Cannabis Research Opportunity!

[CannabisResearcherMan]

Hi OzStoners! 

I'm a honours student at Monash University (Australia) currently running a research project investigating the associations between Cannabis use, motivations of cannabis use, and affect (i.e. your feelings/mood) following use. I'm hoping to find anyone interested in participating in cannabis research and being paid for their time. 

 

Study Background: Past research has shown that while cannabis use in itself is thought to be relatively harmless, specific patterns of use have been associated with a range of poorer outcomes such as stress, anxiety, and depression. Research into why people use cannabis, and their daily mood patterns around use, will allow us to distinguish between problematic motivations of use (that result in adverse consequences) from less harmful motivations of use (that result in less or no consequences). This in turn, will help inform future research and inventions that aim to help users who are dealing with problems relating other this cannabis use. 

 

Eligibility + Study Details: I'm looking for regular cannabis users (3+ times a week), who are between the ages of 18-55, and are interested in learning more about how their cannabis use affects their feelings/mood. This is a paid study (you will be reimbursed up to $51.50 for your time) and will involve quick daily surveys and 2x Zoom  interviews. If you participate in this study you will also receive a summary of your cannabis use and feelings/mood across the study period at the end of the study.

 

Please click to the link below to find out more and express your interest in this study! Happy to answer any questions/concerns anyone might have.

https://monash.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1SVccLxUhZMGABf

[Indycar]

"Are you a Cannabis user?" Nope, try Cannabis consumer.

 

We don't see Drinker's referred to as Alcohol User's, or Smoker's as Tobacco User's, or folks that take pharmaceutical drugs as Drug User's. How about basing your research on a netural platform, only then you'll get genuine findings, instead of this predetermined nonsense approach that you take solely for government funding..

 

Gotta say, this shit is getting old..

Edited August 10, 2020 by Indycar

[CannabisResearcherMan]

"Are you a Cannabis user?" Nope, try Cannabis consumer.

 

We don't see Drinker's referred to as Alcohol User's, or Smoker's as Tobacco User's, or folks that take pharmaceutical drugs as Drug User's. How about basing your research on a netural platform, only then you'll get genuine findings, instead of this predetermined nonsense approach that you take solely for government funding..

 

Gotta say, this shit is getting old..

 

Apologies for the use of "cannabis user" instead of "cannabis consumer". You make a valid point about the stigma of saying user instead of consumer, one that I (unfortunately) hadn't come across or considered before.

 

This is something I'll keep in mind in future posts, as well as in the research itself. Cheers for taking the time to point that out and giving the post a read

Edited August 11, 2020 by CannabisResearcherMan

[Nonannystate]

"Are you a Cannabis user?" Nope, try Cannabis consumer.

 

We don't see Drinker's referred to as Alcohol User's, or Smoker's as Tobacco User's, or folks that take pharmaceutical drugs as Drug User's. How about basing your research on a netural platform, only then you'll get genuine findings, instead of this predetermined nonsense approach that you take solely for government funding..

 

Gotta say, this shit is getting old..

Bit harsh.

User, consumer, I don't give  a fuck!

 

What's your definition of a "Neutral Platform", just by way of interest?

[Indycar]

Bit harsh.

User, consumer, I don't give  a fuck!

 

What's your definition of a "Neutral Platform", just by way of interest?

Not harsh at all considering the crap we've copped since prohibition

 

What you do or don't give a fuck about doesn't concern me in the slightest.

 

My definition in regards to "Neutral Platform" is without bias. Which quite often isn't the case with these studies. If you've been around long enough you'd come to realise these studies are Federally funded with the intention to make Cannabis look bad. They have a predetermined outcome, they go through the process, pick out the bits they want for their case study and release their findings. It makes the Fed Gov happy, and it boost Universities funding. Happy families all round.

 

Anything else while you're up there on your high horse, champ?

[Indycar]

 

Apologies for the use of "cannabis user" instead of "cannabis consumer". You make a valid point about the stigma of saying user instead of consumer, one that I (unfortunately) hadn't come across or considered before.

 

This is something I'll keep in mind in future posts, as well as in the research itself. Cheers for taking the time to point that out and giving the post a read

 

Thanks for your consideration, CRM.

[Ford Fairlane]

Hi CRM,

Do you or your supervisors have any other published papers we can have a look at?

Thanks

Ford

[Nonannystate]

Not harsh at all considering the crap we've copped since prohibition

 

What you do or don't give a fuck about doesn't concern me in the slightest.

 

My definition in regards to "Neutral Platform" is without bias. Which quite often isn't the case with these studies. If you've been around long enough you'd come to realise these studies are Federally funded with the intention to make Cannabis look bad. They have a predetermined outcome, they go through the process, pick out the bits they want for their case study and release their findings. It makes the Fed Gov happy, and it boost Universities funding. Happy families all round.

 

Anything else while you're up there on your high horse, champ?

Nice work there mate.

That time of the month?

 

Lucky for me i'm not after your approval or we might both have our panties in a knot!

 

Anyway, niceties out of the way....

 

Interesting take.

I've not paid much attention to many cannabis studies over the years, other than the pro medicinal benefit research which seems to counter the negative government argument which lumps cannabis in the same corner as most other illicit drugs, which is why I was curious as to the "Neutral platform" remark.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

I'll take a closer peek and see what I can find.

 

That's about it from up here on the pony.

Cheers Cob!

Edited August 11, 2020 by Nonannystate

[MongyMan]

specific patterns of use have been associated with a range of poorer outcomes such as stress, anxiety, and depression. Research into why people use cannabis, and their daily mood patterns around use, will allow us to distinguish between problematic motivations of use (that result in adverse consequences) from less harmful motivations of use (that result in less or no consequences). This in turn, will help inform future research and inventions that aim to help users who are dealing with problems relating other this cannabis use.

 

Just sounds like more of the same old same old negative cannabis research to me as well.

 

Starting from the stance of cannabis has "poorer outcomes but this research will help us reduce the risks" is NOT a neutral platform it is a predetermined platform and just more negativity regarding cannabis in reality.

[MongyMan]

I've not paid much attention to many cannabis studies over the years, other than the pro medicinal benefit research......

If you had you would know exactly where indycar is coming from no doubt as "cannabis research" in Australia up until the last few years has ALL been negative.

 

Are you familiar with organisations such as the NCPIC just for one example NNS?