Monday, January 30, 2017

Cannabis - Up Side, Down Side

It's good to face reality whatever that may be. Good OR bad (as Bulletin of Atomic Scientists has recently pointed out). But this is an article that can be perceived only as bad, bad for the masses, as well as disingenuously good for anti-cannabis groups. What we need is more research, more information. Legalization, not continued abuse. Healthcare, not prison.

This is a time and a climate where we need things like cannabis. Not just for medical issues but also for recreational ones. It is far more gentle on one's system than alcohol, recreational drugs like cocaine, heroin and so on. As for people calling it a schedule one drug, or a gateway to harder drugs, that is pure ignorance and goes against what science shows and we are seeing. They are looking at personality issues there with people, not the actual cannabis itself.

We have a new president now in Pres. Trump. A capitalist and a businessman who has left a lot of damage in his wake in making more and more money. However if he truly is a capitalist and a businessman then cannabis should be legalized by the end of the year, nationally.

Certainly before he leaves office. Which as things are going from his actions, could be any day now. If he is who he says he is in being a capitalist and having such a great mind, nobody has one better, he claims. Then surely he can do anything. Even this.

I'd expect to see by the beginning of 2018, a new and thriving capitalism based, not criminal based, health based not judicially based industry. But we won't. That however is an argument for another time.

There is a new article is talking about people who over indulge on a daily basis, that is to say, actually abuse it, and does not refer to normal or even regular use of cannabis.

Conservative and anti Cannabis types are already gloaming onto this report in droves. It is their Godsend in the realm of anti Cannabis diatribe and potential legislation. They will take this out of context and use it inappropriately as always. Seeing the world as they do in black and white and not the measured grey that it is and how honest people, how adults would normally use information.

It's odd however that this result would be found as cannabis, unlike tobacco, is a vasodialator. Tobacco actually is a vasoconstrictant. Ever know someone who right after sex has to light up a cigarette? HAS to?. It's because in part sex releases chemicals to relax, but they are addicted to nicotine. So while they like the good feeling from the release in the culmination of sex, they crave that tension, that vasoconstrictive effect that nicotine induces. It also explains those anxious people who need to smoke cigarettes. They crave the familiar when really they need soemthing else. But that's the confusion of addiction.

Meaning overall anyway I suppose, that under this study tobacco would be potentially leading to Alzheimer's even more so, yet we haven't heard about that. But apparently not so. Well, kind of. Nicotine has some nasty side effects, and some good ones. However once the body breaks it down into cotinine ....

"In the case of Alzheimer's, cotinine may share nicotine's ability to improve attention and memory and at the same time reduce or halt disease progression. "One advantage of cotinine is that it could be used long-term with little concern about serious side effects and substance abuse."

Who knew?

"Addiction" is a medical term indicating a physical addition. Cannabis is not physically addictive but can be psychologically addictive. That however is a mental and not physiological defect.

About that..."Marijuana use disorder is a new term introduced by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) used by psychiatrists and mental health professionals for diagnostic criteria."
The High Times article has a list of eleven elements for the criteria of diagnosing substance use disorders.

Again, the article states (and I'm not disputing this, but it's odd) that:
"Those diagnosed with cannabis use disorder showed a significant reduction in brain blood flow in almost every region."

I think that requires more investigation because of the way Cannabis works on the brain. It doesn't make sense. If this was a conservative anti cannabis article I would call bull on this. As the article itself indicates, this is odd indeed:

"More research will have to be conducted to corroborate this claim. But it’s reasonable that someone who only lights up occasionally won’t have such an issue. This study conflicts with a 2014 preclinical trial, also published in the Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease. There, tiny doses of marijuana’s active ingredient, delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) had neuroprotective qualities. It helped ward off Alzheimer’s by destroying beta amyloid proteins which are what cause the disease. So in the end, it may be an issue of dosage. A little is okay, but too much is damaging. But only more studies can tell us for sure."

There does seem to be some support for this report's contentions:
Which says:

"Summary - Cardiovascular effects of Cannabis:

"Cannabis increases heart rate in na•ve users although tolerance develops to this effect.

"Cannabinoids can also reduce blood pressure via arteriollar dilatation in a variety of tissues, although the effect on blood flow varies at a local level, with some organs or brain regions experiencing vasoconstriction, others vasodilation.

"In the withdrawal phase following cessation of chronic use, cerebral blood flow may be significantly reduced.

"Cannabis use has been implicated as a causative factor in a small number of patients suffering strokes or transient ischaemic attacks, and may represent a risk factor to susceptible individuals.

"However cannabinoids, in particular CB1-receptor agonists, have been shown to protect against nerve cell death following stroke, and dexanabinol at an advanced stage of the licensing process as a drug to be administered to victims of stroke or closed-head injuries to minimise the long-term brain damage caused by such events, and to improve survival and recovery prospects."

Conservatives and anti Cannabis types are gloaming onto this report in droves. It is their Godsend in the realm of anti Cannabis legislation. They will take this out of context and use it inappropriately. Seeing the world as they do in black and white and not the measured grey it is.

More to come, I'm sure.

No comments:

Post a Comment