"The 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that up to half of daily marijuana smokers become addicted -- an estimated 2.7 million people in the U.S."

[Jaroko]

I know one guy that smokes weed daily, and frankly yeah, he's a fucking loser, with no ambition, just plays games all day and always has money problems. So my anecdotal evidence from one person definitely supports this data.

I can back it up too, Its painful because its my best friend. Hes been smoking weed for about 7 years and even tho he makes 3 times more money than me from a cleaning job his dad handed to him hes got nothing to show for it. The only time he seems happy is when hes gaming with me on Skype, Try to talk to him in RL and hes a dick that don't want to do anything. The problem is that we cant get him to leave his house. hes just sits in his room if hes not cleaning and smokes and games. So yeah i would back this up too.

[Ihsatakar]

This has some pretty serious correlation-does-not-equal-causation problems going with it.

[PBitt]

I mange just fine without it.

[cousinit1686]

Hahaha, I love these kind of studies. Because I used to smoke I'm going to lie and steal and such? My parents were stoners, and I was one until very recently. To clarify, I was a thief in my younger days (pre smoking) and I grew out of it. I smoked daily for the last 7-8 years, quit over a month ago. To be fair, it is a pricey habit, and I'm glad I stopped.

Before it was my "stop hating the world" go to, now all I have is metal and deep breaths. Wish me luck.

Can't wait for it to be decriminalized, so I can go back to it one day in the future

[leigonlord]

A very good example of how people can sometimes use data to reach an incorrect cause as the result of the data. In this case the logic is flawed. They are concluding (wrongly) that cannabis smoking must be the cause of someone having a lower income. That argument is so wrong in fact that it's like 1920's Reefer Madness wrong. The actual cause of the data lining up that way is simply employer's drug tests. People who are unemployed or have a lower income job, the "losers" the article refers to, just do not have much to lose if they smoke so there is no disincentive to. For people with careers and higher paying jobs, the vast majority today of employers do drug testing and they don't want to risk losing a job by smoking. It's been proven for many years for alcohol to be far worse than cannabis for health and certainly doesn't cause people to have lower income. Plenty of financially well-off people smoke and especially those who are self-employed, that are retired, or that run their own business and don't have to worry about drug tests, so there's no correlation there to cannabis and low income. Make pot legal and remove it from the list of things employers test for and the data will drastically change.

This report is like if someone did a study and said that data showed people who don't lock their doors are less likely to be robbed, and then argues we shouldn't lock our doors. Except it would neglect to account for the fact that people who don't lock their doors are usually in suburban high-cost homes in neighborhoods without much crime...

so its not smoking cannabis makes you a loser but losers smoke cannabis

[Ravingmad]

People with problems tends to deal with "life issues" with drugs (Cannabis in that case) or alcohol, mostly caused by depression. Drugs/Alcohol channel depression and vice versa. They fuel each other in a vicious circle that gets worse with time. So I find the word "Loser" a little bit harsh, considering that depression is a form of modern's life disease. I don't think that because you're sick that you're a loser. And if you have an addiction, it means you need help, not being rejected and/or seen as a loser in the first place. The study shows facts, causes and effects on long term cannabis usage, but doesn't explain you "why?" do they have long term cannabis usage. Most of these people just need a wake-up call, a slap in the face and a purpose in life to be able to move on. But most don't get that chance, are labeled as loser and will remain so.

[Putin-Chan]

This just in, doing drugs makes you less productive!