It also offbase to say “drug use” however. Because hallucinogen use may actually make someone less likely to commit crimes especially violent ones.
Maybe you mean like meth or crack use
And there’s a lot of meth users out there rising up the statistics or something.
No, I mean drug use in general, ignoring the specific drugs and amounts used. As I said, it varies a lot between drugs and amounts, but the relationship is still strong on the group level.
Is it including alcohol as the “drug” that it should be considered in your stats??
I don’t remember specifically whether the meta-analyses I’ve seen included alcohol or what degree of use they looked at. But alcohol abuse and intoxication is strongly related to violence, and the highest increased risk of violence is associated with using multiple drugs at the same time.
Because the main drugs that increase violent behavior (by class) are alcohol, benzos, amphetamines and cocaine …pcp too but that’s not a class of drug.
Opiates, marijuana, and psychedelics actually create a decrease in violence it seems.
But opiate and marijuana WITHDRAWAL can cause increase in violence.
But a lot of it seems to be based on the area and type of user.
A lot more urban cocaine use than shrooms use for example. And typically more violence in urban areas
There are a lot of flaws I’d say in any of these studies (in regards to the idea that one statistic can be manipulated a certain way to influence biases)
Maybe as a whole drugs increase violence. But if most our population of drug users were middle class hallucinogen users, they’d be calling drug users “too passive” rather than “dangerous”.
Anyways @anon9798425 more than making a case for psychedelic drugs was I trying to display the problems with statistics and bias in articles in general.
Which I think a few posters at the beginning of the thread were clearly trying to prove
I was just adding fuel to the fire
Most every argument has at least 2 sides. And flaws in its points. Have a good day.
Basically all scientific papers have thorough discussions throughout of potential biases and misinterpretations. That’s how science moves forward, and how we know we can trust the conclusions when the picture as a whole becomes clear, as it has in this case. It’s a mistake to think we can point out a few shortcomings in scientific papers and then conclude that the truth is unknowable and that all opinions are equal.
The part about drug use and violence is important because it shows schizophrenia and MI themselves are inconsequential when it comes to violence and homicide. It is not necessary to differentiate between drugs to show this, and so it is not a weakness or bias that they were grouped together, and there are other studies that have attempted to differentiate between them.
I guess I just prefer “substance abuse” because there’s a lot of stigma and misunderstanding about the word “drug”.
Everyone does drugs
Not everyone is a substance abuser.
Substance abuse is bad to me
Drugs are not
Yet I hear a lot of stigma towards “drugs”. It’s not a good thing when our society uses a word they don’t even know what it means so damn freely in a negative nature much of the time.
When really drugs aren’t bad. It’s the abuse of drugs. And not every drug even has POTENTIAL for abuse.
I completely agree with this, I just think telling people what the truth is is what’s most important here. I was an addict myself for many years, and I know the stigma is bad.
I used the word “drugs” because “substance abuse” is sometimes used to distinguish other drugs from alcohol.
Again this is only people known to the person who strikes out this isn’t mass humanity abuse.
Medical Studies change and are refuted so much that I think it’s a mistake to say anyone really knows human behaviour.
I can easy use ONE scientific article to debunk this article.
This is just based on myths.
Yes you are absolutely right. There are so many that can completely contradict each other.
Same thing with drug studies. The clinical studies I would bring to doctors about my products showed how my drug tested better in studies against my competitors drug, while they had their studies that did the same. It’s all about verbiage. There are plenty of studies that don’t get shown to physicians or the general public.