![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 29 to 53 of 94. Go back in thread:
Posted by dcruik518 on February 26, 2009, at 15:06:06
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by SLS on February 24, 2009, at 6:07:08
> I don't want to reproduce the whole debate here, but I have researched old Mary Jane, and she has the potential to precipitate psychosis in some individuals. There is also some question that it might accelerate the induction of schizophrenia.
>Yeah, and from what I just heard it seems like pot is a common trigger for depersonalization and derealization disorders, which can be devastating.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20090223/msgs/882661.html
~D
> That's all. If people want to debate the issue, I would recommend the Psycho-Babble archives or do some searches on Google and PubMed.
>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by detroitpistons on February 26, 2009, at 15:51:43
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by dcruik518 on February 26, 2009, at 15:06:06
Mmmmm, I think the psychosis thing is a bit of a stretch, to say the least. Though not impossible, this must be a very, very, VERY rare phenomenon. I think that somebody would only have psychosis related to marijuana use only if the psychosis was going to happen anyways. I'm sorry, I just don't see it. Pot can affect different people in different ways, but compared to a lot of other substances (some of which are prescribed to us), I think marijuana is relatively harmless. I'm just speaking from personal experience, research of my own, and a lot of observation of actual pot smokers...call it field work, if you will.
People said Syd Barrett was an "acid casualty." More realistically, he was probably prone to schizophrenia because of his genes, and perhaps the daily LSD use sped up the process or triggered the first psychosis, but we have no way of knowing. But LSD and marijuana aren't even comparable in that sense. I bring this up just as an example.
People with predispositions to different kinds of mental and emotional disorders are going to get abnormal effects from lots of different drugs. If you give adderall to someone with severe anxiety, guess what? It might not be suitable for that person. They may have a panic attack.
People with addictive personalities will probably smoke marijuana too much, and perhaps have some bad consequences. Almost anything used excessively is bad. It's true, a lot of people who smoke too much pot may become lazy/ listless, etc. But you know what? The people I've encountered who let that happen aren't exactly the most motivated to begin with, by their very nature.
None of this means that marijuana is inherently "bad" or "good." I don't think anyone can convince me that daily marijuana use is any worse than daily alcohol consumption...not gonna happen. Alcohol is way more destructive. As for occassional use, I'd say that 99.9% of the "once in a while" crowd has zero problems.
There are plenty of people who have absolutely zero negative reaction from smoking cannabis, and there are plenty of cancer and terminally ill patients who get a lot of benefit from it. At different points in my life, I've smoked marijuana on a regular basis. Not once have I ever experienced any kind of withdrawal or "discontinuation syndrome" when I stopped. To the contrary, if I miss an Effexor dose by 8 hours, I'm a complete mess. Marijuana can have a soothing, stabilizing effect for me. That's just me. Some people get good results and others don't. It's as simple as that.
The bottom line is that there are just too many variables involved to try to make judgments about marijuana, one way or the other.
> > I don't want to reproduce the whole debate here, but I have researched old Mary Jane, and she has the potential to precipitate psychosis in some individuals. There is also some question that it might accelerate the induction of schizophrenia.
> >
>
> Yeah, and from what I just heard it seems like pot is a common trigger for depersonalization and derealization disorders, which can be devastating.
>
> http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20090223/msgs/882661.html
>
> ~D
>
> > That's all. If people want to debate the issue, I would recommend the Psycho-Babble archives or do some searches on Google and PubMed.
> >
> > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
>
Posted by SLS on February 26, 2009, at 17:47:38
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » dcruik518, posted by detroitpistons on February 26, 2009, at 15:51:43
> I would recommend the Psycho-Babble archives or do some searches on Google and PubMed.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/
Use search keyword expression:
(marijuana OR cannabis) AND psychosis
- Scott
Posted by desolationrower on February 27, 2009, at 3:23:01
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by SLS on February 26, 2009, at 17:47:38
THC is pro-psychotic, cannabidiol is anti-psychotic. if you're prone to problems choose the right strain
-d/r
Posted by Garnet71 on February 27, 2009, at 23:34:07
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by desolationrower on February 27, 2009, at 3:23:01
I came across this article today and it seemed fitting to post. I'm NOT telling me son about it though..lol
"Two new studies suggest that red wine and marijuana may help to prevent or slow Alzheimers disease and other age-related memory loss.
An article first published at miller-mccune.com on November 21, 2008, points out that at the November, 2008 meeting of the Society of Neuroscience in Washington, D.C., Ohio State University researchers reported that THC, the main psychoactive substance in the cannabis plant, may lower inflammation in the brain, and even stimulate formation of new brain cells.
And in the Nov. 21, 2008, issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry, neurologist David Teplow of the University of California, Los Angeles reported that naturally occurring components of red wine called polyphenols can block the formation of proteins that build the toxic plaques thought to destroy brain cells. In addition, these substances can reduce the toxicity of existing plaques. Both actions can slow memory loss.
Neither of these findings surprises me. That marijuana has medical efficacy against a variety of conditions is firmly established scientifically, and the health benefits of moderate red wine consumption are also becoming clearer with each passing year. As of November, 2008, 15 states had laws with provisions for medical marijuana on the books, and I hope more states enact enlightened policies in this regard. In the meantime, if you enjoy an occasional glass of red wine, continue to do so as part of an overall healthy diet."
http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/WBL02129/Red-Wine-and-Marijuana-against-Alzheimers.html
Posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 6:26:28
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by Garnet71 on February 27, 2009, at 23:34:07
I wish they had bothered to identify the studies they were using as a platform to declare the contentions as fact. Only two studies? Firmly established?
I don't think so.
I've watched some of my best friends become dullards without memory due to chronic use of the stuff. There's a reason we called them "burn-outs".
***************************************************
- Scott
Posted by detroitpistons on February 28, 2009, at 10:44:46
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » Garnet71, posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 6:26:28
Yeah, I don't see how marijuana can help to improve memory, but I guess anything's possible. Until I see lots more studies, I won't be too convinced. However, they used to (and some still do) say marijuana kills brain cells. I don't buy that. There's no credible evidence for it.
During the times that I have used marijuana heavily, I have to admit that my short term memory seemed to be affected a bit, but nothing dramatic.
I remember being "busted" in college once because we were smoking in our dorm room. I had to go through all this crap in order to get them off my back. I remember having to have a conversation with one of the graduate assistants in our dorm. He was telling me how I was destroying my life and yada, yada, yada. Then I showed him my grades and informed him that I was pulling pretty much all 4.0's and he shut up. It was quite hilarious. You should have seen him flounder.
> I wish they had bothered to identify the studies they were using as a platform to declare the contentions as fact. Only two studies? Firmly established?
>
> I don't think so.
>
> I've watched some of my best friends become dullards without memory due to chronic use of the stuff. There's a reason we called them "burn-outs".
>
> ***************************************************
>
> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?CMD=search&DB=pubmed&form=4&term=(cannabis+OR+marijuana)+AND+chronic+AND+memory&dispmax=100
>
>
> - Scott
Posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 11:01:32
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » Garnet71, posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 6:26:28
Well the article came from Dr. Weil's website, which reports most things superficially, but I agree that yes, even for short articles the particluar study could be easily referenced.
I tell my son about the burnout effect all the time and it fortunately has sunk in. Of course to a teen male brain I was another mother who didn't 'know anything'. Now that he is older, he is more influenced by my convictions. Of course, over 50% of ADDers self-medicate, so I'm really not surprised for his liking the drug's effects.
Maybe people in the study were more occaisonal users? I don't think it would hurt anyone to use it a few times a year, and it could be greatly benefial to those with chronic diseases and cancer. For those with serious illnesses--I am totally convinced the benefits outweight the costs in terms of side effects. Thre are side effects from conventional medications that are far worse than what you'd get from marijuana. I think cannibus is much safer than a lot of pharmaceutical drugs and shouldn't be demonized.
But for chronic recreational users, it does take away one's motivation, perhaps the burnout effect you were referring to Scott. I haven't kept in touch with any chronic/long-time cannibus users that I used to know to have to opportunity to see if that was reversed when they quit.
Posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 11:04:35
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » SLS, posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 11:01:32
> I haven't kept in touch with any chronic/long-time cannibus users that I used to know to have to opportunity to see if that was reversed when they quit.
That's a good point.
- Scott
Posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 11:10:24
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 11:04:35
It is not the point of my posting here to take out of the hands of people their marijuana. I do agree that cannabinoids have medicinal value. However, like all drugs, one should be as informed as possible of the possible effects of marijuana THC, both good and bad, so that one can make an informed decision.
- Scott
Posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 11:18:18
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 11:10:24
Scott, I see where you are coming from. I hope you didn't think I meant you when I said 'demonizing cannibus'. I meant some institutions that give no credit for it in terms of medicinal use.
Posted by detroitpistons on February 28, 2009, at 11:25:00
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by SLS on February 28, 2009, at 11:04:35
I'm one of them, and I can tell you it's reversed. I am an ADHD/ anxious/ depressive, somewhere on the bipolar spectrum. I was probably self medicating. As much as I defend cannabis, I don't think everyone should be using it all the time, especially young people. I think it has a potential to interfere with emotional and social development in some young people, and possibly to exacerbate or even mask psychological disorders.
If I could do it all over again, I would not have smoked pot, at least not to the extent that I did. At the same time, I don't think it should be criminalized and demonized, and I think there are several good medicinal uses for it. There are too many variables (even down to the strain being used) to draw any conclusions about marijuana, one way or the other. Different people get completely different effects. It's much easier to place experimental controls on pharmaceuticals, even something as simple as dosing.
For terminal patients, it's a no brainer. They are dying. Whatever it takes to make them feel better is fine by me. If I was terminally ill, I'd probably want a constant supply of strong opiates. I wouldn't be too worried about addiction at that point.
> > I haven't kept in touch with any chronic/long-time cannibus users that I used to know to have to opportunity to see if that was reversed when they quit.
>
> That's a good point.
>
>
> - Scott
>
Posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 11:58:42
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by detroitpistons on February 28, 2009, at 11:25:00
"As much as I defend cannabis, I don't think everyone should be using it all the time, especially young people. I think it has a potential to interfere with emotional and social development in some young people, and possibly to exacerbate or even mask psychological disorders."
That is a good point, and I totally agree. I"ve also felt the same way about casually giving psych meds to young people, except those who seriously need it. When my son was diagnosed with ADD a long time ago, I refused to put him on meds--even though the prinicpal of his middle school said he would end up in jail and expelled from school by 18 if i did not get him Ritalin. We didn't have health insurance, and that principal along with his 'team' who surrounded me in a conference room--threatened me and told me I had to apply social security disability for my son and put him on Ritalin- or else. Oh, and that school was awarded the Presidential award one year for being the 'best' school in the country, while this guy was Principal. Schools have the incentive to try to eliminate those with mental health issues, and some seek to seperate those with such issues from the rest. My school district has a special night school where the students learn 3rd grade reading and math throughout high school. Putting an ADDer admist the most boring, elementary work makes things much worse off...They almost banished my son to that 'special' program had I not risked losing my home to hire an attorney. And a great attorney he was-could have sued the whole school district for the illegal ways they handled cases. I was blown away by this attorney, who is also an advocate for students with disabilities. He also told me-no wonder your son is having so much trouble paying attention, being motivated, and sitting still in class--look at his IQ, which was fairly high. I had never thought of that, and the internet wasn't available to learn so much about ADD. THis attorney taught me about it instead.
Well, I didn't follow that principal's advice and my son graduated from high school with a 2.9 - despite missing 50 days per year on average and often forgotting to turn in his homework on time. He's never been in jail and goes to college and maintains steady employment. He watches the Discovery channel, plays sports, does his homework, and hangs out with his friends playing Playstation and watching movies, does chores and fixes things around the house, and tells me he loves me each and every day. Hardly the profile of a criminal.
It was a personal choice for me not to give him potentially brain-altering medications while his brain was still developing; others may conclude the benefits outweigh the risks, but with all the unknowns involved-there was no way for me to make a risk assessment. My only choice was to not take the chance.
Your post somehow brought back these memories. I think I should be getting back to my studies now. lol
Posted by detroitpistons on February 28, 2009, at 12:25:17
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » detroitpistons, posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 11:58:42
What a bold statement from a school principal! He's going to end up in jail? I guess people in all positions of authority say really dumb things. What a horrible experience to go through, to have to hire an attorney and all that.
> "As much as I defend cannabis, I don't think everyone should be using it all the time, especially young people. I think it has a potential to interfere with emotional and social development in some young people, and possibly to exacerbate or even mask psychological disorders."
>
> That is a good point, and I totally agree. I"ve also felt the same way about casually giving psych meds to young people, except those who seriously need it. When my son was diagnosed with ADD a long time ago, I refused to put him on meds--even though the prinicpal of his middle school said he would end up in jail and expelled from school by 18 if i did not get him Ritalin. We didn't have health insurance, and that principal along with his 'team' who surrounded me in a conference room--threatened me and told me I had to apply social security disability for my son and put him on Ritalin- or else. Oh, and that school was awarded the Presidential award one year for being the 'best' school in the country, while this guy was Principal. Schools have the incentive to try to eliminate those with mental health issues, and some seek to seperate those with such issues from the rest. My school district has a special night school where the students learn 3rd grade reading and math throughout high school. Putting an ADDer admist the most boring, elementary work makes things much worse off...They almost banished my son to that 'special' program had I not risked losing my home to hire an attorney. And a great attorney he was-could have sued the whole school district for the illegal ways they handled cases. I was blown away by this attorney, who is also an advocate for students with disabilities. He also told me-no wonder your son is having so much trouble paying attention, being motivated, and sitting still in class--look at his IQ, which was fairly high. I had never thought of that, and the internet wasn't available to learn so much about ADD. THis attorney taught me about it instead.
>
> Well, I didn't follow that principal's advice and my son graduated from high school with a 2.9 - despite missing 50 days per year on average and often forgotting to turn in his homework on time. He's never been in jail and goes to college and maintains steady employment. He watches the Discovery channel, plays sports, does his homework, and hangs out with his friends playing Playstation and watching movies, does chores and fixes things around the house, and tells me he loves me each and every day. Hardly the profile of a criminal.
>
> It was a personal choice for me not to give him potentially brain-altering medications while his brain was still developing; others may conclude the benefits outweigh the risks, but with all the unknowns involved-there was no way for me to make a risk assessment. My only choice was to not take the chance.
>
> Your post somehow brought back these memories. I think I should be getting back to my studies now. lol
Posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 21:29:24
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » garnet71, posted by detroitpistons on February 28, 2009, at 12:25:17
Thx Detroit. That was back when I had a severe depression and wasn't being treated, so it was a memorable experience. I left that conference room in tears, although i was able to assert myself to this guy that what they were doing was wrong--inappropriate and that they stepped out of their bounds, and also that under the ADA, my son should be receiving support, not threats. I felt they bullied/ganged up on me.
The attorney came later when he was in h.s., but it was an extention of school policy and communication bet. that principal and the h.s. principals that started at that time.
Some kid stole a bottle of Percocets from his parents to sell them. The kid was caught and searched, the pills were found, and he gave the names of about 8 kids he passed pills along to. My son was questioned and searched, he had nothing. My son has this thing about being honest no matter what, and gets himself into trouble by telling the truth, so when they asked him if he was involved, he said yes, the guy gave him 1 pill and he passed it along to someone else. So for that, he faced expulsion among the guy with the pills and 6 other kids (one's cased was dismissed or something). The parents of the teen with the pills hired the highest profile criminal attorney around, and I hired mine. All 6 kids whose parents had not hired attorneys got expelled from school; only my son and the guy whose parents hired the equivalent of Johhny Cocharan were able to stay in school and later graduate. This was 10th grade. At the end of the hearing, the school board Superintendant and a board member told me I was doing a good job with my son, that he was going to be allright, and they wished us luck.
I don't know about the other teens, but my son, as told to me by all his teachers, was always respectful to them; no history of violence-never involved with one fight throughout his years of school. Never got in trouble with drugs prior to this. I think when they try to seperate the 'difficult' ones with the mainstream with expulsion after subsequent suspensions, those kids go downhill from there--and make the drug problem worse. We live in a middle-upper class neighborhood, and drugs have been a problem here like anywhere else, and I understand the necessity of keeping drugs out of the shcool.
But to crucify someone for the rest of their life for admitting that they passed one pill to another, is cruel. I could see if the offense was repeated, but for God's sake their kids and make mistakes. Geez, when I went to school, people smoked weed in the classrooms. None of them faced courts, lawyers, and expulsions that would potentially ruin the rest of their life.
The made sure me and my son were't allowed to attend his graduation commencement because he was late/absent too many times (and 2 seconds counts as an instance). However, the policies were only enforced on those they wished to pursue. The captain of the football team, for example, didn't have to worry about such attendance tracking.
I later spoke to the asst. prinicpal about school policy, as an interest in a nice coversation, and she contends those with any issues should be all put in that night school, seperated from society, to be conditioned for unsuccess.
Sorry, part vent going on here.
Posted by detroitpistons on March 1, 2009, at 12:05:05
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » detroitpistons, posted by garnet71 on February 28, 2009, at 21:29:24
Geez, vent away. You deserve to after all of that....
Posted by Budzoid on March 1, 2009, at 23:29:42
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » garnet71, posted by detroitpistons on March 1, 2009, at 12:05:05
This just in! Maybe the governmental ignorance concerning the use of medical marijuana for people who can be helped by it is finally changing. Check out this link and read what our new Prez thinks about the subject.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29433708/from/ET/
Posted by sam K on March 2, 2009, at 0:45:42
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by Budzoid on March 1, 2009, at 23:29:42
medical marijawana>!>>!>!>! get me some n letz blazeeeeeeee. jkin I dont smoke. not against it though. toke up ya potheads!!
Posted by Neal on March 3, 2009, at 3:54:11
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by sam K on March 2, 2009, at 0:45:42
The body makes its own versions of THC, dubbed endocannabinoids, which work by binding to the same specific receptors as THC. Endocannabinoids travel in the opposite direction of most brain signals. In this way, they play a part in regulating almost all brain and body processes, making endocannabinoids prime targets for treating many diseases and conditions.
Posted by SLS on March 3, 2009, at 5:38:34
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by Neal on March 3, 2009, at 3:54:11
> The body makes its own versions of THC, dubbed endocannabinoids,
Comparing endogenous cannabinoids to THC is like comparing dopamine to apomorphine. Dopamine is a natural internal substance that facilitates normal function. Apomorphine, a synthetic substance that binds to the dopamine receptor, puts you to sleep at low dosages and can produce psychosis at higher dosages. It is not a natural product of the body, and does not work the same pharmokinetically or pharmodynamically. There are no THC receptors. THC is an environmental substance that just happens to bind to the internal endocannaboid receptors. I know you know this, but I just wanted to expand upon an important point. THC, like Valium, attaches to a particular receptor, but does not act like an endogenous substance at that synapse.
> making endocannabinoids prime targets for treating many diseases and conditions.
Agreed.
- Scott
Posted by Neal on March 3, 2009, at 17:23:25
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » Neal, posted by SLS on March 3, 2009, at 5:38:34
well, you caught me using the old cut-and-paste from some article. I knew it was probably bull****, but I thought it was funny. Humor should be a part of any discussion of pot.
Thanks for giving us the straight dope,
~neal
Posted by Budzoid on March 3, 2009, at 21:38:05
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » SLS, posted by Neal on March 3, 2009, at 17:23:25
I was a recreational user for over 30 years. Now that I'm in my 50's, I've developed severe arthritis in my neck that is causing neuropathy. Cannabinoids are one of the few proven treatments for neuropathy. Since I have to have pain medicine to function, I had to sign a drug contract stating I will not use illegal drugs. I get drug tested every month to ensure this. I believe I would not require as much morphine and oxycodone if I could supplement my treatment with cannabis. I know I could use a little euphoria in my life every now and then. Constant, severe pain sucks!
I hope you can understand why I'm in favor of decriminalization and medicinal use. For me, it's personal.
Posted by detroitpistons on March 3, 2009, at 21:43:46
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by Budzoid on March 3, 2009, at 21:38:05
> I was a recreational user for over 30 years. Now that I'm in my 50's, I've developed severe arthritis in my neck that is causing neuropathy. Cannabinoids are one of the few proven treatments for neuropathy. Since I have to have pain medicine to function, I had to sign a drug contract stating I will not use illegal drugs. I get drug tested every month to ensure this. I believe I would not require as much morphine and oxycodone if I could supplement my treatment with cannabis. I know I could use a little euphoria in my life every now and then. Constant, severe pain sucks!
> I hope you can understand why I'm in favor of decriminalization and medicinal use. For me, it's personal.
>
I take it you don't live in one of the 13 states where medical marijuana is legal? I wouldn't be surprised if more states followed suit in the next couple of years. Obama just basically ordered the DEA to not raid dispensaries in California....the times are a-changin.
Posted by Budzoid on March 3, 2009, at 22:05:55
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis » Budzoid, posted by detroitpistons on March 3, 2009, at 21:43:46
I know, I was the one who posted that news. I live in the deep south (always a few years behind everybody else) and at last check, the state house of representatives had passed the bill, but it came up a few votes short in the state senate. Maybe later this year or next year. They recently did a poll in our second largest city and 87% were in favor of medicinal use. Sooner or later the peoples' voices will be heard.
Posted by sukarno on March 4, 2009, at 13:46:53
In reply to Re: In Defense of Cannabis, posted by Budzoid on March 3, 2009, at 21:38:05
I'm all in favor of medical cannabis, but we must be aware of the dangers of smoked cannabis as it presents a lot of risks vs vaporized cannabis or Sativex (which is sprayed in the mouth IIRC).
Google stroke and cannabis (or marijuana). More than a few young people who smoked cannabis without any preexisting medical conditions or structural abnormalities in their brains developed multiple cerebellar infarcts, which then caused the cerebellum to swell and put pressure on the medulla, which caused their deaths.
Three cases were seen in five years at the same hospital in St. Louis. Two of the cases were young adults/adolescents who only occasionally smoked cannabis. They were non-smokers of tobacco. The other case involved a man in his 30s who was a long time tobacco and cannabis user who had recently increased his already heavy intake. I think he survived. I know one of them survived.
The cannabis was tested for adulterants but none were found.
It was thought that the toxic constituents of cannabis smoke ("tar") caused inflammation and damage to the blood vessels of the cerebellum. Another theory was proposed that it was orthostatic hypotension (low blood pressure upon standing) that triggered the strokes. Cannabis is known to lower blood pressure.
It is a false statement that cannabis never killed anyone or that it is safe.
I think we should import Sativex, as it is sprayed in the mouth or under the tongue, and this bypasses the liver, so it is not converted into Delta-11 THC (and thus remains as Delta-9 THC). It also contains the other cannabinoids, but thankfully because it isn't smoked, there are no toxic substances in it.
I also believe though, having said that, that smoking anything, including oregano or parsley could trigger a stroke.
Carbon monoxide is a very dangerous substance. Carboxyhemoglobin in the blood is a very bad thing. Hemoconcentration can lead to blood clots.
Also Google, "cannabis arteritis".
Although what I point out above is quite rare, the doctors at that hospital said that 3 cases in 5 years of strokes (leading to death in 2 of those 3 cases) in otherwise healthy individuals without preexisting health conditions at the same hospital, should throw up red flags everywhere. It isn't as rare as once thought, but I wouldn't say the risk approaches 1% of anything of that sort.
If you are in moderate to severe chronic pain and have a choice between opiates or side-effect ridden medications such as tramadol, I would definitely take the risk and go with cannabis (even smoked).
At least there is no serious withdrawal when cannabis is abruptly discontinued. If there is any withdrawal, it is mostly psychological and physically mild.
Regards,
Paul
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.