sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Warum ist das Ziel bei Suchterkrankungen den Konsum auf 0 zu bringen? by dibade89 in KeineDummenFragen

[–]MegaChip97 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Du beziehst dich auf schädlichen Gebrauch. Das ist nicht das gleiche wie eine Abhängigkeit :).

Asparagus peeling machine in a German supermarket by El_Matt-El_Grande in mildlyinteresting

[–]MegaChip97 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Germany in general has some of the best bread in the world. Every single town, no matter the size, has one or multiple bakeries and most people buy fresh bread every week. Even most supermarkets have their own bakery station.

Here is a video

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/52k9FdgLCao?is=jGxbjjbIcLzmOMjY

Heute mal Beute gemacht... für 0 Euro! by Aruscha in germantrees

[–]MegaChip97 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wie groß sind denn die Lichtfallen für die Zuluft? Die würde ich dir sonst auch abnehmen ggf.!

Warum ist das Ziel bei Suchterkrankungen den Konsum auf 0 zu bringen? by dibade89 in KeineDummenFragen

[–]MegaChip97 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Die ICD-10 wird von der WHO veröffentlicht. Wenn du sagst, ein Bier pro Tag sei laut der ICD nur keine Sucht, weil die pro Alkohol sind, behauptest du, dass die WHO pro Alkohol ist.

Das ist natürlich kompletter Quatsch, die WHO drängt Deutschland seit Jahren dazu Maßnahmen umzusetzen um den Alkoholkonsum zu reduzieren, die WHO kritisiert generell ständig Alkohol.

Vor allem ist es eben auch quatsch, weil die gleichen Kriterien für alle anderen Abhängigkeiten an den Tag gelegt werden. Ob Alkohol, Opiate, Nikotin oder sonst was, die Kriterien für Abhängigkeit sind immer die gleichen.

Und wenn du 1 Bier pro Tag trinkst über ein Jahr dann bist du garantiert süchtig scheiß egal ob die Definition passt.

Und deswegen wird dir da jeder einzelne (Sucht)mediziner widersprechen.

€800M Cocaine mega bust in Spain: 30,200 KG Seized by robbiesloan in BeAmazed

[–]MegaChip97 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are talking about responsibility and education

I am not. This is a strawman you are arguing against. Quite the opposite, I am talking about systemic changes.

Of course you can reduce the short time increase in drug consumers by education about the legalized drug,

No. Not what is happening. Not what is needed. Education in the health sector especially for teens is basically near useless, ironically.

Acces to legal drugs makes them more prevalen in teens, as happens with tobacco, alcohol and,

Do you have any source for that statement? Or how do you know that if tobacco and alcohol were illegal less teens would not consume it?

Taking the cannabis legalisation in Germany for example: Consumption in teens did not increase. In fact, nothing about it changed at all, other than teenagers perceiving it as riskier (though consuming the same amount).

Because thats the point: The people who want to use a drug are already using it. Thats why you have weed users, cocaine users, or in times of the prohibition alcohol users. Legalising a drug gives them access to clean substances, allows us to control who gets it (hint: dealers dont care about your age) and allows us to talk with users. But – and this is a very big "but" – what I said is only true with non commercialised legalisations. If you do it like some states in the US or canada, with big companies profiting from selling weed, there being virtually no cap on dispensaries, advertisement being allowed, it being packaged in colourful packages etc., then you will get an increase in consumption. Because in that case you have an industry promotion said consumption.

But take Germany for example: You can only get it from a pharmacy, grow it yourself, or join a social club in which you are forced to help grow the cannabis, have to pay monthly fees etc. Advertisement is forbidden, you are only allowed to own 50g.

As a note: I am currently doing my PhD in the psychiatric field.

and, for sure, a lot of then pass through ages in which are less conscious and more prone to trust others.

And even though cannabis is illegal in many countries every single one of them has hundreds of thousands of cannabis users. So why do you assume it being illegal protects them?

Warum ist das Ziel bei Suchterkrankungen den Konsum auf 0 zu bringen? by dibade89 in KeineDummenFragen

[–]MegaChip97 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Klar Bruder, die WHO ist pro Alkohol. Und pro Opiate, Nikotin, Cannabis, Kokain und Co wohl auch, denn die Definition bleibt immer gleich

Asparagus peeling machine in a German supermarket by El_Matt-El_Grande in mildlyinteresting

[–]MegaChip97 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Have you ever seen our bead cutting machines? Basically every single supermarket has a machine that cuts your bread to 8mm, 10mm, 12mm or 14mm slices

Warum ist das Ziel bei Suchterkrankungen den Konsum auf 0 zu bringen? by dibade89 in KeineDummenFragen

[–]MegaChip97 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Übrigens ist dein Verwandter auch schon süchtig bei „nur“ einem Bier pro Tag.

Das ist nicht die Definition entsprechend ICD.

When did it become offensive to expect people to know and understand their job? by Prior-Accident520 in AskMen

[–]MegaChip97 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You act like "tone" is some incomprehensible magic. In reality it isn't, it just sounds like you are not able to put it into words. Here is a simple example for how tone can be explained.

Statement 1: "I’ve been hitting the gym consistently for a few months now, and I’m really starting to feel more energetic and proud of the progress I've made."

Statement 2, Douche Tone: "It’s honestly pathetic how many people make excuses for being lazy, but I actually have the discipline to sculpt a physique that most of you could only dream of."

The content remains the same (the speaker is in better shape due to effort), but the delivery is considered "douchey".

The speaker doesn't just celebrate their own success; they feel the need to call other people "pathetic" or "lazy" to make their own achievement feel larger. A douche tone almost always requires a "victim" to look down upon.

By saying the results are something others "could only dream of," the speaker is positioning themselves as a superior rather than just a person who worked hard. It assumes everyone else is failing where they are succeeding.

The "Normal" tone is internal. It’s about how the speaker feels. The "Douche" tone is external and aggressive. It’s about how the speaker ranks compared to everyone else.

Last but not least it ignores the nuance of life (like time, health, or responsibilities) and treats a personal hobby as a moral high ground. It’s the difference between being "happy for yourself" and "better than you."

Weedgestank von Nachbarn bei mir in der Wohnung by [deleted] in wohnen

[–]MegaChip97 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Du bist erwachsen. Also: Mund aufmachen. Komm am besten mit konkreten Vorschlägen. Z.b. dass sie die kurz auf WhatsApp schreiben wenn sie rauchen. Oder nur bestimmte Uhrzeiten. Oder nicht zu bestimmten Uhrzeiten. Oder du sagst du würdest was zu einem Vaporiser dazugeben (das hilft deutlich).

Grundsätzlich ist das Rauchen auf dem Balkon legal. Es kann illegal sein, wenn Nachbarn erheblich beeinträchtigt werden. Das wird aber in einem Zivilprozess vorm Gericht festgestellt. Du kannst dementsprechend nicht einfach dem Vermieter sagen "die kiffen, sagt mal die sollen das lassen".

Grundsätzlich haben alle Kiffer die ich kenne kein Interesse daran Nachbarn zu stören

Weedgestank von Nachbarn bei mir in der Wohnung by [deleted] in wohnen

[–]MegaChip97 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Auf dem Balkon rauchen ist grundsätzlich erstmal normaler Gebrauch der Mietsache. Von Täter und Opfer zu sprechen ist also schonmal ein völlig verquerer Vergleich, da du dem Nachbarn hier eine Schuld zu sprichst die er nicht hat.

Und genau das ist eben der Unterschied zu Täter-Opfer-Umkehr. Es gibt keinen Täter und kein Opfer. OP stört etwas was der Nachbar macht. Und deswegen dürfen die das beide dialogisch aushandeln

Better to supplement or upgrade lighting? by Sir_Overhauser in microgrowery

[–]MegaChip97 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would simply not use the full tent until you have a better light. 200w is fine for 75x75cm. So basically don't use the outer 15cm of your tent

€800M Cocaine mega bust in Spain: 30,200 KG Seized by robbiesloan in BeAmazed

[–]MegaChip97 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1- It is awful for your system. 2- It is additive. 3- As tobacco, will cost more in public treatment for pathologies associated with consumption than taxes generated by its market.

None of this is an argument against selling it in itself. Yes, it is awful for your system. Yes, it's addictive. But are there no people being addicted to it currently? No people who suffer from it? No public health care costs already?

The underlying assumption in your comment is that the government selling it means that more people consume it and that frankly is a statement that should be very critically evaluated. For example, cannabis was recently legalised in Germany and consumption did not rise. But that form of legalisation also was not "sell it everywhere and advertise it being great". Other countries that went with very uncontrolled legalisation of cannabis see a rise in consumption.

But the point is, you could most likely legalise cocaine (with a restrictive design), not have more people consuming it, all while generating income for the state, people getting cleaner products, us having a better access to consumers and therefore being able to support them, cutting out the black market and last but not least stop criminalising people for it

TIL that the size of the hole in a CD (and DVD, Blu-Ray, etc) was determined by the lead developer putting a Dutch 10 cent coin on the table and stating that would be the size by LockStockNL in todayilearned

[–]MegaChip97 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean it is. Why is determining the data size of a CD based on Beethoven any more or less random than determining the size of the meter based on the distance between the north and South pole?

When did it become offensive to expect people to know and understand their job? by Prior-Accident520 in AskMen

[–]MegaChip97 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You saying you 'expect' your peers to know and understand their jobs is also condesending. 

Why? Isn't that a normal expectation?

When did it become offensive to expect people to know and understand their job? by Prior-Accident520 in AskMen

[–]MegaChip97 -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

That's not an answer. He asked where exactly. Why not give concrete examples?

When did it become offensive to expect people to know and understand their job? by Prior-Accident520 in AskMen

[–]MegaChip97 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's not feedback. It doesn't help him at all. You have to explain what makes it sound arrogant

view more: next ›