Top European Research facility: Super strong cannabis caused 1/4 new psychosis cases

a reply to: nullafides

That is irrelevant.

As I have said, the thread is not about alcohol.

If you want to make a thread about alcohol, I would have plenty to say about it, but this thread is about SPECIFIC research.

a reply to: vonclod

I just wanted to post a different interpretation of this study.

velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.ca...

Opponents of drug reform will use this study to support continued prohibition—the Home Office has already done so—but it is actually another reason to liberalise.

Three points stand out. Firstly, that there is no association between cannabis use and psychosis for those who started smoking the drug after the age of 15. Secondly, that only those who use cannabis very frequently are at higher risk. Thirdly, that it is only skunk marijuana—which is high in THC—that seems to increases risk.

The difference between hash and skunk consumption in the case and control groups is striking. 44 per cent of the control group had smoked hash, but only 14 per cent of the group with psychosis had done so, whereas only 19 per cent of the control group had smoked skunk while 53 per cent of the group with psychosis had done so.

It would seem that this research study - far from highlighting the effects of high THC cannabis, actually provides proof of the harms CAUSED directly by prohibition.

This study is still only epidimiology. It still provides no proof of causation. But high THC cannabis is a direct result of prohibition (if the cannibis has a high THC content, then it can be packaged smaller and escape detection easier).

Tired of Control Freaks

originally posted by: AkaDeDrow
I've noticed that some, not ALL people can develop incredibly bad side effects such as mental illnesses including schizophrenia, paranoia and aggressive/depressive personality disorders.

Where you say that those mental conditions apparently are brought on by the use of cannabis, I'd say that someone drawn to the use of such a drug beyond purely recreational (you know, like that beer you had last night, that ONE beer) was probably dealing with those underlying issues in the first place.

It's called self medication. For instance, with schizophrenia and smoking cigarettes...

Psychological and social theories

Several psychological and social explanations have been proposed. The earliest explanations were based on psychoanalytic theory.

The socioeconomic/environmental hypothesis proposed that smoking results because many people with schizophrenia are unemployed and inactive, so smoking relieves boredom. Research has found that this explanation alone cannot account for the extreme amount of smoking among people with schizophrenia.[3]

The personality hypothesis focused on the association between smoking and higher level of neuroticism and anxiety. This hypothesis proposed that anxiety as a symptom of schizophrenia may contribute to smoking.[3]

The psychological tool hypothesis argues that smokers use nicotine to manipulate their mental state in response to various environmental conditions, such as reducing stress and managing negative emotions. Research on this hypothesis notes that people with schizophrenia often cannot cope with problems in constructive ways, so use of smoking as a psychological tool may result in a vicious cycle of more and more smoking.[3]

The self-medication hypothesis argues that people with schizophrenia use nicotine to compensate for the cognitive deficits that result from schizophrenia, the antipsychotic medication used to treat schizophrenia, or both. The cognitive effects hypothesis suggests that nicotine has positive effects on cognition, so smoking is used to improve neurocognitive dysfunction.[3]

Schizophrenia and Smoking

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: nullafides

That is irrelevant.

As I have said, the thread is not about alcohol.

If you want to make a thread about alcohol, I would have plenty to say about it, but this thread is about SPECIFIC research.

Irrelevant, if you discard it.

Alcohol, like cannabis, is a drug that is used by our society. What you are not seeing is that one is socially acceptable, and the other is not. That is why you are making your points specifically about cannabis.

Exclude it if you must, but, accept that if you do it is due to your own socially based prejudices of "good" and "bad" drugs.

Truly...of "drugs". Anything you put into your body is a drug as it effects the body's chemistry. But we've chosen to use "drug" as a label with a high potential for negativity.

a reply to: vonclod

if you had read my post rather than instantly going on the defensive, you'd know that I said "Some, Not all"

I have known a lot of smokers over the years, even smoked it myself, I've also known a lot of drinkers too, if I think about it, the ratio is around the same for the negative effects.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

As someone who mostly has negative experience with it, I have to say I don't agree. My guess is that these people have underlying mental illness that becomes more pronounced when they are under the influence and the only connection that could be made was the cannabis. I doubt it would have mattered in the end if they ever smoked or not.

In my teens i enjoyed it, but it turned on me in my twenties and makes me think too much and gives anxiety attacks.

You are not going to develop psychosis or schizophrenia in a few hours of ingestion. As soon as it's over you are back to normal. Also, i doubt the strain gives a stronger experience than other more intense psychedelics such as lsd and psilocybin. Edible cannabis has always made extreme cannabis experiences available.

Nothing smacks of absurd fear mongering like "a new super strain" of anything be it drug or disease. Even with the alleged solid reputation (i say alleged just because i personally don't know), i call b.s.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks
If they took the money wasted on this drug war in general and put it to health and education we would be far better off. The study in the op is flawed..imho.
I have to get to work but will check on this thread later.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

I doubt it would have mattered in the end if they ever smoked or not.

If they get better by just stopping with the use of it, do you think they would have become it when they didn`t had used it ?

In the Lancet article, it states that

Volunteers were administered the Psychosis Screening Questionnaire 10 and were excluded if they met the criteria for a psychotic disorder or if they reported a previous diagnosis of psychotic illness.

www.thelancet.com...

Then farther down:

Between May 1, 2005, and May 31, 2011, we approached 606 patients with first-episode psychosis

ibid

Uh, okay.....so they did not meet the criteria for Psychosis as per the questionnaire, but they were in psychosis? One of the many holes in this study.

Also, I found this interesting, as it is commonly accepted knowledge in mental health that people with a mental illness tend to be heavier tobacco smokers than those who do not.

A larger proportion of patients with first-episode psychosis (184 [45%] of 410 individuals) reported having smoked 100 tobacco cigarettes or more than did controls (60 [16%] of 370 individuals; p

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

If they get better when they stop the use then they aren't psychotic or schizophrenic.. they are just high.

a reply to: AkaDeDrow
Ok 1 more post, why have I or the 40+ people I have known over the last 30 yrs of my adult life not had the same experience as you? Alcohol yes..seen lots of violent stupidity. I must go and the OP does not want alcohol in the discussion.
Cheers.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

I did not mean freaking out the moment they have used it, but the days following without the use of it.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Then it's not likely the cannabis. It has little to no real long term effects.
If they are freaking out later, it's because they have a mental illness.

Almost everyone I know has tried cannabis, i know probably a hundred, if not hundreds, of people that consume it regularly. I have never seen anyone become schizophrenic because of it. Or develop any mental illness. It's not like it's been hard to get in the US even with the prohibition.

These cases are people with underlying mental illness that happened to smoke cannabis and then when their illness manifests it is blamed on an outside factor that couldn't possibly be proven to be the cause.

I mean just the headline is absurd for a legit establishment to claim without any actual proof and just an iffy study.

a reply to: vonclod

I can confirm that I have never seen anyone become aggressive cannabis related after direct use of it, except it can lead to heightened aggression when the person isn`t intoxicated anymore.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

Anyone that has used it a couple of times knows the experience and knows once it is done, it's done.

This is propaganda. That is why they included "a new super strain." They aren't talking about illness caused by just cannabis (which I also contend doesn't cause mental illness), but a new strain.

Do they name the strain and tell us how it has become so widespread and why the experience is any different from other strains? No? That's because stronger or weaker it's cannabis. A new strain is just stronger cannabis. It will have effects that are the same as cannabis extracts, and edibles. There is no super strain that does anything more than existing products.

It's just absurd, they have tested this drug for decades, it can't be a strain so strong it does something new. If it is completely different as in chemicals/makeup then it is not cannabis.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

The problem is with the strong cannabis, something which foreigners aren`t used to.

Trust me, I have sat in coffeeshops and seen Americans come in, ignoring the warnings they were given and to read the day later in the newspaper how they were brought to the ER because they were found on the street unconscious.

a reply to: BornAgainAlien

You claimed you have known people that went to the hospital because of cannabis. How many of those cases was it isolated though? Like they were only there because of the high and once it was worn off they were fine?

If you claim you have known people that have become a life long mental illness case, comparatively how many other users do you know that didn't? Could it be said that they possibly had a naturally occurring genetic mental illness (genetics cause almost all mental illness, with some exceptions being head trauma and other things) an just coincidentally smoked cannabis?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

This is another study that is trying to correlate cannabis use to psychosis without taking into consideration that MAYBE people who are prone to psychosis seek out cannabis (and other drugs) as a form of self-medication. Meaning that the reason psychosis rate is higher among users isn't BECAUSE of cannabis use but cannabis use is a symptom of their potential psychosis. Not surprising. They never want to consider that possibility.

You've gotta be kidding me! Skunk is high in THC, which is psychosis enabling. The anti-psychotic components in marijuana are not high in skunk by comparison. No way it makes any damned sense that people who are prone to psychosis are self-medicating, unless their idea of medication is to cause full blown episodes, just cause.

Skunk is light green and is made of the buds of cannabis plant but is grown very quickly. This means it has very little CBD and a lot of THC making it particularly strong (see 'THC and CBD' section). Different strains include; white widow, purple haze, northern lights, superskunk, amnesia, supersilver, lemonhaze and cheese. Skunk is risky because of how little CBD it has in it and so some users will feel panicky or paranoid when stoned on skunk.

Types of Cannabis

CBD Antipsychotic

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: tothetenthpower



I posted professional research, you are doing the 'fingers in your ears name calling', and to be honest as a moderator you should be behaving far better.



The information as I said previously is clearly stated in the research paper, which I view as valid research.



If your opinion is not believing it, I suggest you go tell THEM instead of harassing me.

Something does not become true simply because someone with 'truth' in their screen name comes on and says it is.

The other opinions on this board offer facts to refute the study, where the OP simply offers 'opinion' that it is unrefutable.

If our opinions (I offered mine in the LAST thread you wasted time on defending this study) offend you, then you obviously do not have the credentials to offer a compelling argument based on facts to defend your 'opinion'.

Theabsolutetruth - really???? That is ALSO simply an OPINION, not a FACT. I suggest a different screen name of 'theunprovedopinion' when putting up such poorly-researched and inconclusive studies.

You, the OP, offered the study and gave YOUR opinion...if we disagree and want to post opposition, it is YOU we are being directed to discuss it with as it is YOUR post that started the discussion. You, the OP, are the one that must bring more to the table to support your OPINION...or simply walk away as you did the LAST thread you invaded with your 'opinion'.

Simply saying it is true from one that only posts 'absolute truth'....means NOTHING, and definitely not TRUTH.

So, cool down, buck up, accept the criticism, and do some more study and offer some different research to support your OPINION.

(what is sad here...is that, for curiosity, I looked at the posting history and did not find what I expected, I actually found research and scientific studies on other subjects that were well-posted and for the most part, uncontroversial, and for the subjects that had controversy, good discussion. I would plead for the OP to accept that for once, the OP picked a subject that they were not well-versed, or had a strong bias, and got her 'opinion' hurt by the responses...defend your credibility, not your bias...and accept the criticism as well-founded discussion, not an attack!!!!)

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

The problem is with the strong cannabis, something which foreigners aren`t used to.

Trust me, I have sat in coffeeshops and seen Americans come in, ignoring the warnings they were given and to read the day later in the newspaper how they were brought to the ER because they were found on the street unconscious.

Yes, but that isn't mental illness. That is just someone that got too high not realizing what extracts and edibles could do. That isn't a life long mental illness like schizophrenia. That is mostly to blame on our prohibition. Most people here didn't know how strong it could be until it was legalized in the US and labs and companies began making products.

That is not mental illness, or what is being discussed here. That is more akin, to someone who thinks they drink coming to my home state and getting genuine white lightning moon shine. They just over did it and then when it's over it's over.