Addictive marijuana?
Medical Marijuana Magazine
//////////LINKS/////FREQUENTLY
ASKED QUESTIONS
Is Marijuana
Addictive?
Medical Marijuana Magazine wishes to thank Steven C. Markoff for
permission to publish the following compilation of data from
several different sources. It is obvious that
&addiction& has many meanings. People even speak of
&addiction& to the I however, as the data
presented below make clear, marijuana is far less
&addictive& than other widely used substances.
Compiled &
Steven C. Markoff
I. Introduction
Given the differing views concerning drugs
and their addictiveness, I found these three doctor's specificity
and close consensus about the relative addictiveness of marijuana
and five commonly used drugs interesting. This booklet's purpose
is to excerpt on a straight forward basis, the minimum
information from the works cited below to support the highlights.
Doctors Compare Addictiveness of
Six Well Known
Dr. Jack E. Henningfield Ph.D. (in
Psychopharmacology) and formerly of the National Institute on
Drug Abuse and Dr. Neal L. Benowitz MD of the University of San
Francisco rank six common substances in five problem areas.
System: 1=Most
A 6=Least Addictive
1. Henningfield Ratings
Withdrawal*
Reinforcement*
Tolerance*
Dependence*
Intoxication*
? In April 1997, after reviewing
the literature, Dr. Henningfield changed his ratings of
marijuana and caffeine's tolerance and dependence to 5's
and 6's respectively.2.
Benowitz Ratings
Source: Reformatted from the
August 2, 1994 N.Y. Times Article &Is Nicotine
Addictive? It Depends on Whose Criteria You Use&
*Withdrawal: Presence and severity of
characteristic withdrawal symptoms.
*Reinforcement: A measure of the
substance's ability in human and animal tests, to get users to
take it again and again, and in preference to other substances.
* Tolerance: How much of the
substance is needed to satisfy increasing cravings for it, and
the level of stable, high need that is eventually reached.
*Dependence: How difficult it is
for the user to quit, the relapse rate, the percentage of people
who eventually become dependent, the rating users give their own
need for the substance and the degree to which the substance will
be used in the face of evidence that it causes harm.
*Intoxication: Though not usually
counted as a measure of addiction in itself, the level of
intoxication is associated with addiction and increases the
personal and social damage a substance may do.
Doctors Survey of Health Officials on the Inherent Addictiveness
of Six Commonly Used Drugs
Health officials were asked to put
aside social as well as economic pressures such as drug
availability or acceptability and to evaluate the inherent
addictive potential of the following six drugs.
Relative Addictiveness of Common Drugs(100=Most A
Conclusion:(1) The most addictive drug, nicotine, is
not only not scheduled, it can be purchased without a
prescription by anyone over the age of 18.
(2) Cocaine is about as
addictive as coffee or tea's caffeine.
(3) Alcohol is about as
addictive as heroin.
Data: Reformatted
from the book The Chemistry of Mind-Altering Drugs
by Daniel M. Perrine, Ph.D., Associate Professor of
Chemistry at Loyola College, Baltimore, Maryland.
Published by the American Chemical Society, Washington
D.C., 1997.*
&Hooked: Why Isn't Everyone
an Addict?& by Deborah Franklin, In Health magazine,
volume 4, number 6, pp. 38-52, November/December 1990.
__________________
* On May 14, 1997, Dr. Perrine
stated that &Addictivity& in this chart is most
comparable to the &Dependence& from the previous chart.
Addictiveness of
Commonly Used
HIGHLIGHTS:
Three Doctors Rate the
Addictivity of Six Substances
(1.=Most Addictive)
Henningfield Ph.D.
N. Benowitz MD
D. Perrine Ph.D.
Cocaine (Nasal)
5. Marijuana
& Caffeine
6. Marijuana
Source Data:
August 2, 1994 edition of N.Y.
Times, article &Is Nicotine Addictive? It Depends on
Whose Criteria you Use& by Philip J.Hilts, section C, page
The Chemistry of
Mind-Altering Drugs: History, Pharmacology, and Cultural Context,
by Daniel M. Perrine, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Chemistry,
Loyola College of Baltimore.
FEEDBACK/////LINKS/////FREQUENTLY
ASKED QUESTIONSDoes a medicinal dose of kava impair driving? A randomized, placebo...
- PubMed - NCBI
The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function.
FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListApplyChoose DestinationFileClipboardCollectionsE-mailOrderMy BibliographyCitation managerFormatSummary (text)Abstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListCSVCreate File1 selected item: FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListMeSH and Other DataE-mailSubjectAdditional textE-mailAdd to ClipboardAdd to CollectionsOrder articlesAdd to My BibliographyGenerate a file for use with external citation management software.Create File
):13-7. doi: 10.8..Does a medicinal dose of kava impair driving? A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study.1, , , , , , .1The University of Melbourne, Department of Psychiatry, Richmond, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. jsarris@unimelb.edu.auAbstractOVERVIEW: Increasing concerns over the potentially impairing effects of prescriptive sedative drugs such as benzodiazepines on driving have been raised. However, other alternatives such as natural medicines may also carry similar risks with respect to driving safety. Kava (Piper methysticum) is a psychotropic plant commonly used both recreationally and medicinally in the United States, Australia, and the South Pacific to elicit a physically tranquilizing effect. To date no controlled study has tested a medicinal dose of kava versus placebo and a standard sedative drug on driving ability and driving safety.OBJECTIVE: Due to the need to establish the safety of kava in operating a motor vehicle, we compared the acute effects of the plant extract versus the benzodiazepine oxazepam and placebo using a driving simulator.METHODS: A driving simulator (AusEd) was used by 22 adults aged between 18 and 65 years after being randomly administered an acute medicinal dose of kava (180 mg of kavalactones), oxazepam (30 mg), or placebo one week apart in a crossover design trial.RESULTS: No impairing effects on driving outcomes were found after kava administration compared to placebo. Results on specific driving outcome domains revealed that the oxazepam condition had significantly slower braking reaction time compared to the placebo condition (p =.002) and the kava condition (p =.003). The kava condition had significantly fewer lapses of concentration compared to the oxazepam condition (p =.033). No significant differences were found between conditions for steering deviation, speed deviation, and number of crashes. Results were not modified by driving experience. On the Bond-Lader visual analogue sub-scale of alertness, a significant Treatment × Time interaction (p =.032) was found, with a significant reduction over time for oxazepam decreasing alertness (p &.001), whereas no significant reduction was found in the kava or placebo conditions.CONCLUSION: The results indicate that a medicinal dose of kava containing 180 mg of kavalactones does not impair driving ability, whereas 30 mg of oxazepam shows some impairment. Research assessing larger recreational doses of kava on driving ability should now be conducted.PMID:
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Publication TypesMeSH TermsSubstancesFull Text SourcesOther Literature SourcesMolecular Biology Databases
Supplemental Content
External link. Please review our .Iron prophylaxis during pregnancy -- how much iron is needed? A ran...
- PubMed - NCBI
The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function.
FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListApplyChoose DestinationFileClipboardCollectionsE-mailOrderMy BibliographyCitation managerFormatSummary (text)Abstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListCSVCreate File1 selected item: FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListMeSH and Other DataE-mailSubjectAdditional textE-mailAdd to ClipboardAdd to CollectionsOrder articlesAdd to My BibliographyGenerate a file for use with external citation management software.Create File
):238-47.Iron prophylaxis during pregnancy -- how much iron is needed? A randomized dose- response study of 20-80 mg ferrous iron daily in pregnant women.1, , , , , , .1Department of Obstetrics, Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. milman@rh.dkAbstractOBJECTIVE: To determine the lowest dose of iron preventative of iron deficiency and iron deficiency anemia in pregnancy.METHODS: A randomized, double-blind intention-to-treat study comprising 427 healthy pregnant women allocated into four groups taking ferrous iron (as fumarate) in doses of 20 mg (n = 105), 40 mg (n = 108), 60 mg (n = 106), and 80 mg (n = 108) from 18 weeks of gestation. Iron status markers [hemoglobin (Hb), serum ferritin, and serum soluble transferrin receptor (sTfR)] were measured at 18 weeks (inclusion), 32 weeks, and 39 weeks of gestation and 8 weeks postpartum. Side effects of iron supplements were recorded. Iron deficiency was defined as serum ferritin &13 microg/l and iron deficiency anemia as serum ferritin &13 microg/l and Hb &5th percentile in iron replete pregnant women.RESULTS: There were no significant differences between variables in the four groups at inclusion. At 32 and 39 weeks of gestation, group 20 mg had significantly lower median serum ferritin (13 and 16 microg/l) than group 40 mg (17 and 21 microg/l), group 60 mg (18 and 23 microg/l), and group 80 mg (21 and 24 microg/l) (p & 0.0001). At 32 and 39 weeks of gestation, group 20 mg had a significantly higher prevalence of iron deficiency (50 and 29%) than group 40 mg (26 and 11%), group 60 mg (17 and 10%), and group 80 mg (13 and 9%) (p & 0.001). The prevalence of iron deficiency anemia at 39 weeks of gestation was significantly higher in group 20 mg (10%) than in group 40 mg (4.5%), group 60 mg (0%), and group 80 mg (1.5%) (p = 0.02). At 32 weeks of gestation, mean Hb in group 20 mg was lower than in group 80 mg (p = 0.06). There were no significant differences in iron status (ferritin, sTfR, and Hb) between group 40, 60, and 80 mg. Postpartum, group 20 mg had significantly lower median serum ferritin than group 40, 60, and 80 mg (p & 0.01). The prevalence of postpartum iron deficiency anemia was low and similar in the four groups. The frequency of gastrointestinal symptoms was not significantly different in the four iron supplement groups and thus not related to the iron dose.CONCLUSION: In Danish women, a supplement of 40 mg ferrous iron/day from 18 weeks of gestation appears adequate to prevent iron deficiency in 90% of the women and iron deficiency anemia in at least 95% of the women during pregnancy and postpartum.PMID:
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Publication TypesMeSH TermsSubstancesFull Text SourcesOther Literature SourcesMedicalMolecular Biology Databases
Supplemental Content
External link. Please review our .A national study of attrition in general surgery training: which re...
- PubMed - NCBI
The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function.
FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListApplyChoose DestinationFileClipboardCollectionsE-mailOrderMy BibliographyCitation managerFormatSummary (text)Abstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListCSVCreate File1 selected item: FormatSummarySummary (text)AbstractAbstract (text)MEDLINEXMLPMID ListMeSH and Other DataE-mailSubjectAdditional textE-mailAdd to ClipboardAdd to CollectionsOrder articlesAdd to My BibliographyGenerate a file for use with external citation management software.Create File
):529-34; discussion 534-6. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013ec.A national study of attrition in general surgery training: which residents leave and where do they go?1, , , , , , , , .1Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT , USA. heather.yeo@yale.eduAbstractOBJECTIVE(S): Implementation of the 80-hour mandate was expected to reduce attrition from general surgery (GS) residency. This is the first quantitative report from a national prospective study of resident/program characteristics associated with attrition.METHODS: Analysis included all categorical GS residents entered on American Board of Surgery residency rosters in 2007 to 2008. Cases of attrition were identified by program report, individually confirmed, and linked to demographic data from the National Study of Expectations and Attitudes of Residents in Surgery administered January 2008.RESULTS: All surgical categorical GS residents active on the
resident rosters (N = 6,303) were analyzed for attrition. Complete National Study of Expectations and Attitudes of Residents in Surgery demographic information was available for 3959; the total and survey groups were similar with regard to important characteristics. About 3% of US categorical residents resigned in 2007 to 2008, and 0.4% had contracts terminated. Across all years (including research), there was a 19.5% cumulative risk of resignation. Attrition was highest in PGY-1 (5.9%), PGY-2 (4.3%), and research year(s) (3.9%). Women were no more likely to leave programs than men (2.1% vs. 1.9%). Of several program/resident variables examined, postgraduate year-level was the only independent predictor of attrition in multivariate analysis. Residents who left GS whose plans were known most often pursued nonsurgical residencies (62%), particularly anesthesiology (21%) and radiology (11%). Only 13% left for surgical specialties.CONCLUSIONS: Attrition rates are high despite mandated
1 in 5 GS categorical residents resigns, and most pursue nonsurgical careers. Demographic factors, aside from postgraduate year do not appear predictive. Residents are at risk for attrition early in training and during research, and this could afford educators a target for intervention.PMID:
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
MeSH TermsFull Text SourcesOther Literature Sources
Supplemental Content
External link. Please review our .}