Daily Pot Use Tied To Age of First Psychotic Episode

An anonymous reader writes "Reuters reports, 'In a study of adults who experienced psychosis for the first time, having smoked marijuana daily was linked to an earlier age of onset of the disorder.' ..."This is not a study about the association between cannabis and psychosis, but about the association between specific patterns of cannabis use ... and an earlier onset of psychotic disorders,' Dr. Marta Di Forti, who led the research at the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College, said in an email. Among more than 400 people in South London admitted to hospitals with a diagnosed psychotic episode, the study team found the heaviest smokers of high-potency cannabis averaged about six years younger than patients who had not been smoking pot. Psychosis is a general term for a loss of reality, and is associated with several psychiatric diseases, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. ... "The thorny question is whether they might otherwise have developed the disease or would have not had mental illness. It's a distinction we haven't figured out yet," Compton said. ... It is still unclear whether there are safe levels of use for cannabis, she added. '"

Comments

Cause and effect may be backwards

[TheRealMindChild]

Perhaps these folks were smoking that much pot as a coping means ("self medicating") because of their troubles, rather than pot causing the troubles

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[dyingtolive]

I'm afraid that doesn't fit the narrative.

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[king neckbeard]

How do you figure that? I'm pretty sure that these conditions exist in some state prior to one's first episode. There's also the fact that this particular pattern might select itself for certain demographics more than others, and the environment they are in might contain factors that do influence this.

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[ihtoit]

oh, yes, 1936.

"Marihuana turns you GAY!!"

Well, fuck me, as long as that's all it does...

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Zakabog]

From the article -

But the evidence has been unclear. For example, one recent study from the Netherlands found it's equally possible that people prone to psychosis may be more likely to smoke pot, possibly as a way of "self-medicating" (see Reuters Health article of December 25, 2012, here: http://reut.rs/1d7aIvU)

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Anonymous Coward]

methinks your sarcasm detector is busted.

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

> methinks your sarcasm detector is busted.

Too much pot perhaps?

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Curtman]

Marijuana use has increased drastically since the 1920's, from thousands to millions. There is no corresponding increase in psychosis. Does that fit your narrative?

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Curtman]

It's been documented in may places.

Decline in the Incidence of Schizophrenia in Finnish Cohorts Born From 1954 to 1965

If there was a causal link between marijuana use and schizophrenia for example, there would be an increase that could be shown in historical data. The evidence instead suggests that maybe some people have been successful at self-medicating.

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[TsuruchiBrian]

Not necessarily. It could be that marijuana increase schizophrenia, and some other factor decreases schizophrenia fore than marijuana increases it. I'm not saying this is the case, but you can't just look at a period where schizophrenia decreased and say that everything that increased in that time period can't be increasing schizophrenia.

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Curtman]

If the incidence of schizophrenia decreases during the same period as marijuana usage increases, it becomes very difficult to show a causal link. That's the situation this discussion leads to. Incidence of schizophrenia should follow the increase in marijuana use when plotted against time, it doesnt. It's inverse.

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Curtman]

Is schizophrenia on the decline in Canada?
The preliminary comparison showed a 42% decrease in the number of first-admission schizophrenia cases over 20 years. In the main study, the annual inpatient prevalence rates decreased significantly (52%) from 1986 to 1996 with no corresponding change in outpatient rates, regardless of sex. Although total major affective disorders increased, this was due to an increase in major depression, not bipolar disorder.
This is the first Canadian case-register study to support the widely reported falling rates of schizophrenia in other parts of the world over the last 40 years. Since this is a geographically limited prevalence study based on only 10 years of data, further research over longer periods of time in other regions of the country is required to support or refute these findings.

Canadian teens lead developed world in cannabis use: Unicef report
This is the second time in a row that the WHO study has ranked Canadian teenagers as the highest cannabis users, though the percentage of teens itself has dropped. In 2002, the same survey showed that 37.5 per cent of 15-year-olds in Canada had used cannabis in the past year.

Etc...

Re:Cause and effect may be backwards

[Curtman]

You do not understand what the person you replied to is saying.

I do. I'm only suggesting that if marijuana use increases 1000% and there is no epidemic of schizophrenia afterward, there doesn't seem to be any reason to assume a causal link, or to fear one..

There may be underlying factors influencing the decrease in schizophrenia, but there is absolutely no evidence that using cannabis will increase your likelihood of being diagnosed with it.

This just in...

[wiredlogic]

People with addictive personalities more prone to mental problems. Who'd have thunk?

Re:This just in...

[sg_oneill]

People with addictive personalities more prone to mental problems. Who'd have thunk?

Or , ya know, you could actually read the article. Its not about how prone someone is, its when the symptoms start. Schizophrenia shows early symptoms in childhood, and if you've got it, you will succumb to psychosis eventually. Whats happening here is the pot smokers are succumbing earlier. This wont affect most people, but those who are succeptible, perhaps pots a bad idea. The trick scientifically is identifying those in danger.

Re:This just in...

[JoeMerchant]

But, is it the THC, or the lack of social support and constant surreptitious activity required to obtain and use pot that leads to earlier onset?

Put another way, would the same thing have been found in a study of alcohol use during prohibition? Or, will the same study replicated today in Colorado, have different findings?

 

Re:This just in...

[mcgrew]

I've seen no studies, but I know a lot of pot smokers and it's all over the board. Some smoke rarely, some grab the bong before they're out of bed. I'd say there are a lot of daily smokers, though, most working-class (construction, factory) folks I know are sober all day, come home, eat dinner, then smoke a few hitters and drink a few beers while watching the tube.

As Oscar Wilde said, "Work is the curse of the drinking class."

in the context of society..

[gl4ss]

..there probably isn't a "safe use level".

however, and here is the big thing, the thing to test against should be daily alcohol use of comparable amount - or if possible, test against whichever it is the people choose if they have both options available.

though, I'd reckon that if you're likely to have psychosis of some sort you're already more likely to be choosing to be a fucking _daily_ pot smoker for 20 years - if you get little crazy from being high 20 years that's not even news - but that is not the point, you go pretty fucked just from drinking 8 beers a day for 20 years too...

Reefer madness?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's strange timing that this study is being released around the time Colorado has fully legalized pot, Washington is well on their way to doing so, and you can get "medical marijuana" in other states.

I'm not sure what the motivation is. Personally, I don't see a very good future for the middle class (automation of pretty much every job is coming,) so it would seem that it would be in everyone's best interest to keep most of the unemployed population stoned every day to reduce petty crime. I guess I'm just a pessimist though.

The whole war on drugs thing just needs to be dropped. Let everyone have whatever they want and plow the money you were putting into police and prisons into treatment programs for people who voluntarily want to stop.

CAPTCHA: syringe. Holy coincidence!

Re:Reefer madness?

[fustakrakich]

The whole war on drugs thing just needs to be dropped.

Why do you want to kill a golden goose? Join the dark side of prohibition and make billions.

Re:Reefer madness?

[ultranova]

Yes, capitalism is unfair. Sadly, all other economic systems -- when implemented in large scale, and in the real world -- are even less fair. Otherwise, the Soviet Union would have survived while the US collapsed.

So maximum fairness is the same as maximum efficiency, the only difference between SU and US was the economic system, and there are only two possible economic systems?

Nice logic.

Re:Reefer madness?

[pspahn]

Speaking of side effects of the War on Drugs, there was an interesting story the other night on the news in Denver.

A lot of pot shops are employing military grade security personnel to protect them these days. Granted, one of the most likely reasons is that this is a cash based business (the only non-cash transactions are based on creative use of ATMs), so there is motivation from others to rip them off on their way to deposit their monies. However, it is clear that the need for such specially trained security is due to the fact that pot was illegal for so long and run by the black market. Now you have those same thugs trying to rip off these businesses trying to get their hands on the product so they can take it back to the black market.

Had there not been a War on Drugs in the first place, there really wouldn't be this need for such high security at these shops.

Of course, on the other hand, it has helped to improve our local economy. I would say that I have approximately 20 friends that I see on a regular basis. Out of those 20, nearly half of them are employed directly by pot facilities, and several more are employed indirectly by businesses that have pot shops as clients.

There are many effects the War on Drugs has had on our society, and most of those effects are not going to be known until the War on Drugs ceases to exist.

Source data for this study?

[SpankiMonki]

From TFA:

The researchers surveyed 410 patients between the ages of 18 and 65, two thirds of them male, all of whom had a psychotic episode and were admitted to in-patient psychiatric units.

I'm not a statisticianololgist, but passing out surveys to psychotic people in a mental hospital doesn't seem to me to be the best way to gather accurate data for a study.

Re:Source data for this study?

[MisterSquid]

From TFA:

The researchers surveyed 410 patients between the ages of 18 and 65, two thirds of them male, all of whom had a psychotic episode and were admitted to in-patient psychiatric units.

I'm not a statisticianololgist, but passing out surveys to psychotic people in a mental hospital doesn't seem to me to be the best way to gather accurate data for a study.

This study's major flaw is that the researchers needed 10 more patients to pass the threshold for statistical relevance.

Re:Source data for this study?

[tgv]

The number 420 apparently means something in this context. From Wikipedia: "420, 4:20, or 4/20 (pronounced four-twenty) is a code-term used primarily in North America that refers to the consumption of cannabis and by extension, as a way to identify oneself with cannabis subculture or simply cannabis itself."

Worthless and inconclusive research, I'm afraid...

[bogaboga]

And this is because this research doesn't answer the following question:

Can we be sure that even though psychosis manifested itself earlier in the subject population, it (psychosis), still maifested itself later in this particular group?

In otherwords, can we be sure that pot use in this specific group didn't delay psychosis even though on average, psychosis came earlier as compared to the other group?

I know of folks who use pot daily. They are now in their late 90s. One could argue that pot is responsible for their delayed psychosis if at all, no?

Yes and no...

[f3rret]

While I am all for legalizing it, the article does have a point.

I recall at least one British study looking at the link between cannabis and psychosis that found that strains with a high THC/other canabinoids ratio would cause tests subjects to score higher on at least one standard test questionnaire for psychosis, while subjects injected with a more 'natural' blend of THC and other canabinoids would tend to get a psychosis score not much different from them being sober.

The conclusion as I recall was that there is some evidence that strains bred specifically for a high THC content could be more likely to cause psychotic event or temporary psychosis-like states.
BBC did a documentary that filmed part of said study, here it is: http://youtu.be/ZGr0ne9FHOM

Pot?

[koan]

Some of these guys are smoking high quality oil on titanium nails, that shit is potent (having smoked it myself) I stay away from it because it makes me useless, and then it makes my tolerance so high I can only get a buzz eating a 500mg 5150 bar.

Just wait, someone is going to get it down to a THC powder, and then...

I quit smoking not too long ago, I had sweats, irritability, and sleeplessness for ~2 weeks, this isn't 1960's pot.