Slashdot Mirror
Cannabinoids Induce Brain Cell Growth?
Harlan writes "The Globe and Mail is reporting that researchers at the University of Saskatchewan are claiming that high doses of cannabinoids have induced new brain cell growth in the hippocampus, the part of the brain responsible for learning and memory, in rat subjects. There are some interesting potential implications in regards to high doses of cannabinoids found in substances like marijuana."
I mean, have you seen the complexity of some of those home-made bongs?
There's some serious brain power gone into engineering those bastards.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
I always suspected... uhm, what were we talking about again?
Noise Is Music Podcast.
Same thing we do every night, Pinky - get baked and munch out.
Lost: Sig, white with black letters. No collar. Reward if found!
Now that my kids have read this we can argue about, "But DAD, Slashdot says!"
My ZooLoo
The team injected laboratory rats with a synthetic substance called HU-210, which is similar, but 100 times as potent as THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol), the compound responsible for giving marijuana users a high.
..or better yet, how do I make it?
Clearly my dealer has been lying to me. He swore there was nothing stronger than his stuff. Where do I get HU-210?
bite my glorious golden ass.
The authors are far more cautious in their interpretation than some of the /. readers...but then this is not that much of a surprise.
PDF (a few MBs) http://www.pubmedcentral.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid= 1253627&blobtype=pdf
The mentioned research used 'canaboids', which is a group of componds resembling those found in cannabis(THC). It was already known that the brain uses neurotransmitters that are in the form of canaboids and it contains several types of receptor for it, just like opiates have human equivalents in the form of endorfines.
But similar results done with THC (Tetra Hydro Cannabinol), the main compound in hash and weed have found no evidence for this cellgrowth stimulation. So let's not jump for joy yet. One experiment/paper does not mean it has been accepted as scientific fact yet.
Besides, you can be sure that with such a hot subject and the way research is financed/politiced there will be more research 'debunking' this even if it turns out to be true after all.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
If you're just going to talk, pass that over here.
What a surprise to click on Slashdot and see news about cannabinoids - I feel like I'm reading my own site ...
... shortcut url http://cann.com/
t ml
I operate CANNABIS.COM
Some informative pages to check out:
Lots of cannabis Research information *with sources listed*
http://www.cannabis.com/research/
TR-446 Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of 1-Trans-Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (CAS No. 1972-08-3) in F344 Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies)
http://www.cannabis.com/research/tr446study.shtml
(mirror of the study published by the U.S. National Toxicity Program)
Cannabis News
http://www.cannabisnews.com/
And finally, Erowid's Cannabis Vault...
http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis.sh
Ron Bennett
While we're all thinking ... think of how many cannabis users could have done so much more if it wasn't for that pesky arrest record, jail time, etc.
The penalties are what create much of the problems, not cannabis itself.
Ron
Well let's start with Fried et. al. [www.cmaj.ca], who concluded that ongoing heavy use of marijuana has a signficant negative impact on IQ.
(I think I can afford a few IQ points, better a little dimmer and a lot happier than a little brighter but a lot more misrable...)
And then we can in fact see the short term memory impairment,
Heyser, C.J.; Hampson, R.E.; and Deadwyler, S.A. Effects of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on delayed match to sample performance in rats: Alterations in short-term memory associated with changes in task-specific firing of hippocampal cells. Journal of Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics 264(1):294-307, 1993.
(The research is not conclusive. We are not rats.)
And let's not pretend that smoking marijuana isn't going to have a negative effects on the lungs,
Tashkin, D.P. Pulmonary complications of smoked substance abuse. West J Med 152:525-530, 1990., and
Sarafian, T.A.; Magallanes, J.A.; Shau, H.; Tashkin, D.; and Roth, M.D. Oxidative stress produced by marijuana smoke. An adverse effect enhanced by cannabinoids. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol 20(6):1286-1293, 1999.
(controlled vaporization reduces the carcinegens to nil. Smoking is bad for you, no question about that, no matter what you smoke.)
Or the immune system
Srivastava, M.D.; Srivastava, B.I.; and Brouhard, B. Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol alter cytokine production by human immune cells. Immunopharmacology 40(3):179-185, 1998.
(The research is also not conclusive. Also just about all research sponsored by the USA federal government has to be bent toward proving cannabis harmful. SO just about any research from the USA is politically tainted by its ideological war...pawn that you are you parrot it.
Marijuana capable of producing psychotic symptoms? Yes.
Fergusson, David M., John Horwood & Elizabeth M. Ridder, "Tests of Causal Linkages Between Cannabis Use and Psychotic Symptoms," Addiction, Vol. 100, No. 3, March 2005, p. 363.
(In already vulnerable persons. The threshold for 'psychosis' is very low... Evangelicals are a more psychotic sometimes...)
The original poster was talking about chronic use, implying ongoing, so let's also examine the effects of current intoxication: Learning and memory are in fact impaired by cannabis:
Grant, Igor, et al.,(2003) "Non-Acute (Residual) Neurocognitive Effects Of Cannabis Use: A Meta-Analytic Study," Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. Cambridge University Press, 9, p. 685.
Long term permanent damage? Absolutely, but only to the lungs.
(I support legalising cannabis and even I wouldnt make that sweeping generalization. It is likely you are correct however.)
Negative impacts on the brain during ongoing use? Absolutely.
(Define negative impact? Obviously millions feel its acceptable.)
Maybe you ought to be familiar with the research yourself before attacking other people? This is just a tiny fraction of all the research conducted. A simple 5 second google search would have turned up all you needed to know to not look like the jackass you do now.
(Maybe if the state arbitrarily named you a criminal for burning some plant matter, you would be defensive when people parrot the drug war lies?)
A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. Dwight D. Eisenhower
From the conclusion of your first article:
Current marijuana use had a negative effect on global IQ score only in subjects who smoked 5 or more joints per week. A negative effect was not observed among subjects who had previously been heavy users but were no longer using the substance. We conclude that marijuana does not have a long-term negative impact on global intelligence. [emphasis added]
As for the hyperbole of your other claims, let's dispose of them by referring to the most-widely used medical textbook in the world, The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy entry on marijuana:
Critics of marijuana cite much scientific data regarding adverse effects, but most of the claims regarding severe biologic impact are unsubstantiated, even among relatively heavy users and in areas intensively investigated, such as immunologic and reproductive function. However, high-dose smokers of marijuana develop pulmonary symptoms (episodes of acute bronchitis, wheezing, coughing, and increased phlegm), and pulmonary function may be altered. This is manifested by large airway changes of unknown significance. Even daily smokers do not develop obstructive airway disease. Pulmonary carcinoma has not been reported in persons who smoke only marijuana, possibly because less smoke is inhaled than during cigarette smoking. However, biopsies of bronchial tissue sometimes show precancerous changes, so carcinoma may occur. In a few case-control studies, some tests detected diminished cognitive function in small samples of long-term high-dose users; this finding awaits confirmation. Studies in newborns have not found evidence of fetal harm due to maternal use of cannabis. Decreased fetal weight has been reported, but when all factors (eg, maternal alcohol and tobacco use) are accounted for, the effect on fetal weight disappears. delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol is secreted in breast milk. Although no harm to breastfed babies has been shown, breastfeeding mothers, like pregnant women, are advised to avoid using cannabis. [emphasis added]
Btw, I am not sure why you have to call the poster you are responding to names. Seems like your arguments should be able to stand on their own.