The Journal of Neuroendocrinology published a review last year, which suggests that oral THC may significantly reduce plaque development in diseases associated with obesity, such as atherosclerosis.
Atherosclerosis, a condition of plaque deposits in the lining of the arteries that results from a diet high in cholesterol, is one of the major causes of death in overweight/obesity-related disease. The plaque is created as a by-product of specific cells, called macrophages, when they consume fatty particles. As the plaque gathers, the walls of arteries become stiff and eventually collapse.
The study suggests that THC interacts directly with macrophages and suppresses their plaque-creating abilities through the Cannabinoid Type II receptor (CB2R). Immune cells in our body, such as macrophages, have many more cannabinoid receptors expressed on their surface – this makes them an exceptionally strong target for cannabis-based medicines.
The authors note that oral administration of low doses of THC resulted in significant inhibition of plaque development, an effect that could be reversed by blocking the CB2R.
What does this mean for humans? It is difficult to say without further research. But the results are hopeful. Given the politics surrounding cannabis, it might be a long while before the FDA approves a study in humans on cannabis and atherosclerosis. On the other hand, research such as this shows not only that we have only begun to investigate the healing potential of this remarkable natural compound, but the importance of advocating for a more open environment for future research.
GW Pharmaceuticals announced plans to expand their research agenda by investigating the therapeutic potential of new cannabis-ethanol sprays into the realm of metabolic diseases such as Obesity and Type II Diabetes.
For this project, GW is teaming up with Mike Cawthorne, the group director of the research team that “discovered the multi-billion dollar insulin sensitizer drug, Rosigilatzone.”
The new cannabis spray will be extracted from plants which contain high amounts of CBD and THCV. CBD has shown potential to treat fatty liver diseases and hpercholesterolaemia and also blocks the psychoactive effects of Delta9-THC. THCV, a natural antagonist or Cannabinoid receptor blocker, has notable effects on increasing energy expenditure. THCV, unlike Delta9-THC, is usually present only in small concentrations on the plant. However, GW may have developed a so called THCV-rich cannabis plant.
Developing a treatment for a complex illness, such as metabolic syndrome, can be explored using two cannabinoids in combination and can potentially “be addressed with a single medicine.”
The San Jose Mercury News reported that Marijuana smoke will be added to the ever-growing list of cancer-causing materials covered by prop. 65 in CA.
Putting marijuana smoke in this category seems misplaced at best when diet colas, which contain everything from saccharine to questionably FDA-approved Nutrasweet and other chemically engineered sweeteners are not included. (Sorry if Nutrasweet or Diet Coke is on the list, but I couldn’t find it.)
It is particularly ironic that marijuana smoke will be the only smoke on the list, given the level of industrial air pollutants that are not included on the list.
It’s too bad the very studies used by OEHHA to make this decision were deeply flawed regarding the methods, leading to artificially high readings of hazardous compounds. Some of the leading cannabis researchers in the world published a three part study on cannabis smoke a few months ago. This study compared the techniques used to analyze cannabis smoke and they found huge flaws with current methods which produced exaggerated levels of side products. In some cases, the authors suggest that previous researchers left out essential information regarding their methods–making it impossible to repeat previous experiments or confirm the results! Despite credible reports which demonstrate that practically all previous research comparing cannabis and tobacco smoke is flawed and inaccurate, OEHHA went ahead and used bad science to support their politics.
A political decision like this, will undoubtedly cause confusion for years to come. After all the two main ingredients on the plant, THC and CBD, have notable anti-cancer properties. In fact, research which demonstrates that combining THC and CBD has synergistic or greater than additive anti-cancer properties, will be presented at the upcoming International Cannabinoid Research Society meeting (July 7th-11th in Chicago).
Prop 65 may cause future inconveniences for any cannabis patients who needs to be able to smoke in a public or private facilities, i.e. trying to ease their glaucoma before their eyes explode from the ocular pressure.
However, there remains two benefits to this decision:
1) Legitimacy
2) Deterrence to non-medical users
1) This is a step towards regulating cannabis. A simple regulatory mechanism such as requiring a warning label, may provide some legal protections for those who follow it. Therefore by listing the potential harms, as on every bottle of a pharmaceutical drug, it provides a bit of legitimacy because the consumer is protected or informed, and because it reinforces the reality that cannabis is a medical treatment.
2) Often I hear criticisms regarding access to medical cannabis, specifically with regard to who has access to it and who gets it. Additionally, some are concerned that people who fake illnesses to get pharmaceutical drugs will also con doctors who recommend medical cannabis. A cancer warning would deter any casual/recreational user from taking advantage of a system intended to serve the state’s seriously afflicted and chronically ill population.
What about the Science?
It has never been conclusively shown that smoking cannabis will cause, prevent, or treat cancer. What science has shown is that:
A) the active ingredients in cannabis, when isolated or in combination have anti-cancer properties.
So, there is no concrete proof that smoking cannabis will cause or fight cancer but the individual compounds in the smoke have anti-cancer and pro-cancer properties. Meaning the side products of cannabis smoke can cause cancer but the most abundant ingredients (cannabinoids) fight cancer. How they work together remains unclear, so it seems unfair to label cannabis smoke as a carcinogen because that’s only half the story.
I know neither politics nor science is about being “fair.” However, science is the pursuit of truth/facts. So in the interest of truth, let’s incorporate what is actually known about cannabis smoke into the Prop 65 warning:
“Cannabis Smoke contains compounds known to the State of California that may cause or treat cancer.”
The study was conducted with 6 participants who were recruited to smoke cannabis and keep a diary for 15 days. They were instructed to write in the diary immediately after smoking cannabis.
The participants were also told to write in the third person or make up a character (such as “Il Messaggero,” Italian for “the messenger”) in order to create a distance between the person and their emotions. In theory, this makes it easier to write about yourself; it may also encourage novelistic tendencies in the subjects, rather than objective reports of their experiences.
The study’s author describes three major recurrent feelings and four psychological themes recurring throughout the diaries of the individuals. The authors conclude that the major recurrent feelings in the journal were:
1) The participants had a sense of being different from the rest of society. (The study does not make note of the fact that standing apart from society remains one of the most popular themes in Western art, politics and literature.)
2) The rejected outside world was experienced as permeated by repetitive and soulless social activities, and the stress of having to deal with these activities was often regarded as unbearably suffocating. (The study does not make note of how this is different from non-cannabis users who do not enjoy the office Christmas party or visiting their in-laws any more than chronic cannabis users.)
3) Participants seemed to rebel against a consumeristic society, ‘possessed’ by (removedthe) “Titans.” (The study does not make note that criticism of an overly consumeristic society is common among everyone from Pope Benedict XVI to billionaire investor Warren Buffett – neither of whom is known to smoke cannabis.)
The authors placed certain quotes into categories or themes by going through diaries looking for psychological admissions of drug abuse or dependence by the participants.
Here is quote from each of the 4 categories:
Withdrawing from everyday life
“He discovered that [smoking cannabis before going to work] was so much better, that the hours elapsed much quicker. Perhaps it was because [cannabis] made him more detached, distant. And what he needed in that job … the most boring and sterile job ever … was exactly to be detached and to be able to go into his world where, somehow, the time elapsed faster even if with no rush.”
Indulging in the here-and-now of the emotional body
“Dope amplifies his sensations, it’s like a mirror that reflects the image of what you are. It makes you feel the truth; it’s like an oracle. The only problem is that it takes your energies away. In order to look inside yourself you have to be strong … Some people do not see anything. The ability of seeing doesn’t come from the drug, because that ability you either have it or not. The drug can only amplify what you already have inside yourself. That’s why some people can smoke and some others cannot.”
The containment of the sacred space
“[Smoking] in the right situation and with the right people … those that never tried it cannot judge it scot-free … you have to know it very well in order to fully appreciate it. The joint is a ritual and one has to know it very well before getting to fully appreciate it.”
Living the addiction
“Il Messaggero remembered his dream. He was in a swimming pool completely submerged by the water. He looked around at the artificial scene (with very bright neon lights) and knew that the water was fresh but he couldn’t touch it. He was wrapped in a transparent ball, made of a sort of warm and half-solid liquid, like gel. When he woke up he was a bit disappointed … he thought that that gelatinous ball might have been the dope and he remembered that every time he dreamt about water he was happy and he always felt that he could do lots of things.”
This type of progressive study may remind one of Baudelaire’s Hash writing from 1860. An essay written by Allan Ginsberg while smoking a joint also comes to mind. However, regardless of the intentions of the author, this publication was most likely funded to explore drug abuse.
Using selective themes will slant research like this towards negative views or findings regarding drug use. Raw data, in the form of numbers or words, should not be filtered through a preconceived theoretical framework. Research needs to be analyzed objectively, that means without fitting the subject material into a political or religious framework.
The author also claims the aim of this study is to provide “insight into the phenomenon of being a cannabis user.”However, given the thousand-plus years that cannabis has been used, and that cannabis is now the single most widely used illegal drug in the world, one wonders whether the study should explore the psychology behind a more compelling phenomenon: People who have never used cannabis.
Charles C. Lynch is the former owner and managing Caregiver for Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers in Morro Bay.
The dispensary opened on April 1 2006 with the blessing of the city and even joined the Chamber of Commerce. In July 2006 the dispensary was granted a Conditional Use Permit from the City of Morro Bay to include a Medical Cannabis Nursery at the dispensary.
The Dispensary operated for almost one year without any major problems or complaints to the owner. On March 29, 2007 the Local Sheriff and DEA agents raided the Dispensary and Home of Charles Lynch. Lynch was not arrested at the time and reopened the dispensary on April 7 2007 with the blessing of the City of Morro Bay. A week after reopening the dispensary the DEA called the Landlord and threatened him with Forfeiture of his property unless he evicted the Dispensary from the building. On May 16, 2007 the Dispensary closed permanently.
On July 17, 2007 Lynch was arrested at his home and charged with Federal Marijuana Distribution. Lynch pleaded not guilty and went on trial July 22, 2008 in Los Angeles. Lynch was not allowed to discuss state law or mention ‘medical marijuana’ during the trial. Also large amounts of evidence including Lynch’s compliance with State and Local laws could not be considered as factual by the jury. Before opening the dispensary Lynch called the DEA and asked about thier policy regarding medical marijuana dispensaries. The DEA told Lynch it was up to the Cities and Counties to decide how to handle the matter. This was Lynch’s only defense in Federal Court and is called entrapment by estopell when a government agent says something is ok when in fact it might not be. Click here for more information.
On August 5, 2008 Lynch was convicted in Federal Court for operating the Central Coast Compassionate Caregivers. On January 6, 2009 Lynch appeared before Judge Wu to request a new trial on the grounds that he was not allowed to get his defense before the jury and other new evidence. The request was denied. Charles has been out on a $400,000 bail posted by his loving and trusting family and was under house arrest for over nine months.
During March 2009 United States Policy regarding Medical Marijuana changed in favor of states as long as the dispensary complied with state law. Lynch’s dispensary complied with all state and local laws during the time it was open. Click here to read the San Francisco Chronicles report of the new policy. On Friday March 13, 2009 John Stossel and ABC News 2020 aired he story of Lynch on National Television. On Sunday March 15 Al Roker did a documentary entitled Marijuana Inc. Al Roker reporting and focused in on the case of Charles C. Lynch.
