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

originally posted by: snowspirit
www.heretohelp.bc.ca...

A Canadian study.

What researchers have learned from these studies is that cannabis can potentially cause psychosis, but only in a select group of people who are naturally vulnerable.

This should be common knowledge...I have experienced this many many times in my life and I know people in the medical establishment that have had the same deductions. I know about 7 people which freaked out using drugs and after had temporary or long lasting mental problems. Anxiety and schizophrenia are the ones I've witnessed the most, I would think that depression is possible too.

Don't get me wrong I'm all for legalization and unbiased education about THC. I'm high right now lol
But it would be lying to myself to say that getting high, with whatever the drug, can't trigger latent mental problems.

originally posted by: snowspirit
Most people's paranoia comes from worrying if other people know that you're high. Once that stigma of "doing something illegal" is gone, so is the paranoia.

You might be on to something here... 75% of the first time bad trips I've seen had this type of paranoia to fuel the anxiety. The fear of what other people might think because it's illegal and prejudiced by some.

a reply to: OneManArmy

Verbal attacks, presumptions and accusations are not rational questions.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: OneManArmy

Verbal attacks, presumptions and accusations are not rational questions.

Are you a machine?
The repetition is like a bot with a glitch.
Are you a glitch in the matrix?
lol.

WOW MAN, thats some freaky ish. Thats deep.

EDIT: Yes thats a joke.

Out of curiosity (for these types of studies), how do they rule out laced cannabis?

(In the US, it can be enhanced with PCP.)

a reply to: DMFL1133

It can, but in Europe the change it happens is almost nullified.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: OneManArmy



Verbal attacks, presumptions and accusations are not rational questions.

And...

Starting ANOTHER thread to re-hash the research that was torn apart in the LAST thread you posted it in is not rational. You hijacked that thread, got blasted for it with the misguided and biased research you offered...that was not enough???

That hijack alone exposed your agenda. AND NOW you think it so unfair for others to point that out.

It is not logical.

Asserting that others are uneducated and therefore incompetent to be able to debunk your posted research is NOT an attack?

There is much illness here to be diagnosed, and it is not the supposed psychosis of those you wish to defame.
Report to work, and check yourself in. Your employer will understand and give you some good drugs to treat your malady.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: OneManArmy

Verbal attacks, presumptions and accusations are not rational questions.

so all the idiots and their irrational vitriolic attacks are just proving the research correct

You said the above!

All I have to say at this point?

Pot meet kettle!

No matter what you believe in your lack of skill in promoting propaganda and debating those who disagree with you, is pathetic at best!

You tried to covertly call me an idiot earlier and I called you out for that! Your response? I was paranoid!

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

In this thread, the OP asked for opinions about why there had been a recent increase in claims of 'gangstalking' and people claiming to be 'targeted individuals'.

Here is my first post on that thread, in full:

I put it down to the enormous popularity of coc aine as a recreational drug.

I had (silly me) forgotten the even greater popularity of high-potency cannabis.

It's no news to ATS members that conspiracy theories have been 'mainstream' for some time. Recently, I've noticed another upsurge in social media. Formerly sensible people on my Facebook page have suddenly gone all conspiracy-theorist.

They're all smokers.

I posted the BBC article in the OP on my Facebook wall this morning. I've no doubt there'll be some interesting responses. But it is even more relevant here. Social media plus high-potency cannabis may well add up to an epidemic of paranoid schizophrenia. Don't say no-one told you they saw it coming.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

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.

The study is of a group of first-episode psychotics. Are you saying that people at risk from psychosis unknowingly self-medicate themselves with cannabis before they've ever had a psychotic episode?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Bullcrap. Here is a great refutation of your study...

Here's one of the studies mentioned in that link:

"The observed tendency for cannabis use to precede or coincide with rather than follow mania symptoms, and the more specific association between cannabis use and new onset manic symptoms, suggests potential causal influences from cannabis use to the development of mania. It is a significant link."

Dr Marwaha also said the review suggested that cannabis use significantly worsened mania symptoms in people who had previously been diagnosed with bipolar disorder.

He added: "There are limited studies addressing the association of cannabis use and manic symptoms, which suggests this is a relatively neglected clinical issue. However our review suggests that cannabis use is a major clinical problem occurring early in the evolving course of bipolar disorder..." Source

In my wide and deep experience of this issue, there is a definite, visible link between weed and serious, clinical wackiness.

a reply to: Astyanax

These people are NOT paranoid.
Everyone is out to get them. Its TRUE. Really. Its a conspiracy!!!!

I thought it was Obama's minions out trying to discredit the seekers of truth and unravelers of hidden conspiracies. They work by making everything a conspiracy, so nothing is credible anymore. The truth is buried in lies and distortions. And the walls are melting too.

(sorry had to say it)

I might suggest that legalization may take some of that MJ out of the hands of the thirteen-year olds that seem to have polluted Facebook and Twitter and all of the blogs on the net. And maybe, getting jobs for the unemployed would give people something to do and less time to think about why they are being pushed out of life.
And then maybe they could afford some MJ and quit trashing the 'net.

(and no I don't have any so don't blame my random thoughts on THAT)

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Since there appears to be some question about whether the paper posted by the OP was peer-reviewed or not,

How The Lancet handles your paper

Peer review
Every Article, Case Report, Hypothesis, Seminar, and Review published in The Lancet has been peer reviewed. Occasional contributions (eg, Essays) are accepted without peer review.

On submission to The Lancet, your report will first be read by one or more of the journal's staff of physicians and scientists. Our acceptance rate overall is about 5% and it is an important feature of our selection process that many papers are turned away on the basis of in-house assessment alone. That decision will be communicated quickly.

Research papers and most other types of paper that receive positive in-house reviews are followed by peer review by at least three reviewers. You will receive notification of which editor is handling the peer review of your paper. If reviews are encouraging, and the editorial consensus is also favourable, then we seek statistical advice where appropriate. Source

a reply to: Astyanax

But seriously, some people do not need to be using MJ. That we can agree on. But ONLY that.

Some people don't need sugar. They get fat and develop diabetes and heart disease.
Some people don't need to be drinking. They become alcoholics, or violent to their spouses, or wreck their cars and kill people.

Some people cannot even be responsible on the road, they can't drive, endanger others, even become violent themselves and attack others with their vehicles.

Some people have no business on a motorcycle, but that is an activity many enjoy legally.

Where do you draw the line between incarceration of everyone participating in an activity, as opposed to helping to identify and help those that cannot handle such activity???

How much harm comes from the persecution and incarceration of otherwise responsible adults enjoying just one of many potential recreational activities that are legal, but have hazards that harm others?

How much persecution of people seeking a well-established and effective medical treatment can you justify to prevent the hazards of psychosis to another sub-set of the population???

Feeedom has consequences, but do you want to give that up too???

Get REAL people, don't tolerate the progressive agenda to control everything about our lives! That is all this is, just one example of a larger agenda! (woops, my paranoia is showing)

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Since there appears to be some question about whether the paper posted by the OP was peer-reviewed or not,

You mean peer reviewed like this debacle?

Tuesday, the British Medical Journal published the second of its three-part series claiming that the 1998 study in The Lancet that sparked fears that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine could cause autism was the result of deliberate fraud and profiteering. 

www.thedailybeast.com...

a reply to: DMFL1133

not just in the U.S. now mate, pretty much all over, in Australia we have a growing problem with cannabis being laced with ICE (Crystal Meth/Methamphetamine) and it seems to make a lot of people go nuts and get very aggressive.
I don't know if legalisation is the solution or not, because regardless of restrictions, people will still experiment, but maybe, just maybe legalising it, or regulating it will provide users with a "cleaner, stabler" product.
I think a better option would be to do extensive study and research towards it's effects and potential side effects, then to Educate people with the facts. (although there will still be fools refuting the findings.)

a reply to: IslandOfMisfitToys


articles.mercola.com...

A new investigation into Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s hotly contested MMR-autism study concluded there was no fraud committed by Dr. Wakefield
At least 28 studies from around the world support Dr. Wakefield’s controversial findings; Dr. Wakefield has also published dozens of peer-reviewed papers looking at the mechanism and cause of inflammatory bowel disease, and has extensively investigated the brain-bowel connection in the context of children with developmental disorders such as autism.
Growing research is now supporting the link between gastrointestinal disturbances and autism; it could be that if your child has suboptimal gut flora, vaccines can become the proverbial "last straw"—the trigger that sends his/her immune system over the edge into the development of chronic heath problems

a reply to: lakesidepark

It is people that post nonsense like your posts that are the ruin of ATS.

People that cannot stand real research, instead shouting their mouths off about their own UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINIONS.

I posted this research, I think it is valid. The research proves a link between high potency cannabis and psychosis, that is a FACT, an important fact that people should know. 25% of new psychosis cases could have been avoided, that is a lot of people.

Presumably the list of things you accused me of for just posting this research you are also accusing the researchers of, the IoPP of, The Lancet of, The peer review team, the editors etc, because they are even more involved in this research than me, all those educated scholars you think of as harbouring some ''agenda'' and having ''mental health issues'' because they are educated and choose scientifically researched fact based information over rhetoric.

Do you argue about evolution also?

The research is professional and valid it is not a ''hoax'' nor ''debunked''
the previous thread wasn't ''hijacked'' by posting research
posting research IS ''rational''
starting a new thread IS ''rational''
posting a thread does not imply an ''agenda''
posting research does not imply an ''agenda''
posting research does not imply ''illness''
posting research does not imply the need for ''drugs to treat your malady''

Research from The British Medical Journal that confirms the IoPP research.

www.bmj.com...

We investigated the association between cannabis use and risk of psychosis by analysing the expression of psychotic experiences. Psychotic experiences share many characteristics with clinically relevant psychosis, such as demographic, environmental, and genetic risks, and are thought to represent a behavioural marker for psychosis liability.18 31 32 Psychotic experiences are a common and generally transitory phenomenon in the general population, that, nevertheless, might become abnormally persistent and progress to clinical psychotic disorder if combined with exposure to environmental risks.19 33 34 Our study confirmed cannabis as an environmental risk factor, impacting on risk of psychosis by increasing the risk of incident psychotic experiences, and, if use continues over time, increasing the risk of persistent psychotic experiences.

The finding that longer exposure to cannabis was associated with greater risk for persistence of psychotic experiences is in line with an earlier study showing that continued cannabis use over time increases the risk for psychosis in a dose-response fashion.5 This is also in agreement with the hypothesis that a process of sensitisation might underlie emergence and persistence of psychotic experiences35 as an indicator of liability to psychotic disorder.18 31 Sensitisation refers to the phenomenon that repeated exposure to an (environmental) stressor leads to progressively greater responses over time.35 36 37 38 In rats, repeated exposure to THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, the main psychoactive component of cannabis) induces behavioural sensitisation: rats pre-treated with increasing doses of THC show greater behavioural (locomotor) responses to a THC challenge after a 14 day washout period than THC naive rats.39 40 In humans, however, direct evidence for cannabis sensitisation is lacking.

As our study showed that the risk of persistent psychotic experiences increases with longer periods of cannabis exposure, we suggest that a process of sensitisation underlies the association between cannabis and psychosis.32

Yeah psychosis is only caused by 'immature' resin glands that haven't developed in to CBN,CBD,CBG etc,so it is therefore raw THC.

Most people including dispensaries,uninformed citizens and AMsterdam are guilty of this.Prohibition is responsible for this lack of knowledge and greed is also responsible in the cases of dispensaries and Amsterdam.

Also the genetic bottleneck has lead to a very generic/mundane similarity,in what is available,back in the70s old timers had access to landraces from the 'sweet spots' which are now under threat from European hybrids (bred in to increase yield) which once bred into the line will be near impossible to draw out.There is a very real problem of extinction of certain species due to this.

Digressing to CBD,they say for cannabis to be effective against cancer,it must have at least an 80%coverage of Matured Amber (CBD) resin glands and be administered in oil form and not forgetting having a customed designed genetic profile to suit the needs of the patients ailments.

For the best of both worlds, a 50/50 ratio is ideal,although many examples barely have a 5/10% ratio,a microscope check will determine what you are dealing with.

So the 'psychosis card' is being played by prohibitionists,who say, that this is down to stronger than ever THC and like I said,this is false,it is this raw THC which hasn't broken down into CBD etc that is the issue.

Further research that confirms the IoPP research from The British Journal of Psychiatry.

bjp.rcpsych.org...