Head north from Humboldt County and, after about two hours, you’re now pretty much able to spark up all the way to the North Pole.

Voters chose on Nov. 4 to legalize marijuana in Oregon, Alaska and the District of Columbia, joining Colorado and Washington in the inevitable swing toward decriminalization.

In Oregon and Alaska, ganja lovers will be allowed to grow, possess and purchase pot under regulatory framework similar to that in Washington and Colorado, which collect taxes on the sale of marijuana, though retail shops in Oregon will not be allowed for a couple years until a permitting process is in place.

By some predictions, Oregon’s marijuana will be significantly cheaper than Washington’s because of the Beaver State’s already burgeoning medical marijuana industry and significantly lower taxes.

Alaska — like Washington — had no dispensary framework, so legalization there will be a bit more complicated as entrepreneurs, municipalities and users seek to establish an industry from scratch.

In Washington, D.C., people will be allowed to possess up to 2 ounces of pot, but retail sales will remain illegal. That could be interesting in a city where the nation’s now-Republican-held Congress and Senate work, though Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, called the national marijuana victories “extraordinary” in a Los Angeles Times article.

“Reform of marijuana and criminal justice policies is no longer just a liberal cause but a conservative and bipartisan one as well,” Adelman said. “On these issues at least, the nation is at last coming to its senses.”

Florida, one of the last bastions of common sense, voted against medical marijuana, though constitutional measures there require 60 percent approval in the state.

Meanwhile, the San Francisco Chronicle reports that momentum is growing to legalize marijuana in California with a measure on the 2016 ballot. The aim is to align the measure with the presidential election, which proponents expect to “deliver younger voters to the polls who tend to be more supportive of pot.” Counting on the youth vote — what could go wrong?

If there is budding support in the golden state, it flies in the face of the national trend, according to a recent Gallup poll. According to a report in the Huffington Post, the poll found legalization support has vaporized over the past year, with the number of Americans supporting it dropping from 58 percent down to 51 percent. But national legalization proponents appear undaunted. “I would take passage of laws in two states and our nation’s capitol over some jumpy poll’s results any day,” Marijuana Policy Project Communications Director Mason Tvert told the Post. “If Gallup finds 49 percent support in 2016 after five more states vote to end marijuana prohibition, I could live with that.”

If Tvert’s quote left marijuana smokers feeling high and mighty, a recent report in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences might harsh their vibe a bit. As reported in the New York Times, the study found that “chronic” pot smokers (those who toke up at least four times a week) have, on average, less gray matter in their orbital frontal cortex, “a region that is a key node in the brain’s reward, motivation, decision-making and addictive behaviors network.” Interestingly, however, the study found that region of pot smokers’ brains to be better connected than those of non-users, which the study hypothesizes might be the brain’s way of compensating for its “under-performing” gray matter. The study — which compared 48 users with 62 non-using control subjects — also noted that the average IQ of the pot smokers was “significantly lower” than that of non-users. That tidbit was “not a finding of the study, but an incidental factor that might be indirectly linked to marijuana use.” We’re not positive — cough, cough — but it sure sounds like the researchers just called pot smokers dumb.

Thadeus Greenson is the news editor of the North Coast Journal.

Grant Scott-Goforth was an assistant editor and staff writer for The Journal from 2013 to 2017.

Join the Conversation

2 Comments

  1. :::”a recent report in the journal of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences”

    This is more fear-mongering over a small NIDA funded study showing a correlation with small changes of unclear clinical significance. Many things can be correlated with structural changes in the brain including exercise, alcohol use, tobacco use, even caffeine. Changes in and of themselves are meaningless. Also, the study author admitted: “While our study does not conclusively address whether any or all of the brain changes are a direct consequence of marijuana use”

    There may be short-term effects but there are no reputable studies proving any permanent brain damage in adults who use cannabis, unlike alcohol.

    There are many peer reviewed studies published in respected medical journals that show cannabis does not have permanent adverse effects on the adult brain. [34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43] In fact, adolescent drinkers who also smoke cannabis may suffer less brain damage than drinkers who do not smoke cannabis. [30,31] In a recent study researchers observed teen’s brains over a 1.5 year period. They found that teens who used alcohol during this period had reduced white matter integrity. These changes were not observed in cannabis users.[32]
    Even the U.S. Government has a patent on the cannabinoids found in cannabis for protecting the brain. Cannabinoids have shown to be neuroprotective against damage from stroke and trauma, and effective in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease and HIV dementia.[33] Cannabis has also been shown to reduce the mortality of those who have suffered traumatic brain injuries. [44]

    This extensive review of studies which examined the long-term cognitive effects of using cocaine, (meth)amphetamines, ecstasy, opiates, alcohol, and cannabis, sums it up:

    “All substances of abuse, except cannabis, were associated with sustained deficits in executive functioning, especially inhibition…”
    “There was little evidence for sustained cognitive impairments in adult abstinent cannabis users.”
    van Holst RJ and Schilt T. Drug-related decrease in neuropsychological functions of abstinent drug users. Curr Drug Abuse Rev. 2011. Review.

    SOURCES:

    30. Mahmood et al. Learning and memory performances in adolescent users of alcohol and marijuana: interactive effects. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2010.
    31. Jacobus et al. White Matter Integrity in Adolescents with Histories of Marijuana Use and Binge Drinking. Neurotoxicology and Teratology. 2009.
    32. Bava et al. Longitudinal changes in white matter integrity among adolescent substance users. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2013.
    33. Patent 6630507 – Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants. Filing date: Apr 21, 1999.
    34. Schreiner, A. M & Dunn, M. E. Residual effects of cannabis use on neurocognitive performance after prolonged abstinence: A meta-analysis. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology. 2012.
    35. Delisi et al. A preliminary DTI study showing no brain structural change associated with adolescent cannabis use. Harm Reduct J. 2006.
    36. Block et al. Effects of frequent marijuana use on brain tissue volume and composition. Neuroreport. 2000.
    37. Tzilos et al. Lack of hippocampal volume change in long-term heavy cannabis users. Am J Addict. 2005.
    38. Pope et al. Neuropsychological performance in long-term cannabis users. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001.
    39. Fried et al. Neurocognitive consequences of marijuana–a comparison with pre-drug performance. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 2005.
    40. Grant et al. Non-acute (residual) neurocognitive effects of cannabis use: a meta-analytic study. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2003.
    41. Institute of Medicine. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. The National Academies Press. 1999.
    42. Hooper et al. Intellectual, neurocognitive, and academic achievement in abstinent adolescents with cannabis use disorder. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2014 .
    43. van Holst RJ and Schilt T. Drug-related decrease in neuropsychological functions of abstinent drug users. Curr Drug Abuse Rev. 2011. Review.
    44. Nguyen et al. Effect of marijuana use on outcomes in traumatic brain injury. Am Surg. 2014.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *