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."

Comments

Correlation not cause

[gurps_npc]

Which is more likely: 1) People with psychological issues seek pharmaceutical drugs to help them stay calm and not screw up their lives even though they are hearing voices and other psychotic issues.

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.

Re:Correlation not cause

[SomePgmr]

I'm not the GP, but I do know that some prescription antidepressants have known side effects that can include violent psychotic breaks and strong suicidal ideation.

That's not conspiracy talk, that's printed on the box.

Having said that, I'd honestly like to know more about this link between marijuana use and psychosis. I know everyone here has already dismissed it, but this is the sort of thing people should have pretty good answers on. It's not a new theory, after all. Show us the results. Good ones. We'll go from there.

Re:So

[flaming error]

Especially true when the study is conducted in a swing state like the Netherlands.

Re:So

[Anonymous Coward]

"Both of the above" is not the same as "inconclusive".

Re:So

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Re:Wonder drug? I think not.

[FatdogHaiku]

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...

Re:So

[Baloroth]

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.

Re:Wonder drug? I think not.

[Runaway1956]

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.