Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Adults?

Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Adults?
4.65 (93.03%) 66 votes

How much cannabis is too much for those who start smoking as adults?

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

“Can the recreational use of marijuana cause cognitive impairment?” Uh, yeah—that’s kind of the whole point. “[P]eople clearly do not use cannabis only for its harms.” Like, what about boosting creativity? That’s one of the reasons people smoke it. But, you don’t know, until you put it to the test. They looked at “divergent thinking”—the ability to brainstorm creative solutions to problems—and, at a dose people might typically use to get high, their creativity took a hit, too. So, it may just “be an illusion.” People think they’re more creative when they’re high, but it may not be the best strategy, and even turn out to be “counter-productive.”

For a few hours after smoking, one’s learning, memory, and attention may also be impaired. But, the question is: Does it cause any lasting problems? In other words: “Is cannabis neurotoxic for [a] healthy brain?” Researchers have found that cannabis users have a significantly “smaller hippocampus [the memory center in the brain]…compared to non-users.” Yeah, but a snapshot-in-time study can never prove cause and effect. What you have to do is follow people over time. Only then can you see which came first.

And, what they found was, both—there are pre-existing “structural abnormalities” in the parts of the brain that control inhibitions and decision-making that may make someone more likely to take up the drug. But, the shrunken hippocampus does seem “a consequence of chronic cannabis exposure.” Okay, but is it permanent?

There was a famous study published about pre-GPS London taxi drivers who spent literally years learning and memorizing how to navigate around the city, and they had hefty hippocampuses to prove it—”correlat[ing to] the amount of time spent as a taxi driver,” suggesting the structure of the brain is in constant flux. So, if you stop using marijuana, does your hippocampus grow back to full size? Researchers tested users six months after quitting, and still found shrinkage. But, what about years later? We didn’t know, until now.

Yeah, “hippocampal volume is reduced in long-term cannabis users.” But, “this atrophy can be restored following prolonged abstinence.” Even after 15 years of use, 29 months after quitting, the size of their hippocampus appeared to bounce back. And, the same with cognitive impairments—gone within a month or two after stopping, unless they started regularly using as a teen.

Those with the most persistent cannabis use starting as an adolescent may end up losing up to eight IQ points—significantly more than if they started as an adult, and even if they then quit, starting that young appears to cause permanent brain damage. But, to get that lasting damage may require “[b]oth adolescent onset and almost 2 decades of persistent…use.”

Sounds like if you start using as an adult, though, there don’t seem to be any irreversible neurological problems—unless, perhaps, you smoke like 16 joints a day. In 2017, a study was published on extreme chronic and heavy cannabis use, and their poor brains really did seem to go to pot. “[L]ong-lasting brain dysfunction…in more than half,” and even long-lasting “psychotic symptoms:” hallucinations, delusions, and, not just memory problems, but like difficulty drawing basic figures. But again, this was at 10 times the average daily dose in Colorado—for example, a total lifetime consumption of around 75,000 joints.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Jesse Orrico via Unsplash. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

“Can the recreational use of marijuana cause cognitive impairment?” Uh, yeah—that’s kind of the whole point. “[P]eople clearly do not use cannabis only for its harms.” Like, what about boosting creativity? That’s one of the reasons people smoke it. But, you don’t know, until you put it to the test. They looked at “divergent thinking”—the ability to brainstorm creative solutions to problems—and, at a dose people might typically use to get high, their creativity took a hit, too. So, it may just “be an illusion.” People think they’re more creative when they’re high, but it may not be the best strategy, and even turn out to be “counter-productive.”

For a few hours after smoking, one’s learning, memory, and attention may also be impaired. But, the question is: Does it cause any lasting problems? In other words: “Is cannabis neurotoxic for [a] healthy brain?” Researchers have found that cannabis users have a significantly “smaller hippocampus [the memory center in the brain]…compared to non-users.” Yeah, but a snapshot-in-time study can never prove cause and effect. What you have to do is follow people over time. Only then can you see which came first.

And, what they found was, both—there are pre-existing “structural abnormalities” in the parts of the brain that control inhibitions and decision-making that may make someone more likely to take up the drug. But, the shrunken hippocampus does seem “a consequence of chronic cannabis exposure.” Okay, but is it permanent?

There was a famous study published about pre-GPS London taxi drivers who spent literally years learning and memorizing how to navigate around the city, and they had hefty hippocampuses to prove it—”correlat[ing to] the amount of time spent as a taxi driver,” suggesting the structure of the brain is in constant flux. So, if you stop using marijuana, does your hippocampus grow back to full size? Researchers tested users six months after quitting, and still found shrinkage. But, what about years later? We didn’t know, until now.

Yeah, “hippocampal volume is reduced in long-term cannabis users.” But, “this atrophy can be restored following prolonged abstinence.” Even after 15 years of use, 29 months after quitting, the size of their hippocampus appeared to bounce back. And, the same with cognitive impairments—gone within a month or two after stopping, unless they started regularly using as a teen.

Those with the most persistent cannabis use starting as an adolescent may end up losing up to eight IQ points—significantly more than if they started as an adult, and even if they then quit, starting that young appears to cause permanent brain damage. But, to get that lasting damage may require “[b]oth adolescent onset and almost 2 decades of persistent…use.”

Sounds like if you start using as an adult, though, there don’t seem to be any irreversible neurological problems—unless, perhaps, you smoke like 16 joints a day. In 2017, a study was published on extreme chronic and heavy cannabis use, and their poor brains really did seem to go to pot. “[L]ong-lasting brain dysfunction…in more than half,” and even long-lasting “psychotic symptoms:” hallucinations, delusions, and, not just memory problems, but like difficulty drawing basic figures. But again, this was at 10 times the average daily dose in Colorado—for example, a total lifetime consumption of around 75,000 joints.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Jesse Orrico via Unsplash. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Doctor's Note

What if you start before age 25? See my last video: Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Teens?

All my upcoming cannabis videos can be streamed right now for a donation to the 501c3 nonprofit that runs NutritionFacts.org. Find all of the videos on the marijuana topic page

Want an herb that can help your brain? Check out Benefits of Rosemary for Brain Function and  Best Aromatherapy Herb for Alzheimer’s.

The cannabis issue reminds me of a similar clash of politics and commercial interests in the cell phone debate. If you’re interested, check out my videos Does Cell Phone Radiation Cause Cancer? and Cell Phone Brain Tumor Risk? I continue that video series with the next installment, coming up: Do Mobile Phones Affect Brain Function?

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

188 responses to “Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Adults?

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

  1. The adults I know who smoke pot seem to have a muted emotional response in
    some situations in life, removed from reality. Less of an ability to see the present
    moment. So un-zen, not-zen, a sort of mindlessness.

    Interesting, a famous actor we all know, and he used to be outspoken on his
    pot use, has since quit and he says it is all for the better. Says he is now more
    “emotionally available” to life.

        1. Yes, Harrelson.
          Harrison Ford just stopped as well. Older guy I think he says it makes his cognition a bit less foggy.
          Bit harder I suspect to find those publically stating in this field they are now using it.

    1. Thank you for the interesting video series.

      Bella, I’m a habitual user of cannabis and I find that when I’m less high I have minimal to medium emotional reaction, my emotional intelligence is higher than average for a 20s male, always has been a little extra as a kid, pre-pot too. I was on all sorts of medications as a child so I am unsure if those had an impact on my brain development, but on high highs I’m almost twice as likely to cry from an emotionally invoking stimulus. Having dealt with drugs for stomach issues since birth I am aware of the risk benefit analysis for the use of any substance, therefore any case studies of folks who probably would have died from the increased risk of dementia, cancer, etc that many pharmaceutical drugs are being linked but survived because of cannabis use would be very interesting because they may be in a worse situation or dead and unable to take the cognitive test at all.

      My use in adolescence was reasonably high, it was less than 1/2 joint a day on average because I felt myself get stupid when “partying” which led to increased consumption, at least I only got really drunk twice, but now I only do edible oils 0.5-1 gram and 1-5 0.1 gram inhalations from a vaporizer set to 165 Celsius a day. All that being said I am an A level student on material I care about, psychology graduate, starting my own business and very intelligent when compared with my weed and non-weed smoking peer group. I do high THC in the morning and evening and a balanced or CBD high during the day when operating as a drone for society. The THC improves sleep and eating, keeping my weight healthy and the CBD calms IBS similarly to THC with less hunger and sleepiness.

      Maybe I just got lucky? I think one of the important factors here is what you do when you are high. I’m sure a lot of people are doing social cannabis and just chilling and eating or playing video games or reading so I think it would be cool to see a study on how people with different pot related past times and methods of consumption differed on measures of quality of life and intelligence.

      1. I am similar to yourself. A good student in highshool, honors student at University of Michigan, with a successful career track leading me to a major tech company earning well into 6 figures.

        While my raw talent is immutable, I am now 34 and I can sense just a slight lag in some of my decision making. But that might just be because I have a kid and get less sleep!

        Overall, I do like the Rastafarians— I enjoy the herb in a controlled manner as yourself, I eat a WFPB diet, and I exercise daily (yoga and 15 mike bike ride). It’s all about balance. If I just smoked a lot and ate junk food and didn’t exercise, I’d certainly have a lower IQ…

        1. Pot smokers never seem to be concerned about drawing smoke into their lungs. Nobody ever talks about that. I am sure it is not as bad as cigarette smoke, but smoke is smoke. I hope they pass the law for medicinal purposes though. I would like to apply marijuana oil topically for a medical condition I have. I smoked pot in high school about a dozen times, but all I ever got out of it was a headache. I also smoked cigarettes up to the age of 19 and that was probably worse.

          1. Jack just want to venture a guess and not to drive you to smoke pot, I don’t myself..

            As a kid I did and hung with people who dealt. If you did not get high likely what you smoked was filler not pot. Dealers sell filler to unsuspecting kids as they can make 99 percent profit and retain the good stuff for the more experienced.
            Dealers back in the day would cut pot with usually oregano and save the pure thing for themselves or friends. How far away how young and inexperienced was the more proportion the pot was cut. In the end and sometimes entirely.

            Strictly a money thing.

          2. Jack, the first question my cardiologist asked me when I walked into his office years ago was if I smoked pot. I said no, and asked him why. He said, and I quote, ” the boomer pot smokers are dropping like flies. ” He went on to explain how the risk of suffering a heart attack is dramatically raised after smoking pot, and this effect lasts much longer than for cigs .. 5 hours or more I believe he said. The friday night out-on-the-balcony smokers were not exempt apparently.

            As an aside, I did notice decades ago in high school/college/work that certain personalities are drawn to specific drugs, be it alcohol, pills, pot, crack etc. While they may use another drug from time to time, or as a complement to what they usually do, they tend to have one ‘not negotiable”. I have also seen more than a few heroin users clean up.. but not pot smokers – not a one.

            1. the boomer pot smokers are dropping like flies. ” He went on to explain how the risk of suffering a heart attack is dramatically raised after smoking pot, and this effect lasts much longer than for cigs ..

              Show the study which supports this contention please.

          3. Right? it’s like, what part of smoke–ANY kind of smoke, is not a result of combustion? I’m all for oils, topical & oral admin

      2. I am starting to wonder if they account for exercise levels in the studies…..Ran across a study just now by scan that showed a 12 percent difference in this part of the brain size amongst kids who exercised and those who did not.
        And similar function study shows similar results but not confirmed by scan in the elderly.
        We know there were controls in all the studies but how entire were the controls?
        Were you “Maybe I just got lucky?” or did you remain physically active. Perhaps you hit on something….what do most do when high on pot?

      3. Can we join forces? Same story use it for IBS. Graduated magna cum laude in psychology and currently starting my own business while I go to graduate school for social work and public health. Send me an email and let’s chat!

        jfwayne18@gmail.com

      4. ben, so you’re suggesting that the effects of marijuana might be different in those who read vs say… those who go bird watching? I’m not sure I understand that premise.

        I’m not questioning your intelligence, but even if you’re incredibly smart and successful, it doesn’t mean that your IQ might have been a little higher if you hadn’t smoked before adulthood. But then who cares if you’re doing so good… However, like you said, maybe it didn’t affect you for various reasons… genetics, lifestyle and dietary factors, etc. Maybe it doesn’t affect everyone in the same way. I just wanted to throw that suggestion in there. Of course our IQ can be affected in other ways too… I wonder how impacted children of “hunters” growing up on flesh from animals killed with lead bullets are IQ-wise.

        I’m glad things worked out well for you. Still, I think the scientific findings are a very good reason for those to not smoke before adulthood and can help give a little guidance to those who did, in how to counteract it.

        1. ^Actually I do understand if you’re referring to those staying active compared to those who are inactive. Still, I don’t think it would change the impact significantly. If that were the case, then adolescents who smoke(d) pot would have no difference when compared to those who do/did not but were inactive.

          1. From psychology today ..

            Researchers in 2010 found an association between physical fitness levels and the hippocampus size of 9 and 10-year-old children. The children who were more fit had a larger hippocampus and performed better on a test of memory than their less-fit peers. The hippocampus is a structure tucked deep in the brain, which is known to be important in learning and memory.
            “This is the first study I know of that has used MRI measures to look at differences in brain between kids who are fit and kids who aren’t fit,” said University of Illinois psychology professor and Beckman Institute director Art Kramer, who led the study with doctoral student Laura Chaddock and kinesiology and community health professor Charles Hillman. “Beyond that, it relates those measures of brain structure to cognition.”
            When they analyzed the MRI data, the researchers found that the physically fit children tended to have bigger hippocampal volume — about 12 percent bigger relative to total brain size — than their out-of-shape peers. The children who were in better physical condition also did better on tests of relational memory — the ability to remember and integrate various types of information — than their less-fit peers.”

            Referencing this ill advised comment…”Still, I don’t think it would change the impact significantly.”

            1. ron, not sure how my comment was “ill advised,” simply sharing my thoughts here like everyone else, but you seem to think anything you disagree with on this subject is ill advised. I didn’t read through the published data as always linked below the video, but I would assume the study would have taken other factors into account, maybe I’m wrong, I’d have to read it. I’d be surprised though since I imagine many factors could play a role in the hippocampus part of the brain. So even with the study you’ve referenced, I wonder if it was from inactivity or diet as both result in being less fit, maybe just being less fit or less healthy in general would be the cause. But while I highly doubt it personally, if the effects of marijuana on the hippocampus were solely based on an inactive lifestyle, it would at least appear that those who smoke regularly are more likely to be inactive resulting in a smaller hippocampus one way or another. Then that would also be true that lifestyle factors would play a role in any damage, but I doubt they didn’t consider that. I’ll have to read through it later. But between you and Dr. Greger and his team, you’re the one coming from an obvious bias (based off of some of your other comments) and as Dr. Greger has long proven himself to cite quality studies and look for holes in studies and point them out, I trust the results explained in these videos over your speculations. That isn’t to say you didn’t share relevant info in your reply.

              1. Your comment is ill advised as that study shows a 12 percent drop in size between active and not active children. Other study also shows a similar pattern of decreased cognition particularly amongst elderly with inactivity as opposed to activity.
                So your conclusion of no much difference or little effect is wrong.

                You refuse to admit any study or statistical evidence which does not support your view. That is bias.Nor will you admit in being mistaken in any single solitary issue nevertheless points in discussion. Clearly you do not even read what others respond at times, evidenced on this thread..So pot that kettle is also black. It is your way or the highway, and yes I do take exception to that.
                I admit the variety of study suggests that a conclusive determination is not possible.
                So who is exhibiting bias…clearly you are.

                1. A quote on one supportive study of my challenge mentioned in Harvard health publication..
                  In a study done at the University of British Columbia, researchers found that regular aerobic exercise, the kind that gets your heart and your sweat glands pumping, appears to boost the size of the hippocampus, the brain area involved in verbal memory and learning. Resistance training, balance and muscle toning exercises did not have the same results

                  To restate my contention and challenge I am now presenting in formal fashion…..I contend until proven otherwise unless exercise component was specifically addressed in the control and study groupings the results may be compromised by that component.
                  It may be peoples who exercise more tend to not smoke pot and thus H size is larger. And it may be that will reflect in any study control group as it is necessarily comprised of those who do not smoke pot as control.

                  To restate a contributory supportive comment..the choice of CBD free pot may also compromise H size study finding. CBD is known by additional study to have a protective effect on H size and cognitive function when combined with THC injestion.

                  Likely now to be insulted and demonized rather than to have these studies looked into to find if my claims hold water……
                  That would involve actually doing some work as opposed to just calling people names. Calling names if far easier…

    2. In retrospect, what I didn’t like about chronic use back when I was a “head” was the adverse effect it had on my motivation. Life is competitive and challenging by design. I found myself withdrawing from competition and challenge. It was easier to justify doing so on pot.

      Internalizing media messages like Boston’s old song Peace of Mind didn’t help either:

      I understand about indecision
      And I don’t care if I get behind
      People living in competition
      All I want is to have my peace of mind.

      1. I have seen many teens using pot and most of them have exactly the attitude you mentioned.
        A teenager without the desire to succeed is usually unwilling to achieve his potential.

      2. You sure it wasn’t the music doc…really Boston.
        Even forty years later I would never admit to that.

        It is hard to think straight when your ears are bleeding or are impelled to vomit ;).

        So a woman the other day talking about how she was a young person in a old body…asked her what music she listened to…Led Zeppelin was her reply……

        Hmmm said I

    3. Now I will respond with another actor and comedian and following another discussion here, someone will call foul and say you can not bring up individuals as it is not scientific(banging head against wall) but here it is as someone has brought up Woody Harrelson…for a negative on pot use, I will introduce a positive….
      Joe Rogan
      UFC color commentator Joe Rogan, an open smoker and supporter of marijuana, took to his podcast (h/t Bloody Elbow) recently to speak with Ethan Nadelmann, founder and executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, a New York City-based non-profit organization working to end the War on Drugs. Rogan said not only is there drug use in the UFC, he thinks most fighters in the promotion are blazing outside of their fight schedules.
      “That’s also the weird thing about martial arts. A tremendous amount of UFC fighters smoke pot. I mean, a massive amount where it’s a huge issue with them involving drug tests, you know, where they have to stop smoking weed for the last four weeks or so in order to pass drug tests. More UFC fighters smoke pot than don’t smoke pot.”
      That isn’t really news to UFC president Dana White, who in 2012 suggested the exact same thing. However, regardless of his personal feelings on the issue White has always maintained that marijuana is illegal and fighters should not be smoking it.
      For Rogan’s part, the 48-year-old says he started smoking pot when he was 30. And it’s all thanks to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu wizard Eddie Bravo, who was a co-worker of Rogan during the early days of the UFC when he provided live scoring and post-fight interviews
      .”

      Rogan is a fight commentator, a actor, and does I think it is, three comedy specials for Netflix each year, and does a ongoing standup comedy routine, working out of a club in LA many nights, and a you tube blog which presents 2 hours of new content on workdays. Eddie Bravo is a black belt in jujitsu and runs a nationwide group of individual training schools to teach his form of jujitsu. Joe Rogan not that long ago received his black belt in jujitsu.

      Enotions are sort of a hard thing to pin down. Bravo is a proponent of using pot for training and even competition as it enhances his focus. Rogan supports that opinion. Which is the why, to include injury pain management…most all UFC fighters use it. UFC is generally the elite of Mixed martial arts.
      The winners those who earn the most in the sport.
      Bravo was ranked fifth globally in jujitsu at one time. Rogan was top of his class in his martial arts discipline back in his day.

      1. o qualify..back in the day I also smoked pot drank alcohol and many other things. As a kid. Went on to have a great success with my life by my read. Not working for money for almost 20 years as has not been necessary any longer. Hobby volunteer and political has been my free work.

        But really nothing for years and years and year..so really have no dog in the fight.

        By my take those with the stoners are lazy bums do nothings and not motivated….they were that before pot came into the picture. Some people are just that way. Pot makes it easier if you are that way. Fills up the time other wise a person like that is doing nothing. So they prefer to use it but it is not that made them that way. It is a consequence of being that way, pot.

        In kids before pot…. a part of the brain that controls impulse has been found in study to be smaller. Those with that smaller part are more inclined to become pot abusers as teens. Yes it gets even smaller with chronic use….but is it the cart before the horse?
        A part that and a part this…I think it is a bit both.
        But the idea one is a lazy stoner because of pot..to my opinion pot was not usually the cause. Hard to admit that as we want to say something anything made my kid a bum…..but some are just that way. Way before pot in our culture other things fit in that thing. People some are just that way.

      2. James Garner (Rockford Files) smoked quite a bit of pot. He said that alcohol should be illegal because it causes so many health and social problems. I always figured him as a conservative. I was quite surprised to hear him say that.

        1. James Garner (Rockford Files) smoked quite a bit of pot.

          Poor guy he was the feature in the meat is what’s for dinner add campaign….then he suddenly died of cardiac related problems….sad.
          Dropped his adds like a rock they did.
          Nice guy I have heard.

          1. Just another Maverick, I guess….

            [James] Garner’s memoir, “The Garner Files,” in which the actor explains:

            “I started smoking marijuana in my late teens. I drank to get drunk but ultimately didn’t like the effect. Not so with grass. Grass is smooth. It had the opposite effect from alcohol: it made me more tolerant and forgiving. …

            “I smoked marijuana for 50 years. I don’t know where I’d be without it. It opened my mind to a lot of things, and now it’s active ingredient, THC, relaxes me and eases my arthritis pain. I’ve concluded that marijuana should be legal and alcohol should be illegal. But, good luck with that.”

            https://www.celebstoner.com/news/celebstoner-news/2014/07/20/james-garner-marijuana-should-be-legal/?ref=2&ref_type=tab

          2. Ron
            You might be thinking of Robert Mitchum. His was the authoritative, hyper-masculine voice I heard, telling the world that “Beef, It’s whats for dinner!,” to strains of Aaron Copland’s “Rodeo.”
            Mitchum died at 80, of lung cancer, after a life of smoking cigarettes. Of course, Mitchum, appropriate to this discussion, was arrested for marijuana, in 1948 and did hard time for it. With all that marijuana in his system, no wonder he was so concerned about dinner.

            1. No I am not mistaken.
              Here is a quote from the LA times back in the day, as regards to their sticking with him despite his triple bypass…

              James Garner, sidelined last week by quintuple-bypass heart surgery, is still a star in the eyes of the Beef Industry Council, which has no plans to drop him from its current “Beef: Real Food for Real People” ad campaign.
              “We certainly plan to keep him as a spokesperson,” said John Francis, vice president of marketing for the Chicago-based council, which represents beef producers nationwide.
              Garner, star of the defunct “The Rockford Files” and “Maverick” TV series, is currently featured in four TV commercials, four radio spots and one of the council’s two print advertisements promoting beef.
              On Monday, he was listed in satisfactory condition at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. The 60-year-old actor is “beginning to eat a normal diet” but hospital spokesman Ron Wise wouldn’t say if beef is included. Garner is expected to be discharged later this week, Wise said.

              Garner’s contract with the Beef Industry Council expires at the end of May “but it has an option to extend,” Francis said. “We haven’t begun to discuss it at this point.”
              No shootings for new commercials are yet scheduled, added Jeanne Sowa, a council spokeswoman.
              In the council’s current campaign featuring Garner, one ad has a “right-brain, left-brain” theme. The logical left side of the brain tells you “3 ounces of lean, trimmed beef in a balanced and varied diet can easily fit within the leading dietary guidelines,” Garner notes, while the creative right side tells you that “Beef just tastes good.” In the closing, Garner eats steak and smiles: “The nice thing about sirloin. Makes the whole brain happy.”
              The actor entered the hospital April 18 for repair of an aortic aneurysm, a weakening in the wall of the main artery carrying blood to the stomach, according to Wise. But doctors postponed that surgery when tests showed Garner had clogged vessels near the heart, he said.
              “That (aneurysm) will undoubtedly be repaired later,” said Wise, who added that Garner had a “positive mental attitude about the surgery. He was very cool about the whole thing–cool in the way you’d expect James Garner to be cool. He was very relaxed; his spirits were excellent. He didn’t seem to have any fears (before the surgery). He did say, ‘I wish I hadn’t waited 45 years to quit smoking.’ ”
              Dr. Jack Matloff, head of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery at Cedars, performed the five-hour operation, Wise said. Matloff and his team have operated on, among others, George Burns, Milton Berle and Ella Fitzgerald, he said.

              by Taboola

              1. Ron, I apologize for dismissing your version of the ad campaign.  You’re right, of course.  I just wasn’t aware of the length and breadth of the campaign; I must have lost interest after the first few years…

                This from Wikipedia (and would the lie to us?):

                The campaign was launched the week of May 18, 1992 by the Chicago-based National Livestock and Meat Board through a promotional arm, “The Beef Industry Council”,[1] by the advertising firm of Leo Burnett Company. The “Beef. It’s What’s For Dinner” campaign was established through television and radio advertisements that featured actor Robert Mitchum as its first narrator,[2] and scenarios and music (“Hoe-Down”) from the Rodeo suite by Aaron Copland,[3] followed by a large magazine campaign that was rolled out in late July and early August.[1

                | | | | | |

                |

                | | | | Beef. It’s What’s for Dinner – Wikipedia

                |

                |

                |

                After Mitchum’s death, they looked elsewhere and found among the new spokesmen, James Garner. 

                We’re both right!

                | | | | | |

                |

                | | | | Rodeo (ballet) – Wikipedia

                |

                |

                |

                | | | | Rodeo (ballet)

                Rodeo is a ballet scored by Aaron Copland and choreographed by Agnes de Mille, which premiered in 1942. Subtitle…
                |

                |

                |

                | | | | | |

                |

                | | | | Leo Burnett Worldwide

                |

                |

                |

                | | | | | |

                |

                | | | | Aaron Copland

                After some initial studies with composer Rubin Goldmark, Copland traveled to Paris, where he first studied with …
                |

                |

                |

                | | | | | |

                |

                | | | | Robert Mitchum

                Mitchum is rated number 23 on the American Film Institute’s list of the greatest male stars of Classic American …
                |

                |

                |

                1. Sure …I didn’t say Mitchum was not. I seem to recall his voice being used actually. They prefer the masculine voice mostly as this fits in with this part of their add campaign.
                  Garner had the same type of voice, but not quite as deep. But was pretty identified with a male grouping by his appearance and style.

                  Garner was a nice guy to my opinion though I am vegan. Mitchum I don’t know.
                  They did drop Garner when he died…they had to I guess.

                    1. You know back in the day, this was not to far from the Joe McCarthy days when people lost their jobs and were completely blacklisted for years and year, things like this said a real lot about a person…. he marched in the August 28, 1963, “March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom,” sitting in the third row listening to Dr. King’s
                      “I Have a Dream” speech.

                      as Steve mentions. You were to context…….. putting it all out there taking a real chance. Especially a actor.

                      I don’t know about these days and times but then taking a stand was a big big chance and a real strong statement.
                      RIP Garner even though you sold that meat stuff. If I had a grade…you made it…..A plus.
                      And he was seemingly a real nice guy.

        2. James Garner was hardly a conservative. According to Wikipedia, he marched in the August 28, 1963, “March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom,” sitting in the third row listening to Dr. King’s
          “I Have a Dream” speech. He supported Dennis Kucinich, among many other progressive and/or Democratic candidates. He died at 86. Had he not smoked marijuana for fifty years, he might have made it to 90…but he wouldn’t have had nearly so happy a life.

    4. I had the worst experience of my life on medically prescribed mj. I am still dealing with the consequence 3 years later!

    5. I guess my first question is where do all these studies come from since cannabis study has been outlawed in the United States for many years. also how are we supposed to believe anything from any of these doctors when for the last 30 years they’ve been telling us that cannabis is a deadly drug yet they know from the usage of it pre 1930s how much good it did for everyone. I can just tell you this I’ve been a cannabis user for over 35 years I’m 56 years old I work hard 7 days a week my blood pressure is perfect my cholesterol everything perfect I have not been sick not even so much as a cold in 18 years I’m an entrepreneur I have 9 patent pending inventions I’ve spoken at many College’s festivals City Council meetings SB hearings and have never written a speech and I speak wonderfully I’m also a retired electrician and I can still wire a 20,000 square foot house without writing down anything. I can build just about anything…etc. so I’m calling BS on the brain damage and any of these reports written by anyone in the medical field

  2. Dr. G, on a separate note, you mention in a blog that omega 3’s are a possible cause of TYPE 2 DIABETES)
    “The review found that blood sugars increase in diabetics given fish oil. Another possible cause (type 2 diabetes) is that omega 3’s appear to cause oxidative stress. A recent study, highlighted in my video, Fish and Diabetes, found that the insulin producing cells in the pancreas don’t appear to work as well in people who eat two or more servings of fish a week.”

    I am wondering, any chance that an excess/overload of plant-based omega 3 from walnut and flax could cause the
    same issue? I am talking about an “excess” here, as well as for people who do not process flax and walnut well. I and
    a few others I know get real thin blood on both plant-based omega 3 as well as fish, and seem to get a sort of short-term
    memory-fog from either source, whether fish, plant, whole food, or oil. Could excess omega-3 be the issue, harming the
    blood vessel integrity? Thanks.

    1. Lizzy,

      Perhaps you need to examine your omega 6: 0mega 3 ratio. For awhile I recorded my food in Cronometer.com, just to see if I was missing anything. Since I don’t use added oils, I only get what comes in natural veggies and flaxseeds, chia seeds, etc., and I noticed I wasn’t getting much omega 6. I haven’t done anything to change that, and it hasn’t seemed to cause any problems, but we are supposed to get some omega 6 fats in our diets. Some say 1:1, others say as much as 4:1, with more of the omega 6 fatty acids. It’s just a thought. I’ve never read anything about getting too little omega 6, since the big problem in the western world these days is getting far too much omega 6 in the mix.

      1. Hi, Rebecca,

        I, too, notice that I am getting a miniscule amt of omega 6 and plenty of omega 3–so I wonder the same thing….

    2. Litzy, I highly doubt that. I also don’t recall Dr. Greger ever saying omega-3’s we’re linked to anything bad, the problem wasn’t omega 3 content but the source: fish/fish oil.

      Commenting on Rebecca’s reply, I actually did experience a noticeable consequence of not getting enough omega 6 (from healthy plant sources). At the time, I was obsessed with getting extremely high omega 3’s in comparison to omega 6 which I wasn’t getting enough of and that had shown up in my blood work. If I had say, a nut butter or something that day, I would have excessive amounts of things like flax in order to skew the ratio. I didn’t have any negative side effects from getting extreme amounts of omega 3, I was actually overall MUCH healthier as I had begun eating WFPB, but I did have some issues with breakouts which I never had a problem with before and my hair was getting thinner (I also contribute the hair issue to chronic stress at that time). I learned that not getting enough omega 6 can cause our skin to produce stickier sebum and thus results in breakouts. And omega 6 is also essential for hair growth.

      Once I stopped worrying about ratios and simply made sure to get 2 tbsp of ground flax a day as a rule, and didn’t worry about omega 6 amounts from the nuts and seeds and such in my diet, my issues went away.

    3. Hi I’m a RN health support volunteer with NF.
      There are many times that we have found that something that has health benefits in food, does not have the same benefit or even causes harm when isolated and manufactured in a supplement. The famous case of beta carotene supplements.

      I do not think you will have a excess level of omega 3 from flax and walnut consumption. Dr. Greger recommends 1 tablespoon of ground flax/day and an ounce of nuts a day in his Daily Dozen. If you are following those recommendations, you will not be in excess. It may be more than the omega 3’s in the fish and fish oil supplements causing harm. It could be the fat, toxins, animal protein . . . I don’t know that we have identified the mechanism.

      There has not been much research done on excess omega 3 because that is the opposite problem you’ll have if you eat the standard American diet. Most of the research has been done on excess omega 6 and deficient omega 3 which is a much more common issue with the standard American diet as oils and processed foods are full of omega 6. That is part of why fish is promoted so much. If you are eating the standard American diet full of omega 6, you needs some omega 3 to balance it. The ration should be close to 1:1. Too much omega 6 and too little omega 3 had an inflammatory effect. That should not be a problem with a whole food plant based diet. If you aren’t eating excess omega 6, you don’t need to work so hard to get extra omega 3.
      I would stay within the recommended amounts of omega 3 if you are going to supplement
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/should-we-take-epa-and-dha-omega-3-for-our-heart/
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/should-we-take-dha-supplements-to-boost-brain-function/

      NurseKelly

      1. NurseKelly, can you share where you’re getting your ratio reccomendation from? Seems like there is no agreed upon ratio and not a lot of studies have gone into it. Most studies from my understanding, are based off of westernized diets getting their omega 6 from processed foods and animal products. Omega 6 rich whole plant foods on the other hand are shown to be anti inflammatory in contrast to animal/refined food sources.
        It also seems hard to accomplish a 1:1 ratio unless you either get very little fat or consume supplements or excess flax or chia to accomplish said ratio. It doesn’t seem like nature’s design backs up such a strict ratio if you look at the balance of fats in many of the healthiest whole plant foods. After digging to find “the” answer, it seemed the ratio thing is just theory and not an agreed upon one. This is why I ask.

  3. So where are the studies that recreational use of marijuana has no effect on cognition, creativity, etc? Or even positive effects? And what is the proportion of studies that report it does to those that report that it does not have deleterious effects? Who funded these studies? Also, what level of use is meant by “chronic” use? I did hear that the typical use was 1.6 joints a day in Colorado, which seems high to me. Are there dose-response curves, showing different long-term effects at different doses?

    1. Just one thing I noticed…any pot shop in Colorado to my knowledge is going to have a line of products. They vary from potency and effect and there is always a line of edibles, which tend more potent.
      If one wants a little calming effect they buy this type. They want to get blotto go to a wild place and dance…they get this type. And on and on in between.

      Typical use then would cover a lot of ground. Typical use of what kind? And how about edibles, all the shops sell them seem pretty popular.
      It is like the people producing these studies are lost about ten years back. This is not he pot of today in Colorado. Google any pot shop in Colorado and their list of products comes up..it just is different than ten years ago or 1.6 joints per day if that is the number.

      1. Here is a link to one store. this store offers 200 strains of recreational pot… https://www.oasissuperstore.com/products/recreational/

        Really this is a completely different world of recreational use than prior to legalization.
        I can’t see as many most or perhaps all of the studies are reflecting this experience the real user today in Colorado. And who likely in ten years time will be in all places.

        What good is the study if it reflects only a type of person who is being replaced gradually by another. Look at this store…this is not a stoners store.
        Up scale looks like whole foods to me.

        I think a bunch just do not know this world exists. This is it this is real. Google it a hundred more come up just like it.

  4. I live in a small, rural, Colorado town historically famous for its cannabis culture. Many people I know grow their own, use it as trade, give it as gifts, etc. Use is almost as common as beer. But joints I don’t see so much. When people “smoke a joint” it is usually several people passing one around for one or two hits each and done. Or a puff or two from a vaporizer. 1.6 joints for one person seems to me a huge amount and not at all average even at a party. I have seen in some friends, what is clearly memory and even cognition problems but there is absolutely no way to know if that is connect to cannabis use or just “aging”.

  5. Hi Dr. Gregor,

    Interesting series! This topic leaves me with a few questions that I’m hoping you can answer:

    –In terms of cognitive damage to those who started smoking in their teens, how much would the teen have to smoke to incur damage? Would a teen who gets high about four times a year on average thought their teen years, with occasional once a month indulgence have anything to worry about? What if any, is the safe threshold? (My son is sitting here asking me this for obvious reasons.)

    –Since the brain isn’t really finished developing until one reaches their 20’s, are those who smoke cannabis in their 20s also at risk for permanent brain damage?

    –And lastly, does CBD oil (with only trace amounts of THC) cause this type of brain damage as well?

    Thanks so much for taking the time to provide some answers and thanks for all the work you do! Have a great day!

  6. The problem with unsupervised psychotropic drug use is that when there is impairment, the organ that is impaired (the brain) is also the organ one relies upon to make decisions about whether and how much of the drug one is going to use. Therefore, in these matters it seems particularly advisable to rely upon objective data, rather than what “feels right”. In general, I am a great believer in listening to my body, but with respect to substances that manipulate neurotransmitters, the mediators of my thought, it seems prudent to defer to the wisdom of others. I have yet to hear a convincing health-based argument for using pleasure-producing (and therefore potentially dependency-inducing) recreational drugs, and I am relieved to take them off the table. Thanks, Dr. G, for delivering the sometimes inconvenient truths.

  7. Is this information only applicable to smoking marijuana? Or dose this also include using CBD OIL for pain or for other medical reasons?

  8. I have ADD and age-related pain from arthritis and degenerative disc disease. I have gotten good results for focus with CBD in edible form (capsules or cookies). Smoking is a threat to my lungs (age 72) and makes me too stoned.

    CBD is offered in various proportions with THC: 18:1, 10:1, 8:1, down to 1:1. I am told CBD oil does not get into the brain; that the CBD must have some THC as a carrier to get across the blood/brain barrier.

    I don’t get pain relief from various forms of THC. Ibuprofen interferes with my kidney function, and I have switched to acetaminophen.

  9. Many people confuse feelings with emotions. Feelings are conscious. Emotions are not (deep and irrational). Yet emotions run the show of your brain. They tell you how to react and they affect feelings, heart (through medula), etc. So, if you want to get the benefit of MJ and feel good, but without the negative effects of bombing the brain with chemicals to achieve feelings, you have to learn how it works from the center out, which is not easy.

  10. Considering that Carl Sagan was a regular cannabis user, I would say many of the above comments are spoken from a place of ignorance. Not everyone responds the same to it. Biochemical individuality exists not just with prescription drugs and foods.

    Also, following the quote used in the video taken from ‘Transl Psychiatry 6:e710’ it says,”Moreover, we show for the first time that hippocampal volume and neurochemistry are reduced to the greatest extent in users exposed to THC without CBD.”
    Currently the cannabis industry is highly focused on CBD. Perhaps the good doctor can look into research and do a video on WHICH type of cannabis provides the least harm.

  11. Dr. Greger, you must know that the plural of hippocampus is hippocampi, not hippcampuses! Or were you just in a more creative mood, today?

  12. I’ve said it before and I’ll keeping saying it- Thank you Dr. Greger and team for providing us the balanced, unbiased, and comprehensive insight into nutrition and lifestyle sciences!

  13. Not for me. I don’t want my mind/body controlled any more than necessary. Nor would I want to be (deliberately) hypnotized. There are plenty of subliminal messages (TV, etc.) as it is, and we gotta stay alert. Just walking on the street these days requires total concentration on what’s going on around us.

    A little “science” about MJ: https://science.howstuffworks.com/marijuana4.htm

  14. Geoffrey Levens, to cause an 8 point reduction in IQ, all one needs to do is have a dentist drill out a bunch of molars and install toxic fillings. This is especially harmful for children. Some adults have reported memory loss after they started using cell phones in their 30’s. In his amazing book, “Making a Good Brain Great” Dr. Daniel Amen reports a great number of ways we can knock down our intelligence. Daniel Amen reports we have all suffered some degree of brain damage. His books give us some ideas for repairing it.

  15. My cousin is the only marijuana user I’ve known in my life. He smoked most of his adult life and quit last year at age 79 after a quadruple bypass. His memory is excellent, and he is always focused on learning new things. He’s one of the smartest people I know.

    1. Then I guess that means the science is wrong because someone will always have an uncle or a cousin or a neighbor… I think that’s great about your cousin, but that doesn’t really tell us anything about the impact marijuana has on the brain. I mean there are cigarette smokers who live well into their 90’s, yet cigarettes are incredibly harmful. Also, in the video, Dr. Greger explains that unless one smokes 16 joints a day or more, smoking pot doesn’t permanently damage adult brains.

      1. Well then a admission of truth…” that unless one smokes 16 joints a day or more, smoking pot doesn’t permanently damage adult brains.

        1. I have challenged and cited this study, but am met with personal attacks and insult..
          I now restate the challenge and again cite the study….https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2678214?redirect=true.

          This study show no proven cognitive deficit by teenage use of pot….it is a metanalysis produced on April 18 2018
          Disprove it.
          Or continue to throw out insults…..
          If you do not or cannot disprove it I win……
          Insults really don’t matter in discussion nor debate.

  16. Dr. I’ve a question please.

    I’ve only been on a vegan diet for 2 months and I’m eating low fat as well but I eat nuts and avocado everyday, I eat till I’m completely full, and I’ve lost my period, I’m not underweight at all(163cm and 64.5kg) what do you think I should do to have my period back Please.

    1. No one has replied and it has been several hours…so I will to qualify as just another blogger with not qualification. Usually someone they will see my reply and then reply to correct me.
      To start…
      WE do not know your age or any medical conditions.
      The correct response is to consult your doc to do blood work and a complete check up to rule out any auxiliary cause of this. Many things can cause loss of periods not just diet. Some disease processes as well.

      Assuming you are young with no known medical conditions allergies or meds… and you are healthy and have had recent check ups and blood work done…

      To my understanding loosing ones period is related to dietary intake not actual weight of the person. In other words if one was even fat they could loose a period if they went on a starvations type diet for a extended period.
      So it would mean you have inadequate caloric intake. How to increase calories? Fat is the most concentrated source of calories.
      But if you have heart problems high blood pressure high cholesterol or any number of additional conditions you may not care to eat more fat.
      So what is another choice or two….find a way that you like to increase calories. Add a smoothie perhaps with berries flax seeds and other things thrown in.
      Or what you would prefer. Peanut butter has a lot of calories but also fat. You can put about anything you like in a smoothie.
      Medical conditions aside calories is a cause of loss of period not necessarily body weight.

      But first if you have not…consult your doc. Vegans, I am one as well, It requires a bit of study to my opinion to get it right. Study or consult a nutritionist to get it right. It is great if done right in a informed way. If not, it can be detrimental to health as can be most any diet.

    2. Hi, CR! There are many possible factors that could cause loss of one’s period. Besides certain health conditions and nutrition-related factors, stress can cause amenorrhea as well. I would recommend consulting with your doctor, who will have a better understanding of your health history and is credentialed to help you find the root cause. In the meantime, you may find this resource helpful (tips from a plant-based dietitian on how to get your period back). Best of luck to you!

    3. CR, make sure you’re getting enough fat. Not getting enough fat can mess with your hormones. You could get your blood tested. Also, are you taking B12 everyday or a high dose once a week? Dr. Greger has dose recommendations somewhere on this site, just type in B12. And are you eating the foods Dr. Greger recommends?
      It HAS only been 2 months, maybe your hormones are just balancing out or your body is going through other changes and it could be effecting your period. Dr. Greger also explains somewhere on here that women who consume flax can sometimes have longer periods but less of them throughout the year. I wouldn’t worry too much over 2 months, but I would make sure you’re getting proper nutrition and if you feel there’s a problem, perhaps get your blood tested.

      I’m no authority on this subject, just going by my basic understanding and experiences. Hopefully you’ll get a response from one of the volunteers. Good luck!

  17. Creativity is measurable by a study in “divergent thinking?” How exactly is such thinking measured?
    And marijuana use inhibits such “divergent thinking” so that creativity is demonstrably affected?

    I only wish we had this kind of “science” available earlier so that these poor schlubs who used the drug might have avoided it and gone on to have successful lives: Bill Gates and Steve Jobs (although they supposedly preferred LSD), Carl Sagan, Madonna, Hugh Hefner, Seth MacFarlane, Jon Stewart,
    Morgan Freeman, Oliver Stone, Seth Rogen, Margaret Mead, Dave Chappelle, Lady Gaga, Bob Marley, Willie Nelson, Whoopi Goldberg, Maya Angelou, Stephen Colbert, Conan O’Brien (at Harvard, he only graduated magna cum laude) and a few hundred more who come to mind. And when those people acknowledged their use, they opened themselves up to potential felony charges in the vast majority of States, in this country. Imagine who else has been smoking…

    Citing a “study” that contemplates a subject using 16 joints a day is the equivalent of following a user of alcohol who drinking 16 pints of whiskey a day. Or has sex 16 times a day. Or someone who strenuously works out at a gym for 16 hours a day. If this isn’t a straw man argument, I missed something, in my reading.

    This is the most disappointing series of videos that Dr. G has produced. I have to assume that there is a back story to how this series came to be made, with its own agenda, having nothing to do with eating well. Dr. G, please take a chill pill–but no more than 15, a day.

    1. I’ve been checking my biases at the door for these videos also, and I feel the same way as you.

      These are the most reductive narrow minded studies I’ve seen—oh wait, that’s right, because the science of cannabis has been surpessed so all we have are these narrow studies. Biases are everywhere…

        1. “I have personally assumed doc has two teenage kids, who he does not want to see smoking pot…..”

          Ron, so because you don’t like what some of the evidence shows, you’d go so far as to accuse Greger of using his work to sway his personal life? That’s a pretty big thing to accuse someone of and so beyond obviously undeserving in Dr. Greger’s case. That’s just ridiculous.

          1. What is ridiculous is your assertation that the science presented here is the only science on the issue…
            And your claim that I am accusing Dr Greger of a position that is related to his personal life……He admits he employs all of his dietary guidance on his family, I can produce video from him stating such and he himself will not deny it.

            Why should pot be exempt from that? Do you suppose he is exempting family from one opinion and not another?
            Everyone develops opinion related to the personal. It is as we are humans. The human condition inspires bias, the only question is to what extend.

            1. I didn’t assert it was the only science, I just acknowledged the science intead of going into a denialist rampage like you.

              You have doubts, questions, concerns… ok, anyway of sharing them without making outlandish claims and accusations?

              You have that totally backwards, he doesn’t report cherry picked evidence to fit a bias or agenda as you’ve accused him of, he APPLIES what the best available evidence says to his own lifestyle choices and family… who in their right mind wouldn’t?! Some pretty sloppy twisting there, ron.

              Dr. Greger goes off of what the evidence says, that couldn’t be more apparent. You on the other hand make it obvious when you’re coming from a place of bias, so your accusation is ironic to say the least.

              1. Bias is part of being human. Of course we all share things with our families and our families serve as impetus for much of most things peoples do…..

                As to this…” I just acknowledged the science intead of going into a denialist rampage like you

                Who says what I say is a denialist rampage….you????
                So what…. I don’t care for your personal opinion not a whit.. It is clear you are telling peoples how to act and be. That is plainly none of your business. My comment was not addressed to you nor about you in any remote fashion. You take exception take exception but this…”using his work to sway his personal life? That’s a pretty big thing to accuse someone of “…is nonsense. It is expression of opinion and a rather mild one at that.

                AS to this…”Dr. Greger goes off of what the evidence says, that couldn’t be more apparent. You on the other hand make it obvious when you’re coming from a place of bias, ” I have multiple times versed alternative study and statistical study that presents a oppositional view to Dr Gregers claims….they are right here in this discussion anyone can see them.

                What is ironic is your continual attempt to personalize this discussion. And your attempt to distract from study that supports a contrary view.

                1. I restate Steve’s contention and support it….and elaborate upon it…
                  Citing a “study” that contemplates a subject using 16 joints a day is the equivalent of following a user of alcohol who drinking 16 pints of whiskey a day. Or has sex 16 times a day. Or someone who strenuously works out at a gym for 16 hours a day. If this isn’t a straw man argument, I missed something, in my reading.

                  A straw man argument is the putting up of a persons side in argument that one does not hold. then to knock down that not held position.
                  In this specific added into the video is a study on cognitive decline in peoples smoking 16 joints a day.
                  No reasonable person in a fair and equal discussion on wether pot is harmful to adults would introduce this as a proof of a thing.
                  We all assume that amount is harmful. A real discussion would have stated a reasonable amount of use in the video.
                  This absurdly large amount is of course beaten down easily. But it is a straw man….no one would ever support that.

                  So Steve’s contention is supported.
                  Demonize me or refute my elaboration.
                  If you demonize me you loose.
                  Simple really

      1. Apparently the recent announcement of GOP speaker Boehner investing in the marijuana industry has some on the right so over-defensive they even feel the need to show political BIAS on non political discussions.

    2. I had to smile at that…”Citing a “study” that contemplates a subject using 16 joints a day is the equivalent of following a user of alcohol who drinking 16 pints of whiskey a day

      Thinking to myself…well what sort of problems or perhaps structural defect in the brain would impel one to consume 16 joints a day. I’ve been around a lot of users back in the day and unless one was a some sort of a party a rave or something 16 is a absurd amount. Heavy users I have known 5 I would say was about it. Morning one lunch one dinner one and with friends recreating after work and all 2 or 3 shared. A big party like new years or some such maybe a bunch more, but really 16 a day…..how could you be walking around..you must just be lying around in bed all day..

      Then the question may be….does lying around in bed all day have negative effects on brain matter?

    3. Steve,

      I’m a little confused by your list of people you apparently believe are creative. Is that meant to be humorous sarcasm or are you being serious?

      Have you ever listened to a Beethoven symphony or a Mozart concerto? Now that’s real creativity.

      Or how about the paintings and sculptures of Michelangelo? Or the poetry of Elizabeth Barrett Browning or Edna St Vincent Millay?

      Or the mathematics developed by Isaac Newton or Wilfred Gottlieb Liebnitz? Or the physics theories of Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr?

      Now these are the really creative people who I doubt used any psychedelic substances. I don’t mean to sound rude, but your list of Hollywood elites seems really pathetic compared to genuinely creative intelligent people. Whoopi Goldberg … really?

      Thank you Dr Greger for doing this series. Maybe it will prevent the destruction of the mind of a future genius!

      1. Darwin Galt,

        I’m sorry that you were confused by those whom I listed, under the general rubric of “creative.” I used the particular term so as to address the claimed impact on creativity by the use of marijuana. I understand that you see nothing creative in the works of such people as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs,
        Carl Sagan, Margaret Mead or Maya Angelou, much less Whoopi Goldberg (what was I thinking?).
        Your erudition is duly noted.

        I’m wondering how you can acclaim people such as Beethoven and Mozart, both of whom drank like fishes. In fact, Beethoven was found to have had cirrhosis when his autopsy was performed. Of course, they’re not the only ones who drank to excess: Bach was known to have been often paid, in beer; and, of course, Edgar Allen Poe and Hemingway were both heavy, heavy drinkers.

        I’m surprised to see your admiration for Elizabeth Barrett Browning, as well. I’m sure that you’re aware that she was a regular user of Laudanum, a tincture of Opium. She wasn’t alone in the use of Laudanum, or course. She was joined by those other would-be creative types in using the drug, a list that includes Keats, Shelley, George Elliot, Bram Stoker and Gabriel Dante Rossetti. Those who simply used the straight Opium included Samuel Johnson, Lewis Carroll, Charles Dickens, Berlioz, Ben Franklin, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Florence Nightingale, Chopin, and Mary Shelly.

        I’m certain that you’re also aware that Robert Louis Stevenson wrote “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” in six days, while high on cocaine. He wasn’t the only famous coke head, in antiquity, of course. With him, were Freud, Rudyard Kipling, Edward Elgar, and, last, but hardly least, Queen Victoria.

        But you were referring to the dangerous stuff, pot, right? Historians can find few people who ever used that darn stuff. The only ones of whom I heard much include William Shakespeare,
        George Washington, James Madison and Tom Jefferson. Hardly anyone you’d term creative.

        Rest assured that keeping marijuana a Class One Drug and keeping States from legalizing the evil weed while incarcerating tens of thousands of people, can’t help but assist you in your goal to “prevent the destruction of the mind of a future genius!”

        Good luck in your endeavors.

        1. You keep right on smokin’ there, Steve. I hope you find happiness in your distorted reality.

          Fortunately, I am already happy, so I have no desire or need to escape reality!

          1. This “Steve. I hope you find happiness in your distorted reality.
            Fortunately, I am already happy, so I have no desire or need to escape reality!

            is really presumptive and insulting.

            Those who smoke pot are then escaping from reality?
            You do realize California Colorado and a number of other states have legal recreational pot and the peoples in those places generally use it to unwind following a week of work?

            And exactly who leaves you as a person who may qualify others as having a distorted reality?.

            1. Which always happens really….. when a argument does not suffice the personal attacks ensue…”You keep right on smokin’ there, Steve. I hope you find happiness in your distorted reality.

    4. I’m a little confused by your list of people you apparently believe are creative. Is that meant to be humorous sarcasm or are you being serious?

      Have you ever listened to a Beethoven symphony or a Mozart concerto? Now that’s real creativity.

      Or how about the paintings and sculptures of Michelangelo? Or the poetry of Elizabeth Barrett Browning or Edna St Vincent Millay?

      Or the mathematics developed by Isaac Newton or Wilfred Gottlieb Liebnitz? Or the physics theories of Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr?

      Now these are the really creative people who I doubt used any psychedelic substances. I don’t mean to sound rude, but your list of Hollywood elites seems really pathetic compared to genuinely creative intelligent people. Whoopi Goldberg … really?

      Thank you Dr Greger for doing this series. Maybe it will prevent the destruction of the mind of a future genius!

      1. What the heck..Have you ever listened to a Beethoven symphony or a Mozart concerto? Now that’s real creativity.
        Have you ever listened to Allan Ginsberg reading Howl….now that poetry.
        Didn’t care for the guy personally most of the beats led horrible lives in one way or another but name a better poet from his time period….
        How about a writer Jack Kerouac ring a bell…..most consider him the best for his time period as well.
        William Burroughs was he a creative artist who brought a way way new thing of writing to the period….and on and on.
        Musicians seriously?
        All the black blues musicians smoked back in the day…..Beethoven is superior to them because he wrote elitists music only the rich could listen to…..
        Yes there were no poor in his audiences back in that day. That music was the purview of the rich. The poor folk ballads and such. The rich music is superior…why? Seems a thing of opportunity to me like as not. Talent and luck in those days. Talent without the sponsorship and you were Jolly Joe Roger singing balads for a coin hat on the street corner.,

        1. ron in New Mexico,

          I beg your pardon! I think you have a false impression of Beethoven’s work by stating: “Beethoven is superior to them because he wrote elitists music only the rich could listen to”

          Actually, he wrote many short “folk” pieces that many folk musicians could easily play. Check out this youtube link:

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaKiR155BI8

          I have yet to hear any modern musician come close to the complexity found in Beethoven’s music. It is simply astounding compared to the yelling and screaming found in today’s so-called “music”!

          1. Darwin,

            Long time no see. How’s your brother John?

            But no creativity in music since the classical era? Excusez-moi, but consider this account from a 1967 TV show:

            “Enter composer, pianist, and New York Philharmonic director Leonard Bernstein. Born in 1918 and hailed as one of the most accomplished and astute musical minds in American history, he could not only appreciate the techniques and innovations of the youth-driven pop-rock explosion of the sixties, he could get the ear of his middle-aged peers and explain to them just what they were missing.

            “The television broadcast Inside Pop: The Rock Revolution gave Bernstein a mass-communication platform on which perform this analysis, asking aloud the questions of (a) why this music so infuriates Americans over a certain age and (b) why he himself likes it so much. Decked out in a square-friendly suit and tie and appearing on the even square-friendlier CBS network, Bernstein plays clips of songs by the Beatles, Bob Dylan, the Rolling Stones, the Byrds, and the Association, breaking down the genuine musicological merits of each: their vocal expressions, their unexpected key changes, their countless sonic layers, their stripped-down melodic sense, and their lyrics’ adeptness of implication (“one of our teenager’s strongest weapons”). Bernstein also calls upon “Society’s Child” singer-songwriter Janis Ian and Beach Boys mastermind Brian Wilson to perform live. Quite a few crew-cut, cardigan-clad, martini-sipping adults must have come away from Inside Pop with a new, if grudging, appreciation for the craft of these long-haired youngsters.”
            http://www.openculture.com/2013/03/leonard_bernstein_demystifies_the_1960s_rock_revolution.html

            Well, Bernstein calls 95% of popular music “trash” but in the 5% he focuses on in the show he finds real creativity which impresses him. He goes through some of it on his piano or by playing excerpts from the recordings explaining what he likes.

            And then there’s Bob Dylan’s recent receipt of a Nobel Prize for literature, with which I as a former English teacher heartily concur.

            Or if you just want to appreciate your favorite music even more, get a little high and play it on your best stereo system.

            1. Hey Scott,

              Both myself and my brother, John, are doing well. Thank you for asking.

              Actually, I do like to listen to some popular music, especially some of John Fogerty’s songs (formerly of CCR fame). BTW, he still does concerts at his age! And Bob Dylan is one of my favorites, too. He definitely has a way with words.

              But that said, I would still rank Beethoven’s creativity far above any of the modern composers. Just my opinion, we all have our likes and dislikes of music styles.

              And no thank you on the getting high to appreciate music. I like my wonderful brain just the way it is. After being WFPB for a while now, I’m a very happy person.

              1. Darwin,

                LOL and good for you!

                I really don’t know how to measure or judge creativity, although I think if you know a little something about the discipline in question then you may be able to see the uniqueness and new contributions a creative talent brings–as long as they don’t leap so far ahead that they lose the follower.

                I know relatively little about music, except what I’ve learned to like. I listened to quite a few classical recordings in college, and managed to take one music appreciation class. While schooling at U. of Iowa in Iowa City I saw the Boston Philharmonic perform Brahm’s 1st symphony (aka/Beethoven’s “10th”) as well as one of the world’s leading pianists of that time (the 1970s) but I forget his name. (Too much weed, I guess.) I also drove halfway across the state to Iowa State U. to catch the Vienna Philharmonic in the excellent concert hall at Ames. They performed either Mozart’s 33rd or 39th symphony, I never remember which–probably because I’d been smoking that demon weed again for the event, plus I tossed down a couple white crosses (mild speed) to go with it.

                But in any case I had listened to a recording of it several times prior and was at the edge of my seat when the music came to a sudden halt. The conductor froze with his baton raised high –as if there was still more to come. But with my heightened awareness and speed-loaded reflexes I instantly burst into applause from high in one of the balconies to an otherwise dead silent concert hall full of disconcerted Iowans who didn’t know what to think. After some agonizing long moments of my applause only, not at all sure if I was doing the right thing, the conductor relaxed to acknowledge that the piece was indeed over, and the rest of the packed hall joined in, much to my relief. I was the one farm boy who “knew the score” and wasn’t fooled by that Austrian surprise.

                Some years later I caught Beethoven’s 9th being performed at the then-new Davies Symphony Hall in San Francisco, but I’ve forgotten who performed it as well, although I wasn’t smoking anything that night.

                But I’ve never enjoyed the 9th more than one night, before any of these experiences, when my dorm roommate shared some really good herb with me. I hadn’t imbibed any cannabis in a few months at that point. The THC kept me awake, so I clapped on my headphones with a long extension cord and listened from my top bunk as he went to sleep. Some scientists say that it’s merely stimulating an area of the brain which registers pleasurable experiences. But what of it; isn’t that why we seek those experiences in the first place? Is the creativity merely a subjective impression, or is the subjective impression also the creativity. “O body swayed to music, O brightening glance, How can we know the dancer from the dance?”

          2. Your view on what comprises art in music is filled with cultural bias…” I have yet to hear any modern musician come close to the complexity found in Beethoven’s music. It is simply astounding compared to the yelling and screaming found in today’s so-called “music”!

            Complexity simply does not define quality. It may or it may not. Blues music and Jazz has very many complex elements within it, and virtually all of the artists smoked and the vast vast majority were black.

            1. Yes it is certainly true Beethoven is noted for his poor mans balads……I stand corrected…...Not
              The Who(the rock group) wrote a rock opera…do you think perhaps they were notable operatic composures.
              The Moody Blues as well….same there…..they wrote a thing so that is their thing…..thing not that.

    5. Yeah I have to agree with Darwin in regards to who you’re calling creative, not saying I don’t find some of those people talented (I adore Bob Marley) but I literally “laughed out loud” a few times reading your list.

      All the study is saying is that scientific evidence does not support the premise that people are more creative when high. It doesn’t mean people who get high cant be creative people. Maybe take one of those pills you mentioned…

      “And when those people acknowledged their use, they opened themselves up to potential felony charges in the vast majority of States, in this country. Imagine who else has been smoking…”

      Haha, right… Come on… you can literally get away with rape in Hollywood.

      Lastly, people seem to be confused. Saying someone who smoked or smokes weed went to a good school and did well does not say anything. I’m no statistics expert but I would assume that in order to give that argument any validity, they’d have to compare how many people with higher education were pot users vs those who were not, and then consider various other details and factors as well.

        1. ron, you’re so freaking childish when don’t get your way.”

          Another personal attack, with not bit of a challenge to refute any study nor discussion I have presented here.
          Keep it up…is shows a thing and it is that you have not a argument. That is why peoples personalize arguments.

          I present statistical study that shows following the commercial sale of pot in Colorado pot use among the underage declined. You support Dr Gregers view. That view from a RN publication which verses commercial sales to have started in Colorado in 2013 and a statistical derivative to support his argument is presented from that.

          Commercial sales began in 2014 not 2013 as he stated in his video on underage use of marijuana in Colorado.

          So refute the study I have presented here..personal attacks will not serve that purpose.
          I suspect you will present another personal attack..why? As my statistical study is valid and his cannot be reasonably supported.So you will not endeavor the impossible. TG already tried on this specific…I think he realizes it makes no sense.

          1. So here is the statistical evidence that shows pot use has not increased in Colorado following legalization and implementation which resulted in commercial sale in 2014 January..
            https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016.htm

            Refute it or call me names.I do know how to read statistical information.
            Dr Gregers view expressed in the preceding video on this issue expresses contrary view on this specific.
            So support his view if you can.
            Call me names….you loose..sorry that is the way of debate and discussion.

  18. My question from several days ago about the dangers/benefits of CBD and CBD/THC was answered by one of the sources of this video. CBD oil without the THC appears protective and possibly helpful.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5068875/ and
    source
    Yücel M, Lorenzetti V, Suo C, et al. Hippocampal harms, protection and recovery following regular cannabis use. Transl Psychiatry. 2016;6:e710.

    I think I got this right. Someone correct me if I am reading this wrong.

    1. Got it right as I read it cactus…”:Our findings suggest that not all cannabis users experience adverse brain and behavioural outcomes24, 25 as cannabinoid compounds such as CBD may have a role in minimising harm. Indeed, previous reports have suggested that CBD may ameliorate psychotic and adverse cognitive effects of THC.6, 21, 26, 27, 28 For instance, participants pretreated with CBD experience significantly reduced psychotogenic and anxiogenic effects of THC.26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 At a neural level, CBD exerts opposing effects to THC on brain function and connectivity in regions that are high in cannabinoid receptors including the hippocampus.27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 “

      1. For those that may not be familiar with it this is from Wiki on what it is…“Cannabidiol (INN;[3] abbreviated as: CBD) is one of at least 113 cannabinoids identified in cannabis.[4][5] It is a major phytocannabinoid, accounting for up to 40% of the plant’s extract.[6] CBD does not appear to have any psychoactive effects such as those caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). It may have a downregulating impact on disordered thinking and anxiety.[7] Potential uses are the subject of ongoing research.[8]
        Cannabidiol use appears to be safe, but a 2017 review recommended larger and longer human trials before a definitive conclusion is reached.[9] One animal study reported that co-administration with THC potentiated the effects of THC.[10] One possible mechanism is by competing for the THC receptor sites.[11]

        Sorry I have to vent…;)..if these F&^%heads would spend more time actually researching this thing instead of going in guns blazing in all sort of study to demonize pot…we actually may find some useful things in pot. And ways to mediate bad effects found.
        But no…lets do more studies of peoples smoking 16 joints a day, and then study their brains…..wonder what we will find there…..headlines tomorrow..pot use causes brain damage…..now proven..
        Vent over…;)

  19. Regarding the Nutrition Facts behind herb use, I’d like to know more about how diet and exercise would play into this.

    I think that these studies are helpful, and it’s great. But I also wonder what the lifestyles where for some of these participants.

    Did they eat a healthy diet? Did they exercise daily? Exactly how much did they smoke/eat?

    I’ve found with a healthy diet, daily exercise, and a mature approach to cannabis intake… I feel stronger and smarter than I ever have before. Other days not so much, but hey ying and yang.

    Maybe do a segment on how to recover from or balance cannabis use with nutrition and exercise?

    1. It is not any form of answer to a question but thought you may find this article interesting…. http://www.laweekly.com/arts/these-martial-artists-use-marijuana-to-get-to-a-higher-level-7158594

      Eddie Bravo is a bit of a character but pot did not make him that way, just the way he is. Nevertheless all those guys train hard and take care of themselves, though most eat meat. Some guys who compete in UFC the Diaz brothers for example do not eat meat at all when in training for a fight. WFPB is becoming very popular as a training aid.

      1. This crowd here it seems by majority wants to live to be a hundred and twenty. Many in other venues are finding WFPB to be a very handy training and recovery aid.
        There are negatives associated with pot. Would proper management of diet and possibly injestion of things like CBD oil remove that….we will probably never know as the scientists by majority seem to only want to find negatives in pot not to manage it.

  20. Oh also there was an interesting bit (not verbalized) about CBD in one of the papers… see 2:32 – the hippocampus volume decrease was for cannabis (THC) without containing CBD.

    1. Damn…you are observant Mark.
      That is absolutely right. And other study in discussion here shows CBD to prevent loss…

      How can that not be mentioned? Seems a pretty critical thing. CBD as I read it is normally a pretty essential part of pot.Would have to jump through some hoops to manage to have pot use without CBD seemingly.
      Thanks

      1. Ah I get pissed so easy,,,”the hippocampus volume decrease was for cannabis (THC) without containing CBD.

        If someone knew or suspected that CBD stopped the volume decrease. To produce a study which shows cannabis to reduce volume is easy as pie….remove the CBD normally present in cannabis from the cannabis.

        Houston we have a problem…

  21. We live in Northern California and what worries me is the number of pregnant women that I see smoking pot. When I’ve asked if they are worried about the baby the response that I typically get is that pot used to be harmful but not it is legal so it is safe for pregnant women and their babies!!!

    1. Donna,
      You might take some comfort in an academic study comparing the newborn children of marijuana-using mothers versus non-users.

      “Is it safe to use cannabis while pregnant or nursing? Cannabis can be very effective for the hyperemesis gravidarum (intractable vomiting) that sometimes accompanies pregnancy, but is it toxic for babies? What about the safety of using cannabis while breastfeeding? Melanie Dreher, PhD did some of the best work on this subject, studying a large number of pregnant women and babies in Jamaica, and her findings are reassuring.”

      The 18-page study was published in 1994 in the Journal of Pediatrics, and is available in full without charge at the following site: http://cannabisclinicians.org/breastfeeding-and-cannabis/

      Already possessing a Ph.D. in nursing, Dreher may have been doing this research for a master’s degree in anthropology, as I understand that she has both degrees. Starting with a study sample of about 30 expectant mothers who smoked marijuana, and 30 who did not, she found that the children of the smoking mothers did better in the first three days after birth, and were still doing better in all categories when assessed again at one month of age by a clinician using a standardized scoring protocol. The assessments were blinded to which groups the children came from. Dreher also subdivided the “marijuana mothers” into three groups based on how much they used during pregnancy. The children of the heaviest smokers did the best.

      Dreher wrote:
      “Comparing the two groups, the neonates of mothers who used marijuana
      showed better physiological stability at 1 month and required less examiner
      facilitation to reach an organized state and become available for social stimulation.
      The results of the comparison of neonates of the heavy-marijuana-using mothers and
      those of the nonusing mothers were even more striking. The heavily exposed neonates
      were more socially responsive and were more autonomically stable at 30 days than
      their matched counterparts. The quality of their alertness was higher; their motor and
      autonomic systems were more robust; they were less irritable; they were less likely to
      demonstrate any imbalance of tone; they needed less examiner facilitation to become
      organized; they had better self-regulation; and were judged to be more rewarding for
      caregivers than the neonates of nonusing mothers at 1 month of age.”

      Dreher cautions against reading this result too literally without considering other potential confounding factors she lists, but it is still a fascinating result.

      1. Interesting stuff Scott
        It is now a known that we pass down our stress responses to our descendents, per this reference…https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160328133534.htm.

        Even more so evident is the mother being under stress during pregnancy by other study..
        Venturing perhaps these mothers doing pot occasionally were just more laid back less stressed and it is that they passed on to their children.
        Just to venture a thing.

    2. Donna Meahl, that mindset that because something is legal it is therefore safe could be used to justify drinking during pregnancy, or smoking tobacco. Or eating excessive amounts of junk food (“I’m eating for two!”) Or taking supplements, which are completely unregulated. But hey, legal. etc. Thalidomide was legal, and considered safe to prescribe to pregnant women. Till it was proved otherwise. And true, not all babies seem to suffer harm from these behaviors. Just some do.

    3. Donna, I find that absolutely disgusting. Dr. Greger actually has a video on here about that. Today’s marijuana is 6-7 times more potent than in the 1970’s, so it likely significantly more dangerous.The only time pot might be justified during pregnancy is when someone is having dangerous amounts of morning sickness… in one woman’s case she threw up acid, then lining, then green bile, then blood. That is like an extreme, life or death scenario. To smoke recreationally during pregnancy is sickening. Not to mention that the SMOKING in and of itself is horrible for babies! From my understanding, every time a pregnant woman inhales smoke, they deprive the baby of oxygen and that can cause severe damage. So if a pregnant woman was smoking kale, that would seem stupid (at best) as well.

      Incidentally, it appears that a healthier (ideally WFPB) diet can prevent morning sickness.

      Here’s the video: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/natural-treatments-morning-sickness/

      I’m sorry but if someone’s pregnant and they can’t abstain from recreational use for 9 months, they have a problem and are being selfish or stupid or both.

      1. This is total nonsense…”Today’s marijuana is 6-7 times more potent than in the 1970’s,

        Any pot bought in any pot legal state has the ability of the buyer to choose the strength of the product. It is well known and advertised with as many as 200 varieties of pot being available for the buyer.
        And since California is now on board that includes a very large segment of the population of America.

          1. CBD content as well by strain is variable. And certain strains may be chosen to consume which are low in THC and high in CBD.

            But of course our minds are all made up about this pot thing and lost in some conclusion based upon the way things were in this world when only illegal pot was available medically and recreationally.
            A 1980’s type world when a dealer decided what brand you bought and what potency you consumed.

            Let me guess…scientific study shows one may purchase only one type of pot nowadays and any real thing in contrary to scientific study as it is not science is false……
            And not to mention in study referenced here, for some reason (nod and wink included)…CBD free pot was the choice. A little structural bias to produce favored result perhaps……???
            No of course not….science science it is. As if science and study is never manipulated to produce desired result by corporation.

        1. Not nonsense, ron. Watch the video above or read the sources cited since you’ve decided that whenever you don’t like something, Dr. Greger is being evil and bias and tricking us cause his kids or whatever.

          1. Again you are personalizing the discussion..
            “”Watch the video above or read the sources cited since you’ve decided that whenever you don’t like something, Dr. Greger is being evil and bias and tricking us cause his kids or whatever.”.

            I challenge his video and study contentions and presented alternative facts to support my view. Do you respond to my challenge…of course not.

            It is valid and proven that peoples buy pot nowadays with any concentration they may desire. I can go through the various brands and explain which is strong which is mild and which is inbetween. But really by just looking through the link I have provided anyone may make that determination of fact.

            I repeat finding no valid challenge to my contention presented….any person in any pot legal state which is a large proportion of the peoples in the US….can buy whatever strength they desire.
            The contention pot today is way stronger than that prior..is proven a unfounded claim.
            False a lie not true at all despite study which may support that view. Study may be in error at times…we all know that.

            1. Here provided as supportive evidence is a quote from one of colorados numerous pot shops…

              It clearly states mild..
              One buys what one wants to. If a shop in Colorado is not offering different strains and potencies one would be best advised not buying from them.
              All the better shops do. One has 200 varieties of every shape and form.
              Here is a example of one mild strain from a shop..
              Strain Name: Trainwreck
              Grade: B
              Type: Sativa dominant
              Looks: Gorgeous. Dusted in crystals with lots of orange hairs.
              Smell: Spicy, earthy, with a hint of skunk.
              Taste: Much like the smell.
              Effects: The first thing I noticed was the immediate cerebral effects. Lightly visual, a nice body buzz, but it is still easy to get stuff done.
              Potency: Mild – moderate. 2-4 hours.
              Reviewed by: Lexistence”

              Refute or challenge my evidence. I contend your supportive study is out of touch out of date and does not represent the real of pot buying in large large segments of the US public so it cannot be introduced into these discussions as valid.

              I expect I will now be demonized for offering this contrary view supported by quote from valid source.

  22. Wow, that verified everything. I know people with the psychotic end result and those who improved after stopping and people who started young and lost their cognitive abilities.

    I am not a pot smoker, but I was still happy with the brain having sections grow back.

    I was a big soda and coffee drinker and those both affect the brain, plus, I definitely have damage from homocysteine and possibly still from concussion.

    Brain plasticity is my other hobby and this was encouraging.

    I believe highly in brain plasticity, but it is such a challenging process to do on your own. I think it is working, but there are nights when I need videos like this to give me an emotional boost to keep working on it.

    I honestly don’t even know how people who had strokes where they are paralyzed and can’t talk get the will to walk the whole process through, but since people started finding out that it is possible to recover, more and more people do the work and succeed.

    I know that path is one of the paths for Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s and if I had a child with autism, they would be doing brain plasticity from the youngest age.

    Don’t know if it will work for every brain related thing, but it would be a shame to not try.

    1. Deb,
      No one’s mentioned this yet, but the government has a patent on marijuana compounds, specifically citing their potential usefulness in cases of brain injury:

      “Just check out US Patent 6630507 titled “Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants” which is assigned to The United States of America, as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services.
      The patent claims that –

      “Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases.The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia.
      “The patent was obtained in October of 2003.”
      –http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/257008

      Mary Jane giveth, and Mary Jane taketh away

      1. Most people seem to be unaware of the fact that the psychoactive effects of cannabis are only triggered by heat. There are accounts online of people who have solved serious health problems by drinking raw cannabis juice. I don’t know how they can stand the taste, and I can’t vouch for those people, of course, but their stories would be worth at least preliminary investigation by researchers, to determine the need for further research.

        And of course the government wouldn’t patent cannabis if it didn’t have valuable uses, would it? The patent itself seems to be enough to warrant delisting cannabis as a schedule 1 drug, which has no medical value.

  23. The federal group, (working under health and human service) who has been doing statistical summery of drug alcohol and other use since around 1971, using a nonprofit for data retrieval.
    Whose last study results were from a base of 70,000 people. And whose information is provided as a assist to those in the professional fields of psychiatry and substance abuse..

    Found marijuana use amongst the underage in Colorado has not gone up in any fashion following implementation of legalization in January of 2014. Which is the date it became possible to find and buy commercially available pot. To remove the fears of any who may have seen the last video and perhaps taken the wrong contrary to fact impression from it…https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016.htm

    1. If you did not have the wrong, not supported by fact notion, that pot legalization had caused more underage kids to consume pot….please disregard.

      But if you did…….there it is proof. Another study by the Colorado dept of health affirms the same thing but no need to beat a dead horse.

      Other studies done and occasionally pointed to as supporting that false thing…..they were likely produced from data before January 2014, when pot became commercially available for recreational use in Colorado.

  24. There seem to be many Egyptians weighing in on these marijuana videos.

    At least, I assume that they are Egyptian since they all seem to be living in denial.

    However, on another topic entirely, I saw earlier today this news article about a JAMA Oncology paper which reported a 42% reduced (relative) risk of death for colon cancer patients who followed guidelines on diet and exercise. That’s astonishing. Can you imagine the headlines there would be if a drug delivered these results? Or a supplement?

    For me at least, it reinforces the benefits of a diet high in fruits and vegetables (although I have never really understood this phrase since fruits are vegetables) and regular exercise.

    “Good diet and exercise habits may improve survival rates for people who have colon cancer, according to results of an observational study published April 12 in JAMA Oncology.

    Patients with stage III colon cancer and a lifestyle considered highly consistent with the American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines on diet and exercise had a 42% lower relative risk for death compared with patients who did not, said Erin L. Van Blarigan, ScD, from the University of California, San Francisco, and colleagues.”
    https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/895371?src=wnl_edit_tpal&uac=129079FG
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/2678094

    1. My kid, ………at lunch to his friend in the breakroom a 50’ish white guy 70 pounds overweight a city job he goes home after lunch to sleep for a hour or two. Then wakes up and returns to the yard where he clocks out for the day ….so he says to his friend….when he returns home he plops down in the easy chair where he sits watching the telly till time for bed. Inspects city buildings as a job for concrete cracks, got the job through his brother in law, Brother in law helped on a politicians campaign way back in the day…. been doing it for thirty years…..my kid, got no incentive, unmotivated…you know what it is…pot he smokes pot all day…

      Look look at this looking at his video screen usually adjusted to porn on the desk on the break room floor….. pot causes brain damage unmotivation dismotivated…right here see…..
      Gotta lock up those pusher put em all in jail….ruining us all they are….see pot brain damage…..look here study this study shows it….
      Walks to the vending machine and gets a snicker bar…..well see ya tomorrow he says…yeah says his friend.

      1. Sure Ron. Junk food, no exercise, obesity, alcohol, tobacco all these things are more unhealthy than pot smoking. None of that proves that pot is actually healthy or harmless.

        And Carl Sagan may have loved his pot but then Einstein loved his pipe Sagan died at 62 and Einstein at 76.

        Also, yes lots of suv=ccessful sports peopie may use pot. Lots of other successful sports people use steroids or various other drugs. None of that proves that any of those things are healthy.

        They do however remind me of a quip about football (or soccer as I believe it is called in the less enlightened corners of the globe)

        “Rather than the unattainable standard of ‘safe’ we should be thinking in terms of ‘safer’. Despite the risks associated with soccer, I would, for instance, prefer my children play soccer rather than play with live hand grenades.”
        https://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/content/interview/e-cigarette-interview-david-sweanor/2/

        So, yes, I would rather see people smoke pot than play with live hand grenades, eat junk food or consume alcohol or tobacco. But that’s not a choice we are faced with since we don’t actually have to do any of those things. It’s not an either/or choice is it?

        And yes, certain extracts of marijuana do have medical benefits. As do certain extracts of foxglove, belladona, the yew tree etc. None of that proves that recreational use of marijuana, foxglove, belladonna or yew leaves/bark/seeds are harmless or beneficial.

        1. Junk food, no exercise, obesity, alcohol, tobacco all these things are more unhealthy than pot smoking.

          Glad to see your admission of fact.
          And we have on this very discussion peoples so scared of the potential side effects of pot they are in a uproar…my son took pot four times as a teenager…..what am I to do? Is the damage permenant?
          Which is what this video leads to…..unrealistic fear as a result of misrepresentation of fact. See it here right here on the discussion.
          You do not get the point of my little fiction. People who have obvious holes in their lives as regards to motivation and morality produce in their kids usually what….kids with the same holes.
          Why is child birth the most litigated form of medicine…..everyone expects a perfect birth a perfect kid.Things go wrong and they do, what do they do….externalize almost always. In this specific any problem with a adolescent becomes a thing of pot if they smoke pot. Not adolescence itself or the above mentioned kids go through but things but a thing external..it can’t be us it must be some external..pot.

          It is fine and true there are some deficient aspects to pot some named in this video. In this climate where we have a million people in jail in relationship to this and other drugs usually with a disproportionate amount by race, to overestimate the negatives of pot is itself..criminal.

          And this overstateing leads directly to not seeing the positive aspect in pot. How many states still do not allow medical marijuana, despite children with a specific type of seizure pot to be on occasion the only remedy?. Look it up.
          Why is that fact….overstatement of harm from pot. Why is not pot derivative considered a alternative to opioids with people who need pain management but tend to addiction…overstatement of pot harm is why.

          You can not produce a video and then say…see harm just showing the facts here…..discounting the entire thing of pot and how it has been demonized to bad effect for probably money interest.
          Science is not separate from the world which produces it. In this world this place pot harm has been overstated for about 150 years.
          Any video on harm to balance all the negative BS has to as well state perspecftive. LIke H decreases in size…but ….no exercise in kids decreases the same part of the brain 12%…check it out, by study. Why no mention of that per perspective. Why no mention that kids who have small H’s tend to later on abuse pot. But this is before pot use……

          So we needless worry people about pot when a real thing right before us has much more effect. And yes 16 joints per day produces permenant brain damage…..does anyone need to say that. When Dr Greger did a video on alcohol did he mention that anyone who drinks a pint of whiskey a day for years will suffer irreversable brain damage…why not? Why did he not?
          It is fact.

          He did not as he wants to overstate the one and understate the other. Yes both cause harm. And you correctly state all those others that cause often more harm to cognition as well. Diabetes study now shows untreated causes directly loss of cognition. More than pot use recreationally…I doubt it.
          16 joints a day…sure.
          And on and on…there is simply no balance to this series. Clearly in the video on kids and pot the increase use of pot since commercialization was a complete reach, completely untrue and led to unnecessary fear of legalization. Why that?

          Why all of this…this is a nutrition site not a pot site.
          I could go on and on and on….truth is none of us are buying this stuff anymore. Harm in pot recreationally, a little bit. Harm for teens, not that I advocate for it nor that it should be allowed….a little bit as well.

          Harm from 16 joints a day….sure. But the latter is lumped in with the rest and then the outcome is…poor Jimmy a concerned mom asks…. smoked pot last year…is his brain permenantly damaged??? Right here on this thread….this BS has caused unnecessary fear.

          Right you are she will be calling her state political rep to speak for more regulation and higher penalty for users and dealers….so the rest of us suffer for BS.

          But we have had about enough…..I smoke not pot but see the harm of BS about the harm. That is clear. The harm is bv the science…a very small potential in a habitual user likely reversible in any but a person totally consumed by pot.
          But how many are reading that from this video……few.

          Why is that…because the material is presented in a jingoistic fashion that is tailored to make greater the harm and make less the benefit on a perceptual basis.
          I see that in national media all day every day…I don’t need it here.

          1. F^%$…..”gets high about four times a year on average thought their teen years, with occasional once a month indulgence have anything to worry about? What if any, is the safe threshold? (My son is sitting here asking me this for obvious reasons.)”

            This is a nice mother with a nice kid who cares and now she has to needlessly worry about this BS because of a video with agenda…the science is there it is true but it is in a contextwhich greatly overstates harm and understates benefit.

            So harm is produced…a woman and her son worry needlessly…..who wants that?
            Gets me pissed to no end it does plainly speaking.

            1. I probably know the tale is told for me.
              I get pissed I go away with time and consideration.

              So I am lost to this…think I am alone in this or how many more are lost to what is probably good real nutritional advise….for what? Pot

              And they wonder why it is so easy for the other side to go on with their nutritional lies….our side stabs themselves in the foot like as not given even the slightest opportunity.
              BS I can get about anywhere.Coming here requires effort why that then?

              1. First Dr. G told us a teaspoon a day of cinnamon is great at treating diabetes. I pumped my diabetic mother with cinnamon. Last week I read him say the same cinnamon causes liver damage, so don’t use it to treat it diabetes. I’ll stop looking to this site for help on how to feed my mother. I realuze now it’s no better than any other site with conflicting nutritional information.

                I’ve learned a lot from reading your and others’ comments on cannibas. The most appalling fact I’ve discovered is that the GOVERNMENT!!! owns patents on cannibas compounds because of their potential health benefits. Holy moly if that isn’t ripe for conspiracy theories, I don’t know what is. I’m beyond shocked.

                1. 30yrsChronic, you’re simply not understanding the way science works. We only know what has been discovered. As more research is done, more and more is revealed. Dr. Greger does an exceptional job at keeping us up with what the latest and greatest evidence has to say. That’s exactly why you were informed about cassia cinnamon potential harm in high doses… you want immediate answers to all things, you should be praying more than looking to scientific research.

                2. 30’s it certainly makes me happy and feel good when I hear about someone taking care of their mother in her older days.
                  I took care of my father before his passing and consider it perhaps one of the better things I had done in life.

                  On the issue…the field of nutrition is a growing one with change being a essential part.
                  Dr Greger per example once drank Hibiscus tea all day every day but now has moderated consumption due to a possibility of some injestion of unwanted things in it.
                  Things change as we are learning as we go.
                  Most of Dr Greger’s nutritional information is valid and true. He has really no corporate sponsors nor is he selling anything the book sales go to the foundation not him..

                  So if you are going anywhere for nutritional advise this is a good probably the best place to go. It is important however to read or view a lot of information on subjects… often one thing will run into another.
                  A thing like diabetes is quite a long study with very many videos and componants to it.
                  Other things…well I say you can make up your own mind on things.
                  This is nutrition facts not other facts.

          2. Ron He is reporting the results of studies – he is not making this stuff up.

            You appear not to like the results from these particualr studies so you are accusing the messenger of bias, jingoism and who knows what for daring to mention them.

            He doesn’t make any recommedations about legislation or even whether people should consume the stuff. You appear not to think that people should even discuss reports of possible harms from mj.

            I find incomprehensible your indignation and questioning of people’s integrity for mentioning studies that show harms from mj. Your posts just seem very one-eyed to me. Sorry but there it is.

            And this video is the effects on the brain of mj use. it is not about the overall effects of mj (whatever they may be).

            And if discussion of the overall effects does occur, Presumably you would want Greger to suppress eg all mention of liver toxicity resulting from long term chronic pot use because reports of harm from mj use are just BS if I am reading your last post correctly
            .

            1. Agreed with Tom. I’m confused, why would you have a problem with scientific evidence? To me I think this is so important to know. I happen to know someone who smoked a lot as a teen and is now in their 20’s. This person is extremely intelligent and always has been, but they noticed differences in their brain after getting high a lot and they actually felt like they lost a lot of their intelligence. I told them that they can regain any damage from all the use with changes now and it’s pretty cool that I can refer them to this stuff. The real evidence can actually help people.

              If anything, for those concerned about pot use having any negative impacts, you’d think they’d be happy to hear that normal use as an adult doesn’t seem to do permanent brain damage. Maybe there are people who feel doomed because they smoked a lot when they were teens long into adulthood but even with those people, who knows how much a WFPB diet and healthy lifestyle can change and reverse.

              1. As to this, as shown in the prior video on kids and pot, and the claim that pot use had gone up in Colorado following commercialization of it(a consummate lie)…..” I’m confused, why would you have a problem with scientific evidence

                end your confusion….this is not nutrition in which Dr Greger does a excellent job…this is a cherry picking result. Am I now expected to assume Dr Greger does good work in all areas as he does in one?

                Well then now start providing political lessons he should, as pot in America is more a political issue than a nutritional one. And I am certain the title of this site is nutritional facts not pot facts.

                1. Again with the personal attacks with not a bit of science to refute my contentions which are presented in this discussion multiple times and in multiple fashions….I didn’t count them up, but I’d say at least 10 to 20 of my posts reference studies or challenge to studies…

                  And this is the response….” and learn to do so like a mature adult who is interested in actually conversing as opposed to angrily silencing anything they dislike. Your behavior here is absolutely ridiculous.”

                  Personal attacks do not win the day in discussion nor debate.
                  I am still waiting for a challenge to the study I Jimbo and others have stated…

                  A “Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis” published in JAMA Psychiatry April 18 disproves the widely held belief that marijuana use —especially by young people— leads to cognitive decline.
                  Investigators reviewed data from 69 separate studies published between 1973 and 2017 involving 8,727 subjects (2,152 frequent or heavy users and 6,575 controls). Researchers reported no significant long-term deficits in memory, attention, or other aspects of cognitive functioning that could be independently attributed to cannabis use, regardless of subjects age of initiation. These findings are in contrast to similar studies assessing the impact of alcohol use and other controlled substances on cognition, which “have shown medium to large effect sizes.”

                  But all I get is called names.Think you are winning your argument by demonizing me…I think not…refute this study and you may win the day…till then it is absurd to do that thing.

            2. You must be joking Tom
              All the studies that the tobacco industry sponsored were scientific studies with much in that way to recommend them.
              And in current times at least 400 scientific studies proport to show human caused global warming a myth….

            3. Missed this study then did we ..https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5068875/
              Check even the title..think it may have some application?

              Ron He is reporting the results of studies – he is not making this stuff up.

              and how many others are missed here. Well a metanalysis on underage use seems to have found a adversarial conclusion, And his statistical pot use on teenagers following legallziation…we know about that one. And it seems these are not all..

              Point being of course no one is contending he is making stuff up..you are presenting a straw man.. you are now knocking down.
              Well here here…I never said he made up a thing.
              You claiming that I did says a boatload. It says your argument without so added is deficient.

    1. “it’s science! Get over it.
      Like Dr Gregers claim in the prior video pot use amongst the underage has gone up since commercial sale in Colorado….valid science like that???

      1. You’re right, ron, we should all listen to you ranting and raving like a child. Clearly you’re the voice of reason here. You’re all but holding your breath and kicking the floor.

        1. Instead of a response to my challenge..I get another personal attack
          “You’re right, ron, we should all listen to you ranting and raving like a child. Clearly you’re the voice of reason here. You’re all but holding your breath and kicking the floor.”

          Here is my statement with a link from anther post I made in this discussion..refute it if you can..

          Found marijuana use amongst the underage in Colorado has not gone up in any fashion following implementation of legalization in January of 2014. Which is the date it became possible to find and buy commercially available pot. To remove the fears of any who may have seen the last video and perhaps taken the wrong contrary to fact impression from it…https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016.htm

          Calling me names will not suffice to win this discussion. You must defeat my challenge if you are supporting Dr Gregers view. As I am challenging Dr Gregers view with statistical study which opposes his statements.

          1. To repeat…https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016.htm

            Refute it.
            It is statistical summary that is adverserial to Dr Gregers contention versed on pot and underage use in his prior video on this subject
            But you cannot as it is not possible. A solid statistical study produced by a authority in this specific field that has its results used without question by thousands of substance abuse counselors and psychiatric specialists since around about 1971.

            So instead you will call me names.

  25. Ok I know there were controls in the studies and we do also know that there were decreased volumes observed but….do we know if exercise volume was allowed for in controls and in subjects….
    From psychology today….
    “Researchers in 2010 found an association between physical fitness levels and the hippocampus size of 9 and 10-year-old children. The children who were more fit had a larger hippocampus and performed better on a test of memory than their less-fit peers. The hippocampus is a structure tucked deep in the brain, which is known to be important in learning and memory.

    “This is the first study I know of that has used MRI measures to look at differences in brain between kids who are fit and kids who aren’t fit,” said University of Illinois psychology professor and Beckman Institute director Art Kramer, who led the study with doctoral student Laura Chaddock and kinesiology and community health professor Charles Hillman. “Beyond that, it relates those measures of brain structure to cognition.”
    When they analyzed the MRI data, the researchers found that the physically fit children tended to have bigger hippocampal volume — about 12 percent bigger relative to total brain size — than their out-of-shape peers. The children who were in better physical condition also did better on tests of relational memory — the ability to remember and integrate various types of information — than their less-fit peers.

    Really would it be remotely possible for anyone who smokes 16 joints in a day to do even the slightest bit of exercise? And if they did stop would they then begin exercising?
    Is our recovery of size of this thing a recovery by nonuse of pot or the introduction of healthy lifestyle choices such as exercise?

    Do we remotely assume only children are affected in this manner? Seems elderly in study have increased performance measurable in the area of cognition with exercise by study…. though I don’t think they measured brain anatomy.
    Ok spill the beans, drop the load……was exercise volume accounted for in control in study?
    Not saying it was or was not…..would be critical to know.

  26. I was wondering if someone could give me a sensible explanation for the following.
    If meat and milk and cheese, cause blood sugar & triglyceride spikes, see video here https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-to-prevent-blood-sugar-and-triglyceride-spikes-after-meals/
    Why then, is the glycemic index for these foods so low?
    Is Jenkins et al, not up to date with these things regarding the index? What exactly went wrong when measuring the data from the GI-index if animal foods seem to have a much more pronounced influence on blood sugar homeostasis?

    1. PH….“Hot off the press….not MJ but CBD and somewhat relevant. First CBD product to gain FDA approval.

      Big pharmas plan is to allow only the componants of pot legal so they may then be the ones to profit from it.
      The FDA nor them can stand in the way of real proof of aid. The aid in this specific was for seizures. Childhood seizure aid from meidcal pot has been know of for years and years despite no sponsored science to support it.
      Now big pharma wants to cash in and profit. Which is a start in the right direction but far from the whole ball game. Pot interferes with their pain med game…..so the FDA will not be approving any of that for quite a while by my take.

      1. How can you derive the benefits of CBD?
        If you live in a state that permits medical marijuana you can consult with a physician, get a doctor’s recommendation and visit a dispensary with a wide variety of CBD products to choose from.
        Unfortunately, federal restrictions have made it difficult for patients in some states to find reputable CBD products. However, making your own CBD tincture is an option some may want to try.
        To ensure your tincture is high in CBD (as opposed to THC), experts recommend using Indica strains like ACDC, Harlequin and Ringo’s Gift. Bear in mind, any tinctures made with these strains will still contain THC (which is psychoactive). So plan accordingly. The following recipe does not mix well with children or motor vehicles.

        Peoples in pot shops do self select brands with enhanced parts based on effect to them. But pharma companies have not a finger in that pie as the strains are not patentable.

  27. My theory is that people think they’re more creative when high because dumber things fascinate them more, so they think it’s something greater than it is.

    This is an incredibly helpful video!! Too much mixed info out there, it’s nice to see what the real science has to say.

    1. S

      If your theory is correct, I’m thinking that, judging by the frantic, almost terrified response to this marijuana series, by so many concerned about The Children, true Creative Artistes, and our future
      geo-political competition with Russia and China (where, apparently, death awaits those who smoke weed), that there are an awful lot of secret pot smokers who visit this site, and who perceive its content as something much greater than it is, and can’t help but react appropriately.

      You may very well be right! Does this fit under the broad category of irony?

      1. Yeah, kind of reminds me of the frantic almost terrified responses to the videos about red wine and coconut oil

        they couldn’t possibly have been true either – they only prove that Dr G is a shill for the pharmacutical industry or that he has strong biases – because none of those things can be harmful and in fact are actually good for us ………….. because, because ……….. erm, well …………. because!

      2. Methinks….“I think we have another anecdotal case study here of where a pot smoker has lost ability to think rationally :-)
        Discounting all the contributions and excellence of the contributions of peoples of color to the art of music and claiming only European composers of a complex issue to satisfy a standard of excellence would qualify as irrational.

  28. All the marijuana commentary I’ve read is in regard to smoking it. Smoking always struck me as a bad idea – organic combustion products are a slow poison for the lungs – cooking fires cause COPD just as certainly as tobacco leaves. Never seen any data on marijuana that is simply swallowed – thus avoiding the toxic products of combustion. Making the singular point that medical users should, at the least, not be smoking this stuff. Common sense dictates that avoiding smoke is likely to reduce harm.

    1. Well obviously not inhaling smoke is going to prevent damage that the smoking itself causes. Even smoking clove which is one of the most antioxidant rich foods on the planet, is extremely harmful to the lungs.

      I always thought similarity, that those using marijuana medicinally should avoid smoking it. I actually think everyone should avoid smoking anything.

    2. Yes common sense would infer this…”Common sense dictates that avoiding smoke is likely to reduce harm.
      The concern is in the main not to give a fair equal balance to the idea pot is only marginally harmful but to continue to attempt to provide a preponderance of effect to the negative.,
      Which as one poster has noted and evidenced in the video….the pot used in one of the key supportive claims…had not CBD in it.

  29. Swallowing marijuana is likely less harmful than smoking it. Adding toxic combustion products to the mix doesn’t truly address the issue of marijuana toxicity per se. Inhaling the smoke from burning organic material is well known for it’s pulmonary toxicity – as is excessive use of almost anything from butter to beer. The real issue is whether it’s the proper function of govt. to get involved in what should be (IMHO) a private decision. It is inconsistent to ban marijuana, and not alcohol or tobacco. Even if any use of marijuana laid waste to the lives of everyone who used it, was true (it isn’t), it’s still a personal decision, and no business of the govt. Our absurd laws have resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands of people around the world, due to the rise of drug cartels – whose business model requires illegality to exist – making us complicit in their murders. The drug laws are by far, the worst offense against society. At least the damage the individual users do to themselves (and to their families) is more limited.

    1. Excellent comment Michael. Many of these laws and enforcement strategies tied into the political, with not a bit of interest in furtherance of the good of the people at large.

  30. I agree that smoking is not a wise idea, but in the case of marijuana some very anomalous results have turned up:

    “Study Finds No Cancer-Marijuana Connection

    By Marc Kaufman
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, May 26, 2006
    The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.

    The new findings “were against our expectations,” said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.

    “We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use,” he said. “What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect.”

    “Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin’s previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought.

    “Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.

    “Tashkin’s study, funded by the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute on Drug Abuse, involved 1,200 people in Los Angeles who had lung, neck or head cancer and an additional 1,040 people without cancer matched by age, sex and neighborhood.”

  31. ODD how this was posted the very same day another study something very different. A “Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis” published in JAMA Psychiatry April 18 disproves the widely held belief that marijuana use —especially by young people— leads to cognitive decline.

    Investigators reviewed data from 69 separate studies published between 1973 and 2017 involving 8,727 subjects (2,152 frequent or heavy users and 6,575 controls). Researchers reported no significant long-term deficits in memory, attention, or other aspects of cognitive functioning that could be independently attributed to cannabis use, regardless of subjects age of initiation. These findings are in contrast to similar studies assessing the impact of alcohol use and other controlled substances on cognition, which “have shown medium to large effect sizes.”

    Authors concluded: “Associations between cannabis use and cognitive functioning in cross-sectional studies of adolescents and young adults are small and may be of questionable clinical importance for most individuals. Furthermore, abstinence of longer than 72 hours diminishes cognitive deficits associated with cannabis use. [R]esults indicate that previous studies of cannabis youth may have overstated the magnitude and persistence of cognitive deficits associated with marijuana use.”

    Note the diplomatic phrasing used by the authors to describe the vast trove of NIDA-funded literature that “may have overstated the magnitude” of cognitive impairment caused by marijuana. Even “vastly exaggerated” would be an understatement. The studies ascribing cognitive damage to marijuana are generally deceitful —elaborately rigged lies disguised as scientific findings. Our taxpayer dollars at work!

  32. This all is of course ignored...April 18 disproves the widely held belief that marijuana use —especially by young people— leads to cognitive decline.
    Investigators reviewed data from 69 separate studies published between 1973 and 2017 involving 8,727 subjects (2,152 frequent or heavy users and 6,575 controls). Researchers reported no significant long-term deficits in memory, attention, or other aspects of cognitive functioning that could be independently attributed to cannabis use, regardless of subjects age of initiation. These findings are in contrast to similar studies assessing the impact of alcohol use and other controlled substances on cognition, which “have shown medium to large effect sizes.”

    Only our science you see is valid. Other science it conflicts with our view so it must be invalid or just not exist at all…

    Comical really.
    WE win we win we win and are not going away..Today close to home here…Albuquerque New Mexico removed criminal penalty for personal pot use…
    Read it and weep me hearties…..you are loosing. Like with global warming denial, produce 400 studies or not showing it to not occur…we produce 4000 more that shows it does.Pick your study we can pick a inverse.
    Pick this study or that and then scream science science science…and we remember back in that dark day big tobacco did the same.

    And who is winning…check polls…we know who is winning. Your day is over and our ship in this regard is coming to shore.
    I weep for all the innocents jailed for this minorly harmful thing. And if I did pray would pray for those who aim to continue this debacle.

    1. What is probably even more distasteful and harmful to society is the vast numbers being hooked on opioids when a viable alternative to pain management(agreed one which may not work for all like more pain meds)…..is ready available and cheaply procured. With no threat of addiction.

        1. INSYS the drug company found to have donated around 500k to the antilegalization campaign when pot was on the ballot in Arizona…..
          Coincidentally marketing a morphine based pain killer whose sales may be impacted by legaiization.

    1. Well Reg by my guess you will probably be wondering for quite a while.
      In one of he studies which is present in the video a poster has mentioned evidenced in the video is a notation auxiliary to the stated thing (2;32 in the video just below the read by doc G part) one may find in that study which serves as a main supportive part, the pot used was CBD free.

      CBD is shown in other study to be protective of the size of that part of the brain and likely functionality as well..

      So if edibles show less harm or no harm by my take they will not study it. Pot content by CBD amount varies considerably.
      So then the science which we on this side are claimed to be denying due to irrational personal favorance will be found suspect by design of study.

      1. Abandon ye all hope here who would enter this place…..

        all hope for a unbiased review of the science and statistical summery as regards to pot that is,(nutrition a pretty bang up job is endeavored)….

        Most noted by my read is docs claim on the preceding video on underage use of pot……. the claim completely false, that underage use has increased in Colorado following commercial sales.
        By some creative linguistic monopoly doc has equated a court decision which had no application on commercial sales to be a point from which one could access that thing and draw statistical conclusion. A full year before commercial sales began in January of 2014…

        I cannot fathom such a thing excepting the present of clear complete bias.
        So Reg as they say in Jersey..forget about it.
        Assumeing presumptuously that edibles cause less harm to intended users. Edibles are more commonly consumed by accident by kids however.

  33. The study that Jimbo and others are referencing to offer contradictory information adversarial to points made on permanant neurological damage from use in even underage is available here.
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2678214?redirect=true

    But I suspect this is not to be considered valid science despite it being published in the JAMA psychiatry documents.
    As it conflicts with some who hold a differing opinion and only consider those studies which support their view as valid. Which on this subject are Dr Gregers views.

    But for the rest of us…it appears as the study recommends…any permenant cognitive damage(yes when under the influence one has typically cognitive decline of a temporary nature) other than in absurdly gross amounts of consumption for years upon years …..is still in every sort of question. Inconclusive to put it in a word….not proven nor disproven.

    Despite the rabid vehement prostrations of the anti pot crowd.

    1. Which in part the result of this one may find in the studies conclusion(thanks to Jimbo and others)…
      “Although other outcomes (eg, psychosis) were not examined in the included studies, results indicate that previous studies of cannabis in youth may have overstated the magnitude and persistence of cognitive deficits associated with use.

  34. It is vital to discuss the potency of today’s marijuana cultivars as they are breeding them for higher THC content. Until cannabis products are standardized, I would assume they are not necessarily safe or smart.

    1. One buys what one wants to. If a shop in Colorado is not offering different strains and potencies one would be best advised not buying from them.
      All the better shops do. One has 200 varieties of every shape and form.

      Here is a example of one mild strain from a shop..
      ” Strain Name: Trainwreck
      Grade: B
      Type: Sativa dominant
      Looks: Gorgeous. Dusted in crystals with lots of orange hairs.
      Smell: Spicy, earthy, with a hint of skunk.
      Taste: Much like the smell.
      Effects: The first thing I noticed was the immediate cerebral effects. Lightly visual, a nice body buzz, but it is still easy to get stuff done.
      Potency: Mild – moderate. 2-4 hours.
      Reviewed by: Lexistence”

      A local visit to any shop and a discussion with a salesperson will find the type of pot you prefer.
      No one will give you potent pot if that is not what you want.They want repeat customers so will not deceive you.

      1. In a comedic fashion they sometimes call the attendents budtenders as in bartenders..

        But the actuality is similar. In a bar one tells the bartender what drink they want of a selection beer whiskey or rum or this or that. Different drinks have different effects.
        A budtender one tells the attendant what effect one wants and the budtender recommends from their selection what best matches that effect. Contrary to drinking we may not know the effects this is new to our culture.

        So the idea one has this or that foisted upon them and gets a effect that is not desired is completely bogus.
        They would end their own business..who would go there again…most places have a lot invested a look see at any of the shops tells one that.

        Most look like whole foods as opposed to shoprite..upscale..
        A lot invested they want to keep customers and draw in new ones by word of mouth.
        To sell them pot they do not want would kill the idea of repeat customers.

        And one can research usually the various brands by potency and effect on line using a search if one wants to find out before a visit.

          1. To be clear, it may appear I am selling this thing…I am not.
            I don’t smoke pot have not for years upon years.
            I am familiar with the business a bit as I did research investing into it actually before it became legal in Colorado. And at the same time looked into investing into medical marijuana in New Mexico with associates.

            I found the barriers to entry commercially were to large and it favored cash only use.
            So I decided against it firmly and can anticipate no circumstance when I would rethink that. I will never invest in this thing.

            But people need to know what it is..it is not what it was prior to legalization. Completely different. It is like buying liquor I surmise in prohibition days as opposed to after that ended…a way different experience. People back then made stuff to drink in their bathtubs. Pot dealers grew pot illegally in forests….now both are all commercial and one knows what one is getting. No one quality controls a pot dealer in a illegal state. In a legal state…sure they can be sued.

            In legal states which is a bunch, a large proportion of people in the US, with California now on board, one knows what they are getting when they buy it.
            Does scientific study from nonlegal environments apply to legal….well I would say that depends. AS to type of use and actual item consumed…I say not. Legal weed manufactured/grown for study which the feds do…..is simply not generally what one finds in pot shops..
            It is only one type of pot that one finds. THC varies as per brand and CBD varies as well.

            You want to trend study against pot..through CBD content out of your studied pot. You want to show study with predominant cognitive decline with use..use high THC pot content….

            But they are variables in legal states one may allow for. All sorts of pot is available with different effect and composite. More or less THC buy this variety, more or less CBD buy this variety and or combination of the two…..
            When they start studying pot in this new format is by my guess when we will be able to make conclusive determinations.

            Now the system does not favor good study of typical pot use in legal states.
            Hearing statements made like pot is way stronger now…you just know they are talking a illegal framework context…..you choose they type/strength of pot you want in legal states. Most places provide a profile like I have provided above.

            No offense but most are really lost in the past on this thing, to include those applying science to it for the most part.
            Recreational use in pot legal states is indeed that. Like with alcohol some use it and abuse it most do not.
            The harm is likely differing in effect but use patterns may approximate…most just use it occasionally and after work or on the weekends. Same as alcohol.
            .

  35. The barriers to research of pot is presented well in this somewhat dated article. It references the prior administration removing barriers which I assume the current administration has again raised..
    From not high times but the NY times… https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/science/obama-administration-set-to-remove-barrier-to-marijuana-research.html

    How we can really draw any solid concrete recommendations to the negative(other than with perhaps overt overuse of abnormally large amounts) based on the current science is beyond my understanding.

    The current environment is just not conducive to good scientific study.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This