+95 Those reports that say things like "Scientists find chocolate is actually good for you" are annoying because they mislead, and worst of all, MISS THE POINT. How about we all follow this rule? "In excess, ANYTHING is bad for you - And in real moderation, NOTHING is truly bad for you" - DONE. amirite?

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Yeah, but we still need to find out //what// that moderation is. Different things have different effects in different dosages. Compare alcohol to cannabis. A drink is considered normal, and nobody would think twice about taking a drink. However, 20 drinks will kill a non-tolerant adult. (typically) A bowl or two is pretty much the norm for smoking cannabis, but you could smoke 20 bowls easily without any side-effects at all. Hell, if you found a way to smoke 100 bowls, you still wouldn't experience any toxic effects. Moderation varies from thing to thing,

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Indeed, I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. But it doesn't detract from the message. Standards vary for most things within a category. It stands to reason. But here, that shouldn't mean people don't agree that moderation is required.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Arsenic. It accumulates in your system so even one atom a day would kill you eventually. But I agree with the sentiment. I don't NW posts because there's this one esoteric example that doesn't fit 'always' or 'never'.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Arsenic is poison - i'm obviously not referring to actual poison that you would NEVER use even functionally never mind recreationally. It's not an exception that defies the rule because it's f**king poison, I'm not sure it's in the same category.

by Anonymous 11 years ago