Slashdot Mirror
Link Between Marijuana and Psychosis Goes Both Ways
An anonymous reader writes with news of a study out of the Netherlands (abstract) about the link between psychosis and marijuana use. The researchers wanted to examine what caused the relationship — was marijuana use leading to psychosis, or did those suffering from psychosis have a higher tendency to seek out marijuana? As it turns out, they found evidence for both. From the article:
"... using pot at 16 years old was linked to psychotic symptoms three years later, and psychotic symptoms at age 16 were linked to pot use at age 19.
This was true even when the researchers accounted for mental illness in the kids' families, alcohol use and tobacco use. Griffith-Lendering said she could not say how much more likely young pot users were to exhibit psychotic symptoms later on. Also, the new study cannot prove one causes the other. Genetics may also explain the link between pot use and psychosis, said Griffith-Lendering."
2) Drugs cause the problems - but no one ever noticed before.
3) Some idiot won't even consider option #1 and go right option #2 - without any evidence at all, let alone proof.
Note, I have kidney disease - and as such do not take pot, drink alcohol or do any other drug without my doctor's express advice. My body can't handle it - but I'm not stupid enough to think other people have the same problem I do.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
So the only clear conclusion is that we need further study. Which will be made more difficult by the criminalization of the substance in so many jurisdictions where that research could be performed.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
Especially true when the study is conducted in a swing state like the Netherlands.
"Both of the above" is not the same as "inconclusive".
I personally find studies out of Amsterdam to be the most unbiased in the world. Remember that it's tolerated there, not promoted, like cigarettes in America, for instance, by the tobacco lobby.
If the drug does cause psychosis, then society as a whole can react to it accordingly. Conversely, if people with psychosis are attracted to the drug, then there must be an underlying reason for that.
I look forward to seeing what else comes of this.
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
I don't know what kind of expansion you are talking about. After years of watching pot smokers I can't actually say their minds have expanded at all. Some of them seem to have lost a bit of functionality, actually.
LSD with her therapist present or MDMA with her therapist and the kid present. Marijuana is not the only currently illegal drug with serious medical uses.
http://www.maps.org/
I really shouldn't have used someone else's email address for this account.
I'd be more inclined to listen to pro-drug arguments if they were rational and not based on feelings or false promises.
I have never used pot and have no plans to, regardless of legality, so I don't have any direct emotional investment in it. However, I do not care if others do it or not, and I don't want my tax money wasted on some people's witchhunts to deal with it.
I don't see why there needs to be a more complicated argument than that. There shouldn't be any irrationality or false promises needed. Half the time I see overly extensive arguments in favor of such things, it is to counter similar overly extensive negative arguments, neither of which should really matter in the end.
I'm about half-baked already but I am going to find some citations to dispute you. I think... ohhh man, cupcakes! They are like a whole little world with frosting on top of it...
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
As far as i know the active ingredient is the same as it has always been. You have modern strains of weed that might produce more of it, but so what. We have always had the ability to concentrate high levels of THC into things like hashish and pot oil. The dose you ingest has always depended on what you smoke and how much. Three fat stogies of 1978 Columbian gold or one medium sized J of 2012 Northern Lights and you are in exactly the same place.
Its like arguing that wine is twice as bad for you as beer because it contains twice the percent of alcohol.
You misinterpreted her statement. The correlation is, in fact, given in the abstract (relevant quote below). What she says she cannot do, because the study did not examine it, was how likely young pot users were to exhibit psychotic symptoms later, i.e. when they were not young (they only covered between 13 and 19 years old, looks like).
Findings
Significant associations (r=.12-.23) were observed between psychosis vulnerability and cannabis use at all assessments. Also, cannabis use at age 16 predicted psychosis vulnerability at age 19 (z=2.6, p<.05). Furthermore, psychosis vulnerability at ages 13 (z=2.0, p<.05) and 16 (z=3.0, p<.05) predicted cannabis use at, respectively, ages 16 and 19.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
I'm a pretty heavy pot smoker myself and know potheads of all types. Smart, stupid, lazy, motivated etc. Just like the rest of the population. But, anecdotally I have always thought smoking pot (or doing any drug) at a young age was bad. I noticed that most people I know who used to smoke when they were young can't now because it makes them way too paranoid or zone out and shut down. People I know who started smoking when they were older don't see to have this issue. Myself included.
Ever wondered how much less shitty the world might be if people like yourself just minded their own business?
Potheads want to smoke? What does it cost you, exactly? Put a price on what it actually costs you, for potheads to light up. No, you can't count the exorbitant costs of maintaining the DEA, the narc squad at your local police department, or the drug interdiction teams at the state level. You can't count all the costs involved in smuggling drugs. Those costs are created by nosy bastards who can't stand the idea that potheads might want to get high.
Pot can be grown in backyards for little to nothing. The pothead grows his own, dries it, rolls it, and smokes it at almost no cost to society, but people like yourself want to get involved. Why? Let the dopehead do his thing. That mellowed out bastard poses NO THREAT to you and yours.
So, just maybe you're partly right. Maybe if he spent all that energy and resources on bettering himself, or helping the community, the world just might be a little better.
Then again - I've met a lot of dopeheads who were veterans. They've already given to the communities across America. Leave them the hell alone!
Whatever their reasons for smoking pot, that's THEIR problem, not yours.
Shut up, sit down, and learn some tolerance. Maybe the potheads will allow you to sit with them, eat some munchies, and sing 'Kumbayah'. Think about it. Free munchies and some comaraderie. You don't even have to light up, they aren't as prejudiced as you are.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
There are many existing studies that have already proven several things about marijuana use:
1. Smoking (anything) raises your risk of oral and lung cancers, including marijuana.
In fact studies show the opposite for marijuana.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=large-study-finds-no-link
Cannabis smoking appears to protect against lung cancer. This study is now seven years old, and an even larger one fifteen years ago found the same thing:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FA%3A1018427320658
Can't be cannabis interfering with your ability to process information. I guess we will just have to chalk it up to prejudice and willful ignorance.
3. Marijuana causes psychosis in healthy people...
Link please?
4. Marijuana is addictive. It's a hotly debated point but the fact is that many people really struggle to stop using it and relapse.
Meaning... you know there is no real support for this, but you want to throw it out there as a claim anyway. You do know that by this same standard tanning is addictive too, right?
Marijuana advocates reject all criticism, and assume all scientific studies are somehow flawed or are the result of anti-marijuana conspiracies. To them marijuana _has_ to be the perfect drug, even if reality contradicts that viewpoint. Sounds crazy, but it's roughly what you'd expect from people who are no longer living in our reality.
Looking glass time. You are describing your own rejection of scientific evidence.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age