Is marijuana addictive? You can bet your heroin on that!

[entheogensmurf]

Is marijuana addictive? You can bet your heroin on that!
From the Blogs
All About Addiction Helping addicts get their lives back.
by Adi Jaffe

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...et-your-heroin

Yes, marijuana and opiates are connected, so what does that mean?
Published on January 24, 2010

This is the ultimate question for many people. In fact, when discussing addiction, it is rare that the addiction potential for marijuana doesn't come up. Well, this is one of many posts on the topic, and before some of the readers get all upset, please read the post in its entirety.
Some basic points about marijuana

The active ingredient in marijuana, THC, binds to cannabinoid receptors in the brain (CB1 and CB2). Since it is a partial agonist, it activates these receptors, though not to their full capacity. The fact that cannabinoid receptors modulate mood, sleep, and appetite to some extent is the reason behind many of marijuana's effects.

But how is marijuana addictive? What's the link to heroin?

What most people don't know is that there is quite a bit of interaction between the cannabinoid receptor system (especially CB1 receptors) and the opioid receptor system in the brain. In fact, research has shown that without the activation of the µ opioid receptor, THC is no longer rewarding. If the fact that marijuana activates the same receptor system as opiates (like heroin, morphine, oxycontin, etc.) surprises you, you should read on. The opioid system in turn activates the dopamine reward pathway I've discussed in numerous other posts (look here for a start). This is the mechanisms that is assumed to underlie the rewarding, and many of the addictive, properties of essentially all drugs of abuse.
But we're not done!

Without the activation of the CB1 receptors, it seems that opiates, alcohol, nicotine, and perhaps stimulants (like methamphetamine) lose some their rewarding properties. This would mean that drug reward depends much more heavily on the cannabinoid receptor system than had been previously thought. Since this is the main target for THC, it stands to reason that the same would go for marijuana.
So what?! Why is marijuana addictive?

Since there's a close connection between the targets of THC and the addictive properties of many other drugs, it seems to me that arguing against an addictive potential for marijuana is silly. Of course, some will read this as my saying that marijuana is always addictive and very dangerous. They would be wrong. My point is that marijuana can not be considered as having no potential for addiction. As I've pointed out many times before, the proportion of drug users that become addicted, or dependent, on drugs is relatively small (10%-15%). This is true for almost all drugs. All I'm saying is that it is probably also true for marijuana.

Citation:

Ghozland, Matthes, Simonin, Filliol, L. Kieffer, and Maldonado (2002). Motivational Effects of Cannabinoids Are Mediated by μ-Opioid and κ-Opioid Receptors. Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 1146-1154.

If you have the energy and desire, perhaps a response in the comments section would be appreciated by his anticipating wait for verification to get those dopamine releases that take away the shakes for a while for every agreement for his argument being accurate, administered by his drug dealing reward center.

I just encountered this chap, however, it was only a few glances to see there must be significant damage to his anterior cingulate cortex to seriously hold a sincere believe what he says is true while not twitching from the errors.

I may allocate some typing to address this harmful to society person over there later. The resolution to resolved his dopamine addiction may require the help of LSD, Shrooms, Ketamine, perhaps even some ganja.

[EckY]

Always makes me laugh when stoners say weed isnt addictive like thats some plus point of smoking it all day every day.

[Pandaro]

Told yall!

[AIDSINFESTEDPENISBURGER]

No one is taking my heroin. Not betting shit.

[sbgarner81]

How can someone try to understand and better yet explain something as authority on it and never experience it? I quit reading here "In fact, research has shown that without the activation of the µ opioid receptor, THC is no longer rewarding."

Research has shown? I can tell you that I still get stoned and I have never shot up. WTF is up with all the propaganda going around right now?

[sly_toker]

everything is addictive

MJ addiction does not come up very often because it has little to no health consequences and you can still be a normal functioning member of society when sober...

[crescentwrench]

You can observe whether or not the receptor is activated by means other than experience. It's the same way they can observe and identify an epileptic seizure in action without flopping on the ground. That's actually a better method than experiencing it, you can get data on multiple subjects objectively because you're not a subject yourself.

[sbgarner81]

Originally Posted by crescentwrench

You can observe whether or not the receptor is activated by means other than experience. It's the same way they can observe and identify an epileptic seizure in action without flopping on the ground. That's actually a better method than experiencing it, you can get data on multiple subjects objectively because you're not a subject yourself.

A seizure is a visible physical experience. They are trying to explain brain function and how people feel. But I get your point.

[crescentwrench]

Yeah, you can do that. Activation of lack of in a brain receptor is a visible physical experience, assuming you have the right equipment. How do you think we know the different portions of the brain responsible for different functions? Or how pain killers work? It's not magic, or even all that uncommon. We can observe lots of shit without experiencing it. Hell, we know the composition of stars light years away, it's not outrageous that we can tell what's going on in people's brains. I don't know how they're measuring any of that but receptor activation seems to be a pretty straight forward one. Brain functions a certain way, receptor activated. Brain functions a different way, receptor not activated. If the receptor isn't activated there's no way the subject can be feeling anything.

That's actually a much better method of study because it eliminates experience. Experience can be affected by perception, personal bias, placebo effect, any number of things that can skew results. Personal experience is usually the worst method of scientific research and the first one accounted for to remove from the experiment.

[glassJaw]

Originally Posted by crescentwrench

Yeah, you can do that. Activation of lack of in a brain receptor is a visible physical experience, assuming you have the right equipment. How do you think we know the different portions of the brain responsible for different functions? Or how pain killers work? It's not magic, or even all that uncommon. We can observe lots of shit without experiencing it. Hell, we know the composition of stars light years away, it's not outrageous that we can tell what's going on in people's brains. I don't know how they're measuring any of that but receptor activation seems to be a pretty straight forward one. Brain functions a certain way, receptor activated. Brain functions a different way, receptor not activated. If the receptor isn't activated there's no way the subject can be feeling anything.

That's actually a much better method of study because it eliminates experience. Experience can be affected by perception, personal bias, placebo effect, any number of things that can skew results. Personal experience is usually the worst method of scientific research and the first one accounted for to remove from the experiment.

The brain is still not fully understood, especially not enough to start deducing ideals like marijuana is addictive. Is it mentally or physically addictive? If they said it was physically addictive, they couldn't get away with it, because it is bullshit. I'm not high right now, and I have that great just woke up and took a fat shit feeling. So they can say, oh look at the brain wave patterns in this marijuana abuser, it looks just like the brain of that heroin abuser, so therefore they must both be addictive. That isn't good enough. They have to prove that when those brain wave patterns are present, addiction is caused. Obviously not the case. I had a few friends and even a cousin that got into dope, and I can tell you first hand comparing the two's addictiveness is not logical.

[glassJaw]

And here's another thing that bothers me. Why is being addictive even relative to legalization? Xanax has destroyed more peoples lives around me than weed ever could, and it is destructively addictive. Yet I could go get a prescription to xanax today if I wanted to.

What the fuck is up with that?

[crescentwrench]

Originally Posted by glassJaw

The brain is still not fully understood, especially not enough to start deducing ideals like marijuana is addictive. Is it mentally or physically addictive? If they said it was physically addictive, they couldn't get away with it, because it is bullshit. I'm not high right now, and I have that great just woke up and took a fat shit feeling. So they can say, oh look at the brain wave patterns in this marijuana abuser, it looks just like the brain of that heroin abuser, so therefore they must both be addictive. That isn't good enough. They have to prove that when those brain wave patterns are present, addiction is caused. Obviously not the case. I had a few friends and even a cousin that got into dope, and I can tell you first hand comparing the two's addictiveness is not logical.

See what I mean about experience? It wouldn't work that well if you were a subject because you already think physical addiction is bullshit. It would be better to eliminate your bias and directly monitor the activity of your brain and compare it to other subjects and their results.

Experience doesn't tell you much, and experience of one tells you nothing. I can take a vicodin and chase it with flexaril, lorazopam and 3 beers and still lay on the floor wishing there was a way to cut out my back. That same cocktail would likely kill my wife. But none of that invalidates how those things work. It just means they didn't work for me.

So yeah, if you look at the brain waves of a marijuana and heroin abuser and they're the same, you can make a reasonable case that they are having a similar effect. You'd also have to consider sample size and methodology, that's how they would prove the connection between brain wave patterns and addiction. You get enough people showing the same effects then you have made a case. They're trying to make conclusions on how these things affect people, not individual persons. They're trying to find an average, there's always going to be the ones who won't fall into the average.

As to what addiction has to do with legalization, I agree. It means fuck all considering the amount of drugs that cause addiction if used improperly (or sometimes properly).

[Frizzle Fry]

I don't think you guys should be smoking marijuana anymore.

[vinimach]

life's too short to not be addicted to things

[Hauzer is BANNED]

Marijuana is 100% addictive. I could go down every symptom of addiction and check off each one for marijuana use, as well as mental and physical dependence.

[ClayTrainor]

I would say that Marijuana is as addictive as videogames and fast food, but comparing it to drugs like nicotine and heroin is kind of laughable. I'm definitely addicted to pot, and enjoy smoking nearly every day but, I don't experience withdrawal symptoms or anything like that if i do stop for a week or 2.

[sbgarner81]

I just threw out a bottle of childrens tylenol flu that my wife bought cause of all the new active ingredients that were being tested. Twice on the bottle it said to see overdose warning, yet I couldn't find one.

There is no way I would take advice from the same people that made that poison for profit.

Let me know when we cure cancer.

[glassJaw]

Originally Posted by Hauzer

Marijuana is 100% addictive. I could go down every symptom of addiction and check off each one for marijuana use, as well as mental and physical dependence.

Are you saying you are physically dependent to marijuana? If that is the case I don't even want to know how much you must smoke.

Please though, don't just make the statement, follow through. There are inquiring minds that, I'll be honest, disagree, but are willing to at least hear you out.

I'll tell you frankly that being addicted to marijuana physically is not something that affects my life in any way shape or form. I've been up for several hours and I don't give a shit that I'm not high. I'm about to go to class not high, and I'll feel just as good as I do now. And then tonight I'm going to get home and blaze the fuck out and feel even better.

Physically dependent means the body won't chemically function without it. Seizures are typical of a physical dependency that is not indulged. All I'm saying is, where are mine?

[crescentwrench]

Originally Posted by sbgarner81

I just threw out a bottle of childrens tylenol flu that my wife bought cause of all the new active ingredients that were being tested. Twice on the bottle it said to see overdose warning, yet I couldn't find one.

There is no way I would take advice from the same people that made that poison for profit.

Let me know when we cure cancer.

Well at least we know where you're coming from.

[bringmeacoke]

Is marijuana addictive? Who gives a shit if it is or not?

How many people does marijuana kill?

What is the point of this article? The stoners will shrug it off and those opposed will use it as propaganda.