Is marijuana addictive?

[Tweety]

A couple of us were having this discussion tonight. One nurses says no it is not addictive. I said "well I've know some potheads who couldn't stop smoking, couldn't face life without pot, etc." Sounds like an addict to me.

She says it's not been proven to be physically addictive.

Actually, I'm of the belief anything can be addictive, especially if it's mood altering, or even endorphin raising.

[portland_guy]

An independent study contradicts a key premise of U.S. anti-drug policy -- that marijuana is a "gateway" to more harmful drugs like heroin or cocaine -- the Chicago Tribune reported Dec. 5.

Research conducted by the private, non-profit RAND Drug Policy Research Center concluded that marijuana use probably doesn't lead teens to experiment with harder drugs. Rather, the study found that teens who use hard drugs are predisposed to do so.

"The evidence has seemed so strong in favor of the gateway effect that a lot of policymakers and others have taken it for granted the gateway effect is real," said Andrew Morral, lead author of the RAND study. "We have shown why this is not necessarily the case."

The research was based on data from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse taken between 1982 and 1994.

According to the study, 50 percent of U.S. teens have access to marijuana by the age of 16, while exposure to cocaine, heroin, or hallucinogens doesn't occur until age 20.

"Kids get their first opportunity to use marijuana years before they get their first exposure to hard drugs," Morral said. "It is possible marijuana is not a gateway drug. It's just the first thing kids often come across."

The researchers do not advocate legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana, though they do question the U.S. government's intensive focus on the drug. "If our model is correct, to a certain extent we are diverting resources away from hard-drug problems," Morral said. "Spending money on marijuana control may not be having downstream consequences on the use of hard drugs."

The study is published in the British Journal Addiction.

[Q.]

From doing a small search of our current perodical holdings in our office, I found this:

Cannabis-induced psychosis: a cross-sectional comparison with acute schizophrenia.

Source

Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 105(3):173-8, 2002

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The existence of cannabis-induced psychosis (CP) remains controversial, partly because of methodological problems. We hypothesize that acute schizophrenia (AS) and CP can have distinct demographic, premorbid and clinical features. METHOD: We compared 26 patients with CP to 35 with AS, after their cannabis-consumption status was confirmed by repeated urine screens. Patients with CP were assessed after at least 1 week but not more than 1 month of abstinence. Symptoms were evaluated with the Present State Examination (PSE). RESULTS: In group CP, male gender, expansive mood and ideation, derealization/depersonalization, visual hallucinations, and disturbances of sensorium were more frequent than in group AS. Premorbid schizoid personality traits were more frequently associated to AS and antisocial personality traits to CP. CONCLUSION: The continuous heavy use of cannabis can induce a psychotic disorder distinct from AS. These two clinical entities share some features but they differ in others.

Authors

Rubino T. Vigano D. Massi P. Parolaro D.

Institution

Department of Structural and Functional Biology, University of Insubria, via Dunant 3, 21100 Varese, Italy.

Title

The psychoactive ingredient of marijuana induces behavioural sensitization.

Source

European Journal of Neuroscience. 14(5):884-6, 2001 Sep.

Abstract

Here we describe, for the first time, the occurrence of behavioural sensitization after chronic exposure to Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Rats were treated twice a day, for five days, with increasing doses (5, 10, 20, 40, 40 mg/kg i.p.) of Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol or its vehicle and after 20 days of withdrawal, animals were challenged with 5 mg/kg (i.p.) of the drug and their behaviour was assessed. Contrary to the motor inhibition induced in control rats, challenge with Delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol in pre-exposed animals elicited a complex behavioural syndrome mainly characterized by oral stereotyped items. Due to the relevance of behavioural sensitization in drug-seeking behaviour that persists long after discontinuation of drug use, our findings suggest that cannabinoids could trigger neurobiological alteration not dissimilar from those observed with more harmful abused drugs.

[ziggyRn]

I think that legalising it will only create a bigger problem...

The dealers become legit...after all, just who will continue to supply it all the way down the chain? The people already established in the business of course...they become a legit bunch of crooks...with suits on this time. They will be harder to control once 'legal'.

The real motive in legalising something that was previously forbidden is going to be $$$$$$$$....it was all about money [and lots of it] before and it will continue to be.

Could say that there are hidden powers trying to sway public opinion to accept legalisation as the best way to control the problem. I would say that liberal politicians are more likely to be gullible...

I also think that it's a fallacy that legalising something will remove its attraction therefore less problem. On the contrary... it's legal, it's OK...I'm not doing anything wrong, it's legal...

Some people are like sheep...easily led

OK, off my soapbox now and putting flame retardant suit on.

:eek:

Also, Amsterdam is now considered to be the 'drug capital'of Europe...so much for supposed control.

[sjoe]

portland_guy writes: "I say make it legal, just tax the hell out of it. We spend millions (billions?) on trying to remove marijuana from society. How long has the drug war been going on? Well, let me tell you it isn't working. It is just as easy to obtain as it was 20 years ago."

And MUCH more powerful. I wouldn't have stopped smoking it (back in the '60s), except I didn't need any more amotivationality. I have always had more than I could use.

[EmeraldNYL, BSN, RN]

People who are under the influence shouldn't drive, whether it's alcohol, pot, or legal narcotics. Therefore, people who do drive under the influence should be strongly punished. However, just as most people don't go jump in a car when they're drunk (most people have better sense than this), if pot is legal most people won't try to drive after they've been smoking pot. I am personally angered by the fact that my tax money is going to fight a useless drug war which we aren't winning or even making any progress on whatsoever. Especially when pot is actually safer than alcohol-- you can't die from smoking too much pot, but you CAN die from drinking too much. All pot really does is make you lazy, and I support the right of people to be lazy if they want. People shouldn't work or drive while drunk/high, but other than that, I don't think the government has any right to tell people what they can and can not put in their bodies.

[portland_guy]

Also, Amsterdam is now considered to be the 'drug capital'of Europe...so much for supposed control.

When was the last time you were in Amsterdam? It is one of the safest large cities in Europe.

Do they have shoot outs between police and drug dealers that we do nearly everyday in the US? No. The drug war is not working, face it.

[LasVegasRN]

This is a huge debate here in Nevada and has been put on the ballot twice.

I don't think marijuana in and of itself is addicting. I have a friend who is an avid smoker and trust me when I tell you it helps him tremendously with stabilizing his mood.

I see the medicinal value. I think it should be legalized for medicinal use.

I'd rather smoke pot than drink alcohol. But, alcohol is legal and pot is not... so... cheers! :)

[PennyLane, RN]

I'm with PortlandGuy and Emerald on this one. Our tax money is going to fighting the drug war, and including pot dealers in with it. As far as effects, they are far less severe than drinking. Susy, just as one may get drunk off one drink when one has never had a drink before, so can one smoke too much the first few times they smoke. Regular smokers do not get out of control when they get high. It is not physically addictive, and one cannot die from smoking too much pot.

As far as lung damage goes, yes, I think it can be very harmful to your lungs. But there are other ways to ingest the substance (pot brownies, for instance!)

I think it should be legal and gov't regulated. It is far and away the safest drug around. And it's completely natural!!

Smoke on, people!

[donmurray]

The "gateway" relationship between pot and hard drugs is that due to its illegality, the pot has to be purchased from the same scuzzball that is dealing the other stuff. As there is more profit in it, he's going to offer loss leaders on the harder, more expensive stuff. A real free market economy approach!

In the UK we recently reclassified pot as separate from other "class 3" drugs, and minor possession is no longer a routinely arrestable offence. Saleable quantities will still get you busted.

[portland_guy]

Hi allnurses members -

I would love to hear anyone elses take on this. Do others feel legalization is a good/bad idea? What do people think of the drug war? Is it possible to have 2 global wars going on at once (drug war and terrorism)?

[fergus51]

Originally posted by Susy K

I'm not sure I understand this statement. So, the study examined hard drug users to determine if they used marijuana at a higher rate than non hard drug users? What's a "higher rate?" Meaning frequency of use, as in one a week/once a day thing?

I'm most curious to see if hard drug users started their drug habits with marijuana or not, regardless of frequency of use.

No, meaning did they use marijuana first and become hard drug users? Was their rate of hard drug use after marijuana use any different from other people (you know how many people who use marijuana become hard drug users and how many don't/ how many hard drug users had never used marijuana)?

They found it isn't more common for people who use marijuana to become hard drug users in the future.... The gateway drug idea was just a bunch of propaganda.

[ziggyRn]

hey respectfully portlandguy...

I have been to Amsterdam and have seen it.

I stayed in a B&B...landlady went through an elaborate system of security stuff every night...in fact all the buildings on the street got similarly bolted up at night [not a 'bad'area either]

Why, I asked her...ít's because of the drugs' she said

Sure enough, we were burgled...they managed to get in despite window bars, state of the art locks etc

Walking around Amsterdam, I saw so many syringes, addicts lying around in alleys. i have stepped over addicts to get past.

But the average tourist doesn't see this. I saw it because a Dutch friend said that he would show me the real sights...like streets that he wouldn't walk down [despite being a fit, ex-military guy]...full of drug dealers out in the open doing trade.

I had the impression that the drug business has got a pretty good hold and the battle has been lost

Also, just who will be supplying it when drug dealers are out of the picture? How will drug dealers be put out of the picture?

Excuse my frankness, but it's naive to think that drug dealers can be put out of the picture.

Ziggy's 2 cents