No bias: Does marijuana permanently effect the brain?

[StringJunky]

... Cognitive dissonance or scientific dishonesty? You decide...

A good description of your posts...

[tkadm30]

Nice words. But obviously this statement is suffering from severe scientific dishonesty, since it omit to mention the neuroprotective potential of cannabinoids.

 

This. Omitting to cite or ignoring mainstream research about the neuroprotection effects of cannabinoids is serious lack of

academic rigor.

A good description of your posts...

Well, "StringJunky", do you offer anything else than spurious rants?

Edited January 3, 2017 by tkadm30

[Strange]

 

This. Omitting to cite or ignoring mainstream research about the neuroprotection effects of cannabinoids is serious lack of

academic rigor.

 

 

Why don't you present this research about the neuroprotective effects?

[swansont]

Nice words. But obviously this statement is suffering from severe scientific dishonesty, since it omit to mention the neuroprotective potential of cannabinoids. Cognitive dissonance or scientific dishonesty? You decide...

 

 

How about citing evidence instead of making an assertion?

 

edit: xpost with Strange

[tkadm30]

Clin Immunol. 2012 Jan;142(1):57-67. doi: 10.1016/j.clim.2011.02.010. Epub 2011 Mar 21.

Neuroprotective agents: cannabinoids.

Sánchez AJ¹, García-Merino A.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21420365

 

Curr Pharm Des. 2004;10(18):2177-83.

Cannabinoids as neuroprotective agents in traumatic brain injury.

Biegon A¹.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15281893

Edited January 3, 2017 by tkadm30

[CharonY]

If you had at least read the abstract, you will notice that the protective effects are via modulation of inflammatory events. Which obviously has little impact on long-term use unless you are suffering from certain autoimmune diseases or are in the habit of bashing your skull in.

 

Context matters.

[tkadm30]

If you had at least read the abstract, you will notice that the protective effects are via modulation of inflammatory events. Which obviously has little impact on long-term use unless you are suffering from certain autoimmune diseases or are in the habit of bashing your skull in.

 

Context matters.

 

Smoking anything induce nitric oxide production - a proinflammatory response inhibited by partial THC binding to CB1 receptors.

[iNow]

I suspect most here support the legalization of marijuana, but we also support ensuring accuracy of posts and clarity of comments.

 

It's not all health and happiness when it comes to old mary jane. Ignoring these facts does your argument a disservice.

 

Further Evidence for Causal Link Between Schizophrenia and Cannabis: https://neurosciencenews.com/schizophrenia-cannabis-link-5771/

Summary: Schizophrenia risk may predict cannabis use, rather than the other way around, a new study reports.

 

The study from the University of Bristol comes on the back of public health warnings issued earlier this year by scientists who voiced concerns about the increased risk of psychosis for vulnerable people who use the drug. Those warnings followed evidence to suggest an increased use of particularly high potency strains of cannabis among young people. However, experts cautioned that the risks should not be overstated given the need for greater research into links between mental health and illicit drugs.

Low Hippocampal Blood Flow and Higher Alzheimer’s Vulnerability in Marijuana Users: https://neurosciencenews.com/alzheimers-hippocampus-blood-marijuana-5611/

Summary: A new study reports marijuana users have lower blood flow to the hippocampus, an area of the brain associated with memory and learning.

 

Hippocampus, the brain’s key memory and learning center, has the lowest blood flow in marijuana users suggesting higher vulnerability to Alzheimer’s.

Early Marijuana Use Associated With Abnormal Brain Function and Lower IQ: https://neurosciencenews.com/brain-function-marijuana-development-5231/

Summary: According to researchers, early marijuana use may result in abnormal brain function and lower IQ.

 

In a new study, scientists in London, Ontario have discovered that early marijuana use may result in abnormal brain function and lower IQ.

How Cannabis Influences Formation of Neural Circuits: https://neurosciencenews.com/neural-circuits-cannabis-5020/

Summary: A new study reports cannabis can prune synapses and destroy some neural circuits.

 

A group of researchers led by Associate Professor KIMURA Fumitaka at the Department of Molecular Neuroscience, Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka University, clarified that multiple mechanisms were involved in the formation of neuronal circuits in the cerebral cortex. This group also clarified that a substance similar to cannabinoid, an active substance of cannabis, played an important role in the formation of neuronal circuits, and that the intake of cannabis pruned even necessary synapses, destroying neuronal circuits, a world first.

And that's just a tiny handful of publications from the last 2-3 months. Let's keep some perspective here, shall we?

 

Advocate for legalization or decriminalization. Advocate for avoiding false information, but if you're advocating for effects on our brains, then be accurate and precise when doing so.

[tkadm30]

This campaign of disinformation about the cannabis-induced brain damage is financed by global pharmaceuticals companies who also sells a lot of antipsychotic medications...

 

Just saying.

[Moontanman]

I also think that harm is a relative term, I know a guy who started smoking cigarettes when he was 8 years old, has smoked two to three packs a day and is 86 years old, still smoking... Looking at him could you say that cigarettes are not harmful?

 

Marijuana smoking has to be less than healthy, breathing smoke cannot be good for you, to me the real problem is less than neutral studies and people who don't want to hear their drug of choice is harmful.

 

The man I mentioned above is convinced cannabis is horrific and anyone who smokes it should be put away for life, this he says while swilling bourbon, taking opiates, and smoking like a frieght train... he is a mean drunk too...

 

My main worry is people whose lives are ruined by the law when they get caught smoking pot....

Edited January 3, 2017 by Moontanman

[StringJunky]

I find it odd that supporters of cannabis legislation cite medical research supporting it's efficacy for medical purposes as though that adds weight to it being ok for recreational purposes.

[CharonY]

Even worse is if they start making stuff up and decry actual research as a conspiracy.

[StringJunky]

Even worse is if they start making stuff up and decry actual research as a conspiracy.

Yes, it means they've got no objective anchorage to base any thoughts or opinions on; pointless.

[workpsi]

I haven't looked into this subject in the depth it deserves, but I'd be very surprised if marijuana does NOT cause a permanent negative effect. We know that it can induce life-altering psychosis, probably in those who are predisposed to it in the first place. We know that it affects short-term memory. We know that it lowers IQ by about four points on average, and that it does so in direct proportion to the number of days it has been used. We also know that it dramatically alters blood flow in the brain. Those seem to me to be pretty good hints.

[tkadm30]

I haven't looked into this subject in the depth it deserves, but I'd be very surprised if marijuana does NOT cause a permanent negative effect. We know that it can induce life-altering psychosis, probably in those who are predisposed to it in the first place. We know that it affects short-term memory. We know that it lowers IQ by about four points on average, and that it does so in direct proportion to the number of days it has been used. We also know that it dramatically alters blood flow in the brain. Those seem to me to be pretty good hints.

 

Please provide references to support theses claims.

[workpsi]

 

Please provide references to support theses claims.

Sorry, but I don't have time to do that. I'm sure you can locate all of the relevant research by typing keywords borrowed from my post into a Google search.

[Strange]

Sorry, but I don't have time to do that. I'm sure you can locate all of the relevant research by typing keywords borrowed from my post into a Google search.

 

 

It was a fairly pointless posting then.

[tkadm30]

Marijuana smoking is a lifestyle. I seriously doubt that it can "permanently" affect the brain, except in positive ways. Thoses who claims the opposite are either trolls or disinformed, thanks to the government-sponsored propaganda about cannabis prohibition.

[StringJunky]

Marijuana smoking is a lifestyle. I seriously doubt that it can "permanently" affect the brain, except in positive ways. Thoses who claims the opposite are either trolls or disinformed, thanks to the government-sponsored propaganda about cannabis prohibition.

As I already pointed to the state of current knowledge in post 23 your assertion is weightless and wasn't worth posting.

[Argent]

Marijuana smoking is a lifestyle.

Not all marijuana smoking is part of a lifestyle, but I don't think many people would contest that for regular users it is an important part of their lifestyle. Much like regular alcohol consumption or regular tobacco smoking are part of other peoples lifestyle. Just because a behaviour is a lifestyle choice does not mean it is not harmful. Are you claiming that lifestyle choices are automatically going to contain no negative consequences?

 

 

I seriously doubt that it can "permanently" affect the brain, except in positive ways.

 

. What is your doubt based upon? I won't be convinced by anecdotal evidence, since I can offer anecdotal evidence suggesting you are wrong. What substantive reason do you have for harbouring this doubt?

 

 

Thoses who claims the opposite are either trolls or disinformed, thanks to the government-sponsored propaganda about cannabis prohibition.

Please offer meaningful evidence to counter what you claim is government sponsored disinformation.

.

[tkadm30]

Not all marijuana smoking is part of a lifestyle, but I don't think many people would contest that for regular users it is an important part of their lifestyle. Much like regular alcohol consumption or regular tobacco smoking are part of other peoples lifestyle. Just because a behaviour is a lifestyle choice does not mean it is not harmful. Are you claiming that lifestyle choices are automatically going to contain no negative consequences?

 

 

 

. What is your doubt based upon? I won't be convinced by anecdotal evidence, since I can offer anecdotal evidence suggesting you are wrong. What substantive reason do you have for harbouring this doubt?

 

 

Please offer meaningful evidence to counter what you claim is government sponsored disinformation.

.

 

Let's put the facts straight.

 

• Cannabinoids really promotes brain cells growth: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1253627/
• Cannabinoids protects astrocytes from ceramide-induced apoptosis: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12133838
• Chronic (long-term) THC exposure increases serum BDNF levels in the frontal cortex: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22821081
• Ultra low dose of THC protects brain cells from inflammation-induced cognitive damage: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25042014

 

In conclusion, the disinformation on cannabis prohibition is all about fear mongering and is not based on scientific data. It is a much safer lifestyle than alcohol drinking or smoking tobacco, if you ask me.

Edited February 26, 2017 by tkadm30

[akeley]

Th OP title starts with the words "No bias"...and it kinda baited me into clicking on it (despite the fact that I witnessed quite a few of such discussions and I know how impossible no bias+marijuana clause is

 

No big surprise then that the first answer in this thread is heavily biased from the get-go and this trend continues - on both sides. But that`s normal- it`s an internet forum and human arguments usually descend into attack/defense routines.

 

The bigger problem - IMO, as always - is the fact that the field in which this question exists (psychiatry/psychology/neuroscience) is still vastly unknown and open to various interpretations (even given recent advances). The researchers themselves quite often acknowledge this, unfortunately those who quote their studies mostly ignore such caveats, only to support their own views (again, on both sides).

 

I`m a person who started smoking at the age of 21 and continued to do so nearly every day up till now (~20 years later). By default I`m also heavily biased then, on the other hand researching various forms of bias - and having a scientific outlook on life - is an intrinsic that somehow stuck with me from an early age. Make out of it what you wish. Here are some of my thoughts regarding the OP.

 

-as for the main question: Does marijuana permanently effect the brain? Being a lab rat in my own 20 year long experiment, conclusion is : I don`t know. At this point of time I do not see any significant long term changes that I could attribute to drug use, comparing to the initial state. Of course, as I mentioned above - this field is so "vague" and unknown and suspectible to so many external factors that any conclusions regarding subtle changes are very risque. However - I did not detect any major ones. I`m not any more "dumber" or depressed or unstable than I was 20 years ago.

 

About other people? Well...the only conclusion - again - is that observing other people proves to me that this subject is nigh on impossible to "resolve", due to the so many possible things influencing it. The only effect I could observe for sure is the fact that some people "burn out" - as in are unable to use the drug with pleasurable effect (most often get paranoid). AGAIN however this can be partially influenced by their personal circumstances and initial mental setup - though it`s also rather clear that the drug "builds" up in your system (question remains - if you take a long break and then can do it again, does it prove the change is not permanent?).

 

-regarding short term changes (few days timescale) - these absolutely exist, similarly to alcohol perhaps. It all varies depending on type of marijuana and heap of external factors. The anecdotal "evidence" people love to quote about dumb stoners "forgetting" everything is just silly and baseless though: it`s like saying that drunk guy passed out on a sofa has no life - at this very point of time (+/- some hours), yes, however he might be a F1 driver, CERN scientist or whatever else "respectable" occupation you might come up with (meaning he`s functioning in a high-level profession/life in general).

 

-regarding pro/contra legalisation debacle - this one is fairly easy, for a change: if you`re against it and at the same time not actively oppose other "legal" drugs such as tobacco or alcohol then your position is automatically invalid. As for those more logically inclined: people will always use this drug, however it being illegal multiplies serioulsy negative effects. Some of these are:

-being incarcerated/having a police record - for doing something rather harmless/personal

-price gouging by criminals

-product polluting by criminals: mouldy weed or weed artificially altered to increase its weigh by adding harmful agents

-propagation of "legal highs" (even if they`re illegal) - these are wildly dangerous chemical substitutes

 

I just thought I`ll share some PERSONAL observations. I`m fully aware this is a science board though: please keep it in mind while replying.

 

And oh, it`s my first post here so "Hello world"

 

[Argent]

I thought your post was well balanced and interesting. I would take exception to one point.

-regarding pro/contra legalisation debacle - this one is fairly easy, for a change: if you`re against it and at the same time not actively oppose other "legal" drugs such as tobacco or alcohol then your position is automatically invalid.

Your logic here is faulty. One may consider that the horse has long bolted from the stables containing tobacco and alcohol. With this view opening other stable doors would simply make matters worse. This is a valid position to take.

 

For the record I favour legalising most, probably all drugs, taxing them like alcohol and tobacco, while using a significant proportion of the those revenues to provide objective education on the consequences of their use.

[Lord Antares]

To be fair, I don't think it has any permanent effect either. Positive or negative.

 

All I can say is that when I do smoke a lot, I feel cloudy and lazy and passive and slow, which is a bad thing for sure. But when I stop for some time, I feel completely normal, as if I never smoked it in my life.

Nowadays, I smoke like once or twice a week and I cannot say that it affects my life at all. Smoking often is bad and I know that from experience.

 

The issue is, there are researches which say that it has permanent damage, reaseaches which say there is no long-lasting effect whatsoever, and researches which say that it helps boost you brain power.

How can you know which are legitimate? Some users linked reseaches against marijauana, and tkadm linked some for marijuana. I've seen many completely contradicting ones. How does one tell which are correct?

[akeley]

Your logic here is faulty. One may consider that the horse has long bolted from the stables containing tobacco and alcohol. With this view opening other stable doors would simply make matters worse. This is a valid position to take.

 

I see your point and while I might agree it is a position one definitely can take, I`m not so sure about its validity. Perhaps in a "ideal vacuum", as a pure idea, it might be - but in the real world not so much. There`s just too many conflicts it generates, of a kind that might belong to some other thread. E.g: personal freedoms, hypocrisy of allowing one kind and not the other, comparative harmfulness and so on.

 

Also, the horse that has bolted from the tobacco stable was in recent years somehow collared and tamed. And as you say, legalisation and diverting funds to proper research and education - not only about harms, but benefits of marijuana and how to properly use it- would be much better than current status quo.

 

when I do smoke a lot, I feel cloudy and lazy and passive and slow, which is a bad thing for sure.

 

Aw, come on Since when is it bad to relax? I must take objection here because it reinforces the usual tropes.

 

I mean, if you feel cloudy/lazy/passive/slow in a negative context (or a feeling, more like) then you probably should stop or change the poison. However if you just say that because these are preconceived notions then..well

 

Being (properly) stoned is way more advanced than just the perception a non-user might get while watching Brad Pitt in California (or any other "dumb stoner" caricature). I find it extremely creatively stimulating, experience enhancing and also a strong anti-depressant (though this is more situation/usage dependent - it can also intensify negative emotions).

 

Consider that some of your favourite works of art/media - whatever the style - were created by drug users, and not only alcohol ones. Also, you don`t need to be couch-locked: given a right dose/kind/person it`s entirely possible to be very active.