Just one or two experiences with marijuana may alter teen brains

Agencies
January 16, 2019

Jan 16: Teens who use pot just one or two times may end up with changes to their brains, a new study finds.

There were clear differences on brain scans between teens who said they had tried cannabis a couple of times and those who completely eschewed the drug, researchers reported in the Journal of Neuroscience.

There have been hints that even small amounts of pot at a young age might impact the brain, said the study’s lead author, Catherine Orr, a lecturer at the Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia. “Research using animals to study the effects of cannabis on the brain have shown effects at very low levels, so we had reason to believe that brain changes might occur at even the earliest stages of cannabis use,” Orr said in an email.

Still, she said, “I was surprised by the extent of the effects.”

With an estimated 35 percent of U.S. teens using cannabis, the new findings are concerning, the researchers noted.

Orr and her colleagues saw widespread increases in the volume of grey matter in brain regions that are rich with cannabinoid receptors. Grey matter, which is made up of nerve cell bodies, is involved in sensory perception and muscle control.

To take a closer look at the impact of mild marijuana use in developing brains, Orr’s team analyzed brain scans gathered as part of the larger IMAGEN study, which was designed to look into adolescent brain development.

The researchers analyzed images from 46 14-year-olds who said they had used marijuana once or twice, as well as images from 46 non-cannabis using teens matched “on age, sex, handedness, pubertal status, IQ, socioeconomic status, and use of alcohol and tobacco,” Orr said.

The researchers spotted clear differences between the two groups, which they suspect are due to the low-level pot use. They acknowledge that the study didn’t actually prove that marijuana led to the differences seen in the scans. It’s possible that those who chose to use weed were different to begin with and that the marijuana hadn’t played a role in brain development.

To try to address this question, the researchers analyzed scans from a third group of teens who had not tried marijuana before they had their brain scans at age 14. By age 16, 69 of these kids said they had used marijuana at least 10 times. But their brain scans at age 14 looked no different than brain scans of other kids who had not taken up cannabis by age 16 - which meant there wasn’t any inborn brain difference that would have predicted who would later become a pot user.

There may be serious implications to the brain changes noted by the researchers. “In our sample of cannabis users, the greater volumes in the affected parts of the brain were associated with reductions in psychomotor sped and perceptual reasoning and with increased levels of anxiety two years later,” Orr said.

The reason for the higher volume of grey matter in cannabinoid-rich regions of the brain may be related to a normal process called “pruning” which may go awry when kids use marijuana, Orr said. As young brains develop, unnecessary or defective neurons are pruned away, she explained. When the system doesn’t work correctly, those cells remain in place.

The new findings are a step toward understanding the impact of cannabis on young brains, said Dr. Michael Lynch, a toxicologist and emergency medicine physician and director of the Pittsburgh Poison Center at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. “It’s important that there was a change,” Lynch said. “Adolescent brains are going to be more vulnerable to anything drug or environmentally related.”

If pruning isn’t working right, “the brain may not work as efficiently as it should,” Lynch said. “But I don’t think we can make a final determination on that from this study.”

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 5,2020

Washington D.C., Jan 5: After a woman filed a lawsuit against a diet soda company, the California court has declared that the beverage does not promise to help buyers in losing weight.

The woman had gulped down the drink for over a decade but did not lose inches as a result.

The three-judge panel declared during the hearing: "The prevalent understanding of the term in (the marketplace) is that the 'diet' version of a soft drink has fewer calories than its 'regular' counterpart."

However, the members of the US 9th circuit court have felt that the consumers tend to make out something of their own that is unreasonable and eventually hamper the reputation of brands through a deceptive allegation, reports Fox News.

The response was due to a misleading case filed against Diet Dr Pepper by Shana Becerra from Santa Rosa, California. Shana claimed that she has been addictively purchasing the low-calorie beverage for the past 13 years hoping for losing some fat but failed to lose even a single inch.

The woman also stated that the attractive and fit models misled her into believing that drink will help her in perfecting her body like them.

However, the court's decision was that advertisements are for representational purposes only. "Cannot be reasonably understood to convey any specific meaning at all," as written by Judge Jay Bybee.

Shana had last week made such allegation against Diet coke as well where the court came to a similar verdict. She claimed that she had found various studies where it is evident that the artificial sweetener aspartame used in diet beverages actually boosts weight gain.

But the artificial sweetener is approved in by the concerned administrative department and thus is used in most American drinks.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 10,2020

Washington D.C., May 9: Do the middle age feel much stressful now, and seems to have changed over time, if compared to the life in the 90s? Well, this recent study indicates that it might be true.

The study has signalled to the fact that life may become more stressful majorly for middle-aged people than it was in the 1990s. The researchers reached this analysis even before the novel coronavirus started sweeping the globe.

A team of researchers led by Penn State found that across all ages, there was a slight increase in daily stress in the 2010s compared to the 1990s. But when researchers restricted the sample to people between the ages of 45 and 64, there was a sharp increase in daily stress.

"On average, people reported about 2 percent more stressors in the 2010s compared to people in the past," said David M. Almeida, professor of human development and family studies at Penn State.

"That's around an additional week of stress a year. But what really surprised us is that people at mid-life reported a lot more stressors, about 19 percent more stress in 2010 than in 1990. And that translates to 64 more days of stress a year."

Almeida said the findings were part of a larger project aiming to discover whether health during the middle of Americans' lives has been changing over time.

"Certainly, when you talk to people, they seem to think that daily life is more hectic and less certain these days," Almeida said.

For the study, the researchers collected data from 1,499 adults in 1995 and 782 different adults in 2012.

Almeida said the goal was to study two cohorts of people who were the same age at the time the data was collected but born in different decades. All study participants were interviewed daily for eight consecutive days.

During each daily interview, the researchers asked the participants about their stressful experiences throughout the previous 24 hours.

They asked questions related to arguments with family or friends or feeling overwhelmed at home or work, so and so. The participants were also asked how severe their stress was and whether those stressors were likely to impact other areas of their lives.

"We were able to estimate not only how frequently people experienced stress, but also what those stressors mean to them," Almeida said.

"For example, did this stress affect their finances or their plans for the future. And by having these two cohorts of people, we were able to compare daily stress processes in 1990 with daily stress processes in 2010," Almeida added.

After analyzing the data, the researchers found that participants reported significantly more daily stress and lower well-being in the 2010s compared to the 1990s.

Additionally, participants reported a 27 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their finances and a 17 percent increase in the belief that stress would affect their future plans.

Almeida said he was surprised not that people were more stressed now than in the 90s, but at the age group that was mainly affected.

"We thought that with economic uncertainty, life might be more stressful for younger adults. But we didn't see that. We saw more stress for people at mid-life," Almeida said.

"And maybe that's because they have children who are facing an uncertain job market while also responsible for their own parents. So it's this generational squeeze that's making stress more prevalent for people at mid-life," he concluded.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
July 2,2020

London, Jul 2: The World Health Organisation says smoking is linked to a higher risk of severe illness and death from the coronavirus in hospitalised patients, although it was unable to specify exactly how much greater those risks might be.

In a scientific brief published this week, the U.N. health agency reviewed 34 published studies on the association between smoking and Covid-19, including the probability of infection, hospitalisation, severity of disease and death.

WHO noted that smokers represent up to 18% of hospitalised coronavirus patients and that there appeared to be a significant link between whether or not patients smoked and the severity of disease they suffered, the type of hospital interventions required and patients' risk of dying.

In April, French researchers released a small study suggesting smokers were at less risk of catching Covid-19 and planned to test nicotine patches on patients and health workers — but their findings were questioned by many scientists at the time who cited the lack of definitive data.

WHO says "the available evidence suggests that smoking is associated with increased severity of disease and death in hospitalized Covid-19 patients. It recommends that smokers quit.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.