If you went to school in the United States in the 1980's or 90's, you were lectured consistently and repeatedly by teachers, parents, medical professionals and police offices about the horrendous dangers of marijuana. The basic storyline was something like: if you took a puff of marijuana you would quickly degenerate into a slobbering drug addict and end up fellating some crack dealer for a $5 rock, after which you'd contract AIDS and die an agonizing death. So over the years, the folks doing the anti-cannabis messaging lost a lot of credibility, which is why folks are rightly skeptical of new anti-cannabis claims.
Note: There's a little hyperbole in here, but only a little. U.S. drug education was pretty bonkers in the 80's and 90's.
2. This article in no way states that cannabis usage causes schizophrenia. It says there is a correlation, and furthermore the fact that both low and high usage having the same effects. That actually harms the case that it DOES, since you would expect the odds of it causing issues would increase with amount ingested.
Not necessarily? The correlation is observed, and there may be causation, in one, or both, directions, that is all we can conclude from the study. The causality doesn't have to be linear with the amount ingested, few things are linear in biology. For example, one could imagine that a certain amount blocks the development of a particular region of the brain. Ingesting more does not necessarily blocks it "more".
There is no evidence that this happens, but it is worth exploring, because schizophrenia is a hell of a condition, and is still largely misunderstood.
I'm saying we cannot interpret this research study the way people want to. Correlation != causation, and the results on this seem murky in general, as outlined how amount consumed does not affect likelihood of symptoms.
Comparing modern Covid research to this is... dishonest. We have a massive amount of data to parse and analyze with vaccine effectiveness etc.
Meanwhile, this is a single meta-study that doesn't make any strong claims.
Currently, approximately 129M US adults have used cannabis and there are 3.2M schizophrenics in US. 16% of schizophrenics use cannabis, while 27% have a history of using cannabis. This makes any correlation, if there is one, extremely difficult to see, because currently, at best, only 864K schizophrenics of 3.2M have ever used cannabis. This means, if there is actually a causation, then using cannabis entails a risk of 1 in 149.3 of causing schizophrenia, which seems high until you consider schizophrenia affects 1 in 300 people worldwide. So it is possible that using cannabis doubles risk of schizophrenia, but we wouldn't say it caused it. 100% of schizophrenics drink water... why isn't drinking water researched as a cause of schizophrenia?
> If it was so difficult to demonstrate a correlation then so many studies wouldn't have been able to do just that.
employs a fallacy, assuming the conclusion aka begging the question. But that's ok, because I'm really not arguing any position.
Is cannabis on the whole better than some other substances? Sure. Does that make it harmless and invalidate this paper? No.
As we know, global warming has a positive corellation with a decline of a pirate activity, but nobody yet discovered the cause.
* as a person who at least read some things on it - it should be really described as 'attempts at s.m.' but here we are
If someone offers you schizophrenia at a party, don't take it
Also it's known(both by researchers and users) that cannabis can increase/create paranoia in some people. And paranoia is stressful so that can lead to schizophrenia(and paranoia is a part of the diagnostic criteria for schizophrenia).
Would be incredibly hard to test though, requires going back and forth with a time machine. Would be cool, though.
They're not saying cannabis use cause schizophrenia. Their conclusion is pretty clear "Both high- and low-frequency marijuana usage were associated with a significantly increased risk of schizophrenia. The frequency of use among high- and low-frequency users is similar in both, demonstrating statistically significant increased risk in developing schizophrenia."
But from my experience a solid form of psychosis is not too uncommon. We had an enormous amount of users in school and some destroyed their lives with weed and ended in psychiatric care or didn't finish their degrees. Another problem is that weed is extremely potent today. Not the same stuff people smoked in the 60s anymore. Today people use extremely potent cultivated plants.
"may accelerate schizophrenia if you have a history of that in your family"
Then we can all move on and have it in the same substance of every much more dangerous OTC drug approved by the FDA.
CBD is mostly accepted as a milder agent, and has had medications containing it approved by the FDA, like EPIDIOLEX.
I don't understand if the more I smoke the more risk I have to contract it? At this point I should be hallucinating forever...
I wonder if this is people with schizophrenia unintentionally medicating themselves?
I don't have access to the full text.
Even someone skeptical of broader mental health can watch a video of a schizophrenic person and see that there is something deeply wrong with that person.
I don't think you know what schizophrenia is.
Do you have a study or textbook that discusses this? I'm interested in reading more
Given the ethical limitations on this kind of research, I think a research group that wants to talk about probable causation really needs a cross cultural method to randomly sample and demonstrate active case prevalence changes and to run that sampling over many years.
It’s gotten “debunked” like so much else. Debunked means you aren’t allowed to talk about something. Bad parenting causes mental health problems, even though the factcheckers say otherwise.
Such that someone generally needs to have the genetic predisposition for <mental_health_issue> in order for the bad parenting to surface it. In some cases the genetic predisposition is stronger such that we need less (or more) environmental influence to being about <issue>
While it's not entirely incorrect to say that <environmental_factor> (such as parenting or cannabis) can bring about <issue>, its also misleading because we don't get the full picture of cause and effect
And as such we have people who go around on the internet claiming they know the ~one true cause~ because they read some mischaracterized study reported on by <media_institution>
Never listen to media institutions about singular scientific studies, the reporting is almost always entirely trash