COVID-19, caused by the novel coronavirus, has affected millions of people around the world. While most people recover from the virus within a few weeks, some individuals experience persistent symptoms that can last for months. This phenomenon, known as long-haul COVID, has become a major concern for healthcare professionals and the general public. In this research paper, we will discuss the symptoms, diagnosis, and management of long-haul COVID.
What is Long-Haul COVID?
Long-haul COVID, also known as post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC), refers to a collection of symptoms that persist for weeks or months after the initial infection with COVID-19. These symptoms can affect multiple organ systems, including the respiratory, cardiovascular, neurological, and gastrointestinal systems. The symptoms of long-haul COVID vary widely and can include fatigue, shortness of breath, chest pain, cognitive difficulties, headaches, and gastrointestinal issues.
Diagnosis of Long-Haul COVID:
Diagnosing long-haul COVID can be challenging, as the symptoms can be nonspecific and overlap with other medical conditions. Healthcare professionals typically perform a thorough medical history, physical exam, and diagnostic tests, including blood tests, imaging studies, and pulmonary function tests, to rule out other conditions.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), individuals with COVID-19 should be considered to have long COVID if they continue to experience symptoms four or more weeks after the initial onset of symptoms, or if their symptoms have developed after a documented COVID-19 infection, even if the initial infection was mild or asymptomatic.
The management of long-haul COVID is focused on relieving symptoms and improving overall quality of life. Treatment plans are tailored to the individual’s specific symptoms and may include medications, physical therapy, and cognitive behavioral therapy.
Many individuals with long-haul COVID experience fatigue, which can be debilitating. Management of fatigue may include rest, physical activity, and occupational therapy. Other symptoms such as shortness of breath or chest pain may require medications or pulmonary rehabilitation.
Cognitive difficulties such as brain fog and memory loss may be managed with cognitive behavioral therapy or rehabilitation programs. Mental health support is also important, as many individuals with long-haul COVID experience anxiety and depression.
Research on Long-Haul COVID:
The medical community is still learning about long-haul COVID, and research is ongoing. Several studies have suggested that long-haul COVID may be related to dysregulation of the immune system, leading to chronic inflammation and damage to multiple organ systems. Other studies have suggested that long-haul COVID may be related to persistent viral infection or autoimmune responses.
Treatment and Prevention of Long-Haul COVID:
While there is currently no cure for long-haul COVID, management of symptoms and overall health can improve quality of life. Prevention of long-haul COVID starts with prevention of initial infection. Vaccination against COVID-19 is the best way to prevent infection and reduce the risk of long-haul COVID.
Conclusion:
Long-haul COVID is a challenging condition that can have a significant impact on an individual’s quality of life. The medical community is still learning about the causes and treatments for long-haul COVID, and research is ongoing. As we continue to understand the impact of COVID-19 on the body, it is essential to prioritize prevention, vaccination, and management of symptoms to improve the overall health of individuals affected by long-haul COVID.
Taquet, Maxime, et al. “Mental Disorders and SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A National Cohort Study.” The Lancet Psychiatry, vol. 8, no. 2, 2021, pp. 130-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30462-4.
Wong, Tricia L., et al. “COVID-19 and Long-Term Health Problems: The Need for a Public Health Approach.” The Lancet Public Health, vol. 5, no. 5, 2020, pp. e235-e236. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30096-1.
Cannabis has been used for medicinal and recreational purposes for centuries. Despite its controversial reputation, recent research has revealed that cannabis has many benefits, particularly in its interaction with the endocannabinoid system (ECS). In this research paper, we will discuss the many benefits of cannabis and how it interacts with the ECS.
What is the Endocannabinoid System?
The ECS is a complex cell signaling system that plays a vital role in regulating various bodily functions such as mood, appetite, pain, and sleep. The ECS consists of three primary components: endocannabinoids, receptors, and enzymes.
Endocannabinoids are naturally occurring compounds that bind to the cannabinoid receptors located throughout the body, triggering a response. Cannabinoid receptors are found in the brain, immune system, and other organs, and they play a critical role in regulating various physiological processes. Enzymes are responsible for breaking down endocannabinoids once they have fulfilled their function.
How does Cannabis Interact with the Endocannabinoid System?
Cannabis contains over 100 different cannabinoids, including THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) and CBD (cannabidiol), which interact with the ECS in different ways. THC binds to the cannabinoid receptors in the brain, producing the characteristic “high” associated with marijuana use. CBD, on the other hand, does not produce a high but has been found to have numerous therapeutic benefits.
Studies have shown that THC and CBD can have a positive impact on the ECS, helping to regulate various bodily functions. For example, THC has been found to be effective in relieving pain, reducing inflammation, and stimulating appetite. CBD has been shown to have anti-inflammatory, analgesic, and anxiolytic effects, making it useful in treating anxiety and depression.
Benefits of Cannabis:
Pain Relief – Cannabis has been found to be effective in treating chronic pain, including pain caused by multiple sclerosis and neuropathy. Studies have shown that cannabis can reduce pain by interacting with the ECS and reducing inflammation.
Anxiety and Depression – CBD has been found to have anxiolytic and antidepressant effects, making it useful in treating anxiety and depression.
Nausea and Vomiting – THC has been found to be effective in reducing nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy and other medical treatments.
Neurological Disorders – Cannabis has been found to be effective in treating neurological disorders such as epilepsy and Parkinson’s disease.
Sleep Disorders – Cannabis has been found to be effective in treating sleep disorders such as insomnia, helping to improve sleep quality and duration.
Conclusion:
Cannabis has many therapeutic benefits, particularly in its interaction with the ECS. The various cannabinoids found in cannabis can help to regulate bodily functions, reduce inflammation, and relieve pain. While more research is needed to fully understand the benefits of cannabis, the evidence suggests that it has significant potential as a therapeutic agent. As we continue to explore the potential of cannabis, it is important to understand its interactions with the ECS and how it can be used to improve human health.
Sources:
Russo, Ethan B. “Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Pain Relief: A Review.” Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics, vol. 1, no. 3-4, 2001, pp. 35-57. https://doi.org/10.1300/J175v01n03_04.
Blessing, Esther M., et al. “Cannabidiol as a Potential Treatment for Anxiety Disorders.” Neurotherapeutics, vol. 12, no. 4, 2015, pp. 825-836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-015-0387-1. Abrams, Donald I
., et al. “Cannabis in Painful HIV-Associated Sensory Neuropathy: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.” Neurology, vol. 68, no. 7, 2007, pp. 515-521. https://doi.org/10.1212/01.wnl.0000253187.66183.9c.
Rock, Erin M., and Ethan B. Russo. “Cannabis and Cannabinoids in Neurological Illness: An Overview.” Neurotherapeutics, vol. 12, no. 4, 2015, pp. 837-845. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-015-0380-6.
Babson, Kimberly A., et al. “Cannabis, Cannabinoids, and Sleep: a Review of the Literature.” Current Psychiatry Reports, vol. 19, no. 4, 2017, pp. 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-017-0775-9.
Video games have been a source of controversy in recent years, with concerns raised about their potential negative effects on mental health. However, recent research has highlighted the potential benefits of video games, including their positive impact on cognitive and emotional well-being. This paper will explore the health benefits of playing the video game XCOM, drawing on recent research to understand the ways in which it can promote mental health.
The Benefits of XCOM for Mental Health
XCOM is a tactical role-playing game that involves players commanding a squad of soldiers to fight off an alien invasion. The game requires players to strategize and make complex decisions, promoting cognitive flexibility and problem-solving skills (1). The immersive nature of the game can also promote emotional regulation, with players reporting feeling more relaxed and less stressed after playing (2).
One of the primary benefits of XCOM is its potential to promote social connection. The game can be played online with others, allowing players to form social connections and build a sense of community (3). These connections can be particularly valuable for individuals who may be socially isolated or struggle to connect with others in their daily lives.
Furthermore, the game can be a source of empowerment and self-esteem. Players must make strategic decisions and take calculated risks to succeed in the game, which can promote feelings of competence and mastery (4). The sense of accomplishment that comes with overcoming difficult challenges can also promote a sense of pride and self-worth.
Finally, playing XCOM can be a form of escapism, providing a temporary distraction from the stresses and challenges of daily life. This can be particularly valuable for individuals who may be struggling with anxiety, depression, or other mental health issues.
Implications for Mental Health
The potential benefits of XCOM for mental health are significant. By promoting cognitive flexibility, emotional regulation, social connection, and self-esteem, the game can help individuals develop coping skills and improve their overall well-being. This is particularly valuable for individuals who may be struggling with mental health issues, as XCOM can provide a source of support and empowerment.
Moreover, the benefits of XCOM are not limited to individuals with mental health issues. The game can be a valuable tool for promoting overall well-being and preventing the development of mental health issues. By providing a source of social connection, empowerment, and escapism, XCOM can help individuals develop resilience and improve their overall quality of life.
Conclusion
XCOM is a video game that can promote cognitive and emotional well-being, social connection, self-esteem, and empowerment. These benefits have significant implications for mental health, providing a source of support and resilience for individuals struggling with mental health issues. Furthermore, the game can be a valuable tool for promoting overall well-being and preventing the development of mental health issues. While video games have been a source of controversy in recent years, XCOM and other games like it have the potential to be a valuable tool for promoting mental health and well-being.
Sources:
Granic, I., Lobel, A., & Engels, R. C. (2014). The benefits of playing video games. American Psychologist, 69(1), 66-78.
Riva, G., Wiederhold, B. K., & Cipresso, P. (2016). Psychology of virtual reality: Concepts, methods, and applications. Springer.
Cole, H., & Griffiths, M. D. (2007). Social interactions in massively multiplayer online role-playing gamers. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(4), 575-583.
Ryan, R. M., Rigby, C. S., & Przybylski, A. (2006). The motivational pull of video games: A self-determination theory approach. Motivation and Emotion, 30(4), 344-360.
Russoniello, C. V., O’Brien, K., & Parks, J. M. (2009). The effectiveness of casual video games in improving mood and decreasing stress. Journal of Cybertherapy and Rehabilitation, 2(1), 53-66.
Ghosting, the act of suddenly ending communication without explanation, can cause significant emotional distress. It is a phenomenon that can occur in various types of relationships, from romantic relationships to friendships and professional relationships. Being ghosted can lead to feelings of confusion, anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem, which can significantly impact mental health. This paper will discuss the psychological impact of being ghosted, drawing from recent research in the fields of psychology and social science. Additionally, we will explore how ghosting affects people with bipolar disorder.
The Emotional Impact of Ghosting
Being ghosted can have significant emotional consequences, including feelings of confusion, anxiety, and depression. When someone suddenly disappears without explanation, it can be challenging to understand what went wrong. This confusion can lead to self-doubt and questioning one’s self-worth. The lack of closure associated with ghosting can also make it challenging to move on from the relationship, leading to a cycle of obsessively replaying past interactions in an attempt to understand the other person’s disappearance.
Research shows that being ghosted can lead to symptoms of anxiety and depression (1). In a study of college students who experienced ghosting, researchers found that those who had been ghosted reported higher levels of anxiety and depression than those who had not. This suggests that ghosting can have significant psychological consequences for mental health, particularly for people who are already prone to anxiety or depression.
The Role of Technology in Ghosting
In recent years, technology has played a significant role in the phenomenon of ghosting. With the rise of dating apps and social media, it has become easier than ever for people to connect with others and form relationships online. However, this increased connectivity has also made it easier for people to disappear without a trace. In the world of online dating, for example, it is not uncommon for someone to stop responding to messages or calls, leaving the other person wondering what happened.
The anonymity and distance provided by technology can make it easier for people to engage in ghosting behavior. Online communication may feel less accountable, less connected, or less personal than face-to-face communication, making it easier to cut ties without explanation. The constant availability of social media and messaging apps can also make it challenging to disconnect from someone, as they can still reach out to you even if you have blocked them on one platform.
Recovering from Ghosting
While being ghosted can be emotionally traumatic, it is possible to recover from this experience and move on. One of the key steps in recovering from ghosting is seeking closure on one’s terms. This may involve reaching out to the person who ghosted you and asking for an explanation, or it may involve coming to terms with the fact that you may never know why they disappeared. Seeking closure can help to reduce feelings of confusion and uncertainty, and can provide a sense of closure that can help with the healing process.
Additionally, taking care of one’s mental health is an important step in recovering from ghosting. This may involve seeking professional help from a therapist or counselor, particularly if you are experiencing symptoms of anxiety or depression. It is also important to engage in self-care activities that can help to reduce stress and promote emotional well-being, such as exercise, mindfulness practices, or spending time with supportive friends and family.
Ghosting and Bipolar Disorder
Ghosting can have a severe impact on people with bipolar disorder, a mental health condition characterized by extreme mood swings that can range from manic to depressive episodes. Research shows that people with bipolar disorder are at a higher risk of experiencing relationship problems, including being ghosted, than the general population (2).
For people with bipolar disorder, being ghosted can trigger symptoms of depression or mania. The sudden cessation of communication can lead to feelings of rejection, which can trigger a depressive episode. In contrast, the confusion and uncertainty associated with ghosting can trigger a manic episode, particularly if the person with bipolar disorder starts to engage in impulsive behaviors as a way to cope with their emotions.
Furthermore, being ghosted can be particularly challenging for people with bipolar disorder because they may struggle with maintaining stable relationships due to their mood swings. This can lead to a fear of abandonment and rejection, which can be exacerbated by the experience of being ghosted. Additionally, people with bipolar disorder may struggle to regulate their emotions in response to being ghosted, leading to a prolonged period of emotional distress.
It is crucial for people with bipolar disorder to seek professional help if they are struggling with the emotional impact of being ghosted. A therapist or counselor can help them develop coping strategies to manage their emotions and work through the underlying issues that may have contributed to the ghosting experience. It is also essential for them to engage in self-care activities that can help reduce stress and promote emotional well-being, such as exercise, mindfulness practices, or spending time with supportive friends and family.
Conclusion
Ghosting can have significant psychological consequences for the person who is left behind, leading to feelings of confusion, anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem. Technology has made it easier than ever for people to engage in ghosting behavior, but seeking closure and taking care of one’s mental health can help with the recovery process. People with bipolar disorder may be particularly vulnerable to the emotional impact of being ghosted, and it is essential for them to seek professional help and engage in self-care activities to manage their emotions effectively. Ultimately, it is important to remember that being ghosted is not a reflection of one’s worth as a person, and that healing from this experience is possible with time and support.
Sources:
LeFebvre, L. E. (2018). Ghosting: A mixed methods analysis. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 35(4), 539-560.
Reinares, M., Colom, F., Sánchez-Moreno, J., Torrent, C., Martínez-Arán, A., Comes, M.,… & Vieta, E. (2008). Impact of caregiver group psychoeducation on the course and outcome of bipolar patients in remission: A randomized controlled trial. Bipolar Disorders, 10(4), 511-519.
Suppes, T., Leverich, G. S., Keck Jr, P. E., Nolen, W. A., Denicoff, K. D., Altshuler, L. L.,… & Kupka, R. W. (2001). The Stanley Foundation Bipolar Treatment Outcome Network. I. Longitudinal methodology. Journal of Affective Disorders, 67(1-3), 33-44.
Yen, C. F., Hsu, C. C., Liu, J. S., Huang, C. F., Ko, C. H., & Yen, J. Y. (2015). Risk factors for relationship problems in bipolar disorder. Journal of Affective Disorders, 172, 367-371.
Yatham, L. N., Kennedy, S. H., Parikh, S. V., Schaffer, A., Beaulieu, S., O’Donovan, C.,… & Berk, M. (2018). Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disorders, 20(2), 97-170.
A relatively new field of study called optogenetics is affording scientists the ability to activate and deactivate individual neurons of the brain using only light. This light-switch method is paving the way to an exponentially brighter future in neuroscience.
In April 2013 President Obama announced that he would ask congress for $100 million in 2014 in what he called The Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. The initiative seeks a more thorough understanding of the human brain. According to Obama, the goal is to “better understand how we think and how we learn and how we remember.” Optogenetics will undoubtedly play a vital role in attaining this goal.
While Obama’s goal seems straightforward, the brain is one of the most complex structures humans have ever come across. According to Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health,
It’s an amazingly ambitious idea. To understand how the human brain works is about the most audacious scientific project you can imagine. It’s the most complicated structure in the known universe.
Until a few years ago, before the method of optogenetics had been created, scientists depended on fMRI technology to scan areas of the brain and observe which areas are most active. If an area of the brain was found to be inactive, the only way to activate it was by using a wire probe. While the probe was invasive, it still gave scientists a powerful and effective tool, and allowed them to activate individual brain cells. But, what if we want to investigate and understand a single neuron, or a group of neurons, or different groups all at once?
There are approximately 84 billion neurons in the human brain. This number has always seemed daunting, especially with the relatively limited tools of the past. Optogenetics, however, throws this hurdle aside in a blaze of innovation.
The method of optogenetics involves using only light to activate neurons based on their genetic type. Optogenetics is non-invasive and can even be performed on freely moving animals while still retaining exceptional precision.
Elizabeth Hillman, a biomedical engineer at Columbia University, is very excited about the optogenetic breakthrough, explaining that,
[Through optogenetics] you can select that very specific genetic cell type, and you can tell that specific cell type to react when you shine light on it.
For example, in the video below, scientists selected a specific motor neuron in a mouse to be affected by light. Just by shining a blue light on its head, they tell the mouse to start running. When the blue light disappears, so does the mouse’s movement.
While the methodology is opening doors left and right, optogenetics does not come without faults. Because neurons don’t naturally respond to light, it is necessary to alter the gene with additional genetic material so that it reacts to the optogenetic process. Genetic engineering in humans isn’t exactly mainstream right now. We know that using viruses to alter genes in humans works very well, but there are obvious risks associated with that process.
So, how will optogenetics personally influence your life when it is commercialized? Depression, epilepsy, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, addiction, and even fear may one day be flipped off with a simple flash of light. Consequently, these illnesses could be activated with a flash of light as well.
The future is clear: multicolored laser pointers will become the new standard tool for doctors and soldiers alike.
Critics are quick to point out the consistently noted dangers of cannabis ingestion. These are the same arguments that have been used for decades. They remain aggressively debated without compromise, despite decades of rational evidence suggesting falsity and fallacy. The seemingly valid concerns regarding cannabis use that top the critics’ list are: the gateway drug theory, short-term memory loss, psychosis, decreased intelligence, harm from cannabis smoke, depression, an elevated heart rate, and worries over driving while high. Let’s allow science and logic to save the day, shall we?
Psychosis
An historically major issue concerning cannabis is the worry that it may induce schizophrenic symptoms or intensify various forms of latent schizophrenia. The subjective experience of ingesting cannabis is highly personal and varies greatly among users around the world. Common experiences include:
Greater enjoyment of food taste and aroma
blogs.sfweekly.com
An enhanced enjoyment of music
A greater enjoyment of comedy and humor
Distortions in perception of time and space
Short-term memory loss
Improved long-term memory recall
Creative thinking
New perspectives
Increased libido
Elevated mood
Heightened sensitivity to external stimuli
Relaxation
At extremely high doses common experiences include:
Altered body image
Auditory/visual illusions
Hallucinations (extremely rare)
Mild dissociation of mind and body
Panic attacks
Paranoia
While the vast majority of the effects of cannabis are viewed as positive, panic attacks and paranoia are obviously unwanted. Between 20 and 30 percent of recreational users experience intense anxiety and/or panic attacks after smoking cannabis.
While these symptoms usually occur due to thoughts of legal ramification for ingesting cannabis, exaggerated worry over a thought process, or general anxiousness over trying something new, it has been reported that the symptoms can happen spontaneously as well. It is possible and plausible that these symptoms could lead to greater and more persistent symptoms of psychosis. However, there are multiple aspects of the psychosis worry that needs to be discussed.
First, through our increasing knowledge of cannabinoids and the role they play on the endocannabinoid system, researchers have discovered that certain cannabinoids have a marginally stronger effect than others with regards to producing hallucinations delusions, and subjective psychological stress.
While the THC (the most psychoactive cannabinoid found in cannabis) offers incredible physio/psychological health benefits, it has been linked to being the sole culprit of producing more schizophrenia-like symptoms.
When comparing multiple subjects under the influence of only THC, a mixture of THC and CBD (cannabidiol), and no cannabinoids, researchers found that only THC produced subjectively negative psychological effects. The subjects with no additional cannabinoids in their system and the subjects with the mixture of THC and CBD both experienced a nearly identical psychological effect. The only major difference was that the subjects who had ingested the mixture reported less anhedonia (unable to experience pleasure) then the other two groups. The researchers concluded that if anything, their research highlighted
the importance of distinguishing between different strains of cannabis.
Once we break cannabis down into its component cannabinoids it is easy to see why users describe such incredibly varied experiences. Cannabidiol is extremely effective in treating and preventing symptoms of schizophrenia, as research continues to suggest. Many researchers believe that cannabis legalization will herald a revolution in the treatment of various psychological disorders, including schizophrenia. According to a 2005 double-blind study analyzing the antipsychotic effects of cannabidiol, researchers found that:
cannabidiol treatment was accompanied by a significant increase in serum anandamide levels, which was significantly associated with clinical improvement. The results suggest that inhibition of anandamide deactivation may contribute to the antipsychotic effects of cannabidiol potentially representing a completely new mechanism in the treatment of schizophrenia.
Other studies on the topic affirm that many subjects report
A group of Dutch scientists say that there is no proof that cannabis induces schizophrenia. These findings will be embarrassing for the Dutch government, which has been bearing down on Marijuana Coffee Shops saying the drug induces schizophrenia.
The truth is that much of the research done thus far has been skewed and largely unscientific. Under proper guidance, and using the correct strains, researchers all around the world agree that cannabis is a wonderfully effective psychotropic medication. Researchers discussed the consistently shown promise and proof of cannabis as an effective psychotropic medication in the British Journal of Psychiatry:
I considered Arseneault et al‘s (2004) search for evidence of the association between cannabis and psychosis as quite skewed. They did not explore the evidence regarding positive, therapeutic or beneficial psychoactive effects of cannabis in mental health in the context of appropriate, rational and clinical usage…Signalling, mostly inhibitory, suggests a role for cannabinoids as therapeutic agents in central nervous system disease where inhibition of neurotransmitter release would be beneficial. Evidence suggests that cannabinoids inhibit the neurotransmitter glutamate, counteract oxidative damage to dopaminergic neurons and may be potent neuroprotective agents (Croxford, 2003)…knowing [cannabis’] potent neuroprotective function, its potential role in psychiatric practice should not be discarded lightly.
The most important thing to remember is that symptoms of schizophrenia generally (nearly always) precede cannabis use. Schizophrenia and general psychosis have far more to do with genetic make up than anything else (refer to the graph).
Research regarding the connection between cannabis and psychosis, especially symptoms of schizophrenia, remains historically lacking and skewed with regards to component cannabinoids in cannabis. Cannabis produces highly varied subjective experiences, and research has revealed that each cannabinoid within cannabis has a markedly different effect on individuals. Multiple recent studies have shown that cannabis, specifically the cannabinoid CBD, is a highly effective agent in treating schizophrenia and other psychological disorders. Most importantly, symptoms of schizophrenia precede cannabis use in the vast majority of cases. There is currently no clear evidence that cannabis is directly responsible for causing psychosis and schizophrenic symptoms in users.
Depression
This is one of the most commonly used arguments against the use of cannabis as a form of medicine or recreation. Like the psychosis argument debunked above, the depression argument is always portrayed in a skewed and exaggerated fashion. The most important thing to remember as we discuss this is that correlation does not imply causation.
forum.grasscity.com
It is well known that many already depressed individuals (ranging from mild to incapacitating depression) use cannabis as a form of self-medication. This often takes place after finding no success with taking a whole slew of expensive, addictive, and biologically destructive prescription drugs handed out by the oh so helpful DSM devotees.
Over 4400 adult internet users [who] completed The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale and measures of marijuana use. We employed an internet survey in an effort to recruit the most depressed and marijuana involved participants, including those who might prove unwilling to travel to the laboratory or discuss drug use on the phone or in person. We compared those who consumed marijuana daily, once a week or less, or never in their lives. Despite comparable ranges of scores on all depression subscales, those who used once per week or less had less depressed mood, more positive affect, and fewer somatic complaints than non-users. Daily users reported less depressed mood and more positive affect than non-users. The three groups did not differ on interpersonal symptoms.
Cannabis users, whether they ingested the substance less than once a week or every day, reported far less depressive symptoms and far more happiness and satisfaction than non-users. The study goes on to say that:
The media continues to report links between marijuana and depression. In a recent review, Degenhardt, Hall, and Lynskey (2003) identified a modest relationship only among problematic users. Many studies show no link between cannabis and depression despite appropriate statistical power, measurement, and design (Fergusson & Horwood, 1997; Fergusson, Lynskey, & Horwood, 1996; Green & Ritter, 2000; Kouri, Pope, Yurgelun-Todd, & Gruber, 1995; McGee, Williams, Poulton, & Moffitt, 2000; Musty & Kaback, 1995; Rowe, Fleming, Barry, Manwell, & Kropp, 1995). One neglected source of depression among marijuana users may stem from medical use. Separate analyses for medical vs. recreational users demonstrated that medical users reported more depressed mood and more somatic complaints than recreational users, suggesting that medical conditions clearly contribute to depression scores and should be considered in studies of marijuana and depression. The data suggests that adults apparently do not increase their risk for depression by using marijuana.
Just like we discussed in all of the other arguments, the public only sees what the media picks and chooses to show, which is usually negligible data that has been exaggerated and skewed to fit their hype. The previous study also brought up an excellent point that has never been discussed before: are the results of studies concerning cannabis and depression that get aired by main stream media corrupted by reports of depression that originate from medical suffering? The use of cannabis is so wide spread around the world, especially in the US, that it should not be discounted.
After adjusting for differences in baseline risk factors of marijuana use and depression, past-year marijuana use does not significantly predict later development of depression.
Finally, in a longitudinal study completed in 2009 regarding cannabis and suicide,researchers found that:
Although there was a strong association between cannabis use and suicide, this was explained by markers of psychological and behavioural problems. These results suggest that cannabis use is unlikely to have a strong effect on risk of completed suicide, either directly or as a consequence of mental health problems secondary to its use.
The depression argument is false in many of the same ways as the psychosis argument. In the vast majority of cases depressive behavior precedes cannabis use. Additionally, in most cases where cannabis is used to self-treat depression it is found to be successful. Cannabis is a clear biological antidepressant and exhibits incredible therapeutic properties. Depression is highly subjective and everyone experiences it differently. The truth is that in multiple studies both light and heavy cannabis users report far less depressive symptoms than non-users. There is no evidence whatsoever that cannabis use predicts or causes depression. Many depressed people use cannabis and report positive results far more often than people using contemporarily prescribed prescription medication.
Driving While Stoned
(*Note: this report does not advocate driving while under the effects of any substance, including cannabis. The aim of this section is to view the credible findings on how cannabis affects drivers.)
cannabis impairs driving behavior. However, this impairment is mediated in that subjects under cannabis treatment appear to perceive that they are indeed impaired. Where they can compensate, they do.
Despite biological theories for how cannabis might potentially affect a driver, experiments using driving simulations in the lab find that:
drivers who drank alcohol overestimated their performance quality whereas those who smoked marijuana underestimated it. Perhaps as a consequence, the former invested no special effort for accomplishing the task whereas the latter did, and successfully. This evidence strongly suggests that alcohol encourages risky driving whereas THC encourages greater caution, at least in experiments.
The [findings] contrast with results from many laboratory tests, reviewed by Moskowitz (1985), which show that even low doses of THC impair skills deemed to be important for driving, such as perception, coordination, tracking and vigilance. The present studies also demonstrated that marijuana can have greater effects in laboratory than driving tests. The last study, for example showed a highly significant effect of THC on hand unsteadiness but not on driving in urban traffic.
It is apparent that despite multiple laboratory studies displaying favorable results, real world driving tests are even more positive. When we actually test the effects of cannabis on drivers in the real world, we see very little safety issues, if any at all.
Drivers under the influence of cannabis, unlike alcohol, realize they are under the effects of a substance and successfully compensate for their altered state of mind by driving slower and by giving themselves more space between other vehicles. One of the first actual road tests with cannabis studies drivers in the lab, on the highway, and in congested urban areas. The results affirmed that as far as cannabis’ effect on actual driving performance:
Driving quality as rated by the subjects contrasted with observer ratings. Alcohol impaired driving performance according to the driving instructor but subjects did not perceive it; marijuana did not impair driving performance but the subjects themselves perceived their driving performance as such….Thus there was evidence that subjects in the marijuana group were not only aware of their intoxicated condition but were also attempting to compensate for it…drivers become overconfident after drinking alcohol…and more cautious and self critical after consuming low THC doses by smoking marijuana.
Drivers under the effects of cannabis pay more attention to the road; drive more slowly, and leaving themselves more room between other cars.
The truth is that alcohol is a far more serious problem than cannabis when it comes to driving. Studies performed from 1982 to 1998 demonstrate time and time again that alcohol is significantly more dangerous than cannabis on the road. Alcohol use is also far more prevalent in crash statistics.
Blood and/or urine from fatally injured drivers in Washington State were collected and tested for the presence of drugs and alcohol. Drug and/or alcohol use was a factor in 52% of all fatalities. Among single vehicle accidents, alcohol use was a factor in 61% of cases versus 30% for multiple vehicle accidents. Drugs most commonly encountered were marijuana (11%), cocaine (3%), amphetamines (2%), together with a variety of depressant prescription medications.
The study even found that it was far less likely to find alcohol in a person’s system in the presence of cannabis, implying that cannabis use lessened the prevalence of alcohol use on the road:
Trends noted included an association of depressant use with higher blood alcohol levels, while marijuana use was associated with lower blood alcohol levels.
With regards to comparisons between cannabis and illicit substances overall, Accident Analysis & Prevention, a peer-reviewed journal, reported in its July 2004 article titled “Psychoactive Substance Use and the Risk of Motor Vehicle Accidents,” by K.L.L. Movig, et al.:
The objective of this study was to estimate the association between psychoactive drug use and motor vehicle accidents requiring hospitalization.
The risk for road trauma was increased for single use of benzodiazepines and alcohol…High relative risks were estimated for drivers using combinations of drugs and those using a combination of drugs and alcohol. Increased risks, although not statistically significant, were assessed for drivers using amphetamines… No increased risk for road trauma was found for drivers exposed to cannabis.
The largest study ever done linking road accidents with drugs and alcohol has found drivers with cannabis in their blood were no more at risk than those who were drug-free. In fact, the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free. A study spokesman, Dr Jason White, said the difference was not great enough to be statistically significant but could be explained by anecdotal evidence that marijuana smokers were more cautious and drove more slowly because of altered time perception. The study of 2,500 accidents, which matched the blood alcohol levels of injured drivers with details from police reports, found drug-free drivers caused the accidents in 53.5 per cent of cases. Injured drivers with a blood-alcohol concentration of more than 0.05 per cent were culpable in nearly 90 per cent of accidents they were involved in. Drivers with cannabis in their blood were less likely to cause an accident, with a culpability rate of 50.6 per cent. The study has policy implications for those who argue drug detection should be a new focus for road safety. Dr White said the study showed the importance of concentrating efforts on alcohol rather than other drugs.
The BBC and CNN both filmed their own research on the actual effects of cannabis on driving ability. The BBC study focused on a single driver and found that he actually drove better while ‘high’; driving more cautiously and paying more attention to the driving test. The CNN study was a bit more extensive and controlled.
The study, conducted in Washington where recreational cannabis use is legal, focused on 3 volunteers who drove under the effects of different amounts of cannabis. They drove alongside a driving instructor with drug recognition experts (police officers with specific drug recognition training) watching them from outside the vehicle. The volunteers included a heavy daily user, a weekend user, and an occasional user. Even at 7x the legal limit of driving under the influence, 5x the legal limit, and 4x the legal limit respectively, all of the volunteers passed their driving tests, received positive reviews from the driving instructor, and would not have been pulled over by the drug recognition experts.
It’s just safer to drive under the influence of marijuana than it is drunk….Drunk drivers take more risk, they tend to go faster. They don’t realize how impaired they are. People who are under the influence of marijuana drive slower, they don’t take as many risks.
From a theoretical point of view it makes sense that people would be concerned over potential risks of ‘driving while stoned.’ However, the research speaks for itself. Laboratory and real world test results have confirmed time and time again that cannabis does not have a detrimental effect on driving ability. People under the effects of cannabis, unlike alcohol, realize their altered state of mind and compensate successfully for it. In most instances cannabis users drive more safely; driving slower, paying more attention to the road, and remaining more cautious and vigilant. Cannabis does not pose any serious danger to drivers or anyone else on the road.
atheistfoundation.org.au
Cannabis Smoke and Lung Damage
patients4medicalmarijuana.wordpress.com
There are endless reports that claim cannabis harms the lungs and bronchial airways, as well as increasing the risk of lung cancer. What you’ll quickly notice though is that the studies these reports are quoting from are completely theoretical studies based on comparisons with cigarette smoke, as opposed to actual findings from research. Additionally, they only focus on one mode of cannabis ingestion, one that destroys many of the medical benefits of cannabis; smoking.
It is true that there are over 50 potentially carcinogenic substances found in cannabis. Additionally, because smoked cannabis is not completely dry and is smoked without a filter, there is roughly 4 times more tar than the amount found in cigarettes. One can see why studies would speculate that cannabis may increase the risk of lung cancer. As usual, when you look at the actual science, the opposite is true.
First of all, there is currently not a single known case of cancer originating from the ingestion of cannabis. As stated numerous times in this report, there has never been a death that cannabis was directly responsible for.
A study in 2005, the largest ever conducted of its kind, left Donald Tashkin, a pulmonologist at UCLA‘s David Geffin School of Medicine, scratching his head. Tashkin and his research team had hypothesized an association between cannabis and lung cancer, but even after 30 years of observing thousands of subjects they were unable to find a connection between cannabis and lung cancer.
We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use. We expected that we would find that a history of heavy marijuana use – more than 500 to 1,000 uses – would increase the risk of cancer from several years to decades after exposure to marijuana. What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect.
kushsmoke.com
The heaviest users in Tashkin’s study smoked more than 60 joint-years worth of marijuana, or more than 22,000 joints in their lifetime. Moderately heavy users smoked between 11,000 and 22,000 joints.
That’s an enormous amount of marijuana [however] in no category was there any increased risk, nor was there any suggestion that smoking more led to a higher odds ratio. There was no dose-response, not even a suggestion of a dose response, and in all types of cancer except one, oral cancer, the odds ratios were less than one. This is the largest case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very extensive questionnaire about marijuana use. Bias can creep into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning.
That being said, Dr. Tashkin wisely notes:
It’s never a good idea to take anything into your lungs, including marijuana smoke.
Smoke does not belong in your lungs, and just as this report does not advocate driving while under the effects of cannabis, it equally does not recommend smoking cannabis. What this report does suggest is using a vaporizer, cooking the cannabis into food, or making a cannabis oil. All of these methods make this entire argument irrelevant as they do not involve any form of smoke.
The media has bombarded the public with seeming ‘proof’ that cannabis leads to lung cancer. The truth is that all of this ‘proof’ has been entirely speculative. Despite cannabis smoke containing carcinogens and up to 4 times more tar than the amount found in cigarettes, long term studies confirm that there is no increased risk of lung cancer from smoking cannabis. On the contrary, the cannabinoids found in THC work to fight against cancer and even protect healthy cells. Most importantly, because cannabis can be ingested in many ways that don’t involve smoke, this entire argument is irrelevant.
Critics are quick to point out the consistently noted dangers of cannabis ingestion. These are the same arguments that have been used for decades. They remain aggressively debated without compromise, despite decades of rational evidence suggesting falsity and fallacy. The seemingly valid concerns regarding cannabis use that top the critics’ list are: the gateway drug theory, short-term memory loss, psychosis, decreased intelligence, harm from cannabis smoke, depression, an elevated heart rate, and worries over driving while high. Let’s allow science and logic to save the day, shall we?
Gateway Drug
Many critics of cannabis use claim that cannabis is a gateway to harder and more persistent drug use. They are implying that if a person uses cannabis, recreationally or medically, they are more likely to use dangerous drugs like cocaine (again, ironically listed as a schedule 2 drug) or heroin. Although multiple studies have found that cannabis users are more likely than non-users to engage in the use of more ‘hardcore’ substances (meaning higher addiction potential and/or more biologically detrimental), there are endless holes in this argument.
Much of their [US drug-policy leaders] rhetoric about marijuana being a ‘gateway drug’ is simply wrong. After decades of looking, scientists still have no evidence that marijuana causes people to use harder drugs. If there is any true ‘gateway drug,’ it’s tobacco.
Alcohol and tobacco are more accessible and far more likely to be used by teens, consequently making those substances more likely to lead to further drug use. As stated by Elders, they are the true gateway drugs. In one of the most highly credible and sourced assessments on the science of drug use, the Institute of Medicine stated that:
In fact, most drug users do not begin their drug use with marijuana–they begin with alcohol and nicotine, usually when they are too young to do so legally…
There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect.
Starting to see the trend here? Alcohol and tobacco are far more dangerous and addictive than cannabis. If the gateway drug theory did have any legitimacy, it would have to be applied to alcohol and nicotine, two completely legal substances, before it could be attributed to any other substance.
The best analogy I’ve ever encountered for the ridiculousness of the gateway drug theory comes from Lynn Zimmer, PhD, Professor Emeritus at Queens College at the City University of New York:
In the end, the gateway theory is not a theory at all. It is a description of the typical sequence in which multiple-drug users initiate the use of high-prevalence and low-prevalence drugs.
A similar statistical relationship exists between other kinds of common and uncommon related activities. For example, most people who ride a motorcycle (a fairly rare activity) have ridden a bicycle (a fairly common activity). Indeed, the prevalence of motorcycle riding among people who have never ridden a bicycle is probably extremely low. However, bicycle riding does not cause motorcycle riding, and increases in the former will not lead automatically to increases in the latter.
Nor will increases in marijuana use lead automatically to increases in the use of cocaine or heroin.
If we overly criminalize behaviors like marijuana use among teens, this could interfere with opportunities for education and employment later on, which, in turn, could be creating more drug use.
The gateway drug theory is weak and unfounded. It is in fact not a credible theory at all. It has no place in the realm of science.
Decreased Intelligence
It is a propaganda technique that we have been hearing for nearly the entire 20th century and it continues into the 21st century; cannabis makes you stupid, a loser, a burnout.
While there is clear evidence that cannabis, like other substances, alters perception and brain function, there is no evidence that cannabis alters brain function in a purely negative way. Additionally, there is absolutely zero evidence that the biological effects of cannabis are permanent. On the contrary, science tells us that all of the consistently noted negative biological aspects of cannabis are entirely temporary.
According to Igor Grant, MD, Executive Vice Chairman at the University of California, San Diego Department of Psychiatry:
Smoking marijuana will certainly affect perception, but it does not cause permanent brain damage. ‘The findings were kind of a surprise. One might have expected to see more impairment of higher mental function. Other illegal drugs, or even alcohol, can cause brain damage…
If we barely find this tiny effect in long-term heavy users of cannabis, then we are unlikely to see deleterious side effects in indivduals who receive cannabis for a short time in a medical setting…
If it turned out that new studies find that cannabis is helpful in treating some medical conditions, this enables us to see a marginal level of safety.
Government experts now admit that pot doesn’t kill brain cells.
This myth came from a handful of animal experiments in which structural changes (not actual cell death, as is often alleged) were observed in brain cells of animals exposed to high doses of pot. Many critics still cite the notorious monkey studies of Dr. Robert G. Heath, which purported to find brain damage in three monkeys that had been heavily dosed with cannabis. This work was never replicated and has since been discredited by a pair of better controlled, much larger monkey studies, one by Dr. William Slikker of the National Center for Toxicological Research [William Slikker et al., ‘Chronic Marijuana Smoke Exposure in the Rhesus Monkey,’ Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 17: 321-32 (1991)] and the other by Charles Rebert and Gordon Pryor of SRI International [Charles Rebert & Gordon Pryor – ‘Chronic Inhalation of Marijuana Smoke and Brain Electrophysiology of Rhesus Monkeys,’International Journal of Psychophysiology V 14, p.144, 1993].
Neither found any evidence of physical alteration in the brains of monkeys exposed to daily doses of pot for up to a year.
The surprising truth is that cannabis actually promotes the creation of new neurons in hippocampal regions of the brain, the part of the brain most responsible for memory. Xia Zhang, an expert at the Neuropsychiatry Research Unit, Department of Psychiatry, at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada along with other medical researchers, points out that cannabis is the only illicit drug ever found to promote the creation of brain cells:
We show that 1 month after chronic HU210 [high-potency cannabinoid] treatment, rats display increased newborn neurons [brain cell growth] in the hippocampal dentate gyrus [a portion of the brain] and significantly reduced measures of anxiety- and depression-like behavior.Thus, cannabinoids appear to be the only illicit drug whose capacity to produce increased hippocampal newborn neurons is positively correlated with its anxiolytic- [anxiety reducing] and antidepressant-like effects.
College students who smoke cannabis demonstrate comparable or even higher grades than their cannabis abstinent classmates, and are more likely to pursue a graduate degree.
The short answer is yes, cannabis alters your mind and body, like any other substance in the world, but it does not make you stupid (certainly you’re not going to claim any of these highly successful cannabis-users are stupid), and all of the physiological and psychological effects are temporary.
Critics of cannabis use argue that memory loss, especially short-term memory loss, occurs more prominently in cannabis smokers. They also claim that it is a permanent effect. All of these claims are either exaggerated or wrong. We’ve already discussed how all the effects of cannabis ingestion are completely temporary; the same applies to memory.
To begin, it is true that cannabis has a noticeable effect on short-term memory as well as working memory, while the user is under the influence. Cannabis affects working memory through the mechanisms stated above, by encouraging neurogensis, or the creation of neurons, in the hippocampus region of the brain. Although this has a positive effect on memory overall, it disrupts short-term memory while the user is ‘high’ by creating ‘noise’ in the hippocampus. These effects are detectable at least 7 days after heavy cannabis use,
but appear reversible and related to recent cannabis exposure rather than irreversible and related to cumulative lifetime use.
Furthermore, after extensively studying cannabis use, lead researcher and Harvard professor Harrison Pope came to the conclusion that:
From neuropsychological tests chronic cannabis users showed difficulties, with verbal memory in particular, for ‘at least a week or two’ after they stopped smoking.Within 28 days, memory problems vanished and the subjects ‘were no longer distinguishable from the comparison group.’
These tests affirm that the physio/psychological effects of cannabis are temporary and reversible.
As for the seriousness of the temporary effects on short-term memory, studies have found that the effect is negligible. Researchers from the University of California, San Diego School of Medicine headed by Dr. Igor Grant analyzed data from 15 previously published controlled studies involving 704 long-term cannabis users and 484 nonusers and found that:
long-term cannabis use [is] only marginally harmful on the memory and learning. Other functions such as reaction time, attention, language, reasoning ability, perceptual and motor skills [are] unaffected. The observed effects on memory and learning, [show] long-term cannabis use [causes] ‘selective memory defects’, but that the impact [is] ‘of a very small magnitude.’
In fact, rather than having deleterious effects on memory, Ohio State University scientists have shown that
Research supports this claim as past studies have revealed that cannabinoid receptors stimulated by cannabinoids in cannabis act as an anti-inflammatory agent and serve to improve memory in old rats.
Surprisingly, recent research into the activity of the hippocampus suggests that the key to a good memory is forgetting. Think of the brain as a computer with enormous hard drive space. Despite this incredible amount of storage, it is still finite. The more memories our brains create, the harder it is for our working memory to properly remember and recall. In this way, forgetting a few things actually isn’t a bad thing. It is in fact highly beneficial overall.
Another important point is that different cannabinoids found in cannabis affect memory centers in the brain in remarkably different ways. Through further legalization, scientists will have the freedom to perform more extensive research, while growers will have the opportunity to create strains of cannabis that have an even more minimal effect on the memory centers of the brain.
These studies reveal that in the short run, short-term and working memory are disrupted by the ingestion of cannabis by creating new neurons in the memory centers of the brain. These additional neurons disrupt working memory by acting as additional ‘noise’ to the active, recalling mind. These short-term memory lapses are completely temporary though, and in the long run the brain is actually left with additional neurons and a more expansive memory center. To use the analogy of a computer again, think of heavy-cannabis ingestion as a temporary lapse in primary memory functionality for the sake of upgrading the storage capabilities of secondary memory.
Elevated Heart Rate
It is true that many cannabis users describe symptoms of panic and consequently an elevated heart rate, especially during their first time trying cannabis. What still remains debated is whether cannabis itself biologically causes heart rate to increase.
The most well known study done on the correlation between cannabis and heart rate, and subsequently the only truly credible and widely used study, is one performed by a man named Dr. Murray A. Mittleman. Mittleman’s study focused on:
information on cannabis use from 3,882 middle-aged and elderly patients who had suffered heart attacks. A total of 124 patients were identified as current users, including 37 who reported smoking the drug up to 24 hours before their attack, and nine who had used it within an hour of experiencing symptoms.
Mittleman’s conclusion was that the first hour after taking cannabis heart attack risk is 4.8 times higher than during periods of non-use. In the second hour, the risk drops to 1.7 times higher. According to Mittleman this was the first study to document that smoking cannabis could trigger a heart attack, but that the trigger mechanism remained unknown. So what’s the issue with this constantly cited study?
Besides the fact that any type of smoke entering the lungs produces the same effect (it is not necessary and not medicinally optimal to smoke cannabis, a subject that is covered later in this report), Dr. Lester Grinspoon, who is one of the world’s foremost cannabis researchers as well as Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and a former senior psychiatrist at the Massachusetts Mental Health Center in Boston for 40 years, explains why this study should be dismissed. Dr. Grinspoon tells an interviewer, in response to Mittleman’s study:
..let me say that since 1967 there have been numerous reports and studies, each of which the American media has blown out of all proportion, stating one or another supposed ill effect of marijuana use. I can list them, if you’d like. ‘Increase in the size of the ventricles, decrease in testosterone, destruction of chromosomes.’ All were front-page stories, none of them have ever been replicated. In other words, they didn’t pan out scientifically. Of course, the studies that contradicted them ended up on page 31 or thereabouts, if they got mentioned at all… I would point out that out of 3,882 patients, we’re talking about 9 who used marijuana within an hour of the onset of a heart attack. That’s around 0.2%. By sheer mathematics, given that people sleep eight hours per day or so, we can deduce that 6.7% of those patients emptied their bowels within an hour of onset. It’s incredible to me that the numbers here could be said to constitute a significant risk factor.
So, as is typical of the main stream media, a report was utterly sensationalized and relatively negligible data was heralded as proven truth. Dr. Grinspoon elaborates on the shortcomings of the study by reminding the interviewer that:
[Mittleman] put that increase [in heart rate] at 40 beats per minute. In truth, that number is closer to 20 beats per minute, which is probably consistent with running up the stairs in one’s house...I blame the media far more than I do Dr. Middleman. I read his abstract, and in its conclusion he cautioned against making too much of the data…in 1997, Kaiser Permanente did a large-scale study which included more than 65,000 admitted marijuana users, and they could not demonstrate any impact of marijuana use on mortality. If marijuana use really was a significant risk factor for heart attack, it is hard to believe that it didn’t turn up there. Again, I’m not saying that there is absolutely no risk demonstrated here. But given the history of the research since 1967, I’d be surprised if these findings don’t go down the same chute as all of the other front-page scare stories.
It’s really not that hard to believe. We have seen the same baseless scare tactics take place 20 years ago, 40 years ago, 60 years ago, 100 years, and more!
With regards to actual significant scientific data, cannabis has in fact been shown (as stated in the ‘Cannabis Cures Everything’ section of this report) to treat and protect the heart, as well as help prevent heart disease through the interaction with the endocannabinoid system of the heart and surrounding regions of the body. It is consequently a likely tool for fighting and preventing obesity (along with hemp seeds). The science is still emerging, but what little research exists strongly suggests that cannabis will serve an extremely positive role in keeping the heart healthy in the future.
The single study that is consistently used to argue that cannabis poses a danger to cardiovascular health is far from significant and only became prominent through sensationalized media. Repeat studies suggest the cannabinoids found in cannabis play a pivotal role in cardiovascular health and the prevention of heart disease.
Even more amazingly, studies all around the world have concluded with exponentially growing empirical affirmation that cannabis completely and totally cures cancer. It additionally acts as a preventative, stopping cancer from ever coming back. Don’t believe me? Continue reading, or just ask the US government; they own the patent for cannabis as a successful cure and/or treatment for a whole array of medical conditions.
Before we delve into the medicinal benefits of cannabis, we must first understand the vehicle through which cannabis performs its medicinal magic, the endocannabinoid system.
The Endocannabinoid System
Cannabis is one of the most highly effective medicinal substances in the world. It has the power to treat and/or cure a countless number of illnesses and syndromes, including a whole array of different types of cancer. But how can a single substance have such an extraordinary effect on our biology? It all begins with the endocannabinoid system.
Because the discovery of the endocannabinoid system is relatively new, and despite there being over 12,000 scientific articles concerning the endocannabinoid system, there are still gaps in our understanding. There is still a significant amount of research that needs to be done, and educating people on the actual science of cannabis’ activity in the body will help to clear the smoke of ignorance and closed mindedness. Once people embrace the current research that is taking place, further research into more specific and particular roles of the endocannabanoid system will take off at lightning speed. What we do know is the following:
Endocannabinoids are the substances our bodies naturally make to stimulate these receptors. The two most well understood of these molecules are called anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG). They are synthesized on-demand from cell membrane arachidonic acid derivatives, have a local effect and short half-life before being degraded by the enzymes fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH) and monoacylglycerol lipase (MAGL).
Phytocannabinoids are plant substances that stimulate cannabinoid receptors. Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the most psychoactive and certainly the most famous of these substances, but other cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN) are gaining the interest of researchers due to a variety of healing properties. Most phytocannabinoids have been isolated from cannabis sativa, but other medical herbs, such as echinacea purpura, have been found to contain non-psychoactive cannabinoids as well.
The information above focuses on the two most well known endocannabinoids in the body, as well as the most well known cannabinoids in cannabis, but there are far more. Cannabinoids are split into three categories:
It is through the encocannabinoid system that cannabis is able to perform its magic. Cannabis has the ability to treat and/or cure a constantly growing list of illnesses, including cancer. Dependent on the individual and the type of cannabinoid used, most types of cancer have been observed responding positively to the introduction of cannabis in the system, including cancer found in the breast, prostate, lung, thyroid, colon, skin, pituitary gland, ovary, pancreas, as well asmelanoma, leukemiaandmore! The cannabinoids in cannabis act through the body’s natural endocannabinoid system to cure and/or treat cancer in several ways, the most prominent and well researched being:
One of the greatest benefits of cannabis as medicine is that it stimulates and acts in harmony with a system that is already present throughout the body. Instead of prescribing five or more different, highly addictive pills to treat various symptoms, and additional pills to treat the endless side effects (often worse than the illness itself) of all the pills, doctors are able to use cannabis and the cannabanoids within it, as a single, natural medicinal source without any physical addiction potential and little to no harmful side effects. Plus, don’t forget, it is impossible to overdose on.
Cannabis Cures Everything Else
Along with treating various forms of cancer, cannabis can be used to treat a constantly growing list of other diseases and syndromes as well. It may even slow the aging process. Additionally, the cannabinoids found in cannabis are exceptional anti-oxidants and neuroprotectants. It is such a remarkable substance that it is able to treat seemingly opposite illnesses simultaneously, like obesity and eating disorders/malnutrition. Again, the key is the activation and involvement with the endocannabinoid system. Cannabis has shown results ranging from promising potential to revolutionary effectiveness in curing and/or treating:
It is because the cannabinoids in cannabis are so influential on the endocannabinoid system, a system that spans every part of our body, that they are able to have such an effective, overarching, revolutionarily positive effect. Keep in mind that the above is what researchers have found with limited funds, little time, and immense legal obstacles. The golden age of cannabis research hasn’t even started yet.
Cannabis Oil: Run From the Cure
The most medicinally beneficial way to ingest cannabis is by making a high potency cannabis oil. It should be clear now from this report that cannabis is far more effective than conventional medicine for a near-endless variety of ailments. This is especially true for cancer.
The point is, no matter what type of conventional medicine you use, your chances of survival are bleak, and the side effects are horrendous. On the other hand, there is a medicine available that has been proven to completely cure cancer in the majority of cases, as well as having little to no adverse side effects. Additionally, it is as non-toxic as a substance can get, and is impossible to overdose on. Plus, it focuses on treating the side effects of cancer along with the cancer itself. At this point, you recognize that I’m referring to cannabis, but in this case, I’m referring specifically to cannabis oil, also called hemp oil and hash oil (though hemp oil could also refer to a pressed oil derived from hemp seeds which contains a relatively low amount of medicinally superior cannabinoids, namely THC. To avoid confusion I will refer to it only as cannabis oil).
Cannabis oil refers to a highly potent extract of cannabinoids from cannabis, especially THC, usually in the range of 40-90% purity (though there are claims of higher purity), in the form of a thick oil that can be taken daily. The same science discussed above applies to cannabis oil as the same cannabinoids are present, only with the oil they are in much higher concentrations. It is due to the increased potency in cannabinoids, specifically THC, that cannabis oil is the most medicinal and beneficial form of the medicine.
The use of cannabis oil became most prominent due to a documentary made by a man named Rick Simpson. The documentary is called ‘Run From The Cure,’ ( the word cure referring to the conventional cures for cancer, like chemotherapy. The documentary focuses on the science of the endocannabinoid system, how to make the oil and what to expect, doctor testimonials, research regarding cannabis’ effect on cancer, and testimonials from patients that have used cannabis oil to successfully cure their cancer.
Another story that is making ground breaking news is a story that is dubbed: Brave Mykayla. It is the story of Mykayla Comstock, a 7 year old girl from Oregon who successfully used medical marijuana, specifically cannabis oil, to fully cure her leukemia.
Additional information on Rick Simpson, Rick Simpson Oil (cannabis oil created using Rick Simpson’s simple method), and how to make cannabis oil yourself can be found on Rick Simpsons personal website: http://phoenixtears.ca/.
Cannabis oil is effective to an unprecedented degree, so says science and the people who have used it successfully to treat their cancer. Unfortunately, unless you are approved to use cannabis medically, it is incredibly expensive and potentially dangerous to procure due to its legal status. Something obviously needs to change, but what can be done? What’s the next step? **This article is preceded by and continues in the report: Cannabis Cures Cancer and Everything Else: A Through History and Review.
*Note: Although it does not specifically contain a discussion on cannabis oil, this exceptional video speaks extensively on the overall science of cannabis’ effects on the endocannabinoid system, presents testimonials from doctors and patients, and discusses various government funded/peer reviewed studies verifying cannabis’ extraordinary effects. It is the video I recommend to anyone even remotely interested in the subject, and is a great introduction to the plethora of research on the issue. It contains the following credible credits:
Dr. Robert Melamede, Ph.D.
Associate Professor and Biology Chairman
Biology Department at the University of Colorado
CEO and President of Cannabis Science
“Cannabinoids kill cancer cells in many cases, people are not aware of this”
Dr. Manuel Guzman, Ph.D.
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
Professor at the Complutense University, Madrid, Spain
“Cannabinoids have the effect of inducing death in cancer cells”
Dr. Prakash Nagarkatti, Ph.D.
Vice President for Cannabinoid Research
University of South Carolina Columbia Distinguished Professor
“Cannabinoids can be used effectively as anti-cancer agents”
Dr. Sean McAllister CPMC Scientist
California Pacific Medical Center Research Institute http://thesethgroup.org/videos.html
“Cannabidiol inhibits aggressive breast cancers”
Dr. Donald Tashkin, M.D.
University of California, Los Angeles
Emeritus Professor of Medicine
Medical Director of the Pulmonary Function Laboratory
“THC actually has an anti-tumor effect”
Dr. Robert Sterner, M.D.
UCSD General Surgeon
Graduate of Harvard & UCLA
“Marijuana seeks out cancerous cells and preferentially kills them”
Dr. Jeffrey Hergenrather, M.D.
Addiction Medicine Specialist
President of the Society of Cannabis Clinicians
“There are multiple mechanisms of action in which cannabis kills cancer cells”
Dr. Bonni Goldstein, M.D.
Canna Centers, Medical Director
Cannabis Researcher and Scientist
“Cannabidiol has been found to make cancer cells commit suicide”
Dr. Josh Wurzer, Researcher
Laboratory Director, SC Laboratories
Cannabis Researcher and Scientist
“Health benefits attributed to THC is actually because of the CBD content”
Final Thoughts
It should now be clear by reading this report that cannabis and hemp remain illegal for utterly irrational reasons that are actually damaging society as a whole. Most importantly, cannabis should not be labeled a schedule 1 substance as it contains, at the very last, a substantial amount of medicinal value. This medicinal effect comes with the added bonus of having little to no danger of addiction, overdose, or biological harm; something that cannot be said about most other substances approved by the FDA. Even aspirin, a substance millions of people around the world pop like candy, kills 1000’s of people every year. Let’s not forget that the most popular pain killer in the world has been found to substantially increase heart attack risk.
A slew of studies…show diclofenac — sold under the brand names Voltaren, Cambia, Cataflam and Zipsor — is just as likely to cause a heart attack as the discredited painkiller Vioxx (rofecoxib), which was pulled from the U.S. market in 2004.
We have so many issues with modern medicine, yet a cheap (free if you grow it) natural, highly effective medicine/pain killer already exists in the form of cannabis. Why is it still only available to less than half the country, and only after jumping through extraordinary loopholes? Even more ludicrous, although medical cannabis users are practicing their legal state right, and moreover, the natural right to peacefully preserve their own lives, they are still labeled by the federal government as criminals deserving up to life sentences behind bars. This is alarmingly unreasonable and irresponsible decision making at best. At worst it is pure foolishness and downright criminal in itself.
Regardless of medicinal comparisons between substances, what is important is that people have as many medicinally effective substances available to them as possible, without interference from Big Brother. As Lynn Zimmer, PhD, former Professor Emeritus at the Queens College, City University, New York explains:
The question is not whether marijuana is better than existing medication. For many medical conditions, there are numerous medications available, some of which work better in some patients and some which work better in others. Having the maximum number of effective medications available allows physicians to deliver the best possible medical care to individual patients.
I, Healthyheartbeatz, a grown man of 25, have a soft spot for children in need. Me, with all of my bravado and manliness, me with all of my outspokenness and inclination to argue, YES I still cringe every time I see a helpless child in need on TV or displayed in an advertisement. That may have to do with my ridiculous sensitivity and sympathy, not to mention I am also very much so captivated by puppies, but that is besides the point of course! Children are our future and taking care of them is priority! We can’t let them turn into mindless zombies, something must be done!
Why must you bother me with all of this? Well, I stumbled upon a series of recent studies put together by (FXB) Center for Health and Human Rights that of course made me cringe and fired up my synapses in order to reach out to you, our Wondergressivers (ererers). But let’s take it easy, I am not in any way trying to make you, our loving reader, pay anything or donate anything. This is a news group dedicated to researching and informing others! Naturally that is exactly how this will all play out, and without any final request other than for the lot of you to be “in the know”-
Failing to intervene nutritionally to aid malnourished children can stunt them for life and failing to provide antiretroviral drugs to parents can turn their children into orphans, putting them at increased risk of falling into crime, drug abuse, prostitution, and other societal ills.
Just think, all of our non-action towards the kids of tomorrow acts as a catalyst for failure in the future. Who knows when the next Einstein will be neglected or the next Copernicus will starve to death or the next Socrates will be condemned by society… wait, just a second. Countess Albina du Boisrouvray, a passionate supporter of helping the children of the world and founder of (FXB) Center for Health and Human Rights, said in an interview:
There are more than a billion of these children around the world, they are living in extreme poverty. They live by codes of conduct completely divorced from ours, and the older they get, the harder it will be to reintegrate them, even at great cost. Each day, they drift further and further. A huge percentage of the world’s adults are going to be almost a different species. This is terrible for society and for the economy — for everything officials are supposed to be worried about — as well as terrible for the kids.
But of course it’s not only the poor who are suffering, we have kids suffering daily from our public school failures as well as neglected children of our country.
There is no link to donate, there is no outcry to change your ways, its a simple message, a pass off of knowledge. So don’t forget our youngins. Babies are our future, past, present, and just about everything else. Without babies we wouldn’t exist. Some babies are super lucky being thrown into traffic and surviving unscathed. Other babies are watched over by angels as they simply survive unforeseen complications at their birth. Just a little baby power to end on a high note. Preacher OUT!
Ripped directly from the headlines of tomorrow comes the announcement that men in black are indeed here now. Never fear though. A bit of future technology, now well into the experimental phase, has effectively been used on test subjects to wipe selective memories.
We have shown previously that lateral amygdala (LA) neurons with increased cyclic adenosine monophosphate response element–binding protein (CREB) are preferentially activated by fear memory expression, which suggests that they are selectively recruited into the memory trace. We used an inducible diphtheria-toxin strategy to specifically ablate these neurons.
…Or in lay-speak, “See that bit of brain there? When I scooped it out, he didn’t remember anymore. Cool, huh?”
Wow, how’s that work?
Because memories are found in specific collections of neurons, haphazardly zig-zagging the brain, and digging around in the brain is kind of hard (it’s brain surgery, not simple rocket science), finding the particular cells that carry a memory is like finding a needle in an active volcano.
This new development, however, uses a CREB protein as a marker, dropping the difficulty to finding a needle in a hive of fire-ants. This highlights the role of a particular neuron bundle in a memory (snip, easy as circumcision), and suddenly Uncle Rick is no longer lobbing coffee cups at Thanksgiving dinner when the electric carver reminds him of Charlie back in ‘Nam.
Now, when it comes to memory, we’ve seen how to fix it in the elderly, implant fake memories for entertaining the kids, and even develop photographic recollection, but now: Eternal Sunshine, Total Recall, Memento; take your pick. On Monday, how bout Jason Bourne-ing” the shit out of your parents and when they start to suspect they’re super-soldiers, leap out with an “April Fools, you’re actually a middle-class suburbanite!!!” Get’s ’em every time.
Joking aside, obviously the ramifications of this new procedure are staggering, and the potential for… wait… What was I talking about?
Fun side-note:
Anyway. Almost totally unrelated (segways are for chumps), something you won’t want to forget: kick-start you day being serenaded in Portuguese by a dimply Brazilian girl. Easier to greet the world with a smile…
Wondergressive 
