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

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: jude11

It is called that in the UK, it is also for the purpose of differentiation. Read the graph, it mentions ''hash'' and ''skunk'' those are different forms of cannabis.

Trust me when I say that I am very well aware of what skunk and hash are.

While hash is indeed a different form, skunk is merely a strain and got the name from its intense skunk-type smell in the raw form and if strong enough when smoked as well.

This can help: www.leafly.com...

Peace

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

There's a double edge sword here. On the one hand, if the research is correct, it adds clout to the continued criminalization of cannabis and more funding for study and research to support that side while on the other it lends clout to decriminalization and more open use of available strains and their potency and the better administration of such to eliminate the completely unnecessary super strong varieties out there, sold purely for their potency fame.

Either way, one must still consider a very important factor...it's not always what you do to a mind and body but the mind and body that you do it to, because someone who is schizophrenic or phsycotic and uses cannabis may also suffer without it's use.

More time, more research, more everything. Then we will begin to be able to use it's magical properties without destroying ourselves and eachother for the sake of machismo and fame.

a reply to: jude11

As I said, it is called such in the research for the purpose of DIFFERENTIATION.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

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.

I am a member first, my status as a moderator has nothing to do with this. It's not professional research, we have shown you it being such.

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

Which we have refuted and you've simply ignored.

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

Why did you bother posting this, on a discussion forum if you didn't want to discuss it?

Did you expect an echo chamber, where everybody just pats you on the pack for having internet? We discuss things, we debate here. If you don't' want to engage the membership, then don't' write OP's.

~Tenth

a reply to: theabsolutetruth
Skunk is not a different form of cannabis, it is the regular form just a different strain x bred in the 80s and enjoyed for it's flavour and potency. There are a great many strains equal to it and it is subjective..like a green apple vs a red one.
Edit..I see jude11 explained it

a reply to: nerbot

The research also addresses such issues. If people would actually read it instead of knee jerk reactions they might realise that.

My own opinion is that clearly street cannabis as it is, is not constructive, in fact often damaging.

I am aware however of some potential medical uses of specific chemicals in cannabis that could be medically utilised in a controlled and safe manner, obviously after considerable research on the specifics.

www.thelancet.com...

A theoretical explanation of why skunk might have been
preferred by patients with first-episode psychosis is that,
when they began to experience their illness prodrome, these
individuals might have sought increased concentrations of
THC to self-medicate. However, experimental studies show
that THC induces psychotic symptoms, while cannabidiol
ameliorates them and reduces anxiety.16–19 That people who
already have prodromal symptoms would choose a type of
cannabis that is high in THC and has little cannabidiol
(such as skunk), which might exacerbate their symptoms,
rather than a cannabidiol-containing type (such as hash),
would seem counterintuitive.

a reply to: vonclod

I know that.

If you care to scroll back you will see that I mentioned it due to being asked by another poster about it's name use in the research, which I have said at least twice on the thread so far is due to DIFFERENTIATION.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: seeker1963

He wasn`t on any when he became it, he got them because of his psychosis but I told him it was rubbish to take them when he kept smoking cannabis...so he quit with both and become well again very soon without the help of anything after that.

That isn't what you initially said.

I have had extensive experience with psychiatrists, Big Pharm drugs, and MJ. Of course there will be a very small percentage of people who might have a bad reaction. I am not refuting that, but to make something out to be so bad when there are so many people like myself who have had the total opposite reactions is about as pointless as the majority of the politically biased articles on ATS.

If 1 out of 1000 people have a bad reaction to something does that mean it should be illegal? Or does it mean that person should accept responsibility and stop taking something that reacts badly to their body chemistry?

Sounds like more pro nanny state propaganda to me! We are talking about responsible adults aren't we?

I think there is some merit to the study. I am one of those people who can't tolerate some strains they affect me badly. I am pro legalization, but I will not touch the stuff until it is legalized here or I am in a state that regulates it.

I am fine with the CBD strains they help with my condition, but because you never know what you may get in a black market I will not risk a bad reaction here.

a reply to: Grimpachi

Thank you for your considered response.

I do think there could be safe, legally regulated, controlled medical applications of specific isolated chemical compounds in cannabis, after considerable research.

a reply to: theabsolutetruth
Yes I see..things move along here pretty fast and I missed that it was addressed.
Im all for the research now that that it is allowed..I just find no correlation with this study to any user I know..Im simply being truthful..sorry.

Cannabis does have it's side effects and can ruin a life (even mentally). But it's not really the drug that causes it, it's the user/person.

I call it influence. The drug influences you to do things. Example: You may love the high of cannabis, but you want to feel more. The high influences you to try other drugs to feel the high. But again, cannabis doesn't make you do it, you do it yourself and have complete control of your actions without side-effects of the body (no withdrawal like other drugs).

I had a friend who couldn't go a day without smoking it. She was such an awesome person to be with at first, but then she just began to abuse of the drug and laterally 90% of her mind was just cannabis, cannabis, cannabis. She always talked about it, had pictures, etc. Now she was kicked out of school for too many absences, being caught with cannabis at school, and is doing nothing with her life. She also had a relationship with someone of the same type (cannabis lover). He raped her, cheated on her many times, but she kept staying with him. She was never home and always out without warning or consent of her mother. Throughout those entire months/year, she changed her character and wasn't the same person anymore. It got to a breaking point where all she did was just use me. She only needed me as a body guard for when she sold weed, needed food, had no one else to go to, or I invited her to something that required money (seriously, she wouldn't go to the park with me unless it required that I spent money on her). A very very close and one of my best friendship's has been lost u-u

Now this sounds like a horror story and "propaganda" to stay away from the drug, but no my point is that people ruin their own lives with the drug. Though the drug didn't 100% play a role on my friends life, it did play a major role. If you don't have self control, you will most likely end up on a harsh road. Some people can't even live a day without talking about cannabis, smoking it, or praising it.

I don't hate cannabis, I just hate the influence it can have on peoples lives (though some influences can be very positive).

I know this is unrelated to the actual OP topic, but I just wanted to post this since it was in relation to cannabis.

I'm really not sure why this is so controversial?

There is good evidence to believe that THC, like MANY other psychoactive substances, can precipitate psychotic episodes in people with a predisposition toward psychosis. The same thing could be said of alcohol, benzodiazepines, amphetamines, coc aine, DXM (active ingredient in OTC cough syrup), codeine, certain antidepressants, etc (even caffeine).

It's notoriously difficult to establish causation in these studies because people with disorders that include psychosis tend to self-medicate at a much higher rate than the general population. Also, the age of onset for many disorders involving psychosis overlaps with the age group with the highest rates of alcohol and recreational drug use. It also bears mention that even if a causal link can be drawn between episodes of psychosis and drug and alcohol use, this shouldn't be taken to mean that the underlying condition was caused by these substances as opposed to being triggered by or exacerbated by their use.

In regards to this particular study, the methodology isn't particularly rigorous and there's no real effort to quantify the levels of THC ingestion. Other sources of bias are pointed out by the study's authors:

The strategy we used for control recruitment, based on a variety of advertising strategies rather than on random selection, might have biased the findings

A possible limitation of our study is the absence of data on number of joints or grams used per day. However, because we collected information about use over a period of years and not about present use, the reliability of such detailed information would probably have been confounded by recall bias to a greater extent than was the general description of pattern of use that we obtained.

They simply asked people about the frequency of their cannabis consumption and relied on the opinion of respondents as to the THC content.

a reply to: nerbot

Over in The Netherlands they try to forbid too strong weed, it may only have a not too high percentage of THC in it, but that`s not something which they can regulate.

There are a lot of Mayors who want to grow it themselves in their districts in The Netherlands, but the government themselves are blocking it...it would help them also to keep the quality at safe levels...

Google Translate :

Municipalities do not follow up requirement regulated cannabis cultivation

a reply to: theabsolutetruth

I've always said that people shouldn't do things they can't handle. I've done enough "things" but I've never put myself in a situation (trip) that I could not have control over. Likewise I've seen people stupidly up their dose, and have a very bad time from it, only to have mental disabilities in the future from it as well.

Unfortunately due to T&C I cannot get into details regarding what situations I was talking about but it does include the type OP is referring too.

a reply to: seeker1963

That isn't what you initially said.

You thought it was a lie because I was talking about one of those cases.

I have seen many others become it because of it including this case, but I don`t consider all of them as being friends.

From who I considered to be friends a total of 3 of them have gone psychotic, and all after several years of daily use + one who I will consider half a friend. One was walking around naked miles from his home and one of the others saw everything to be a colour.

The others I have seen were people who I saw regularly, but didn`t want to call them friends so to say.

After 30+ years of personal observation of family and friends and 1st hand experience I can say that long term dope smoking can send you bat # crazy. 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.
I've also noticed that some can also end up with a "short fuse" and can go from happy to hyper violent very quickly, by saying hyper violent I mean they can go into a frenzy, in other words, rather than just punching someone a couple of times and regaining self control, they will stomp on your head till you're a bloody pulp.
I've also observed that those addicted will generally aggressively defend the drug.
These are just some of my observations over the course of my life, things I have seen and experienced 1st hand and JUST from weed usage, I've seen worse things happen when other drugs were involved.
Fell free to disagree, argue or whatever, it won't change the fact that what I've written is true.
I am also aware of the many useful and legal applications the drug can have, from antiseptics to building materials.

a reply to: AkaDeDrow

If I could star your comment twice, I would.

I have seen that happen in the past, and have even been on the receiving end of psychotic style violence because of it in the past.

It is not safe for the general public to randomly partake of cannabis as they do not know their own underlying psychology, their predisposition to reaction nor of the particular chemicals ingested, nor of the safety of the product. As the study elaborates it is like playing roulette, their minds are at stake and the safety of others.

Hence the value of such important research.

a reply to: AkaDeDrow
Thanks for the warning..I guess everyone I know including me must be about to snap like a dry twig and stomp people to a bloody pulp.
Not even going to bother.

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: AkaDeDrow
It is not safe for the general public to randomly partake of cannabis as they do not know their own underlying psychology, their predisposition to reaction nor of the particular chemicals ingested, nor of the safety of the product. As the study elaborates it is like playing roulette, their minds are at stake and the safety of others.

Hence the value of such important research.

You can easily replace the word cannabis in your statement with the world alcohol, and it would be just as true.