Talk:Gateway drug theory

Isn't there something in the idea that people who use "soft" drugs like cannabis are more likely to associate with and/or be targeted by sellers of harder drugs, though? Even ciggy smokers are more likely to be open to trying cannabis than non-smokers? 01:24, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What I've read is that the there might be some correlation between cannibis and harder drugs for the reasons that you state. But the cigarettes to cannibis is not generally supported.  But I'm not an expert.  Citations coming.  Sterile 01:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * dont know if this is relevant but when I was in high school / college (1968-1974 approx) there was a practise among dealers to spike drugs with something harder. So your weed was soaked in a mild solution with cocaine and so on. That did lead people to move up to much harder stuff to getthe same kick Hamster 03:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

"Conservative deceit"
If, as the article seems to imply, the jury may be out on the question ("Studies on the gateway drug theory show conflicting results; some studies support the concept while others bring it into question.") is it fair to tag this with "deceit"? Moreover, what evidence can we present that ties the concept of "gateway drugs" to a uniquely conservative POV? I know more than a few non-conservatives who buy the idea...Amin7b5 02:54, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It's silly snarky thing... lulz an all that Secret Squirrel 03:00, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Use of the word "Theory" in this article.
Stop it.

A Theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.

There are enough people out there misunderstanding the word theory without needing to perpetuate that nonsense here. It is an assertion, and should be labeled as such. 16:12, 8 January 2014‎ (UTC)