Major Cannabis Investigations.
|Post Reply||Page 12>|
Joined: 13 June 2003
Topic: Major Cannabis Investigations.
Posted: 06 August 2007 at 14:18
Now that The Lancet has published a spurious 'meta study' that claims cannabis is definitely 'linked' to mental illness, I thought it might be instructive to look back at the last 100 years of cannabis research.
The meta-study in The Lancet is a statistical comparison of recent studies. The list below is not a statistical analysis, but simply compares 100 years of exhaustive research to the new (ahem) data. Makes for interesting reading
NB - The list does not include two recent Lancet studies (1995 and 1999?) that found no link between cannabis and mental illness. For some reason, these important findings did not receive nearly so much attention as most recent one. Go figure...
This list was summarised from the document at:
MAJOR CANNABIS INVESTIGATIONS
INDIAN HEMP DRUGS COMMISSION (1894)
The commission has come to the conclusion that moderate use of hemp drugs is practically attended by no evil results at all.
The influence of [marihuana]... has apparently been greatly exaggerated...There is no evidence ... that it has any appreciably deleterious influence on the individual using it.
CANAL ZONE STUDY (1929)
... use of the drug is not widespread and ... its effects upon military efficiency and upon discipline are not great.
CANAL ZONE STUDY (1931)
No link was found between cannabis use and any delinquency or morale problems.
There [is] no direct relationship between the commission of crimes of violence and marihuana ... and marihuana itself has no specific stimulant effect in regard to sexual desires. The use of marihuana does not lead to morphine or cocaine or heroin addiction.
BRITISH ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON DRUG DEPENDENCE (Wooton Report 1969)
We think that the dangers of [marihuana] use as commonly accepted in the past ... have been overstated ... There is no evidence that in Western society serious physical dangers are directly associated with the smoking of cannabis ... The association in legislation of cannabis and heroin ... is inappropriate and new legislation to deal specifically and separately with cannabis ... should be introduced as soon as possible ... Possession of a small amount of cannabis ... should not be punished by imprisonment ... Sale or supply of cannabis should be punishable ... with a fine not exceeding £100, or imprisonment for a term not exceeding four months.
CANADIAN GOVERNMENT The Non-Medical Use of Drugs (1970)
Physical dependence to cannabis has not been demonstrated and it would appear that there are normally no adverse physiological effects ... occurring with abstinence from the drug, even in regular users .... Since cannabis is clearly not a narcotic we recommend that the control of cannabis be removed from the Narcotic Control Act .... The Commission is of the opinion that no one should be liable to imprisonment for simple possession.
In summary, at typical doses of cannabis use, few acute physiological effects have been detected. Those which have been identified generally seem to have little clinical significance. Even at relatively high doses, few substantial physiological changes occur.
NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MARIHUANA AND DRUG ABUSE (1972)
A large amount of research has been performed on man and animals regarding the immediate effect of marijuana on bodily processes. No conclusive evidence exists of any physical damage, disturbances of bodily processes or proven human fatalities attributable solely to even very high doses of marijuana.
These few consistently observed transient effects on the bodily function seem to suggest that marijuana is a rather unexciting compound of negligible immediate toxicity at the doses usually consumed in this country. The substance is predominantly a psychoactive drug. The feelings and state of consciousness described by the intoxicated seem to be far more interesting than the objective state noted by an observer.
[In a study of very heavy marijuana use in Jamaica, no] significant physical or mental abnormalities could be attributed to marijuana use, according to an evaluation of medical history, complete physical examination, chest x-ray, electrocardiogram, blood cell and chemistry tests, lung, liver or kidney function tests, selected hormone evaluation, and psychological testing. There was no evidence to indicate that the drug as commonly used was responsible for producing birth defects in offspring of users.
There is little proven danger of physical or psychological harm from the experimental or intermittent use of natural preparations of cannabis .... Existing social and legal policy is out of proportion to the individual and social harm engendered by the drug .... Marihuana's relative potential for harm to the vast majority of individual users and its actual impact on society does not justify a social policy designed to seek out and firmly punish those who use it.
WERKGROEP VERDOVENDE MIDDELEN - Background and Risks of Drug Use, (1972)
Cannabis does not produce tolerance or physical dependence. The physiological effects of the use of cannabis are of a relatively harmless nature ... The current law does not respect the fact that the risks of the use of cannabis cannot be equaled to the risks of the use of substances that are pharmacologically much more potent ... This hurts the credibility of the drug law, and the prevention efforts based on the law are made untrustworthy.
"the first intensive,
multidisciplinary study of cannabis use and users to be published." The
study examined the legislation, ethnohistory, and social complex of ganja, and
the acute effects of smoking in a natural setting. The subjects were thirty males who had smoked an average of seven
marijuana cigarettes of relatively high potency each day for an average of
seventeen years, and thirty controls. Clinical studies evaluated
respiratory function and hematology, electroencephalography, and psychiatric
condition. Finally, psychological assessments were made of the subjects. The
results of the study support the findings of the National and Canadian
Commissions; no significant physiological or psychological differences were
found between long-term smokers and non-smokers, there was no evidence of
physical dependency (addiction), severe overdose reactions, insanity, cerebral
atrophy, brain damage, personality deterioration, or "amotivational
While Americans are concerned with the alleged
"amotivational" and drug-escalation effects of marihuana, ganja in
This study indicates that there is little correlation between use of ganja and crime, except insofar as the possession and cultivation of ganja are technically crimes. There were no indications of organic brain damage or chromosome damage among the subjects and no significant clinical (psychiatric, psychological or medical) differences between the smokers and controls....
Despite its illegality, ganja use is pervasive, and
duration and frequency are very high; it is smoked over a longer period in
greater quantities with greater THC potency than in the
REPORT OF DOMESTIC COUNCIL DRUG ABUSE TASK FORCE - "White Paper on Drug Abuse" 1975 (this is the report that Nixon threw in the garbage, I think)
The report urged that marijuana possession
offenses be "de-emphasized" because they posed the least risk of harm
to the individual and to society of the drugs commonly used in the
Additional studies have been published which indicate that even very heavy use of cannabis over long periods of time does not have deleterious physiological or psychological effects. See, e.g., Mendelson, Behavioral and Biological Concomitants of Chronic Marihuana Use (U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command - 1974) [released to public in November 1975] (finding no significant adverse effects on physiological, cognitive or neurological functioning following chronic marijuana smoking, including no changes in testosterone levels following chronic marijuana smoking).
THE GREEK STUDY (1976) Hashish, A Study of Long-Term Use,
In a 1975 study of hashish smokers in
The main finding of the study, which was
sponsored by the
SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL
One of the most striking facts concerning cannabis is that its acute toxicity is low compared with that of any other drugs... No major health effects have manifested themselves in the community ... Legal controls [should] not [be] of such a nature as to...cause more social damage than use of the drug ... Cannabis legislation should be enacted that recognises the significant differences between ... narcotics and cannabis in their health effects ... Possession of marihuana for personal use should no longer be a criminal offence.
In 1971, the National Institutes of Health
The NIH refused to accept the final report for publication and demanded that it be rewritten three times. Still not satisfied, they had it rewritten again by another editor and ultimately printed only 300 copies. A copy of the original version was leaked to the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
Committee recommended the immediate decriminalization of marijuana, and in the long run, its regulation and taxation. The Committee found no clear evidence that marijuana use leads to any long-term health consequences.
Committee concluded that no causal relationship had been established between marijuana use and undesirable behavior.
The potential effects on the development of adolescents, the Committee's primary concern, are not at issue because the right advocated herein applies strictly to adults.
In the final analysis, any potential danger associated with marijuana use was not seen as serious enough to override the factors weighing in favor of decriminalization.
Over the past forty years, marijuana has been accused of causing an array of anti-social effects including ... provoking crime and violence,.. leading to heroin addiction,.. and destroying the American work ethic in young people. [These] beliefs ... have not been substantiated by scientific evidence...The advantages of a policy of regulation include ... the savings in economic and social costs of law enforcement ..., better controls over the quality and safety of the product, and, possibly, increased credibility of warnings about risks ... persuasion rather than prosecution ... [enforcement] on the edge of constitutional limitations ... [will foster] disrespect for all law and the system in general.
THE EXPERT GROUP Report on Effects of Cannabis Use, (1982)
...there is insufficient evidence to enable us to reach incontestable conclusions as to the effects on the human body of the use of cannabis... There is evidence to suggest that the therapeutic use of cannabis or of substances derived from it for the treatment of certain medical conditions may, after further research, prove to be beneficial.
THE COPTIC STUDY - (1983)
In 1981, two UCLA psychologists, Drs.
Ungerleider and Schaeffer, tested the physical and mental health of ten members
of the Jamaica-based Ethiopian Zion Coptic Church. The church, which has
official recognition from governments in
The study showed absolutely no brain differences between the subjects and non-smokers - nor did it confirm the increase in IQs claimed by the Coptics.
MARIJUANA RESCHEDULING PETITION (1988)
Various agencies petitioned to have marijuana reclassified from a Schedule I to a Schedule II substance under the Controlled Substance Act. In addition to finding that there were valid and accepted medical uses for marijuana, and recommending that marijuana be reclassified so that it might be available by prescription, Judge Young made the following findings of fact:
4. Nearly all medicines have toxic, potentially lethal effects. But marijuana is not such a substance. There is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented cannabis-induced fatality.
5. This is a remarkable statement. First, the record on marijuana encompasses 5,000 years of human experience. Second, marijuana is now used daily by enormous numbers of people throughout the world. Estimates suggest that from twenty million to fifty million Americans routinely, albeit illegally, smoke marijuana without the benefit of medical supervision. Yet, despite this long history of use and the extraordinarily high numbers of social smokers, there are simply no credible medical reports to suggest that consuming marijuana has caused a single death
6. By contrast, aspirin, a commonly used, over-the-counter medicine, caused hundreds of deaths each year.
7. Drugs used in medicine are routinely given what is called an LD-50. The LD-50 rating indicates at what dosage fifty percent of test animals receiving a drug will die as a result of drug induced toxicity. A number of researches have attempted to determine marijuana's LD-50 rating in test animals, without success. Simply stated, researches have been unable to give animals enough marijuana to induce death.
15. In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume. For example, eating ten raw potatoes can result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible to eat enough marijuana to induce death.
16. Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care.
Id at 56-59.
AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL DRUG STRATEGY COMMITTEE (1994)
Australia experiences more harm ... from maintaining cannabis prohibition policy than it experiences from the use of the drug ... We conclude that cannabis law reform is required in this country...Any social policy should be reviewed when there is reason to believe that the costs of administering it outweigh the harms reduced.
MINISTRY OF HEALTH, WELFARE AND SPORT
Cannabis is not very physically toxic ...Everything that we now know...leads to the conclusion that the risks of cannabis use cannot ... be described as 'unacceptable'...It has been demonstrated that the more or less free sale of ... [marihuana] for personal use in the Netherlands has not given rise to levels of use significantly higher than in countries which pursue a highly repressive policy ... Dutch policy on drugs over the last twenty years...can be considered to have been successful.
The potential therapeutic value of cannabinoids is extremely broad... Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs, primarily THC, for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation...The psychological effects of cannabinoids, such as anxiety reduction, sedation, and euphoria can influence their potential therapeutic value... Marijuana plants have been used since antiquity for both herbal medication and intoxication...
In general population, marijuana use is not associated with increased mortality. There is no conclusive evidence that marijuana causes cancer in humans, including cancers usually related to tobacco use ... the adverse effects of marijuana use are within the range tolerated for other medications...Few marijuana users develop dependence...[are] less likely to do so than users of other drugs (including alcohol and nicotine) and marijuana dependence...[is] less severe than dependence on other drugs...Marijuana and THC withdrawal...is mild and subtle compared with the profound physical syndrome of alcohol or heroin withdrawal....
Cannabinoids are an interesting group of compounds with potentially far-reaching therapeutic applications ... but the road to market...is expensive ... and studded with scientific, regulatory, and commercial obstacles. There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect...Instead, the legal status of marijuana makes it a gateway drug.
The U.S. Government's response to the overwhelming evidence from all the studies attesting to the beneficial qualities of cannabis is typified by remarks made by James O. Mason, head of the U.S. Public Health Service.
In early June 1991, the Deputy Director of National Drug Control Policy, Herbert D. Kleber, assured a national television audience that anyone with a legitimate medical need for cannabis would be able to obtain a permit. A few weeks later, however, Mason announced that the program would be suspended because it undercut the Bush administration's "War on Drugs":
If it is perceived that the Public Health Service is going around giving marihuana to folks, there would be a perception that this stuff can't be so bad. It gives a bad signal. I don't mind helping these people ... but there is not a shred of evidence that smoking marihuana assists a person with AIDS.
The program was discontinued in March 1992,
and 28 patients whose applications had already been approved were denied the
promised relief. The few patients who were already receiving legal cannabis
continued to be supplied with the drug. As of 1996, only eight people are
allowed what is for all others a forbidden medicine. In spite of the latest study,
Cannabis is undoubtedly one of the most thoroughly studied psychoactive substances known to man and certainly has the longest history of use, with the possible exception of alcohol. In thousands of years of use by millions of people, it has proven to be relatively harmless as compared to even the most benign-seeming drugs and has never been shown to cause even a single death.
© Copyright WPT 2002
Joined: 30 May 2007
Location: United Kingdom
|Quote Reply Posted: 07 September 2007 at 19:50|
i think alot of the effects from using marijuana (smoking/ingesting/external applications) greatly differ from person to person and these statements of cannabis being the key to mental illness is in my opinion testament to the media flexing there muscles because they can, dont under estimate the powerful and influential medium that is the media, they could provide proof that eating 5 portions of fruit and veg a day can make you go blind, infertile and want to bite off your own toes if they wanted...and there audience would be very open to absorb such crap too.
the media in this country likes to pigeon hole absolutely everything (including humans)
if heroin can be used in medicine and even synthesised along with cocain (both primarily within the healthcare and dentistry professions) then why cant cannabis?
all three are plant derived and serve a pupose
there are alot of things in life that can be benificial in moderation that in excess are damaging, alot of which can be visual and aural, like if you drink too many stella you might want to punch someone in the face or if you smoke too much you might not be able to run the london marathon....surely alot of it has to do with the individual seeing, hearing and experimenting? the persons complete identity, life influences etc cannot ever be replicated and are completely unique?
while this is going on...fake sugar, fake colouring, fake flavouring, synthetic depression tablets/drugs and genetically modified food ingredients are ok to be manufactured ,sold to kids and reep vast amounts of revinue with little research and regard to future consequences!
Joined: 26 August 2007
Location: United Kingdom
|Quote Reply Posted: 08 September 2007 at 02:24|
hear hear, i agree whole heartedly with what you say dan, long life t ya
Sensi Advanced Grower
Joined: 16 December 2006
|Quote Reply Posted: 08 September 2007 at 03:14|
oh thanks ganja missed it for some month, eh .?
very intresting reading,but I where are the studys from this century ? ... must be its copyrighted only two years into the 21th cent
gd smoke !
1 TIME FOR YOUR MIND, BODY AND SOUL !
Joined: 06 September 2007
|Quote Reply Posted: 01 October 2007 at 17:37|
Let's just see if im right. This is good, huh?
The results are prooving that the bieffects when using marijuana has been very exadurated (something we already knew).
If it's like that, why don't countries pay any attention what so ever? :S
Sensi Advanced Grower
Joined: 27 June 2007
|Quote Reply Posted: 20 January 2009 at 19:42|
Below is a comment from a friend of a friend. I e mailed him a copy of what ganja put up.
I made sure that i mentioned this was taken from a forum and titled it "an interesting read"
For the life of me i'm not quite sure what he's getting at.
'Interesting forward, we could get a good discussion going on this? The website http://www.
Anyhow the conclusions of the Moore et al. study which appeared in the Lancet did stretch their actual results. At the end of the day the findings of a meta analysis can, and frequently are, flavored by the authors exclusion criteria and at the end of the day aren't a substitute for experimental results. As stated by Merete Nordentoft in the comments section of the Lancet, "The ultimate proof of a causal relation would be a large-scale placebo-controlled randomised trial of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (the principal psychoactive component of cannabis) exposure in healthy young people with long-term follow-up..."
The 1995 Lancet editorial began with the since much-quoted words: "The smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health." In this issue (2007) they conceded that "Research published since 1995, including Moore's systematic review in this issue, leads us now to conclude that cannabis use could increase the risk of psychotic illness..." Still a hazy issue really so.
At the below blog there's a detailed argument posted (with lots of good pubmed links to articles) about why cannabis is not congenial to the mental health of many of its users. http://andrewsullivan.
Anyhow have a look through the blog and Lancet articles / study, attached. Comments?'
Does anyone have any comments suggestions?
"It is possible that a certain amount of brain damage is of therapeutic value."
Dr Paul Hoch
Joined: 19 June 2011
|Quote Reply Posted: 27 June 2011 at 12:57|
Nice investgation You did. Your my kinda nigga!!! Yeah!!!
Martin Luther King:"All men are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny"
Joined: 24 June 2011
Location: Hell, Latin A.
|Quote Reply Posted: 07 July 2011 at 05:44|
that don't mean everybody should smoke though
I know some fellows that turn a little edgy and shady with a little green touch....
Joined: 17 January 2012
|Quote Reply Posted: 27 February 2012 at 21:38|
I love smoking skunk and have grown it for many years, smoking the strongest strains can effect you a little.mainly if you already have any insecurities or have any mental health issues, which I don't...Anyone with such like conditions can still enjoy smoking,they should just be aware.I have suffered my self from the FEAR at times, and found having smoked for the last 27years on a daily basis that Sativa is a much more preferable smoke for me.The Indica high can leave you feeling a little antisocial and cagey so try something else with a different cross percentage.I have just tried to find the right strains that work for me.It works!
Much respect to all,and the connoisseurs who support the weeds existence to us all.
Sensi Advanced Grower
Joined: 14 September 2010
Location: pfst Emlichheim
|Quote Reply Posted: 30 August 2012 at 11:06|
now there is a new zealand report... to stupid for words actualy..
exactly the opposit conclusions of how it realy works.
Its a scientific report which means a logic report.
logic means :
1 and 1 = 2 AND -1 and -1 = -2
so logic has 2 faces true and untrue
every conclusion has 2 possibilities.
i wrote before about darwin:
apes come from humans that is ther same true as humans came from apes.
Can you imagine if the NZ report would conclude that you get more clever from smoking weed????
so they turned the conclusion around and the government is satisfied with the conclusion and the scientist gets money for a new investigation, scientific research.
so logic is like a jojo, you can conclude what you want and need.
cocacola is healty etc. its all possible with logic.
1 and 1 =2 and the opposit is true too
which one is common to say this or the opposit is true?
Scientist usualy take the one that makes most money..
mainly the most money for the firm or govermendt that pays the receipt of the investigation.
And if you think more and more about this logic science..wich is much younger than our favorit plant,
you start to see that logic chooses always the result that is against nature.
i believe in nature , i stand above logic science. logic is a part of philosophy science and again with philosophy you can go al the way you want, its for every person different. my philosofy about life is different than yours! Always !
1 coincedence: love can make people have the same thoughts, and money too.
Thats why i could if i would earn a $100000 on this site!
i wrote before there is nothing pure in this world!
so young people have a lower iq , they say, its not true they have much more
brains than not smokers, the problem is the government cant use clever children in there system, saying you get more stupid from smoking the holy plant is the most stupid thing i have heard about the plant.
The plant can be evil too..
the plant decides how it will work out, for every person in a different way!
ugh i have spoken again, ugh,ugh.
Some say friends do not exist, we cant make words for things that do not exist...
Willie van het Kerkhof, Groningen NL
|Post Reply||Page 12>|
|Forum Jump||Forum Permissions
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You can vote in polls in this forum