Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times)

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Junghalli
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5001
Joined: 2004-12-21 10:06pm
Location: Berkeley, California (USA)

Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times)

Post by Junghalli »

From the New York times science section (any spelling or grammar errors are probably mine, I'm copying from the newspaper):
Roni Caryn Rabin wrote:In the '60s, marijuana was a hallmark of the counterculture, along with free love, bell bottoms, long hair and bandannas. But marijuana has had the most staying power.

This month, in a remarkable first, the recreational use of marijuana became legal (depending on your definition) in Colorado and Washington. Over a dozen other states have decriminalized possession of small amounts, and Massachussetts recently became the 18th state to allow its use for medicinal purposes.

Though federal law still bans both the sale and possession on marijuana, President Obama has said the federal government has "bigger fish to fry" and won't aggressively prosecute tokers in states where its use is legal.

The rise of marijuana as an adult pastime is a victory for those who've always felt its hazards were overblown. Proponents of legalization argue that marijuana is much safer to use than alcohol, pointing out that it is virtually impossible to overdose on marijuana.

While marijuana can be addictive, scientists generally agree that fewer than 10 percent of marijuana smokers become dependent on the drug, compared with 15 percent for alcohol, 23 percent for heroin and 32 percent for tobacco. Marijuana does contain carcinogens, including tar and other toxins similar to those found in tobacco, but people generally do not smoke marijuana in the same amounts as cigarettes.

Still, legalization takes health consumers into murky territory. Even though marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States, questions about its health effects remain.

For starters, this is not your parents' pot. Today marijuana is much more potent: The mean concentration of THC, the psychoactive ingredient, in confiscated cannabis more than doubled between 1993 and 2008.

Increased potency may be having unforseen consequences. The human brain's cannabinoid receptors are typically activated by naturally ocurring chemicals in the body called endocannabinoids, which are similar to THC. There is a high density of cannabinoid receptors in parts of the brain that affect pleasure, memory and concentration. Some research suggests that these areas continue to be affected by marijuana use even after the "high" dissipates.

"It's much more potent marijuana, which may explain why we've seen a pretty dramatic increase in admission to emergency rooms and treatment programs for marijuana," said Dr. Nora D. Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse. "When we hear 'Well, I smoked and nothing happened to me' we need to think about the context of when these people started to take it, how frequently they used and how active the marijuana was."

Those in favor of legalizing marijuana say the increase in potency has been exaggerated, and that when users have more powerful pot, they adjust their consumption and actually smoke less.

Teenagers may be more vulnerable to addiction, however, and those who start smoking pot at a younger age are at higher risk. Approximately one in six will become addicted, Dr. Volkow said. Young adults who start smoking marijuana at earlier ages also tend to smoke much more, and more often, than those who start in their later teens, researchers say.

In users who develop a dependence or addiction, quitting can cause intense withdrawal symptoms, like anxiety, trouble sleeping, lack of appetite, mood swings, irritability and depression, experts say.

Both Colorado and Washington restricted marijuana use to adults age 21 and over when they legalized recreational use in November. But experts worry that the perception of marijuana is changing because its stigma as an outlawed drug has eroded.

"When people can go to a 'clinic' or 'cafe' and buy pot, that creates the perception that it's safe," said Dr. A. Eden Evins, director of the Center for Addiction Medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. "Before we unleash the powers of the marketplace to woo people to use this addictive substance, we need to better understand who is at risk."

"Once moneyed interests are involved, this trend will be difficult to reverse," she added.

The most disturbing new studies about early teenage use of marijuana showed that young adults who started smoking pot regularly before they were 16 performed significantly worse on cognitive tests of brain function than those who had started smoking later in adolescence. They performed particularly poorly on tests assessing executive function, which is responsible for planning and abstract thinking, as well as understanding rules and inhibiting inappropriate responses.

Imaging scans also found detectable differences in how their brains worked, said Staci Gruber, the lead author of these studies and director of the cognitive and clinical neuroimaging core at the imaging center at McLean Hospital in Boston. Imagine scans found alterations in the frontal cortex white matter tracts of the brain in the early-starters, she said, that are associated with impulsiveness.

"The frontal cortex is the last part of the brain to come online, and the most important," Dr. Gruber said. "Early exposure perhaps changes the trajectory of brain development, such that ability to perform complex executive function tasks is compromised."

A recent study showing a drop in IQ scores among teenagers who are regular pot smokers is especially troubling, Dr. Evins said. A more recent study found that people who started smoking marijuana as teenagers and used it heavily for decades lost IQ points over time, while those who started smoking as adults did not, though some critics have said these differences may not be meaningful. Older survey studies had indicated that regular pot smokers were less likely to graduate from high school or pursue higher education, but it was never clear which came first, difficulty in school or the drug use.

"If parents who are spending thousands of dollars on SAT prep courses knew about the cognitive effects marijuana has on their kids' brains, they would be up in arms," Dr. Evins said. Other health concerns about marijuana are less well documented but may turn out to be significant. States that legalized marijuana prohibit driving under its influence, and studies have found marijuana smoking increases weaving between lanes and slows reaction times. And although marijuana is not as damaging to the lungs as tobacco, in part because people do not smoke a pack of joints a day, a regular habit can eventually take a toll on the lungs.

At the very least, the new studies suggest parents who recall their own pot parties may want to suggest greater moderation to their children. And teenagers who insist on trying marijuana are better off waiting until they're older.

"It's the same message as with alcohol," Dr. Gruber said. "Just hold on, it's worth it to wait."
I sometimes get the feeling more than a few people on the pro-legalization side think marijuana is a pretty much completely benign drug, turns out that's (apparently) not so.

I don't find this a compelling pro-prohibition argument, but it suggests that users should be made aware of the risks so they can approach the drug with appropriate caution, as with alcohol and tobacco.
User avatar
PhilosopherOfSorts
Jedi Master
Posts: 1008
Joined: 2008-10-28 07:11pm
Location: Waynesburg, PA, its small, its insignifigant, its almost West Virginia.

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by PhilosopherOfSorts »

Junghalli wrote:From the New York times science section (any spelling or grammar errors are probably mine, I'm copying from the newspaper):

SNIP ARTICLE

I sometimes get the feeling more than a few people on the pro-legalization side think marijuana is a pretty much completely benign drug, turns out that's (apparently) not so.

I don't find this a compelling pro-prohibition argument, but it suggests that users should be made aware of the risks so they can approach the drug with appropriate caution, as with alcohol and tobacco.

Nobody ever said pot was completely benign, nobody that knew what they were talking about, anyway, only that its less dangerous than other things (alcohol, tobacco, ect) which are legal.

I personally would regulate it in much the same way as alcohol.
A fuse is a physical embodyment of zen, in order for it to succeed, it must fail.

Power to the Peaceful

If you have friends like mine, raise your glasses. If you don't, raise your standards.
DarkArk
Padawan Learner
Posts: 163
Joined: 2010-10-08 10:38am
Location: Seattle

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by DarkArk »

I'm rather curious how eating it rather than smoking it affects the body. There's obviously nothing doing damage from smoke, but you do get a more concentrated dose. I haven't found anything scholarly related to that; the studies always assume you're smoking it.
compared with 15 percent for alcohol, 23 percent for heroin and 32 percent for tobacco
That I find interesting. I've always thought of heroin as being one of the most addicting substances out there. Good thing I absolutely hate cigarettes.
while those who started smoking as adults did not
This I also find interesting. Just how many high school students are using pot in the first place? Alcohol was always the big thing at my HS. Has the pot-using culture penetrated into that age group significantly?
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by General Zod »

DarkArk wrote: This I also find interesting. Just how many high school students are using pot in the first place? Alcohol was always the big thing at my HS. Has the pot-using culture penetrated into that age group significantly?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/0 ... 54425.html

It's a couple years old but it has a handy chart midway down.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Ziggy Stardust
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3114
Joined: 2006-09-10 10:16pm
Location: Research Triangle, NC

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Ziggy Stardust »

DarkArk wrote:
compared with 15 percent for alcohol, 23 percent for heroin and 32 percent for tobacco
That I find interesting. I've always thought of heroin as being one of the most addicting substances out there. Good thing I absolutely hate cigarettes.
This surprised me, as well. I am curious how they derived these figures, and there might be huge differences between different methods of consumption (not to mention the fact that heroin is often cut with other chemicals).
Hamstray
Padawan Learner
Posts: 214
Joined: 2010-01-31 09:59pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Hamstray »

DarkArk wrote:I'm rather curious how eating it rather than smoking it affects the body. There's obviously nothing doing damage from smoke, but you do get a more concentrated dose.
It takes longer to kick in and effects last longer. I'd recommend against doing so if you have no idea what dose has what effects on you. You wouldn't want to get stuck in a loop of thought for several hours.
User avatar
Aaron MkII
Jedi Master
Posts: 1358
Joined: 2012-02-11 04:13pm

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Aaron MkII »

Yeah, think of it as being like a slow release pill.
User avatar
Raw Shark
Stunt Driver / Babysitter
Posts: 7477
Joined: 2005-11-24 09:35am
Location: One Mile Up

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Raw Shark »

Hamstray wrote:
DarkArk wrote:I'm rather curious how eating it rather than smoking it affects the body. There's obviously nothing doing damage from smoke, but you do get a more concentrated dose.
It takes longer to kick in and effects last longer. I'd recommend against doing so if you have no idea what dose has what effects on you. You wouldn't want to get stuck in a loop of thought for several hours.
It also makes some people who are not affected in such a manner while smoking it veeeeeeeeery sleepy.

"Do I really look like a guy with a plan? Y'know what I am? I'm a dog chasing cars. I wouldn't know what to do with one if I caught it! Y'know, I just do things..." --The Joker
User avatar
Broomstick
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 28773
Joined: 2004-01-02 07:04pm
Location: Industrial armpit of the US Midwest

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Broomstick »

Ziggy Stardust wrote:
DarkArk wrote:
compared with 15 percent for alcohol, 23 percent for heroin and 32 percent for tobacco
That I find interesting. I've always thought of heroin as being one of the most addicting substances out there. Good thing I absolutely hate cigarettes.
This surprised me, as well.
It's a great illustration of "legal isn't always safer". Or less addicting. Those who have worked in the addictions field have long known that tobacco is at least as addicting as opiates, and in many cases more so, but the general public hasn't gotten the message yet.
A life is like a garden. Perfect moments can be had, but not preserved, except in memory. Leonard Nimoy.

Now I did a job. I got nothing but trouble since I did it, not to mention more than a few unkind words as regard to my character so let me make this abundantly clear. I do the job. And then I get paid.- Malcolm Reynolds, Captain of Serenity, which sums up my feelings regarding the lawsuit discussed here.

If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich. - John F. Kennedy

Sam Vimes Theory of Economic Injustice
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

Raw Shark wrote:
Hamstray wrote:
DarkArk wrote:I'm rather curious how eating it rather than smoking it affects the body. There's obviously nothing doing damage from smoke, but you do get a more concentrated dose.
It takes longer to kick in and effects last longer. I'd recommend against doing so if you have no idea what dose has what effects on you. You wouldn't want to get stuck in a loop of thought for several hours.
It also makes some people who are not affected in such a manner while smoking it veeeeeeeeery sleepy.
I don't know why anyone actually enjoys using pot this way, it's totally not fun in the slightest.

The proper way to use marijuana is with a device like this which gives you the same feeling as you get from smoking but without the smoke.
DarkArk
Padawan Learner
Posts: 163
Joined: 2010-10-08 10:38am
Location: Seattle

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by DarkArk »

It also makes some people who are not affected in such a manner while smoking it veeeeeeeeery sleepy.
Funny, because I find when I smoke it or use a vaporizer I don't get a high and just go to sleep. Eating a cookie on the other hand will.

Given the advice people gave me, perhaps I should have clarified that I've tried it before. Nothing I haven't experienced myself though thanks anyway.
It takes longer to kick in and effects last longer. I'd recommend against doing so if you have no idea what dose has what effects on you. You wouldn't want to get stuck in a loop of thought for several hours.
Perhaps I should have been more clear: in terms of damage. Smoking still hurts the lungs. Is there any long-term negative consequences to baked goods? None that I know of once you're past 20, but I still haven't come across a scholarly paper on the issue.
User avatar
Spoonist
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2405
Joined: 2002-09-20 11:15am

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Spoonist »

Just a minor note that the act of smoking itself is part of the addiction. As in doing something physical associated with an addictive substance.
If you are a recovering alcoholic or quitting smoking something, then the associative actions with those addictions are the hardest.

Like taking a beer when watching sports, or taking a cigarette after sex, or passing a bong when watching cartoons.

This is why tobacco companies are trying to shut down other forms of nicotine intake than smoking, they are less addictive.
User avatar
Ziggy Stardust
Sith Devotee
Posts: 3114
Joined: 2006-09-10 10:16pm
Location: Research Triangle, NC

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Ziggy Stardust »

The Kernel wrote: I don't know why anyone actually enjoys using pot this way, it's totally not fun in the slightest.
Only if you don't know your limits and appropriate dosage. I have had plenty of fun with edibles in the past.
The Kernel wrote:The proper way to use marijuana is with a device like this which gives you the same feeling as you get from smoking but without the smoke.
Handhold vaporizers are pretty mediocre, actually. The most efficient (I won't say proper) way to smoke is with something like a Volcano-brand vaporizer. Uh ... or so I've heard. :wink:
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

Spoonist wrote:Just a minor note that the act of smoking itself is part of the addiction. As in doing something physical associated with an addictive substance.
If you are a recovering alcoholic or quitting smoking something, then the associative actions with those addictions are the hardest.

Like taking a beer when watching sports, or taking a cigarette after sex, or passing a bong when watching cartoons.

This is why tobacco companies are trying to shut down other forms of nicotine intake than smoking, they are less addictive.
Have you ever used an e-cigarette before? I did for three years before deciding to stop using nicotine completely so I have a few observations:
  • It reproduces the feeling of smoking just as much as smoking an actual cigarette if you have the right formulation. It even replicates the trademark "lung burn" with steam.
  • It's actually a lot harder to quit because the health effects aren't obvious (you don't get smokers lung or the smell) and you are taking in a good deal more of nicotine since you find yourself quickly "chain smoking" them.
So why do the traditional tobacco makers not embrace these devices? Well there are a few reasons...
  • They don't have the barriers to entry that traditional cigarettes do, this making it very hard to compete. I know this isn't obvious but compare the e-cigarette market (which is not regulated in any real way) to traditional tobacco products and you'll notice that it's a series of conglomerates versus small players. The reason for this is that tobacco products require a much more complex distribution chain and are subject to such high level of regulation that massive amounts of consolidation happened.
  • They are expensive. Oh sure, not compared to the US prices for cigarettes (which are completely driven by taxes and laws) but the US isn't the growth market for RJ Reynolds or Philip Morris. People in China and India want to pay $0.05 for a cigarette and they aren't going to be able to afford a $50 vaporizer, nor the more expensive upkeep or cartridges that are required.
  • Vaporizers are items that require a decent amount of upkeep which none of the tobacco companies have the affiliate base to handle, nor do they have the resources for consumer education. Disposable e-cigarettes are possible (they are actually already being heavily used in the medicinal marijuana market) but they aren't cheap.
  • The FDA is largely ignoring the e-cigarette market and thus it is still very much a grey market item. Technically legal but until they can classify it this is always going to be a fringe product. Sure this is something that lobbying could fix but as I said the major tobacco companies are not really focused on the developed market.
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

Ziggy Stardust wrote: Handhold vaporizers are pretty mediocre, actually. The most efficient (I won't say proper) way to smoke is with something like a Volcano-brand vaporizer. Uh ... or so I've heard. :wink:
No, shitty handheld vaporizers suck. The one I linked to most certainly doesn't--it may be one of the finest pieces of engineering I've ever laid my hands on. Really, this is something that would have come out of the Apple design labs had they been interested in this market.

Yes it's $250 but it feels like it is worth every penny. The little manufacturing touches like the high quality aluminum shell and the neodynium magnets that secure the oven are of unbelievably high quality.
User avatar
PainRack
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7569
Joined: 2002-07-07 03:03am
Location: Singapura

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by PainRack »

DarkArk wrote:I'm rather curious how eating it rather than smoking it affects the body. There's obviously nothing doing damage from smoke, but you do get a more concentrated dose. I haven't found anything scholarly related to that; the studies always assume you're smoking it.
Well, there was that article I linked to a few years back about how marijuana is linked to schizophrenia... Sure, its about smoking it too but for the brain, the issue should be the drug and not the way you get it.


But then again, there's also other stuff about pharmacokinetics that affect how a drug affects the body... There this working hypothesis about how a chemo drug Velcade, has less nerve damage when administered as a skin injection rather than a IV drug because of the rate of drug absorption.
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

PainRack wrote:
DarkArk wrote:I'm rather curious how eating it rather than smoking it affects the body. There's obviously nothing doing damage from smoke, but you do get a more concentrated dose. I haven't found anything scholarly related to that; the studies always assume you're smoking it.
Well, there was that article I linked to a few years back about how marijuana is linked to schizophrenia... Sure, its about smoking it too but for the brain, the issue should be the drug and not the way you get it.


But then again, there's also other stuff about pharmacokinetics that affect how a drug affects the body... There this working hypothesis about how a chemo drug Velcade, has less nerve damage when administered as a skin injection rather than a IV drug because of the rate of drug absorption.
Virtually every drug on the market has a laundry list of extremely rare side effects and drug interactions--heck most of the birth control pills on the market raise the chance of getting a stroke, heart attack or DVT yet not only are they not banned but doctors don't even screen for the common genetic markers for blod clots before dispensing it. Or how about the fact that if you mix any one of eight classes of common drugs with the over-the-counter St. John's Wort it can lead to a lethal drug interaction? Drug interactions are a fact of life and kill a lot more people than is generally understood.

Marijuana is NOT harmless and it has a certain amount of risk associated with it which varies depending on how it is used. However anyone who tries to use the fact that pot is not totally harmless as a reason to ban it is both burying their head in the sand and presenting a false choice that something must be totally safe or it is dangerous and should be banned. I think that was the plot of Demolition Man not a serious suggestion at how to run a society.
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

By the way, two other points to make on this.

1) Very few people are aware that the FDA actually does recognize the medicinal value of the primary component of marijuana (THC) and does allow for the prescription and sale of a synthetic extract. This should come as no surprise as both Cocaine and virtually every form of concentrated opiate (including Fentanyl which is a hundred times more potent than morphine) are listed as Schedule II drugs. What's really fascinating though is that the FDA classified Marinol as a Schedule III and decreed it safe for general use even though they haven't expanded on the difference between it and "natural" marijuana. It's likely that just like with opiates there is zero difference.

2) There was actually an interesting paper written about the harmful effects of marijuana compare to some common classes of prescription drugs like benzodiazapines, amphetamines, anto-emedics and even Viagra and the results are pretty interesting. It's written by a pro-marijuana advocacy group but all of the data was compiled from the FDA themselves under the Freedom of Information Act. It can be found here.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by loomer »

I know the 'them damn kids is smoking stronger stuff!' line is mostly alarmist nonsense, but I do think it'd be interesting to do a study on the CBD:THC ratio of older and less modified strains versus your high-performance strains that have arisen as part of the move away from primarily outdoor cultivation to hydro and in-door setups. My admittedly limited understanding is that CBD is the component that acts as an anti-anxiety drug, rather than THC, and the rise in psychosis linked to marijuana might be linked to the shift in ratio. All hypothetical, but if anyone knows of actual studies on the ratio and its connection to drug-induced psychosis, I'd appreciate a link or just a name.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
PainRack
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7569
Joined: 2002-07-07 03:03am
Location: Singapura

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by PainRack »

The Kernel wrote:By the way, two other points to make on this.

1) Very few people are aware that the FDA actually does recognize the medicinal value of the primary component of marijuana (THC) and does allow for the prescription and sale of a synthetic extract. This should come as no surprise as both Cocaine and virtually every form of concentrated opiate (including Fentanyl which is a hundred times more potent than morphine) are listed as Schedule II drugs. What's really fascinating though is that the FDA classified Marinol as a Schedule III and decreed it safe for general use even though they haven't expanded on the difference between it and "natural" marijuana. It's likely that just like with opiates there is zero difference.
Does the FDA actually say there's a difference between Marinol vs natural marijuana?

I mean, outside of dose control, which are the exact same problems herbal medications face.....

Although I will note that there are significant differences between Marinol and smoking marijuana in terms of preventing nausea and increasing appetite. To put it simply, Marinol is only one THC whereas marijuana has a more potent mixture of THC that affects the entire cannaboid system differently, which explains why Marinol is less effective than marijuana with relatively more side effects.

2) There was actually an interesting paper written about the harmful effects of marijuana compare to some common classes of prescription drugs like benzodiazapines, amphetamines, anto-emedics and even Viagra and the results are pretty interesting. It's written by a pro-marijuana advocacy group but all of the data was compiled from the FDA themselves under the Freedom of Information Act. It can be found here.
This is abuse of the VERs system. Seriously. Just look at the ADR related to Krytril. Right. Using Kyrtil and having a whole lot of other chemo drugs at the same time and having allergic reactions/etc= Krytril is more dangerous than marijuana?!?!
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

PainRack wrote: Does the FDA actually say there's a difference between Marinol vs natural marijuana?

I mean, outside of dose control, which are the exact same problems herbal medications face.....
Yes the FDA lists Marijuana separately as a Schedule I.
Although I will note that there are significant differences between Marinol and smoking marijuana in terms of preventing nausea and increasing appetite. To put it simply, Marinol is only one THC whereas marijuana has a more potent mixture of THC that affects the entire cannaboid system differently, which explains why Marinol is less effective than marijuana with relatively more side effects.
Yes but there's no evidence its more dangerous or addictive. But then again the FDA has never really needed to justify its drug classifications.
This is abuse of the VERs system. Seriously. Just look at the ADR related to Krytril. Right. Using Kyrtil and having a whole lot of other chemo drugs at the same time and having allergic reactions/etc= Krytril is more dangerous than marijuana?!?!
That sounds like good reasoning until you consider the reality of the situation. When a person is on a battery of chemotherapy drugs they are being extremely closely monitored by both their Oncologist as well as a Pharmacist to triple check drug interactions. My wife did a rotation in Oncology as part of her PharmD and the amount of attention paid to Pharmacokinetics for Cancer patients is totally unprecedented for any other Ambulatory Care (with the possible exception of Warfarin).

Besides, that's simply one drug on the list. How do you explain Zophran, Zanaflex, Lithium, Haldol, Gabapentin, Wellbutrin, etc? I know where most of these drug interactions come from but an interesting thing about looking at this list is that they actually picked a battery of drugs that seems to be based on some of the most commonly prescribed drugs that have at least some interactions to worry about. Still most of the drugs on this list would be in the fairly well tolerated category (you don't see any Tricyclics, MAOIs or Warfarin on the list do you?) and MDs hand many of these prescriptions out like hotcakes.
Last edited by The Kernel on 2013-01-13 01:31pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
The Kernel
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7438
Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Location: Kweh?!

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by The Kernel »

loomer wrote:I know the 'them damn kids is smoking stronger stuff!' line is mostly alarmist nonsense, but I do think it'd be interesting to do a study on the CBD:THC ratio of older and less modified strains versus your high-performance strains that have arisen as part of the move away from primarily outdoor cultivation to hydro and in-door setups. My admittedly limited understanding is that CBD is the component that acts as an anti-anxiety drug, rather than THC, and the rise in psychosis linked to marijuana might be linked to the shift in ratio. All hypothetical, but if anyone knows of actual studies on the ratio and its connection to drug-induced psychosis, I'd appreciate a link or just a name.
One of the disadvantages of Marijuana being illegal is that it is very difficult to find good studies on it. And as I said, the question is whether or not Marijuana is significantly harmful not whether there is some amount of abuse, addiction or interaction to it. That's why the FDA has multiple drug classifications in the first place as it allows different drugs to be treated in different ways (Schedule II drugs for instance are not fun to deal with for either the patient or the medical provider).

That said I do believe that Marijuana should be a prescription substance but I don't think there is a good justification to not make it OTC for recreational use.
Grumman
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2488
Joined: 2011-12-10 09:13am

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by Grumman »

DarkArk wrote:Perhaps I should have been more clear: in terms of damage. Smoking still hurts the lungs. Is there any long-term negative consequences to baked goods?
Diabetes?
User avatar
cosmicalstorm
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1642
Joined: 2008-02-14 09:35am

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by cosmicalstorm »

I smoke haschisch every other week or so. Usually mixed with tobacco. Aside from that I don't use any drugs, no alcohol, no cigarettes. I've tried to figure out how this habit affects my risk of cancer in general, and lung cancer in specific. Does anyone have any info on the links between infrequent use of THC and cancer-risk?
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29205
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Re: Legalizing of Marijuana Raises Health Concerns (NY Times

Post by General Zod »

Marijuana's been linked to an increase in testicular cancer risk (it doubles), depending on who you want to believe.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerPrev ... d=17183711
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
Post Reply