Dangers Of Marijuanas

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
Do I have to to post that?
You don’t have to do anything but I’d hope you have some relevant experience before spreading a wild claim like you just did. Of all the people I know with autism I can guarantee you the majority of their parents definately did not smoke weed especially not when pregnant
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
You don’t have to do anything but I’d hope you have some relevant experience before spreading a wild claim like you just did. Of all the people I know with autism I can guarantee you the majority of their parents definately did not smoke weed especially not when pregnant
Its in the news...they are already spreading the study results :rolleyes:
 

Moswen

Newbie
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
8
You don’t have to do anything but I’d hope you have some relevant experience before spreading a wild claim like you just did. Of all the people I know with autism I can guarantee you the majority of their parents definately did not smoke weed especially not when pregnant
I don't agree with the findings of the study, but your anecdotal experience is hardly proof that the study is wrong.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
Its in the news...they are already spreading the study results :rolleyes:
You really don’t know how to read research do you?



Researchers found that the rate of autism diagnoses among children with in utero cannabis exposure was 2.2%. Of those whose mothers did not use the drug during pregnancy, only 1.4% were diagnosed with autism.
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
You really don’t know how to read research do you?



Researchers found that the rate of autism diagnoses among children with in utero cannabis exposure was 2.2%. Of those whose mothers did not use the drug during pregnancy, only 1.4% were diagnosed with autism.
I don’t have to do research to post the article that quotes a massive study that was done on the issue. Now if someone who after they read the article wants to do research...that’s up to them.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
I don't agree with the findings of the study, but your anecdotal experience is hardly proof that the study is wrong.
7125 - Kids with autism

3148 - moms who smoked pot/exposed to cannabis - one time during early pregnancy

2.2% had autism

69 kids with autism

7,055 kids with autism with no pot exposure.

neither is an article on a propaganda site proof that the study is right. Those are the supposed figures from the study. Still looking for the ACTUAL study.
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,204
Lisafer says "Paying attention to the news..is a first step".

....to being totally incapable of thinking for yourself.

You being the perfect example
 

Moswen

Newbie
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
8
7125 - Kids with autism

3148 - moms who smoked pot/exposed to cannabis - one time during early pregnancy

2.2% had autism

69 kids with autism

7,055 kids with autism with no pot exposure.

neither is an article on a propaganda site proof that the study is right. Those are the supposed figures from the study. Still looking for the ACTUAL study.
I believe the link to the study is in the first paragraph of the propaganda site: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1002-5

Regardless, that doesn't detract from my original point. You acted as though Lisa was doing some grave disservice to everyone in the world with autism by posting a link and asking a question and then you act like an authority on the subject because you know a couple people with autistic kids. Sloppy work, here.
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
Lisafer says "Paying attention to the news..is a first step".

....to being totally incapable of thinking for yourself.

You being the perfect example
It’s good to know what’s being said..and anyone can research to see if its true or not.
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,204
I believe the link to the study is in the first paragraph of the propaganda site: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1002-5

Regardless, that doesn't detract from my original point. You acted as though Lisa was doing some grave disservice to everyone in the world with autism by posting a link and asking a question and then you act like an authority on the subject because you know a couple people with autistic kids. Sloppy work, here.
Sorry to interject here but can I just enquire as to who you are? Are you the defence for the clownage? If not then I'd suggest you have a quick look through this forum so you can see the quality of Lisafers work here at VC forum.

I think this is a reasonable request as not to cause you any type of public embarrassment when you do find out that Lisafer is nothing more than a slightly dysfunctional troll.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
Does copying a link from the Daily Mail constitute research?..........no, I thought not.
It’s more than that though. It took me like 3 minutes to run the numbers that article actually gave to see that it’s ridiculous. Of the moms who smoked pot only 70 kids got autism. That leaves over 7,000 with autism that pot was not involved at all. And over 3,000 moms who smoked pot who’s kid didn’t get autism at all. Clearly this isn’t a causal relationship.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
I believe the link to the study is in the first paragraph of the propaganda site: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1002-5

Regardless, that doesn't detract from my original point. You acted as though Lisa was doing some grave disservice to everyone in the world with autism by posting a link and asking a question and then you act like an authority on the subject because you know a couple people with autistic kids. Sloppy work, here.
1) you don’t know lisa
2) Lisa didn’t ask a question
3) it’s more than “know a couple people with autism” - it’s literally my career.
4) it is doing a grave disservice to people with autism by perpetuating a bad mother steroetype on their parents with shoddy half assed science, blame the mom blah blah.. it’s a disservice to the whole autism community.
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,204
It’s more than that though. It took me like 3 minutes to run the numbers that article actually gave to see that it’s ridiculous.
But that's the point, Lisafer is ridiculous.......ridiculous people post ridiculous shit.

You should know this by now Jess.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
I believe the link to the study is in the first paragraph of the propaganda site: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1002-5

Regardless, that doesn't detract from my original point. You acted as though Lisa was doing some grave disservice to everyone in the world with autism by posting a link and asking a question and then you act like an authority on the subject because you know a couple people with autistic kids. Sloppy work, here.
I will also point out that while that is a link to the study all that is available to read is an abstract. I want to read the whole entire study. That is what I am looking for. Apparantly I am going to need to pull it up in an academic data base and quite frankly I don’t feel like switching to my actual computer at the moment. The numbers that I provided should be more then enough for people to get the inkling it’s nonsense.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
But that's the point, Lisafer is ridiculous.......ridiculous people post ridiculous shit.

You should know this by now Jess.
I do. I just don’t want naive people reading her shit and thinking the mothers of all autistic kids are pot smoking delinquents who hurt their own kids when this isn’t based in reality.
 

Moswen

Newbie
Joined
Aug 13, 2020
Messages
8
1) you don’t know lisa
No, I don't. But in a hypothetical where I see Person A attacking Person B, I don't need to know Person B's history to come to their defense
2) Lisa didn’t ask a question
Quoting Lisa: "The true cause of autism?"
3) it’s more than “know a couple people with autism” - it’s literally my career.
That wasn't my point. My point was that your refutation of the study was based on an anecdote. Even if you're an expert on autism anecdotes aren't "proof" that your argument is the correct one. I say that even while acknowledging I don't even think the study is true.
4) it is doing a grave disservice to people with autism by perpetuating a bad mother steroetype on their parents with shoddy half assed science, blame the mom blah blah.. it’s a disservice to the whole autism community.
Really? Does the whole autism community come to the VC forums to get the latest hot take on autism?
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,204
No, I don't. But in a hypothetical where I see Person A attacking Person B, I don't need to know Person B's history to come to their defense
OK Superman that's all fine and dandy but before you lunge head first into flight mode I'd recommend a quick risk assessment of your environment.

Lisafer is not somebody that needs defending, just take my word on it. I'm just trying to save you some time that's all.
 
Top