Marijuana Linked To Brain Changes, But Are They Harmful?

[LITLJON]

Marijuana linked to brain changes, but are they harmful?

Can pot rot your brain? A preliminary study reveals brain abnormalities in everyday pot smokers, and its author has a bit of advice for marijuana mavens:

 

Article does a flip flop.

[The Digital Nomad]

Many things can create brain changes - even your cellphone. Music, stress, environment, - and medicine can cause brain changes.

 

The real question is - is it harmful? Perhaps everything in moderation is the key. don't over do the cellphone, don't over do the marijuana.

 

My personal experience, based on work performance evaluations, college grades, and public reaction of me - I think my marijuana use made me a better person.

 

Poor people wrongly use alcohol as medicine to treat depression, pain, and anxiety - it creates the cycle of abuse. Some things do damage your brain, alcohol is one of them.

 

-DN

[greenbuddha]

If a person really wants to see some brain 'change' just take a look at the MRI of heavy alcohol user.

 

Now THAT'S some brain change, baby!

[LITLJON]

I got that they saying that in only 30 days after stop of use things return to normal = no damage thus a positive for medical use right?

[sarazorz]

I got that they saying that in only 30 days after stop of use things return to normal = no damage thus a positive for medical use right?

 

The comment "Ditch the doobies" in the very beginning, which if you notice is NOT a quote taken from the scientist, will give people the idea that marijuana is bad for the brain. "Ditch the doobies," is paraphrasing inserted by the author of the CBS article. But, the Dr. Hivonen called it "good news" when the receptors turned back to "normal". That was a biased assumption made by the Dr. Hivonen, who has no proof that these abnormalities actually are damaging. He's probably just assuming they are, because it's "abnormal". Well, of COURSE cannabinoid receptors will act differently in people who smoke. Duh.

 

At least CBS gave the opportunity for an argument:

"You have to call it change, not damage...If you give someone an antidepressant, it changes their neurotransmitters - it's not necessarily damage. There's no evidence that cannabinoid receptor activity affects behavior, Dr. Galanter said."

Even though, just the simple act of stating "Ditch the Doobies" in the beginning of an article is enough to change the minds of people. Ah, the minute ways the media can influence the public. Creepy isn't it.

 

edit: because I'm bored, I'd like to point out how Media uses subtle visual tricks to suggest ideas in people's minds. Yep, I'm talking about implanting ideas. Inception! Let's pretend for a second that you are reading an article titled, "Here is what I think about your mother"

 

Here is what I think about your mother

by sarazorz

 

Blahblahblah blah and a blah blah so when there's blah blah, I said blah blah and blah. So blah blah blah and then there was blah and blah.

 

Your mother is fat and ugly.

 

Blah blahblah blah and then she was like blah blah and I really thought blah blah and blah. Just kidding blah blah I really like your mom blah blah she makes really good brownies blah blah and she is always very nice blah blah in fact she is nicer than my mom blah blah blah.

 

To the average person, the idea they will get from this article is that I really don't like their mother. This is due to how humans read, and focus on things that are surrounded by negative space in a wall of text. The simple trick of using the enter key, typing Your mother is fat and ugly, using the enter key again...will give the idea that I think your mother is fat and ugly. When I really don't. If you read the rest of the article you would know that. What I've found is that when an article asks a question, or suggests a question, people will stop reading when they think they have found the answer. This is true even more so, when the "answer" is located very early on in the article.

 

Don't fall for the focal point trick.

 

See what I did there? Anyways, sometimes it's not "the media" to blame though, ideas may be suggested by a simple unconscious maneuver done by the author who formatted the article who believes marijuana is damaging, to the web designer who is publishing the article who thinks marijuana is damaging. People sometimes suggest their opinions without even knowing it, simply by pressing the enter key.

 

I wrote a thesis on this for a Typography class. I find it absolutely fascinating. Don't be tricked, read articles until the end, I say!

[TajMahal]

The comment "Ditch the doobies" in the very beginning, which if you notice is NOT a quote taken from the scientist, will give people the idea that marijuana is bad for the brain. "Ditch the doobies," is paraphrasing inserted by the author of the CBS article. But, the Dr. Hivonen called it "good news" when the receptors turned back to "normal". That was a biased assumption made by the Dr. Hivonen, who has no proof that these abnormalities actually are damaging. He's probably just assuming they are, because it's "abnormal". Well, of COURSE cannabinoid receptors will act differently in people who smoke. Duh.

 

At least CBS gave the opportunity for an argument:

"You have to call it change, not damage...If you give someone an antidepressant, it changes their neurotransmitters - it's not necessarily damage. There's no evidence that cannabinoid receptor activity affects behavior, Dr. Galanter said."

Even though, just the simple act of stating "Ditch the Doobies" in the beginning of an article is enough to change the minds of people. Ah, the minute ways the media can influence the public. Creepy isn't it.

 

edit: because I'm bored, I'd like to point out how Media uses subtle visual tricks to suggest ideas in people's minds. Yep, I'm talking about implanting ideas. Inception! Let's pretend for a second that you are reading an article titled, "Here is what I think about your mother"

 

 

 

To the average person, the idea they will get from this article is that I really don't like their mother. This is due to how humans read, and focus on things that are surrounded by negative space in a wall of text. The simple trick of using the enter key, typing Your mother is fat and ugly, using the enter key again...will give the idea that I think your mother is fat and ugly. When I really don't. If you read the rest of the article you would know that. What I've found is that when an article asks a question, or suggests a question, people will stop reading when they think they have found the answer. This is true even more so, when the "answer" is located very early on in the article.

 

Don't fall for the focal point trick.

 

See what I did there? Anyways, sometimes it's not "the media" to blame though, ideas may be suggested by a simple unconscious maneuver done by the author who formatted the article who believes marijuana is damaging, to the web designer who is publishing the article who thinks marijuana is damaging. People sometimes suggest their opinions without even knowing it, simply by pressing the enter key.

 

I wrote a thesis on this for a Typography class. I find it absolutely fascinating. Don't be tricked, read articles until the end, I say!

 

Good catch....Anyone ask you about being an author for us here?

[sarazorz]

Good catch....Anyone ask you about being an author for us here?

 

No, I'm relatively new here. I would be gracious of such an opportunity though!

[The Digital Nomad]

its called bias or writers slant - The use of words like abnormal can only incite readers into FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Despair). I also agreed - the author tried wrongfully to insert his cute conjecture - "Ditch the Doobies", it did not even match the evidence presented in the article, moron.

 

But indeed, what is normal and what is abnormal - more blood flow, more activity here, and less there in my head - you can only judge my performance by my behavior, personality, ambition, etc. There is no normal. I do know that I proved myself as a 3.7gpa college student, exceed expectations of employers and friends alike. That is my evidence that my 27+ years of use worked out ok for me!

[sarazorz]

its called bias or writers slant - The use of words like abnormal can only incite readers into FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Despair). I also agreed - the author tried wrongfully to insert his cute conjecture - "Ditch the Doobies", it did not even match the evidence presented in the article, moron.

 

But indeed, what is normal and what is abnormal - more blood flow, more activity here, and less there in my head - you can only judge my performance by my behavior, personality, ambition, etc. There is no normal. I do know that I proved myself as a 3.7gpa college student, exceed expectations of employers and friends alike. That is my evidence that my 27+ years of use worked out ok for me!

 

Indeed, I know plenty of hyper-intelligent, successful people who have smoked for years. To me, cannabis use increases creativity and allows for a sort of...different...thought process. "Expansion of the mind" as everyone says. It also gives a sense of well-being, which is healthy for the brain. Long term "happy moods" are great for the brain and are imperative for optimum performance. Long term depression is actually physically damaging to the hippocampus. Not only that, but it has been proven that bad moods ie depression can cause memory loss and cognitive problems. That's science, look it up! My conclusion is that smokers are generally happier people, thus, it's possible that their brains perform even better than those who don't smoke. That's just my theory though. I think it makes sense.