Stronger form of drug can be trigger for mental illness

[Lunar Loops]

Here we go again. More scare-mongering, based on half-truths, downright lies and maybes. SWIS does not think anyone can really argue with the fact that smoking MJ can lead to an increased risk of mental health issues in susceptible people. So what? Just about anything that changes the brains chemistry can result in an increased risk for susceptible individuals.

Where do these people get their figures of strains being twenty times stronger than they were in the seventies?

Research has also shown that the incidence of schizophrenia doubled in South London between 1964 and 1999.
Prof Murray said: "Our evidence is that drug abuse contributes to that."

How very scientific. What exactly is this evidence? SWIS is sure the stresses and strains of modern life contribute to that...unemployment, etc, etc

Anyway, here is the article from The Telegraph (UK):
Stronger form of drug can be trigger for mental illness
By Martin Beckford

Last Updated: 2:31am GMT 12/02/2007

Although political attitudes to cannabis use have softened over the past decade, more and more evidence has emerged linking the drug to serious mental illnesses.
Many psychiatrists now believe abuse of cannabis increases susceptibility to schizophrenia, particularly in the young, while it is feared that the increasing strength of cannabis on sale in Britain could be making the problem worse.
Cannabis is thought to heighten problems with psychosis because it increases the release into the brain of a chemical called dopamine, which causes the hallucinations experienced by those suffering from schizophrenia.

One study of 50,000 conscripts into the Swedish Army found that those who smoked cannabis as teenagers were six times more likely to be diagnosed with schizophrenia than those who did not take the drug.
Robin Murray, professor of psychiatry at London's Institute of Psychiatry, was one of the first to investigate the effects of cannabis on mental health after realising that many patients who suffered relapses also smoked the drug.
He has said: "There are now seven studies showing that if you are a heavy cannabis user in your adolescence, you increase your risk two- to threefold of going psychotic later on."
It is believed that a particular type of gene makes some people much more likely to develop schizophrenia if they abuse cannabis while young.
Prof Murray said: "A vulnerable minority, about 25 per cent of the population, is prone to psychotic reactions if they take regular cannabis."
Research has also shown that the incidence of schizophrenia doubled in South London between 1964 and 1999.
Prof Murray said: "Our evidence is that drug abuse contributes to that."
In December last year the children's mental health charity YoungMinds carried out a survey which found half of respondents who smoked cannabis - most before they were 18 - had suffered paranoia, vomiting and blackouts.
Barbara Herts, chief executive of YoungMinds, said: "We know that if young people use cannabis regularly or heavily they are at least twice as likely to develop a psychosis by young adulthood than those who don't smoke."
Some reports have claimed that modern cannabis, sometimes known as "skunk" because of its smell, is as much as 20 times stronger than strains of the drug available in the 1970s because of the advanced indoor cultivation techniques of British cannabis growers.
Last year police in Nottingham found cannabis plants with a Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content of 29 per cent, much higher than the average of 6-8 per cent content.
Marjorie Wallace, chief executive of the mental health charity Sane, added: "Cannabis, particularly in the more potent form of skunk, can increase a young person's chances of developing schizophrenia or a similar illness by four times. The only way to prevent the risk is to give out a clear message that cannabis is still illegal."
Gulf War veteran David Bradley, who last month admitted shooting dead four members of his family, was a daily smoker of cannabis and this is feared to have made worse his many mental health problems.
Toby Hedworth QC said: "He may have been suffering from all three [post-traumatic stress disorder, a psychotic disorder and schizophrenia] and his use of cannabis may have compounded them."

[Nature Boy]

How can they conclusively deduct that an individual is six times more susceptible to schizophrenia due to marijuana use when they haven't yet found a case of marijuana use directly causing schizophrenia in the first place? This is the epitomy of bad science. People need to wake up and educate themselves in order to know the real facts about drugs, and maybe even more importantly, people need to educate themselves in order to see through bullshit scare articles like this.

[howlongisthenight]

so usually I'm skeptical of both sides.....anti-drug propaganda seems to always be made-up nonscientific baloney, and then the drug users seem to be in a denial stage to any actual negative effects,
but anyways....this one has to be of the more ridiculous variety considering the title of the article and the implications it attempts so describe.

Ever turned around a soda can and wondered what the hell all that shit was? I'm going to laugh when they find out one day that high-fructose corn syrup causes every form of cancer and contributes to mental illness.
And what about all the people who staved-off mental insanity from relaxing with Mary Jane once in a while?
I mean....I want to do a study proving that watching MTV decreases your IQ....just for kicks

[Akewstick]

How can they conclusively deduct that an individual is six times more susceptible to schizophrenia due to marijuana use when they haven't yet found a case of marijuana use directly causing schizophrenia in the first place? This is the epitomy of bad science.

That makes no sense. Read back what you wrote.

How can they conclusively deduct that an individual is six times more susceptible to schizophrenia due to marijuana use when they haven't yet found a case of marijuana use directly causing schizophrenia in the first place? This is the epitomy of bad science. People need to wake up and educate themselves in order to know the real facts about drugs, and maybe even more importantly, people need to educate themselves in order to see through bullshit scare articles like this.

Out of three lines of text, one is an attempt at an argument, and two are "oh my god the man is trying to mess with our minds, man".

SWIM thinks people would respect the average drug user much more if (s)he put a little more time into constructing arguments and a little less time into saying "this is just like, the government like, trying to control us".

We've heard, MKULTRA, propaganda, corrupt and poorly educated conservatives, we know. How about a little constructive debate?

Editted to add: For the record, I agree with the sentiment that the man is trying to control our mind, man. I just don't think it needs to be pointed out at every opportunity.

[Nature Boy]

Originally Posted by Akewstick

Editted to add: For the record, I agree with the sentiment that the man is trying to control our mind, man. I just don't think it needs to be pointed out at every opportunity.

What happened to you Akewstick man? Has the system got you on their side now?

What I said makes perfect sense. There's little or no point in examining the susceptibility of marijuana users to schizophrenia when there's no solid proof that there's a link in the first place. Any bit of evidence is sketchy at best. It's the same way marijuana might be capable of staving off Alzheimer's. It's a nice idea but it's wishful thinking realistically. You may as well check marijuana users for increased cases of athlete's foot or runny noses. Research can be twisted to paint a negative picture. If SWIM gets a little bit upset about that, so what?

[Spare Chaynge]

I dont know man im feeling kinda weird. lol

[vantranist]

SWIM has definatly had an increase an a certain mental illness.

Before swim started smoking this illness was very mild and hardly noticable, through the first few months of swim smoking (4-10) his condition got worse and worse. He is really confident it was drug use that did it, and MJ at that, although you can never be 100% sure.

SWIMS condition is called SID and while its still managable swim somtimes feel that it really interfears with his way of life, witch it never did before he was smoking.

SWIM did use LSA while smoking(not at the same time, just same time period) withch definatly could of been the caus of it. However i doubt cannabis helped.

BTW im not one to get pleceabo effects very strong at all and can usally cope with any side effect a drug has on me, this is the only side effect that has ever been serouse enogh to make me consider stoping, and thats after hardcore methamphetamine and MDMA use.

[Bajeda]

This is reminiscent of the UNODC 2006 World Drugs Report albeit more simplified and not as well presented. Check out the cannabis section of their report. It has alot of interesting information, some of which was a bit threatening to swim's views, but for the most part he doesn't get the sense that the writers of the report are wrong. He just hopes things turn out so that they are wrong in the end. As for now, with swim's personal knowledge and experience with cannabis and with what he knows from medical research currently available on the topic it would be a sign of denial to prematurely disavow any relationship between cannabis and mental illness. Cannabis is a very safe drug, but im not going to argue its completely benign either. I think a large problem with the whole current drug debate is that we are arguing many issues of health, which while important, aren't the key issues behind prohibition. They just seem that way to further justify government intervention in such markets. Centering the debate more behind political and social issues, and looking at the issue of prohibition from the context of how it affects society as a whole relative to how drug use alone affects society as a whole would help get away from quibbling over inconclusive health issues not central to such a debate.

Anyways, as to the health issues themselves... As I said earlier, the science behind certain claims being made isn't conclusive or indiscriminate, but it isn't completely wrong or based in propaganda either, its just often presented that way. Just please don't deny all claims to any negative effects marijuana might have because of emotional attachement to the substance or as a response to proliferated anti-drug propaganda. Instead look at it from a scientific viewpoint and consider how it affects you and how it may affect others. We are talking about a very sizeable population of people who use, have used, or will use cannabis so it is good to look into all the possibilities, even if they hopefully in the end turn into wild goose chases. As to the mental health issue, until more conclusive scientific research has been done, swim will take everything he sees and hears with a grain of salt, and continue to see marijuana as a fairly low-risk substance that could potentially have a stronger influence on a person's life than expected and will advise reduced use or abstinence to anyone he sees having problems with the substance. Calling marijuana the "devil's weed" isn't especially ethical, but then again with current circumstances and evidence it isn't right to say its completely 100% totally safe either. Too many pot smokers lean towards that direction for swim's liking.





BajEdit: My comments are in response to the ideas presented in the quotes below. I generally try to look at bigger issues academically and objectively, so I felt it necessary to address some of the issues in larger debates that I saw exemplified in this disucssion over a more specified topic.

Originally Posted by shroomonger

Here we go again. More scare-mongering, based on half-truths, downright lies and maybes. SWIS does not think anyone can really argue with the fact that smoking MJ can lead to an increased risk of mental health issues in susceptible people. So what? Just about anything that changes the brains chemistry can result in an increased risk for susceptible individuals.

How very scientific. What exactly is this evidence? SWIS is sure the stresses and strains of modern life contribute to that...unemployment, etc, etc

Originally Posted by Nature Boy

There's little or no point in examining the susceptibility of marijuana users to schizophrenia when there's no solid proof that there's a link in the first place. Any bit of evidence is sketchy at best. It's the same way marijuana might be capable of staving off Alzheimer's. It's a nice idea but it's wishful thinking realistically. You may as well check marijuana users for increased cases of athlete's foot or runny noses. Research can be twisted to paint a negative picture.

Originally Posted by Akewstick

SWIM thinks people would respect the average drug user much more if (s)he put a little more time into constructing arguments and a little less time into saying "this is just like, the government like, trying to control us".

We've heard, MKULTRA, propaganda, corrupt and poorly educated conservatives, we know. How about a little constructive debate?

[Lunar Loops]

Lest there be any confusion here as to the views of SWIS on this matter, just let me clarify for him. SWIS agrees wholeheartedly with everything Bajeda had to say on the matter.

As stated previously, SWIS feels that the use of any substance that can change one's perception will undoubtedly result in an increased risk of mental issues within susceptible individuals (he has seen this at first hand). However, there are also many for whom no increased risk will result. The "So what" comment at the end of that statement was probably somewhat ill conceived and easily misinterpreted. SWIS did not mean "so what if it poses a danger to the mental well-being of certain susceptible individuals"; FAR from it, he feels that anybody with such issues should avoid recreational drug use of any kind that is likely to excaserbate the problem. He meant that "the fact that it may, and indeed almost certainly does, pose a risk to a small minority of people is no good reason for making (or keeping) something illegal". There are many other things in society that potentially pose a risk to the mental well being of the population.

It is the idea of a nanny-state that is so abhorent to SWIS. The idea that we should come up with blanket legislation in order to protect a small minority. It is a matter of personal liberty. Where do you draw the line? Do we make peanuts and all nut containing products illegal to protect those that may inadvertently suffer consequences from their consumption?

[Nature Boy]

SWIM's being taken out of context it seems. Checking for marijuana users susceptible to schizophrenia is like finding a needle in a haystack. Marijuana causing schizophrenia is no more than a myth right now. People with schizophrenia may have their symptoms increased by marijuana use however. Obviously these are two very different matters and need to be treated separately.

[Bajeda]

Thank you for the responses. I was looking for something like that in your comments. I didn't mean to disagree with your statements or try to insinuate that you felt a certain way about the issue, but rather I wanted to clarify what was posted as I felt the way your opinions were presented might lead to them being misconstrued by someone with less background experience-wise and with the science behind such claims.

I basically didn't want people to interpret the comments in question as saying Marijuana = Safe or contributing to such a train of thought.

I hate how legislative issues come down to a health-risk debate, when that isn't the central issue with prohibtion in the first place. Authorities just try to make it seem that way and pro-cannabis activists exacerbate this by arguing from the polar opposite side, leaving the merits of actual scientific evaluation of this issue in a context they weren't meant to be in.

So yeah, thanks again for the clarification. It should be apparent to all that while there are many health issues related to marijuana being debated, the evidence is very inconclusive and hard to find causative factors for, though this doesn't mean research on these issues is insignificant or useless or deserves a reactionary response from any of the parties involved in the debate.