Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Teens?

Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Teens?
4.7 (93.91%) 69 votes

Is the American Academy of Pediatrics’ opposition to cannabis legalization just reefer madness revisited?

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.

“Since the commercialization of marijuana in Colorado, its use among adolescents and young adults has increased significantly.” Up to a 50% increase reported in a single year. And, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics: “Marijuana is not a benign drug for teens. The teen brain is still developing, and marijuana may cause abnormal brain development”—which is why they and the Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry have “officially oppose[d]…legalization.” “Whereas adult users appear comparatively immune to cannabis-induced [long-term changes in brain function and structure], the same cannot be said of [those starting] during their early teens, when effects are both more severe and more long-lasting.” During puberty, parts of the brain are actually reorganizing themselves, making this a “vulnerable” period. Remarkably, “the brain does not complete development until approximately age 25.”

Okay, but is this just Reefer Madness revisited? Show me the data. Yeah, “[s]tudies of long-term, heavy…users [tend to] show [they] perform worse on [various] tests.” But, how do we know they weren’t that way before they even started using? Then, of course, here you are demonstrating they have memory impairments, and yet, you’re relying on their answers in terms of when they started and how much they’ve smoked over the years. So, what you need are “prospective, longitudinal investigation[s]”—meaning following kids over time, before and after, to see what’s really going on.

Even better, you might think, would be a randomized, controlled trial where you force half the kids to smoke. And, “even if [that] were ethical, it could merely show that cannabis has [the] potential…to impair cognition.” Only a prospective, longitudinal study can really get at whether it’s actually impairing brain function in the real world, and how much.

This was the first study ever published. About a hundred young adults, “assessed since infancy,” and after controlling for other factors like alcohol use, and their brain function before they started smoking, the bad news is that they did find that “regular heavy users did [do] significantly worse…in [terms of] overall IQ, processing speed,…and…memory.” But, the good news was that the effects seemed to be temporary. The brains of those who smoked heavily but then stopped appeared to start functioning normally again after like three months. So, yeah, if you’re in school, of course, you want to function at your best. But at least there’s no permanent brain damage—or so we thought. The average use of these former smokers was only about two years; they were testing them when they were about 18 years old.

In this study, they didn’t just follow a hundred kids, but a thousand, from birth all the way to age 38. What did they find? They found that same decline in brain function, confirmed by reports of trusted friends and family, especially among those who started younger. But, here’s the kicker: “…cessation of cannabis use did not fully restore [brain] function…among [those who started in their teens, even if they subsequently quit].” So, this suggests a true, long-standing “neurotoxic effect…on the adolescent brain,” which justifies why public health authorities are so concerned.

And, it was a “global” decline in mental function, “across [all five tested] domains:” executive function, memory, processing speed, perceptual reasoning, and verbal comprehension, consistent with the thought that there’s a critical brain development window that you just don’t want to mess with. The decline in IQ of about six points is the kind of brain damage you see with low-level lead exposure, both of which “are potentially preventable.” But how?

Do we need more DARE, Drug Abuse Resistance Education? Maybe. If it wasn’t a complete failure. No beneficial effects in terms of changing “drug use or [even] attitudes towards drug use,” which appear to be getting more permissive over time, combined with earlier ages of initiation. So: “Increasing efforts should be directed toward delaying the onset of cannabis use by young people,” at least until adulthood.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Rafael Castillo via flickr. 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.

“Since the commercialization of marijuana in Colorado, its use among adolescents and young adults has increased significantly.” Up to a 50% increase reported in a single year. And, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics: “Marijuana is not a benign drug for teens. The teen brain is still developing, and marijuana may cause abnormal brain development”—which is why they and the Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry have “officially oppose[d]…legalization.” “Whereas adult users appear comparatively immune to cannabis-induced [long-term changes in brain function and structure], the same cannot be said of [those starting] during their early teens, when effects are both more severe and more long-lasting.” During puberty, parts of the brain are actually reorganizing themselves, making this a “vulnerable” period. Remarkably, “the brain does not complete development until approximately age 25.”

Okay, but is this just Reefer Madness revisited? Show me the data. Yeah, “[s]tudies of long-term, heavy…users [tend to] show [they] perform worse on [various] tests.” But, how do we know they weren’t that way before they even started using? Then, of course, here you are demonstrating they have memory impairments, and yet, you’re relying on their answers in terms of when they started and how much they’ve smoked over the years. So, what you need are “prospective, longitudinal investigation[s]”—meaning following kids over time, before and after, to see what’s really going on.

Even better, you might think, would be a randomized, controlled trial where you force half the kids to smoke. And, “even if [that] were ethical, it could merely show that cannabis has [the] potential…to impair cognition.” Only a prospective, longitudinal study can really get at whether it’s actually impairing brain function in the real world, and how much.

This was the first study ever published. About a hundred young adults, “assessed since infancy,” and after controlling for other factors like alcohol use, and their brain function before they started smoking, the bad news is that they did find that “regular heavy users did [do] significantly worse…in [terms of] overall IQ, processing speed,…and…memory.” But, the good news was that the effects seemed to be temporary. The brains of those who smoked heavily but then stopped appeared to start functioning normally again after like three months. So, yeah, if you’re in school, of course, you want to function at your best. But at least there’s no permanent brain damage—or so we thought. The average use of these former smokers was only about two years; they were testing them when they were about 18 years old.

In this study, they didn’t just follow a hundred kids, but a thousand, from birth all the way to age 38. What did they find? They found that same decline in brain function, confirmed by reports of trusted friends and family, especially among those who started younger. But, here’s the kicker: “…cessation of cannabis use did not fully restore [brain] function…among [those who started in their teens, even if they subsequently quit].” So, this suggests a true, long-standing “neurotoxic effect…on the adolescent brain,” which justifies why public health authorities are so concerned.

And, it was a “global” decline in mental function, “across [all five tested] domains:” executive function, memory, processing speed, perceptual reasoning, and verbal comprehension, consistent with the thought that there’s a critical brain development window that you just don’t want to mess with. The decline in IQ of about six points is the kind of brain damage you see with low-level lead exposure, both of which “are potentially preventable.” But how?

Do we need more DARE, Drug Abuse Resistance Education? Maybe. If it wasn’t a complete failure. No beneficial effects in terms of changing “drug use or [even] attitudes towards drug use,” which appear to be getting more permissive over time, combined with earlier ages of initiation. So: “Increasing efforts should be directed toward delaying the onset of cannabis use by young people,” at least until adulthood.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Rafael Castillo via flickr. Image has been modified.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Doctor's Note

Stay tuned next for Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Adults? But, I have a whole treasure chest of cannabis videos that are going to be dribbling every month or so until the end of 2019. If you want to see them all now, I put them all in a digital DVD you can download or stream right now.

Here are the ones that are up so far:

And more are coming, so visit the marijuana topic page to see all of the latest. 

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

168 responses to “Does Marijuana Cause Permanent Brain Damage in Teens?

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. Guess I’m a nerd. Although I’m far from being a teen, I’ve never had the desire to take up ciggie smoking, much less Mary Jane/weed. (Or even alcohol; I eat red grapes every day instead.) Maybe I might try some pot on my deathbed.

  2. I live in Canada and I just want to say that not all Canadians support the legalization of marijuana- especially me. As an RN I am so concerned about the health and safety issues around its use for both the user and the community.

    Ironically, many of us think that if alcohol and now the typical north American diet was held to standards for health outcomes- they would fail and legislation would ideally support education, prevention and access to healthier choices. Nope, not the way we are going with marijuana, when we had just that chance.

    It saddens me to think of the beautiful minds that will most assuredly be damaged by this drug as is done with all neurotoxic substances- I have a young nephew who uses it everyday and I love him dearly. He won’t listen even more so thanks to our genius legalization choice. I have no issue with medicinal use at all.

    So onward we go, learning, learning, learning.

    A proud and healthy monthly supporter of Nutritionfacts.org

    1. I am from Canada too and it is very unsettling to hear the talk around how benign marijuana is from teens. My 16 year old has “informed” me that marijuana is harmless, you can’t get addicted to it, and it is a lesser drug than alcohol. Perhaps he has some valid points in some of his thinking but what bothers me is how legalization suddenly makes it seem okay to kids at the same time as it becomes more accessible. Now, where it used to be considered an off limits drug, it is seen as harmless and acceptable to youth who might not have entertained regular use before. The same sense of harmlessness with responsible use is associated with alcohol, gambling, and fast food but that moved even further to promoting these as healthy, exciting entertainment, and inexpensive meal alternatives respectively. We now deal with the fallout of this because it seems our main information has come from those vested interests making money, whether it be through taxes or profits. Thanks Dr. Gregor, for providing fact based education that I can use to feel confident in talking to my teenagers.

      1. Well keeping marijuana illegal and demonizing its effects has worked how well in America to stop use…from Pew research..

        Nearly half (49%) of Americans say they have tried marijuana, and 12% in the past year, which the 2012 National Survey on Drug Use and Health says is the most commonly used illicit drug in the U.S. The government survey showed that 18.9 million Americans 12 or older (7.3%) had used marijuana in the prior month.

    2. I can agree that keeping marijuana out of the hands of youth if its has a statistical chance of impacting the IQ levels they have a chance of reaching if they defer experimenting with it until later. That said having also grown up in Canada I found that people see alcohol as a harmless social activity and yet what studies and findings do we have on what it statistically does to impact the development of youth vs keeping it out of their hands until they’ve matured.

      My point is if you are going to take a stand against allowing youth at marijuana you had better include alcohol, methamphetamines [ Adderall and Ritalin ] and other substances as well. If you are not going to take them all out of circulation for youth then what is the point of going after just one when it ultimately then leads to so many pointless incarcerations arising from the illegal distribution that just crops up when you make it illegal.

      1. Being properly treated for ADHD actually reduces the likelihood that children with the disorder will grow up to abuse alcohol and drugs.

    3. Hey, guess what? You’re wrong. I’ve been smoking pot since 17, and my life couldn’t be better. I’ve got a nice car, a six figure job, and a wonderful wife who also smokes. What “source” is feeding you these lies about weed?

      1. I am sure that people who drink and smoke say the same thing. And people who eat burgers, pizza and fries too.

        And the source of the “lies” you talk about, is the scientific literature. But don’t worry about all that nonsense – you obviously know the Truth.

    4. I was a teen in the 90’s and grew up on Long Island. If I wanted weed all I had to do was go to school. If I wanted alcohol, I could just forget it because it was impossible to get. Adults helping kids get alcohol faced arrest and embarrassment on the news. No one over 21 would help. I think alcohol is far more dangerous than weed. The legalization will keep it away from kids because it kills the black market.

    5. My experience is that young people have been using marijuana whether it’s legal or not. It’s still illegal for under 21. Legal or not, young people have been using marijuana and will continue using it. It’s much safer to have it legal and regulated for the 21 and up crowd although age 24.5-25 would be better for the brain. Legalization helps prevent illegal drug drama and senseless imprisonment of users/dealers. Those with addiction problems need treatment not more regulation.

  3. I am a drug counselor for a huge public school district.
    I can tell you mj can de-rail teens.
    We also see use in children as young as 6-something not addressed in research, but occurring with increasing frequency. We also see increasing anxiety and depression in regular heavy users.
    Talk to your kids-talk about the brain research-ask them if they know someone who “smokes too much”-what does that look like?

  4. The real concern is the permanent brain damaging effects of antidepressant and other psychiatric drugs. On top of that should be the concern over the brain damaging effects of cholesterol, saturated fat, fast-food, MSG, fluoride, energy drinks, vaping and overall poor nutrition.

    1. Exactly why just go after one substance and all the expense and irrelevant jail sentences that arise from declaring it illegal if you are not going to go after stopping the use of all the other bad actors out there. If we can’t cover them all then better to make everything legal and come up with a better approach to dissuading youth and older folks from using health damaging products, e.g. evidence based facts, vs authority figure “because I told you not to” messaging, on how it is harming you like this video by dr. greger.

    2. This is all true but it’s also like saying that relative to cutting off an arm or a leg, cutting off a toe is relatively harmless – so let’s keep on doing it or at least not worry about it. That’s not a unsuitable analogy because we are basically talking about different types of self-harm here.

      It is not a choice between alcholol and marijuana, or between vaping and marijuana, or unhealthy food, prescription anti-depressant drugs. OTC drugs or marijuana. It;s not a choice between worrying about MSG or fluoridated water (although the problems alleged with those things may well be in the same class as chemtrails).versus concern about marijuana use. We don’t ignore littering or shoplifting because murder and robbery are so much worse, Why should society close its eyes to the adverse health effects of mat=rijuana use?

      We don’t need to do any of those things including using marijuana. We will be healthier if we don’t Isn’t that the point? What the legislators choose to do about it is another matter but these videos are about the health effects of what we consume – not about what legislation, our elected representatives should pass.

      1. TG Understand your point but creating laws tends to create undesired consequences like drug trafficking and drugs trained with very harmful substances.

        Legalization of medical cannabis is revolutionizing Oncology. It serves as an excellent alternative to opioid drugs and the scientific evidence is growing showing that it slows down tumor progression. I recommend cannabis and CBD oil in my practice which is working with cancer patients.

        Education is the answer. Teach our children that occasional recreational use of cannabis is harmless and that any drug can be harmful if abused. Criminalization of any drug is counterproductive. If you want to solve our drug crisis, go after the real drug pushers, Big Pharma and corrupt medical doctors.

        1. Thanks Mark. You clould reasonably argue that making marijuana illegal drives organised crime – as outlawing alcohol during prohibition did.

          However, I am not sure that the evidence clearly demonstrates that occasional recreational marijuana use is harmless. Any more than occasional recreational use of alcohol, tobacco, uppers, downers are demonstrably harmless. That sort of claim seems like wishful thinking.

          That said, i don’t think that making marijuana illegal is a good idea. I do believe that education and making people aware of the sciience will be helpful as it is with alcohol, tobacco and junk food. These problems will probably always be with us. The best we can do is give people the information they need to make informed choices.

          1. I totally agree with TG…Cannabis has great benefits for sick people with cancer….just this point alone is worth considering…and so much more good uses…

      2. “but these videos are about the health effects of what we consume”…not really. What is the lead in this video…children are being led into more marijuana use due to legalization in Colorado.

        Then is elaborated upon the substantiation on the negative of childrens use of pot.
        If this was only about the negative effects the child use claim in the first study stated would not exist.
        Clearly the video extends beyond that scope.

        1. Not really Ron. It is just setting out the facts. What people do with the information is another matter. the video doesn’t make any recommendationa about either legalising or criminalising use.

          I can’t see the point in getting offended by being presented with facts we don’t like. My view is that making marijuana illegal is counter-productive but I’d still like all the information placed on the table. Hiding the stuff we don’t like isnt helpful to my mind.

          1. Really Tom?
            Any source I can find including another here from Wiki….”During 2014, the first year of implementation of Colorado Amendment 64, Colorado’s legal marijuana market (both medical and recreational) reached total sales of $700 million
            Show sales of recreational marijuana beginning in January of 2014. It was approved and legal in 2012 but the law required many modifications and mediations to allow for legal sale. It did not take effect until Jan 2014.

            So are we seeing a bit of confirmation bias here….law passed but no sales made commercially other than in a medical context we draw statistical conclusion on commercial sales???

            The video clearly states in 2013, statistically one year before the shops were set up and opened.
            Talk about misleading and cherry picking. Lets now say crime has increased dramatically in 2019 neverminding that we are in 2018. Or any number of misleading wrong things to prove points we care to make.

            1. No wonder our politic is in so much trouble…peoples are willing things into existence by the virtue of their belief.
              Just played the video again for the hundredth time now I think….it clearly states the commercialization of Colorado pot and refers to the study(which is a published thing in a RN nursing journal not a study on marijuana or some related issue) is in 2013.

              AT that time commercial sales were not possible. The law was passed in 2012 but due to varying reasons did not take effect until 2014.
              Is anyone really watching the videos here? Legal medical marijuana was available at that time not commercial sale of recreational pot.

              And this invalidates at least two widely known and published studies federally and in state that show legalization has not had any increase in use by underage peoples in Colorado.
              Everyone knows it but those who hold fervent views against marijuana and will further them to any extend.
              Like climate denial really…it just harms ones cause if one adds that to their argument. It is a known. All know the fact Colorado recreational use has not increased pot use amongst the underage…it, that concept it does…no longer holds water.

              Abstract that entire segment which was not a add on nor a minor thing hidden within other things….but the lead, the starting point the premesis on why this is a problem…and we could say this video has validity.
              As stands it leads to misconception and false conclusion as evidenced by many of the comments here.

            2. Dr Greger is making a direct quote from an article in the professional literature. It’s there on the screen in black and white. The source article argued that a 2009 Denver court decision made marijuana de facto legal in Colorado and represented the commercialisation of medical marijuana.

              You have to watch these videos carefully and check the sources before coming out with all guns blazing and claiming that Greger personally is mosrepresenting the facts.

              As for confirmation bias, have you ever considered that this might colouring your own arguments?

              1. That is misleading and you know it. Almost everyone on this board takes it the way I take it and actually the way about everyone takes it…when did commercial cultivation and sale of marijuana begin…Jan 2014. Check a general encyclopedia source Wikipedia….that is the terminology used.

                Court decision my foot….no peoples had access to legal pot following that court decision. No more than before, medical marijuana was it until 2014

                I don’t smoke pot nor am I invested in it nor intend to.

              2. I’m still not clear if Tom and Ron are exactly on the same point, or are using different definitions of when MJ became “available” in Colorado (to what extent it became available.) But I can give you this personal experience.

                I visited the state in the summer of 2012. I was curious about the medical herb, so I visited several pot dispensaries. This was up in Nederland above Boulder, a mountain community filled with more than the usual number of alternative lifestyle people. As an out-of-state resident and with no medical permission to buy, the stores still welcomed me in and showed me their products. They were all proud to show off their budding businesses, so to speak. I’m sure there were security cameras in use if only for their own protection since they were cash-only businesses, but possibly also for Colorado’s Big Brother to watch them. In any case it would have been insane for them to sell to a non-medical user. No doubt they had to keep track of each sale and the I.D. of the purchaser. But I couldn’t be a purchaser.

                I don’t know when it was instituted, but I understand that Colorado does some extreme form of tracking MJ production in that each plant grown there has its own bar code. And grow facilities, at least, if not also stores, are under 24-hour video surveillance that the state authorities are tapped into.

                I was back out there again in January 2013 and tried to visit the same stores. This time the doors were shut and had large warning signs that no one without a medical permit was allowed on the premises. The signs also stated that there would be no recreational sales until 2014. End of tour.

                In late 2015 I passed through the state again. Now they had recreational stores and medical stores. I don’t know if the two could co-exist in the same building or not, but all the recreational stores I visited were that only. Now with just my out-of-state I.D. I could buy whatever recreational products were offered, up to a daily limit, I believe, although a dedicated purchaser could skip from store to store maxing that out if so inclined and with the necessary funding.

                So I suspect that while some medical herb was diverted to friends and family members prior to 2014, that it was inconsequential to amounts which could have leaked out to teens after the beginning of 2014. And still, apparently, teen use began declining somewhere around that same time.

                Finally, drop back in time to 1971. I was 20 years old, had dropped out of college, and moved to Denver to live with friends. We were all from out of state. When we wanted to score drugs, all we had to do was drive up to Boulder to a street next to the university which was simply called “The Hill.” All sorts of hippies were loitering around there, and as you walked slowly past them the offers were muttered, “Acid, mescaline, grass…” It was all for sale there, no questions, no I.D., no regulations at all.

    3. Funny I was watching a video series by PBS on the opioid crisis. The conclusion by the desk host was to the effect of….we must stop the illegal sale of drugs such as heroin with the kids that is what it is all about…yada yada yada…same story since really Richard Nixon war on drug days.

      But the new crisis is all about peoples starting that thing from prescribed med use. Then when the supply dries up due to lack of expiration of prescribed dose or need for amounts exceeding prescribed dose then they graduate to more potent heroin.
      And steps have been taken to limit prosecution of the makers of opioids and distributors federally by legislation, just last year.
      WE all know of some small towns with thousands in population being used as hubs for distribution of millions of doses of opioids.

      But no it is as if we are stuck in 1970 or 1980 at best. Nutrition, I wish we could get that far…we can’t even get past a obvious like opioid abuse right in front of our face.
      Same old same old media to protect vested advertiseing interest.

    4. Yeah, Gregor spends too time much combating “what is hip” rather than what has been present for decades, and is only getting worse, despite being more under the radar comparatively. From an educated guess, I would put anti-depressants ahead of alcohol and marijuana smoking combines—in terms of damage the body—especially the brain.

      My biggest issue with these videos on marijuana and alcohol, is the fact that there is no “standard” dose. If a video was done about anti-depressants, yes, their would be confounding factors such as age, weight, sex, etc. However, the research would be more controlled by the mere fact that these anti-depressants would be considered in milligram doses that make measuring effects much more possible than the former two. Not only are the same confounding factors prevalent with marijuana and alcohol, but having no standard dose makes the research even more susceptible to confounding.

      Light and moderate consumption of alcohol and marijuana is infinitely more subjective than a precise amount like 500mg of a prescribed anti-depressant.

      1. Legal pot use is making such a comparative possible. But you are certainly correct active component varies. And actual dose ingested varies as well.
        Who is to say if one is smoking a entire joint part of one or how much is shared with others. Back in the day that was how it was done, shared almost always.
        Self reporting then becomes completely a kilter.

        Legal pot varies greatly as to potency. It is a selling point. In the shops they sell variants with differing anticipated affects. Some are mild some are quite dramatic. Which is why I find statements in study to the effect of marijuana has become much more potent over the years so suspect…..have they not visited a Colorado pot shop…one chooses potency desired.

        It is like there are two worlds…. one exposed to the real of it and one exposed to a scientific opinion of it.
        Yes we could now in theory design a study with the same exact version of marijuana available legally and then study the various variables and result by dose and duration.But scientists are still in the world of 1980’s or so when you bought what a dealer sold you, likely the strongest thing available and likely as well with added substances to it. You venture jail you want the biggest bang for your buck so illegal trends to blotto pot sale, not calming stuff.
        A real pot shop..clearly they are very remote from that. And thus what peoples are really taking is not a known and their study represents not the real as they so little endeavor the real?

        Self reported study generally you get a past read on things not present nor current situational things.
        So is a 1980’s type users consumptive pattern dose and all relevant in scientific study to a 2018 legal pot user in Colorado and now California….I would guess in most respects not.
        When I was a kid most of my stuff I know now was modified with added substances to enhance a high. A younger kid they would perform the inverse degrade it with filler oregano typically. The closer you were to the dealer the better your stuff was.
        Peoples reporting no effect on their first try….most probably they were smoking filer not pot. There is no quality assurance with illegal pot.
        Self reported study is about useless.

        Brain study by scan..one study shows kids that have a decreased content of certain brain matters to have a increased chance of developing a addictive pot behavior type….are we then seeing by scan over time the result of pot or the result of a degenerative process which we do not understand and thus may be adjacent to pot but not cause? Is it not possible this decrease may in fact cause the addictive behavior in some unknown manner.

        I read the study part…the authors found it curious and interesting.
        I tend to doubt the negatives being fed a line of BS for so many years and so many powerful interests such as bid pharma and big liquor being against it.
        Not that it is harmless but way less than some other things commonly endorsed in our culture.

        1. The brain study scan result I mention derived by a link provided by Tom from a neuroscience source..
          As compared to healthy controls, MJ using adolescents have also been found to have decreased right OFC volumes (Churchwell et al., 2010) suggesting a potential relationship between OFC volume and onset of substance use. Interestingly, in a recent study by Cheetham and associates (Cheetham et al., 2012), smaller OFC volumes at age 12 were found to predict initiation of marijuana use by age 16. Furthermore, two other studies of adult participants reported reduced OFC volumes in MJ users (Filbey et al., 2014; Battistella et al., 2014).”

          OFC volumes by those studies were probably predictors of marijuana abuse in teens not a result. We may think in a isolated fashion considered as they correspondingly found in MJ users it is a causal factor of use. But it may be decreaed OFC volume tends one towards this abuse at a early age.

          So brain scan result may seem definitive but be anything but. Reducing a probable known to a suspected known or assumptive theory of causation by a possible not proven or probable causation..Depending upon interpretation of result and auxiliary information provided by study.

    5. your misinformed opinions are irrelevant. MSG is safe. it’s literally sodium and an aminoacid found in any protein source. vaping is all about harm reduction, not about being safe. and fluoride, if you had any basic chemistry knowledge, you’d know it’s safe.

  5. Dood……that’s gnarly. Did a lot of wead when I was yung, and
    have been abel to hold down this grate job at 7/11 for the last 47
    yeers (free slurpys, too)…hoping for a promotion to casheer, soon
    (but not good with numburs, or spellin). Cowabunga!!!!!

    1. It is sad to hear that! Hope your nephew listens to you before it is too late. I am against legalization of marijuana because I believe that some use the “ medical” term as an excuse to maintain an addiction that may be detrimental to their health. I can support it for someone with a terminal health condition like cancer or similar. While I respect the opinions of those who are for it; I am strongly against it.

    2. You know this is really offensive to peoples who hold service type jobs like at a 7/11….”Did a lot of wead when I was yung, and
      have been abel to hold down this grate job at 7/11 for the last 47
      yeers (free slurpys, too)…

      Don’t have friends at 7/11 working but do have a Walmart. Rural areas that may be all there is. Intelligent peoples often working two jobs to make ends meet. Comedy is comedy and I am no social justice warrior but plenty of real normal some of them intelligent peoples, are holding down jobs just like that. It is the economy or economic situation of our current times. Plenty employed the stats show, but at jobs with no unionization history and thus lower paying by far and large.
      30 years ago I would guess that was more a read on personal inability. Now I think it is largly circumstantial. Have you talked to them at those places…seem ordinary to me mostly. And I mean most not a one or two here and there that are normal. Almost all just like me. I am fortunate they are not.

    3. I’m sorry S your attempt at comedy is well taken

      But in todays economic world more and more of us are finding ending up at 7/11 or Walmart are not things we elect or caused by deficiency, but are forced upon us by circumstance.
      Many school teachers in place like Oklahoma work those type jobs to make ends meet. I heard a couple due to the strikes in those type places explaining these things. I don’t work those jobs but have friends who do. I am fortunate by circumstance but they are not.
      Really 30 years or so I would not comment on that.

      Now the world has changed.

  6. I don’t think anyone is advocating legal access to marijuana for young people. My position is to legalize it, regulate it, and tax it. And regulate means limiting legal access to adults. Taxes can be used toward drug education and rehabilitation programs. Most people can drink responsibly, though some cannot; is that sufficient grounds to prohibit alcohol? What about gambling? Or my big concern: what we eat? Look around us: we have a serious epidemic of obesity and associated chronic illnesses, mostly due to processed food and animal product consumption (as well as a sedentary lifestyle). Should we prohibit those foods?

    1. Dr. J, prohibiting bad foods, no, stop subsidizing them by government yes!
      But having other harmful substances available isn’t an excuse to ok another.

    2. Yes, prohibiting harmful foods is a very good idea. It will increase the health of our population, decrease cost of healthcare and we will feel better too.

    3. I couldn’t agree more. From what I’ve read, the criminalization of pot is overwhelming our prison system. And it supports a whole industry of violent criminals both here and in the producer countries. It seems to me that use of intoxicants is the symptom not the problem anyway.

    4. Agree Dr J completely.
      Obviously we tried keeping it illegal and it is to no good result. If however one is a member of a Drug cartel it does serve to keep competition limited to criminals.

      About the same if one thinks about it during alcohol prohibition times. The largest boom to organized crime ever.

    5. As you know Dr J we tried this…”Most people can drink responsibly, though some cannot; is that sufficient grounds to prohibit alcohol? What about gambling?
      Prohibitions in both cases led to the creation of organized crime a black market economy and eroded societal values overall due to widespread corruption and the continuance of behaviors deemed illegal but still endeavored.
      Which thought about is the affect of not legal pot upon the nation.

      Some will probably get abusive with it when they did not when illegal. But compared to the other vast consequences that is a minimal effect.
      Half of us have tried it by most polling. So half of us by federal consideration felons engaging in felonious behaviors….and none consider the societal consequence of that….what it means when so many do such a thing…it means laws no longer matter as they no longer reflect us. Which leads directly to other bad behaviors of much more significant import.

  7. I think those of us working with teens suspected this as an outcome of marijuana use.
    Thank you so much Dr. Gregor for this information. This is a great service!

  8. Something being legal or not is just an ideological grouping made by some people. But remember that the damage caused by MJ if sensed by lowering IQ (measurable), its effect is the tale of broader damage that ranges over all other possible neurological functions. The most important is probably the executive function (capacity of planning, making accurate estimations, etc).

  9. So wait, are we just relying on trusted Informants to weigh in on cognitive decline etc? Shouldn’t we be able to see permanent damage via brain scan results? Can anyone enlighten on this? This video left me feeling there’s not much evidence backing the so-called harmful effects of MJ. It would be nice to have more conclusive evidence since I’ve known a few potheads over the years and can say they appear to have been affected based on the way they speak and think.

    1. The problem appears to be differing and inconsistent results from studies using different design parameters and examining people with different mj use habits, length of use etc.

      However, a number of MRI studies have detected differences in brain structure and wiring eg
      https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187892931500081X?via%3Dihub

      This 2014 article from the Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences appears to provide a good overview of what is known. Not sure if anybody has seen anything more recent?
      http://www.pnas.org/content/111/47/16913

      1. The problem to my opinion Tom is not this…” The problem appears to be differing and inconsistent results from studies using different design parameters and examining people with different mj use habits, length of use etc.

        but in our attempts to draw definitive conclusions from that stated.

  10. The controllers love nothing more than the malleability of a dazed and confused populace. True individuals—who, by the way, would never dream of branding themselves, like a stinking cow, with a tattoo—reject the mainstreaming of stupefying drugs. True individuals, true freethinkers seek maximum clarity. They practice maximum discrimination, constantly sweeping away every cloud of error that might obscure their vision of the sun.

    1. Really Alphonsus…”who, by the way, would never dream of branding themselves, like a stinking cow, with a tattoo
      I have a tattoo covering my entire back which is drawn from what is called liberation through hearing, or commonly the Tibetan book of the dead.
      It is dikini script approved of by a lama and originated by Padmesambhava a mystic and saint. Upon death it is though if one has that on one (usually carried) we will be liberated from certain defilements upon rebirth, things like greed anger hatred and such. Dikinis are spirts and their script is dikini language tattooed on my back…am I a cow then? A stinking one?

      Or is that serving spiritual purpose for me?
      You are apparently the qualifier…so you tell me..
      Do not use drugs however can not claim to know the minds of all that do nor the purpose I expect varied they may indulge.

  11. Okay, but what about young kids who are controlling epileptic seizures with cannabis? Which is worse for their brains – more seizures or less? Many other maladies respond favorably to cannabis.
    Thousands claim eating plant-based whole foods is horrible for your health. They promote paleo, ketosis, blah, blah, blah diets with straight faces and handfuls of scientific studies to back up their claims. Confusing? Frightening? Sure is.
    We have to find what works for us. I believe the entire planet would be healthier if all two-leggeds ate from the vegetable kingdom. Our species learns through trial and error. Looks to me like we’ve pretty well completed the trials on health and disease in this country. What we’re doing is falling apart, yet the pharma-medical-political complex clings desperately to a profit-based approach relying on more surgeries, medical devices and pills. Our bodies are their profit centers.
    Which brings me back to cannabis. It’s a lot cheaper to smoke a joint or eat a brownie for a migraine, than pop a pharma-pill. What does that pill do to a 14-year old who suffers with migraines? Big pharma is very nervous about this much cheaper alternative for all kinds of ailments. They will not go quietly, they will fund research and call it “science,” when it is nothing more than a thinly disguised attempt to hold the upper hand in “health” care.
    We have laws restricting alcohol use for kids, the same kind of law should extend to marijuana use. Sometimes those laws work, and sometimes they don’t. And yes, we need fully functioning brains to keep our fragile democracies working. Bottom line is we have proved conclusively that prohibition does not work. Education works. Telling the truth works. A balanced approach works.
    If we are truly concerned about our young people, we could focus our attention on environmental pollutants in the water, air and our food. Nutrition. Now, there’s something to promote!
    One last thing, Louis Armstrong, one of the greatest musicians of the 20th Century “smoked weed” every day. So did Carl Sagan. So did – and do – millions of highly creative, productive people.
    I, too, am a proud supporter of NutritionFacts.org. Thank you for the work you do in changing the conversation about health.

    1. To add to the comment the one last thing part…Bill Gates explaining in a interview with Buzz feed on why he voted for the legalization of marijuana in Washington state….””Can they keep it out of minors’ hands? Will it reduce alcohol consumption? Are there some people who use it at levels you might think of as inappropriate? Will drug gangs make less money?” he asked, adding that so far he’s been impressed with the implementation of the law, which goes fully into effect later this year.
      “I think people are going about this trying to make sure it’s labeled well, trying to make sure you’re collecting taxes so more than any of the additional state costs that will get imposed by this thing are funded by the consumers,” he said.
      And he suggested the legal market would cut into the illegal drug trade. Traffickers “are going to make a lot less money, and some of the perverse things about the illegal drug trade will be avoided
      .”

      And yes Steve Jobs was a regular user at one point by self admission.

    2. Lots of people drink alcohol and smoke tobacco every day. That doesn’t prove those things are healthy or harmless any more than celebrities who use mj every day prove mj is healthy/harmless.

      This argument seems a lot like the claims of smokers that the longest lived people on Earth are smokers eg
      https://www.sott.net/article/282019-The-oldest-people-on-Earth-are-all-smokers

      Some people have genetic resistance to the effects of smoking
      https://www.thedailybeast.com/smoking-doesnt-kill-them-the-strange-science-of-the-longevity-gene

      1. Well sure..discount all the comments about the successful users of pot who have no negative effect and also discount all the multiple comments on pot stating their friend loved one relative or whoever is lazy suicidal and incompetent as a person as result of use…..

        You first….

        1. So, what’s your point Ron? Don’t the comments about successful users of pot cancel out the comments about adverse effects from pot use? And isn’t that one of the main reasons we rely on science – not (cebrity) endorsements and testimonails – to determine if something is harmless or niot?

          Also, why not substitute “red wine”, “fine bourbon” or “Havana cigars” for “pot” while we’re at it? Not to mention grass-fed organic beef.

            1. A fair rendition would require a addition of both sides of antidotal comments being invalid.
              You fail to present that and thus exhibit bias.
              That is my point.

              1. I have no idea what you trying to say there, Ron. You fail to present any evidence that one bunch of anecdotes is any better that the opposing bunch of anecdotes.

                That is why we need to rely on good quality scientific evidence. That is my point.

                1. You are only positing the negative anecdotes. A fair equal consideration requires if we are introducing personal opinion into things both sides as personal opinion or experience is not a study in science. One can introduce that into discussion and it is fair game if both sides acknowledge it. If however one wants to just introduce negative aspect of ones personal opinion and then discount positive it is not fair game.

                  Your comment to the negative is celebrities and a comparison to smoking and alcohol.
                  Others are introducing geniuses and this and that on the positive side.
                  I say fine if we allow anecdotal things allow both.
                  If we want to disallow both we must then comment on the invalidity of peoples here saying….well my cousin had this problem using pot and this happened and this and that. Many of those type comments are found in this discussion.You raise objection only when positive personal experience is mentioned.

                  So you are being biased.

  12. Any thoughts on the oils, is cbd oil ok for young adults 18-25 or still a bad idea ? It does not have thc in it. Thanks.

    1. good question on cdb oil. I heard it counter acts THC might improve brain function, but I’ve not seen the actual study on that. Anyone know?

  13. Good video. Thank you

    My own opposition to MJ is based on my experience that MJ (and all psychoactive
    drugs – including alcohol, opioids as well as MJ ) depress emotions. My experience
    is that one has to face one’s emotions and deal with them appropriately. My
    experience is that running away from one’s emotions by using drugs (legal and
    illegal) is the path to death.

    I am ambivalent about Medical MJ. Maybe it does do some people some good. But
    I am outraged that every teenager who smokes pot will smirk and say “It’s medicinal.”

    I am intrigued that the brain continues to develop until age 25. Perhaps people
    should not be allowed to act in adult movies (etc) until they are at least 26.

    1. “I am intrigued that the brain continues to develop until age 25. Perhaps people
      should not be allowed to act in adult movies (etc) until they are at least 26.”

      Logically, you’d have to argue also that the minimum age for enlistment into the armed forces should also be raised. I can see that causing major problems.

    2. My own personal experience with alcohol is now that it makes me sleepy and also makes it hard for me to do mechanical things. It now has no other effect on me. Certainly it is not enjoyable.
      Some abuse it but I also see some use it responsibly and sanely apparently enjoying it.
      Should I then call for a prohibition as we had in the 1900’s of that thing knowing it a complete failure that led to the growth of organized crime and eroded societal values….no.

      In things that affect us personally but are group decisions political decisions I find it necessary to go beyond myself and personal experience.
      What is harmed more harmful more to society….. a thing of some negative effect illegal which results in many put in jail for victimless crime, innocents really put away for years a large number of peoples…. or a allowing a thing of minor (societal impact considered) harm allowed… ?

  14. Commercialization is the operative word in the first sentence of this video. I think Colorado and other states have capitulated in the war on drugs, realizing that if you can’t beat them, you might as well join them and make some hefty tax revenues while you’re at it. Demand will always be there and the industry will continue to thrive. But at what cost to the citizens of Colorado (and elsewhere)? What will the rank and file teen and pre-teen adolescent look like two generations from now following this paradigm shift? Somebody needs to take a look at those societal metrics before the whole country goes to pot.

    A reformed 60s pothead

    1. Nothing in current study suggests underage pot use is increasing with legalization in Colorado….”What will the rank and file teen and pre-teen adolescent look like two generations from now following this paradigm shift?

      Dr Gregers reference to this stated at the inception of the video is inaccurate. Read the PDF and in the first page shown without paying the fee to read the entire thing the reference is in 2013, in not after. Pot recreationally started in 2014 in Colorado. Were they referencing medical marijuana in Colorado perhaps abuse of medical marijuana …really I did not pay the fee but can only guess so.

    2. To be clear commercialization..”Commercialization is the operative word in the first sentence of this video.
      the selling of pot strictly to make a profit not for medical purpose started in 2014 not 2013 as the study reference claiming pot increase amongst kids points to.

      The stated increase is for 2013.
      Pot commercial operation the selling of pot openly started in 2014.

      1. You need to read the source study. It states that de facto legalisation occurred following a 2009 Denver court decision, even though the formal legislation didn’t change until January 2014.

        1. Absurdity…it was legal in a legal sense. It was also more legal in a official sense in 2012 by vote. But it was not available to the general public for purchase(commercial use) until Jan 2014….so it could not reflect increased use by minors as there was no increase in availability in 2013.

          If that occurred it was clearly random.

  15. If children drink alcohol, they will suffer adverse health effects. If they smoke cigarettes, they’ll cough. If you allow a 12 year old to drive a car, danger looms. Are we to use the potential for the illegal use of something by underage people as the determinant for legality? Are parents simply unable or unwilling to mind the children that they have brought into the world? For these abolitionist commenters, aren’t you among those who decry the so-called “Nanny State?”

    Everyone has a story. Using the worst anecdote as the basis for public policy is a constant and fatal error. There’s an old axiom, in law, that hard facts make bad law. We are free people first. Those who are ready to make prisoners of those whose behavior we dislike have had active careers jailing homosexuals, labor organizers, political dissenters, drinkers (18th amendment) as well as the current crackdown on those who dare to feed the homeless or leave water for desert travelers, in the US.

    Personally, I smoked my first marijuana when I was 17, after starting college, at 16. I spent three years in the Army. I have a doctorate. I have belonged to MENSA for 40+ years. I vote; I own a home; I have a family. Before retiring, I held security clearances, including Top Secret, for decades. And I don’t drool.

    Please take care of your children, and let the rest of us get on with our lives.

    1. Thanks a million! Wish I’d said that.

      Everyone has opinions. That doesn’t make them true or relevant for all. So, I say do what works for you, stand up for the rights of others to do the same, and do as much good as you can while you can.

    2. Excellent comment. Smoked when I was 12 I think it was personally.

      Stopped working for a living at the age of 48. With only hobby financial interests since then. Have all I want basically, nice home, cars two kids no debt everything owned. Did volunteer work steadily for five years and eight years of political work…..one could paint that all with the color of failure I suppose..but it would take a very creative mind to figure out how that is so….

      And I have not smoked or used any drug for many many a year now, nor alcohol.

  16. This bears witness to what I saw in the people who smoked in their teens. They got passive and lost cognitive ability. The ones who stopped smoking after a year or so, got better. The ones who didn’t, not only got worse cognitively, but eventually had some mental health issues, like schizophrenia or just bizarre behaviors. One of them tried to kill his relative, related to schizophrenia. He is still a nice young man now that he is medicated, but he still is less intelligent, as if he never grew up mentally, and I would have said that he was smarter than many people when he started. I was talking to another young man who got off pot and he said that he was invited to a pot brownie party and spent the weekend stoned, then, the hosts got paranoid and tried to kill him. Hard to say what is true in some of those communities, but his story was that they went from all mellow to people getting paranoid, to him having someone take out a power tool and try to kill him as he ran away. I don’t know how often that type of reaction happens, but the fact that I know more than one person it happened to, makes me want to put it out there, in case anyone else goes through it. I knew a few other people who went through grad school, but couldn’t kick the habit and ended up unemployed and sleeping on people’s couches. Works as long as someone will take you in.

    I still wonder if they have long enough studies on adult brains, because looking at the brain scans from Dr. Amen, there is visible damage from it, even if it doesn’t affect people cognitively. I am a little protective of my brain cells right now and of things like gray matter. I know people with brain damage from toxic chemicals and don’t know how to sort out which type of damage is from heavy metals in their dishes versus pot smoking.

    1. i noticed direct onset/triggering of mental illness in others. horrific.
      not everyone is immune to the possible bad effects of pot.

    2. Deb you may care to listen or watch one of a blogger Joe Rogan’s podcasts. He is a regular user of pot and one of its advocates. But he has several million followers of his podcasts on You tube. Though I disagree with most of his stances on nutrition(he is a paleo guy) his podcasts are some of the most intellectually stimulating out there. His topics cover a vast range of things from science anthropology psychology and basically anything under the sun or any import.

      Yes he gets high about daily. Is a actor a comedian (does usually several comedy specials for Netflix each year) a commentator for Mixed martial arts UFC, does a podcast usually daily for 2 hours time average and in his spare time just received his black belt in Jujitsu.

      Mostl in MMA/UFC use pot. Few fit your model. Most do it for pain management in training and for recreational purpose.
      They are tested around about fight time, when a fight is scheduled and immediately after but regardless they use it.
      Those are able fit athletes who train physically for hours daily at their art.

      People with problems tend to try to self help their problems, Part of that is with illegal drugs and alcohol. So tested yes..a abnormal amount of people with problems with have use of pot and/ or alcohol or other drug use. Did the drugs cause the problem?
      Some maybe it had a hand in it. But in how many is it just a symptom of a other illness of the psychological sort?.

    3. Deb, your comment reminds me of responses from a friend, almost every time I send her a link to a nutitionfacts.org video or similar article which I think might be of interest to her: She lists off several friends and family members who ate terrible diets, drank, smoked, etc and lived hale and hearty into ripe old ages (90s). And of others who didn’t but practiced healthy lifestyles, and died at younger ages, some after debility and decline. We consistently have discussions of the difference between anecdotes and data. Curiously enough, I did not expect to find that confusion in these comments — but I do. And btw, she doesn’t disagree with the information in the videos. I think she doesn’t know what to do with the evidence of her experiences.

  17. Not all studies agree with those marijuana use statistics:

    “Following legalization, the rate of adolescent marijuana use in Colorado has fallen to its lowest level in nearly a decade, according to new federal survey data.

    “State-level numbers from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health show that a little more than 9 percent of Colorado teens age 12 to 17 used marijuana monthly in 2015 and 2016, a statistically significant drop from the prior period. That’s the lowest rate of monthly marijuana use in the state since 2007 and 2008.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/12/11/following-marijuana-legalization-teen-drug-use-is-down-in-colorado/?utm_term=.2aca4f5e1a1c

    In my experience as an 18-year old in 1970, and as a substitute school teacher in 2008, it was much safer when teens used marijuana than when they turned to alcohol if marijuana was not available. While I was substitute teaching in an art class, one teen who I knew and liked from other classes told me that he had been kicked out of this class for arguing the same MJ vs alcohol point with his regular teacher. He cited his behavior on alcohol when he couldn’t find any MJ. He and a friend had gone on an alcohol-fueled vandalism spree breaking out the windows on several school buses.

    I saw the same behavior changes when I was his age. Young men eager to prove their masculinity would get drunk and engage in sometimes vicious brawls, or wild drunken driving. But later, as marijuana arrived in our rural Midwest town, some of the wildest of those young toughs became much more peaceful and might even forswear alcohol for the sociopathic behaviors it had led them to. A definite hippie subculture developed which looked down on all things violent, but it was shunned and ridiculed by the more conservative kids ” who still got their kicks from getting drunk. We called them “juice freaks” Several of them died from drunk driving accidents.

    1. Colorado dept of health said the same thing with the same kind of result…their use rate was basically the same…. From that article reporting on their results…“In 2015, 21 percent of Colorado youths had used marijuana in the past 30 days. That rate is slightly lower than the national average and down slightly from the 25 percent who used marijuana in 2009, before legalization. The survey was based on a random sample of 17,000 middle and high school students in Colorado.
      “The survey shows marijuana use has not increased since legalization, with four of five high school students continuing to say they don’t use marijuana, even occasionally,” the Colorado health department said in a news release.

      Part of the use of drugs is the romantic aspect to it…illegal renegade rebel…remove that stigma attached to it and what do you get…..bunches of old folks using weed….not so romantic at all, a bit dismal really.

      Which produces the result of less kids or the same amount using not more.

  18. Anybody else notice how intense those highlighter colors were in this video? Blew me away, man. Totally awesome. Not sure why, though….well, gotta go. It’s time for a pizza.

  19. lots of kids are using e vape devices to smoke pot. most onlookers assume it is second hand nicotine.
    nope, and we are all breathing it in, the second hand vape exhaust. a growing public menace.

      1. Virtually every public place in New Mexico has laws which equate vaping with smoking. Meaning it is not allowed except in very select places publically like vaping stores.

        I guess there is minimal chance of getting high from that but thought about it is just gros…..s to be breathing in those vapors unwillingly.

        If that is not your situation where you live I suggest you get politically active and see to it as your politicians whose responsibility it is to enact such laws are plainly not doing their jobs.
        Sometimes I think New Mexico is backward but then I look around and see in the main public paid free basic college, things like that, and realize they are progressive.
        So perhaps your place where you live allows public vaping and is backward.

  20. Probably the most destructive movement for children is, and has been, the feminist movement. Uh oh, is that the sound of steam whistling out of someone’s ears? Humanity has lost touch with simplicity and modesty; instead of having a mother, now children have a TV, computers, video games, and a cell phone… the mother is generally a stranger by the time a child becomes a teen.

    If we’re not present when the child is young, the opportunity is lost, and it never returns. If the parent has proven to be a friend, worthy of respect, a normal child will become the greatest of friends. Simply knowing you don’t want them to do drugs would be enough to keep them away, that’s the case when a child is raised properly. So the real problem; children are off somewhere, and the parents are off somewhere else… whatever is learned in one generation is completely lost to the next.

    I hear mothers complaining at work all the time about how their teens have one problem or another, don’t listen, etc.. What do we expect? A child is like a blank sheet, a sponge adopting the habits of whoever or whatever he is surrounded by.

      1. Aside that women work because they have to. One income no longer makes it. So the kids have to go to daycare. Feminism is not the cause of that.
        That deficit as well is not gender determinated. A man could stay home and take time with kids as well as a woman. Some do actually if they have the resources.

    1. Michael, um, really? Fathers don’t play any role at all in raising their children? Actually, that’s true, too often they don’t. And it’s a huge problem. I guess that’s why they’re not complaining at work about their children’s poor behavior or problems?

  21. China has a hard line policy on illegal drug use. Many people are executed in China for distributing illegal drugs. China will dominate the planet when present day teenagers in America become the political and military leaders of the future. Wars are won by those with the highest intelligence.

    1. Wars are won by those with the highest intelligence“…excepting the Gengis Khan families conquest of China are we? By my read barbarism won out in that one.

      1. Genghis Khan had a very high I.Q. He used special bow construction, military maneuvers, negotiations, mastery of horsemanship, was able to motivate followers, was able to rank people by ability and not by social status. Genghis Khan was a genius. He defeated the best minds of his day including the Chinese empire. You won’t be around when today’s pot head teenagers become adults and try to defend America from the anti-drug culture of communist China….They will defeat your corrupt society.

        1. He was a good leader who knew how to fight. Intelligent people in my book do not murder their brothers. They find other more reasonable ways to mediate dispute.
          And the Chinese of that day were by any read the more intelligent civilized society. The Khans were horsemen who thought all those who lived in houses deficient and weak.. tents were their preference.
          Khan won by ruthlessness and savagery, any historical account of his day attests to that.With time his family advanced.

          1. The fact is that the Chinese were not smart enough to

            defeat the military genius of Genghis Kahn. And, the

            fact is that the anti-drug government of China today

            will become more powerful than the drug infested

            populations that are riddled with crime, corruption,

            that have floods of illiterate people from all over the

            world populating its cities. Ron, you live in a world

            of hallucinations.

            1. John you are clearly projecting your own conservative blight into Ron with your fear monger omg over China taking us all over. Please keep your hallucinations to yourself.

  22. I respect Dre Greger and all he does but…and this is a big but…..the first line is completely wrong. Colorado has not had a increase in under age use of marijuana.

    Here is a link from the wash post, if this does not work I will post another as this is widely known….the incidents of use is actually marginally down.. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/06/21/colorado-survey-shows-what-marijuana-legalization-will-do-to-your-kids/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.180bb4ee8bf9

    1. Yes, in a previous comment on this thread I cited a later, even stronger piece from the Post showing the decline in teen MJ use after legalization in Colorado.

      Analysts of the published science on MJ, including Dr. Greger, need to remember that we have lived in an official culture of demonization of MJ use for some 80 years now, where ALL the government’s efforts and funding have gone to studies trying desperately to find negatives. These efforts have still sometimes backfired when honest researchers find data contrary to government policy.

      Anti-cannabis commissars largely suppressed an accidental research finding from the University of Virginia in 1974 that MJ had anti-cancer effects.
      It became the subject of an after-publication book-burning attempt by the Feds to destroy all copies of the report.

      In 1983 the Reagan/Bush Administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966-76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer, who states, “We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared.”

      https://www.alternet.org/story/9257/pot_shrinks_tumors%3B_government_knew_in_%2774

      ​A Spanish researcher who independently discovered and published positive findings about cannabis in 2000 later wrote, “Unfortunately, the world bumps along between such moments of hope and long periods of intellectual castration.” Ibid. ​

      1. There are large financial interests that are adversarial to the legalization of pot for any use and they will take any measures to stop it.
        First is big pharma as pot interferes with their marketed pain meds. Second is alcohol distributorships as they obviously compete with marijuana in the recreational market.

        Why peoples trust those two is beyond my comprehension. And their influence has really resulted in a large empty spot as to research. Pot being still categorized as a drug likely to harm has many obstacles for study.
        So we get some study but really not all that much and a lot of study with internal bias.

        As this video shows…No offense to Dr Greger but this piece as the lead in attests is a product that shows inherent bias.
        Does he know he has bias..probably not. But the product of his study this video..shows it. Nothing supports increased use by adolescents in pot legal.
        states. It appears his selection to substantiate that was based on a early premature study. Why just that and the disregard of the later more substantial studies by federal sources and state dept of health sources?

        Internal bias..it confirms what he thinks so he does not look beyond it.

          1. Sure they are now. They would be stupid not to.
            But from 2012 CBS prior to legalization in Colorado ….”Bill Phelps, a spokesman for Philip Morris USA, maker of Marlboro, based in Richmond, Virginia, was vague when asked about the future intentions of the nation’s largest tobacco company.

            We have a practice of not commenting or speculating on future business,” Phelps said, adding “tobacco companies are in the business of manufacturing and marketing tobacco products.”

            Less mysterious was Bryan Hatchell, a spokesman for the second-largest cigarette maker, Reynolds American Inc., maker of Camel and Pall Mall, among many others.

            “Reynolds American has no plans to produce or market marijuana products in either of those states,” Hatchell said. “It’s not part of our strategy.”

            They had no hand, none whatsoever,r in the legalization movement. Will they at some future time..probably. Seems a natural to me legalized federally when that occurs. State wide scope does not favor Big Tobacco. California could bring them in by scale, but I think most states are trying to make the growing and distribution local affairs which shuts them out.

            1. The biggest impediment to big national or global companies participating is the cash only transaction status of marijuana. As a illegal substance federally banks who operate nationally can not allow for transactions which include the bank as a part of the transaction process. In the US.

              So it is all cash and only cash. Big companies are not situated to function in that environment.
              Tobacco is seeing the writing on the wall, Canada other places it is becoming legal. There they may be able to function using banks transactional abilities. As it is in the US, they cannot.

          2. TG,
            “…Indeed, alcohol and pharma groups have been quietly backing anti-marijuana efforts across the country. Besides Insys [maker of patented “synthetic marijuana”], the Arizona Wine and Spirits Wholesale Association gave one of the largest donations to the state’s anti-legalization campaign when it paid $10,000 to Arizonans for Responsible Drug Policy. And the Beer Distributors PAC recently donated $25,000 to the Campaign for a Safe and Healthy Massachusetts, making it the state’s third-largest backer of the opposition to recreational cannabis.

            Purdue Pharma and Abbott Laboratories, makers of the painkiller OxyContin and Vicodin, respectively, are among the largest contributors to the Anti-Drug Coalition of America, according to a report in the Nation. And the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, considered one of marijuana’s biggest opponents, spent nearly $19m on lobbying in 2015….” etc there’s much more in the article
            https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/oct/22/recreational-marijuana-legalization-big-business

      2. (My first comment was published at 4:42pm under the name “Scott”. My follow-up to “ron in New Mexico” was done as an email reply, but published under the name “8Mango” at 10:23pm. Only the God of computer coding knows why.)

        BTW, adding to my first comment—in 1970 my college roommate died while drunk and riding with a drunken driver who was speeding along at 120 mph on a straight, flat stretch of rural highway at night. I had smoked MJ with my roommate several times prior to this, but I had already renounced alcohol as a teenaged thrill. They rear-ended a car which was following a tractor, killing the tractor driver and hospitalizing that man’s fiance’ who was following his slow moving tractor to illuminate it at night.

        The interesting thing I’ve noticed about marijuana smokers who get very high and drive–as long as they are not under the influence of other drugs–is that they tend to drive slower than the speed limit.

        1. Yes Scott…. I did a little informal look see at the mechanism behind alcoholics and drunk driving. Most of the science is still in the probable not proven catagory but….
          Alcohol is considered a depressant. And it is at certain levels. But at lesser levels it has stimulatory effects which are comparable in some regard to amphetamine in psychological contexts.
          It is thought that those who are most prone to alcoholism are those who predominate with the stimulatory effect upon their psyche.
          And a consequence is the thinking that one is better at things when under the influence. A better driver a better fighter whatever.

          Motor function decrease results always with alcohol effect. But that simply does not account for the common occurence of people under the influence doing things such as driving so fast and so recklessly.

          By my guess pot lacks this stimulatory effect. And some people may also predominate or tend towards it or not with alcohol. I for instance personally when drunk,( I drank as a kid) always drove very slowly and carefully knowing I had motor deficit. Others I knew tended to think they were ready for NASCAR. I had virtually no stimulatory effect.
          Pot driving you would probably still have a motor function deficit but lack the thinking that you are better at a task like driving.

          This effect explains how we have here in New Mexico peoples with in excess of ten DUI’s. One just arrested two weeks ago stopped on the freeway was of course when awoken bragging for lapel camera how he was so so bad and tough…..pipe stem arms it was obvious nonsense..but that is the amphetamine like effect in result.

          None such probably occurs with pot just motor deficit I would assume. Both should not be allowed for driving but clearly one is assumedly more dangerous. No pot smoker without alcohol or some other thing in their system is going to be speeding like that.

          1. Ron, I’ve never cared for the highly technical use of the term “depressant” in popular literature because I confuse it with mental depression. I don’t think other laypeople keep it straight either. I’m not a scientist or M.D., but I believe the term refers to alcohol’s action on body systems such as breathing, which is what–the autonomic motor/nervous system? –The system which keeps us alive without our conscious input. Drink too much alcohol too fast and that system becomes so “depressed” that you die from a drug overdose.

            Marijuana does not affect the area of the brain controlling such functions –or so I’ve read. That’s why it’s impossible to die from the drug effects of a marijuana overdose. On the other hand, I do know that it speeds up heart rate while lowering blood pressure.

            I believe the reason the marijuana users drive slower than the speed limit when strongly affected by the drug is that they are mentally distracted by multiple new or enhanced sensations. Or they may be hyper-aware of being stoned and are extra-fearful of driving errors–that’s certainly been my experience a time or two. I had to remind myself to speed up. It’s a bit like being on a thrill ride at the carnival, except that you have control of the ride, so you can slow it down if it bombards you with too many sensations.

            It also seems to convert physical aches and pains almost to pleasures. I was a carpenter for many years, and have had a few years of recreational training as a jazz and ballet dancer. Marijuana has routinely inspired me to stretch my tired limbs in a kind of free-form yoga or ballet which feels exquisite–very good and very healthful. Without it I tend to stay scrunched up in a reduced posture those aches produce, and I certainly wouldn’t have enjoyed the otherwise painful stretches. It was no surprise to me when after legalization there were classes being offered in “Ganga Yoga” where the students get high before they work out. It makes perfect sense. Now at age 66 I still do a lot of very awkward physical work as I remodel my house. I don’t always care for the mental effects of marijuana, but I always find its physical effects on my musculature and joints (my body’s joints) to be delightful in a way I’ve never felt with any other substance. It was on that basis that I got a medical marijuana card. This is the same reason, I believe, why many athletes like marijuana, and the NFL and other sports organizations are struggling with it. The athletes know how it helps them.

            As for mental deficits and/or concomitant lack of emotional development, some of the anti-cannabis comments on this blog are excellent evidence of those, although the sources of commenters’ problems are unknown. They almost validate the humorous adage that marijuana makes people who don’t smoke it go crazy.

            1. Yes funny stuff Scott. WE know it has that effect ;)

              One pretty world class jujitsu artist, who once was at least top five globally, Eddie Bravo, speaks of marijuana as being a known aid to competition. Bravo runs a nationwide group of schools following his training, but no longer competes. He has written about the effect on training.
              And the Diaz brothers, UFC fighters, one tested positive immediately after a fight(for which he received a multiyear suspension) at amounts that suggested he certainly had performed In his last fight under the influence.

              I simply cannot believe I am seeing this reefer madness type comments in this todays time and day. It is like with climate change deniers…your boat has come and gone. People generally no longer believe this nonsense.

              Yes it is not all good nor all bad, but few things are. Things that we enjoy at least.
              I do not imbibe however.
              I have not studied marijuana in depth so I cede to your statements on effects.
              Alcohol there are three measurable effects for study purpose, stimulation depression and decreased motor function.
              Specific varies as to individual and amount consumed as to depressive effect or stimulatory effect but motor function decrease is a constant.
              Those that tend to addiction to alcohol seem to predominate stimulatory effect.

  23. From the article, and this is not cherry picking I can produce a bunch more as this was widely reported..
    In 2015, 21 percent of Colorado youths had used marijuana in the past 30 days. That rate is slightly lower than the national average and down slightly from the 25 percent who used marijuana in 2009, before legalization. The survey was based on a random sample of 17,000 middle and high school students in Colorado.
    “The survey shows marijuana use has not increased since legalization, with four of five high school students continuing to say they don’t use marijuana, even occasionally,” the Colorado health department said in a news release.

    No the Colorado dept of health is not on the dole of the marijuana industry nor being forced to say this.
    Looking at the video it appears superficially at least they were looking at 2013 data which was right after it was legalized in 2012.

    Now we have three years to look at the effect and the answer is in…..kids are not using more.

    Which leads me then to question…how valid is the rest of the video?
    No offense to Dr Greger great guy doing great work in a myriad of ways but this…..appears biased. How can we take the rest to heart if the lead in is wrong?

    1. And though legalized in 2012 it did not when I now did a look see, become in force able to be bought until January 2014…meaning a 2013 read on increased pot use by teens in a legal framed setting a impossibility.

  24. Well supposedly the level or maturity level at which one has when one starts to smoke pot is the ultimate level of maturity they will reach. In other words if you become a constant pot smoker at 15 that is your final maturity level. So for those of us who use our minds and senses more than our bodies realize that your ability to process remember and any other damage like macular degeneration or eye health in general could be weakened by smoking of any substance. So why trash your hard drive, do you want a full CGI live experience with a pristine brain or Pong in a slightly damaged one. At least I’ll be able to outthink you.

    1. I’m sorry Michael…who says this..”Well supposedly the level or maturity level at which one has when one starts to smoke pot is the ultimate level of maturity they will reach.

      Not that I advocate pot for kids nor that I even have used it personally for years upon years but…..who says that?

  25. The study that Dr Greger bases his final conclusion on presents and admits to its own limitations, which are posted here..from the study itself…
    ” Three final points are important to make. First, the subgroups without a diagnosis of dependence or any report of persistent use should also be considered. As shown in Table 1 from Meier et al., most individuals in the study (85.8%) did not ever report regular cannabis use. Those who reported nonregular use (50.6% of the total) showed no decline in IQ or neuropsychological performance. Only 14.2% of the total sample was assigned to one of the three subgroups defined by degree of regular use of cannabis. This raises questions about the proportion of cannabis users in the general population to whom these findings most readily apply and highlights the need to interpret the findings in the context of a specific pattern of cannabis use rather than to all cannabis use, per se”

    The area of the study has pot in that time frame illegal. I presuppose a alternative theory….honest people (since dishonest people would not admit illegal activity)….have cognitive deficit with time. more so then dishonest peoples.
    As this is self reported use and all….

    And what tests were done to determine levels of decline……they did not I hope….depend upon friends relatives or other third parties with no qualification to make these observational determinations did they???
    Of did they….
    Is this quackery or good substantial scientific study…you tell me.

  26. Honestly, I have read studies from both directions and read both sides saying that the other side is politically spinning.

    Ron, how did you decide which of the studies was right, because I saw multiple studies from both directions.

    I have also seen articles on a slight increase and Colorado having the most usage at all ages in the nation.

    One of the study graphs, which I looked at said that the very young, the number hadn’t changed, but teens to 25 it had increased by 1/3 and s6 and over it had doubled. One group debunked the young going up, but another group said that it went up slightly, but not statistically significant and more than one group said that it will be a long time before we have real answers.

    Honestly, these polls may all be shams. To me, asking kids questions about pot, when there is peer pressure and the whole world is looking at them is the least possible reliable way of studying behavior.

    Children’s hospital ER visits by young people who smoke pot has increased dramatically.

    That causes me to doubt the “It went down” theory.

    Most of the voices, which sounded reasonable said, “It will take decades to know what happened.”

    That is what I believe to be true.

    Self report by teens under a microscope is a ridiculous way of getting information.

  27. The whole process reminds me of the last Presidential election.

    Polls by adults strongly wanting to get one answer or another, sometimes get the answer they are looking for.

    I see it with Keto.

    Politics and money corrupt that process far too easy.

    And, as far as “why should we believe the rest of it” – the first sentence was based on a real document, whether political or real.

    The later information was based on studies.

    Studies trumps self-report by young people.

  28. Nah..the references Scott and I mention were made by Federal sources(Scotts) and by Colorado dept of health(mine). Those were not polls but study reported in the Washington Post not deadhead news. And reported elsewhere.

    It is clear there was no increase in Colorado. Most of the big horror stories are coming to be found untrue. Serious interests are against legalization big pharma and big liquor. Bad study/polls will be produced.

    It is a known truth. Do you seriously think big media like the Wash post would report things that work counter to their advertising revenue stream? Yes big pharma and big alcohol advertise in the Wash Post…pot does not. They would report immediately anything against pot in that regard if it held the slightest bit of water.
    They did not lead the story they ran with a existant story..it was reported in multiple forms and fashions.

  29. Keep in mind Deb your first “real” document was published in the journal of emergency nursing in regards to treatment of injuries subsequent to marijuana not remotely about the findings of study result on marijuana use increase post legalization amongst children,

    If it was a population study why then is it published in the journal of emergency nursing?

  30. Read the article yourself Deb..the first page is available in PDF form without paying a fee…the study he references which claims this false thing….the source is listed in his notes or you can take the study title from the video….
    It states the increase in 2013…legal pot began in Colorado the dispensaries opened in january 2014.
    It states not after but in 2013.
    In

    All that needs to be done really is for anyone to read the first page and see the reference. In any event the study is about injury prevention and likely cause of injury related to pot a nurse may likely see not statistical study of pot use amongst the underage.

    The wash post studies referenced are studies of pot use amongst underage.

    Don’t trust me or anyone read it yourself.

  31. Easier for you perhaps Deb..just look at the video the beginning. It has the study and the date they made their statistical reference from as 2013. Pause it and read it.
    .
    Here from Wikipedia..” Enacted as Article 18, section 16 of the state constitution, the law addresses “personal use and regulation of marijuana” for adults 21 and over, as well as commercial cultivation, manufacture, and sale: regulating marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol,[3] namely for recreational use. The commercial sale of marijuana to the general public began on January 1, 2014, at establishments licensed under the regulatory framework.[4]

    1. More and more as I think about it the anti pot crowd resembles the global warming deniers crowd. Yes 3% or so of the studies and scientists who reflect that (which actually amounts to some 400 or so studies as the thing is so closely followed) support denial.

      And we can find studies which proport vast vast negatives from pot use when allowed legally.
      But the real climate… what we are seeing.. is speaking to the truth of global warming, global records set each year.
      And in places where pot is legal, yes Colorado if you look at the years it was legal 2014 on not 2013 as the video suggests….

      There are very many positives and a few negatives. The real result is speaking directly to that.
      Which is why the ship has sailed…the vast majority support decriminalization. As they also know global warming is real.

      Our media and our politic does not really reflect both now commonly held opinions.
      Hold any personal opinion certainly continue. But realize as life goes on that ship has sailed..public opinion has gone beyond your personal thing of thought.

      It is as a tide has turned. A point begins from which we may extend….the real life tale of the thing becomes evident. AS with pot has presented in Colorado.
      Yes it has negatives and it causes life destruction probably for a select few.,Want to address the negatives do we?…start by sticking to the real not 2013 data on commercialization when pot was not available commercially in Colorado until 2014.
      Or you instantly loose us the majority of us for the rest of your claims of harm.

      WE have simply been lied to excessively long and completely in this thing of pot and global warming to take these statements at face value.
      We no longer buy it…the majority of us.
      But continue to sell please do..it matters not. You sell in the end with the things of climate change denial and this thing of evil pot in the end only to yourselves.
      WE no longer buy it. You hazard us throwing all the negatives out the door though we know reasonably they do exist. But as innocents continue to be imprisioned for this thing and harm overtly occurs….we can not stop really that reactionary response. Lie more about it and more on our side the truth will also find the door.

      Dr Greger I realize this is click bait and draws in views and viewers. But please stick to the thing of nutrition. God forbid inaccurate statements here translate to accurate statements made on nutrition. WE after all come her for nutrition facts not pot facts. For that we go elsewhere.
      I would go for views by a current and accurate review of nutritional falsehoods spread in national media. A refutation of current things we may find out there to draw in views. That is my bias to draw in viewers but honestly marketing is not my profession.

      But this may draw in views but with inaccurate or misleading information will end up speaking against the basis of this site. If you choose to provide a thing on pot…it is well known and studied all must be bulletproof. This video is clearly not.

      I realize pot may be considered nutrition as a form of ingestion is eating. But take my word on in…hardly anyone is eating pot on the basis of nutritive value.
      A single video would probably suffice on that and be in a way on target and on topic.
      Unless your aim is agenda…in which case I repeat…this little serves that aim.

      1. Things come up in national and global media of completely false nutritional content at least once per week.

        Yes I know it is presumptious fo me to offer suggestion but I do…
        Each item receives inordinate amount of popular attention. It generally affirms a way of eating which is harmful but is wanted to be thought good.

        Any video on a current item that has drawn interest will in response also draw in views to a contrary opinion. Click on that they will click on this. And it will be lumped in on a google search and be read in combination with usually the false inaccurate story. Most searches prioritize by content and date….
        It is in a way using intelligence field/marketing principal in a way to offer or get out adverse content. To get a thing viewed. Same date(roughly_ same subject the views will vastly increase for the second if the first is popular.

        Again I am no marketer, but suggest you may delegate a staff member to address this and see if a quick response format could work.
        If it can be workable it will draw in viewers I can almost guarantee it.
        Pot discussions on a nutrition format only marginally does that.

        If click bait is the aim here.

        1. All the you tube political channels feed off current news to gain and retain audiences.The key word is news not politics.
          If a thing is new/news they will watch it. Nutritional news will serve the same master. Current new and news…. any commentary about it will draw views.
          It is human nature to want new.

          The content itself must of course not be sacrificed for the interest of response. Which is the difficulty. But if political sites can mange the content well and currently….why not a nutritional site? Seems the base of information the studies are really known and substantial. And most of the clap trap the national media produces a third grader could refute by applying only a bit of common sense nevertheless real concrete study.

          So I am most preumptious ;) Really it seems every week which suggest a design to it. Which I suspect is intentional by their side disinform but not to much and not to little. Just the right amount to seed doubt and then inaction on diet. And a continual drumbeat in national media about every week a story.
          Care to take on the big boys this may be how.If not do continue on pot and this and that.

  32. This is completely off topic. I request that Doctor Greger provide comments regarding consumption of a product which contains “nicotinamide riboside” and “pterostilbene”. Thanks from a loyal Doctor Greger customer.

  33. I agree. Keep the kids off the pot. That is very important.

    However, I will be smoking my herb every day. I don’t appreciate the imediments to my rights as an adult because of fear mongers.

    May I raise the idea that bringing Cannabis into a legitimate status will help us teach our youth about it more effectively. Daddy isn’t a criminal anymore, and instead of hiding it, I can talk about it openly (without fear of a teacher hearing and condemning a parent to child services or who knows what).

    I’ll conpare this to European’s lower drinking and and overall high level of maturity around alcohol at younger ages. Meanwhile, American kids continue to binge to near deathbintoxications. Why? Lack of parental guidance, leads to stigma and kids figuring it out on their own.

    1. Exactly..”Daddy isn’t a criminal anymore, and instead of hiding it, I can talk about it openly (without fear of a teacher hearing and condemning a parent to child services or who knows what)

      Peoples do not understand the societal implications of a thing such as maintaining illegal status when about half of the population uses or has used it.
      How does a kid act when they know their father and or mother engages in societal defined criminal behavior…..
      Does anyone think that is to good effect.
      How can one trust government when a part of it is involved with wanting mom or dad in jail due to recreational pursuit? Think they may just get the impression they are a outcast someone different and not a real part of the main?
      And yes how can one describe difference between one illegal substance with moderate to low personal effect from one other illegal substance such as heroin with a known usually terminal result. Don’t worry about cognitive decline with that..likely you will be dead before that presents.

      And then legal prescribed opioids which are far worse than pot, where does a kid who parents smoke pot put that…a doc prescribes it must be good I would guess.
      And lets not forget about in half the states when found even with possession jail may result. For what?
      Think kids will not notice that?
      This antipot thing for kids sake is about complete farce. You want them not to use it till adulthood… legalize it so yes the parents may talk openly about it without threat looming in the backround.

      And rebellion which all kids go through in their teen years..it may not involve pot as dad and mum do it and it is quite legal.

  34. It is all here really the national survey produce by the feds as regards marijuana alcohol tobacco and all…… https://www.samhsa.gov/data/sites/default/files/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016/NSDUHsaeShortTermCHG2016.htm

    Takes a bit to do through but it shows no increase in Colorado for study years since legalization.
    Or one can just read the wash post article Scott has linked earlier digesting it. Colorado dept of health study…same result, no increased in use by underage peoples.

  35. Has there been a video done of the dangers of eating one high fat, high salt, and high cholesterol meal? For instance how it might affect blood pressure and blood numbers or trigger a problem? I was wondering about one of the meals servers at some restaurants that can have enough of the above for a day or two. Just wondering.

  36. The study cited below is new and comes from researchers at reputable institutions (University of Pennsylvania, Veterans Administration, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia). It concludes that “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.

    I don’t have access to the full text of the paper and am not professionally qualified to assess it. Since it comes to a very different conclusion than the New Zealand ‘Dunedin’ study that forms the basis for much of Dr. Greger’s assessment I’d be interested to hear his take on it.

    JAMA Psychiatry. Published online April 18, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0335April 18, 2018

    Association of Cannabis With Cognitive Functioning in Adolescents and Young Adults
    A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

    J. Cobb Scott, PhD1,2; Samantha T. Slomiak, MD1; Jason D. Jones, PhD3; et al Adon F. G. Rosen, BS1; Tyler M. Moore, PhD1; Ruben C. Gur, PhD1,2

    Author Affiliations
    1Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
    2Veterans Integrated Service Network 4 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center at the Philadelphia VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    3Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    JAMA Psychiatry. Published online April 18, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.0335

    Main Outcomes and Measures
    Results from neurocognitive tests administered in cross-sectional studies were primary outcomes, and we examined the influence of a priori explanatory variables on variability in effect size.

    Results
    Sixty-nine studies of 2152 cannabis users (mean [SD] age, 20.6 [2.8] years; 1472 [68.4%] male) and 6575 comparison participants with minimal cannabis exposure were included (mean [SD] age, 20.8 [3.4]; 3669 [55.8%] male). Results indicated a small overall effect size (presented as mean d) for reduced cognitive functioning associated with frequent or heavy cannabis use (d, −0.25; 95% CI, −0.32 to −0.17; P < .001). The magnitude of effect sizes did not vary by sample age or age at cannabis use onset. However, studies requiring an abstinence period longer than 72 hours (15 studies; n = 928) had an overall effect size (d, −0.08; 95% CI, −0.22 to 0.07) that was not significantly different from 0 and smaller than studies with less stringent abstinence criteria (54 studies; n = 7799; d, −0.30; 95% CI, −0.37 to −0.22; P = .01).

    Conclusions and Relevance
    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. 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. Reported deficits may reflect residual effects from acute use or withdrawal. Future studies should examine individual differences in susceptibility to cannabis-associated cognitive dysfunction.

  37. Uh-oh! Was the New Zealand study used as “the basis for much of Dr. Greger’s assessment”? I remember seeing it come under a lot of scientific criticism. See http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/01/twins-study-finds-no-evidence-marijuana-lowers-iq-teens

    “Now, in the first study of its kind, scientists have analyzed long-term marijuana use in teens, comparing IQ changes in twin siblings who either used or abstained from marijuana for 10 years. After taking environmental factors into account, the scientists found no measurable link between marijuana use and lower IQ.

    “This is a very well-conducted study … and a welcome addition to the literature,” says Valerie Curran, a psychopharmacologist at the University College London. She and her colleagues reached “broadly the same conclusions” in a separate, non-twin study of more than 2000 British teenagers, published earlier this month in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, she says.”

  38. A 2017 analysis by the Denver Post showed Colorado had experienced a 145% increase in the number of fatal crashes involving marijuana-impaired drivers between 2013 and 2016. While the analysis stresses that the increase cannot definitively be attributed to the legalization of marijuana, it reports that the number of marijuana-impaired drivers involved in fatal crashes has more than doubled since 2013, the year before the state legalized recreational marijuana use.

    1. https://www.denverpost.com/2017/08/25/colorado-marijuana-traffic-fatalities/

      ​”​ Colorado transportation and public safety officials, however, say the rising number of pot-related traffic fatalities cannot be definitively linked to legalized marijuana.

      ​”​ Positive test results reflected in the *NHTSA data do not indicate whether a driver was high at the time of the crash *since traces of marijuana use from weeks earlier also can appear as a positive result.
      ​”​

      “Pointing to a number of different studies, the industry counters that the data is imprecise and does not definitively link fatal crashes to marijuana use.

      “Unlike alcohol, THC can remain detectable in the blood stream for days or weeks, when any impairment wears off in a matter of hours,” said Taylor West, former deputy director of the National Cannabis Industry Association.
      “So all those numbers really tell us is that, since legal adult-use sales began, a larger number of people are consuming cannabis and then, at some point … (are) driving a car.”

      1. To add to 8 M’s excellent response Colorado also is one state which does not require a full autopsy when a fatal death occurs due to vehicular accident.

        So also the basic data may certainly be in question. We may only also be seeing a sampling of result which does not reflect the real. Perhaps those counties more prone to doing full autopsy following a car accident death may be more prone to pot use…we simply do not know unless the same procedure is applied uniformly throughout the state.

    1. So on 4/20, the renegade national marijuana holiday, CNN runs a click-bait article built from the offhand comment of former beer entrepreneur, Colorado Governor Hickenlooper. The story briefly reaches modern heights of hysteria reminiscent of the 1930s propaganda campaigns “Reefer Madness” when a subheading asks “Did Marijuana Bring a Killer to Town?” The story failed to ask what the killer was doing before he came to Colorado. One doubts that it was charity work.

      Governor Hickenlooper’s successful chain of brewpubs led to him entering politics. https://www.amazon.com/Opposite-Woe-Life-Beer-Politics-ebook/dp/B017SCQKIS. If he now wants to ban recreational marijuana, then he is the beer kettle calling the pot black.

      The Denver police department explicitly denied a nexus between an observed rise in property crime–their largest crime problem–contemporaneous with the proliferation of legal cannabis outlets. But the article presses forward to an outlying county not as thickly graced with marijuana outlets to find a confirmed anti-marijuana sheriff who backs up the sketchy crime/pot premise with “data” from his jailhouse conversations with transients. How scientific! After suing the state to prevent marijuana legalization, the sheriff is primed to blame pot for anything and everything.

      If transients are flocking to Colorado, it may be because they are tired of being harassed by police in other states for yet one more offense, possession of marijuana. And if Hickenlooper wants to do something constructive, then he could encourage other states to legalize marijuana too. That would lead to an instant drop of crime since marijuana offenses would no longer be crimes, and people would be far less likely to be ripping one another off.

      Police arrest 140 people every day in New York City for possessing small amounts of marijuana. It’s now by far the most common misdemeanor charge in the city, and thousands of these arrests take place when police stop-and-frisk young men in the poorest neighborhoods. While police say these stop-and-frisks are a way to find guns, what they find more often is a bag of marijuana.

      https://www.wnyc.org/story/126232-marijuana-arrests/

    2. Albuquerque now leads the nation in various areas of crime to include car thefts. A new mayor possibly things will now improve, at least people hope so.

      And on every freeway off ramp one finds homeless begging for money.
      And pot was just removed from strict penalty just a week ago, so it had not a thing to do with crime.

      As our neighbor Colorado to the north is having a increase, I doubt seriously pot had a thing to do with it.
      The rampant drug abuse of heroin opioids and others like meth seem responsible here.
      A woman who seemingly had a hand in the death and dismemberment of her own daughter two years ago, of course it was meth the drug they were high on.
      Three participated in the crime. It seems typical criminal behavior those who participate here at least it is not pot they are high on.
      A while back a few miles from me(meth makers choose rural areas to make their drug)two parents were killed in a meth deal gone wrong…they left the toddlers to starve to death with the bodies of their parents…..saddest thing I had ever heard of.
      Luckily that cabin burned to the ground a bit ago in a forest fire.

      So just personal observation but links to pot and crime are virtually nonexistent here. yet we have the same increases. Violence it seem meth property car theft heroin is involved to provide money for that.
      The cartels influence and New Mexico as a main route for those illegal drugs appears partial cause as well.

  39. On the homeless thing here I am not exaggerating. Went through the intersection of Eubank and I40 yesterday…..five or so begging spread out at each respective place the cars stopped at the lights.
    It is the same throughout the city…Why….it is not pot as mentioned it is illegal here. I have never seen it that way here prior to about five years ago and it is getting worse each year.

  40. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_libel_laws

    The link above describes what food liability laws are. The biggest case in recent times was the case where Oprah was sued by the cattlemen’s association for her comments that they said were derogatory about beef. Basically, these laws are in place to prevent anyone from saying anything derogatory about foods, companies that manufacture food, restaurants that serve food, or any food related industry. So, does that mean that people who vigorously support a whole plant food diet and others could be liable for saying things that are derogatory about meat, eggs, dairy, cheese, fish, chicken, and the such? It doesn’t seem to make any difference if you have scientific papers to back up your derogatory statements because these huge food monopolies have their own scientific evidence to counter the opposition. And, how do these laws potentially effect all of the YouTubers that have put up whole plant food diet videos that disparage meat eating, and the such? There are a lot of vegans on YouTube that most subscribers to Dr. Gregers blog have never heard of such as Happy Vegan, Vegetable Police, Durienrider, and the such who constantly give negative information toward the Standard American Diet. Some of them have over a million subscribers, which is more than Dr. Greger. It will be interesting to see how this plays out as our solar cycle has entered the solar minimum which some have called the 400 year cycle of the GRAND MINIMUM which can last 40 years and beyond like it did back in the 1600’s. When cold weather grips the planet for long periods of time there are food shortages. With these food liability laws in place it will become illegal to share information about any aspect of food that might be deemed negative by governments and large companies.

    Watch this short 5 minute video on YouTube that explains and shows you how these laws are now in place in many countries around the world.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFMhy99DxW0

    1. John that Wiki article leaves a little bit to be desired. It is widely known Oprah and all her staff went vegan. I think that was widely reported and it is not as the article infers she is skirting the issue of meat.
      Secondarily the UK does not follow our broad standard of libel. Theirs is much more comprehensive and less in the interest of free speech. What goes on over there will not fly here legally, they do not mention that.

      Don’t hold your breath on the cold weather. The east coast has cooled the last several winters due to a disruption of the arctic jet stream. Due to loss of temperature differential the stream is no longer as strong as it was in the past. It now meanders and dips and sways. The arctic to the inverse was above freezing these last two winters twice. A unheard of thing. Why…the meandering jet stream.
      There is also some suggestion the Gulf stream which supplies heat in winter to the northeast is loosing its force due to salinity loss and some rather complex issues related to deep ocean heat. A consequence of global warming may indeed be a colder northeastern US.

      The supreme court should under the free speech clause rule those laws unconstitutional. Likely they were never challenged to that level. Oprah if she lost may have done that as she had the resources but it may have addressed only her liability not any criminal charge. We may never see a challenge to that level is by my read few are cited by those laws. Civil liability has a lesser standard then criminal prosecution for offense.

      I am not to worried. You tubers say all sorts of things seem nothing is being done to anyone except by you tube itself.
      Vegan gains is probably the most vicious vegan you tuber out there. He has now been arrested twice in Canada for weapons violations likely he will not be found guilty however. He slams everyone all the time. Nothing comes of it though at least one has tried to seek legal remedy against him.

      1. Ron, thanks for your input on the potential for future colder weather. If there is future long term colder weather it will have an impact on food production. Long term colder weather will also raise the cost of energy and fuel, and there will be frequent disruptions of electrical lines going down.
        However, this present spring and approaching summer looks to be pleasant.
        Things come in cycles. It is interesting to see how weather cycles over the last 1000 years match up with population movements, wars, business cycles, famines, draughts, and pandemics.

        1. John your basic premesis is correct…hot weather more than normal with global warming will result in food shortages. It is just a matter of time. Unpredictable extreme events of weather are occurring and due to occur with increasing frequency. So farmers are behind the 8 ball globally.
          A drought one year and a flood the next, sort of like Texas has been having the last five years or so…makes it very difficult to grow things.

          And our experience is only 7 percent or so of total land mass everywhere…globally the same type thing is occurring….and it will get worse.

          Food shortage eventually is a guarantee the only question is when and who?

          1. 4 feet of rain in Houston drew a lot of press deservedly, but less press attention was devoted to New Orleans in the same year that had rain every single day for 4 months. And the year prior South Carolina had Houston type rain amounts there. And we here in the southwest are going from drought to flood back to drought again. California the same.

            I had 4 inches of rain in October, unheard of here in that month and then not a drop of rain/snow for months and then a inch and a half and now back to drought….It probably averages out the same…but how could farmers manage that? Statistics don’t tell the story. The weather is plainly gone bonkers. India the capital deluged two years ago, also a hurricane hit the arab states. Storms hitting the UK of monstrous proportions, and on and on.

          2. Poor countries like African countries will be hurting for

            food the most when extreme weather starts to become

            more common place. Industrial countries like America

            can ship in foods from Central America, South America,

            or from any part of the globe that is managing to produce

            crops. in other words, we in America will get the first

            pickings of any available food sources.

            Back in the early 1600’s when there was a long solar

            minimum that lasted over 40 years, there were millions

            of people who starved to death. People migrated to

            wherever they could to find food, and a lot of

            wars broke out back then. This was the time when

            the Pilgrims coming to America could hardly hang on

            because they couldn’t get any crops to grow.

            But, despite the long solar minimum, and despite

            the millions that starved there were still a lot of people

            that survived. But, here in America, the problem we

            face is keeping the electrical grid up and running.

            Just during normal winters electrical wires come down.

            Can you imagine all of the black outs that will happen

            during long drawn out winters that have record snow

            and ice. Americans are so dependent on electricity

            for heating, cooking, and running appliances that they

            would be up a creek without a paddle if the electrical grid

            went down for a real long time.

            1. Your predictions on food shortages are probably true….but virtually no one is predicting colder temps on average in the coming decades to include NASA whose site attests to that.

              Their site is here…. https://climate.nasa.gov/

              Take the time and read through it.

              1. The government will never tell you anything that might

                start a panic. The government does hide things. The

                government does cover up things. For example,

                the government totally denies that UFO’s exist. But,

                we have videos all over YouTube showing UFO’s. We

                have eye witness accounts from all kinds of reputable

                people. Even I have seen a UFO one time when I

                was visiting Salt Lake City. The government has

                done secret experiments on the population over the

                last 200 years such as giving random people LSD,

                or using subliminal messaging, and many other experiments.

                You can trust the government about as good as you

                can trust Big Tobacco, Big Agriculture, and Big Pharma.

                So, this issue of coming cold temperatures can really

                be known to be true or false is by just watching world

                wide weather patterns in the next 3 years. If this

                solar minimum is going to be a GRAND solar minimum

                then we will see drastic changes in 2019 and 2020.

                Noting to fuss about here. Just take a seat, relax,

                and watch what happens in the next two years. If things

                continue to be business as usual, then I guess the

                GRAND solar minimum is a hoax. If we see crop

                failures on a large scale, and lowering temperatures,

                and building ice on the north and south pole beyond

                the usual….then maybe we should either think about

                moving or at least stocking up on Greger’s daily dozen. Ha !

                1. John,

                  Regardless of what the government predicts from it, what is NASA saying about the current sun cycles? –the data more than the temperature predictions. The video you sent me to had some of that, like the cyclical variations in solar output over the last couple thousand years. There were even names for each cycle. There was a nice line chart showing that as waves over many centuries. It was saying that much of that data came from NASA or other scientific sources, perhaps ice cores or who knows what. I’d just like to see what NASA is showing as their data.

                  1. I am guessing that NASA is just saying that present global temperatures

                    are presently not going down, but maintaining the status quo. However,

                    we only began the solar minimum back in 2017. The sun fluctuates

                    back and forth every 11 years between solar minimum and solar maximum.

                    But, every 400 years or so, the solar minimum will last 40 or so years instead

                    of just 11 years. We don’t know if this coming solar minimum is going to be

                    just an ordinary 11 year cycle or the GRAND solar minimum of 40 years.

                    We don’t know yet. We might NOT really know until 5 or 9 years goes by.

                    During a regular solar minimum there is just a reduction in sunspots and a

                    slight cooling here on earth which is negligible. In a 40 year grand solar

                    minimum there is drastic cooling of the earth in general and just about

                    NO sun spots whatsoever.

                    But, if you look at the charts….it seems to indicate that this new solar

                    minimum might actually be the 400 cycle GRAND solar minimum. But,

                    then again, maybe not. If it is, Smart people can easily survive it.

                    Back in 1640 a lot of people survived that solar GRAND minimum that

                    lasted around 40 years, but a lot of poor people also died of starvation, wars,

                    and demographic changes.

                    Even if the government really believed that this is the beginning of a solar

                    GRAND minimum, they would not tell us. They do not want to interrupt

                    the business cycle or cause people to move, or horde supplies. They

                    want to keep the money flowing as long as possible. If this is a GRAND

                    solar minimum then living in Canada, Russia, Norway, Sweden,

                    Iceland, Finland, Washington State, Chicago, New Hampshire,

                    New York, Boston, and Maine is going to be extremely unbearable.

                    Also, Alaska will be extremely problematic. The northeastern seaboard

                    of the United States is where a lot of big money corporations are positioned.

                    Also, a lot of military and government agencies are located in this

                    part of the country, so if a deep freeze comes down there way that is

                    going to last 40 years, they are going to have to move. But, they have time.

                    This deep freeze is a slow process. Everybody is going to have time to

                    move southward. Canada and Russia will be hit the hardest. However,

                    the Russians are used to living in the severest of cold weather and their

                    infrastructure is built to handle it. Even their military systems are built to handle extremely

                    cold temperatures.

                    If we have a lot of Canadians and people living in the upper northern states

                    moving down south that is going to create a huge economic upheaval and

                    political upheaval. I think a lot of Hispanics might move back down to

                    Mexico or Central America for economic reasons and weather related

                    reasons. If a worse case scenario takes place, then you can expect crop

                    failures, and for the electrical grid to go down especially in the northern states

                    and the northeast. Our electrical grid is very fragile, old, and in need of updating.

                    It is theoretically possible for the grid to go down in the north and then cascade

                    down to the south like a chain reaction resulting in the entire North American

                    continent going into a black out. If that happens, then that will be when the

                    shit hits the fan…..and it will be a total break down of law and order and each

                    man for himself. When that happens it will be very difficult to get Dr.
                    Greger’s

                    daily dozen. As a matter of fact, a lot of vegans will be wishing that they had

                    a little venison to eat. If the entire grid goes down, then it will be next to

                    impossible to transport produce, food, and goods from warm climates

                    into America and into American grocery stores. With no electricity….there will

                    be no internet….nobody will know what is going on which will lead to absolute

                    chaos, gangs, looting, and the emergence of the road warriors.

                    Have a good day,

                    1. John the leading researcher in this field says this a quote…”TTogether with other researchers, Krivova succeeded, with the aid of these proxies, in computing, in detail, the variability of the solar irradiance for the past 11,000 years since the last ice age. Compared with the models of other research groups, Krivova’s simulation tool proved to be very reliable. Climate modelers therefore use it also for those simulations that are included in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) climate report. ”

                      Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-03-fluctuations-solar.html#jCp
                      Climate change modeling which all call for a increase not decrease in global temps…..already include this data.

                      Those areas you mention most are under the influence of the gulf stream flow. With cessation and decline in flow all those areas may indeed see colder temps..but that is a small percent of total global land mass certainly under 10%.
                      Alaska no..that is trending appreciably hotter as is most of the arctic… many degrees hotter on average than lower latittudes due to weakening of the polar jet.

                    2. Alaska may fair better because it is surrounded by the ocean. But, I would bet that it gets iced over really bad, and that the bearing strait will freeze over and connect Russia with Alaska like it did during an much earlier time. Just my bet. Anyhow, nothing to really worry about for the next two years. If we do see things are starting to get colder in 2020 you can bet that this issue will enter the 2020 presidential race.

                    1. I read the article. I agree it is a very complex undertaking to make

                      predictions from solar activity. All we really have to go on is the

                      last GRAND solar minimum back in the 1640’s or so. It’s anybody’s guess

                      as to what is going to happen.

                      The article you mention does have this quote however:

                      “Indeed, the sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now. Ongoing Solar Cycle 24.” LIke I said,

                      it is anybody’s guess. The main thing is to be aware of

                      this phenomenon, and if you live up north, you should have

                      a Plan B. Since you live in New Mexico, you have nothing

                      to worry about, unless the northern states just go “dead” from

                      an electrical grid failure. Then such an economic and demographic

                      upheavel will have a ripple effect everywhere in America, and in

                      Mexico, and Central America.

                2. NASA is not neutral on this issue nor saying temps on average will stay the same.
                  From their site on consequences and effects…
                  Scientists have high confidence that global temperatures will continue to rise for decades to come, largely due to greenhouse gases produced by human activities. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which includes more than 1,300 scientists from the United States and other countries, forecasts a temperature rise of 2.5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit o

              2. Russian scientists are all on board for coming global cooling and the coming Grand solar minimum. They will be the main country that is hurt the most if this prediction is true. But, they are preparing for it.

                1. John I don’t know why you bother with this issue. The vast amount of americans know of man made global warming but those that rule will have no part of it nor even acknowledge it for discussion. The last presidential debates saw one question and about under a minute reply on it. And now things to attempt to remediate it are being undone. The fuel efficiency standards are all being revoked. Ford as consequence is in their longer term plan removing almost all cars from their American line up. Only fuel users, pick ups will be available and a couple of car brands. The rest of the world will get the more efficient cars.
                  We will be like mexico used to be…..In the distant past you went to mexico city you choked on the leaded gas fumes coming from cars…so we go that way…third or second world not first any more…..no problem.

                  I personally am prepared somewhat if things go south. I live semirural have weaponry and a food stock, as all should have to my opinion. But the go south thing will be from global warming not cold though the northeast will likely see colder winters.Heat air conditioning is the stressor for the grid.

                  As to Russia they know fully what is coming. But their economy sells oil and gas. It is not to their benefit to focus on global warming for that reason. Though they did sign onto the paris accord.

                  So I say why bother with it? They will not listen to us and do what they will for their immediate profit. Oh well….but to believe this what you claim…plainly none do. But no matter they are following your lead not the majority.For corporate interests that…..
                  They want to destroy this world our future…..I say oh well….they will have it then. I me….they will not own. I suffer them but will not believe in them nor that they may control….so I am vegan…personally the least amount of carbon production a human may endeavor is from that thing.
                  For now they cannot outlaw that thing.
                  Rise up then fight them…no my model in this is ghandije. I will not eat their evil thing of animal food if I can possibly avoid it….I am not alone….we are many.

                  1. And John no offense intended…..I feel safe to say I speak for all of us in this thing of diet related to global warming……we will not be influenced not a tiny bit by misinformation.
                    We were misinformed by so many for so long in this thing…now being admitted to subsequent to litigation……we screen everything and will not spend time with loons like Alex Jones.

                    WE fight it all with our diet…it speaks for us.
                    On a side note the Russian peoples are strong and well tested…they will survive this thing of global warming likely better than almost all of nations. War for thousands of years those wanting their lands has made them what they are…a strong people.
                    I have no fear for their outcome. Untested nations they will likely devolve into radicalism and then devolve into separate states.

                    We will see who really is strong and great but it will take a hundred fifty years for that result.

                    1. Eating a bit of chocolate vegan of course now….as then I will be going to hit the weights, 360 squats from the down position my focus effort today….and tomorrow I will buy some more bullets as I expounded a few shooting to scare off coyotes that were going for my tiny dog….what will you be doing John?

                      If SHTF who exactly will survive…hedge some bets against me perhaps? Perhaps
                      Three hours cutting brush yesterday, two today..fire is the first result of this thing…..it is called global warming and it is on my doorstep, live by forest I know this thing…. I can not be distracted with fantasy…there is a enemy to prepare for…..drought here is its name….when I sleep tonight I can bother with unreal things. Till then I work and prepare and sleep only at night.

                    2. Ron, you are right. Something is going to change. In your efforts to prep, you might consider Chlorine Dioxide. Some people call it miracle mineral supplement. You can buy it at WalMart in the camping section. It is a water purification tablet. Anyhow, a lot of people are saying that chlorine dioxide will kill any bad pathogens that might be in your body such as malaria, protozoa, fungi, bacteria, and virus. Check out all of the videos on YouTube on MMS. Listen to a friend of mine who is a prepper and why he stocks up on MMS or chlorine dioxide. Here is his link: https://youtu.be/Q_XOoY53Dsg

                    3. Got a well John and a generator hooked up with a power transfer switch to run the pump when power goes down. That is mostly for power and water in a forest fire as they cut the power when one breaks out.
                      Water is key out here. I have portable filters anyway if for some reason this didn’t pan out. Boiling or a drop of bleach would work for pathogens.

                      That something here is heat and drought. Did OK last year but two years before that the nearest town to me south went up. 24 homes burned in June of that year. Dog head fire it was called. This year has been even drier than that year. That town is land grant people. Meaning they have been there since the 1600’s. Says a thing they never burned out in all those years but did two years ago..the weather has never been this dry and warm ever I feel safe in saying. Me here 30 or so.

    2. John,

      Do you have another site or video source for information about this particular Grand Minimum solar cycle. I’d like to hear more about it.

        1. What the heck….some guy rambleing is what it is.

          Here is NASA’s official site on climate change….. https://climate.nasa.gov/

          It starts off with the basics. sea level rise up temperatures up ice levels down, and on and on…..this is their site not a you tube channel.
          It goes on and on for pages of pages of statements on how it is real and occurring.;

  41. Politics may affect result and reporting of same here in the US but global information is not so easily affected….
    The Sun is the Earth’s principal source of energy and climate driver. Yet sometimes it sends more light to the Earth than other times. Astronomers working with Natalie Krivova at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Göttingen take these fluctuations in solar radiation into account in their models to find out whether they contribute to global warming or counteract it. “Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-03-fluctuations-solar.html#jCp

Leave a Reply

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

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This