Replies

Fair enough . . . I also have not read the actually study, but the study did use data from between 82 and 94. Is this not a long enough time period to draw a conclusion about the causality of MJ. You see my biggest problem with this is that I've know MJ users who used harder drugs and I've known those that that did not, myself included. Anectdotal? Yes, but I think it's fair to say from my experience that MJ is not some sort of "gateway," but rather is just the first drug that a person comes across. Everyone I know who used harder drugs had a similar type of risky personality. I think that is the key in this situation, not the MJ.

but the study did use data from between 82 and 94. Is this not a long enough time period to draw a conclusion about the causality of MJ. It would have been if they observed a cohort. That is, someone who is a teanager in 82, starts using MJ, and is then observed in terms of progression to other drugs. That is exactly what makes a study longitudinal: each subject is observed over time.

Of course, by 1994, that teenager is is in his late 20s, so such study would never be reported as focused on teenagers.

What these people have dones is formed a pool out of all data from 1984 and 1992. In this case each subject is not observed over time but only once. This is what makes the study (by definition) cross-sectional.

This is what I was able to deduce.

You see my biggest problem with this is that I've know MJ users who used harder drugs and I've known those that that did not, myself included. Anectdotal? Yes,

YOu are a careful thinker, and I have no problem with a single word you say.

Anecdotal evidence is important also: it helps to develop hypotheses for a subsequent study. I am sure you understand, however, that your evidence depends also on whom you choose to intereact with and whom you choose as friends; they may or may not be typical in terms of the population at large.

but I think it's fair to say from my experience that MJ is not some sort of "gateway," but rather is just the first drug that a person comes across... Everyone I know who used harder drugs had a similar type of risky personality. I think that is the key in this situation... I too think that drug use is only a manifestation of some other traits and behaviors. But this is far from being an opinion: I have not done a study, and I have not examined thoroughly the studies of others. So, I respect your opinion but I have none of mine to offer.

Tbanks for your thoughtful posts, I enjoyed them.

If it were a "personality" issue, then why wouldn't there be a connection between alcohol and hard drugs? I don't see anyone trying to make that connection.

I've yet to meet an alcoholic that would do hard drugs. What percentage of hard drug users were former alcoholics vs. former pot smokers? I'm not saying that one leads to the other. But if one's personality leads them to some initial drug (alcohol or marijuana), then the statistics for that individual to progress to harder drugs should be the same. But I don't think that's the case.

And maybe that's the key. Maybe that's why people think that marijuana is a "gateway" drug. FWIW.