Carl Hart, PhD presenting at Nobel Conference 51

Carl Hart, PhD presenting "Why Drug-related Research is Biased: Who Benefits and Who Pays" at Nobel Conference 51

[@9879SigmundS]

This guy's research is very important.

[@Bonjourmate]

Great presentation.

[@natashia2412]

This was awesome! Thank you, Dr. Hart

[@narrator69]

Epic dreads, and a wonderful speaker

[@BenRoberts12]

here hear

[@debbiedaniel94]

Dr. Hart, may I please be in your meth studies? I think you are brilliant!

[@SarahVision]

this guy is awesome

[@sandronelis5845]

Can't wait for your next book !

[@jaredgreathouse3672]

I love how people hop on the internet for 6 hours and think they know the complexities of neuropsychopharmacology. Where are YOUR degrees? Which studies have YOU done? What's the impact factor in your journals? How long and under whom did you go to school with? We know the answer: they don't exist. Until you have a psych degree, and have immersed yourself in the literature, listen to Dr. Hart. It's like somebody trying to disagree with me on drug policy, and on whether or not enforcement causes violence: I'm the one who's done the meta-analysis, I'm the one who's done the studies and tests, so that means when I say something about drug policy, you listen.

[@jaredgreathouse3672]

@@matthewhuber1418 lol ok

[@jaredgreathouse3672]

@Super Brain 969 lol ok

[@BenRoberts12]

i tend not to rely too heavily on facts and the results of studies as i find it blinds my instinctual judgements

[@francisleroy6215]

Jared Greathouse- you are an idiot, and a white supremacist....greetings from Australia, where equality is at least evidence based...

[@jaredgreathouse3672]

@@francisleroy6215 white supremacist🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@813lynch4]

I'd like to be his test subject

[@BenRoberts12]

i had a deja vu

[@jeffnorman6489]

Dr Hart has been telling the TRUTH for too long now about Drugs. It's TIME for GOV Drug Policy Reform and Decriminalization of ALL DRUGS!! i also have 18 yrs EXP and More about this subject, with my Own Addictions Channel!

[@rjjr.1071]

Haha......

[@laurisklavins5368]

51 comment following ze video nobel pìspraiz conference 51

[@3223ace]

Dr Carl Hart have you seen Scarface ?!

[@dawnanderson611]

ya cause thats a documentry

[@BenRoberts12]

@@dawnanderson611 about gloria estafan?

[@offisk]

No comparison. The movie is set during our era of drug prohibition and, more important, it’s a Hollywood film made for dramatic purposes exploring a drug pin who has become mad with power and abuse. Your comment offers nothing, I don’t regret to say. I would try to offer real life non-hyped examples to further your argument.

[@michaelbrunner1461]

Carl Hart said, " You don't want to live in a drug-free society because it will be difficult to function, difficult to get through the day, difficult for me to get through some of those boring-ass receptions which I have to attend." So, use drugs to deal with your problems. Thanks for the advice to the kids Dr. Hart. The sociopolitical message from activist Hart is clear - Our society has many injustices that require attention. Fine. No problem with this perspective. The problem with the message is Carl Hart's denial that drug use for many, many people (even casual users) causes problems and for some it is deadly. Refine the message Dr. Hart. What you said at the conference is dangerous.

[@Neumah]

+Michael Brunner What Dr. Hart said is not dangerous, it's uncomfortable. What is dangerous is to write laws based not on science and reality, but delusions and misconceptions. He, and others in this conference, also clearly makes the point that people developing problems with drug use most often have underlying problems, that the problematic drug use is a symptom of. 80-90% of drug users do not develop a problematic use pattern. You cannot draw the conclusion that the drugs are the problem. Also, you're extremely disingenuous with your straw man argument "So, use drugs to deal with your problems. Thanks for the advice to the kids". That is not at all what he said and if that is your honest conclusion I hope to the gods that it's just because you're overall uninformed about the subject of drugs and not because of some personal shortcoming regarding reasoning. Medicine is drugs, alcohol is a drug, coffee, tobacco... Take all that away and see what lovely place this will be. Try having surgery without drugs, I dare you. And you find it problematic that people are having a glass of wine at a reception to loosen up? Why? Ok maybe you don't. But if not, why cant they have a bump of cocaine, which is less harmful than alcohol according to many studies, if their overall cocaine use is non-problematic? A non-problematic use of drugs is not a problem and should not be illegal. And a problematic use should be treated, not punished.

[@michaelbrunner1461]

+Neumah Carl Hart told a large audience of high school and college students that meth is no different than Adderall. That is a dangerous comment when made by a professor at Columbia. He said that drug use is not a problem for most people. When a person in a position of authority makes this statement to impressionable minds, that's irresponsible and dangerous.Not only were his comments irresponsible, his facts are wrong. He said, "80-90% of drug users DO NOT have a problem." The facts are that approximately 80-90% of those who use drugs (I consider alcohol a drug) will not become dependent - the old term for what is now referred to as a moderate to severe substance use problem. That means 10-20% of those who use drugs will have serious problems and 80-90% will have a mild substance use problem or not be diagnosable - that doesn't mean that many drug users don't have problems, it just means they aren't diagnosed with a substance use disorder. Think of date rape of young women on college campuses as a problem associated with binge use of alcohol - - the woman might not be diagnosed but she still experienced significant consequences due to her use. Think of DWI by someone who overindulges once to often and drives - they have a problem due to their alcohol use. And on-and-on . . . I'm not "uncomfortable" with activist Hart's assertions that we've got many injustices and problems re: drug laws in this country. In fact, I agree with him on many of those points. Addiction emerges when you expose vulnerable brains - this includes the developing brain (teens and young adults) - to drugs. Avoid the drug - avoid addiction. Carl Hart's didn't say this. In fact, he said the opposite. That's irresponsible and IMO dangerous.

[@Neumah]

Michael Brunner First I'd like to once again point out your false equivalence. When he said methamphetamines and Adderall is the same thing, he was talking about the active compound in Adderall and if that was taken at the same dosage as methamphetamine. He did NOT mean that the general use case of smoking meth is the same as the general use case of taking an Adderall pill. But, with that said, it might very well be totally possible to smoke a small enough amount of methamphetamine to reach the same effect that an Adderall pill would get you. I wouldn't recommend it with the higher risk of overdosing (plus, no comparison of the harmful effects from long-term use were made), but if the fact is that they are the same, then that is the fact and it should not be denied. So wait, if the 10-20% of drug users have a moderate or severe substance use problem (I agree btw that that is not a negligible amount), and the other 80-90% have a mild substance use problem or aren't diagnosable, you are not making a distinction between mild problem and not diagnosable. That's fudging the numbers if anything. What you just said can be interpreted as 100% of drug users have a use problem. I have to ask you to provide a proper source on this one. Addiction, like Dr. Hart pointed out, have a stronger link to the people that get addicted (an their social circumstance) than to the drugs themselves. I agree that young people shouldn't do drugs recreationally, they should hold that off until they turn 25 and their brains have stopped developing. Of course you can avoid drug addiction by avoiding all drugs, just as you can avoid car accidents by never getting your behind in a car. However the former isn't a viable option given human nature. We do use drugs, we always have and we always will. And in order for people to make good decisions about their drug use, which is extremely important, they need good information from the science world, no matter how inconvenient or uncomfortable it might be. And just to be clear, I'm not saying that the things Dr. Hart says is the end-all be-all argument and the final truth. It's science, we learn new things all the time. But what he says should not scare you as long as he backs his claims up by proper science, which he does for the most part. Also, keep in mind that you can't take arguments regarding a very specific detail and apply it to the subject matter as a whole. That's not how science works. Nuances and details are very important.

[@mbrunner13]

+Neumah Here's my issue with Carl Hart's message. He had an opportunity both in his lecture and again during the Q&A segment to provide a clear message message to the young people in the audience: "Using meth and other drugs is very risky and here's why. . . " He did not do this. The science is clear that early use of any drug dramatically increases the risk of addiction. His talk was replete with minimizations of the harms of drug use - - "Drugs . . . are not the problem." Here are the facts: Drugs cause addiction. Drug use causes significant societal harm. Hart argued against this. He is wrong. His message to young people is wrong. Carl Hart was introduced as "neuroscientist and activist." He clearly made a sociopolitical argument in his lecture, and his talk clearly revealed his biases. He presented science to support his political agenda. To me, this is ethically questionable behavior. Worse though, he placed his agenda ahead of giving young people accurate information about drugs.

[@Neumah]

mbrunner13 He did not caution the audience on meth use because that is not his job. He is a scientist and he studies the effects of drugs, and if his studies are showing him that two drugs are the same, why would he go out and say that one of the two is horrible? That goes against his own findings. And again, we're not comparing smoking crack with taking an Adderall pill, we're talking about equal amounts of the two drugs administered in the same way, and he is very clear about that. And that using meth and other drugs is very risky is your own claim, not Dr. Hart's. According to him 80-90% of drug users don't develop a problematic use. There is a strong correlation between early drug use and addiction, yes. However most times the young people who start using drugs seek them out for a reason. Same thing with the legal drug alcohol. Most kids who are drinking early have a problematic background, that's why they start drinking (and in many cases develop a problem). Once again, Dr. Hart is a scientist and he did not attend this conference to warn kids about drugs, but to inform every viewer about certain things that has been found in his studies. Scientifically. He is an activist for one thing: we need to destigmatize drugs and drug use, not because everyone should do drugs but because if they are stigmatized we cannot form good policies regarding them to prevent people from developing a problematic use and help the people who do end up with one.

[@livefromtheground7274]

Very interesting...including his speech which appears to be ... He’s behaving as if he’s high. And I don’t deny his expertise and understanding, however I believe he’s irresponsible.

[@salmanuel4053]

Yes he's high, but his point is that people can use and meet their responsibilities, so if he did a good presentation, is it perhaps a case in point?

[@jeffnorman6489]

Cmon!! UNREAL...You say this out of IGNORANCE!!! So why don't you go.....................goat!!! LOL Idiot And he does use Drugs BTW and he Doesn't have a prob Admitting it either cuz it's not a big deal IF we're still in control of Everything we do in this life! TY God for the Plant called Marijuana, cuz I'm now smoking it for Many things and it's all Natural so...

[@ClickbaitGrifting]

let me guess, your brain did something like this: 1. person is arguing that functional use of drugs is possible, and has admitted to this in the past 2. let me look for reasons that this person is using drugs 3. now I don't have to think about their argument he could have normal difficulties speaking? this is quite common. do you think that anyone with a speech impediment is high? his speech was delivered well.