Cannabis News
The NIDA Just Proposed a Subtle Name Change
NIDA’s Namechange and what it means for the Future of Drugs?
It’s no surprise that I’m not the biggest fan of the Biden Administration, given their political pandering and “bread and circus” tactics over the past four years. They had the opportunity to legalize cannabis yet stalled on every front—instead, they engaged in political theater by “pardoning” certain federal cannabis possession cases, which led to zero people being freed from prison.
However, there is a subtle move by the administration that might have profound impacts on drug research in the years to come. What am I referring to? The subtle name change of NIDA, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, to the National Institute on Drugs and Addiction.
NIDA, a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), has long been at the forefront of the nation’s “War on Drugs,” primarily focusing on the study of substance abuse and addiction from a criminal justice perspective. Its name, which has remained unchanged since its inception in 1973, reflects the stigmatized view of drugs as inherently abusive and detrimental to society.
However, the proposed name change signals a potential shift in perspective, acknowledging that not all drugs are inherently abusive, and that addiction is a complex issue that warrants a more nuanced and scientific approach. This subtle rebranding could pave the way for more comprehensive and unbiased research into the potential therapeutic benefits of various substances, including psychedelics, cannabis, and harm reduction strategies.
In this article, we’ll explore the history and role of NIDA, the implications of its name change, and the potential impact it could have on shaping the future of drug policy and research in the United States.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) was established in 1973, during the height of the “War on Drugs” era. Its mission was clear: to lead the nation’s research efforts in studying the causes, consequences, and prevention of drug abuse and addiction. However, from its inception, NIDA’s approach has been heavily skewed toward criminalizing drug use and perpetuating the narrative of drugs as inherently harmful and dangerous.
Throughout its history, NIDA has played a crucial role in shaping the nation’s drug policies and maintaining the prohibition of various substances. By primarily focusing its research efforts on the negative aspects of drug use, NIDA has contributed to the stigmatization and criminalization of drugs, rather than exploring their potential therapeutic benefits.
Between 2000 and 2020, a staggering 95% of all research conducted by NIDA on cannabis and other drugs was centered around their perceived “harms,” while virtually no studies were dedicated to investigating their potential medical applications. This imbalanced approach to research has created a distorted perception of drugs, one that often ignores or downplays their potential therapeutic value.
By consistently portraying drugs as inherently harmful and addictive, NIDA’s research has been used to justify the ongoing prohibition of various substances, even those with well-documented medical benefits. This skewed narrative has kept potentially life-saving substances out of reach for millions of people suffering from various medical conditions.
Furthermore, NIDA’s emphasis on the criminal justice aspect of drug use has contributed to the disproportionate criminalization and mass incarceration of marginalized communities, particularly people of color. This approach has perpetuated the cycle of stigma, discrimination, and societal harm associated with drug use, rather than treating it as a public health issue. Of course, not all scientists who work at NIDA believed in this, however, they had a mandate and did the science that favored prohibition as opposed to favoring all of humankind.
While NIDA’s historical role in maintaining the prohibitionist stance on drugs is undeniable, the proposed name change to the National Institute on Drugs and Addiction could signal a shift toward a more balanced and scientific approach to drug research and policy.
The subtle name change from the National Institute on Drug Abuse to the National Institute on Drugs and Addiction may seem insignificant, but it could signify a profound shift in how we approach the study and understanding of drugs and addiction.
The previous name, “Drug Abuse,” carried an inherent supposition that drugs are inherently bad and that their use is always abusive. This narrow perspective failed to acknowledge the complex interplay between individual vulnerabilities, environmental factors, and the pharmacological properties of substances. By removing the loaded term “abuse,” the new name recognizes that addiction is a unique experience for each individual and not necessarily a direct consequence of the drug itself.
If NIDA truly embraces this paradigm shift and treats drugs without inherent bias, it could open doors to exploring the therapeutic potential of substances previously dismissed or demonized, such as LSD, psilocybin, DMT, and others. Emerging research has already indicated that these compounds may hold promise in treating various psychological disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and chronic depression.
Psychedelics, in particular, have shown remarkable ability to disrupt deeply entrenched patterns of thought and behavior, offering a potential avenue for healing and personal growth. By studying these substances without prejudice, NIDA could unlock new, potentially less toxic modalities for addressing mental health challenges that have proven resistant to conventional treatments.
However, until there is an actual shift in the focus and priorities of NIDA’s research efforts, the name change alone holds little substance. If the institute continues to allocate the vast majority of its resources to studying the “harms” of drugs, while neglecting their potential benefits, the rebranding will be little more than a cosmetic change.
True progress will require a concerted effort to reorient NIDA’s mission toward a more balanced and scientifically rigorous approach, one that acknowledges the complexities of human experiences with drugs. Only then can we fully harness the potential of these substances to alleviate suffering and advance our understanding of the human mind and consciousness.
The National Institute on Drug Abuse, has played a pivotal role in perpetuating the “War on Drugs” narrative and maintaining the prohibition of various substances, including those with potential therapeutic benefits. For decades, NIDA’s research efforts have been heavily skewed toward portraying drugs as inherently harmful, addictive, and devoid of any medical value, thereby justifying their criminalization.
While the Biden Administration has been a colossal disappointment on numerous fronts, the proposed name change of NIDA to the National Institute on Drugs and Addiction could be one of their few redeeming qualities. By removing the loaded term “abuse” from the institute’s name, it signals a potential shift toward a more balanced and scientific approach to studying drugs and addiction.
However, it’s crucial to note that government institutions move at a glacial pace, often taking years, if not decades, for substantive changes to manifest. The name change alone is unlikely to have an immediate impact on NIDA’s research priorities or the nation’s drug policies. It will take sustained effort and pressure from the scientific community, advocacy groups, and the public to ensure that this rebranding translates into tangible actions and a genuine reorientation of NIDA’s mission.
Nonetheless, acknowledging and scrutinizing these subtle shifts in public policy is essential, as they can serve as catalysts for broader societal change. By bringing attention to the potential implications of NIDA’s name change, we can begin to challenge the deeply ingrained stigma surrounding drugs and addiction, and pave the way for a more compassionate and evidence-based approach to these complex issues.
Ultimately, while the government may move at the speed of a sluggish bowel movement, it is imperative that we, as individuals and communities, embrace these shifts internally, cultivating a more nuanced understanding of drugs and their potential benefits. Only then can we create an environment conducive to genuine progress, where policies and practices are rooted in science, empathy, and a commitment to human well-being, rather than misguided ideologies or political agendas.
WHO IS THE NIDA, READ ON…
“How Long Does One Puff of Weed Stay in Your System?”… This topic can be difficult to answer since it is dependent on elements such as the size of the hit and what constitutes a “one hit.” If you take a large bong pull then cough, it might linger in your system for 5-7 days. A moderate dose from a joint can last 3-5 days, whereas a few hits from a vaporizer may last 1-3 days.
The length of time that marijuana stays in the body varies based on a number of factors, including metabolism, THC levels, frequency of use, and hydration.
Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is the primary psychoactive component of cannabis. THC and its metabolites, which remain in your body long after the effects have subsided, are detected by drug tests.
Since these metabolites are fat-soluble, they cling to bodily fat molecules. They could thus take a while to fully pass through your system, particularly if your body fat percentage is higher.
THC is absorbed by tissues and organs (including the brain, heart, and fat) and converted by the liver into chemicals such as 11-hydroxy-THC and carboxy-THC. Cannabis is eliminated in feces at a rate of around 65%, while urine accounts for 20%. The leftover amount might be kept within the body.
THC deposited in bodily tissues ultimately re-enters the circulation and is processed by the liver. For frequent users, THC accumulates in fatty tissues quicker than it can be removed, thus it may be detectable in drug tests for days or weeks following consumption.
The detection time varies according to the amount and frequency of cannabis usage. Higher dosages and regular usage result in longer detection times.
The type of drug test also affects detection windows. Blood and saliva tests typically detect cannabis metabolites for shorter periods, while urine and hair samples can reveal use for weeks or even months. In some cases, hair tests have detected cannabis use over 90 days after consumption.
Detection Windows for Various Cannabis Drug Tests
Urine Tests
Among all drug tests, urine testing is the most commonly used method for screening for drug use in an individual.
Detection times vary, but a 2017 review suggests the following windows for cannabis in urine after last use:
– Single-use (e.g., one joint): up to 3 days
– Moderate use (around 4 times a week): 5–7 days
– Chronic use (daily): 10–15 days
– Chronic heavy use (multiple times daily): over 30 days
Blood Tests
Blood tests generally detect recent cannabis use, typically within 2–12 hours after consumption. However, in cases of heavy use, cannabis has been detected up to 30 days later. Chronic heavy use can extend the detection period in the bloodstream.
Saliva Tests
THC can enter saliva through secondhand cannabis smoke, but THC metabolites are only present if you’ve personally smoked or ingested cannabis.
Saliva testing has a short detection window and can sometimes identify cannabis use on the same day. A 2020 review found that THC was detectable in the saliva of frequent users for up to 72 hours after use, and it may remain in saliva longer than in blood following recent use.
In areas where cannabis is illegal, saliva testing is often used for roadside screenings.
Hair Tests
Hair follicle tests can detect cannabis use for up to 90 days. After use, cannabinoids reach the hair follicles through small blood vessels and from sebum and sweat surrounding the hair.
Hair grows at approximately 0.5 inches per month, so a 1.5-inch segment of hair close to the scalp can reveal cannabis use over the past three months.
Factors Affecting THC and Metabolite Retention
The length of time THC and its metabolites stay in your system depends on various factors. Some, like body mass index (BMI) and metabolic rate, relate to individual body processing, not the drug itself.
Other factors are specific to cannabis use, including:
– Dosage: How much you consume
– Frequency: How often you use cannabis
– Method of consumption: Smoking, dabbing, edibles, or sublingual
– THC potency: Higher potency can extend detection time
Higher doses and more frequent use generally extend THC retention. Cannabis consumed orally may remain in the system slightly longer than smoked cannabis, and stronger cannabis strains, higher in THC, may also stay detectable for a longer period.
How Quickly Do the Effects of Cannabis Set In?
When smoking cannabis, effects appear almost immediately, while ingested cannabis may take 1–3 hours to peak.
The psychoactive component THC produces a “high” with common effects such as:
– Altered senses, including perception of time
– Mood changes
– Difficulty with thinking and problem-solving
– Impaired memory
Other short-term effects can include:
– Anxiety and confusion
– Decreased coordination
– Dry mouth and eyes
– Nausea or lightheadedness
– Trouble focusing
– Increased appetite
– Rapid heart rate
– Restlessness and sleepiness
In rare cases, high doses may lead to hallucinations, delusions, or acute psychosis.
Regular cannabis use may have additional mental and physical effects. While research is ongoing, cannabis use may increase the risk of:
– Cognitive issues like memory loss
– Cardiovascular problems including heart disease and stroke
– Respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis or lung infections
– Mood disorders like depression and anxiety
Cannabis use during pregnancy can negatively impact fetal growth and development.
Duration of Effects
Short-term effects generally taper off within 1–3 hours, but for chronic users, some long-term effects may last days, weeks, or even months. Certain effects may even be permanent.
Bottom Line
The amount of time that cannabis remains in your system following a single use varies greatly depending on individual characteristics such as body fat, metabolism, frequency of use, and mode of intake. Frequent users may maintain traces of THC for weeks, whereas infrequent users may test positive for as little as a few days. Hair tests can disclose usage for up to 90 days, while blood and saliva tests identify more recent use. Urine tests are the most popular and have varying detection durations. The duration that THC and its metabolites are detectable will ultimately depend on a number of factors, including dose, strength, and individual body chemistry.
PEE IN A CUP COMING UP, READ ON..
Is kratom addictive? Discover the potential for dependence on Kratom, the risks involved with its use, and how to approach its consumption responsibly.
From 2011 to 2017, over 1,800 calls to poison centers involved kratom in the U.S. This significant number highlights the concern regarding kratom addiction.
However, without Food and Drug Administration (FDA) oversight, and due to various consumption methods like teas and capsules, there are significant health risks. Safe use of kratom is now in question due to these issues.
Research debates how dependence develops, outlining signs like loss of control and withdrawal symptoms. These signs are seen in regular kratom users. Ironically, some people switch from drugs like heroin to kratom, looking for a legal alternative.
Understanding Kratom: Origins and Prevalence
Kratom comes from the Mitragyna speciosa tree in Southeast Asia. It can act like a stimulant or like opioids, based on how much you take. People use it in different ways, for a small energy boost or stronger effects at higher doses.
The legal status of kratom in the U.S. is complicated and changing. It’s a hot topic because some worry about its misuse. It’s still legal in several states. This shows how different places handle drug rules. The National Institute on Drug Abuse is looking into its medical benefits. But, the FDA hasn’t approved it for medical use yet. The DEA calls it a “drug of concern,” which means policies might change.
-
From 2011 to 2017, poison control centers in the U.S. got over 1,800 reports about kratom. This shows it’s widely used and might pose health risks.
-
Kratom’s main ingredients bind to opioid receptors very strongly, stronger than morphine even. This fact is key to understanding its effects.
-
As more people use kratom, more are reporting serious health problems. These include liver and heart issues, and tough withdrawal symptoms, particularly in those already sick.
The statistics show mounting worries about kratom in the U.S. As its use grows, it’s becoming more important to health policies and laws. What happens next will depend on further research and legal decisions.
Is Kratom Addictive: Investigating the Substance’s Nature
The question of kratom’s addictiveness focuses on how it affects brain receptors and its long-term health implications. The ongoing debate highlights concerns about dependence and the risk of addiction. Scientists are closely looking at these issues.
How Kratom Works in the Brain
Kratom’s main alkaloids, mitragynine and 7-hydroxymitragynine, bind to the brain’s opioid receptors, similar to painkillers and narcotics. This connection suggests a potential risk of dependence. These alkaloids are key to kratom’s pain relief but also point to possible addiction concerns, especially with frequent, high-dose usage.
Patterns and Consequences of Long-term Use
-
Using kratom often, especially in large doses, can increase the risk of dependence and intense withdrawal symptoms, similar to opioid withdrawal.
-
Although some use it for pain or to improve mood, long-term kratom users might see serious health problems, like liver damage and mental health issues.
-
Withdrawal symptoms, including irritability, nausea, and sleep problems, show kratom’s impact on one’s physical and mental health.
Assessment of Addiction Risks
Studies indicate a significant risk of addiction to kratom, especially with high doses or frequent use. Dependence develops as the body gets used to kratom, leading to tolerance and a need for more to feel its effects. Withdrawal symptoms emphasize this risk, as highlighted by health experts.
Physiological Effects: Kratom’s Impact on the Body
There is a lot of debate about the safety and use of kratom. This herbal extract comes from the Mitragyna speciosa plant. It has drawn attention for its possible harmful effects on the body. The FDA has issued many warnings about kratom, raising safety concerns.
-
Kratom Adverse Effects: Kratom users have reported side effects like nausea, vomiting, and confusion. More serious issues include high blood pressure and liver damage. These problems highlight the risks of using kratom.
-
Herbal Extract Safety: Some kratom products contain heavy metals and pathogens. These can cause severe health issues, including death. This shows the importance of safety in herbal products.
-
FDA Warnings and Regulations: The FDA has linked kratom to over 35 deaths and warns against using it. They point out the lack of medical uses and the risk of addiction.
-
Physiological Impact: Kratom’s effects depend on the dose and the user’s body. Yet, it can lead to dangerous outcomes like liver damage and seizures.
-
Safety Concerns from Authorities: Federal agencies like the DEA are worried about kratom’s safety. Although not a controlled substance, monitoring suggests users should be careful.
Kratom might offer temporary relief for some ailments, but it comes with significant risks. The FDA’s warnings should make people think twice. If considering kratom, it’s crucial to talk to a doctor first. Experts stress the need for safety and caution with herbal extracts.
Conclusion
Kratom’s role in health and regulation is complex, with views and research findings widely varied. Some people use kratom for its claimed health benefits, but it’s a hot topic. Experts advise caution and suggest consulting a doctor before using kratom due to the unclear effects.
Clinical studies using scores like SOWS and COWS haven’t confirmed withdrawal symptoms from kratom. This adds to the debate, especially when some users report withdrawal. This makes kratom a controversial subject among different findings and user experiences.
When it comes to treating opioid addiction, kratom can be both helpful and harmful. Some have used it successfully to fight addiction. Yet, some states have banned it. This highlights the need for regulations and consistent product quality. It also raises questions about kratom’s legal status due to mixed actions by authorities.
The situation shows how complex kratom is in the realm of substance use and law. Without clear evidence supporting either its benefits or risks, it poses a challenge. More research is needed to guide regulations and health advice. For now, anyone thinking of using kratom should be careful, seek medical advice, and keep up with laws and health guidelines.
WHAT IS KRATOM ANYWAY? READ ON…
Webinar Replay: Post-Election Cannabis Wrap – Smoke ’em if You’ve Got ’em
I Had Just One Puff
Marijuana firms Eaze, Green Dragon find new life after $10 million capital infusion
Get some rest on Modified Grapes—November’s Leafly HighLight
Is Kratom Addictive? Understanding Dependence, Risks, and Safe Usage
New Rule, December 5: Oregon Cannabis Retailers, Processors and Labor Peace Agreements
The CBD Dog Treat Guide
Trippin’ Golf Balls – Can Magic Mushrooms Help Your Golf Game?
Australian Broadcasting Corp Alleges Military Veterans Have Been Targeted By Medicinal Cannabis Companies Via Social Media & Offered Free “Product”
Medical Marijuana Passed in 106 out of 106 Counties and Cities in What State? A. Florida B. Kentucky C. Ohio D. North Dakota
Distressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
United States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
What you Need to Know
Drug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
NCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
It has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
Cannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
A new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse
Your Go-To Source for Cannabis Logos and Designs
City Of Oakland Issues RFP For Employee Training Programs
-
Cannabis News2 years agoDistressed Cannabis Business Takeaways – Canna Law Blog™
-
One-Hit Wonders2 years agoUnited States: Alex Malyshev And Melinda Fellner Discuss The Intersection Of Tax And Cannabis In New Video Series – Part VI: Licensing (Video)
-
Cannabis 1012 years agoWhat you Need to Know
-
drug testing11 months agoDrug Testing for Marijuana – The Joint Blog
-
Education2 years agoNCIA Write About Their Equity Scholarship Program
-
Cannabis2 years agoIt has been a wild news week – here’s how CBD and weed can help you relax
-
Marijuana Business Daily2 years agoCannabis, alcohol firm SNDL loses CA$372.4 million in 2022
-
California2 years agoA new April 20 cannabis contest includes a $40,000 purse