The Link Between Marijuana and Schizophrenia

[MobBoss]

Marijuana can't cause physical addiction like Tobacco, but you can become dependent on it

The article in the OP seems to disagree with you in the case of Schizophrenics that smoke pot.

Indeed, many schizophrenia patients who smoke pot smoke enough to become addicted. As Henquet's study showed, the drug's mood-boosting effects appear immediately after smoking, as do some hallucinations, but the bulk of negative marijuana-related effects appear later on, as an increased rate of hallucination that affects patients even when they are not high. This is the exact type of drug effect that raises addiction risk: The user's experience is one of short-term gain associated with the drug, with long-term pain that seems unrelated. "This is what explains why patients with schizophrenia use cannabis for longer and more frequently than controls," says Henquet. "They are apparently more sensitive to the addictive potential than other people."

 

[civ_king]

The article in the OP seems to disagree with you in the case of Schizophrenics that smoke pot.

did you read what you quoted, you can become dependent on Marijuana it is not physical, it is mental, tobacco causes a physical addiction

 

[CaptainF]

I'm really not sure what you mean. That illegal things are not immoral? If that's what you mean, then they don't have to be. Laws are passed for a variety of reasons other than morality alone - reasons such as public health, safety, efficiency and so on.

None of which really apply to marijuana, or any other drug for that matter. The current "laws" regarding drugs help none of those issues mentioned.

I don't think it is about moral authority alone. If it is about any one thing, it is about consequences. I don't care what you put in your body, it is the consequences of what you put in your body that concern me.

What I put in my body is none of your business. When I harm you, then it's your business.

I didn't hand politicians the power to regulate these things - but we live in a democracy; compromise is essential to democracy and so is respect for the laws that are passed by the legitimate authorities. If you don't like them, challenge them through legal and political means - it's a free country. You don't have the right to break the laws of a democracy unless it is an emergency situation.

Interesting, considering that drug laws were never implemented democratically.

In the overall drug market, there are multiple stages of production, shipping, finance and so on. Criminologists and police specialists have identified the groups behind these processes and know they are very violent and dangerous. So I stick to my point - buying drugs is simply not ethical, although you can continue to evade that point if you don't want to recognise it.

I don't know why you consider to make such sweeping generalizations when they only serve to show how ignorant you are.

Do you really think someone growing marijuana for personal use is an inherently violent individual? I know many such individuals who wouldn't harm a fly.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe all the violence in the drug trade (which mostly applies to harder drugs like coke and H) is because these drugs are illegal? When you don't regulate something legally, you let the violent thugs in to corner the market. Something us Americans learned back in the 30's.

You are being somewhat rhetorical, and you are also switching the blame back onto the government. It is the responsibility of the government to provide security and police dangerous behaviours.

Drugs in and of themselves aren't dangerous.

The War on Drugs actually is dangerous, far more dangerous than drugs could ever be.

The government sees fit to regulate thousands of legal chemicals. Why can't the government regulate 10 or 20 more substances instead of wage a futile eradication effort that will never achieve it's goals?

I'm sorry, did you actually have a rational argument as to why taking drugs is a good idea?

Addiction, crime, death, mental illness, social breakdown, murder, gangs, rehab, wasted lives, overdose - yeah, I'm seeing the benefits.

Don't conform to authority kids - listen to people like formaldehyde, they are really smart and have all the answers.

Yes, tell kids that all drugs will kill you. Then, when kids inevitably try drugs like alcohol and marijuana and don't die, they sure won't be trusting your judgement on any other substance.

Well, it doesnt make sense to even try to argue with people so mired in their love for marijuana that they get all upset if say anything bad about their drug.

Yeah, I guess there is no use arguing with us, especially after your assertion in the OP was found to be incorrect.

I still think is a good article and quite informative, and I think more than a few drug users are simply seeing what they want to see.

We see that there is no causal mechanism in the relationship between marijuana and schizophrenia. Sorry if you can't take off the reefer madness goggles.

I also dont think the prop in California is going to pass. The state hasnt gone utterly bonkers yet.

"Bonkers". Yeah, because we all know how rational and effective prohibitionist laws have been thus far.

You say this, however, marijuana addiction is one of the most commonly treated addictions in drug therapy and rehab. I guess the DSM-IV disagrees with you thus far.

Marijuana is not physically addictive. It's about as addictive as video games.

We've been over this before, how drug rehab for pot smokers is a sham.

The article in the OP seems to disagree with you in the case of Schizophrenics that smoke pot.

I'm not seeing any physical withdrawal symptoms in there. Do you?

They keep smoking pot because it's pleasurable, which is the reason the vast majority of people smoke pot (other than the folks who use it for medicine).

 

[MobBoss]

did you read what you quoted, you can become dependent on Marijuana it is not physical, it is mental, tobacco causes a physical addiction

Yeah, I read it, and understand it better than you do. Its not 'mental' which refers to the psyche, its chemical, in that it refers to the reaction the brain has in releasing serotonins and the ensuing effect that has. That makes it a physical issue...not a mental one.

I'm not seeing any physical withdrawal symptoms in there. Do you?

Yup, its evidenced (in the OP) by increased psychotic episodes due to changes in brain chemistry.

They keep smoking pot because it's pleasurable, which is the reason the vast majority of people smoke pot (other than the folks who use it for medicine).

You dont think that can be addictive? Of course it can.

Yeah, I guess there is no use arguing with us, especially after your assertion in the OP was found to be incorrect.

Except, it wasnt. Lets face it, nothing I say, do or post here is going to change any dope smokers opinion about pot. Thats fairly evident.

 

[Formaldehyde]

What is "evident" is that some people who made up their minds long ago what the facts must be can't even read a simple article without completely misrepresenting what it states.

Did you address these comments? If so, I must have missed them...

The very article you posted stated that whilst there appears to be a link between marijuana and schizophrenia, the data is insufficient to make such a conclusion. Anyone with a basic understanding of statistics would not conclude that marijuana causes schizophrenia after reading the article you posted.

Also, whilst there was a study that suggested those with schizophrenia can become addicted to marijuana, it was clearly stated that the marijuana increased the cognitive functioning of those with schizophrenia. "The research showed that patients who smoked marijuana had faster brain processing speed, greater verbal ability and better memory than patients who didn't smoke"

So basically, you'd have to ignore roughly half of the article to reach the conclusions you did. I hope for your sake you did so deliberately to further your obvious agenda.

Mobboss I dispute your tl;dr version of the article. There does not appear to be a proven link yet.

Use of marijuana increases. Rate of schizophrenia remains the same.

I'm afraid I'm missing the correlation here.

 

[CaptainF]

Yup, its evidenced (in the OP) by increased psychotic episodes due to changes in brain chemistry.

That same article also says that schizo people smoking pot are better off, cognitively speaking.

You dont think that can be addictive? Of course it can.

Nice, you've just agreed with me that marijuana is no more addictive than video games, base jumping or sex.

Except, it wasnt. Lets face it, nothing I say, do or post here is going to change any dope smokers opinion about pot. Thats fairly evident.

Your assertion in the OP was that there is a "proven link" between schizophrenia and pot. There is a correlation, but no proven link. That part you seem to have ignored.

 

[civ_king]

Yeah, I read it, and understand it better than you do. Its not 'mental' which refers to the psyche, its chemical, in that it refers to the reaction the brain has in releasing serotonins and the ensuing effect that has. That makes it a physical issue...not a mental one.



Yup, its evidenced (in the OP) by increased psychotic episodes due to changes in brain chemistry.



You dont think that can be addictive? Of course it can.



Except, it wasnt. Lets face it, nothing I say, do or post here is going to change any dope smokers opinion about pot. Thats fairly evident.

Look WoW is addictive, so is Marijuana, but you can go cold turkey on them relatively easy, but getting the desire to cold turkey is different. Smoking on the other hand most people can't shake by just going cold turkey

 

[TheDanish]

My suitemates during my freshman year of college all smoked. Brightest guys in the world, one of them transferred to Harvard (I believe it was Harvard... if not, it was another Ivy League university).

Just like alcohol, it all depends on how responsibly you use it. And just like alcohol, some people have a susceptibility to related problems (schizophrenia/alcoholism), but most don't.

 

[nonconformist]

You say this, however, marijuana addiction is one of the most commonly treated addictions in drug therapy and rehab. I guess the DSM-IV disagrees with you thus far.

Maybe in the US?

It's not addictive in the normal sense of the word; i.e it doesn't cause a physical dependence on it by binding to endogenous receptors; however, psychologically, amongst certain people, they learn to associate "good times" and such with it, and find it hard to release seratonin and endorphines without it. In that sense, it is addictive, but more like pornography and high-octane sports than alcohol, tobbacco and heroin.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The only reason why it is "commonly treated" in drug rehab in the US is due to the fact that the courts frequently force people into such programs to escape jail time and even prison sentences, typically for violating their probation after flunking a piss test. I seriously doubt that hardly anybody has ever volunteered for "rehab" from pot smoking as they frequently do for alcohol or other drugs which form actual physical dependencies. It is simply not that difficult to quit, especially if you want to do so.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Sounds like an appalling waste of taxpayers money that.

 

[Earthling]

Did you address these comments? If so, I must have missed them...

Formaldehyde, I too posted on the first page that MobBoss' "tl;dr" of the article seemed quite wrong

 

[ParkCungHee]

One explanation may be that the two factors are coincidental, not causal: perhaps people who have a genetic susceptibility to schizophrenia also happen to especially enjoy marijuana

This is a Perhaps?

 

[tycoonist]

Let's all just ignore mobBoss's inability to see the mountain of evidence as anything more than a molehill.

 

[GenMarshall]

Pots already illegal....

No it's not MobBoss. These states disagree with you:

US States that decriminalized cannabis

Just let us smoke pot in peace and lay off the federal law crap. It has no ill harm to anyone. It makes us relax and escape the harsh realities that Bush has brought upon us . We dont want the Gman knocking down our door just because we wanna smoke pot.

 

[MobBoss]

No it's not MobBoss. These states disagree with you:

US States that decriminalized cannabis

Thats not legalization, civg, you misunderstand the meaning there. Pot can be decriminalized (meaning you wont go to jail for possessing small amounts - but you will still pay a fine) and still be illegal.

Just let us smoke pot in peace and lay off the federal law crap.

Whats this 'us' stuff?

It has no ill harm to anyone. It makes us relax and escape the harsh realities that Bush has brought upon us . We dont want the Gman knocking down our door just because we wanna smoke pot.

Still quite possibly a reality...especially where you live since it hasnt even been decriminalized there yet.

If you cant to the time, dont do the crime, civg!!!

Let's all just ignore mobBoss's inability to see the mountain of evidence as anything more than a molehill.

Odd thing about molehills is that you can still put your foot in one and break an ankle.

 

[Berzerker]

I'm really not sure what you mean. That illegal things are not immoral? If that's what you mean, then they don't have to be. Laws are passed for a variety of reasons other than morality alone - reasons such as public health, safety, efficiency and so on.

Then homicide rates matter, right? Property crimes? Earlier you said it was okay (or something) when I pointed out prohibition laws increase the cost of drugs thereby inducing more theft from people willing to steal. Our homicide rates were doubled during drug wars too. So morality doesn't matter, and your drug war makes us less safe. What was your argument again?

Yes that is how crime is defined and yes it was a crime for slaves to run away, and what the Nazis did was legal. That doesn't add anything to your argument though.

Wasn't meant to add to my point, it was meant to shred your argument - and it did. You just told us slavery and genocide are not crimes! Ever hear the phrase "crimes against humanity"? It refers to criminal governments... The concept of "crime" was not invented by politicians and government and it is rooted in morality. Thats what the "consent of the governed" refers to in the DoI... I must have the moral authority before I can consent to have government act on my behalf... I dont have the moral authority to decide what you can or cannot put in your own body.

It doesn't follow that because of this, you can choose any law and say it is flawed in the same way. The slave and race laws were immoral - they were wrong for a reason. The law is not a flawed concept in itself, you can't make direct analogies between nazis/slavery and drug prohibition without giving reasons as they are not directly comparable.

You said drug use is a crime because it's illegal... That means the state gets to define crimes, it doesn't. The Nazis and slavery make that point for me...

I don't think it is about moral authority alone. If it is about any one thing, it is about consequences. I don't care what you put in your body, it is the consequences of what you put in your body that concern me.

You dont have the moral authority to decide what everyone else ingests. Now in my scenario, somebody with pot sells it to me for cash. You enter the picture with armed men to stop us. You are responsible for the violence that ensues, you are responsible for "the consequences" - dont blame us for being violent or call us criminals. But if you're gonna accuse people, dont use some "Minority Report" BS as your "justification". Thats the argument of racists, "they" commit more crime. At least most racists dont argue for jailing the undesirables

I didn't hand politicians the power to regulate these things - but we live in a democracy; compromise is essential to democracy and so is respect for the laws that are passed by the legitimate authorities.

You support the politicians having this power, you advocate for it. Dont hide behind "democracy", and Ayn Rand was not an advocate of your brand of democracy.

If you don't like them, challenge them through legal and political means - it's a free country. You don't have the right to break the laws of a democracy unless it is an emergency situation.

Free country? You just argued for taking away our freedom!

In the overall drug market, there are multiple stages of production, shipping, finance and so on. Criminologists and police specialists have identified the groups behind these processes and know they are very violent and dangerous. So I stick to my point - buying drugs is simply not ethical, although you can continue to evade that point if you don't want to recognise it.

Somebody with pot sells it to me for cash. YOU enter the picture with armed men to threaten our lives because you dont like pot. Drug users didn't create drug cartels, you did that with a law you say makes us safer. Facts be damned, you dont even care if the law has made us less safe. I dont really care either, I support gun rights even though we might be safer without so many guns. And while I know booze is the worst of all the drugs wrt "societal" problems, trying to stop people from drinking was nearly as disastrous as our modern drug wars.

You are being somewhat rhetorical, and you are also switching the blame back onto the government. It is the responsibility of the government to provide security and police dangerous behaviours.

The job of government is to help us protect our rights - life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. You've used the state to take away these rights and you appear to be a fan of Ayn Rand. That does not compute

When geurillas or terrorists engage in prolonged bombing campaigns, they try to blame the government for failing to provide security. That is what drug-takers are doing - creating a dangerous state by their own choice of actions and then smugly blaming the police and government so they can force a climbdown. They're not fooling anyone.

I'd get banned for saying what I think of that nonsense, but drug users aint taking drugs so they can blame the state for the mess created by prohibition laws. Thats insane! And thats truly ironic, you in charge of security scares the hell out of me. Who will protect us from you? So, you're admitting now that prohibition comes with more crime? More danger? What was your argument again? Safety?

Such freedom doesn't exist.

Sure it does, it just doesn't exist when you get to decide what everyone else ingests.

 

[GenMarshall]

Thats not legalization, civg, you misunderstand the meaning there. Pot can be decriminalized (meaning you wont go to jail for possessing small amounts - but you will still pay a fine) and still be illegal.

I did not misunderstood anything square .

Whats this 'us' stuff?

It's us verses the squares who dont want us to enjoy the pleasures of relaxing pot

Still quite possibly a reality...especially where you live since it hasnt even been decriminalized there yet.

If you cant to the time, dont do the crime, civg!!!

Sorry, but I am gonna smoke it to my hearts delight and not going to do the time. Smoking it should not be a crime. Should we make tobacco and booze consumption illegal?

Again, it's the conservative mindset that fear the "OH NO!!! POT IS BAD FOR YOU" and want to criminalize it. God forbid pot threatens your tobacco and cigarette sales. Theres nothing bad about smoking the pot, there are no effects to it whatsoever. The Link Between Marijuana and Schizophrenia is just a scare tactic conservative squares love to use.

 

[Berzerker]

Odd thing about molehills is that you can still put your foot in one and break an ankle.

I recommend ice, then heat for the ankle Mobby. Get better soon, see a doc


I'd bet prohibition has created more jobs for kids over the last 25 years than McDonalds

 

[MobBoss]

I did not misunderstood anything square .

Uhm.

Yes. You did. Quite simply, Pot is still illegal even though it is decriminalized.

It's us verses the squares who dont want us to enjoy the pleasures of relaxing pot

Dude.....the term 'square' went out more than a few decades ago. You even using it is more than a bit embarassing to be honest.

Sorry, but I am gonna smoke it to my hearts delight and not going to do the time. Smoking it should not be a crime. Should we make tobacco and booze consumption illegal?

How do you afford it? Where do you smoke it? Arent you concerned it could turn up on an employment drug screen as part of applying for a job?

Again, it's the conservative mindset that fear the "OH NO!!! POT IS BAD FOR YOU" and want to criminalize it. God forbid pot threatens your tobacco and cigarette sales.

Again, the status quo federally is that it will remain crminalized. Some states may have eased up on that, but you need to reconile the simple fact that it remains illegal.

I'd bet prohibition has created more jobs for kids over the last 25 years than McDonalds

This hasnt been prohibition.

And I would be willing to take that bet.