> Because of the Volume of Distribution of the cannabinoids and the
> multicompartment models of how cannabinoids are distributed throughout
> the body, THC and related compounds tend to accumulate in the brain
> and liver. There is some accumulation in adipose tissue, but in
> general, unless you are losing or gaining weight, there is not that
> great of perfusion of blood in these areas compared to the brain and
> liver. The situation is analogous to arterial plaque formation, but
> since cholesterol does not behave quite the same way as the
> cannabinoids at the blood brain barrier, and since the cannabinoids are
> not actively made in the liver, and since all orally absorbed
> cholesterol passes through the liver before going into the systemic
> circulation, you do not find THC plaques on the arterial walls. So
> this is probably related why there are not THC plaques everywhere. Also
> remember that pot is smoked and if large amounts were taken orally over
> long periods of time, there may be more similarity. Cholesterol is the
> starting material for many hormones and in that sense, it is actively
> transported to a much greater extent than cannabinoids. Expecting
> cholesterol and cannabinoids to behave similarly in the systemic
> circulation is not very realistic because there are so many differences
> in so far as the way the two behave in the body from a purely chemical
> perspective (forgetting about pharmacology for a minute.)
>
> As far as the etiology of working memory loss, you cannot assume
> causality just because there is resin in the brains of many heavy pot
> users, and they have poorer working memories as a population. You
> cannot make the leap and say that A is the cause of B. But they do
> correlate with one another.
>
> If I can find some of the imaging data around here I will try to email
> it to you, but this is an opiates lab and it will be like finding a
> needle in a haystack. I have a copy of Brain Research with a great
> article on this issue and if I get some time I will try to find it and
> send you a copy.
>
> I knew this would open a can of worms whenever anyone blasphemes the
> precious ganja, there is hell to pay.
>
> MobiusDick
> creamedbrainsontoast wrote:

>> "MobiusDick" wrote:
>>

>>> I am speaking euphemistically. You get tar like deposits that remind me
>>> of bong resin in the brain, liver and other fatty areas of the body. It
>>> is not literally bong resin, it is fat soluble cannabinol derivatives
>>> that precipitate out of the blood in these fatty areas due to the
>>> thermodynamics of hydrophobic interactions (and London forces and all
>>> those other physical chemistry terms that are beyond the scope of this
>>> discussion --although if you want to get into the PChem of it, we can.

>>
>> is the mechanism akin to the deposition of fatty acids in the bloodstream
>> as in coronary artery disease or the liver in steatosis? if you've got
>> any pictures sitting around of some of these deposits, i'd be curious to
>> look at them. it seems like one would have to smoke *a lot* (i'll be
>> technical here -- a metric shittonne) of the pot in order to end up with
>> any sort of significant deposits of cannabinoids forming anywhere. in any
>> case, i'd expect them to disperse themselves pretty evenly throughout the
>> adipose and brain tissue and whereever else lots of fat hangs out (i
>> imagine a bunch of triacylglycerides leaning against a wall somewhere,
>> waiting for passers-by so they can pop out their switchblades and mug
>> them. what is wrong with me? must be all the dope i smoked in years
>> past). but, i'm not especially versed in the thermodynamic properties of
>> cannabinoids vis-a-vis the other lipophilic/hydrophobic compounds that
>> stone cold chill in the body, jus' doing they thang.
>>
>> and thanks, but no thanks, for the pchem lecture.
>>

>>> These deposits in the brain disrupt neuronal transmission and probably
>>> have something to do with why working memory (once known as short term
>>> memory) is so grossly affected in heavy users after a long period of
>>> time.

>>
>> again, i'd be curious to see these deposits for myself, and to know how
>> much of the grass these cats were blowing, or if they did other shit that
>> might have caused neurological deficits. i do know that if you wait long
>> enough, even without doing any (recreational) drugs, your memory starts
>> to hit the fritz anyways. my intuition is that people that smoke the
>> reefers, over a period of years to decades, and get used to living in a
>> stoned haze, when they finally stop and wait a couple of months for the
>> accumulated cannibinoids to get completely flushed out of their body and
>> discover that their memory isn't as sharp as it was before they started
>> smoking the doobie to begin with, they're liable to blame the ganja for
>> the loss of their short-term memory, when in fact they're no more
>> forgetful than anyone else their age, give or take.
>>
>> i've seen a similar phenomenon happen with people who do varying amounts
>> of drugs for varying amounts of time and then once they decide to go
>> straight they feel like their cognition isn't as sharp as it used to be,
>> or their memory isn't as keen, or what have you. but it's impossible to
>> say for sure that it is in fact the result of neurological damage wrought
>> by "drug abuse" and not one of a myriad of other things that could have
>> come in to play, the simplest of which is that they just over-estimate
>> their pre-drug cognitive abilities and fail to compensate for the passage
>> of time. another thing is if one goes from keeping their mind busy with
>> something that is mentally demanding and then spend a while eating
>> cheetos and playing grand theft auto while doing bong rips every 20
>> minutes, their cognitive abilities are going to decline (except for the
>> ability to shoot a bunch of cops and grab the tank and go find a corner
>> of the map where they can blow shit up unmolested for hours at a time)
>> simply from disuse. it's like suddenly stopping a rigorous exercise
>> regime and laying in bed for a few months and wondering why when you try
>> to get out of bed finally your muscles have atrophied.
>>
>> i worry that automatically assuming that any sort of cognitive decline,
>> real or imagined, that appears (or seems to appear) over the course of
>> one's drug-using career, and (seems to) continue(s) after going straight
>> simply makes it more difficult for people to move on with their lives.
>> it's very possible to feel sluggish and retarded without being either,
>> but believing that you feel sluggish and retarded and can't think as well
>> as you used to because of drugs and they've crippled you for life is a
>> pretty well self-fulfilling prophecy.
>>
>>
>>

>>> But the general point is that heavy pot use is far from harmless. Oral
>>> opiates, without acetaminophen or ibuprofen, have a much milder long
>>> term effect on the body and brain over time that pot does (not to say
>>> that opiates cannot ruin your life easier than pot can, but
>>> physiologically there is not any real irreversible damage done.

>>
>> and "MobiusDick" later spake:
>>

>>> But as far as marijuana being harmless, that depends on what you mean
>>> by harmless. Does it cause pathophysiological changes with heavy use?
>>> Putatively yes. Is it as addictive as heroin and does it cause people
>>> to go into severe withdrawal. No. THC withdrawal is minor due to its
>>> long duration of action (unless precipitated by a CB antagonist, where
>>> it is fairly severe.)

>>
>> do you know of any journal articles about dosing potheads with cb
>> antagonists to see what happens? have they done human trials with them
>> yet? i've read about what happens when you do it to mice. as far as long-
>> term problems from the doob, they seem to be less severe than you'd
>> think, especially with regards to the respiratory tract. it's pretty
>> well-established (imo) that smoking cannabis alone doesn't increase the
>> risk of lung cancer or copd significantly over baseline, and may well
>> have a protective effect. compare that to the effects of tobacco use on
>> lung function. as for the rest of the body, i haven't seen as much
>> research, but i have the feeling that, except for the hardest of the
>> hardcore potheads out there, any negative sequelae to their dope-smokin'
>> ways are pretty minor. certainly less than those associated with alcohol
>> or tobacco, or high-dose, long-term methamphetamine use.
>>
>> but this is a hard drugs group, and it's time to stfu about pot. like you
>> say, opioids are about as safe a class of drugs as there exist today. the
>> withdrawal syndrome is a bitch, and their illegality makes balancing a
>> habit with the rest of one's life much, much, much more difficult than it
>> otherwise would be, or should be, but neither of those is so much a
>> result of the substances themselves as it is of their political
>> situation. [w/r/t w/ds, i mean that given effectively unlimited access to
>> opioids, no one would have to go through withdrawal unless they wanted
>> to, unlike today where supply is so tightly restricted]. except for --
>> what -- constipation? miosis? -- someone can be physically dependent on
>> opioids for their entire life and not suffer any ill effects from the
>> habit. i don't know any other class of drugs that are so remarkably
>> without toxic effects when used over extended periods of time.
>>
>> now, if only we could start treating addiction as a sociopolitical
>> problem instead of a biological one or a criminal one....
>>
>> --
>> -creamedbrainsontoast
>> "One tablespoon of butter, one egg yolk, one scant tablespoon of flour,
>> salt and pepper to season, half cup of milk, three-fourths pound of
>> brains. Parboil the brains. When cool, salt to taste and chop in small
>> pieces. Cook flour and butter in double boiler; add milk and beaten egg
>> yolk and stir slowly into butter and flour, add seasoning and brains.
>> Cook about three minutes and serve on toast."