Reefer Madness 2020

Sigh. I am so sick of this intentional reefer madness; this is exactly the kind of idiocy that harms the effort to educate folks accurately on drug use and feeds the ignorance and draconian policies that have created mass incarceration in the US.  Furthermore, when you lie to those of us who've used drugs like cannabis for any length of time, we call "bullshit" on this stupidity and it creates a cognitive bias within us; we almost always default to a position of "anything the government or "researchers" try to tell us, we know the opposite is true."

Don't believe me?  Ask anyone who uses substances what they think of the DARE program.

Regarding the article that generated my rant here, let me make a few points before flushing this piece of "research" down the nearest toilet:

1. I don't know anyone who uses "intravenous THC," nor have I ever, nor would I want to use "intravenous THC," and of course it would be associated with a "slightly more pronounced" increase in ANY symptoms or effects - good or bad. Any 1st year med student will tell you that medically-speaking, "intravenous administration is the preferred route of administration of any medication."
2. Anytime "scientists" tell you that tobacco use might be "protective" in any way, you know you're dealing with questionable and sketchy "researchers." 
3. The authors themselves tell us that "many of the meta-regression analyses used involved fewer than 10 studies and were underpowered to detect small or moderate effects, which is a limitation... More participants were male than female, so the generalizability of these findings is also limited."  In other words, this "meta-analysis" is fraught with problems, grossly inaccurate, almost certainly biased (see #4 below), and should never have been published and pushed into the field.    
4. The disclosure list reads like the who's who of Big Pharma.  Surprised we don't see Big Tobacco (although I'm sure they were proud to see their murderous product highlighted in a "positive" way) and Big Alcohol brand names in there too.  

...

However, intravenous THC was associated with slightly "more pronounced" increased symptoms than inhalation, although this may be confounded by dose, they added.

The induction of psychotic symptoms was also lower in people with higher versus lower tobacco use, suggesting tobacco use may be a "protective factor," the authors noted, although they cautioned against using tobacco to "counter" THC effects.

Howes told MedPage Today that "[another] possibility suggested by other evidence is that tobacco reduces the levels of the protein in the brain that THC binds to so it has less effect. This needs testing, and it is important that people don't think tobacco will protect against the effects of THC containing cannabis."

Many of the meta-regression analyses used involved fewer than 10 studies and were underpowered to detect small or moderate effects, which is a limitation, the authors noted. More participants were male than female, so the generalizability of these findings is also limited, they added. Researchers were additionally unable to differentiate the effects of THC on specific symptoms, like hallucinations or delusions.

Disclosures

The study was funded by the UK Medical Research Council, the Maudsley Charity, the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Rosetrees Trust, the Stoneygate Trust, the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), and King's College London.

Howes disclosed support from Angellini, AstraZeneca, Autifony, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Heptares, Janssen, Lundbeck, Lyden­Delta, Otsuka, Sunovion, Rand, Recordati, and Roche. Co-authors disclosed support from, and/or relevant relationships with, Dana Foundation David Mahoney Program, Neurocrine Biosciences, Clinical and Translational Science, the National Centre for Advancing Translational Science, the NIH, VA R&D, the Heffter Foundation, the Wallace Foundation, Takeda, Angellini, AstraZeneca, Autifony, Biogen, Eli Lilly, Heptares, Janssen, Lundbeck, Luden-Delta, Otsuka, Sunovion, Rand, Recordati, and Roche. A co-author disclosed serving on the Physicians Advisory Board of the Medical Marijuana Program for the State of Connecticut.

Hjorthøj and Posselt disclosed no relevant relationships with industry.

Nuff said.