Family First mind altering cannabis poll

It’s easy to see what Family First were on when they commissioned a cannabis poll with Curia Market Research – publishing their results on a website called saynopetodope.org.nz/poll confirms a distinct bias.

Curia is a reputable polling company, but they do what clients want, and Family First got what they wanted. To get a different result to past polls showing clear majorities support cannabis law reform of some sort required some leading poll questions and misleading reporting to the poll.

Family First:  New poll suggests only 18% of Kiwis support recreational cannabis legalisation

A new poll commissioned by conservative Christian lobbyist group Family First has found that less than 20% of New Zealanders support legalisation of recreational marijuana, but there is strong support for its medicinal use.

The independent poll, carried out earlier this month by Curia Market Research, surveyed 1000 randomly selected people reflective of overall voters.

But the results contradict previous polls, conducted in New Zealand using similar sample sizes, which have found that Kiwis tend to be evenly divided on the issue. For instance, a 1 NEWS Colmar Brunton poll conducted in October suggested that 46% of Kiwis were in favour of legalisation of cannabis for personal use and 41% were against.

They are correct about the Colmar Brunton poll

“The Government will hold a referendum on legalising marijuana. Do you think the personal use of marijuana
should be legalised?”

  • Yes 46%
  • No 41%
  • Don’t know 12%

Interviewing took place from October 15 to October 19, with 1006 eligible voters contacted either by landline or mobile phone. The maximum sampling error was ±3.1 per cent.

…but that doesn’t ask what the Greens are proposing for the referendum – some legalisation, but with age and sale restrictions.

But they didn’t mention a NZ Herald/Horizon poll also taken in October: 60 per cent support for legal cannabis – new poll

A new poll shows that 60 per cent of New Zealanders would vote to legalise cannabis for personal use in a referendum.

It also reveals that over 300,000 Kiwi adults – mainly the youngest and the poorest – are using cannabis daily – in contrast with other research that show far lower daily use.

The poll is the first since the Government announced last month that the referendum on the issue will take place at the same time as the 2020 election and would be binding.

Though the question that will be put to voters has yet to be decided, the confidence and supply agreement between Labour and the Greens states that the referendum will be “on legalising the personal use of cannabis”.

That is the same question that was used in a new survey, by Horizon Research and commissioned by licensed medicinal cannabis company Helius Therapeutics.

  • Yes 60%
  • No 24%
  • No opinion 16%

Quite a different result. Why? It can depend on what questions are asked, and how they are asked.

The Horizon poll asked more detailed questions:

  • 63% wanted a regulated market for legal cannabis with licensed operators
  • 39% wanted the legal age to buy cannabis to be 18; 36% supported 21; 32% said if the legal age was set too high, it would lead to a black market
  • 58% said penalties for breaking the law in a legal cannabis market should be about the same for breaking the law on alcohol sales; 28% supported severe penalties
  • 18% supported the Government owning and controlling all production and sale of cannabis
  • 40% wanted a Government excise tax, and 68% said any tax revenue should go towards health services
  • 60% said they believed legal cannabis would result in lower levels of crime, or have no effect, while about a third said it would reduce harm and a quarter said it would increase harm.
  • 81% support medicinal cannabis

From a nationwide survey conducted in October of 995 adults 18 and over, and weighted to be representative of the population at the 2013 census. The margin of error is 3.1 per cent.

To understand the Family First poll result it’s worth looking at the questions they asked.

  1. If restrictions on the use of cannabis were reduced, do you think the use of cannabis would increase, decrease or remain the same?
  2. Do you believe tobacco companies are pushing for restrictions on cannabis to be lifted?
  3. Do you think cannabis use can damage the brains of young people under the age of 25?
  4. Do you think that drivers using cannabis are more likely or less likely to cause accidents?
  5. Do you think that young people under the age of 25 who regularly use cannabis are more likely or less likely to get a job?

So the poll starts by asking four questions about possible negative effects of cannabis use, plus a bizarre implication that tobacco companies could be involved.

Only then did they ask the question that they headline:

6. Which of the following statements comes closest to your opinion on cannabis?

  • Current restrictions remain 7%
  • Lift restrictions for medical but not recreational use 65%
  • Lift restrictions for recreational use 18%
  • Unsure/Refuse 10%

The Government is not proposing to “lift restrictions for recreational use” anywhere near completely. They make it clear they want significant restrictions to remain.

Asking leading questions like this is a technique that is specifically not recommended in polling. Curia is a member of the Research Association of NZ, which states in their political polling guidelines:

Question Order

It is recommended the principal voting behaviour question be asked before all other questions

The report must disclose the order of questions asked and any political questions asked before the principal voting behaviour question

The story should disclose any other questions which may have impacted the responses to the principal voting
behaviour question

The principal voting behaviour question was asked last, not first, and this was not disclosed in the Family First publicity releases. The story also did not disclose the wording of the questions and did not disclose all the questions.

The full poll report (not clearly linked) headed Curia Market Research did disclose the questions and order of questions. it states:

CODE COMPLIANCE: This poll was conducted in accordance with the New Zealand Political Polling Code, the Research Association New Zealand Code of Practice and the International Chamber of Commerce/European Society for Opinion and Market Research Code on Market and Social Research.

It also included the NZ Political Polling Code emblem as per “Compliant polls Polls following the code are entitled to use the emblem below to signal their compliance.”

I question whether the Family First cannabis poll complied with the Polling Code or Code of Practice.

It doesn’t help perceptions that Curia does National Party polling, and Simon Bridges and other National MPs have expressed their opposition to cannabis law reform.

Family First are trying to alter minds and opinions on the proposed cannabis referendum by pushing some fairly strong crap into the debate.

More on this at Stuff:  The great weed wars of 2020 could be defined by blue on green friendly fire

Leave a comment

36 Comments

  1. Jacqueline

     /  28th April 2019

    It’s also easy to see what you are doing re Islamophobia and hating on Christians.

    As per my past comments, if Christians band together for attempting political clout, they are off track. It turns to custard every time and I wish they would learn. If they would hurry up and listen, we all could actually run a safe happy country – for ourselves, and as a blessing in the world, especially our political allies.

    Reply
    • Is this directed at me? I don’t hate Christians, that’s a ridiculous assertion. You may hate my lack of religious beliefs or affiliation, but it looks like you also see that as hate, which is quite wrong.

      “if Christians band together for attempting political clout”

      Some of them try that, but they don’t represent all Christians and I think will never be able to. There are quite a wide range of Christian beliefs and political preferences and positions on political issues.

      Reply
    • Blazer

       /  28th April 2019

      @Mother wtf has your drivel got to do with the..topic?

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  28th April 2019

        Not a lot, Blazer.

        I am finding M/J’s constant repetition very teejus indeed.

        She is unlikely to make many converts to her way of thinking.

        Reply
  2. Corky

     /  28th April 2019

    Family First must understand we are officially going to be a nation of druggies. We already are, so nothing will change. 😃

    Reply
    • Griff.

       /  28th April 2019

      Leading questions designed to get the answer they wanted followed by the open ended question “Lift restrictions for recreational use ?”
      DPF should be ashamed to be responsible for such biased polling obviously made to get a pre determined result .

      Or maybe not .

      Curia believes polling is an art, as well as a science. The most essential aspect to any poll is taking the time to understand the key drivers for clients, and ensuring the questions asked will be of maximum value to them in making decisions based on the research.

      https://www.curia.co.nz/faq/
      Family first got what they paid for… a poll that supported their resistance to legal cannabis.

      The poll represents uneffical behavior for a polling company in my view.

      Reply
      • NOEL

         /  28th April 2019

        Wouldn’t take too much from it Griff.
        To paraphrase the pollies the only poll that matters is the referendum.

        Reply
  3. Dennis Horne

     /  28th April 2019

    1, not every problem has an answer. 2, mind-altering drugs can be harmful for the individual and a problem for others. 3, prohibition does not stop use and it allows criminals to profit.

    A referendum just imposes the will of the majority on the rest, even on matters that are no concern of theirs.

    If you want to reduce criminal activity and pointless police operations, it must be sold in licensed shops.

    How do you reduce harm to users and danger to others – what sort of regulations are required? How flexible do they need to be? Where does medical care fit in? That is what should be under discussion.

    Reply
    • Griff.

       /  28th April 2019

      Reduce Harm.
      Legalize Regulate Tax and Educate .

      A Legal market will do less harm to society than prohibition does .

      Regulate.
      Age restrictions. There is convince evidence that it harms developing minds.
      Advertising restrictions. Industry is always going to seek to grow markets restrictions on advertising sponsorship and retail outlets counters this desire.
      Documented supply. We need to know who is growing and selling the product and that they and the product meet reasonable standards of quality and have quantified measurement of active ingredients.
      Restrictions for driving or working under the influence should be based on sound science .. For instance peer reviewed science suggests driving while mildly under the influence is less of an issue than driving while under the present lower alcohol limit. Testing for the blood metabolites of cannabis is not evidence for intoxication.

      Tax.There is a health cost to society in its use this should be recovered from its users as should the cost of regulating the market.

      Educate. Money spent on education has proven to reduce the risk and costs of drug use.

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  28th April 2019

        You cant reduce harm after the fact, when its clearly harmful to start with. Its just your circumlocution to think all the attendant issues dont need to be debated. – Throwing it over the fence is the common term.

        Educate …. buzz word du jour.
        I doubt theres any agreement on curriculum or time allowed for the process, at what level or what you want to achieve from education about an addictive drug.

        Tax ? hahahaha. 80-90% will be ‘offmarket’ transactions even the stock market works that way.

        Reply
      • Pink David

         /  28th April 2019

        “Legalize Regulate Tax”

        One of the main augments for legalisation is to close the black market and remove drugs as a source of income for criminals.

        Regulation and taxation simply recreate the opening for the black market.

        Reply
        • Griff.

           /  28th April 2019

          Regulation and taxation simply recreate the opening for the black market.

          Ya go to the sly groogers to buy your piss do ya ?
          Nope.
          You go to a regulated taxed liqueur outlet because you get uniform quality product at an reasonable price without having to deal with a shady gangsta.

          The only way we will still have a viable black market is if they push the price up or the quality down.
          Cannabis costs a dollar or two per kilo to grow dry and package. There is room for obscene levels of tax and compliance costs before it rises the price above what is paid now .
          To give an idea of the profits demanded by the black market to offset the risks.
          Think of paying $350 an oz in metric thats $12,250 a kilo for tomatoes .
          That’s like buying wine by the case for a tinny about a bottle of wine level of intoxication its $20 for less than a gram or over $20,000 a kilo…..

          Reply
          • Pink David

             /  28th April 2019

            If you think any tax will be the order of that on alcohol, your kidding yourself. Alcohol is also highly brand-centric. A beer is not just a beer.Tobacco will be the metric, and we already have a significant black market there.

            The tax on tobacco is $0.83 per cigarette, the cost to manufacture is less than $0.10.

            “To give an idea of the profits demanded by the black market to offset the risks.”

            The risks will drop significantly on legalisation, the pricing will adjust to suit.

            Reply
          • Griff.

             /  28th April 2019

            If you think any tax will be the order of that on alcohol, your kidding yourself. Alcohol is also highly brand-centric. A beer is not just a beer.Tobacco will be the metric, and we already have a significant black market there.

            ROFL
            yess piss drinker always think alcohol is special
            Here is the thing. ‘
            Piss is ethanol. Often what you are drinking is manufactured pure whey or grain based ethanol with added chemical flavors .
            Even lower cost wine is often not what many think. It can be adulterated with chemicals to simulate flavors and juices sourced from anywhere.
            The buzz is just ethanol. I have drunk Reagent grade lab ethanol in juice it is exactly the same as drinking vodka and juice.

            Cannabis is a organic product with many active ingredients far more complex and important to a user experience in a commercial mature market than your average piss drinker sculling commercial beer or sprites or cheap wine.

            Few would go get any old shite from a tinny house or your local gang if given the option of shopping in a comfortable retail outlet for quality named strains even at a premium.

            As to what the law will look like and the penalty’s
            You dont know what they will propose and neither do I though i will make a submission if the opportunity arises.
            i expect they will have stricter penalties than the ones we presently have for the illegal selling of alcohol.
            We dont have that much of a black market for either alcohol or tobacco I can not see cannabis being any different in time.

            Reply
          • Pink David

             /  28th April 2019

            “Few would go get any old shite from a tinny house or your local gang if given the option of shopping in a comfortable retail outlet for quality named strains even at a premium.”

            Perhaps there is business in that for you.

            Reply
  4. Dennis Horne

     /  28th April 2019

    A far bigger question in my mind is, why do so many people need to blot out their existence? Maybe a more permanent solution is right for them, should they choose, but we can’t accept that because it threatens our own psyche? If it’s a temporary phenomenon, can we really help them, or is it just wishful thinking? I suggest if you believe you have the answers you haven’t.

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  28th April 2019

      I smoked it at university and it never blotted out my existence; it was very pleasant and relaxing.

      Reply
      • Dennis Horne

         /  28th April 2019

        I have some difficulty drawing any general conclusions about the topic from a sample size of 1.

        Maybe that is the problem with discussions on what numbers mean.

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  28th April 2019

          Same here and I frequently say so here. I was only talking about my own experience.

          One is far too small a sample to judge anything by, and I wish that more people could see it. I am not silly enough to think that the very nice, well-spoken Mongrel Mob member down the road is representative of all MMM.

          Reply
  5. Duker

     /  28th April 2019

    “But they didn’t mention a NZ Herald/Horizon poll also taken in October: 60 per cent support for legal cannabis – new poll”
    Firstly its NOT sponsored by NZ herald but a paid for poll by some legalise cannabis group
    “New Zealand’s largest licensed medicinal cannabis company, Helius Therapeutics, has released the result after commissioning Horizon Research..”

    Its weird to rip into Curia for its polling ( You are wrong on that too) but accept the dubious Horizon poll – who dont use random telephone sampling the statistically correct method. Instead Horizon uses an online panel which is self selected – as online polls are- and prizes offered for participation ! The cannabis poll changed from a minor cash prize to expensive Apple laptops which ‘doubled’ participation.
    https://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/531/poll-says-t

    As for Curias poll, their methods cant be faulted. yes they did ask some leading questions before , but are still factual, and the major poll question is just a standard one for that issue. Its not correct to say they are ‘unethical’. They belong to the Industry Market research organisation and doing unethical polls would see you getting kicked out.
    Yet you find no problem with the online poll paid for by a so called medicinal marijuana group ! Horizon doesnt belong to the NZ market research industry group, I doubt they would qualify They give some bumpf about a European Online Research ‘Organisation’ which they arent a member of either. merely give some ‘answers’

    Reply
    • Griff.

       /  28th April 2019

      As for Curias poll, their methods cant be faulted. yes they did ask some leading questions before , but are still factual

      Umm no the questions are not factual. .
      Uninformed opinions about the harms or others questions has has no standing and is not factual it is at best anecdotal.

      https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
      anecdotal

      You used a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.

      It’s often much easier for people to believe someone’s testimony as opposed to understanding complex data and variation across a continuum. Quantitative scientific measures are almost always more accurate than personal perceptions and experiences, but our inclination is to believe that which is tangible to us, and/or the word of someone we trust over a more ‘abstract’ statistical reality.

      The leading questions asked in the poll are a form of poisoning the well.
      https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/140/Poisoning-the-Well
      Poisoning the Well.

      (also known as: discrediting, smear tactics)
      Description: To commit a preemptive ad hominem attack against an opponent. That is, to prime the audience with adverse information about the opponent from the start, in an attempt to make your claim more acceptable or discount the credibility of your opponent’s claim.

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  28th April 2019

      Good to see you defending David Farrar, Duker. However the conditioning leading questions are blatantly indefensible. The poll result is worthless.

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  28th April 2019

        Questions are leading but they actually are factual, Im sure Farrar checked , well his experts who run the business. eg
        https://www.nhs.uk/news/pregnancy-and-child/cannabis-has-more-lasting-effect-teenage-brains-alcohol/
        ( PG would call NHS research as crap, clearly very baised , I get that its his opinion. But people in glass houses shouldnt be throwing stones at others biases where they attempt market research
        .
        Do you think pre referendum these issues wont be raised, are we even having a referendum ?

        Reply
        • Griff.

           /  28th April 2019

          ROFL
          More crap .

          Conclusion

          This complex analysis suggests that cannabis use by teenagers may have an ongoing effect on their brain function, particularly in the areas of:

          working memory (important for completing tasks)
          perceptual reasoning (important for understanding the world)
          inhibition control (important for learning to resist harmful impulses)

          The main difficulty is that we still don’t know with certainty whether teens who used alcohol and cannabis had worse brain function because of substance use, or whether they were more likely to use alcohol and cannabis because of their poorer brain function.

          Similarly we can’t pull apart the influence of confounding health, lifestyle and environmental factors. We don’t have a full picture of how other circumstances in their lives, such as peer groups or the home environment, might affect both drug and alcohol use and brain function and academic performance.

          If cannabis is having a direct effect on brain function, we can’t tell easily from this study how much of an impact this might be. The differences in test results are not easily understood by non-experts. We don’t know, for example, if the teenagers in the study who used cannabis were less likely to achieve educational or vocational qualifications, or go on to academic or professional success..

          This is only one of the problems with uninformed views like those prompted in the Poll… correlational is not causation.

          Besides which tinny houses dont ask for ID! It has been easier for a child to score cannabis than piss since before I was a kid forty years ago because of the unregulated black market…

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  28th April 2019

            Cannabis Use during Adolescent Development: Susceptibility to Psychiatric Illness
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3796318/
            Cannabis and mental health
            More evidence establishes clear link between use of cannabis and psychiatric illness
            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1124674/

            Marijuana use disorder is common and often untreated
            Survey shows marijuana use disorder linked to substance use/mental disorders and disability.
            https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/marijuana-use-disorder-common-often-untreated

            Dont lie about having ‘Harm Reduction’ and ‘Restrictions on teenagers use’ if on the other hand you dont give a fuck about the evidence that its harmful and shouldnt be used by teenagers. There isnt going to be a gold star double blind ‘trial of canbabis smoking’, not when tests in rats mean the empirical evidence follows the observational evidence

            “A 38-year NIH-funded study, published this year in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, showed that people who used cannabis heavily in their teens and continued through adulthood showed a significant drop in IQ between the ages of 13 and 38 — an average of eight points for those who met criteria for cannabis dependence. Those who used marijuana heavily before age 18 (when the brain is still developing) showed impaired mental abilities even after they quit taking the drug. These findings are consistent with other studies showing a link between prolonged marijuana use and cognitive or neural impairment.”
            https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/regular-marijuana-use-teens-continues-be-concern

            Reply
            • MaureenW

               /  28th April 2019

              Agree with the findings for under 18 year olds. Numerous people I’ve been exposed to who took up marijuana early in life, barely function as adults past feeding themselves. I’m referring to cognitive function above basic level. Of course I don’t believe this is true of everyone but I suspect some are genetically predisposed to this damage.

            • Conspiratoor

               /  28th April 2019

              Maureen, here in the north its endemic. Employers struggle to find non stoners to fill vacancies for low skill jobs. Pre-employment drug and alcohol testing combined with random on the job tests condemn a generation of otherwise employable young men to a life on the dole. Very sad

            • Griff.

               /  28th April 2019

              ROFL
              Same sources.

              Marijuana use disorder is common in the United States, is often associated with other substance use disorders, behavioral problems, and disability, and goes largely untreated, according to a new study conducted by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), part of the National Institutes of Health. The analysis found that 2.5 percent of adults — nearly 6 million people — experienced marijuana use disorder in the past year, while 6.3 percent had met the diagnostic criteria for the disorder at some point in their lives.

              In NESARC III, researchers assessed alcohol problems using diagnostic criteria set forth in the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5) in 2013. To allow direct comparisons with previous NESARC surveys, the researchers also assessed NESARC III participants using the previous DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. Although there is considerable overlap between DSM–5 and DSM–IV diagnostic criteria, there are several important differences. For example, while DSM–IV described two distinct disorders, alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence, with specific criteria for each, DSM–5 integrates alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence into a single disorder called alcohol use disorder with mild, moderate, and severe sub-classifications.

              We found that 13.9 percent of adults met DSM-5 AUD criteria for the previous year, while 29.1 percent met AUD criteria at some time in their life,” said Dr. Grant.

              Shite oh dear if you were campaigning to lock piss sellers up and prosecute drinkers you might have a point.
              Relative harm my friend.
              According to your source Alcohol causes five times as many addiction issues as pot.

              The effects of addiction withdrawal is also significantly less for cannabis than for alcohol. One is like a common cold the other can kill you dead.

              Marijuana withdrawal symptoms peak within the first week of quitting and can last up to 2 weeks.
              Symptoms of marijuana withdrawal can include:
              irritability
              difficulty sleeping
              decreased appetite
              restlessness
              cravings for marijuana
              nausea
              abdominal pain
              ////////….//////
              Common symptoms of alcohol withdrawal syndrome include:
              nausea
              vomiting
              fast heart rate
              agitation
              headache
              insomnia
              sweating
              nightmares
              anxiety
              Less frequently, people can develop severe symptoms of alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Severe symptoms are called delirium tremens or DTs.
              Symptoms of DTs include:
              severe tremors
              elevated blood pressure
              hallucinations, usually visual
              extreme disorientation
              seizures
              raised body temperature
              The DTs can be life-threatening. In extreme cases, the brain can have problems regulating breathing and circulation.
              Drastic changes in blood pressure and heart rate can also develop, which may lead to a stroke or heart attack.
              For those trying to detox from alcohol, it is vital to do so under the supervision of a doctor, as the withdrawal symptoms may be severe.

              https://www.medicalnewstoday.com

              Cannabis is less harmful and less costly to society than alcohol.
              Yet we give piss pushers knight hoods and lock up pot sellers .

              Dont lie about having ‘Harm Reduction’ and ‘Restrictions on teenagers use’ if on the other hand you dont give a fuck about the evidence that its harmful and shouldnt be used by teenagers.,

              Another case of you arguing against what lives in your head not what I have said .
              My comment

              Regulate.
              Age restrictions. There is convincing evidence that it harms developing minds.

              Your prohibition has no effect on restricting the supply to youths in fact I have brought cannabis under the table in a bloody ice cream shop.
              Tinny houses dont check for age liqueur stores do because of the difference between a legal market and a black market . It has been easier for a child to buy cannabis than to buy alcohol since at lest the 70’s because one is regulated the other is an uncontrolled black market.

              Prohibition causes far more harm than a regulated legal market .

          • Griff.

             /  28th April 2019

            No efin edit and i missed a blockquote close leaves it unreadable /////
            Excuse me

            Same sources.
            Cannabis.

            Marijuana use disorder is common in the United States, is often associated with other substance use disorders, behavioral problems, and disability, and goes largely untreated, according to a new study conducted by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), part of the National Institutes of Health. The analysis found that 2.5 percent of adults — nearly 6 million people — experienced marijuana use disorder in the past year, while 6.3 percent had met the diagnostic criteria for the disorder at some point in their lives.

            Alcohol.

            In NESARC III, researchers assessed alcohol problems using diagnostic criteria set forth in the fifth edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM–5) in 2013. To allow direct comparisons with previous NESARC surveys, the researchers also assessed NESARC III participants using the previous DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. Although there is considerable overlap between DSM–5 and DSM–IV diagnostic criteria, there are several important differences. For example, while DSM–IV described two distinct disorders, alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence, with specific criteria for each, DSM–5 integrates alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence into a single disorder called alcohol use disorder with mild, moderate, and severe sub-classifications.

            “We found that 13.9 percent of adults met DSM-5 AUD criteria for the previous year, while 29.1 percent met AUD criteria at some time in their life,” said Dr. Grant.

            Shite oh dear if you were campaigning to lock piss sellers up and prosecute drinkers you might have a point.
            Relative harm my friend.
            According to your source Alcohol causes five times as many addiction issues as pot.
            Even allow for the difference in use rates.
            The effects of addiction withdrawal is also significantly less for cannabis than for alcohol. One is like a common cold the other can kill you dead.

            Marijuana withdrawal symptoms peak within the first week of quitting and can last up to 2 weeks.
            Symptoms of marijuana withdrawal can include:
            irritability
            difficulty sleeping
            decreased appetite
            restlessness
            cravings for marijuana
            nausea
            abdominal pain

            ////////….//////

            Common symptoms of alcohol withdrawal syndrome include:
            nausea
            vomiting
            fast heart rate
            agitation
            headache
            insomnia
            sweating
            nightmares
            anxiety
            Less frequently, people can develop severe symptoms of alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Severe symptoms are called delirium tremens or DTs.
            Symptoms of DTs include:
            severe tremors
            elevated blood pressure
            hallucinations, usually visual
            extreme disorientation
            seizures
            raised body temperature
            The DTs can be life-threatening. In extreme cases, the brain can have problems regulating breathing and circulation.
            Drastic changes in blood pressure and heart rate can also develop, which may lead to a stroke or heart attack.
            For those trying to detox from alcohol, it is vital to do so under the supervision of a doctor, as the withdrawal symptoms may be severe.

            https://www.medicalnewstoday.com

            Cannabis is less harmful and less costly to society than alcohol.
            Yet we give piss pushers knight hoods and lock up pot sellers .

            Dont lie about having ‘Harm Reduction’ and ‘Restrictions on teenagers use’ if on the other hand you dont give a fuck about the evidence that its harmful and shouldnt be used by teenagers.,

            Another case of you arguing against what lives in your head not what I have said .
            My comment

            Regulate.
            Age restrictions. There is convincing evidence that it harms developing minds.

            Your prohibition has no effect on restricting the supply to youths in fact I have brought cannabis under the table in a bloody ice cream shop.
            Tinny houses dont check for age liqueur stores do because of the difference between a legal market and a black market . It has been easier for a child to buy cannabis than to buy alcohol since at lest the 70’s because one is regulated the other is an uncontrolled black market.

            Prohibition causes far more harm than a regulated legal market .

            Reply
            • Duker

               /  28th April 2019

              Is that the only argument left – prohibition causes more harm.
              And studies show that ? To the standard that you insist on for the mental health ? Didnt think so.

              An opinion . That will go down well.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  28th April 2019

          Without reading the paper which is behind a paywall there is no indication of how strong the correlations are and for most of it there is no evidence of the cause-effect direction.

          Reply
  6. Zedd

     /  28th April 2019

    the telling stat. in Fam1st poll..even if its true, that only 18% want ‘legalisation’: ONLY 7% want ‘status quo’.. time for a change imho
    🙂

    Reply
  7. I don’t see the problem with the question myself. Its simple and straight forward and i guess the referendum question will be something similar. It won’t be some complex nonsense about trading hours and licences such as the Greens imagine. A referendum question has got to be closed and simple.

    Which also makes it an appalling method for changing this law. Parties should layout their wares in detail, and punters get to vote on their choice. Winnie can then formulate his bottom line, proceed to ignore it and tell Jacinda or whoever he crowns PM what the new law is.

    That’s how law is done in NZ.

    Reply
  8. Dennis Horne

     /  28th April 2019

    Speaking with no claim to expertise … I suspect cannabis does no more harm to a developing brain or any other brain than alcohol (ethanol), and it appears to be less addictive. So, in all probability, moderate use is not a problem for the individual or society.

    The problem seems to be heavy use, which also applies to alcohol. Therefore the most logical answer seems to me to be: decriminalise use, control availability, discourage abuse, help people who need help – as always.

    Wowsers have nothing useful to say about the matter. Whatsoever.

    Reply
    • Duker

       /  28th April 2019

      ” decriminalise use, control availability, discourage abuse, help people who need help – as always.”

      Oh yes , that works a dream with alcohol doesnst it. Oh you forgot the well known harm cannabis does to teenage brains – its worse than alcohol.

      Reply
  9. the one thing the ‘nay sayers’ who would just prefer ‘status quo’, dont mention.. is that the ‘cops V gangs’ scenario it creates, is more harmful/costly (socially) than a ‘Regulated’ alternative : list of rules to follow: R18+, no smoking in public, small home-grow (4plants), licensed commercial supply only, members 420 social clubs etc…. thus spake Z 🙂

    the daze go by… 😀

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s