Chelsea L. Shover, Corey S. Davis, Sanford C. Gordon, and Keith Humphreys Edited by Kenneth W. Wachter, University of California, Berkeley, CA, and approved May 16, 2019 (received for review February 27, 2019)
Medical cannabis has been touted as a solution to the US opioid overdose crisis since Bachhuber et al. [M. A. Bachhuber, B. Saloner, C. O. Cunningham, C. L. Barry, JAMA Intern. Med. 174, 1668–1673] found that from 1999 to 2010 states with medical cannabis laws experienced slower increases in opioid analgesic overdose mortality. That research received substantial attention in the scientific literature and popular press and served as a talking point for the cannabis industry and its advocates, despite caveats from the authors and others to exercise caution when using ecological correlations to draw causal, individual-level conclusions.
In this study, we used the same methods to extend Bachhuber et al.’s analysis through 2017. Not only did findings from the original analysis not hold over the longer period, but the association between state medical cannabis laws and opioid overdose mortality reversed direction from −21% to +23% and remained positive after accounting for recreational cannabis laws.
We also uncovered no evidence that either broader (recreational) or more restrictive (low-tetrahydrocannabinol) cannabis laws were associated with changes in opioid overdose mortality. We find it unlikely that medical cannabis—used by about 2.5% of the US population—has exerted large conflicting effects on opioid overdose mortality. A more plausible interpretation is that this association is spurious. Moreover, if such relationships do exist, they cannot be rigorously discerned with aggregate data. Research into therapeutic potential of cannabis should continue, but the claim that enacting medical cannabis laws will reduce opioid overdose death should be met with skepticism.
(National Academy of Sciences – USA: PNAS first published June 10, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1903434116)
Just to lay the foundation, I have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety and depression…on a recent trip to Las Vegas, where Pot has been legalized, I decided to try a very small amount of chocolate with what they said was about 20 milligrams of THC to see if it would help me with some pain I was having.
What followed was a nightmare. It took roughly two hours to kick in and by the time it did, we were poolside. I literally felt like I was in and out of consciousness, couldn’t see clearly, could barely walk, felt totally paranoid and was convinced I was going to die in the jacuzzi because I couldn’t move or articulate that I needed to get out. This feeling reminded me of extreme depersonalization, which I’ve experienced before with my PTSD, but even worse. I felt like this the better part of the day, and slept on and off almost the entire day. It was a horrible experience and one I never wish to repeat again.
For complete article
STONED BABIES AND UNDERACHIEVING ADULTS
By Dr. Drew Edwards
Physicians and medical professionals routinely warn women not to use marijuana while they are pregnant or nursing. Why? The best available scientific evidence has established that exposure to marijuana’s psychoactive constituent, THC, in utero causes neuroadaptive changes in their baby’s brain, especially in the regions where their cognitive capacity and emotional regulation is formed. As a result, the life trajectories for prenatally exposed children may be permanently altered. These facts, like so many others germane to marijuana’s toxic effects have been well established in the scientific literature for years—and largely ignored.
“Currently, states are struggling with the lack of sound scientific research available in CBD and long-term health impacts, including those to children,” Pam Miles of the Virginia Department of Agriculture, said. She added that her department “is hopeful that FDA will begin to supply significant leadership as it related to CBD, including research related to its health impacts.”…Brenda Morris, representing the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, talked about the “patchwork of laws” surrounding CBD and how that has fostered an environment where “anything is allowed.”
FDA reaction: Amy Abernethy, the FDA principal deputy commissioner who helped organize the public meeting, identified several themes that emerged during the talks.
In general, there is a need to “further clarify the regulatory framework to reduce confusion in the market,” to provide that clarification in timely manner, to collect data on CBD to ensure that the products are safe and to create labeling standards so consumers know what they’re getting.
Full Article Here!