1
$\begingroup$

https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/7546/by-how-much-marijuana-will-shorten-typical-peoples-life

If it's truly politically incorrect, please just say so and point me where I can get credible answer on this question.

Can anyone tell me why by how much does cigarette shorten users' life is on topic (and up voted) while by how much does marijuana shorten users' life is off topic?

At first I made a mistake. I asked by how much marijuana will shorten my life. Probably none because I don't even smoke marijuana. What I really want to know is of course, by how much marijuan will shorten typical's user's life.

If I were asking about tobaco, I bet people would say, "It depends on how much you smoke, typically, you'll lost 20 years of your life." However, for that question, I got tons of downvotes over a small technical error that personal health is off topic. It's as if I were so dumb that I expect all of you know enough about me to diagnose my personal health problem.

Instead, I got tons of downvotes. I fixed that.

Then I got another ridiculously complaint about how I should ask for morbidity which is not the question at all.

C'mon.....

No body knows by how much marijuana will shorten typical user's life? Yes I know it'll vary from users to users. Another technicality that's too obvious. Or is people try to be too politically correct here that they just love to come up with some technical error to avoid answering a simple obvious question people should know before smoking marijuana?

Is it really off topic?

This seems like a simple question with reasonably simple answers. If the answer is 20 years like Tobacoo, it'll send a clear message to all the kids not to do it. If the answer is 0, it'll send another message.

Very simple. Reasonably precise. Very important. Not asked before. And I got tons of technicality.

| |
$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

In my opinion the question "By how much does marijuana shorten typical's user's life?" is a very good question having biological, epidemiological, medical and social aspects. I think biology.SE is the right forum to cover the biological, many medical and some epidemiological aspects of this question.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Can anyone tell me why by how much does cigarette shorten users' life is on topic (and up voted) while by how much does marijuana shorten users' life is off topic? $\endgroup$ – user4951 Jun 24 '13 at 1:00
  • $\begingroup$ @JimThio: I read through your lengthy question, understood your point and I agree with you. However, I think the more you repeat yourself the more difficult it will get to see your point. $\endgroup$ – winerd Jun 24 '13 at 8:29
  • $\begingroup$ +1 selected as answer. Don't know what got onto another $\endgroup$ – user4951 Jun 25 '13 at 6:22
4
$\begingroup$

We intentionally excluded medical advice from our scope, and this question is about medical advice, even if you rewrite it a bit. Such comparisons of health effects are in the end like questions that directly ask for personal medical advice, someone asking "Is eating X healthier than eating Y?" and similar questions is not interested in the biology but in medical advice.

Your efforts to reduce the complex biological effects of marijuana to a single number also give the impression that you're not at all interested in the biological aspects.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Where can I see that medical advices (even those applicable to humans in general instead of personal) is off topic. Also I do not try to reduce complex biological effects to a single number. The biological effects are indeed complex. In that question I want to know that one number. Other aspects can be for different questions. $\endgroup$ – user4951 Mar 18 '13 at 10:29
  • $\begingroup$ biology.stackexchange.com/questions/793/… and many others are also medical advices. $\endgroup$ – user4951 Mar 18 '13 at 10:32
  • $\begingroup$ Okay, where should I ask this type of question then? $\endgroup$ – user4951 Mar 18 '13 at 10:34
  • $\begingroup$ And who are you to presume what I am interested in? How the hell it is relevant? $\endgroup$ – user4951 Mar 18 '13 at 10:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm unable to see life expectancy questions as "medical advice" or as oversimplifications of "complex biological effects". Particularly not as lack of biological interest (no matter how many and what kind of messages Jim Thio writes everywhere). (-1) $\endgroup$ – winerd Jun 24 '13 at 7:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I really don't think "the answer could be used to produce medical advice" is the same as asking for medical advice. Technically, every single question on this site can be incorporated into medical advice. Should we stop discuss biology completely, because someone may decide to derive medical advice from it? Medical advice is when you say, "you should do X for health effect Y". If I say "Y happened to people who did X." and you go and decide to do X because you want Y, that's your problem, not "medical advice". $\endgroup$ – Superbest Apr 2 '14 at 4:48
  • $\begingroup$ An example: If I say, "70% alcohol kills bacteria" and link to a paper where bacteria cultures are treated with alcohol and found to be mostly dead, and some fellow reading this decides to drink himself silly to cure his bacterial infection, how is it rational to hold me responsible? $\endgroup$ – Superbest Apr 2 '14 at 4:53

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .