Chronic Cannabis Use May Cause Brain Inflammation

By Hum
in Science News & Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

vcfan

Posted
Posted

 I never said 100% match. that's a straw man. If you want to see why mice and rats are used you can go and study it for yourself. I sure as hell don't get paid to educate you and I am not going to sit here and write up why mice and rats are used and why they are appropriate when you will probably not even bother to read it anyway. Go use google.

 

So you can prove that the entire scientific community which as been using mice and rats for decades have been wrong this whole time?

 

you are misunderstanding what I mean,read below.

 

What field do you work in again? Why do I get the sneaking suspicion would I be willing to be money on the fact it isn't a scientific one?

 

i work in tech, but I worked in the dietary supplement industry while completing my degree. ive probably read a million studies in my day.  

 

 

 

vcfan demands others offer proof of their claims, makes claim of proof, doesn't offer it. :s

 

I don't disagree. The tobacco industry used to hire scientists to dispute claims about cancer. The climate change denialists hire scientists of obfuscate the reality of man-made climate change. But all of this has nothing to do with the fact you can't prove this study or this group has any ulterior motive nor does it have anything to do with your assertion that the testing method is flawed because it uses mice.

 

Try to stay on the point you're defending.

 

 

you know the first part doesn't need proof. its not something you have to go far and wide to get. if you haven't been living under a rock you would have heard and seen such examples already. it takes a few seconds to get your proof. asking for proof for something a little obscure is totally different.

 

And I just think youre missing my point entirely. nobody is disputing why mice are used for testing. I said this study means nothing in that because it hasn't been tested on humans,it may or may not apply to us, NOT because its a waste of time for testing or scientific purposes. I never said such a thing,and this is what you're accusing me of,which isn't true. I just said we don't match up 100% to these animals we are testing,so test results shouldn't be taken as truth until we test on ourselves.

 

People are going to read this and to them it will become a fact that will get spread around. I don't even smoke marijuana so its not like im using illogical points to defend something I like.

Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

You should try getting out more often. Steve Jobs, Carl Sagan, Bill Gates, Sergey Brin, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Richard Branson, ect. all bright pot smoking people. 

 

 

 

Like everything else in life, moderation is key.

 

Pot smokers is not the same as "tried pot a few times in school"

Grand Master

compl3x

Posted
Posted

Pot smokers is not the same as "tried pot a few times in school"

 

I am fairly sure Carl Sagan was a recreational pot smoker. I cannot speak for the rest.

 

 

 

you know the first part doesn't need proof. its not something you have to go far and wide to get. if you haven't been living under a rock you would have heard and seen such examples already. it takes a few seconds to get your proof. asking for proof for something a little obscure is totally different.

 

 

 You said "animals testing means absolutely nothing". That is absolutely false. I then invited you to do and read why animals are used for testing. If you did you would see why your "absolutely nothing" statement was false.

 

 

nobody is disputing why mice are used for testing.

 

You said "Animal testing means absolutely nothing". If you think it means nothing than you obviously think testing on animals has no benefit. This is demonstrably false. You then said "if you believe mice and humans match 100% gene expression patterns then you are out to lunch" - a claim I never made - but one which made it seem as if you beleiuved because we don't match identically no results from an animal study is valid. Again, false.

 

 

I said this study means nothing in that because it hasn't been tested on humans,it may or may not apply to us, NOT because its a waste of time for testing or scientific purposes. I never said such a thing,and this is what you're accusing me of,which isn't true. I just said we don't match up 100% to these animals we are testing,so test results shouldn't be taken as truth until we test on ourselves.

 

People are going to read this and to them it will become a fact that will get spread around. I don't even smoke marijuana so its not like im using illogical points to defend something I like.

 

 

The kind of testing they would be doing on mice wouldn't be ethical to do on humans. They're exposing them to lots of the active ingredient of the drug then administering other drugs to counter the effect. After the experiment they no doubt dissect the animals and study them. In this case they would study the brain of the animal.

 

Mice are used because their genetics and biology are very close to humans and we can easily replicate conditions that effect us in mice and then conduct tests on them. If you read the title it says "may cause brain inflammation" -- because of our shared genes and biology something that has an effect on mice may effect us in the same way -- No one is being asked to take this as wholesale truth. If people on the internet or the idiot mainstream media misinterpret the findings and spread nonsense, which I entirely agree with you that they sometimes do, it has no bearing on the validity of the study.

Grand Master

+Random Stranger Subscriber¹

Posted
  • Subscriber¹
Posted

Depending on the country, there will be a different number of pot smokers.    I have seen people who make $1000000+  smoke pot on regular basis.

Entrepreneurs, lawyers, doctors, etc.   Extremely bright people.    

 

 

It can dumb you down, true, but everyone is affected.  I have also seen tons of people overdo it and loose all the motivation and act dumb, but those people were not much motivated and/or smart in the first place!

 

comparing to the damage alcohol does, weed is much safer.  yet a lot of smart successful people drink!

Grand Master

vcfan

Posted
Posted

 

 You said "animals testing means absolutely nothing". That is absolutely false. I then invited you to do and read why animals are used for testing. If you did you would see why your "absolutely nothing" statement was false.

 

 

You said "Animal testing means absolutely nothing". If you think it means nothing than you obviously think testing on animals has no benefit. This is demonstrably false. You then said "if you believe mice and humans match 100% gene expression patterns then you are out to lunch" - a claim I never made - but one which made it seem as if you beleiuved because we don't match identically no results from an animal study is valid. Again, false.

 

 

The kind of testing they would be doing on mice wouldn't be ethical to do on humans. They're exposing them to lots of the active ingredient of the drug then administering other drugs to counter the effect. After the experiment they no doubt dissect the animals and study them. In this case they would study the brain of the animal.

 

Mice are used because their genetics and biology are very close to humans and we can easily replicate conditions that effect us in mice and then conduct tests on them. If you read the title it says "may cause brain inflammation" -- because of our shared genes and biology something that has an effect on mice may effect us in the same way -- No one is being asked to take this as wholesale truth. If people on the internet or the idiot mainstream media misinterpret the findings and spread nonsense, which I entirely agree with you that they sometimes do, it has no bearing on the validity of the study.

 

I explained what I meant. it means nothing as in, this isn't tested and proven to happen to humans,as things in the past that worked on animals didn't translate to humans. I agreed that they can gain insight testing on animals, but it still doesn't give us definitie answers because these animals are not humans,and there are differences in how some of their cells function. I do realize no one is asked to take this as a wholesale truth, but how many times have you read articles in magazines and online about how scientists cured cancer, or HIV, or diabetes?  that's my beef, not the actual testing on animals. 

Grand Master

compl3x

Posted
Posted

I explained what I meant. it means nothing as in, this isn't tested and proven to happen to humans,as things in the past that worked on animals didn't translate to humans. I agreed that they can gain insight testing on animals, but it still doesn't give us definitie answers because these animals are not humans,and there are differences in how some of their cells function. I do realize no one is asked to take this as a wholesale truth, but how many times have you read articles in magazines and online about how scientists cured cancer, or HIV, or diabetes?  that's my beef, not the actual testing on animals. 

 

Actually never. I have seen articles about shrinking tumors and increasing resistance but I have never read articles saying "Scientists cure cancer in rats".

 

Even if they do exist that would be magazines exaggerating breakthroughs to sell magazines or sites creating click-bait for page views.

Grand Master

FloatingFatMan

Posted
Posted

Actually never. I have seen articles about shrinking tumors and increasing resistance but I have never read articles saying "Scientists cure cancer in rats".

 

Even if they do exist that would be magazines exaggerating breakthroughs to sell magazines or sites creating click-bait for page views.

 

Oh it happens, but only in tabloids.  And tbh, if someone believes anything they read in a tabloid, they probably ARE whacked out on something causing them brain inflammation! :p

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed

      By hellowalkman · Posted

      A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • Politically funny images of the World

      By PsYcHoKiLLa · Posted

      "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • Poll: Grand Theft Auto VI price predictions, cast your vote

      By thartist · Posted

      It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that

      By Nick H. · Posted

      Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0

      By Copernic · Posted

      Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware

  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done

  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
    Show More

  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!