Marijuana Causes Mental Illness?

<p>Anyone hoping to be admitted to a good college, or ANY college for that matter, might want to consider a change of behavior if they smoke pot:</p>

<p>"FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, May 9, 2008</p>

<p>CONTACT: Jennifer de Vallance, ONDCP, (202) 395-6618
Rosanna Maietta, Fleishman-Hillard, (202) 828-9706 </p>

<p>TEEN "SELF MEDICATION" FOR DEPRESSION LEADS TO MORE SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS, NEW REPORT REVEALS</p>

<p>Depressed Teens Using Marijuana, Other Drugs to Relieve Symptoms </p>

<p>RELATED RESOURCE
Teen Marijuana Use Worsens Depression: An Analysis of Recent Data Shows “Self-Medicating” Could Actually Make Things Worse (PDF 658 kb)</p>

<p>(Washington, DC)—Millions of American teens report experiencing weeks of hopelessness and loss of interest in normal daily activities and many of these depressed teens are using marijuana and other drugs, making their situation worse, according to a new White House report released today. The report, from the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), reveals that marijuana use can worsen depression and lead to more serious mental disorders, such as schizophrenia, anxiety, and even suicide. </p>

<p>Research shows that some teens are using drugs to alleviate feelings of depression ("self-medicating"), when in fact, using marijuana can compound the problem. The report, released to coincide with May's Mental Health Awareness Month, shows a staggering two million teens felt depressed at some point during the past year, and depressed teens are more than twice as likely as non-depressed teens to have used marijuana during that same period. Depressed teens are also almost twice as likely to have used illicit drugs as non-depressed teens. They are also more than twice as likely as their peers to abuse or become dependent on marijuana. Marijuana use is associated with depression, suicidal thoughts, and suicide attempts.</p>

<p>"Marijuana is not the answer. Too many young people are making a bad situation worse by using marijuana in a misguided effort to relieve their symptoms of depression," said John P. Walters, Director, National Drug Control Policy. "Parents must not dismiss teen moodiness as a passing phase. Look closely at your teen's behavior because it could be a sign of something more serious." </p>

<p>Although marijuana use among teens has dropped by 25 percent since 2001, more teens use marijuana than all other illicit drugs combined. The new report, "Teen Marijuana Use Worsens Depression: An Analysis of Recent Data Shows 'Self-Medicating' Could Actually Make Things Worse," shows the following:</p>

<p>Teens who smoke marijuana at least once a month are three times more likely to have suicidal thoughts than non-users;
Using marijuana can cause depression and other mental illnesses;
The percentage of depressed teens is equal to the percentage of depressed adults, but depressed teens are more likely than depressed adults to use marijuana and other illicit drugs;
Teen girls who use marijuana daily are more likely to develop depression than girls who do not use marijuana;
Depressed teens are also more likely than non-depressed teens to engage in other risky behaviors such as daily cigarette use and heavy alcohol use.
"Don't be fooled into thinking that pot is harmless," said Dr. Drew Pinksy, internist, addiction expert, and host of VH1's Celebrity Rehab. "Marijuana is an addictive drug. Teens who are already depressed and use marijuana may increase their odds of suffering from even more serious mental health problems."</p>

<p>Since its inception in 1998, the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign has been authorized by Congress to reduce and prevent teen drug use. For more information on the ONDCP National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign, visit <a href="http://www.TheAntiDrug.com."&gt;www.TheAntiDrug.com.&lt;/a&gt;"&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Teens who smoke marijuana at least once a month are three times more likely to have suicidal thoughts than non-users

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Because everyone knows that correlation always implies causation.</p>

<p>Note that also that people who drink Samuel Adams beer are far more likely to be less rich than people who drink cognac. The conclusion: COGNAC IS CLEARLY BETTER FOR YOUR POCKET.</p>

<p>marijuana is bad for you</p>

<p>CC is bad for you. :)</p>

<p>
[quote]
...are far more likely to be less rich...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>sloppy posting </p>

<p>
[quote]
The conclusion: COGNAC IS CLEARLY BETTER FOR YOUR POCKET.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>not a very coherent analogy comparing brandy drinkers w/ beer drinkers. comparing alcohol drinkers w/ alcohol abstinence would make more sense.</p>

<p>I cant believe people still try to argue for the "goodness" of marijuana.</p>

<p>
[quote]
sloppy posting

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The only way to get parallel structure. It was intentional.</p>

<p>
[quote]
not a very coherent analogy comparing cognac drinkers w/ beer drinkers. comparing alcohol drinkers w/ alcohol abstinence would make more sense.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I was simply attacking the idea that you can compare cannabis user demographics with "normal" demographics and argue that cannabis <em>caused</em> those demographics without controls and without further investigation. (BUT OH WAI the government refuses to fund THC studies whilst tobacco companies can pump new money into research that finds how to make tobacco more addictive.) </p>

<p>People who cite such studies should take a course in logic.</p>

<p>
[quote]
BUT OH WAI the government refuses to fund THC studies whilst tobacco companies can pump new money into research that finds how to make tobacco more addictive.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>True, but two wrongs dont make a right.</p>

<p>And comparing tobacco to marijuana is well, just silly, seeing as one has mind-altering effects.</p>

<p>
[quote]
True, but two wrongs dont make a right.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>From a purely (left) libertarian point of view (and from social contract theory), tobacco is an evil because its externalities infringe on others' liberties [which is best countered with a boycott], cannabis causes far less of such infringement, the point that it can be ignored safely if it consumption is moderated.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And comparing tobacco to marijuana is well, just silly, seeing as one has mind-altering effects.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm more and more certain that you may not exactly know what you are talking about.</p>

<p>Tobacco is a hallucinogen. Normally, it's smoked at sufficiently low doses such that you don't hallucinate significantly, but at higher doses (like the Native Americans used to do) you can start to see "visions". It's possible to overdose on tobacco (till you pass out or even die) -- it's nearly impossible to OD on cannabis.</p>

<p>Cannabis' psychedelic effects are more comparable to that of consumer drugs like coffee or alcohol (without the violent behaviour) -- which of course one can moderate. At least cannabis doesn't contain <em>nightshade</em> poisons that make you start seeing things and truly distort your sense of reality.</p>

<p>The reason why people don't even notice the double standard is simply due to cultural bias.</p>

<p>Note that tobacco is a member of the highly poisonous Nightshade Family (Solanaceae), which developed especially toxic poisons as a defence against herbivores. </p>

<p>The other food products we do consume from that family happen to be reproductive structures (e.g. fruits like chilies, tomatoes, eggplants, etc. and the tubers of a potato), parts which would have encountered less selection pressure to develop defences against herbivores, or would have developed selection pressures encouraging consumption in some cases (as in the fruits). In all these species, the leaves are always toxic [which is why you get sick when you eat a potato bud, because those green parts already contain those poisons]. </p>

<p>Surprise surprise -- tobacco is smoked for its leaf. </p>

<p>At least cannabis doesn't come from a plant family that has encountered especial selection to develop deadly poisons among all its members ...</p>

<p>
[quote]
From a purely (left) libertarian point of view (and from social contract theory), tobacco is an evil because its externalities infringe on others' liberties.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>second hand smoke? anything that starts to approach the liberties you are speaking of is increasingly countered w/ public smoking bans. btw enough second hand marijuana smoke can get a passerby high.</p>

<p>
[quote]
it's nearly impossible to OD on cannabis.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>common misconception</p>

<p>
[quote]
The reason why people don't even notice the double standard is simply due to cultural bias.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, marijuana is a proven gateway drug(i've seen it happen),and the brain/lung cell effects are undeniable.</p>

<p>Why have virtually no accredited doctors lobbied for the legalization of cannibas?</p>

<p>
[quote]
The ratio of cannabis material required to saturate cannabinoid receptors to the amount required for a fatal overdose is 40,000:1 [11][12]; consumption of such a large dose is virtually impossible. There have been no reported deaths or permanent injuries sustained as a result of a marijuana overdose [13][14][15][16][17]. It is, for all practical purposes, impossible to overdose on marijuana, as the user would certainly either fall asleep or otherwise become incapacitated from the effects of the drug before being able to consume enough THC to be mortally toxic.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes I quoted from Wikipedia. You can go check the medical effects article yourself and check the sources for yourself, if you want to verify reliability. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Why have virtually no accredited doctors lobbied for the legalization of cannibas?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Appeal</a> to tradition - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[url=<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_fallacy%5DArgumentum"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bandwagon_fallacy]Argumentum&lt;/a> ad populum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia<a href="its%20inverse%20--%20that%20because%20it's%20unpopular%20that%20it%20is%20mistaken">/url</a> </p>

<p>Also, define "virtually no" -- that is <em>your</em> perception. There are plenty of medical groups who have recommended that cannabis be in the least rescheduled [but the FDA has ignored them because of its inherent conservatism from past eras] -- maybe you watch too much right-wing news or something.</p>

<p>
[quote]
No, marijuana is a proven gateway drug(i've seen it happen)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ahh! Argument from anecdote! Very rigourous! </p>

<p>
[quote]
and the brain/lung cell effects are undeniable.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>i.e. "I can't debate science."

[quote]
second hand smoke? anything that starts to approach the liberties you are speaking of is increasingly countered w/ public smoking bans.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Which opposes the libertarian methodology, because state power is inherently dangerous -- the way to do it would be to counter it with cultural / consumer action, such as cultural ostracisation of the smokers involved, refusing to provide service to smokers / refusing to hiring them / etc.</p>

<p>What exactly does this article have to do with getting into college? From a quick read it says absolutely nothing about cognitive skills, executive function, or any of the probably more relevant marijuana-associated effects. It talks about depression, and unless your point is that depressed teens are less likely to get into college (true, but far down the list of issues related to depression), college is not really a relevant thing here.</p>

<p>Furthermore, how is this article in any way surprising? It's well known that people with mental illnesses often self-medicate - this is why, for example, something like 85% of schizophrenics are regular cigarette smokers.</p>

<p>The only interesting thing in this article is Drew Pinksy's assertion that marijuana is an addictive drug. While true (psychological addiction), the man is an idiot - go read his website, where, among other things, he confuses cocaine with methapmhetamine, and makes blaring factual errors regarding the effects of both drugs.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>A "proven gateway drug"? Really? So what you're telling me is that you are suggesting that the statistical correlation between marijuana and other drug use must be a causation relationship? </p>

<p>In any case, even if we accept that marijuana is a gateway drug (and ignore the obvious confounding factors like prior tendency towards drug use, lifestyle and so forth), statistical analysis has shown that there are two gateway drugs with vastly more correlation than marijuana: alcohol and tobacco. Weird how that works, isn't it? And you never hear NIDA going on about their gateway effects. Strange...</p>

<p>Now, as for brain/lung effects, you're (mostly) right about the brain. It is indeed undeniable that chronic heavy (I'm talking smoking multiple times a day, which almost nobody does) marijuana use will decrease memory, executive function and so forth. </p>

<p>But you're dead wrong about lung effects. The latest study (and largest to date) out of UCLA reported no statistical increase in any tobacco-related cancers, COPD or emphysema among regular marijuana smokers. The reality is, it's still not clear what effect marijuana has on the lungs.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>The reality is, numerous doctors have lobbied for marijuana, at least for medical use (many for legalization as well). Your first error is not looking to see if your point of view is true. Your second error is only looking in America. Hate to break it to you, but there's lots of good doctors all over the world, and many of them think marijuana should be legalized. Many doctors in Canada, for example, are heavily supportive of marijuana legalization - especially for medical use.</p>

<p>But, probably the most illustrative demonstration that you are totally wrong is this, one of my favorite documents of all time:</p>

<p>Portland</a> NORML: American Medical Association Opposes the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937</p>

<p>Yes, before it before unpopular and untenable to oppose marijuana laws, the AMA opposed making marijuana illegal. I'll let you sit and digest that for a moment. And yes, I realize it's out of date - but my point is that assertions of marijuana's harmfulness founded upon the supposed social consensus against marijuana are incredibly ignorant of how the issue has evolved. The reality is, even today, the un-politicized people who look into the issue land heavily against marijuana prohibition. Even the special administrative judge the DEA appointed to consider the issue point-blank told the DEA that they should immediately stop prosecuting marijuana. And was ignored. As per normal.</p>

<p>And I won't even delve into how one man's racist campaign (Harry J. Anslinger, go read about it) got marijuana banned in the first place.</p>

<p>
[quote]
t is, for all practical purposes, impossible to overdose on marijuana, as the user would certainly either fall asleep or otherwise become incapacitated from the effects of the drug before being able to consume enough THC to be mortally toxic.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I never said "fatally", and "overdosing" is pretty subjective, as I consider passing out a pretty serious effect, thereby OD'ing.</p>

<p>
[quote]
There are plenty of medical groups who have recommended that cannabis be in the least rescheduled

[/quote]
</p>

<p>by "virtually" i exclude the half-doctors that lead your bs consumer groups.</p>

<p>
[quote]
i.e. "I can't debate science."

[/quote]

[quote]
There are plenty of medical groups who have recommended that cannabis be in the least rescheduled

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I tend to believe the overwhelming majority results. Not all research is publicly funded, and yet the same results are found.</p>

<p>
[quote]
as I consider passing out a pretty serious effect, thereby OD'ing.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>By that definition, every time someone uses Nyquil to help them to go to sleep, they've overdosed ... </p>

<p>
[quote]
by "virtually" i exclude the half-doctors that lead your bs consumer groups.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Let me ask you some things: </p>

<p>1) Are you a doctor yourself?
2) Is your father a magistrate?
3) How do you define "half-doctor"? Doctors who doesn't agree with your views?</p>

<p>You have such an ignorance of basic logic, debating skills and science that I doubt you're the doctor type anyway.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I tend to believe the overwhelming majority results. Not all research is publicly funded, and yet the same results are found.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you know what "peer review" means?</p>

<p>Do you even have any idea how the scientific community works?</p>

<p>Note you have failed to uphold your other arguments, so I suppose I can extract concessions from you across the flow.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>If you knew anything you'd know that one of the criterion describing an overdose is harm or danger occurring. Passing out is not harmful or dangerous in and of itself - otherwise we'd describe all sleeping pills as "harmful".</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Actually, a majority of people in many states and other countries (Canada, the Netherlands, many other European nations) support marijuana legalization, decriminalization or medical legalization. I'm not sure what the percentage is among doctors, but of the non-NIDA/DEA (too politicized) opinions I have read on the issue, there is slight majority support among doctors and policymakers for rescheduling of marijuana.</p>

<p>Stop arguing based solely on your opinions and go find some facts.</p>

<p>Marijuana Triggers Psychosis</p>

<p>
[quote]
In another study being presented at the conference, a two-day gathering of mental health experts discussing the connections between cannabis and mental health, scientists found that marijuana worsens psychotic symptoms of schizophrenics.</p>

<p>Doctors at Yale University in the U.S. tested the impact of THC on 150 healthy volunteers and 13 people with stable schizophrenia. Nearly half of the healthy subjects experienced psychotic symptoms when given the drug.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>1</a> Joint as Damaging as 5 Cigarettes to Your Lungs</p>

<p>
[quote]
"This damage is a full range from symptoms to structural lung damage and reduced lung function," said lead researcher Dr. Richard Beasley, director of the Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, in Wellington.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Pot</a> During Pregnancy May Harm Fetal Brain, Research Shows That Pregnant Moms Who Smoke Marijuana Risk Fetal Nerve Cell Development - CBS News</p>

<p>
[quote]
Basically, marijuana's active ingredient, tetrahdyrocannabinol (THC), may interfere with the development of nerve cells, according to the molecular biologist Tibor Harkany, PhD, who works at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Fainting</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</p>

<p>
[quote]
Fainting, frequently called syncope (pronounced /ˈsɪŋkəpi/), is a sudden, and generally momentary, loss of consciousness, or blacking out caused by the Central Ischaemic Response, because of a lack of sufficient blood and oxygen in the brain.

[/quote]
</p>

<h2>If you seriously are comparing sleeping to passing out, then you I really feel sorry for you.</h2>

<p>I dont know how you can continually compare it to tobacco. Marijuana users toke for longer periods of time, thereby increasing the level of toxin accumulation.</p>

<p>Many doctors promote marijuana use * for their patients*. You are distorting it to sound as though they are promoting for everyone, which they are not. Don't confuse the two.</p>

<p>Hahahahaha.</p>

<p>I'm unclear as to whether you actually read the studies you linked to here.</p>

<p>The psychosis one is not something I'll debate, because it's pretty well known that schizophrenia is aggravated by marijuana. That fact says little to nothing about what marijuana does to non-schizophrenics.</p>

<p>The New Zealand lung study is interesting, though. It showed lung damage from marijuana. Well no kidding, putting tar of any kind in your lungs damages them, reducing their effectiveness. But the really interesting thing is that the researchers found no increase in chronic lung disease or lung cancer to speak of. Sounds a lot like what I was saying, no?</p>

<p>The fetal study was done on mice. I'm not sure I need to explain to you that doing research on mice translates poorly to actual human neurological development.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Obviously they are different, but my point was that passing out is not in and of itself a harmful occurrence. It is often related to harmful occurrences, but is not in and of itself. </p>

<p>But that's really beside the point, because the real issue is this: very few marijuana users will ever ingest enough to even pass out. It takes a lot of the drug to do so. If you disagree, provide a source for your claim that passing out is a regular occurrence with marijuana use.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Because tobacco is a legal smoked substance. A substance that is proven to be worse for you than marijuana.</p>

<p>Even though marijuana users hold in each puff longer than tobacco users, they on average smoke much less overall, since the average amount of tobacco smoked is something like a pack a day for cigarette smokers - even if a joint is equivalent to 5 cigarettes as you claim, almost nobody smokes 5 joints a day.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I'm not confusing the two. Obviously doctors don't promote marijuana use in general. But there's a difference between not promoting it and opposing its legalization. Doctors also don't support alcohol or tobacco - but they're not clamoring for prohibition, either.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Even though marijuana users hold in each puff longer than tobacco users, they on average smoke much less overall, since the average amount of tobacco smoked is something like a pack a day for cigarette smokers - even if a joint is equivalent to 5 cigarettes as you claim, almost nobody smokes 5 joints a day.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>you are simplifying it, its not that easy. </p>

<p>Comparing</a> cannabis with tobacco -- Henry et al. 326 (7396): 942 -- BMJ</p>

<p>
[quote]
Although the active ingredients of the cannabis plant differ from those of the tobacco plant, each produces about 4000 chemicals when smoked and these are largely identical. Although cannabis cigarettes are smoked less frequently than nicotine cigarettes, their mode of inhalation is very different. Compared with smoking tobacco, smoking cannabis entails a two thirds larger puff volume, a one third larger inhaled volume, a fourfold longer time holding the breath, and a fivefold increase in concentrations of carboxyhaemoglobin.5 The products of combustion from cannabis are thus retained to a much higher degree.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
Even if the number of deaths attributable to cannabis turned out to be a fraction of that figure, smoking cannabis would still be a major public health hazard. However, when the likely mental health burden is added to the potential for morbidity and premature death from cardiopulmonary disease, these signals cannot be ignored.

[/quote]
</p>

<h2>Like I've said in a previous post, the wedge between cigarettes and cannibas comes in the form of mental illness.</h2>

<p>I realize there are many conflicting studies posted every year on this topic, but an outright legalization(like both of you suggested) is simply irresponsible.</p>

<p>Yes, except that for a wedge, it's pretty unremarkable - there was something like a 40% increase in schizophrenia incidence, which has been attributed to latent psychotic tendencies that were aggravated by marijuana.</p>

<p>The reality is, you focus on the negative effects of smoking marijuana. But what about the negative societal effects of banning it? Thousands jailed, lives and careers destroyed, massive amounts of money spent on incarceration and prohibition that could be spent on treatment, etc. etc.</p>

<p>Do you consider the unclear, potential negative effects of cannabis to be worse than the lives destroyed by banning it? I cannot see how that point of view would work, but I'm not you I suppose.</p>