Details

Published: 21 October 2021

Hits: 1532

This study examined high-risk health behaviors in marijuana-users among a diverse college population in Southern California, post legalization of marijuana for recreational use.

Study design: A cross-sectional research design was employed utilizing existing data via the 2018 National College Health Assessment (NCHA) from a large Minority-Serving Institution (MSI) population [n = 1345 (Hispanic/Latino/a, n = 456; White, n = 353; Asian Pacific Islander (API), n = 288; Multiracial/Biracial, n = 195; Other, n = 53)].

Methods: Chi square and t-tests assessed differences in descriptive characteristics (age, gender, race/ethnicity and GPA) and high-risk behaviors (alcohol, tobacco and sexual behaviors) among marijuana users and non-users. Logistic regression analyses examined the relationship between race/ethnicity and high-risk behaviors with marijuana use (dependent variable).

Results: Among marijuana-users, significant (p = 0.004) differences were observed between race/ethnicity with Whites reporting using most (32.7%), followed by Hispanics (27.6%) and then APIs (17.8%). Marijuana-users compared with non-users consistently reported high-risk alcohol behaviors (p < 0.0001), were more likely to smoke tobacco (p < 0.0001) and engaged in more high-risk sexual behaviors (p < 0.0001). Logistic regression showed after adjusting for demographic characteristics and high-risk behaviors, race/ethnicity was borderline significantly associated with marijuana use, specifically for Whites (OR = 1.53; 95% CI: (−0.01, 0.86), p = 0.06) and the Other race/ethnicity category (OR = 2.32; 95% CI: (0.12, 1.56), p = 0.02) compared with APIs.

Conclusion: Our findings clearly demonstrate deleterious high-risk behaviors such as alcohol use, tobacco use, and certain sexual behaviors occur more among marijuana-users compared to non-users, post legalization of marijuana for recreational use. Further, race-ethnic differences were observed. Therefore, continued examination of marijuana use trends and high-risk behaviors is critical in monitoring the implications of marijuana policy changes, specifically in diverse populations

For complete research

Details

Published: 19 October 2021

Hits: 1747

The link between tobacco smoke and lung cancer is well-known. Studies show that marijuana smoke has many of the same harmful substances as tobacco, and often more of them. Among the hazards are:

• Benzo(a)pyrene
• Benz(a)anthracene
• Phenols
• Vinyl chlorides
• Nitrosamines
• Reactive oxygen species

People also smoke marijuana in a different way than tobacco, possibly posing greater danger to the lungs:

• You usually inhale marijuana smoke deeply and hold it in, which gives the toxins more contact with your lung tissue and more chance to stick there.
• You generally a smoke a joint all the way to the end. Tar, the sticky stuff left after burning, has high levels of harmful substances, and it’s concentrated at the end of a joint.

When scientists looked at lung tissue of some people who smoked weed regularly, they found changes that are known to signal the future growth of cancer. For complete article go to Does Marijuana Cause Lung Cancer? (webmd.com)

For more evidence based science on harms of Cannabis to lungs

1. How smoking CANNABIS affects your lungs
2. Smoking cannabis causes bronchitis and changes to lung function
3. Marijuana vape users are getting incurable "cobalt lung"

Details

Published: 15 October 2021

Hits: 1606

Download Report

Details

Published: 12 October 2021

Hits: 1588

October 9, 2021

Legalising and commercialising cannabis is well underway from Uruguay to Canada and in at least 10 states in the US. Paradoxically, this shift towards the toleration of cannabis as more-or-less harmless is taking place just as scientists conclusively prove the link between cannabis and psychosis (a less shocking word than “madness” or “insanity”, but the meaning is the same). Cause and effect is today as well established as it is between cigarette smoking and lung cancer.

“Numerous prospective studies have shown that cannabis use carries an increased risk of later schizophrenic-like psychosis,” says an article by Sir Robin Murray of the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London and Wayne Hall of the National Centre for Youth Substance Use Research at the University of Queensland. They cite a study showing that, though Portugal is held up as a pioneer in dealing with drugs, the rate of hospitalisation for psychotic disorders has increased 29-fold since decriminalisation 15 years ago. Another study calculates that between 30 per cent and 50 per cent of new cases of psychosis in London and Amsterdam would not have occurred if the individual affected had not been smoking high-potency cannabis.

Personal observation confirms this: doctors in mental hospitals have told me that they scarcely bother anymore to ask patients if they have taken cannabis, but simply assume it is the case. The situation has deteriorated as the proportion of THC, the psychoactive substance in cannabis producing the “high”, has risen precipitately. Once as low as 3 per cent it has risen to 10 to 15 per cent in Europe and North America, though in Colorado, the first state to legalise recreational use, the THC can reach as high as 70 per cent. Those taking cannabis daily, particularly if they are young, face an escalating risk of permanent mental breakdown.

But if cannabis has already had its “tobacco moment”, when the damage it does is scientifically proven, why do celebrities like Justin Bieber want to destigmatise it and persuade consumers that it will improve their mental health?

The cigarette industry did this a century ago, funding “independent” experts that sought to blur or discredit evidence that smoking caused cancer. Governments were seduced by high tax revenues from tobacco sales and reluctant to do anything to curtail them. Hollywood stars like John Wayne, Clark Gable and Spencer Tracy happily – and profitably – glamourised cigarettes, much as is happening to cannabis now.

Businesses seeking to emulate the tobacco companies at the height of their profitability have formed a bizarre de facto alliance with liberals and progressives, who are appalled by the disastrous mess created by government drug policy. The so-called “war on drugs” has demonstrably inflicted more misery in the US, certainly on the black community, than real military conflicts.

But an over-reaction to government failure provoking a dash in the opposite direction has equal dangers. Those in favour of greater tolerance towards drugs are almost invariably thinking of cannabis as much less nasty than heroin and cocaine. But I have met psychiatrists, with long experience of dealing with drug victims of all sorts, who believe that cannabis is more dangerous than the other drugs because it has the potential to damage many more people.

The legalisation of cannabis will do nothing to hurt organised crime groups, but it will make the drug much more widely available. The idea by proponents of legalisation that the government will tightly regulate its quality and sale is naïve. If the authorities cannot control it when it is illegal, they will be even less able to do so when it is legal. But legalisation – and even limited decriminalisation – will send a message that taking cannabis is a benign activity and does not do you or anybody else much harm. The deterrent effect of illegality will evaporate and the drug becomes no different than alcohol and tobacco.

Once commercially available, all the old persuasive tools formerly used by the cigarette industry swing into action as is happening unstoppably in the US. Celebrities like Justin Bieber will “destigmatise” the drug and give it the gloss of youth and fashion. Once the victims of the tobacco companies coughed up their lungs unnoticed by the wider community, and this time round the victims of cannabis will disappear into mental hospitals without anybody taking much notice.

For More...