Aspies For Freedom

Sixteen new studies in the last six months alone.

1:  White P, Chant D, Whiteford H. Related Articles, Links  
A comparison of Australian men with psychotic disorders remanded for criminal offences and a community group of psychotic men who have not offended.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2006 Mar;40(3):260-5.
PMID: 16476154 [PubMed - in process]
2:  Double DB. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis and psychosis: let's start from the null hypothesis.
BMJ. 2006 Feb 4;332(7536):303. No abstract available.
PMID: 16455740 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
3:  Macdonald AJ. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis and psychosis: Does cannabis really cause psychosis?
BMJ. 2006 Feb 4;332(7536):303. No abstract available.
PMID: 16455739 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
4:  Hall WD. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis use and the mental health of young people.
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2006 Feb;40(2):105-13.
PMID: 16476127 [PubMed - in process]
5:  Wade D, Harrigan S, Edwards J, Burgess PM, Whelan G, McGorry PD. Related Articles, Links  
Course of substance misuse and daily tobacco use in first-episode psychosis.
Schizophr Res. 2006 Jan 31;81(2-3):145-50. Epub 2005 Nov 17.
PMID: 16298107 [PubMed - in process]
6:  Marshall E. Related Articles, Links  
Illegal drugs. U.K. backs off reclassifying cannabis as a dangerous drug.
Science. 2006 Jan 27;311(5760):455. No abstract available.
PMID: 16439632 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
7:  Watts G. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis confusions.
BMJ. 2006 Jan 21;332(7534):175-6. No abstract available.
PMID: 16424501 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
8:  Fergusson DM, Poulton R, Smith PF, Boden JM. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis and psychosis.
BMJ. 2006 Jan 21;332(7534):172-5. Review. No abstract available.
PMID: 16424500 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
9:  Hall W. Related Articles, Links  
Is cannabis use psychotogenic?
Lancet. 2006 Jan 21;367(9506):193-5. Review. No abstract available.
PMID: 16427475 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
10:  Arendt M, Rosenberg R, Foldager L, Perto G, Munk-Jorgensen P. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis-induced psychosis and subsequent schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: follow-up study of 535 incident cases.
Br J Psychiatry. 2005 Dec;187:510-5.
PMID: 16319402 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
11:  de Irala J, Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA. Related Articles, Links  
Causal relationship between cannabis use and psychotic symptoms or depression. Should we wait and see? A public health perspective.
Med Sci Monit. 2005 Dec;11(12):RA355-8. Epub 2005 Nov 24.
PMID: 16319805 [PubMed - in process]
12:  Ferdinand RF, van der Ende J, Bongers I, Selten JP, Huizink A, Verhulst FC. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis--psychosis pathway independent of other types of psychopathology.
Schizophr Res. 2005 Nov 15;79(2-3):289-95. Epub 2005 Aug 25.
PMID: 16125368 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
13:  Verdoux H, Tournier M, Cougnard A. Related Articles, Links  
Impact of substance use on the onset and course of early psychosis.
Schizophr Res. 2005 Nov 1;79(1):69-75. Epub 2005 Jan 11.
PMID: 16198239 [PubMed - in process]
14:  Broome MR, Woolley JB, Tabraham P, Johns LC, Bramon E, Murray GK, Pariante C, McGuire PK, Murray RM. Related Articles, Links  
What causes the onset of psychosis?
Schizophr Res. 2005 Nov 1;79(1):23-34.
PMID: 16198238 [PubMed - in process]
15:  Green B, Young R, Kavanagh D. Related Articles, Links  
Cannabis use and misuse prevalence among people with psychosis.
Br J Psychiatry. 2005 Oct;187:306-13. Review.
PMID: 16199787 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
16:  Viveros MP, Llorente R, Moreno E, Marco EM. Related Articles, Links  
Behavioural and neuroendocrine effects of cannabinoids in critical developmental periods.
Behav Pharmacol. 2005 Sep;16(5-6):353-62. Review.
PMID: 16148439 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE

Hmmm...as someone who went to a rather large high school but might have been the only one not smoking pot(b/c the smell made me sick, not b/c it was "wrong"), I have to say I don't remember the entire campus being pyschotic. I think this is more of a chicken and egg thing. A lot of people self medicate with pot.

I dunno the studies have been quite conclusive that in a small number of peopel cannabis usage can trigger a reaction. It's a small minority though it's not "regular users will go psycho", rather "a tiny minority of people will flip out if they use it".

One such example in the papers the other day, a long term friend of some lady had her face broken in an ungodly amount of ways (After her friend suddenly went medieval on her while high, crushed her windpipe, shattered both orbits of her eyes, broke tons of bones in her face and upper body etc) - no explanation or rhyme or reason (good friends known each other years, no arguements or anger involved) the only factor was her friend was high on cannabis.

As I've mentioned in another thread, I've been smoking cannabus almost daily for the last twenty years of my life.  I'm not psychotic or at least I don't think I am.  There are some withdrawal symptoms I get if I don't smoke it which are irritability, lack of appetite, and insomnia but these last for only about a week.

I think the article is misleading. It makes it seem like cannabus use causes AS.  I know I would still have AS even if I never touched the stuff.

What newspaper published the story?

I think that story was widely reported in various newspapers in the UK anandamide.  I can't remember the woman's name, so can't search for the story, but it was related not to AS, but that her attacker was allegedly suffering from some kind of cannabis-induced psychosis.

I found it. The story was published in The Times.

Cannabis Psychotic nearly killed me

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,...47,00.html


The statement that he went psychotic from smoking pot is conjecture. The victim admits that he began acting strangely days before the attack. I don't see any medical report in that article. An article like this with such conjecture would never make it into Canadian newspapers. I'm surprised it is in the British press.

I listen to my doctor and his advice before I believe what is implied in articles such as this.

I had a friend, a very sweet lovely person, who took some prescription painkillers when she had work done on her teeth. This triggered her underlying, but to that date undiscovered, bipolar syndrome. She became violent and ended up psychotic in hospital for about a month. If a person has an illness that makes them susceptible to becoming psychotic, I should imagine there is a huge range of activities they probably would be better off not doing. I can think of many people I've met over the years who should not drink but they do and create misery all around themselves. But that doesn't mean we should all be prohibited from doing those activities.

And I'll tell you something else, I think that this kind of story is the kind of "reporting" your country might get just before Bush comes in and sets up privatized prisons for herb smokers.  We are very wary about this kind of propaganda in Canada.

  I wasn't sure whether you were referring to what I wrote above as a 'statement' because I didn't report a statement of fact, I reported an allegation.

You're correct in that the newspaper article doesn't refer to any medical report, it does, however, refer to medical experts (in the plural) having given evidence.

"He subsequently pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm. Medical experts concluded that he was mentally unstable at the time of the assault due to “cannabis psychosis”."

I'm guessing that the medical experts who gave expert witness evidence would have based their opinions and conclusions on their medical research and knowledge and experience, and references to medical reports.

Quite frankly, I wouldn't take as gospel my own general practitioner's opinions, because doctors, for the most part are generalists, they don't have specific, expert knowledge.  If my GP told me it was safe to use cannabis, I wouldn't necessarily believe her and think that was the last word on the subject, as there are plenty of researchers out there who have more indepth knowledge about it.

I'm confused, you seem to be contradicting yourself here.  You seem to be saying that if a doctor tells you it's okay to do something, you feel safe doing it... but then you relate the anecdotal story of a friend who did something a doctor told her (i.e. took the medication she was prescribed) and it turned out to have had side-effects.

I'm not sure whether you are saying that doctors know what they are doing and you'll take their word for it, or that doctors don't know what they're doing?!?   :?

Personally speaking, yes, I will listen to my doctors advice, but I'll do my own research, and also bear in mind that our brains may react different to medication than non-Aspies.

You're critical of this article because you seem to feel it's biased against the use of cannabis.  But can you not see that maybe your opinion is equally but oppositely biased, in favour of cannabis, because you seem to strongly reject any possibility it may cause psychosis?

You imply that there's no evidence whatsoever of the assertions of a link between cannabis and psychosis, but in addition to the reference to the expert witness evidence in the trial from medical experts, the article also makes references to warnings from the Royal College of Psychiatrists in this regard, and also, specifically:

"Last year researchers from New Zealand reported that regular cannabis smokers had almost double the normal risk of schizophrenia. Particular concern has focused on the strong “skunk” variety of cannabis."  

Admittedly, the Times article doesn't given a journal reference, but then news articles tend not to be accompanied by references and bibiography sections.

I don't see any problem with the reporting in that article, tbh.  Yes, it may be a little overly reliant on first person testimony of a single person, but that's the 'news hook'.  Medical journals will publish articles every quarter about the effects of cannabis, but most medical journals would make a really dry and boring read for the average layperson.  It helps to illustrate a story with a real, first person example.  And newspapers like to use celebrity and attractive people wherever possible to catch headlines and attract attention.  That's often how news stories are put together, you have a headline grabbing incident, and then you explore the issues around the incident, which is what's been done here, apparently sensibly and in proportion to the crime.  

Really, anandamide, if you want to see silly, irrational reporting, you need to check out our 'Red Tops' (formerly known as the 'Tabloids').

I think you're letting your own opinions on cannabis and it's safety and possible links with psychosis cloud your judgement here.

Englishlulu, I know that you weren't alleging anything that was not printed in the article.

In 2002 our Canadian senate has, after rigorous review of all valid medical studies and in consultation with the public, issued a recommendation that marijuana be legalized.  In fact, they recommended that the age of consent for smoking marijuana be age 16.

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/09/04/pot...ttee020904


Informed Canadians are aware that there are many American organizations that are funded by the US government that publish reports and articles to demonize marijuana. There are economic reasons why the US publishes this propaganda.

There are TWO sides to the issue of marijuana prohibition. It is good to be  fully informed.

Canadians know that the US will never allow us to legalize marijuana without the US imposing trade sanctions. Canabis Sativa is the most efficient source of bio-mass fuel known to humankind. Henry Ford designed the car to run on Cannabis fuel. With only small modification any engine can run on this fuel. It would save the planet. However, such fuel threatens the oil industry.

The pharmaceutical companies also want prohibition to continue because they want to be the only source so that people most buy it from them in pill or spray or other synthetized form, rather than grow their own medicine.

Marijuana will never be fully legalized because powerful organizations profit from prohibition. But prohibtion corrupts everything. We are prevented from using biomass fuel that farmer's could grow in their own countries and this leads to war, famine, and exploitation of the third world.

So you see, there are important liberties and securities at stake and it is important to be informed about these issues when discussing the subject of marijuana, whether a person is for or against it.

Englishlulu wrote:

"Quite frankly, I wouldn't take as gospel my own general practitioner's opinions, because doctors, for the most part are generalists, they don't have specific, expert knowledge. If my GP told me it was safe to use cannabis, I wouldn't necessarily believe her and think that was the last word on the subject, as there are plenty of researchers out there who have more indepth knowledge about it."

I would NEVER take my doctor's advice without hearing from him, or her, a valid explanation for his or her opinion. I would expect an indepth description of what evidence exists for his or her opinion. I also do my own research as I am very concerned about anything a doctor might recommend I use. Once I confirm that my doctor has a valid opinion, based on science, and after considering the options, I'm willing to follow his advice.

Like you, I would not listen to a psychiatrist, for example, who had no expertise on autism. Like you, if I were forced to listen to a load of psychodynamic theories I would respond with what I know of the biology of autism. I would want to know about the practitioner's credentials.  I am educated enough to be my own advocate when it comes to my health.  

I have debated theories about autism with two doctors. I chose one doctor over the other because he made the most sense. I do not blindly accept generalizations from anyone, doctor or not.

My point about the lack of medical testimony in the article was to point out that lawyers can make a case for anything. That is their job.