▲ 305 ▼ Scromit (thelemmy.club) submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by HootinNHollerin@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/memes@sopuli.xyz 146 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 38 points 3 months ago (7 children) Oh you can relax, this is 100% propaganda. The bots are going to light me up for this, but it’s just not a real documented thing permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 14 child comments replies: [–] Mturodo@lemmy.world 41 points 3 months ago (3 children) Absolutely a real thing. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/files/allchildrens/clinical-pathways/chs_pathway-2025-08-18.pdf https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085%2824%2900127-6/ https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2824833 https://gastro.org/clinical-guidance/diagnosis-management-of-cannabinoid-hyperemesis-syndrome/ https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/21665-cannabis-hyperemesis-syndrome permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 months ago Thank you for not just posting "it is a thing!" But instead backing it up with sources. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kieron115@startrek.website 3 points 3 months ago Thank you for the high quality sources. Cleveland Clinic has been recommended to me multiple times by health care providers. permalink fedilink source parent [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -29 points 3 months ago (2 children) 11 month old account Exactly 1 comment Hmm very suspicious permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago (1 child) Damn, it's bros first comment after lurking nearly a year and this is what they get? Geeze it'll probably be another year before they want to comment again. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago Oh don’t sweat it, “bro” is ChatGPT or Opus 4.7 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Ah, yes, attack the person, ignore the data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child) Can you explain how that’s an attack? Isn’t that just normal pointing out bots? And don’t just lazily spam an ad hominem link, since bots don’t have persons to attack permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent [–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 35 points 3 months ago Wikipedia: 45 sources cited permalink fedilink source parent [–] sidelove@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago (2 children) Raises hand meekly... I do in fact get this if I've been consistent for a long-ass time, not necessarily the dose size, but I swear to god you could replace my pen with ipecac and it would be the same experience. That said, long breaks "reset" it for me. And while I don't personally know anyone with the same problem, there are thousands of stories both online and IRL for me of "friend of a friend can't smoke weed anymore because of it". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) I'm super curious now... Are you screaming while vomiting? And this is a different urge than what you feel for a "normal" vomit? Like there is a compulsion to scream while you're doing it? Edit: hmmm, no reply. I think this person may have scromitted themselves to death permalink fedilink source parent [–] other_cat@piefed.zip 1 point 3 months ago If the consistency doesn't take dosage into consideration does it take frequency? I'm curious about that part. I only partake 1 time a week (generally) but I do that every week so my consistency is high. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago* (6 children) Its extremely well documented. This is exactly why you shouldnt take medical advice online seriously. It just stems from an over saturation of cannaboid receptors. The same receptors whose antiemetic effects are useful for cancer patients or other nausea prone patients can be reversed by over saturation of the receptor. It can be fixed typically by a period of abstinence that lets the receptors reset, but some people can never really partake again. I say this as someone who worked as a nursing assistant and used to be an anatomy/biology tutor in college. I also have smoked way more weed than any of you over the past decade. If you havent seen any evidence of this, its because you have no idea how to look. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 months ago I don't think you've smoked more weed than me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] texture@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago I also have smoked way more weed than any of you over the past decade well now im going to assume the whole message is nonsense. good day. permalink fedilink source parent [–] architect 6 points 3 months ago Lol, sure. You literally know no one here but insist you “smoke more weed than any of us” you’re propaganda. 100%. permalink fedilink source parent [–] athatet@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago You don’t smoke more than I do. Shut the fuck up. permalink fedilink source parent [–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 months ago What is the screaming part permalink fedilink source parent [–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 child) It is extremely well documented “Trust me bro” Then I get 10 links that could have been published by the GOP for $30 each. Laughable permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] other_cat@piefed.zip 0 points 3 months ago Okay then YOU set the standards of proof. Anything other than a direct experience, what would you consider credible as a source of counterargument? permalink fedilink source parent [–] protist@retrofed.com 13 points 3 months ago Pretty sure this is actually a real thing, however this Philadelphia Inquirer bit is def written like propaganda permalink fedilink source parent [–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 6 points 3 months ago estimated 32% prevalence among cannabis users 113 cases documented worldwide never heard of it despite your social circle being mostly daily smokers of high-thc weed Lol definitely not a propaganda thing, and all of us 339 pot smokers should be worried permalink fedilink source parent [+] potatoguy@mbin.potato-guy.space 1 point 3 months ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mturodo@lemmy.world 41 points 3 months ago (3 children) Absolutely a real thing. https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/-/media/files/allchildrens/clinical-pathways/chs_pathway-2025-08-18.pdf https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085%2824%2900127-6/ https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2824833 https://gastro.org/clinical-guidance/diagnosis-management-of-cannabinoid-hyperemesis-syndrome/ https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/21665-cannabis-hyperemesis-syndrome permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 months ago Thank you for not just posting "it is a thing!" But instead backing it up with sources. permalink fedilink source parent [–] kieron115@startrek.website 3 points 3 months ago Thank you for the high quality sources. Cleveland Clinic has been recommended to me multiple times by health care providers. permalink fedilink source parent [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -29 points 3 months ago (2 children) 11 month old account Exactly 1 comment Hmm very suspicious permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago (1 child) Damn, it's bros first comment after lurking nearly a year and this is what they get? Geeze it'll probably be another year before they want to comment again. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago Oh don’t sweat it, “bro” is ChatGPT or Opus 4.7 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Ah, yes, attack the person, ignore the data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child) Can you explain how that’s an attack? Isn’t that just normal pointing out bots? And don’t just lazily spam an ad hominem link, since bots don’t have persons to attack permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LastYearsIrritant@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 months ago Thank you for not just posting "it is a thing!" But instead backing it up with sources. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kieron115@startrek.website 3 points 3 months ago Thank you for the high quality sources. Cleveland Clinic has been recommended to me multiple times by health care providers. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -29 points 3 months ago (2 children) 11 month old account Exactly 1 comment Hmm very suspicious permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago (1 child) Damn, it's bros first comment after lurking nearly a year and this is what they get? Geeze it'll probably be another year before they want to comment again. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago Oh don’t sweat it, “bro” is ChatGPT or Opus 4.7 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Ah, yes, attack the person, ignore the data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child) Can you explain how that’s an attack? Isn’t that just normal pointing out bots? And don’t just lazily spam an ad hominem link, since bots don’t have persons to attack permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago (1 child) Damn, it's bros first comment after lurking nearly a year and this is what they get? Geeze it'll probably be another year before they want to comment again. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago Oh don’t sweat it, “bro” is ChatGPT or Opus 4.7 permalink fedilink source parent
[+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago Oh don’t sweat it, “bro” is ChatGPT or Opus 4.7 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Ah, yes, attack the person, ignore the data. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child) Can you explain how that’s an attack? Isn’t that just normal pointing out bots? And don’t just lazily spam an ad hominem link, since bots don’t have persons to attack permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -17 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child) Can you explain how that’s an attack? Isn’t that just normal pointing out bots? And don’t just lazily spam an ad hominem link, since bots don’t have persons to attack permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (1 child) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -7 points 3 months ago (1 child) Attacking a human person and accusing an account of being a bot are completely separate things This is a lazy argument on your part. I disagree with your evaluation permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MagnificentSteiner@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 months ago* (1 child) An account is an inanimate thing... you can't accuse it of anything. You are accusing the person controlling the account of running a bot (which you have zero proof for except vibes) instead of addressing their argument. That's as classic ad-hominem as it gets. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[+] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world -9 points 3 months ago (1 child) Agree to disagree. I only engage with humans, not clankers. Think of it as a CAPTCHA permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 child) Dude, they provided like 7 reputable sources. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gwulgg@lemmy.zip 2 points 3 months ago You can lead a horse to water… permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 35 points 3 months ago Wikipedia: 45 sources cited permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sidelove@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago (2 children) Raises hand meekly... I do in fact get this if I've been consistent for a long-ass time, not necessarily the dose size, but I swear to god you could replace my pen with ipecac and it would be the same experience. That said, long breaks "reset" it for me. And while I don't personally know anyone with the same problem, there are thousands of stories both online and IRL for me of "friend of a friend can't smoke weed anymore because of it". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) I'm super curious now... Are you screaming while vomiting? And this is a different urge than what you feel for a "normal" vomit? Like there is a compulsion to scream while you're doing it? Edit: hmmm, no reply. I think this person may have scromitted themselves to death permalink fedilink source parent [–] other_cat@piefed.zip 1 point 3 months ago If the consistency doesn't take dosage into consideration does it take frequency? I'm curious about that part. I only partake 1 time a week (generally) but I do that every week so my consistency is high. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) I'm super curious now... Are you screaming while vomiting? And this is a different urge than what you feel for a "normal" vomit? Like there is a compulsion to scream while you're doing it? Edit: hmmm, no reply. I think this person may have scromitted themselves to death permalink fedilink source parent
[–] other_cat@piefed.zip 1 point 3 months ago If the consistency doesn't take dosage into consideration does it take frequency? I'm curious about that part. I only partake 1 time a week (generally) but I do that every week so my consistency is high. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago* (6 children) Its extremely well documented. This is exactly why you shouldnt take medical advice online seriously. It just stems from an over saturation of cannaboid receptors. The same receptors whose antiemetic effects are useful for cancer patients or other nausea prone patients can be reversed by over saturation of the receptor. It can be fixed typically by a period of abstinence that lets the receptors reset, but some people can never really partake again. I say this as someone who worked as a nursing assistant and used to be an anatomy/biology tutor in college. I also have smoked way more weed than any of you over the past decade. If you havent seen any evidence of this, its because you have no idea how to look. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 12 child comments replies: [–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 months ago I don't think you've smoked more weed than me. permalink fedilink source parent [–] texture@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago I also have smoked way more weed than any of you over the past decade well now im going to assume the whole message is nonsense. good day. permalink fedilink source parent [–] architect 6 points 3 months ago Lol, sure. You literally know no one here but insist you “smoke more weed than any of us” you’re propaganda. 100%. permalink fedilink source parent [–] athatet@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago You don’t smoke more than I do. Shut the fuck up. permalink fedilink source parent [–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 months ago What is the screaming part permalink fedilink source parent [–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 child) It is extremely well documented “Trust me bro” Then I get 10 links that could have been published by the GOP for $30 each. Laughable permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] other_cat@piefed.zip 0 points 3 months ago Okay then YOU set the standards of proof. Anything other than a direct experience, what would you consider credible as a source of counterargument? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] LemmyFeed@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 months ago I don't think you've smoked more weed than me. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] texture@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago I also have smoked way more weed than any of you over the past decade well now im going to assume the whole message is nonsense. good day. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] architect 6 points 3 months ago Lol, sure. You literally know no one here but insist you “smoke more weed than any of us” you’re propaganda. 100%. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] athatet@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago You don’t smoke more than I do. Shut the fuck up. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 months ago What is the screaming part permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 child) It is extremely well documented “Trust me bro” Then I get 10 links that could have been published by the GOP for $30 each. Laughable permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] other_cat@piefed.zip 0 points 3 months ago Okay then YOU set the standards of proof. Anything other than a direct experience, what would you consider credible as a source of counterargument? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] other_cat@piefed.zip 0 points 3 months ago Okay then YOU set the standards of proof. Anything other than a direct experience, what would you consider credible as a source of counterargument? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] protist@retrofed.com 13 points 3 months ago Pretty sure this is actually a real thing, however this Philadelphia Inquirer bit is def written like propaganda permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 6 points 3 months ago estimated 32% prevalence among cannabis users 113 cases documented worldwide never heard of it despite your social circle being mostly daily smokers of high-thc weed Lol definitely not a propaganda thing, and all of us 339 pot smokers should be worried permalink fedilink source parent