Health & Families

Rain (AM and PM) 3° London Hi 9°C / Lo 6°C

Cannabis linked with mental health problems

By Jack Doyle, Press Association

Tar in spliffs has 50 per cent more carcinogens than cigarettes

REUTERS

In the television advert, the negative effects of the drug - memory loss, paranoia, memory loss and panic attacks - appear as unwanted guests at a party in the user's brain.

An advertising campaign warning of the links between cannabis use and mental health damage was launched today.

In the television advert, the negative effects of the drug - memory loss, paranoia, memory loss and panic attacks - appear as unwanted guests at a party in the user's brain.

Cannabis user Simon smokes a joint and at first feels giggly, talkative and craves food, before the side effects of the drug take over.

The £2.2million campaign, which follows the reclassification of cannabis into Class B last month, is targeted at 11-18 year olds.

It urges youngsters with questions about the drug to "Talk to Frank" by calling an information line or visiting the campaign website.

Frank spokesperson Chris Hudson said: "Cannabis is the most commonly used illegal drug in Britain and 'binge smoking' to achieve maximum effect may be putting peoples' mental health in serious danger.

"There is evidence of a link between cannabis and mental health problems such as schizophrenia, and those who first use it at an early age may be more at risk.

"You never truly know what you're getting and stronger cannabis, such as skunk, can increase the chance of suffering a nasty reaction."

Marjorie Wallace, chief executive of mental health charity Sane, said: "This is a victory for the campaigning of Sane and other organisations who have for years been warning about the direct effects of cannabis in damaging the minds of young people, particularly if they take skunk and smoke from an early age.

"We need hard-hitting campaigns like this to convince people just how frightening the effects of cannabis can be, and that for those who are vulnerable, taking it may not be just chilling out for an evening but could mean robbing themselves of their chances in life."

New penalties for cannabis users were introduced when the drug was reclassified.

Anyone caught in possession of the drug is now given a warning, followed by a fine and prosecution for a third offence. Dealers can be jailed for up to 14 years.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Life Medicine
[info]kaptainkitten wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:09 am (UTC)
If you close down one avenue of self-treatment to do with the stresses and strains of living then surely another will just open up somewhere else?

As for the more serious mental health issues "linked" to cannabis use, what does that mean? Does cannabis cause problems or is it being used to self-treat by those with problems already.


Can no-one in government do "whole world" vision anymore?

Repression of symptoms (drug use in this case) does not make the problem go away.
[info]fuzz_box wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:21 am (UTC)
Is there any scientific evidence for this? "Cannabis ..... may be putting peoples' mental health in serious danger" May be? Interesting that the government wants to give 2.2 mil to "Frank" to convince people of the side effects of "... the most commonly used illegal drug in Britain ...". I'd have thought that we'd all know about them by now.
"In the television advert, the negative effects of the drug - memory loss, paranoia, memory loss and panic attacks - appear as unwanted guests at a party in the user's brain." Memory loss and more memory loss. Sorry I forgot. What?
Seriously though, I have loadsa human friends who've been smoking cannabis since the sixties and seventies and who do responsible jobs, have great memories, are perfectly well balanced, MENSA members etc but unfortunately because of the negative effects of government propagander can't come out and say "Yes I smoke dope and it's not had a bad effect on my mental health". And for balance, I've never met anyone suffering from " - memory loss, paranoia, memory loss and panic attacks - " as a result of illegal drug use. Mind you I don't know anyone who works for the Press Association.
As to 'skunk' there wouldn't be any need for extra powerful cannabis if it hadn't been made illegal in the first place. If booze were in the same position and the penalty for possession of a bottle of beer were the same as for a bottle of vodka, which one would you take to the party?
HM Gov have screwed up and now they've put their faith in throwing taxpayers money away on a feeble attempt at convincing the electorate that they had good reason to ignore the overwhelming body of evidence to the contrary.
Legalize it.

As usual, the government ignores the science
[info]andrewducker wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:40 am (UTC)
As this article makes clear, cannabis doesn't actually cause psychosis.

Sure, it can be overused, but the evidence is most definitely against it causing psychosis.
absolute rubbish
[info]laconico wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:52 am (UTC)
Once again, kids will think other narcotics are safe because of this ludicrous govt PR balls
[info]frwilliams wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 11:01 am (UTC)
"the negative effects of the drug - memory loss, paranoia, memory loss and panic attacks" - the author is evidently a cannabis smoker - suffering from memory loss, and he's suffering from memory loss as well. And paranoia. Everyone's down on us smokers!
They're coming to get you
[info]tominlondon wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 11:14 am (UTC)
Look out of the window - yes, that's them coming for you. Now. There's nothing you can do about it. You're ****ed.


:)
[info]davemeek wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 11:06 am (UTC)
Someone is taking something to give them memory loss. Haven't we recently had scientific studies by SCIENTISTS that failed to make a link and in fact scientists from around the world have no evidence for this (as presented in a way adults understand by an excellent horizon program a couple of weeks ago). Also evidence has been found to destroy the gateway drug argument.
The BMA says there is no proven link and that people with schizophrenia self medicate with cannabis and not vice versa.
News stories without fact that go against scientific and medical knowledge and base themselves instead on political grandstanding are PROPAGANDA. Shame on the name independant.
so to sum up on one side we have politicians, media, anecdotes and moral panic attacks vs medical evidence, scientific evidence and massive anecdotal evidence.
Someone is taking something to give them memory loss, paranoia and panic attacks, if it's not cannabis, could you tell me what it is you are taking.
This information is correct
[info]tominlondon wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 11:12 am (UTC)
I smoked dope every day and night for quite a few years, and eventually became paranoid, got panic attacks, etc. and then freaked out completely. This was not directly due to the cannabis but the cannabis brought to the surface a number of deep-seated psychological issues I had repressed. So you could say that cannabis releases repressed things. Whether or not that means cannabis is dangerous, I don't know, but I certainly stopped smoking it after a number of years because there was no pleasure at all in it, only weirdness and paranoiac fears of imminent doom.
Dishonesty
[info]antonyj7 wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 11:14 am (UTC)
Again a scare campaign treating our young like morons, they will not believe the highly suspect claims made about cannabis use because they are not stupid.

If I drink similar amounts of vodka or other "hard" spirits then for sure it will cause similar damage

Legalise all drugs
Stop playing cheap politics
Treat all drugs the same way

Stop the lies and distortion
Cannabis
[info]rstuart wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 11:59 am (UTC)
Please check out the website www.talkingaboutcannabis.com
Re: Cannabis
[info]spnfl wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 01:20 pm (UTC)
Oh dear. Another example of someone who did something which had a bad result and now they want to make everyone else stop. Why can't you people realise that There are always a minority of people who are affected badly by everything, but making everyone else think it's evil, or scaring them into abstinence is both needless and pathetic. What about the millions of people who use cannabis regularly and don't suffer severe personality disorders? Should we all be encouraging people not to cross roads just because we know someone who got run over? Just accept that your family had a bad experience but that doesn't reflect on the vast majority.
Its the anniversary
[info]workingtonman wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 12:44 pm (UTC)
Its just coming up to 100 years since the US decided to ban Opium in order to stuff the British Empire (for whom it was a very lucrative cash crop) and cosy up to the Chinese. Following the repeal of prohibition the US needed something to keep all the G men employed (and to keep Hoover onside) so they decided to ban cannabis as well as it was perceived to be imbibed only by black people and so it was a measure that could easily be sold to white voters.

If you want to know the full story about how it got banned then read the Virginia Law Review - http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/LIBRARY/studies/vlr/vlrtoc.htm

And note how mendacity and misinformation has been a hallmark of the anti cannabis campaign from the very start.

It has more benefits than side effects and so it should be legalised.
[info]harkadahl wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 01:03 pm (UTC)
What a wast of time. Government after government of any stripe simply will not admit that their entire narcotics policy is shaped to please a handful of newspaper editors, primarily the Daily Mail. Its an ongoing absurdity, and what's more, the vast majority who have direct regular experience of cannabis, know the government position to be based on fear-mongering and dis-honesty. If the government is not credible about drugs from the outset, then the few people who do need help wont trust the authoritarian, punitive, anti-scientific anti-reality posture the government adopts and that is very bad for society, as we can see everyday in the crime stats. Legalize and educate.
Boring
[info]dimlocator44 wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 01:52 pm (UTC)
Another day, another round of scaremongering & moral panic. This won't make a bit of difference, apart from stoned youths having a good laugh about it. As for skunk, it is to other cannabis what whisky is to beer: only a moron would drink two pints of whisky & not expect to get ill. It's incredibly tedious to see this whole issue regurgitated & hijacked day on day.

Re: Boring
[info]joethedumber wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:27 pm (UTC)
Your sister did alot more then weed if she is that mental.
regular use of cannabis is dangerous
[info]wormery wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 02:09 pm (UTC)
Those who say exxtensive cannabis use doesn;t cause any problems should talk to people - there are many, including me - who have family members who have developed psychosis and paranoia because of using it. Now, just because somen can use it without problem does not prove it is safe - some people can smoke 60 ciggys a day for 70 years without problem, but noone would argue that there are no risk factors. It dependd on the person. Also, having a joint at a party will not make you mental - we are talking extensive use here.

But really, having seen my own sister hiding from 'people who are going to gt her' because her mind is fXXXXcked by cannabis and she's a paranoid nutter, I reserve the right to tell those who think cannabis is safe that they are ignorant twerps who have no clue what they are talking about.
Just because im paranoid does not mean MI5 are not watching
[info]copycat7 wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 02:43 pm (UTC)
Just because im paranoid does not neccesarily mean that MI5 are not following me.

Regards

A Canabis User
Cannabis use and abuse
[info]scot_in_canada wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 02:47 pm (UTC)
To everyone who justifies their personal use of cannabis by stating their exposure to other "safe" users: This is a Medical/Toxicological issue. In order to prove long-term safety, long-term studies need to be done, which have yet to be completed. Personal use, anecdotal reports and "healthy friends" do not prove safety. Tell your user friends to seek a doctor's input on their personal health effects before concluding that its safe for long-term use.

As far as short-term effects, if your use isn't a problem, go talk to a health care practitioner about this and make up your own mind. Don't follow the crowd. This is an issue with medical studies behind it.

To those contemplating using cannabis because these people say it is safe: Don't. Talk to someone who knows something of this issue first and get unbiased information so you can make up your own mind.
Re: Cannabis use and abuse
[info]andrewducker wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 03:06 pm (UTC)
Actually, long term studies have been done.
Re: Cannabis use and abuse
[info]scot_in_canada wrote:
Tuesday, 17 February 2009 at 12:36 pm (UTC)
Andrew: I reviewed the summary of the study in your email. Any chance of getting the citation from the publishing journal?
Umm two sides of the coin
[info]revelationman wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 04:36 pm (UTC)
Cannabis in it's purest form has been used for medicine for thousands of years but I do agree the cannabis today is laced and obviously not of the same grade.
I do agree usign cannabis for terminally ill cancer patients but this is a tough subject, the government has very relaxed laws here in the UK. Either you ban it or you don't.
I say yes to medical use , like in Canada were a government appoint firm can control the quality, the rest heavy fines and jail sentences.
spot the intentional error...
[info]sara_sense wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 05:11 pm (UTC)
In the television advert, the negative effects of the drug - memory loss, paranoia, memory loss and panic attacks - appear as unwanted guests at a party in the user's brain.
Cannabis dangers.
[info]gogogob wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 05:53 pm (UTC)
The greatest danger posed by cannabis is persecution and the risk of prosecution.
Your home can be violently entered with or without a warrant.
Your money can be confiscated.
You can spend many years in prison or be forced into unpaid work with a stigmatising slogan emblazoned across your jacket.
You may well find yourself harassed and victimised by the police later in life, there is no redemption.
You will often be obliged to inform prospective employers about your criminal conviction.
You can receive a criminal record that will haunt your entire life, barring you from many kinds of work, prejucing employers and causing travel problems to more than 100 countries.
Cannabis consumers don't suffer from paranoia, it's actually fear!

Incidentally, cannabis does NOT cause schizophrenia, but 'hash psychosis' can be a marker for developing psychosis.

FREE CANNABIS: Just ask your MP. (and criminalise horse riding)
Andrew Ducker
[info]scot_in_canada wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 07:08 pm (UTC)
I'd be happy to review those studies. Can you provide me with the necessary citations? From peer-reviewed journals if you don't mind.
cannabis
[info]tonytechno wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 07:14 pm (UTC)
reefer madness anybody? more propoganda for people to ignore. dont the government realise that the average voter no longer believes a word they say? it is nothing more than a puritanical crusade against a culture that is easy to victimise. there is only one way to deal with the cannabis issue- legalisation is the only way any kind of control could be implemented. stupid condescending adverts are nothing more than a step back to the forties. yet things will not change, because the government has decided this is the way to win votes and its easier than fixing the mess the former chancellor didnt see coming. as for the skunk argument, its nothing new- the first hazes were being enjoyed back in the seventies. nothing more sinister than cross breeding two different variants from different continents of the same plants. cross a sativa with an indica and you get a hybrid, skunk. the skunk issue is nothing more than sensationalisation from the tabloids which the government have latched onto. so gordon, jacqui, do something sensible and listen to the people...
Oh!
[info]the_kegs wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 09:17 pm (UTC)
So, the same long term effects of alcohol then. Makes you wonder why one is illegal and the other overpriced due to government tax.
Review of article
[info]scot_in_canada wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:11 pm (UTC)
This poorly-controlled study in no way signifies that there are no long-term effects of cannabis. Essentially, they studied psychosis in psychosis-prone individuals and concluded that cannabis-induced psychosis may trigger schizophrenia in schizophrenic-prone individuals. That's like saying smoking in heart-attack prone individuals may trigger heart attacks- its essentially intuitive and inconclusive. Do you know the reference that this article was taken?
As opposed to this article, in order to ascertain long-term damage, you need to first establish an ED50 and an LD50 for cannabis. Then recruit 5000 people to be split into am cannabis and a non-cannabis safe smoke similar to cannabis. Then smoke away and you measure lung volumes, coronary artery diameter, chest x-ray, etc for 20 years. Once this is done, I will examine the data and make my own conclusions. Until then, you cannot state it is a safe product.
Andrew ducker
[info]scot_in_canada wrote:
Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:18 pm (UTC)
I reviewed this study. Causality cannot be ruled in or out as it wasn't powered for that. Essentially, cannabis, according to this study, may precipitate psychosis in psychosis-prone individuals. Or, psychosis-prone individuals may take and abuse cannabis. Either way, inconclusive.
Be careful of what you read and the conclusions drawn therein.
Government Weeds
[info]fitzeye wrote:
Tuesday, 17 February 2009 at 07:25 am (UTC)
The whole war on drugs continues to be a huge waste of time and money; this is a war that no government can win, just the same as terrorism. The only way to reduce interest is to educate people as to the true cost of participation.

I believe we should start the education now based upon scientific truths, and in the near future legalize some drugs and bring them into the tax system, just the same as alcohol and tabacco. while we start this process the sentencing of people illegally using or possessing guns/knives should be made a mandatory 30 years in prison.

Any backers out there?
The usual
[info]northwest0161 wrote:
Tuesday, 17 February 2009 at 10:56 am (UTC)
As usual when there's any story about cannabis, the drug users are out in force defending it. Most of you are smokers - you have a problem, probably an addiction to tobacco and therefore a basic disregard for your own health anyway, despite the evidence. So why should anyone listen to you on cannabis?

The funny thing is that, whatever they're puffing away at, smokers of all kinds can apparently never see how foul their activities are. Smelly, nicotine-stained individuals making their desperate grubby little roll-ups.
Re: The usual
[info]drchill wrote:
Sunday, 22 March 2009 at 09:42 am (UTC)
'Smelly, nicotine-stained individuals making their desperate grubby little roll-ups'... this made me laugh as a smoker myself... but what the hells wrong with you, your hatred of smokers seems psychotic.
Prohibitionist Policy: The Stubborn Failure
[info]mmco wrote:
Tuesday, 17 February 2009 at 11:56 am (UTC)
Binge smoking, under-age smoking, as well as the risks involved in unknowingly smoking stronger varieties are all typically associated with the illegal status of a drug and the consequences thereof. Decades of prohibitionist drug policies have not curbed drug use. On the contrary, they expose drug users to unreasonable risks and, in the case of heavily addictive drugs like heroin and cocaine, they push drug users to crime in order to feed their vice. Furthermore, prohibitionist policies actively promote illegal drug traffic and all the crime and corruption associated with it. If cannabis and other more dangerous drugs were legal, regulated and taxed, drug dealers would eventually go out of business. As a result, it would be much easier to enforce age limits to drug use. Finally, as people addicted to heavy drugs wouldn't be forced into illegal practices and marginal lifestyles, it would be easier for them to keep their jobs and their place in society and, eventually, if they chose so, to get help and wean themselves from the habit. Why do people forget the prohibitionist period in the US?
Cannabis
[info]scot_in_canada wrote:
Wednesday, 18 February 2009 at 11:18 am (UTC)
Has anyone considered the non-health ramifications of legalized/decriminalized marijuana? Impaired driving, underage use, etc. I wouldn't envy the person who killed my family in an impaired driving accident.
mmco: if people stopped using, dealers would stop selling. And having smoking legal sure hasn't stopped the smuggling of cigarettes. And how would drug legalization make it easier to enforce age limits? Is there underage drinking? Finally, why don't these heavy drug users get help now? You do not understand the mind of an addict at all.
We need laws to protect the vulnerable and deter abuse. Opium and cocaine were both legal at one time and look what happened there. Reinforcing a maladaptive behaviour makes it more common, not less common.


causing hatred for disabled potheads
[info]astuc wrote:
Wednesday, 25 February 2009 at 08:24 pm (UTC)
Since I am an authorized cannabis user I feel threatened by this article. People close to me have been reading this kind of information for years and I suffer from the misconceptions promoted hear. Making a link between treatment for neuropathic pain and the cause of schizophrenia is hurtful to me and to my place in society.
Skunk: All in their heads?
[info]drchill wrote:
Sunday, 22 March 2009 at 09:34 am (UTC)
£2.2million? What a waste.
Cannabis is openly available to anyone who wants it in the UK and the only way to prevent young people from using it is to introduce suitable legislation monitoring its sale. Legal, illegal, class B or class C classifications have no link to numbers of people using the drug. 'To use or not to use' is a decision people make for themselves, not one the government makes for them. Most people who do smoke weed wish they had a legal means of purchasing it, they do not want to fund a criminal market, yet they are forced to.

People simply aren't buying the mental health argument. Cases appear to be isolated and most people who smoke cannabis experience no lasting ill effect on the mind.

'Skunk' cannabis is to blame of course... yeah right. Its clear by the means the government and media talk about skunk that they have no real idea what it is. Ill take some time to explain;
Skunk is just one strain of cannabis and the first stabilized hybrid to be grown on a commercial scale on the continent. The origional skunk hybrid was bred by crossing a series of plants (Acapulco Gold x Mexican Sativa x Columbian Gold Sativa). The majority of cannabis on the UK market is not skunk, but other hybrids created by cross breeding other individual strains of cannabis. UK weed can be poorly grown and could hold lower or higher amounts of THC than the skunk hybrid - no one knows unless samples are analysed in a lab. This is interesting; to me skunk is no more than a buzz word used by the government to repackage cannabis as a more dangerous drug. So remember, next time you hear the word 'skunk' thrown around in an article or on the news, the reporter probably doesnt know what it exactly is.

Binge smoking is no more of a reason for the prohibition of cannabis than binge drinking is for the prohibition of alcohol. The fact that the government simply cant trust its people to use a mild soft drug responsibly is outrageous. Do we realy need to be mothered like this?
Re: Skunk: All in their heads?
[info]tomdownham wrote:
Tuesday, 31 March 2009 at 09:55 am (UTC)
.
more work needed
[info]msahota wrote:
Tuesday, 21 April 2009 at 08:42 am (UTC)
I think more work is needed in this area. As drug use has increased a lot in society
Cannabis is not all bad
[info]janiegreville wrote:
Wednesday, 29 April 2009 at 11:50 am (UTC)
I'd like to see a more balanced approach to the reportage and discussion of cannabis in our culture. I am inclined to believe that the taking of almost all psychoactive drugs, including alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, should be actively discouraged for young people under the age of twenty when the brain reaches a settled level of formation.

However, vis a vis cannabis I am struck by the hypocrisy of opposition to its use as a recreational drug and/or a route to higher levels of consciousness and/or as a medicinal drug for specific health issues whilst alcohol continues to be entirely untouched as a subject of concern.

I took smoked excessive amounts of cannabis in the summer of 2007 and I ended up in hospital with a hypomanic episode following this consumption and the stress of a divorce court case. However, since then I have learned the lesson and use cannabis occasionally and mindfully and literally watch its effects upon me. The effects have been creatively stimulating, and psycho-therapeutically enlightening. I have been able to access parts of my sub/unconscious during affected periods smoking cannabis and this has enabled me to process and reflect on the pros and cons of cannabis use. In the end what I noticed most was the follow on effect of smoking cannabis - lethargy and demotivation - and this is what has decided me to avoid cannabis most of the time and entirely outside of holiday times or occasional weekends.

Alcohol, on the other hand I have failed to receive any positive benefit from at all, ever. I find that it is a depressant, a disinhibitor in ways that I don't enjoy since I like to be in full control of my senses. In the late 90's I chose to drink wine frequently at a time when my marriage was breaking down and this undoubtedly contributed to my mental health breakdown. Alcohol in moderation and taken for genuinely recreational purposes when one is not stressed or depressed and when one is not seeking to avoid difficulty or emotional pain may be fine, indeed I believe it is fine in such a context. However, it is all too frequently used for the wrong reasons to excess and the personal and social consequences of it are too often devastating in the longer term.

A balanced discussion about cannabis will incorporate the positives as well as the negatives. There is no doubt in my mind that whilst alcohol and nicotine are legal substances then cannabis should be legal too. The hypocrisy of it blows my mind!


Free gym pass

Get fit for summer with Fitness First gyms in London

Download a free gym pass from Fitness First today

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date