cncpc wrote: ↑Mon Dec 18, 2017 1:34 am
Your style of argument and analysis is a little too heavy on labelling others while proclaiming to possess the truth yourself.
Marijuana is not addictive. It has proven to be habit forming in some cases. It's probably harder to stop coffee than pot. Don't claim to have the inside line on what a "sensible person is, because you seem to be saying that it is someone who thinks like you.
The test of marijuana in aviation or any other activity is not that it is harmless, i.e. tasking an advocate to prove a negative. The test is whether its harm is sufficient to raise a reasonable evidence based concern sufficient to deny others employment in certain professions.
My style of argument is to look things up and try to determine if the statement I'm commenting on is true or not. A bunch of people believing what they want to believe is not necessarily the truth. Even if it's almost everyone.You seem to have fallen victim to this yourself. The truth is that a "habit" can be differentiated from a "dependence" by checking out what happens if you stop. By way of an example, I can tell you first-hand that if I give up coffee, I am treated to splitting headaches and irritability. This, medically, means I have formed a dependence. My wife bought decaffeinated beans and the same thing happened, even though I didn't know they were decaffeinated. Therefore, obviously I have formed a dependence rather than just a habit.
Now, according to research, alcohol is like this. While I could personally sit here and say it's not, because I myself can go for indefinite periods without drinking it, there is a body of evidence that suggests it is. There are "withdrawal symptoms" that are unpleasant and impede a person's ability to do without it. The scientific explanation for this, from what I've been able to gather, is that an addictive substance interacts chemically with receptors in our bodies that are meant to interact with the body's own chemicals. Whether or not this "packs a buzz" or not depends on what the receptors were originally for in our body. Opioids for instance, are compatible with the receptors in our brains that are meant to be activated, in a small amount, when our external situation causes the brain to release "reward" chemicals. We have evolved to do behaviours that are consistent with evolutionary "wins", like mating, finding food and winning fights. When artificial opioids get into these recptors, they mimic the pleasure we get from winning. Over time, the brain adapts to this by producing fewer of its own receptor-compatible molecules. When you suddenly pull the plug, it temporarily does not have enough to function properly, and "withdrawal symptoms" are the result.
Alcohol functions a bit differently, by inhibiting the function of neurons, which the brain tries to adapt to in entertaining ways, but the effect is the same, in terms of withdrawal.
Marijuana is the same. You know all about the brain's cannabinoid receptors, and what they do, I'm sure. It meets all the criteria for an addictive substance.
reference: Rotter A, Bayerlein K, Hansbauer M, et al. CB1 and CB2 receptor expression and promoter methylation in patients with cannabis dependence. Eur Addict Res. 2013;19(1):13-20. doi:10.1159/000338642.
Users report irritability, sleep difficulties, physical discomfort, decrease of appetite and restlesness. According to the American National institute on drug abuse, about 30 percent of long-term marijuana users report withdrawal symptoms.
It does seem as though marijuana is on the low side in the list of addictive substances, but that statistic is questionable also considering its use has always been illicit up till this point. The data is hardly reliable.
This doesn't have a whole lot to do with whether it ought to be allowable for pilots to be active marijuana users. What it does have to do with is people in a debate making fake statements based on what they want to believe, and clouding the waters when it comes to deciding what to do about it.
My style of argument is to eliminate bullshit.
I would love to defend my enjoyment of beer by telling you alcohol isn't addictive. After all, I'm not addicted to it. This is exactly the same as your argument for your marijuana. I can't enjoy the same ability to employ bullshit to make my argument as you can, however, because as a legal, practically ubiquitous and exhaustively researched substance, every one of us knows the truth about it.
My opinion is the same as it's always been. It is absolutely imperative, if we all agree that smoking marijuana is something that pilots want to do, that we find out all we can about:
1) How to determine what constitutes "impairment"
2) How to set sensible limits on time between marijuana use and flying in order to prevent impaired flying
3) How to test for impairment in a minimally invasive way
4) How to recognize and treat someone whose habitual use of marijuana is impacting their day-to-day life negatively, (which is the accepted threshold between a physical dependence and an "addiction".
I don't understand why any sensible person would not agree to this, unless they were in such a hurry to smoke some rope that they are willing to ignore the inherent logic.