SCI/TECH: Cannabis linked to mental illness risk

A new survey of people aged between 14 and 24 suggest that some people who smoke cannabis are at risk of developing mental illness. While regular cannabis smoking only increases the risk of developing psychotic mental illness by 6%, regular smoking combined with psychiatric label of potential to become psychotic increases the risk up to 25%. But these are correlations are not from a research, but from a survey and scientists have yet to prove that Cannabis actually does increases the risk of mental illness and not that Cannabis is taken for medical purposes by those who have already developed the illness.



While Cannabis is on one side, on the other side is other drugs which have both medical and recreational purposes. The question is whether the medical use outweighs the negative consequences of drug resulting from recreational purposes, mental illness in Cannabis case.

People with psychosis, whose symptoms include hallucinations, paranoia, hearing voices and a persecution complex, are more likely than not to have a marijuana habit.

I think its mostly due to people self-medicating themselves having givin up on traditional methods. I believe this study didn't consider the other drugs the participants may or may not have taken in his or her lifetime(as it is well known that drugs like '___' can trigger a variety of mental illnesses). These kinds of things are very tricky to prove on a wide scale. FACT: No large comprehensive nonbiased study into the Pros and Cons of Marijuana has taken place and anybody who says otherwise is either lacking some vital information or they are part of the disinfo network that wishes to keep it illigal for power not public safety because that plant can be used for a huge number of things for example: Biodegradable Plastics, Biofuel, Textiles, Health Supplement well you get the picture. It would threaten a number of industries in the here and now. Although in the future with the world moving away from Macroscale engineered products and the big multinationals going towards nanotech in a big way, its just a matter of when Hemp and Cannibis no longer becomes a threat anymore because their products will be far superior to anything we have seen before. Then I could see weed becoming legal, when the economic threat is minimized it is my suspicion that 70% of the critics will disappear because they will stop recieving paychecks

So to sum it up Take these kinds of studies with a grain of salt until a Non-Biased Comprehensive Study is done, then the real debate begins

Originally posted by sardion2000
So to sum it up Take these kinds of studies with a grain of salt until a Non-Biased Comprehensive Study is done, then the real debate begins

Very true.

Here is one example straight from the same news site.

GuardianRobin Murray, professor of psychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, London, said there were still many unanswered questions, such as: "If half the world smokes cannabis, why aren't they all psychotic?"

The good thing about these biased stories is that they look at every good thing or every bad thing. So if we take these two and put them together, we get sort of a unbiased report, which will do for now.

Surf

Correlation is not causation and I think that the methodolgy in this study hardly makes the case for causality. There is a correlation between shoe size and educational attainment, but there is no causal relationship.

It's funny though, when the Guardian reports on the sanity of the American electorate or the Iraq war, they are always dead on, according to many here.

[edit on 04/12/2 by GradyPhilpott]

Don't really know much about the Guardian. It's UK right? This has been published in other source as well that I personally trust, here is the link...

www.newscientist.com...

Originally posted by sardion2000
Don't really know much about the Guardian. It's UK right? This has been published in other source as well that I personally trust, here is the link...

www.newscientist.com...

Yeah UK. I also saw the link in another website, don't remember which one.

Surf

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Correlation is not causation and I think that the methodolgy in this study hardly makes the case for causality. There is a correlation between shoe size and educational attainment, but there is no causal relationship.

It's funny though, when the Guardian reports on the sanity of the American electorate or the Iraq war, they are always dead on, according to many here.

Correlation could also mean causation.

Maybe the more educated you are, you realize that wearing tight shoes might make cut off your toes blood supply, so more educated people buy bigger size shoes than their foot sizes.

My point is that there could be one or not, so we aren't simply say there isn't any.

Everyone makes mistakes, Guardian does it too.

Surf

If it is a mistake it is not the fault of the Guadian nor New Scietist it is of the Scientists who published such a preliminary study. Same thing happened with this Toxicologist who gave a preliminary report of her findings to new scientist saying that buckyballs damage fish brains in a small controlled experiment. Not what I consider double-blind standards. I'm sure both of ya get my point

Edit: News services publish news and in the science biz its kinda difficult to not publish somthing that may be hot on the agenda of many people like this issue.

[edit on 2-12-2004 by sardion2000]

Originally posted by surfup

Correlation could also mean causation.

Maybe the more educated you are, you realize that wearing tight shoes might make cut off your toes blood supply, so more educated people buy bigger size shoes than their foot sizes.

Correlation can suggest causation, so I am not saying that the study is without value, if it leads to further research to establish causation.

Shoe size correlates to educational attainment because children have less educational attainment than those who are older and who have finished more of their schooling. Controlling for the variable of age, there is no correlation. Correlation is a red flag, if you will, but it is not proof.

[edit on 04/12/2 by GradyPhilpott]

I would hope there is more to the study than any of the stories tell. From reading the stories I could easily conclude that 'being stoned all day will make me nuts.' That's a crock.

I am sane I tell you, sane!

What I really dont like, is it seem Gov. is wasting money to find something wrong with Canabis, But Tobbaco and Alchol which kill more than all major drugs combined is ok. Why are they so against it? I bet more people would go to work after a night of smoking then after a night of drinking. and lets take a poll of people who dont drink,and just smoke, I will bet there is no gateway to harder drugs, But I know when people get drunk. It always leads to more.

its just BS. I am not sure HOW a goverment can say one nation under god but make it illegal to grow a plant. LOL They talk out of there @sses

Although it is against T&C's to discuss personal drug taking and the like.. I say this:


7 years of constant daily cannabis use caused "Mr X" to have nothing more than a slight cough.

7 years of similar alcohol use caused "Mr X" to get a buggered liver and die.

1 night of boozing caused "Mr X" to take the next day off work, have a stinking hangover, vomit, and lay in bed all day, unable to look after his kids, leaving the Mrs to do all the work, and he gets no lovin'

1 night of similary heavy smoking, and "Mr X", gets up and goes to work. Earns money to feed the kids, buys them new toys, goes home, smokes some more, plays with the kids, is more relaxed, and gets his end away with the Mrs....


Compare, and if you still say that smoking joints is worse than alcohol then maybe it is you that has the "Psychosis"

Today's pot isn't your parent's pot, it's ten times stronger, and who knows what chemicals they put into it.

What makes you assume they put chemicals on it?

Like I said above, 7 years and going, and still no sign of the slightest problem. Got a well paid job (pays around $40,000 in your monopoly money), got a sprog, and got a good life.....

Ask an alcoholic how good their life is....

Imo Anything can be "linked" to anything else, it just depends who is paying the researchers!

Researchers for phillip morris will "find" that tobacco use is good for your heart!
Researchers for the anti tobacco mob will "find" it causes brain damage etc etc etc

Same for pot, or for that matter any drug especially pharmecuticals, they wish to mass market!

The greatest conspiracy of all is that research yeilds conclusive results and that researchers are honest! Yeah right! We all know money talks, and when its billions, it shouts!

Originally posted by ShiftTrio
What I really dont like, is it seem Gov. is wasting money to find something wrong with Canabis, But Tobbaco and Alchol which kill more than all major drugs combined is ok. Why are they so against it? I bet more people would go to work after a night of smoking then after a night of drinking. and lets take a poll of people who dont drink,and just smoke, I will bet there is no gateway to harder drugs, But I know when people get drunk. It always leads to more.

I think the reason behind that is that we have already achieved some ground on alcohol and tobacco issues, but Canabis is a whole new thing.

Gov't has issued warnings about the other two, but nothing about Canabis, average joe might take this lack of study to be lack of harm from Canabis.

Surf

I'd take Cannabis over Flouride ANY DAY, one is put into your water and toothpaste, the other leads to nearly one million arrests in the US annually. One is DEADLY poison and builds toxicity in the body, the other passes through the urine in about a month. One was used for Rat Poison in the 20's, the other was used to benefit man kind in thousands of ways. You decide.

Originally posted by twitchy
I'd take Cannabis over Flouride ANY DAY, one is put into your water and toothpaste, the other leads to nearly one million arrests in the US annually. One is DEADLY poison and builds toxicity in the body, the other passes through the urine in about a month. One was used for Rat Poison in the 20's, the other was used to benefit man kind in thousands of ways. You decide.

You forgot one thing.

One could be possibly related to mentall illness and others isn't.

Surf

All that this article says is that people who are psychotic have a tendency to want to smoke. The same type of argument has been said regarding criminals and their habits. Just because certain people commit crimes and like to smoke doesn't mean that everyone who smokes is a violent offender and a danger to society. Some people have a predisposition for wanting to try new things and aren't content with the status quo. With that in mind, the substance in question doesn't create for dangers like becoming psychotic or developing any other mind related issues. People are always trying to find excuses. "Oh, I'm psychotic because I smoke pot," or,"I'm insane because I smoke." People are insane because society needs crazy people, and they are unavoidable. They exist and are all over the place. So they smoke, it's probably better for everyone that they do smoke and don't go freak out in public. It's like Chris Rock said in Bigger and Blacker, "Whatever happened to just plain crazy?" People need to take responsibillity for their actions and not associate it with their recreational habits.:

Originally posted by surfup

Originally posted by twitchy
I'd take Cannabis over Flouride ANY DAY, one is put into your water and toothpaste, the other leads to nearly one million arrests in the US annually. One is DEADLY poison and builds toxicity in the body, the other passes through the urine in about a month. One was used for Rat Poison in the 20's, the other was used to benefit man kind in thousands of ways. You decide.

You forgot one thing.

One could be possibly related to mentall illness and others isn't.

Surf

Read.... that was from a survey.... not from actually tests..