Parents Looking into Buying Me Oils That I Don't Want...

[Joshua the Writer]

It would be a shame to delete this thread, simpy because people didn't say what you wanted them to say. There is some brilliant information compiled here that, I'm going to go out on a limb and say, will definitely help, at least, someone who reads it.

There's nothing stopping you from refusing, point blank, to try it, especially if you can demonstrate to your parents that you are fine without some extra biochemical support.

That I should have been so lucky; firstly, to have parents that cared enough to address my issues and secondly, that I could have managed with no biochemical support. I, literally, would have ended up dead or hooked on obesity-making psych drugs without cannabis, as, at your age I had anorexia and I self harmed and had completely debilitating depression and social withdrawal.

With Cannabis, I went on to raise a large family, become a performance artist and am now so social people have trouble believing I'm on the spectrum.

Not exactly. Just forgot to mention a few things. Also, read this:

Edit: I already solved the issue. Just told my dad that I'm uninterested, and that I just straight-up don't want it, which was actually my primary reason, I just forgot to mention that. I also told him we already have stuff that works just as well, if not better. Ignore this thread and continue on with your lives. Nothing to see here!

 

[sidd851]

Actually, they'd pretty much have me pour it out if I said no, anyways, so, yeah...

Also, as @AloneNotLonely said, it's most likely a snake oil type of thing, anyways, so, yeah.

If it isn't regarded as an essential oil in the lists of oils made by companies like Young Living, then it's NOT an essential oil, PERIOD.

Vitamin C (ascorbic acid, L-ascorbic acid)also was not an essential vitamin.
Not until it was discovered that it's lack caused scurvy.
History is littered with such mistakes.

How will you feel, if, in 5 years time, it is discovered and universally accepted that
these oils are essential?
If the ultimate authority, "Young Life" lists them as such?
What if they show further research that you are damaged by your lack of exposure to them?
Damage that can never be undone?

How well will your adamancy have served you then?

The indoctrination you received at that "assembly", however well intentioned, is indoctrination nonetheless, by definition.
I suggest you familiarize yourself with the definition.

As has been said by some very wise and knowledgeable individuals above,
someday you will be a very different person.
Leave yourself room to grow.

May you be well.

sidd

 

[Judge]

Edit: I already solved the issue. Just told my dad that I'm uninterested, and that I just straight-up don't want it, which was actually my primary reason, I just forgot to mention that. I also told him we already have stuff that works just as well, if not better. Ignore this thread and continue on with your lives. Nothing to see here!

Your backpedaling is understandable. But it doesn't validate deleting this thread. There's some interesting information put forth on an interesting subject. Whether one considers it "Pandora's Box" or not.

Let it remain for others, whether kept open or locked. No matter what one's biases might be.

 

[Major Tom]

Someone must have watched this too many times and thought it credible.

 

[sidd851]

Someone must have watched this too many times and thought it credible.

"Next thing you know, they'll be dancin' with the ethnics!"

 

[Joshua the Writer]

How will you feel, if, in 5 years time, it is discovered and universally accepted that
these oils are essential?
If the ultimate authority, "Young Life" lists them as such?
What if they show further research that you are damaged by your lack of exposure to them?
Damage that can never be undone?

No, I'm not suggesting they're the ultimate authority. They usually just go with what is very widely considered essential oils for all things. To be honest, using weed as oil sounds like some stoner hippie sort of level of weird ideas that wouldn't exactly work. It honestly sounds like pseudoscience. It should only be used on people with severe mood disorders if it is proven to work. After all, this is an NEW sort of idea, and, when shock therapy and lobotomy was first invented, it was abused and overused in all sorts of ways.

 

[sidd851]

No, I'm not suggesting they're the ultimate authority. They usually just go with what is very widely considered essential oils for all things. To be honest, using weed as oil sounds like some stoner hippie sort of level of weird ideas that wouldn't exactly work. It honestly sounds like pseudoscience. It should only be used on people with severe mood disorders if it is proven to work. After all, this is an NEW sort of idea, and, when shock therapy and lobotomy was first invented, it was abused and overused in all sorts of ways.

Please, I encourage you to study any of the academic publications on it's use and effects.

Lobotomy doesn't grow in the wild, and we don't share some 60%of our DNA with it.
This is false equivalency.

Removing something from our biologies' that has been with us for millions of years is
not an endeavor to be taken lightly, and it is possible that untold damage has been done by "man's law".
(Neuroprotective antioxidants from marijuana. - PubMed - NCBI)
Adamancy in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence is the beginning of the end of the potential for individual growth and maturity.
You have obvious talents and skills---
Can I suggest that a "First do no harm" platform is appropriate for any endeavor?

Limiting yourself now to a "persona" will most certainly limit your potential to help or change yourself or the world in positive, meaningful ways when the opportunity presents itself.

I, for one, would be saddened to miss your matured and wisened voice from the chorus
of the song of our hopes and dreams of a better world.

I (really) wish you health and wellness,
in every way possible.

 

[Nauti]

No, I'm not suggesting they're the ultimate authority. They usually just go with what is very widely considered essential oils for all things. To be honest, using weed as oil sounds like some stoner hippie sort of level of weird ideas that wouldn't exactly work. It honestly sounds like pseudoscience. It should only be used on people with severe mood disorders if it is proven to work. After all, this is an NEW sort of idea, and, when shock therapy and lobotomy was first invented, it was abused and overused in all sorts of ways.

Well, if you are so adamantly against it, based on "image" "stigma" "newness" (not really, but maybe in the context of our current political climate) and are open to "Essential oils" (which I also use and like, BTW, and I no longer use Cannabis. The legal situation and lack of consistency and quality of available product = too much stress for me), may I suggest looking into edible grade "Copaiba oil? (I hope I spelled it right) As it has, apparently, similar properties to Cannabis CBD oil, with none of the legal constraints or stigma's associated with Cannabis extracts or products.

 

[sidd851]

To be honest, using weed as oil sounds like some stoner hippie sort of level of weird ideas that wouldn't exactly work. It honestly sounds like pseudoscience.

Who is to say that the "stoner hippies" didn't have the whole thing right all along?

I'm not asserting that, but, what I will say, is that if we outlawed beta-carotene, or any other precursor to an essential nutrient, oil, or vitamin, because of intense continued lobbying by a company that just happens to produce and sell vitamin A, are we maintaining our health in a responsible, rational way?
It sounds to me like you have developed an aversion to "hippies", and all things "hippie",
including any substance or idea that they may have promulgated.
This rejection has a very relevent and telling corollary. The other side of the coin, so to speak.
Most everyone loves dogs, right?
If you found that Hitler loved dogs, as well, could you forgive him his every evil deed in light of that new information?

Many times, in order to feel strong, or different, or valorous, the ego seeks "enemies".
Those that it can show to be different in a negative way, so that it can feel superior.
This is a cheap trick, and actually lessens our value as human beings.

Hippie parents love(d) their children, and vice-versa.
Hippie parents want(ed) their children to be healthy(and vice-versa).
Hippie parents want(ed) their children to be happy(and vice-versa).
Hippie parents did not eat their children.
Hippie parents did not eat the children of others.

Given these basic, profound similarities, can you tell me how you or your parents differ from the above?

Unrelated:
I'm curious what you think of Gandhi's historic pilgrimage to make salt.

 

[Joshua the Writer]

Who is to say that the "stoner hippies" didn't have the whole thing right all along?

I'm not asserting that, but, what I will say, is that if we outlawed beta-carotene, or any other precursor to an essential nutrient, oil, or vitamin, because of intense continued lobbying by a company that just happens to produce and sell vitamin A, are we maintaining our health in a responsible, rational way?
It sounds to me like you have developed an aversion to "hippies", and all things "hippie",
including any substance or idea that they may have promulgated.
This rejection has a very relevent and telling corollary. The other side of the coin, so to speak.
Most everyone loves dogs, right?
If you found that Hitler loved dogs, as well, could you forgive him his every evil deed in light of that new information?

Many times, in order to feel strong, or different, or valorous, the ego seeks "enemies".
Those that it can show to be different in a negative way, so that it can feel superior.
This is a cheap trick, and actually lessens our value as human beings.

Hippie parents love(d) their children, and vice-versa.
Hippie parents want(ed) their children to be healthy(and vice-versa).
Hippie parents want(ed) their children to be happy(and vice-versa).
Hippie parents did not eat their children.
Hippie parents did not eat the children of others.

Given these basic, profound similarities, can you tell me how you or your parents differ from the above?

Unrelated:
I'm curious what you think of Gandhi's historic pilgrimage to make salt.

No, it only applies to the types of hippies that get high very often.

 

[sidd851]

No, it only applies to the types of hippies that get high very often.

Some of the greatest artworks, the most impressive scientific breakthroughs, and the most liberating human achievements have been done by people that "got high very often".
What is it about an affinity for "getting high"
that offends you?

What if humankind had been doing it for millions of years?
What if changing one's perception of accepted beliefs, or what observations meant, with the use of naturally psychoactive substances was a driver for the progress of humankind?

What if it was necessary to maintain progress by "stepping outside of oneself" to see things from a new perspective?

 

[Joshua the Writer]

Some of the greatest artworks, the most impressive scientific breakthroughs, and the most liberating human achievements have been done by people that "got high very often".
What is it about an affinity for "getting high"
that offends you?

What if humankind had been doing it for millions of years?
What if changing one's perception of accepted beliefs, or what observations meant, with the use of naturally psychoactive substances was a driver for the progress of humankind?

What if it was necessary to maintain progress by "stepping outside of oneself" to see things from a new perspective?

Nothing much. People just don't think that clearly and don't make the best decisions while high.

 

[Nauti]

Nothing much. People just don't think that clearly and don't make the best decisions while high.

That's purely an assumption and generalisation on your part.

It might be fair to say some people, who get high, fail to think clearly, at least, some of the time, but it's fallicious to generalise and say "people who get high fail to think clearly".

It's just as true to say people who don't get high fail to think clearly, at least, some of the time.

It's not a logical and reasonable assumption to think - people who get high = don't think clearly...
As much as it's not reasonable or logical to assume - People who don't get high = think clearly.

Especially, if you, yourself have never experienced it.

It's simply a hormonal adjustment of an increase in dopamine, anandamide and other hormonal and biochemical stuff scientists haven't figured out yet; a recalibration of the endocannabinoid system which can promote a sense of well-being and euphoria, which, for someone with depression or anorexia, might very well promote clearer thinking, brought on by some well needed "feel-good" hormones.

I certainly agree that abusing any drug, legal or otherwise, tends to distort and hinder progress and wellbeing, but I take objection to your cognitively distorted generalization about "hippies who get high all the time".

Lots of great musicians, philosophers, scientists, writers, artists and sensitive hormonally-compromised souls who use and benefit from "getting high" would, no doubt, disagree with you.

It's an amazing medicine and has been used since time immemorial, by many innovative and advanced souls who think very clearly.

 

[Joshua the Writer]

That's purely an assumption and generalisation on your part. It might be fair to say some people, who get high, fail to think clearly, some of the time, but it's fallicious to generalise and say "people who get high fail to think clearly".
It's just as true to say people who don't get high fail to think clearly, at least some of the time.
It's not a logical and reasonable assumption to think - people who get high=not thinking clearly
As much as it's not reasonable of.logical to assume - People who don't get high = thinking clearly.

I did say they that they don't think THAT clearly, so you are actually just repeating what I just said.

 

[sidd851]

Nothing much. People just don't think that clearly and don't make the best decisions while high.

Okay.
(I'm going to regret this.)
Now we're getting somewhere.
I detest that people don't use their intellect and logic.
I detest that people repeatedly make bad decisions.
These may be my greatest peeves.
I think that they are what's wrong with the world.
Wilfull ignorance.

But, this is a separate issue.

Most people are predisposed to not thinking.
They default to making decisions based on what feels good. Based on what will most benefit them.

There are many drugs, and they can all have horrible consequences and effects.

What there aren't, are drugs that change a person's psyche. Oh, they can alter it, and create problems that aren't already there, or exacerbate underlying ones, yes, there can be horrible effects.
But by and large, they usually only bring to the fore, what has been hidden all along.
But the introduction of a drug won't make an industrious person lazy, or vice-versa.

It can only reveal what is already there.

Besides, this is a moot point, as the OP, and subsequent discussion, had to do with CBD, a proven treatment for many things that does not "get you high".
Avoiding it "because hippies get stoned" is the ultimate illogical argument.

By the same logic, be sure to avoid dramamine if you become nauseous, digitalis if you have arrhythmia, opiates if you have severe pain.
Almost every single medicine in our pharmacopea has it's roots in "getting high".
With the above "logic", will you eschew them all?
Most of them cannot be separated from the "high" as CBD oil can.
Your belief and "conviction" is arranged in a backward and illogical manner.

I really do wish you well, and peace of mind.

sidd

 

[Fino]

Have you guys not know that I just don't want it. I have rethinked it a little, but only removed some of the consequences and made few exceptions. Also, this isn't me supporting or not supporting the legal use of it. I just legit don't want to take it. @the_tortoise said that there is interest in it being an antipsychotic. One of the ADHD meds I used a long time ago was classified as an antipshycotic, and I didn't react well at that time. I just don't want it. Also, maybe it doesn't apply to it, and, instead, let's just go with "I don't want it because I already have something that does the same exact thing, and does it look like I care?" I didn't ask for your thoughts or talk about where else cannabis is found, I was just asking about how to tell my parents, "oh, no thanks, not interested" without end up sounding rude and not have them talk over me.

Wouldn't you just tell them you don't need it? What could they possibly argue? If you actually don't need it, what will they say? "You're so calm, you're doing fine in school, you're agreeable and happy. You need this."

Is that what the situation is?

 

[AloneNotLonely]

Vitamin C (ascorbic acid, L-ascorbic acid)also was not an essential vitamin.
Not until it was discovered that it's lack caused scurvy.
History is littered with such mistakes.

How will you feel, if, in 5 years time, it is discovered and universally accepted that
these oils are essential?
If the ultimate authority, "Young Life" lists them as such?
What if they show further research that you are damaged by your lack of exposure to them?
Damage that can never be undone?

Yes, a compound that is used in biochemical processes on which our body depends and which can be found in pretty much all plant life is equivalent to the industrially produced and isolated oil from a group of plant species that originally only grew in parts of tropical asia, which wasn't even available to the first modern humans. *claps* new levels of hippie have been reached.

Most drugs, medicine, and dangerous poisons have been isolated from plants (and sometimes animals/algae etc). Cyanide, can be found in the pits of many fruits. Isolate it from that, and then tell a hippie it's an all natural compound isolated from apples and they might inadvertently kill themselves. Crack cocaine is about as natural as this "totally natural isolated compound from a Cannabis plant". Once you process it, and isolate certain compounds, things can have very different effects on the body. If it's used in medicine to prevent seizures, then it's clearly medicine. It's no different from what you claim is all produced by "Big pharma" because this product is exactly the same, the vast amount of medication produced by "Big pharma" is nothing more than other compounds isolated from other plants.

Being a rebel by praising any and all parts/compounds that come from the Cannabis plant turns you into the exact same kind of lunatic as the people that made it illegal.

 

[sidd851]

Yes, a compound that is used in biochemical processes on which our body depends and which can be found in pretty much all plant life is equivalent to the industrially produced and isolated oil from a group of plant species that originally only grew in parts of tropical asia, which wasn't even available to the first modern humans. *claps* new levels of hippie have been reached.

Most drugs, medicine, and dangerous poisons have been isolated from plants (and sometimes animals/algae etc). Cyanide, can be found in the pits of many fruits. Isolate it from that, and then tell a hippie it's an all natural compound isolated from apples and they might inadvertently kill themselves. Crack cocaine is about as natural as this "totally natural isolated compound from a Cannabis plant". Once you process it, and isolate certain compounds, things can have very different effects on the body. If it's used in medicine to prevent seizures, then it's clearly medicine. It's no different from what you claim is all produced by "Big pharma" because this product is exactly the same, the vast amount of medication produced by "Big pharma" is nothing more than other compounds isolated from other plants.

Being a rebel by praising any and all parts/compounds that come from the Cannabis plant turns you into the exact same kind of lunatic as the people that made it illegal.

Regardless of it's availability, as I said, it was not regarded as essential until--- scurvy.
Do not attempt to change the argument.

Plants other than cannabis have been creating similar compounds as well, but not usually in amounts large enough to contribute to our use of them.
Your information on cannabis is also incorrect. It was found all over the world.
Unless you believe that the endocannabinoid system and cannabinoid/cannabinol receptors sprung into being overnight.
Evidence has shown that the ancient Scythians from BC13,000- ~BC7,000, Were widely utilizing and probably cultivating the plant.
Evidence has also shown that plants have been making these compounds for about 3 mi. yrs.

You would do well to read my above posts carefully, and perform the requisite research before making false, misleading, and inflammatory suggestions.

That being said, in my experience, you won't.
You seem to delight in reactionary, uneducated ramblings that betray your unfamiliarity with a subject or the conversation that has gone before them.

Here's a suggestion:
Try studying something before you decide how you feel about it.
You just might find that your gut proclivity for disruptive, forceful inanities are reduced.
You may also learn something.
Difficult, I know, when you already know everything.

I might even start taking you seriously.

Ha! Just kidding!


But, if you post something intelligent, unbiased, and in a gesture of goodwill, something contributory, I may even respond.

May you be well

 

[Otenba]

I'm glad things got resolved between you and your parents okay.