World News

I worked inpatient psych for a long time, and can tell you first-hand the link between psychosis and cannabis is real. No, this does not mean "if you smoke weed you're going to get psychotic!" What it does mean is that if you're someone with a genetic predisposition for schizophrenia (e.g. you have a known family history) weed is a potential trigger for a psychotic episode. If someone has already developed schizophrenia, smoking weed can make their symptoms worse and more difficult to manage with medications.

80% of people coming through the psych hospital, whatever, I don't care if you smoke weed. Honestly, I wish people would smoke weed rather than use meth, K2, or a bunch of other drugs that fuck people up. But for that subset of people prone to psychotic episodes, the conversation centers around "some people can smoke weed and be fine, and you are not one of those people."

The most common ages for men to develop first episode psychosis are 18-25, and while it's dumb that this article focuses on teenagers, the risk in that age group is genuinely higher. This article really is dumb overall and does not explain any of this well

This article blows. “Genetically modifying” cannabis for higher THC content? You mean breeding, like every other plant grown for consumption?

he had had persistent delusions for more than six months. Sam was fully convinced that the government was following him and constantly surveilling him

That's not a delusion tho.

You know, I'm not really interested in a long anecdote about Sam and his father. It doesn't add any real information.
I had hoped to read about the actual evidence.

The war on drugs has made research into cannabis difficult and compared to alcohol and tobacco, we are practically blind. Legalization has changed this and we should pay attention.

The only thing to match the propaganda of the drug war is the CBD cure-all craze. I think that it's wise to do some basic research so that one day we can have an informed opinion rather than a knee jerk reaction.

As a someone who studied biology: at an early age, you don't want more neuroplasticity. You already have enough. More may do you harm, and cannabis gives more, so cannabis may do you harm.

When you're 70 and your neural networks are set in stone, do consider what could safely increase neuroplasticity. But whatever you consume, don't consume it by inhaling smoke. :)

He “dabbled” with other substances as well (Xanax, Ecstasy)

Yeah sure it's cannabis.... I have no words.

The link between diabetics and insulin is real

Teens have access to vastly more potent cannabis than their parents had at their age

Oh FFS. I've been hearing this same bullshit for the last 25 years and it's still irrational Reefer Madness conservative fearmongering.

So what? If anything, more potent weed is less harmful because you are putting a smaller amount of burned plant material into your lungs to get the same effect.

It's not like people just... consume one marijuana and however high that gets you, that's what you're going with today. No, you're going to continue smoking until you get sufficiently stoned and then stop and put it out.

It doesn't take long for anyone to figure out how high is too high and how much it takes to get there, and plan accordingly.

It might be a vape pen with 92% THC hash oil in it so you take a couple of sippy little puffs and get mildly buzzed and you're fine with that. Or conversely you can pack up a handful of that leafy brown prohibition-era crap and do gravity bongs until you cough your lungs out, and get a lot higher, because that was your goal.

They sell those oil-soaked kif-encrusted joints here. You do not want to finish one in one sitting. The point of these isn't to get insanely baked, it's that one good hit will do it and you can put it out and save it in the glass jar it came in.

As others have explained already- if you have the kind of brain prone to psychosis, weed is likely to push you over the edge- and that's likely to happen when you're a teenager, because lots of people try it at that age- but something else would have triggered it a few years later. And yes it's just universally worse for adolescent brains. It is already illegal, everywhere it's legal, for people under 21, which is reasonable. But parents need to parent.

The idea that we can and should protect the kids who are predisposed to go schizo by keeping the available cannabis weak enough that no one can smoke enough of it to ever get really high is just absurd when you phrase it that way but that's exactly what anyone pushing this "It's so much more potent now!" pearl-cluching FUD is trying to sell you.

For me it’s real simple: I talk to my kids about drug use and its negative impact on their growing minds and bodies. Like any growing organism, they need good food, fresh air, plenty of water, and exercise. Smoking, drinking, and drugs do not provide any of that, and all I ask of them is to wait until they are older.

Wow they fail basic science. Correlation does not equal causation. More gateway drug scare in its modern form.

I'm wondering about dosage here, really. As a kid, I smoked weed like maybe once a week but I knew kids who were constantly high all day, every day. We called them "permafried" and some even self-identified that way as a matter of pride.

Hopefully, with further study and research, we can get more information about the actual risk to teens with a variety of usage patterns. Then it's a matter of education so that they're aware of the risk before they're presented with the choice to smoke.

This shouldn’t be controversial. It’s been known for about a decade now if not longer.

Lmfao, what if we started smoking the green because of low grade psychosis? Chicken or egg that.

Remember not all studies on the health effects of substance use are there to advocate that the substance be made illegal. Smoking as a example is still around and there are countless studies available to the public to make informed decisions.

Substance use should be up to the individual like all choices that can effect you directly, "my body my choice" so to say. All individuals should have access to all knowledge available freely and without prejudice.

Studies on cannabis use becoming more common should be seen as a good thing, as cannabis use has become less taboo and thus easier to study without researcher receiving backlash.

Now you may disagree with some studies, and that is your right. But to advocate against studies related to the substance IMO at least is hypocritical, as it advocates against the very thing that made the substance legal.

I am a non-smoker and have not tried cannabis, but believe people should have the freedom to choose