Drugs are a touchy subject in the US. I imagine nobody in Europe would do a hire/don't-hire decision based on a drug test. In fact everyone I've ever worked for here in Slovenia where weed is illegal were pretty open about their history (or not so much history) of weed use.
It's very culturally accepted in most of Europe that you smoke weed or have at least at some point in your life. If you claim to have gotten through high school and college without at least trying weed ... I don't think anyone will take you seriously. Even less so if it happens to be true.
Why are americans like this when it comes to drugs? I don't know, and I think most noncorporate types aren't like that in the US either.
As for being held accountable for doing nothing wrong ... would you hire somebody who drinks half a bottle of vodka a day? They're doing nothing wrong mind you.
> If you claim to have gotten through high school and college without at least trying weed ... I don't think anyone will take you seriously.
Interestingly, I know a lot of people in The Netherlands who have not and will never smoke weed, whereas in the USA I had the feeling that nearly everyone (especially the college crowd) was a stoner. If I were to give my non-expert experience, I would guess that about 50% of the people I met in the USA had ever smoked weed, compared to 25-30% in the NL.
> As for being held accountable for doing nothing wrong ... would you hire somebody who drinks half a bottle of vodka a day? They're doing nothing wrong mind you.
Someone who drinks half a bottle of wodka a day is doing something wrong. They are alcoholic and probably not able to function in any job, let alone a job that expects someone to behave responsibly. Wrong <> illegal.
(You need to adjust upwards a couple of points to account for those who don't make it to 11th grade, who are assumed to use drugs at 50% higher rates, and also to account for a couple other factors that are discussed in the methodology.)
And 85% seems really low to me. Out of the 20 people in my 10th grade honors science class I was the only student who had not smoked weed at least once. After that I have asked many people and the overwhelming majority have said they smoked pot at some point in time.
PS: 15% of the population is a lot of people, you would expect to find large clumps of people that don't smoke.
I find it difficult to believe that it's a foregone conclusion that more than 2/3 of adults in the United States of America, my home, have involved themselves with an illegal drug.
I'm not doubting the study, I can't grasp the outcome.
Cannabis is not some terrible thing that turns people into thieves and low-lives. Plenty of the people you interact with every day (and likely have pleasant interactions with) use these substances. Perhaps some of this is location based, as I know on the west coast the general consensus is that people don't give a damn. Every single person I know has a friend or family member that smokes, often times successful and happy people, and it's not a big deal if they do or they don't. Public sentiment is changing every day and I truly believe that in the next 20-40 years cannabis prohibition will be a thing of the past just like alcohol prohibition.
One question for you - which do you think causes more health and addiction problems for people in the US ? Cannabis ? Or alcohol and prescription medications ?
People also download music, drive over the speed limit, and call in sick to work when they're perfectly healthy. The past three presidents have all admitted to trying illegal drugs. What's so surprising?
I'll assume a bottle is a fifth gallon, or 750ml. Half that is 375ml, about 12 ounces, and thus about 12 shots.
I have often enough drunken half that, 1/4 bottle a booze, three double-shot drinks over the course of an evening 4-6 hours. It's definitely not enough to be drunk at that rate or even tipsy. I function just fine. Double that I would be rather tipsy and not enjoy it. But I have known people that polish off a half and even a whole fifth in a single evening. I suppose those are the drunks. They usually function perfectly fine at work and are often top contributors.
I've never smoked pot myself but I know plenty who do and a lot of them are really fine developers, even though they get completely wasted every single evening.
The people that seem to be negatively affected in work are the amphetamine and narcotic users, both of which are often legally prescribed to them for ADHD or back pain. Those folks can get a bit edgy.
As far as flashbacks, I did know one LSD user who had them. But this guy had been very irresponsible and done several dozen hits one day which landed him in an insane asylum for over a year, after which he remembered nothing. He was definitely messed up. Casual users I know of hallucinogens have told me they've never had a flashback. I have noticed though that long term casual users tend to become more and more flaky so I would consider that a negative in a job interview, except that I don't ask such questions of people in that situation. I am skeptical of the claim the authorities made that the person in the referenced article is genuinely at risk of flashbacks because of a single incident of mushroom use years ago.
Well, you clearly have a stronger liver than I do in that case. If you really do manage to down that much wodka on a daily basis, you are considered an alcoholic. At least by most standards: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001940/
Having said that, if you manage to drink this much without anyone noticing in your professional performance, I don't see why that should be a reason to not employ you or fire you (although it is hard to say that in advance). The same goes for cannabis, which has a much less severe impact on your ability to function in society. In The Netherlands, Alcohol is actually considered to be a "hard drug", whereas cannabis is a "soft drug".
Regarding flashbacks, I did read of adverse effects of LSD years after using. I have never heard about the same applying to mushrooms (a completely different chemical).
I'll admit, I'm old and my learning (through bartender's school, no less) reflects that. Most shot glasses will hold a jigger, but you don't fill it for a shot. Further down the page you linked, under "jigger," shows a tool we use(d). A "shot" was a drink, the "measure" was a jigger (1.5 oz) or a shot (1.0 oz). In programming terms, the word "shot" was overloaded.
>> If you claim to have gotten through high school and college without at least trying weed ... I don't think anyone will take you seriously.
Interestingly, I know a lot of people in The Netherlands who have not and will never smoke weed, whereas in the USA I had the feeling that nearly everyone (especially the college crowd) was a stoner. If I were to give my non-expert experience, I would guess that about 50% of the people I met in the USA had ever smoked weed, compared to 25-30% in the NL.
I'd kinda second this. But I'd go so far to say that my experience in the US, a lot of the pot smoking happens in high school, and college was more of a drinking/party experience, I'd say most of my college friends never smoked weed in college. (yeah, we all tried weed in high school, but college was for drinking, chasing girls, and studying hard...) Yeah, we were all engineers.
And now in the "real world" the majority of my co-workers never smoked weed. You could say they're lying, but I'd guess because of my sample pool, it's more selection bias/demographics than anything.
It varies widely in the US depending on where you are and what kind of work you're doing. Many Silicon Valley tech companies don't give a shit, but try working for Federal contractors (many of which are required by law to drug test their employees) and you'll get a completely different experience.
Lots of people accomplished great things despite heavy, regular use of alcohol: Boris Yeltsin, Winston Churchill, Ulysses S. Grant, Christopher Hitchens, Edgar Allen Poe, Alexander the Great, Ernest Hemingway.
It probably depends on the place, it just seems very normal where I live. Young people smoke weed, just the way it is. Even cops have stopped really caring when it's done at open-air events.
But even when you consider that perhaps "only" 50% of your peers have ever tried weed ... what does it say about an employer (or anyone) who readily dismisses half of the population like that?
As long as people can come to work and work efficiently and with a good attitude what they do on their own time is their own business. Depending on weight and tolerance, a half a bottle of vodka a day isn't that much at all to some people.
It's very culturally accepted in most of Europe that you smoke weed or have at least at some point in your life. If you claim to have gotten through high school and college without at least trying weed ... I don't think anyone will take you seriously. Even less so if it happens to be true.
Why are americans like this when it comes to drugs? I don't know, and I think most noncorporate types aren't like that in the US either.
As for being held accountable for doing nothing wrong ... would you hire somebody who drinks half a bottle of vodka a day? They're doing nothing wrong mind you.