Start another marijuana thread, please.

jeffbr said:

PJ_Soul said:

No, I'm good with zero tolerance re not having smoked in 2 or 3 hours, which is what those breathalyzers read, and what I thought we were talking about. We are not in danger of being busted for having THC in our bloodstreams or our hair, lol. I don't see how being a medical patient is relevant. Either you've gotten high in the past few hours or not. It's pretty simple.

I hope you're right. I was talking about DUI's and Canada's framework doesn't necessarily mention breathalyzers. That is something you talked about, and I agree that it is a hopeful future technology. Neither of the links you provided are for devices currently in use, I don't believe. They're being tested and studied, but currently THC testing is done with fluid samples, and DUI determinations are made from pro se THC levels in that fluid. So you're convinced that you have no concerns because of a future technology. I'm concerned because I live in a state that uses pro se limits to determine DUIs, when there is no scientific consensus on behavioral impairment based on those levels. That's where risk to medical patients comes into play for sure. So you are absolutely welcome to look to the future for comfort, but I'm more concerned with the reality of today.

And by "fluid samples" you're referring to urine and blood, as per your link, correct? Because I would agree that those are much less likely to accurately correlate with impairment and recent use, as even the legislators and the police are aware. From your link above I wasn't clear if people are being "forced", as they put it, to give urine or blood samples simply for roadside stops, or if that would really only apply if there was an accident, for instance.

I do know that the use of the oral fluid detectors is being investigated in the US as well so maybe you'll have that soon.

oftenreading said:

And I have to say I think the "medical patient" argument is irrelevant. It's not like the weed is going to discriminate in who it makes high. If a medicinal mj patient is getting high then they shouldn't be driving, just like if someone is taking morphine or dilaudid for pain shouldn't drive if it affects their perceptions and judgment. If the driving is an issue then use a CBD product.

But the edibles issue is a vexing one, in terms of testing, because someone can be very impaired by edibles and the level of THC in the blood/urine/saliva can be very low, due to the differences in metabolism between eaten vs. smoked/inhaled THC.

To answer your post above, yes blood and urine. Those tests are typically compulsory after a failed field sobriety test.

My point about medical patients was that they typically smoke more regularly and will have higher THC levels in their systems even after a couple of hours. They aren't impaired, but are above arbitrary legal limits based on available tests. That's why I'm interested in a breathalyzer test if it can more accurately measure recent use.

oftenreading said:

Mark Emery at it again.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-cannabis-culture-shops-police-raids-1.3900254

The Emerys opened new cannabis shops in Montreal knowing that they were in breach of the current laws and that Montreal police were unlikely to look kindly on it (different culture than in Vancouver/Victoria). I get that they are protesting, but it seems pointless right now, as we all know that the legalization train is proceeding down the tracks. Particularly dumb for him to call Trudeau "a disgrace", in my opinion, given that Trudeau is the only politician to take this on at the Federal level. This screams "publicity stunt" to me.

Yeah, I agree this was a dumb move on Emery's part. Why is he trashing the one person leading the charge in legalization? I haven't read up on Emery's stance lately though. Is he perhaps against regulation and is pissed that it's not just a utopia of decriminalization without any regulation at all? If so, the guy should lay off the weed, haha. No, but I respect Emery kind of He certainly made real sacrifices in the fight... Did he have a real role in the eventual legalization of weed? I would say yes, he probably did. I have never really understood a lot of his methods, but he's still had an impact I think, especially as far as Vancouver goes. I this we might not be enjoying the arrangement that we've got going in Vancouver without Emery's long term involvement in the cause... Although I think many other players probably had a bigger role - the unnamed many who built all the dispensaries and resisted the law as far as that goes get most of the credit IMO. Of course, many of them were probably inspired by Emery, so....

reality check
People in North America spent $53.3 billion on legal, medical, and illicit marijuana in 2016. That's more cash than Americans blow in a year at McDonald's and Starbucks combined.
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-canada-marijuana-spending-legal-illicit-2017-1

I've never tried marijuana but have always been curious of how it would feel to be high.
The reason I have not tried it is because there is evidence that it leads to schizophrenia and bad psychosis.
For all you smokers on here, do you not feel worried that you may develop schizophrenia?
My brother in laws brother is now severely schizophrenic due to smoking marijuana.
Plus, I am a university student, don't need marijuana making me unmotivated and affecting my memory and concentration.

Thoughts_Arrive, you are correct that there is a clear link between cannabis use and development of psychosis, particularly but not only in those who started use quite young (early/mid teens) and who are heavy users. I don't know your age but if you are a university student perhaps you are young, maybe still in your teens. Your risk would be particularly elevated if you have other risk factors, such as a history of psychosis in someone who is genetically related (I'm guessing you're BIL's brother is not a genetic relative, but think about your own siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, etc).

Most of the risk would be related to long term or heavy use, not occasional use, but you are the only one who can judge whether you want to try it or not.

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

Thoughts_Arrive, you are correct that there is a clear link between cannabis use and development of psychosis, particularly but not only in those who started use quite young (early/mid teens) and who are heavy users. I don't know your age but if you are a university student perhaps you are young, maybe still in your teens. Your risk would be particularly elevated if you have other risk factors, such as a history of psychosis in someone who is genetically related (I'm guessing you're BIL's brother is not a genetic relative, but think about your own siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, etc).

Most of the risk would be related to long term or heavy use, not occasional use, but you are the only one who can judge whether you want to try it or not.

You two are both vastly overstating the link between psychosis and cannabis!

Not for developing brains, no.

Edit: and I would add, how can you possibly say someone is "vastly overstating" something when I've offered no figures or estimate of risk, other than to say there is a link? If you think that's vastly overstated, that would suggest you think there is no link, in which case you would be incorrect.

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

Thoughts_Arrive, you are correct that there is a clear link between cannabis use and development of psychosis, particularly but not only in those who started use quite young (early/mid teens) and who are heavy users. I don't know your age but if you are a university student perhaps you are young, maybe still in your teens. Your risk would be particularly elevated if you have other risk factors, such as a history of psychosis in someone who is genetically related (I'm guessing you're BIL's brother is not a genetic relative, but think about your own siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, etc).

Most of the risk would be related to long term or heavy use, not occasional use, but you are the only one who can judge whether you want to try it or not.

You two are both vastly overstating the link between psychosis and cannabis!

Not for developing brains, no.

Edit: and I would add, how can you possibly say someone is "vastly overstating" something when I've offered no figures or estimate of risk, other than to say there is a link? If you think that's vastly overstated, that would suggest you think there is no link, in which case you would be incorrect.

Figures or not, your tone established it as a serious risk. It is a minor link that isn't understood and you may as well coach someone to seriously consider staying indoors to avoid lightning or falling tree limbs.

If a person is really that concerned about psychosis, all mind-altering substances should probably be avoided.

The problem with your analogy is that getting hit by lightning is a rare event, with a risk of one in many thousand over one's lifetime, whereas schizophrenia is not rare. The rate of schizophrenia is 1% in the population, and early use of cannabis appears to increase it by up to 3 times. That is not insignificant, particularly for those who develop schizophrenia, a devastating condition.

And I won't argue with you about what people should or shouldn't avoid to reduce the risk of psychosis, but TA asked about cannabis so that's what I answered.

oftenreading said:

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

Thoughts_Arrive, you are correct that there is a clear link between cannabis use and development of psychosis, particularly but not only in those who started use quite young (early/mid teens) and who are heavy users. I don't know your age but if you are a university student perhaps you are young, maybe still in your teens. Your risk would be particularly elevated if you have other risk factors, such as a history of psychosis in someone who is genetically related (I'm guessing you're BIL's brother is not a genetic relative, but think about your own siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, etc).

Most of the risk would be related to long term or heavy use, not occasional use, but you are the only one who can judge whether you want to try it or not.

You two are both vastly overstating the link between psychosis and cannabis!

Not for developing brains, no.

Edit: and I would add, how can you possibly say someone is "vastly overstating" something when I've offered no figures or estimate of risk, other than to say there is a link? If you think that's vastly overstated, that would suggest you think there is no link, in which case you would be incorrect.

Figures or not, your tone established it as a serious risk. It is a minor link that isn't understood and you may as well coach someone to seriously consider staying indoors to avoid lightning or falling tree limbs.

If a person is really that concerned about psychosis, all mind-altering substances should probably be avoided.

The problem with your analogy is that getting hit by lightning is a rare event, with a risk of one in many thousand over one's lifetime, whereas schizophrenia is not rare. The rate of schizophrenia is 1% in the population, and early use of cannabis appears to increase it by up to 3 times. That is not insignificant, particularly for those who develop schizophrenia, a devastating condition.

And I won't argue with you about what people should or shouldn't avoid to reduce the risk of psychosis, but TA asked about cannabis so that's what I answered.

When I responded to the initial post, this sentence is what caught my eye: "My brother in laws brother is now severely schizophrenic due to smoking marijuana." My point is that there is simply no causality established. A potential contributing factor to exacerbation? Perhaps. Maybe even probably. But not causal. Unless someone can show me a peer reviewed study establishing causality I will continue to rely on the studies that do exist, which explicitly state that "The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself." (From A controlled family study of cannabis users with and without psychosis)

oftenreading said:

jeffbr said:

oftenreading said:

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

rgambs said:

oftenreading said:

Thoughts_Arrive, you are correct that there is a clear link between cannabis use and development of psychosis, particularly but not only in those who started use quite young (early/mid teens) and who are heavy users. I don't know your age but if you are a university student perhaps you are young, maybe still in your teens. Your risk would be particularly elevated if you have other risk factors, such as a history of psychosis in someone who is genetically related (I'm guessing you're BIL's brother is not a genetic relative, but think about your own siblings, cousins, aunts and uncles, grandparents, etc).

Most of the risk would be related to long term or heavy use, not occasional use, but you are the only one who can judge whether you want to try it or not.

You two are both vastly overstating the link between psychosis and cannabis!

Not for developing brains, no.

Edit: and I would add, how can you possibly say someone is "vastly overstating" something when I've offered no figures or estimate of risk, other than to say there is a link? If you think that's vastly overstated, that would suggest you think there is no link, in which case you would be incorrect.

Figures or not, your tone established it as a serious risk. It is a minor link that isn't understood and you may as well coach someone to seriously consider staying indoors to avoid lightning or falling tree limbs.

If a person is really that concerned about psychosis, all mind-altering substances should probably be avoided.

The problem with your analogy is that getting hit by lightning is a rare event, with a risk of one in many thousand over one's lifetime, whereas schizophrenia is not rare. The rate of schizophrenia is 1% in the population, and early use of cannabis appears to increase it by up to 3 times. That is not insignificant, particularly for those who develop schizophrenia, a devastating condition.

And I won't argue with you about what people should or shouldn't avoid to reduce the risk of psychosis, but TA asked about cannabis so that's what I answered.

When I responded to the initial post, this sentence is what caught my eye: "My brother in laws brother is now severely schizophrenic due to smoking marijuana." My point is that there is simply no causality established. A potential contributing factor to exacerbation? Perhaps. Maybe even probably. But not causal. Unless someone can show me a peer reviewed study establishing causality I will continue to rely on the studies that do exist, which explicitly state that "The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself." (From A controlled family study of cannabis users with and without psychosis)

That study (which is one study, not "studies"), doesn't show that cannabis use isn't a factor in development of psychotic disorders. It is underpowered to answer that question (i.e. not enough subjects. I don't think anyone would argue that family history isn't significant; that's well documented.

For the question of the link between cannabis use and psychotic disorders you need larger epidemiological studies. I'll post some later, when I get time.

Edit: but I don't disagree that you can't tell in any individual circumstance whether development of a psychotic disorder is related to cannabis use or not.

I don't disagree with anything you just said. I believe there are links as well, and there are numerous studies that make the claim. Perhaps I wasn't being clear. My issue is with someone saying cannabis caused schizophrenia. That is where I jump in with a request for a peer reviewed study (preferably done this decade) showing causation. Pot can certainly contribute to psychosis. But does pot cause psychosis?