MaxedOutMama
Monday, March 28, 2005
I Wonder
This article in New Scientist claims that various studies have shown that smoking too much marijuana too soon increases your chances of mental problems later. Some of the studies on which this is based seem awfully small to me, but I'm no scientist.
However, one is a large Swedish study published in 1987 which tracked over 50,000 young men who did service in the Swedish army. That study found that men who had smoked cannabis before being called up were six times more likely to end up in the hospital with schizophrenia. The article also points out that establishing a correlation does not establish causation, but the studies have fueled suggestions to change the drug laws in Europe:
And then I have read various contentions that rates of severe mental illness are increasing and the timeframe for that increase correlated roughly to the timeframe for increased drug use:
However, one is a large Swedish study published in 1987 which tracked over 50,000 young men who did service in the Swedish army. That study found that men who had smoked cannabis before being called up were six times more likely to end up in the hospital with schizophrenia. The article also points out that establishing a correlation does not establish causation, but the studies have fueled suggestions to change the drug laws in Europe:
This message is already starting to filter out into society. In the Netherlands, the findings have fuelled a growing clamour for reform of the laws regulating drug use. In the UK, the mental-health charity Sane has called for the reclassification of cannabis to be reversed. And the British government recently acknowledged the link in its strongest terms yet, when it said in a press release that cannabis was an "important causal factor" in mental illness.I just want to close by saying how amusing I find it to have a close and correct scrutiny of the data here and have the scientific community not applying the same level of scrutiny to the claims of global warming. Comparing the wary and skeptical arguments over these studies and this data and comparing the attacks from the scientific community against those who have voiced skepticism about the environmentalist claims is very enlightening. Talk about a double standard!
But for some researchers, such pronouncements are premature. "I'm not convinced," says Les Iversen, professor of pharmacology at the University of Oxford and a member of the UK Home Office's Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. "I think the jury is still out on this one." “Despite a steep rise in cannabis use among teenagers over the past 30 years, there has been no rise in schizophrenia”
He points out that epidemiological studies are notoriously bad at proving cause and effect, in part because it is hard to identify all the confounding factors. Scientists are particularly wary of such research when the conclusions are based on small statistical differences - as in this case. In the New Zealand study, the number of people who had smoked dope on three occasions by the age of 15 was just 29, and only three went on to develop psychosis. "I can't help thinking that the conclusion is rather thin," says Iversen. "It makes you wonder. If they found another confounder, where would that leave them?" Van Os himself admits that his study does not eliminate all the confounding factors.
And then I have read various contentions that rates of severe mental illness are increasing and the timeframe for that increase correlated roughly to the timeframe for increased drug use:
Although comparisons of rates over time are fraught with diagnostic and other methodological pitfalls, the 12 to 19 per 1,000 rate contrasts sharply with prevalence surveys done in earlier years. For example, the 1958 Hollingshead and Redlich study of New Haven, Conn., one of the ECA study sites, reported a rate of 4.2 individuals who were being treated for schizophrenia and affective psychoses per 1,000 total population. Similarly, a census study of Baltimore, another ECA study site, found a rate of 7.1 individuals with psychosis or with psychotic traits, both treated and untreated, per 1,000 total population (Lemkau et al., 1942).I think a survey should be done of environmentalists to check how many of them smoked a lot of marijuana when young. This could explain much!
Comments:
<< Home
The existence of the notion of a link between long-term cannabis use and psychosis is not sufficient basis to assume that there exists any link at all.
Millennia of empirical and experiential evidence shows continued use of cannabis, and other psychoactive plants, throughout evolution and across every civilisation and culture known to man, without harm to self, or others.
Let us not forget the facts in favour of a myth for which scientific evidence does not exist.
Ant.
Anything that defies my sense of reason....
The Cannabis Psychosis Myth Explosion #1
The Cannabis Psychosis Myth Explosion #2
Post a Comment
Millennia of empirical and experiential evidence shows continued use of cannabis, and other psychoactive plants, throughout evolution and across every civilisation and culture known to man, without harm to self, or others.
Let us not forget the facts in favour of a myth for which scientific evidence does not exist.
Ant.
Anything that defies my sense of reason....
The Cannabis Psychosis Myth Explosion #1
The Cannabis Psychosis Myth Explosion #2
<< Home
