Marijuana use connected to aggression

[True Earthling]

I've read comments here that pot makes one more laid back, mellow and less prone to aggression and violent behavior... studies say otherwise...

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands, Feb. 1 (UPI) -- A Dutch study on the effects of marijuana use on teenagers suggests a connection with aggressive behavior.

The BBC reports researchers at the Trimbos Institute in the Netherlands found 17 percent of the 5,551 12 to 16-year-olds questioned had used marijuana within the past year. The study found the higher the frequency and amount of marijuana use, the more aggressive behavior the teenager showed.

A recent study by the British Journal of Psychiatry found similar results.

A 2005 report by the Schools Health Education Unit in Britain found 25 percent of 14- and 15-year-olds smoked pot.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2006/02/01/Study-Link-between-marijuana-aggression/UPI-28721138819619/#ixzz1vBESUXf0

Marijuana Use Linked to Risk of Psychotic Symptoms
Study Shows Association Between Development of Psychosis and Smoking Marijuana
By Denise Mann
WebMD Health News Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD

March 1, 2011 -- Adolescents and young adults who smoke marijuana have an increased risk for experiencing psychotic symptoms, according to a new study.

The new findings appear online in the journal BMJ.

Researchers assessed marijuana use during a 10-year study of 1,923 participants aged 14 to 24 in Germany.

Those participants who had no psychotic symptoms and had never tried marijuana when the study began and then started using marijuana had nearly double the risk of experiencing psychotic symptoms in the future.

And those who used marijuana before start of the study and who continued use over the study period had an increased risk of persistent psychotic symptoms, the study shows.

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20110301/marijuana-use-linked-to-risk-of-psychotic-symptoms

Does smoking marijuana cause aggression?

In general, after using marijuana a person experiences a sedating effect, which makes the drug less likely to cause violence in users than other substances such as alcohol and stimulants (e.g., amphetamines and cocaine).

However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Why do people become abusive or aggressive?

Using marijuana can produce strange behaviour and reactions in people when they are intoxicated. These reactions can be similar to psychosis and paranoia and because of this, marijuana users may experience the following:

confusion – they misunderstand what is going on or what someone has said or done
feeling threatened or frightened
paranoia – they hear voices or think that people are out to get them

http://adai.washington.edu/marijuana/factsheets/aggression.htm

[I owe a]

1. well this proves it Travon guilty!!!11

[Chemisse]

2. My experience is that people are more mellow when high on pot.

I think this is most likely the explanation for the increased violence among the pot-smoking teens:

"it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana."

I think this is particularly true of teenagers, who are more likely to smoke pot as a rebellious act.

[jwirr]

35. That is also my experience and I have been around pot smokers for many years. More likely to go

to sleep than start a fight.

[HillWilliam]

141. Unless you happen to be bogue-ing the last of the Doritos

or holding the last chicken leg!

[jwirr]

142. LOL. They do tend to eat you out of house and home.

[Webster Green]

3. Such bullshit!

National Cannabis Prevention and Information Center?

OK, then.

This is complete bullshit propaganda. They are really stretching here to connect pot & violence.

[True Earthling]

19. Marijuana Use Linked to Risk of Psychotic Symptoms

German study by medical researchers...

Study Shows Association Between Development of Psychosis and Smoking Marijuana
By Denise Mann
WebMD Health News Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD

March 1, 2011 -- Adolescents and young adults who smoke marijuana have an increased risk for experiencing psychotic symptoms, according to a new study.

The new findings appear online in the journal BMJ.

Researchers assessed marijuana use during a 10-year study of 1,923 participants aged 14 to 24 in Germany.

Those participants who had no psychotic symptoms and had never tried marijuana when the study began and then started using marijuana had nearly double the risk of experiencing psychotic symptoms in the future.

And those who used marijuana before start of the study and who continued use over the study period had an increased risk of persistent psychotic symptoms, the study shows.

“Our study confirmed cannabis as an environmental risk factor, impacting on the risk of psychosis by increasing the risk of incident psychotic experiences and if use continues over time, increasing the risk of persistent psychotic experiences,” write researchers who were led by Jim van Os, MD, PhD, a professor of psychiatry and neuropsychology at the South Limburg Mental Health Research and Teaching Network of Maastricht University Medical Center in the Netherlands.

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20110301/marijuana-use-linked-to-risk-of-psychotic-symptoms

[Webster Green]

31. Pantload.

Total bullshit. These are "researchers" with an agenda.

There's plenty of bullshit propaganda "studies" out there. The real science shows cannabis to be awesome.

[RainDog]

69. Did you post this because Trayvon Martin had THC in his bloodstream?

I just noticed you were posting on a thread and said there were unknown unknowns regarding Zimmerman's situation.

I thought this was just another scare post - not a way to try to insinuate Trayvon Martin was violent.

[REP]

136. Plus here's this documentary with proof:

[Politicalboi]

4. It's because the good weed is GONE

The weed that used to give you radical cotton mouth, and half open red eyes and giggly are GONE. These children don't know what good weed is. They've finally ruined it.
But for the most part, most smokers I know are less violent than drinkers.

[Webster Green]

8. No it isn't.

Come...we smoke.

[Politicalboi]

20. Yes, so do I

I've been smoking for 30 some odd years. I remember back in the day where these things would happen ALL the time. Cotton mouth so bad you can't even talk. Eyes so red and glazed over. Weed stuck to the baggie. It's been years since I've felt that. I know, why smoke then. LOL! I'm just saying something missing. Do you have real bad cotton mouth? Do your eyes give you away?

[roody]

28. Visit N Cal.

We have what you need.

[bluedave]

104. don't have

a mailorder business by chance-do ya?

[piratefish08]

92. or Vermont - the Green Mountain State, indeed!

[dionysus]

41. LOL.. dude, you gotta stop smoking dirt then....

[kestrel91316]

46. Really? I wonder what it was I smoked with a friend last month then......

[mike_c]

5. it's a pro-prohibition website, aka self serving government propaganda....

Oh for pete's sake. The ultimate source for those "factsheets" was an Australian "drug abuse and prevention" agency.

[TroglodyteScholar]

6. I've known a LOT of smokers

Not a single one has had any tendency to become aggressive when high.

Sorry, I'll trust my own experience in this case.

[dionysus]

42. there'll be people who are aggressive when high.. but they're douchebags who are

aggressive when sober.

[vaberella]

49. The only thing I've ever seen a pot head aggressive about is food.

I have never seen people devour food the way they do.

[waddirum]

129. I know a few people who completely lose their appetite when high

The total opposite of the munchyies stereotype.

[hifiguy]

58. Same here. Drunks and speed freaks yes

potheads, never.

[panader0]

7. I can assure that this is not correct.........

[bupkus]

9. In other news: Masturbation makes you go blind

[LongTomH]

30. "I'll quit when I need glasses!"

[longship]

10. National Cannibis Prevention and Information Center???

Who are they?

From the article, it seems like it is a put-up job by anti-Cannibis forces. They talk about research which is not cited. The mix in alcohol claims, which makes it not about Cannibis. I'd like to see the studies. We're they blinded? Was there a control group?

This smells more like fishy than anything else.

[Webster Green]

17. National Cannibis Prevention and Information Center

That tells me everything I need to know, but the reasons they cited are really absurd.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

21. Probably funded by big pharma and alcohol distributors. nt

[longship]

43. Actually, National == Australia

Google it. Didn't delve too deep on my low BW iPhone. If you get a chance post what you find there.

Thanks.

Sounds like a dodgy outfit to me.

[True Earthling]

23. Here's a German university study linking Marijuana to psychotic symptoms

Marijuana Use Linked to Risk of Psychotic Symptoms
Study Shows Association Between Development of Psychosis and Smoking Marijuana
By Denise Mann
WebMD Health News Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD
Marijuana Use Linked to Risk of Psychotic Symptoms

March 1, 2011 -- Adolescents and young adults who smoke marijuana have an increased risk for experiencing psychotic symptoms, according to a new study.

The new findings appear online in the journal BMJ.

Researchers assessed marijuana use during a 10-year study of 1,923 participants aged 14 to 24 in Germany.

Those participants who had no psychotic symptoms and had never tried marijuana when the study began and then started using marijuana had nearly double the risk of experiencing psychotic symptoms in the future.

And those who used marijuana before start of the study and who continued use over the study period had an increased risk of persistent psychotic symptoms, the study shows.

“Our study confirmed cannabis as an environmental risk factor, impacting on the risk of psychosis by increasing the risk of incident psychotic experiences and if use continues over time, increasing the risk of persistent psychotic experiences,” write researchers who were led by Jim van Os, MD, PhD, a professor of psychiatry and neuropsychology at the South Limburg Mental Health Research and Teaching Network of Maastricht University Medical Center in the Netherlands.
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20110301/marijuana-use-linked-to-risk-of-psychotic-symptoms

[JonLP24]

94. Psychotic in this context

has a specific medical meaning rather than the general meaning of "psychotic". In other words, it doesn't imply aggression. Psychotic episodes are hallucinations, seeing and hearing things that aren't there. People experiencing those are reacting normally to a world that is insane rather that be feelings of intense fear. They can be "aggressive" if they fear they are in intense danger. I perfectly buy that cannabis use would increase the risk of psychosis but so does many things including alcohol, poor diet, stress, and irregular sleeping patterns.

I think using this article in response to a rebuttal addressing the credibility of the "aggression" claims show that you're unfamiliar with what "psychotic" is in the medical context.

[Ian David]

11. Alternatively, aggressive people self-medicate with marijuana to make themselves less aggressive. nt

[loyalsister]

124. That's possible

It is also possible that in those cases there could be a rebound effect where as the MJ wears off the aggression intensifies.

[Go Vols]

12. lol @ propaganda bullshit

[fascisthunter]

13. lies

straight up garbage and you in particular should be ashamed of yourself for spreading them. Hopefully you one day have the opportunity to realize how shameful your post is.

[marmar]

14. This OP is almost comical.

nt

[EOTE]

112. Almost, if it weren't so incredibly disgusting. NT

[Ian David]

15. That website is NOT HONcode Certified.

http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Patients/Visitor/visitor.html

[cynatnite]

16. People, this statement is key...

"but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems"

I think all this is saying is that there are exceptions to the rule and other mitigating factors are at work. In other words, some users have psychological issues.

Every once in a while you have that one person who reacts differently than the majority when on certain substances whether it's pot, alcohol, or any other drug.

I'm not putting much stock in this study.

[tridim]

27. I had a friend who reacted badly to his first fully stoned experience.

He smoked too much and got very paranoid, confused and scared. I helped him through it for a few hours. I assume he would have been labeled one of the negative subjects in this "study". However, thankfully Cannabis isn't addictive and he was able to stop smoking the next day, for the rest of his life. I told him he made a smart choice for himself.

Since I have mostly pleasant, peaceful and stress-relieving experiences, my choice is to partake here and there.

[waddirum]

130. My choice is "Here, There, and Everywhere"

[inna]

138. It is a very common reaction; it is a "paranoid/self-conscious" not "paranoid/violent" type of thing

though. Very nice of you to help him through that experience, btw.

[Bluenorthwest]

39. Here's another unpicked cherry from one of the links...

"Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug."

[ProfessorGAC]

93. Good Catch

Second dagger in the heart of the OP.
GAC

[Comrade_McKenzie]

18. In this case... I'll take anecdotal evidence over propaganda. nt

[Jamaal510]

22. Judging from personal experience, I don't trust this study.

Nobody I have seen who uses marijuana became abusive. All I have seen marijuana do is increase people's appetites and make them lazy and think slower, and that's it.

[Life Long Dem]

24. I have an outburst right now

I bet it was the article that caused it.

[Honeycombe8]

25. That doesn't prove cause and effect, IMO.

Even if the study is true, it COULD mean that people who are more aggressive are simply more likely to smoke pot. Maybe to calm themselves down, or maybe just because they are more likely to do drugs of any sort.

That 80% of those kids that are violent have blue eyes doesn't necessarily mean that having blue eyes makes you more violent.

[JNelson6563]

26. That explains all the ax murders and what-not.

[Autumn]

29. Marijuana use connected to aggression against Suzy Q's and Ding Dongs

would be about the extent of aggression by pot users I know.

[JimGinPA]

34. And Aggressive Giggling

[DefenseLawyer]

32. KNOW YOUR DOPE FIEND. YOUR LIFE MAY DEPEND ON IT!

You will not be able to see his eyes because of the Tea-Shades, but his knuckles will be white from inner tension and his pants will be crusted with semen from constantly jacking off when he can't find a rape victim. He will stagger and babble when questioned. He will not respect your badge. The Dope Fiend fears nothing. He will attack, for no reason, with every weapon at his command-including yours. BEWARE. Any officer apprehending a suspected marijuana addict should use all necessary force immediately. One stitch in time (on him) will usually save nine on you. Good luck.
-The Chief

[XemaSab]

33. I would tear this OP up one side and down the other

but after two beers and some MMJ, I really can't be bothered.

[MrSlayer]

36. This is ludicrous.

I've been smoking for thirty years and have smoked with literally hundreds of people. Not once have I ever seen a person react violently or psychotic to it, ever.

Now, I'm not saying it's impossible for someone to react that way but I've never seen it and I doubt these numbers highly. It would be a very rare occurrence.

[pipoman]

37. Check out the facts in this important documentary!!1!

You can get you a copy on the eBay..it is really scary what this vile herb does to the human mind!!1! Damn kids are all gonna git all hyped up on the wacky tabacky and kill their parents..it's the devils playground!!11!

[chiffon]

38. bwahaahaahaha...Waiting for the link to the Onion!

[spanone]

40. i can say with forty some years of personal experience this is utter horseshit.

[myrna minx]

44. LOL. If by aggressive, this means the menacing behavior of eating pizza and cookie dough

then by all means. How silly.

[kestrel91316]

45. Hahahahahaha! Could have fooled me. the only aggression I

have ever observed or experienced with cannabis use is around food.

[vaberella]

52. ROFL. I said the same thing. I have seen them seriously crazy about that.

Food never survives. Not even spam right out of the can.

[cherokeeprogressive]

47. Go ahead: Show your naivete by arguing it ONLY makes you MELLOWWWW...

Over 600 hispanic gangs in L.A. County alone. Over 400 black gangs in the same county.

I have an idea and it's the PERFECT answer to gang violence... LET'S GIVE THEM ALL MARIJUANA! After all, it'll make them mellowwwww, right?

According to what I'm seeing in this thread, the antidote to gang violence in So. Cal. is weed. Because you know, they're NOT out there rolling blounts before they go looking for trouble, nope uh uh. If they were, they'd be mellowwwwww, eating Doritos, and playing xBox 360 right? Right?

Over 1,000 gangs in L.A. County, and most of them stoned all the time. Makes you wonder why there's so much gang violence in So. Cal., doesn't it? Seeing as how weed makes you mellowwww?

It makes you mellow if you're predisposed to be mellow, as I'm assuming most DU'ers are, and it makes you other things if you're predisposed to be other things.

A couple lines of meth used to have me sitting on my ass while a few bonghits would have me mowing the front and back lawns, edging the sidewalk in front, cleaning it all up, and then starting on the garage. What you think you know about drugs and how they affect everyone isn't always how it works in real life.

Disclaimer: No matter how badly someone might want this to be, it's NOT a defense of Zimmerman nor is it a takedown of Trayvon Martin. It's an observation about how broad brushes usually leave blotchy streaks on the wall.

[vaberella]

50. I don't understand your point at all. Even with the disclaimer. n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

54. The point is

weed doesn't have the same effect on everyone and plenty of violence has been, is, and will be perpetrated by people who are stoned. Blanket statements of stoned mellowness are just silly.

That Martin had THC in his body neither aggrivates nor mitigates the situation and is proof of nothing.

[vaberella]

55. ROFL. Are you suggesting that gang members are stoned when they commit their crimes?

Do you have links that say that when gang members commit their crime they are high on pot? Because I have the feeling you just perpetuated a few blanket statements of your own there.

[cherokeeprogressive]

61. I don't need links. I grew up with vatos in Norwalk.

Do I think they're stoned when they commit their crimes? Mmmmm ya I do.

You think they aren't? Ever known any vatos locos?

I can say one thing with utmost certainty though... not everyone is mellow when they're stoned and looking to eat some cookie dough or play video games.

[Webster Green]

62. Are you certain that it was the pot that makes them aggressive?

Dude...cause & effect. Look it up.

[cherokeeprogressive]

72. Doesn't make everyone think of cookie dough or pizza.

Doesn't make everyone mellow.

Dude... look at the majority of the responses to the OP.

[vaberella]

66. Actually I don't. Hence the reason I asked for links and supporting evidence.

I'd like to see the evidence supporting your claims.

[U4ikLefty]

118. Pulling out those teen years in 1970's Norwalk , eh?

You live in Big Bear...right?

Yeah you know TONS of "vatos locos", LOL!!!

[Capt. Obvious]

132. Despite the people mocking you, I know what you say is true from experience

I was a half-white, half-Native American growing up in South-Central Los Angeles as a foster child among gang-bangers, running drugs for the Bloods. My African-American foster brothers, Terrell and Taye, joined the Bloods gang when they were 11 and 13. I was given my first gun as a birthday present when I was 14. One of the first things I did once I started making drug money was to buy a burial plot.

[Webster Green]

59. You need to brush up on the concept of cause & effect.

Nobody here is saying that pot ONLY makes you mellow.

We are saying that pot (in the vast majority of users) wouldn't instigate aggression. Cannabis can cure a lot of problems, but it may (or may not) be a cure for aggression in the type of personality that is most commonly found among gang members. There is no evidence in their dumb-ass "study" that supports their conclusion.

Different folks are going to have different reactions to drugs, but to characterize cannabis as a substance that makes people aggressive is really a stretch. It's just more bullshit propaganda from puritanical morons and control freaks.

[cherokeeprogressive]

75. "connected to" and "makes people aggressive" are two different things.

You get that, right?

I don't have as much experience with weed as most people here; only 35 years. 20 of that was as an every day smoker. I've probably been stoned with a thousand people or more over the years.

I have a MMJ card in San Bernardino County. I don't use it as much as I used to because of my job, but I know stoned.

You're right; no one here is saying pot ONLY makes you mellow... but the ONLY posts in response to the OP say it makes them (and all of the stoned people they've ever seen) mellow.

That's funny.

[Chemisse]

91. Most of them stoned all the time?

Broad brush much?

And if true, stoned on what? Are you suggesting they only smoke pot then go out and commit acts of violence? Not a one of them gets drunk, uses amphetamines, does a lot of oxycodone? It's just the pot?

[MrSlayer]

133. There is a difference between weed and Sherm.

The gangs are dusted not stoned. Not to mention the first thing they do is drink. Weed is hardly the cause of gang violence and it's silly to claim it is.

[vaberella]

48. Okay. By this post alone I realize you want to say Trayvon Martin deserved to die.

Thank you for outing yourself.

[Starry Messenger]

90. +1

In a nutshell.

[Blue_In_AK]

51. After 45 years experience,

I've never seen anyone violent or aggressive on marijuana unless they've combined it with alcohol or some other inferior drug.

I'm not saying that it hasn't ever happened, but it hasn't ever happened in my presence.

[Poll_Blind]

53. Bwa-ha-ha! BULLLLLLLLLLLLL SHIT.

PB

[Zorra]

68. ^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^

^^^^^^THAT^^^^^^

[vaberella]

56. No.1 thing I ascertained in this thread is that there are a lot of illegal drug users here.

So when those freepers call us pot-smoking socialist hippies...they're not too far off.

[waddirum]

131. I could care less what they call us

And its not like they're not all high themselves (whether it is herb or happy pills).

[BlueIris]

57. Oppressor!! Trying to take away my precious right to fry my brain however I choose!

[RainDog]

67. some people don't need any help n/t

[EOTE]

114. You clearly fried yours long ago.

And apparently you think very little of rights. It's OK though, without obedient little authoritarians, governments have a very hard time controlling the populace.

[cthulu2016]

60. Perhaps aggressive juvenile delinquents happen to use a lot of drugs

Seems to fit better than any weed-rage theory

[RainDog]

63. No doubt - some people should not use cannabis

even so - as your first link notes:

Paul Corry, spokesman for Rethink, a mental health group, said there isn't enough data to know whether marijuana leads to aggression, or if kids living in environments that promote aggression are more prone to smoke marijuana.

and as your second links notes:

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

There's nothing new under the sun about these two reports. Some people should not drink alcohol, either. They become aggressive - tho not everyone does. It seems the aggression is linked to the individual, not the alcohol itself, since millions of people drink and never start a fight. We do not prohibit alcohol because a subset of the population may have social or mental problems if they drink.

A subset of the population will have a problem with any substance, aspirin, coffee, milk... and so if someone is in that subset, that person should not consume those things.

But what anyone who has ever dealt with people with substance abuse problems knows is this: people often use substances like alcohol, and probably marijuana, to self-medicate. Causation isn't there - the causation exists in someone's individual vulnerability to mental health problems that, generally, exist within that person's family, as well. Of course, if someone never drank, they would not develop alcoholism. But they would very likely still have the same mental health problems that exist outside of the use of alcohol.

What we do as a society is regulate alcohol so that young people do not have easy access to it - it's easier for a teenager to get marijuana than to get alcohol. If young people are more susceptible to problems because of cannabis use - then regulating its use would help to keep cannabis out of the schools where it is sold.

If cannabis were regulated, one issue that is now of concern, that came about because of the war on drugs, is the higher levels of THC in some strains that may cause negative outcomes for some people - but only while they are under the influence of the THC, which would mean a few hours.

Higher levels of THC mean lower levels of CBD. These two cannabinoids balance out one another and, with less CBD, some people are likely to experience negative outcomes like paranoia - this is an effect of the THC without compensating CBD. If cannabis were regulated, however, people could make responsible choices based upon levels of THC and CBD. Some people might choose very low levels of THC in order to utilize the effects of CBD, instead. CBD isn't associated with intoxication - and is, in fact, under study as a possible treatment for schizophrenia.

Even though the studies you include indicate no causation, there may be a miniscule causation AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE between some mental illness issues and cannabis. As a large study indicated:

If...cannabis use is relatively common in the population but appears to cause schizophrenia rarely, it would follow that at least one of the other component causes in the causal constellation is rare. Indeed, calculation of the overall risk for schizophrenia associated with cannabis use revealed that cannabis use confers only a twofold increase in relative risk for schizophrenia.

Cannabis does not appear to represent a sufficient or a necessary cause for the development of psychosis but forms part of a causal constellation.

The development of psychosis, however, can happen without the use of cannabis.

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/184/2/110.full

The above link is not "pro-cannabis." What it is HONEST about is this: cannabis, in and of itself, cannot be considered a cause of mental illness. As Roger Pertwee (Britain's leading pharmacologist regarding cannabis) noted - cannabis may be part of a constellation of factors. Not the cause.

What the study I quoted, above, does is make an assessment of studies to indicate that, yes, we should discourage cannabis use among teenagers - especially very young teens. I don't know anyone who disagrees with this statement. So, the issue then becomes - what is the most effective way to prevent cannabis use among very young teens?

1. Education about risks for use as a young person, most ESPECIALLY if they have a family history of particular mental illnesses.
and
2. Regulation of distribution to limit access to those who are of legal age.

As this study noted, as well, cannabis use is part of the actions of the general population and the majority of people have no problem with it at all - so, the question becomes this: how do we work to limit access to very young people? The answer is: in the same way that we limit access to alcohol. Kids, generally, do not sell alcohol at school. They do sell cannabis, however, and there are no constraints on their actions to sell to very young teens.

All this mental health information, above, whether it explicitly states this reality or not, confirms Roger Pertwee's statement that cannabis should be legalized because it poses no significant risk for schizophrenia for the general population. (Again, Pertwee is the leading pharmacologist who studies cannabis in the UK, with decades of data to draw upon.)

http://www.britishscienceassociation.org/web/News/FestivalNews/_Rethinkingcannabis.htm

...you could identify people who might be at risk of developing schizophrenia. Cannabis is one factor which increases the risk of schizophrenia, but only if it's mixed with a bad childhood environment or a genetic predisposition to schizophrenia.

So, it seems to me that scare stories only work if someone wants to make false statements about the danger of cannabis for the general population. The fact remains that cannabis is one of the most benign substances that exists for the treatment of illness and the associated problems with other illnesses. It is also less harmful than alcohol or cigarettes, two substances that are legal.

iow, the reality remains that prohibition of cannabis is bad policy.

[HuckleB]

64. Correlation is not causation.

I see one study that supports the assertion, and another single study that address psychosis, and then an article.

Of course, it's plausible, but I don't see evidence that the whole of the research points in that direction, especially in terms of determining cause.

On edit: Of course, the majority of responses here offer up anecdotes as refutation. Both sides make me disheartened about the state of DU, and the lack of understanding of the scientific method, logic and logical fallacies.

[RainDog]

73. I think what you see here is the "boy who cried wolf" effect

After 70 years of lies and propaganda, people are not inclined to believe studies that indicate something their personal experience does not corroborate.

With good reason.

Although, no, something should not be dismissed out of hand just because it's not part of someone's personal experience, I agree.

In this case, however, better studies do not validate claims that these two cannot indicate as causal.

What's interesting, in terms of DU, is that this person posted this after the release of information that Trayvon Martin had THC in his bloodstream, combined with the reality that the person who created this post has been somewhat defensive about Zimmerman. These two factors also do not demonstrate causation. However, someone with a low post count who argues against the idea that Martin was murdered in cold blood who now also posts craptacular studies that show no causation about an issue that is tied to the most recent information about the Martin case... these are things that make you go... hmmmm.

[HuckleB]

78. I don't buy it.

It's impossible to discuss anything about marijuana at DU.

Alas, it's not just marijuana. If we want change, we have to focus. Letting our emotions go to anti-science nonsense positions will never make a difference. At least not a positive difference.

[RainDog]

83. this post is not good science

as you noted - there is no causal relationship - as the studies posted in the OP note as well.

all I was saying is that 70 years of anti-science lies that were passed off as science has created a bias among a lot of people who have followed this issue.

one of the biggest scams was Ronald Raygun's claim that pot damaged brain cells. it took years and years to get the study released, tho it was used as anti-marijuana propaganda for those same years and years.

it turned out that what the study indicated was this: if you suffocate a chimpanzee, no matter what substance is involved, that chimpanzee is likely to develop damaged brain cells due to depleted oxygen.

In another case, a study from the 1970s that indicated cannabis may destroy cancer cells was hidden by the govt. The way the study became known was because an activist who was part of the health care maintenance for cancer and HIV/AIDS patients found out about it and leaked it.

Since there is a long history of this same bullshit pretending to be science, it's the rational position to be leery of any such studies. Not to say someone should dismiss them out of hand,

But, again, after 70 years of lies, combined with decades of honest research that disputes these lies, and other studies that indicate positive health care uses for cannabis, while the "powers-that-be" continue to lie about these things - yeah, it makes sense to be skeptical.

If you know your own govt has conspired to lie to you about these things, it's only common sense to question these sorts of things.

Unless you are not inclined to learn from the past.

[HuckleB]

84. So, your anecdotes somehow overcome a decade of hostility and emotional rampage ...

toward anyone at DU who does not see marijuana as holy and perfect?

Sorry, but I think you know better, even if you want your opinion to hold sway.

[RainDog]

86. I'm not supplying anecdotes. I posted links to science

if you note, my post, above, links to research that looks at various studies and also to Roger Pertwee, who is the leading pharmacologist in Great Britain.

I was talking about others on this thread who you were complaining about and explaining why the initial reaction is "bullshit." There's a long history of lies to make such a claim. I didn't say the call of "bullshit' made the claim valid or not. I was just explaining why you see it. It's a bias - but it has a basis in reality. All the way back to the 1940s when Mayor La Guardia did a study that indicated the govt was lying to the American people.

Not many people know about that - but that's the truth - someone tried to catapult the propaganda, but the liars in govt. wouldn't have it.

Later, a professor did another study that indicated the govt was lying about cannabis. What did he get for his efforts? Harassment by the federal govt. He had to take legal means to stop them - all this is on record - it's not anecdotal. The guy started a drug research organization after he experienced the full weight of the federal govt's lies that cannabis is addictive.

The hostility you perceive is based upon 70 years of lies. Somehow that doesn't matter to you. Only your perceived slight is taken into account - which indicates bias on your part as well. But your bias has some basis too, because, yes, you hear the people who are responding to those 70 years of lies. The fault, iow, lies with those who have engaged in anti-cannabis propaganda for decades.

Here's a link to the full La Guardia Committee report: http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/lag/lagmenu.htm

Here's a link to the story of how the federal govt. harassed Prof. Lindesmith: http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/anslingerlindesmith.htm (originally posted in the peer reviewed Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology; Chicago; Winter 1998

The late Alfred Lindesmith was an Indiana University sociology professor who was a long-time advocate of medical treatment of addiction. We demonstrate below how the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) attempted to intimidate Lindesmith, stifle his research, and interfere with his publication of articles counter to FBN policies. In addition, we argue that the American banning of the 1946 Canadian film on drug addiction, Drug Addict, may have been a pivotal event in a pattern of censorship and disinformation carried on by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) under the leadership of its long-time Director, Harry Anslinger. The FBN's campaign to suppress information played a significant role in the emerging public ideology and mythology regarding drug addicts and drug addiction in the United States. Lindesmith's unsuccessful efforts against the ban, as illustrated by his personal papers, his FBN file recently released to the National Archives, Anslinger's papers in the National Archives, and those recently released under the Freedom of Information Act, demonstrate the nearly absolute control of information exercised by the FBN.

Here's a link that talks about the Heath study: http://voices.yahoo.com/does-marijuana-really-kill-brain-cells-4229143.html

In 1974, Dr. Robert G. Heath, a researcher at Tulane University in New Orleans, reported that he had found proof that marijuana caused brain damage while experimenting on monkeys. Heath reported that rhesus monkeys smoking an equivalent of 30 joints a day began to atrophy and die after just 90 days. Autopsies revealed that the monkeys who had been exposed to the marijuana smoke had more dead brain cells than the control monkeys, who had not been exposed.

How did Heath come up with these results? What were his procedures? For six years, no one knew. It took Playboy and NORML six years of requesting and suing under the Freedom of Information Act to finally receive an accurate accounting of the procedures Heath used.

The poor monkeys were being suffocated for five minutes at a time, on a daily basis, over a period of three months. After which they were killed so that their brains could be autopsied, and the dead brain cells caused by carbon monoxide poisoning were attributed to marijuana. This was Ronald Reagan's "reliable scientific" source.

Here's a link that talks about the repressed marijuana study related to cancer. Project Censored calls this one of the most important censored stories of the 20th Century. A link to the actual study is available on DU in the Drug Policy Forum

http://www.alternet.org/story/9257/

In 1974 researchers at the Medical College of Virginia, who had been funded by the National Institute of Health to find evidence that marijuana damages the immune system, found instead that THC slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice -- lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia.

The DEA quickly shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis/tumor research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on the events in his book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes." In 1976 President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies, who set out -- unsuccessfully -- to develop synthetic forms of THC that would deliver all the medical benefits without the "high."

Additionally, the U.S. had a federal program, the Compassionate Investigational New Drug program, that supplied medical marijuana to patients because patients sued because the govt cannot deny people the right to health. The argument for use was "medical necessity." George H.W. Bush shut down the program because, basically, it demonstrates that the Federal Govt. is lying about the medical efficacy of cannabis. There are only four patients who were in the program who are still alive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassionate_Investigational_New_Drug_program

U.S. v. Randall

http://www.marijuana-as-medicine.org/Alliance/legal.html#U.S.%20v.%20Randall

also info here:

Randall v. U.S.

In 1978, federal agencies, disquieted by Randall’s outspoken opposition to the medical prohibition, sought to silence him by disrupting his legal access to marijuana.

In response, Randall, represented pro bono publico by the law firm of Steptoe & Johnson, brought suit against FDA, DEA, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the Department of Justice and the Department of Health, Education & Welfare.

Twenty-four hours after the suit was filed, federal agencies requested an out-of-court settlement. The resulting settlement provided Randall with prescriptive access to marijuana through a federal pharmacy located near his home.

The settlement in Randall v. U.S. became the legal basis for FDA’s Compassionate IND program. Initially, this program was limited to patients afflicted by marijuana-responsive disorders and some orphan drugs. In the mid-1980′s however, the Compassionate IND concept was expanded to include HIV-positive people seeking legal access to drugs which had not yet received final FDA marketing approval.

[HuckleB]

106. None of that has a thing to do with my response to the OP.

There is science on all sides in regard to marijuana. The only scientific consensus that can be made is that it is a generally safe recreational drug. It should be legalized.

That does not justify the fact that DU contains a crowd that cannot discuss any aspect of marijuana without childish emotional attacks.

End of my participation in this ridiculous "discussion."

[RainDog]

113. LOL. okay

I responded specifically to your complaints about DUers on this thread, then to your claim I was posting anecdotes.

Your hostility is unwarranted. I was not being hostile toward you. I was sharing information and, for some reason, this pisses you off.

whatevah.

maybe it has to do with your unfounded claims about the Oregon Attn. Gen's election... lol.

[ohheckyeah]

65. I think these studies

are like the climate change studies funded by Exxon......bullshit to fit an existing agenda.

[marlakay]

70. I only felt that once

and that was after a dinner with wine and port and then ate two cookies I didn't know were from medical pot club. My hubby brought them home. I guess they were pretty strong you were only suppose to have a 1/4 of one cookie and I ate two of them after drinking, all I know is about a hour later I thought I was having a stroke or something, I went in and out of consciousness and my blood pressure went down really low then high. I know because I ended up in emergency room it was that bad.

I still am for pot because I know eating it is different and I had alcohol with it, which i wouldn't have done if I had known. (by the way my hubby felt awful and I felt stupid for not knowing, I should have asked about the bag of cookies)

I have smoked it since with no problem. I use very rarely my hubby is the one with a card.

I normally just feel mellow.

So I am wondering if they had the kids eat it and gave them quite a bit to get the results. I have never heard of anyone smoking pot to get that way, but I have heard of others eating pot having reactions.

[ScreamingMeemie]

71. So Marijuana=Aggression=Okay to murder someone who smokes pot...

Just so we're clear, right?

[Warren Stupidity]

74. Low post count zimmerman apologists are a source of aggressive behavior on du.

I'm still looking for the study. I'll post a link as soon as I find it.

[ScreamingMeemie]

77. You might find one (or 25) in Meta.

[HuckleB]

79. +1,000,000,000,000

[ScreamingMeemie]

80. Concern trolling at its best, and most passive aggressive.

[HuckleB]

85. It was a good joke.

Nothing more. Nothing less.

[RainDog]

88. you realize screaming meemie is saying the OP is attacking Trayvon Martin, right? n/t

[ScreamingMeemie]

101. Thanks RainDog.

[HuckleB]

105. You realize that it's a joke, right?

Sheesh.

[ScreamingMeemie]

100. Yes. Which is why I responded that he could find a study in H&M perhaps.

I found the joke funny and was speaking about the OP.

[WillyT]

76. Marijuana Use Connected To Munchies/Pink Floyd Concerts...

At least... that's what my research shows.

[provis99]

81. pot made me paranoid and aggressive.

tried it six times; had the same six bad experiences.

[cherokeeprogressive]

82. You must be predisposed to support people like George Zimmerman then.

[U4ikLefty]

121. Nah, he's from the same hood in Norwalk as you.

knows many "vatos locos"...LOL!!!

[Rex]

87. True, if you run out of it.

nt

[Warren DeMontague]

89. It leads to irrational behavior, like drug warriors spending $60 Billion a year to keep it illegal.

Other than that, I've heard it will make my testicles fall off, make me grow breasts, make me get date raped, and kill me IMMEDIATELY.

These are all things the good folks at the completely non-biased DARE program told me. They wouldn't lie, right?

[Evasporque]

95. REEFER MADDNESS!!...

[pinboy3niner]

96. Well shit, Trayvon obviously was crazed and deranged and out for blood!1!!

Maybe you should think of changing your username to 'True Zimling.'

[leftynyc]

97. Oh - Horseshit

Aside from these researchers having an agenda, I was once chatting with a cop while attending a Grateful Dead concert at Madison Square Garden - I asked him as pot smoke hung in the air for hours whether this was a nightmare for him. He said he'd rather cover a Dead show than just about any other event - nobody is armed and everyone is mellow. The pot didn't bother them at all. I'll take a cops word on this over these researchers any day.

[99Forever]

98. Bullshit.

This tripe isn't even worthy of a rebuttal. Absolute propaganda hogwash.

[peacefreak]

99. Only

when you get in the way of my Screeming Yellow Zonkers.

[CatWoman]

102. and dumb ass blog posts are connected to gross, stupendous stupidity

[hobbit709]

103. Definitely!

[Romulox]

107. I voted to hide this crap. It violates *MY* community standards. Needed 2 more... nt

[2pooped2pop]

108. Is this a "they drank milk, so that proves milk makes you violent"

kind of study? lol. Teens who commit crimes are more likely to smoke cigs, drink alcohol, the real gateway drug, and smoke pot or use other drugs.

It's all part of their badboy theme. Pot does not make you angry. Just hungry.

[WilliamPitt]

109. The bullshit is getting awfully thick around here.

[EOTE]

111. Seriously. One of the most disgusting posts I've read on this subject. NT

[EOTE]

110. This is one of the most sickening and disgusting things I've ever seen posted on DU.

Let there be no mistake about this, you are defending a murderous thug and trying to get other people to sympathize with a murderer because the person who was murdered had some THC in his blood. That is about as disgusting as anything I've ever seen on FR. Congratulations. You might want to spend a bit of time looking for that lost humanity. You might find it comes in handy.

[RainDog]

115. More reefer madness

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/05/reefer-madness-trayvon-martin-case

When I first saw this post, I had no idea the person who wrote it had been attacking Trayvon Martin. I assumed it was another b.s. post about reefer madness propaganda.

then I looked at this person's recent posts and saw the connection to the recent Trayvon Martin case.

this entire situation is just another example of how the War on Drugs propaganda does a disservice to justice.

[EOTE]

116. Yeah, it's disgusting for multiple reasons.

The reefer madness is just the tip of it. What's even more sickening is that he's using this to defend the killing of a KID with a bag of skittles. I wonder how it is people like this look at themselves in the mirror. Then I imagine that if they have their guns on them, they can look at themselves any time they want.

[RainDog]

119. I notice this same person is all outraged about poor people taking illegal tax breaks

immigrants too, at that.

I wonder if this person has ever been similarly upset about companies off-shoring profits?

it's "interesting" to see what some people find worthy of complaint.

yeah, someone getting a couple of thousand dollars vs. billions. I totally see that the situation indicates those poor people are the cause of all the problems in this world.

[EOTE]

120. Reminds me of that joke about teabaggers and the 1%.

A 1%er and a bunch of 99ers are sitting at a table, they each have 10 cookies. The 1%er goes around the table and takes away 9 out of everyone's 10 cookies and sits back down. The 1%er then turns to a teabagger sitting next to him, leans over and whispers "Hey, you better watch those guys over there, one of them wants to take your cookie."

[U4ikLefty]

123. YOINK!!!

I'm gonna steal that one...like the 1%.

[EOTE]

126. You're welcome to it, it's not mine :p NT

[tabasco]

117. You have to be pretty stupid to believe that shit.

But, there' s a lot of stupid people in the world, right, true earthling?

[EOTE]

122. Hey, we'll see who's laughing when you or a loved one are killed in a Skittles related crime.

Then you'll be wishing the OP was successful in his quest to eliminate Skittles based death by declaring open season on minorities.

[theaocp]

125. Blatantly untrue, but even so...

that means we should make alcohol a Schedule I substance, no? Spin away, dervishes.

[cali]

127. oh bullshit. one can find "studies" on any side of anything

color me not impressed, honey.

[notadmblnd]

128. Yes, I agree Marijuana use can and does cause agression

and this aggression is usually taken out on a bag of Doritis to a box of Swedish Fish.

[otohara]

134. Teens & Pot

They are little jerks....mouthy, argumentative ... So glad the teen years are over. Twenties & pot are just fine.

[Oilwellian]

135. Just wait until you hit your 50's

[H2O Man]

137. Lions & Tigers & Bears!!!

Oh My!!!!

[Beringia]

139. it is too strong for some people

for others it seems to be okay

[arely staircase]

140. well my research was conducted over the entire decade of the 90s

it was thorough and extensive and reached quite different conclusions.