Harper Government's Marijuana Ad Is Being Disliked To Hell

[Storm Shadow]

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/11/13/harper-marijuana-ad-youtube_n_6153434.html

Harper Government's Marijuana Ad Is Being Disliked To Hell (VIDEO)

The federal government’s latest anti-marijuana ad says the science on the drug is clear.
Yet, the Internet's verdict on the ad is even clearer. It hates it.
The ad, titled "Drug Prevention — Marijuana Use," has drawn 2,515 dislikes and a flurry of negative comments on Reddit since it was posted to YouTube on Oct. 20.
By contrast, only 104 users gave it a "thumbs up" on the video-sharing site.
In the ad, a narrator asks over ominous music, "Did you know that marijuana is on average 300 to 400 per cent stronger than it was 30 years ago? And that smoking marijuana can seriously harm a teen's developing brain?"
It goes on to say, "Smoking marijuana. It can damage a teen for life."
And while some users were supportive, others openly mocked it.
"TIL: my parents' age bracket smoked terrible pot," said Reddit user Snodgrass 82.
"Thanks for wasting tax dollars on telling people that flowers are bad," said YouTube user Voluntary Kant.
The government's science may not even be as clear as it claims. Marijuana's illegal status in Canada means that there have been few controlled studies to determine its benefits and damaging effects.
Health Canada, which oversees the country's medical marijuana program, has also refused to endorse the drug as a medicine because there's not enough science to prove its benefits.

 

[Mikell]

That ad is fucking ridiculous. I've emailed them twice through healthycanadians.gc.ca about their sources for these bogus claims, and received no reply so far. I'm going to call them soon. Granted, I don't think teenagers should be smoking, but this fearmongering with unsubstantiated claims is utter bullshit.

 

[trichrider]

i'm 379 times stoneder than in the 70's...

ffs, what rubbish!

 

[HempKat]

That ad is fucking ridiculous. I've emailed them twice through healthycanadians.gc.ca about their sources for these bogus claims, and received no reply so far. I'm going to call them soon. Granted, I don't think teenagers should be smoking, but this fearmongering with unsubstantiated claims is utter bullshit.

I smoked from age 11 until now (so all thru my teen years plus decades beyond) and the only adverse effects was that smoking marijuana impaired my ability to recall dreams but only while using it regularly, during periods of abstinence the ability to recall dreams has always returned.

I agree though that teenagers should avoid it, not because of potential harm but rather because there is so much for them to focus on with regards to the path they want to take in life. Once firmly set on that path then no problem but when making critical life choices one should be clear headed.

As for the strength of marijuana? Well I remember smoking various sativa strains out of Central and South America that were as potent if not more so then many of today's strains. The only difference I see between then and now is back then there was more leaf in the bag then what people typically buy today so it might be a fair argument that marijuana now is less diluted but not by 3 or 400%.

One also has to question the parameters of these "studies" I remember hearing about one study attempting to gauge the effect of long time use. Like many studies they used lab rats (because yeah rats are just like people ) and to simulate long term use they gave rats just THC in doses roughly equivalent to smoking 20 joints all in one little pill.

 

[HerBnGorE(illa)]

Id like to find some of these "new genetics" that they "tested". With numbers like that u have to believe that they had just finished "testing" it!!

"Man, I'm f'ed up...this shit has to be like 300 or 400 times more potent than back in the day....way too strong for everyone else"

....where I come from that is called bogarting! Pass that shit over here!

 

[stoned-trout]

same bullshit different story teller

 

[Eighths-n-Aces]

i need a pipe that looks like a brain


i'll bet you the guy that made the props for that commercial was high as hell

 

[Jhhnn]

That ad is fucking ridiculous. I've emailed them twice through healthycanadians.gc.ca about their sources for these bogus claims, and received no reply so far. I'm going to call them soon. Granted, I don't think teenagers should be smoking, but this fearmongering with unsubstantiated claims is utter bullshit.

It's always been fearmongering with unsubstantiated claims. It's just a different flavor of reefer madness bullshit.

Legalization in several states dooms prohibition. The fact that prohibition was universal concealed the truth, exploited fear of change with falsehood, erected strawmen to rail against. For all the naysayers & doom preachers, CO legalization has been a big let down. Other than cannabis being legal, not a damned thing is different than it was, and that's a beautiful thing to see. One of the most closely watched & much maligned social changes in decades turns out to be a snoozer, by the numbers.

It's what we've needed for decades, and as we knew it would be all along. Now, everybody will know. On one hand, it's a stunning breakthrough, and on the other, it's no big deal at all. Remarkable.

 

[m314]

300 to 400 percent stronger means 4 or 5 times the previous strength. I have no idea what weed was like 30 years ago, but I don't see today's strains being stronger than the best strains in 2000 (when I started growing). Maybe you could make the case that the overall average is stronger when more people are growing a quality product.

I hate these ads that try to change the subject when it comes to legalization. The legalization bills I've heard of apply to adults 21 and over, not teenagers. Alcohol can be harmful to teenagers, but I'm an adult so I'm allowed to buy it.

 

[jd4083]

So are we of the collective opinion here that chronic cannabis use is unequivocally NOT harmful to developing brains? Or is the general message itself from the government too unsavory to swallow? I didn't watch the video yet although I imagine a lot of it is exaggerated or even outright fabricated, but is that part of the message really the biggest issue y'all have? I ask because I thought it was common knowledge that kids shouldn't use pot regularly. (Just like they shouldn't use alcohol regularly...or any drugs, I suppose.)

Just playing devil's advocate here, don't get out the torches and pitchforks.

 

[LEF]

I think in the ads they say 300-400 times stronger

the commercial has a scary vibe going on...

 

[LEF]

I'm not down for people under 18 years old smoking it because of what they say about not fully developed brains, and from experience and even then... I wouldn't advocate mj to someone

unless they we're ill

 

[m314]

So are we of the collective opinion here that chronic cannabis use is unequivocally NOT harmful to developing brains? Or is the general message itself from the government too unsavory to swallow? I didn't watch the video yet although I imagine a lot of it is exaggerated or even outright fabricated, but is that part of the message really the biggest issue y'all have? I ask because I thought it was common knowledge that kids shouldn't use pot regularly. (Just like they shouldn't use alcohol regularly...or any drugs, I suppose.)

Just playing devil's advocate here, don't get out the torches and pitchforks.

There have been one or two studies showing a correlation between smoking pot as a teenager and a slightly lower IQ. The one I'm thinking of was funded by NIDA, who only funds studies set up to demonstrate negative effects of illegal drugs.

The study doesn't show any causative effect, just a correlation that could be explained through other reasons (like poorer kids being more likely to smoke and less likely to go to a quality high school). This study also tried but failed to demonstrate that adults who smoke pot have a lower IQ. The propaganda ads only focus on the first part. "Smoking pot lowers IQ in teenagers!" We aren't trying to legalize it for teenagers, so it shouldn't matter either way.

 

[jd4083]

There have been one or two studies showing a correlation between smoking pot as a teenager and a slightly lower IQ. The one I'm thinking of was funded by NIDA, who only funds studies set up to demonstrate negative effects of illegal drugs.

The study doesn't show any causative effect, just a correlation that could be explained through other reasons (like poorer kids being more likely to smoke and less likely to go to a quality high school). This study also tried but failed to demonstrate that adults who smoke pot have a lower IQ. The propaganda ads only focus on the first part. "Smoking pot lowers IQ in teenagers!" We aren't trying to legalize it for teenagers, so it shouldn't matter either way.

Gotcha, thanks for the level headed response

 

[LEF]

when I first saw the ad, I was somewhat disappointed that our government would put up such an ad

and I was worried about the consequences that it would have (propaganda in a time when people are starting to open up to safe recreation marijuana use)

I think it's a shitty move on their part

 

[devilgoob]

Cannabis has doubled in potency.

I have taken half the hits, to reach the same effect.

 

[Mikell]

Got a response...

Thank you for contacting Health Canada.

Your recent enquiry has been redirected to the appropriate area for a
response.

Sincerely,

Health Canada

Well that's bloody lovely. I send in two requests on the proper contact form, and receive no response. I send in another inquiry to general contact information, and they've sent my request to the original unresponsive service department.

I fucking love Canada, only my tobacco keeps falling out of these bloody Victory cigarettes..

 

[stoned-trout]

weed prob aint any worse the the add meds and shit they pack kids full of now adays....I think young minds should be free from as much as possible personally...when they become adults they can choose their poison...

 

[HempKat]

I was recently looking thru some old documentation dating back to at least the 80's that describe marijuana as having only 4-5% THC and so therefore anything with 5% THC was great stuff. In the early 2000's I remember looking up information on the popular strain "Blueberry" and finding out it had 15-17% THC. So if the assumption from the 80's is correct then one could argue that marijuana has increased 300 to 400% since 15% is 300% of 5%. Here's the thing though, back in the early to mid 70's I was regularly smoking Columbian Gold and Red Bud as well as Panama Red and Acapulco Gold that were as good if not more potent then Blueberry.

So I think the problem here is speaking in generalities such as all marijuana is such and such percent THC or that all marijuana has increased by 300 to 400%. Yes you could prove the assertion that marijuana has increased in potency by 300 to 400% if you compared some average Mexican brick weed to Blueberry but then you would be comparing apples to oranges.

The only change that has happened is that because of the popularity of home growing and the market of breeders to support it we have refined the genetic pool and so people are able to get and grow much better quality weed then the street schwag of the past. There is still however that same shitty street schwag floating around out there that's still maxing out around 5% THC it's just that most people know better then to settle for that.

 

[trichrider]

imo, the ability to even measure the % of thc/cannabinoids is what has improved 3-400% not the actual %'s of present-day flowers.

like hempcat I smoked those same strains back then and had good head from them, nothing more than from present genotypes either.

the article slams cannabis...ignoring its potential as medicine.

...you must be 18 to take this medicine...give it a break. there are multitudes here who have toked since adolescence without losing their minds.