At the federal level, weed is still classified as schedule 1. The federal government's stance has served to place severe restrictions on exactly the sort of research you seem to be calling for.
There is certainly some evidence for health and even psychological risks, but none that I am aware of for "brain damage", which is why you are likely to be downvoted.
What’s the link? Perhaps teenagers with schizophrenia are predisposed to using marijuana.
For instance, 80%+ of schizophrenics smoke cigarettes. Do cigarettes cause psychosis and schizophrenia, or do schizophrenics seek out nicotine due to their schizophrenia? It’s not that simple.
In addition to nicotine, cigarette smoke (tobacco) contains MAOIs. MAOIs were commonly prescribed as antidepressants and antipsychotics back in the 50s and 60s, but fell out of favor for various reasons, despite showing far greater efficacy than SSRIs.
(one of these reasons was dietary: MAOIs have bad interactions with the amino acid "Tyramine", found in aged foods. However, Tyramine content in food has dropped dramatically since the 70s, and this is no longer a significant concern)
When I hear “80% of population X exhibits characteristic A”, my first reflex is to guess on whether I think the size of population X is on the order of magnitude of the presence of characteristic X in the general population. If not, I suspect I am learning something more about pop X than char A.
I’d guess there’s orders of magnitude more smokers than schizophrenics, making it seem unlikely smoking is a primary driver, though I’m sure there’s more to it than that.
I hear 80%+ of all perpetrators of sexual violence engage often with porn, but suspect that if porn drove sexual violence, its rates wouldn’t be decreasing. Most heart attack sufferers drink water within days of their cardiac event. All lottery winners have lottery tickets...
I agree with you science nowadays is mostly junk. On the other hand if we can choose to ignore any study that links X to something bad, then this is a conversation not worth having.
Myself I like to err on the side of caution, since my country has free healthcare which means I have to pay for the mistakes of others, so I don't want them making mistakes in the first place. They should feel free to smoke all the weed they want and become psychotic drones in the fucking Congo
Your healthcare system also treats people who have got into a vehicle accident or a sporting incident - should buses and cycling also be banned? How about alcohol?
Everything has some risk, and the anecdotal evidence is that weed does not affect the vast majority of adults in a way that would result in additional healthcare needs.
No. They are generally safe and people NEED to get around to live. They don't NEED to get high though.
>cycling also be banned? How about alcohol?
Yes, definitely. Both things are risky and bad. But that would be hard to achieve. Since weed has never been legal (at least here), things can go on the way they are.
I have smoked weed heavily in my late 20s, ingested many types of edibles, topicals, etc. I am certainly not as sharp as I used to be. It can cause brain damage indirectly due to changes in your cardiovascular system. It can mimic a temporary sort of vascular dementia, as well as increase your blood pressure to very unsafe levels. Weed can also reduce the amount of grey matter in your orbitofrontal cortex. Not to mention the somewhat bizarre cartoon-like images you see on high doses of edibles. These images can fracture your mind if you see them enough. The risks are very real, and trying to downplay them or censor them is extremely irresponsible.
No. At your thirties you can be at least a sharp as in your twenties. One of the main culprits of loss of sharpness is sleep deficit, that usually hits when having a full time job and family. It's not the age, it's the environment.
There is certainly some evidence for health and even psychological risks, but none that I am aware of for "brain damage", which is why you are likely to be downvoted.