alapomelile

Kiwi families, communities, and especially our young people are already paying a heavy price for a culture that has grown too casual about and perhaps even normalised cannabis use. The 2020 referendum narrowly rejected legalising recreational use (50.7% against), reflecting the common-sense view of many Kiwis that normalising a mind-altering drug is not progress. Yet trends since then show why vigilance is needed.

The latest Massey University New Zealand Drug Trends Survey (NZDTS 2025) indicates that daily cannabis use among users has jumped from 39% in 2020 to 53% in 2025. Prices are falling, availability is higher than ever, and there is a shift toward vaping and edibles, making it easier and more discreet for young people to use. Medicinal cannabis prescriptions have exploded (over 380,000 products supplied in 2025), but this has blurred lines between “medical” and recreational use, with many citing medicinal reasons while patterns suggest broader normalisation.

Population data shows past-year cannabis use at around 15.6% of adults, with higher rates among Māori (33.4%) and young people. Weekly use remains a significant issue for tens of thousands of teens and young adults. This aligns with ongoing concerns in other countries about adolescent cannabis use and its impacts on the developing brain.

A wave of major new studies, led by the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study—the largest long-term youth brain study in the United States—paints a consistent picture: cannabis use during the teenage years interferes with critical brain development, particularly in memory, thinking speed, and reward processing. It also significantly increases the risk of serious mental health disorders later in life. The ABCD findings (e.g., slower cognitive gains in users) do not stand alone. Several other major studies published or released around late 2025–early 2026 reinforce the same concerning patterns.

A recent systematic review published in Frontiers in Psychiatry (2026) examined 36 studies with over 8,400 participants. It found consistent evidence of dose-dependent brain changes in adolescents who use cannabis, such as decreased volumes in the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus/amygdala, faster cortical thinning, and white matter impairments. It also noted increased vulnerability to addiction and variable but concerning cognitive effects. Adolescent-onset use showed greater susceptibility than adult-onset use.

One of the largest US longitudinal studies on adolescent cannabis use and psychiatric disorders analysed medical records of nearly 463,000 adolescents (ages 13–17) in Northern California (study carried out by Kaiser Permanente). Teens who reported past-year cannabis use had roughly double the risk of later diagnosis with psychotic or bipolar disorders, plus significantly higher risks of depression and anxiety (adjusted hazard ratios around 1.2–2.2). Associations held after accounting for prior mental health issues and other substance use, with stronger effects in younger teens. The study positions cannabis as a risk factor (or exacerbating factor) for psychiatric disorders, not merely a result of pre-existing conditions. Authors emphasised prevention, public health messaging, and policy responses amid the expansion of legalisation.

In a 12-month longitudinal brain imaging study, regular cannabis users (adolescents and adults) showed declining activity in the ventral striatum (the brain’s key reward centre) when anticipating non-drug rewards. This dulling of natural motivational pathways might help explain the decrease in drive, focus, and enjoyment of daily pleasures with cannabis users.

Research from both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (including ABCD) has shown that regular cannabis use during adolescence and young adulthood is associated with modest decreases in IQ (on the order of ~2 points in meta-analyses of frequent users), verbal memory, attention, processing speed, and certain executive functions. While some earlier debates highlighted temporary effects or lower-potency products, today’s high-THC products and the adolescent brain’s ongoing maturation (into the mid-20s) amplify concerns.

The effects of adolescent cannabis use can persist in some domains even after abstinence, though there is some individual variability and confounding factors (e.g., other substances, socioeconomic status). While not every user experiences severe outcomes, population-level data and dose-response patterns warrant attention from parents, educators, and policymakers, especially given the increasing availability and potency of these products.

The research is clear and consistent: high-THC cannabis today is not the “low-potency” weed of past generations. Combined with NZ’s existing youth mental health challenges, continuing down a path of liberalisation risks entrenching generational harm, poorer educational outcomes, fractured families, and higher welfare and justice costs.

Protecting our future generations is more important than ever in a world where the acceptance of drugs and their associated harms seems to be increasing, despite the growing evidence of their harms and impacts not just on individuals but on society at large. Whether it’s local trends or international evidence, they all demand that we heed the warnings and prioritise long-term societal and family well-being over short-term liberal experimentation. Parents, churches, communities, community leaders, and politicians have a responsibility to make it clear: for our young people, cannabis is not harmless recreation; it is a significant risk we cannot afford to continue to downplay or ignore.

*Written by FF staff writers*

A recent study out of the UC San Diego School of Medicine has found that teenagers who start using cannabis experience slower development in their thinking and memory abilities over time.

The study, published on April 20, 2026, in Neuropsychopharmacology, examined data from 11,036 participants in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study—the largest long-term research project on brain development in U.S. youth. Researchers followed children from ages 9–10 into ages 16–17, tracking both substance use and cognitive performance. They used a combination of self-reports and objective toxicological measures (urine, saliva, and hair samples) to better detect cannabis exposure.

Findings showed that, across a range of skills (including memory, language, and processing speed) teens who used cannabis exhibited slower gains (restricted developmental trajectories) over time compared to non-users. Interestingly, at younger ages, some future cannabis users performed as well as or slightly better than non-users. However, as they aged and began using cannabis, their cognitive development stalled relative to peers who continued to progress.

The study also examined cannabis components in a smaller subset with hair testing. Teens with evidence of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) exposure (the main psychoactive component) showed more significant memory declines over time than non-users. In contrast, teens with evidence of cannabidiol (CBD) did not exhibit this pattern (though the CBD group was small).

“These results point to THC as a likely driver of the changes we’re seeing,” said lead researcher Natasha Wade. “It also highlights how complex cannabis products can be, especially since some products labelled as CBD may still contain THC.”

Despite the modest size of the differences, the findings are noteworthy during a period of rapid brain development: even small changes in memory, attention, or processing speed can influence school performance and daily life.

Despite the differences being modest in statistical terms, the real-world stakes are high. During a period of rapid and foundational brain development, even small deficits in memory, attention, or thinking speed can impair school performance, learning, decision-making, and long-term life outcomes.

The researchers rightly note that the study does not prove direct causation on its own, and other factors (environment, personality, genetics) may play a role. Yet the associations held strong even after adjusting for family background, mental health, other substance use, and prior cognitive performance. This is not isolated data—it adds to a large and growing body of evidence showing adolescence is a uniquely vulnerable window for cannabis harms.

These findings should serve as a loud wake-up call. Public health experts, parents, educators, and policymakers must be unequivocal: adolescents should not use cannabis. The developing brain is simply too precious and too sensitive to risk interference from THC. With today’s high-potency products widely available, the potential for harm is greater than ever.

As evidence from major studies such as ABCD emerges, it’s clear that the effects of cannabis, particularly during adolescence, are more significant than many acknowledge. The data is undeniable. Safeguarding the next generation requires taking this science seriously and acting on it.

*Written by FF staff writers*

Alongside chronic pain, mental health conditions are among the most common reasons people turn to marijuana for medical use. However, a comprehensive review of cannabis research spanning the past 45 years finds little to no high-quality data supporting its effectiveness for these medical conditions.

Published in the Lancet journal, the meta-analysis found cannabinoids (a type of medicinal cannabis) had no meaningful benefit or significant impact on primary outcomes for anxiety, PTSD, psychotic disorders (including schizophrenia), anorexia nervosa, OCD, opioid use disorder, cocaine use disorder, bipolar disorder, ADHD, and tobacco use disorder. To date, this is the largest and most comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised control trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness and safety of cannabinoids for the treatment of mental disorders and SUDs. The team of researchers in Australia reviewed 54 trials involving 2,477 participants, considering a wide range of conditions, formulations and types of cannabinoids.

The study found that the use of medicinal cannabis for common psychiatric conditions like anxiety, PTSD, and depression was ineffective. Interestingly, they found it did have some impact (though small and the evidence was deemed low-quality by the study’s authors) on conditions like insomnia, autism and tic or Tourette’s syndrome. One of the study’s authors, Jack Wilson, a postdoctoral research fellow at the Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use at the University of Sydney, says, “We clearly need to do more research on cannabis medicines.” “In the absence of evidence at this time, the routine use of medical cannabis products really should be rarely justified for the treatment of mental health disorders,” he told NPR.

He isn’t the only cannabis researcher echoing these sentiments. Ryan Vandrey, a professor of psychiatry and behavioural sciences at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine who studies cannabis, says, “It’s embarrassing how little we have done in terms of data collection, given how widely this is available as a therapeutic”. Regarding the study, he says, “Though done well, a review of this nature invariably comes with major limitations. It collapses data across different products, doses, routes of administration, patient populations, and so on — and excludes findings from long-term observational studies and other sources of evidence. “So it can be challenging to draw firm conclusions, especially when there are not that many actual studies or patients being evaluated,” he says.

This study closely follows another substantial review, published earlier this month in JAMA Internal Medicine. That study adopted a broader methodological approach — including observational research and other study designs beyond randomised controlled trials — yet reached a similar conclusion: there is little convincing evidence that cannabinoids substantially treat mental health conditions. It also issued a caution regarding vulnerable populations, highlighting particular concerns for adolescents, young adults, individuals at risk of substance use disorders, and those living with bipolar disorder or psychotic conditions. This is not a new warning — the association between early cannabis use and increased risk of psychosis is among the more well-established findings in the field.

Whilst the research has technical limitations, like most research studies, its findings can’t be overlooked nor understated. The fact remains that in many countries where medicinal cannabis is loosely regulated, and its advocates are calling for even laxer controls (including NZ) due to the supposed benefits, the science states otherwise.

As the study’s authors noted, due to limited evidence of effectiveness and a higher risk of all-cause adverse outcomes, the routine use of these medicines for mental disorders and SUDs is rarely justified.  It is time for laws, policies, and even politicians to keep pace with the science.

*Written by Family First staff writers*

Legalising cannabis as a move aligned with history’s progress is beginning to crack, at least in the United States.

A referendum campaign is gaining momentum in Massachusetts to overturn the state’s 2016 legalisation of recreational cannabis. This comes amid new research indicating a rise in young cannabis users presenting at hospital emergency departments. This isn’t the only US state to psuh back against legalisation. Other US states such as Maine, Florida and North Dakota and South Dakota have shut down legalisation ballot initiatives, with Idaho set to vote on stronger cannabis prohibitions next year.

Even the US Congress, on a bipartisan basis, passed legislation quietly re-banning a type of cannabis that had been legal nationwide for nearly a decade. The nationwide ban on all kinds of THC comes into effect next year, meaning Americans will, for the first time since federal prohibition in 1937, have less access to cannabis than they previously did.

Since California legalised medical marijuana in 1996, momentum toward liberalisation has appeared relentless. Recreational marijuana is now legal in 24 states and Washington, D.C., with a further 15 states allowing medical use. Public support rose steadily from around 25 per cent in the late 20th century, reaching a majority in 2011 and peaking at 70 per cent in 2023—including majority support among Republicans. Political leaders and activists confidently declared the issue “settled” and “on the right side of history.

For years, cannabis legalisation was seen as inevitable. However, that trend is now showing signs of reversal, with a significant drop in Republican support for the first time since 2016, and even in public support. What once seemed to be an unstoppable cultural movement is showing signs of public reconsideration—suggesting that legalisation persisted not because it was wise or harmless, but because it was regarded as beyond debate.

Interestingly, most Americans neither use cannabis nor have a personal stake in the issue. A 2024 Pew poll shows support for recreational legalisation is about 15 points lower than in other surveys. A 2022 Emerson poll, funded by the anti-legalisation group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, found only 38% supporting the legalisation of “production, recreational use and sales, like in stores,” 18% supporting just decriminalisation of possession, and 30% advocating only for medical use. It seems that while many Americans support legal cannabis in theory, they often prefer it not to be present in their local communities.

For years, cannabis legalisation was presented as inevitable in New Zealand, following the same overseas script that framed reform as “progress” and resistance as outdated. By the time of the 2020 cannabis referendum, voters were told that legalisation was simply the next step on the right side of history.

New Zealanders disagreed. Despite heavy campaigning and cultural pressure, the public voted no—sending a clear message that the wellbeing of families, children, and communities mattered more than ideological momentum. That decision now looks increasingly prudent as overseas jurisdictions quietly confront the unintended consequences of liberalisation, from increased exposure for young people to growing concerns about mental health and community harm. Far from being left behind, New Zealand showed that careful restraint—grounded in protecting the vulnerable—still resonates when voters are trusted to weigh the real costs.

More Americans are realising that the promises of legalisation were overstated and its costs were underestimated. This was evident in the 2020 Cannabis referendum in New Zealand, where most voters saw through the facade and voted no to cannabis legalisation. That choice now seems increasingly wise as other countries quietly face the unintended effects of liberalisation, including greater risks for youth, mental health issues, and community damage. Rather than falling behind, New Zealand demonstrated that restraint—focused on safeguarding the vulnerable—remains powerful when voters are trusted to consider the true costs.

So as more US states consider banning what is widely recognised as a harmful drug, we welcome this shift in attitude and policymaking. It’s also encouraging to see international contexts recognise that legalisation isn’t the perfect solution it’s sometimes portrayed to be, and that prohibiting harmful drugs is becoming an increasingly accepted and normal response by governments and society.

*Written by Family First staff writers*

As the Green Party rehashes their campaign for legalising cannabis and decriminalising drugs, they continue to ignore the Science on the significant harms of cannabis use.  A new study published in the Addictive Behaviors Journal offers one of the most comprehensive analyses to date, examining how cannabis use affects youth aged 15 to 30, and the findings are disturbing and unfortunately unsurprising.

This systematic review and meta-analysis, a pinnacle of evidence-based research, analysed data from 36 studies, with 18 studies ultimately included in the final analysis, encompassing over 500,000 young people. The robustness, reduction of biases through structured methodology, and critical appraisal of systematic reviews and meta-analyses make it difficult to fault the findings from this type of research, apart from the self-identified limitations noted by the authors.

The researchers focused on four crucial mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, suicide ideation and suicidal attempts) in relation to cannabis use, and the findings are sobering and staggering. They confirm what Family First has been warning about: the increasing harms from cannabis. The findings highlighted that regardless of age, gender and even other associated drug use, individuals who use cannabis face a:

• 28% higher risk of depression
• 58% higher risk of anxiety
• 64% higher risk of suicidal ideation 
• 80% higher risk of suicide attempts

The authors underscore a concerning trend: more studies are revealing that cannabis use in adolescent years is linked to subsequent depression in adult years. As frequency and dosage of cannabis use increase, so does the prevalence of depression.  This pattern seems to hold true for all mental health outcomes assessed in the study – that increased cannabis use often correlates with a higher prevalence of  mental health-related outcomes.

Whilst the study didn’t have a gender-specific focus in its analysis (due to most studies being mixed-gender studies), some evidence suggests that young women may be more vulnerable, especially to mood and anxiety disorders. Women with suicidal thoughts were also more likely to use cannabis as a form of self-medication, which often worsened their condition.

The findings further revealed that cannabis use beginning as early as age 15 is linked to long-term mental health impacts. THC—the psychoactive component of cannabis—interferes with brain signaling, emotional regulation, and cognitive function. Adolescents and young adults, who are in a critical stage of brain development, are particularly at risk, yet often overlooked in cannabis research.

As cannabis becomes more accessible and socially accepted, especially among young people, researchers are raising red flags about its devastating impact on the mental health of younger and future generations. The evidence is mounting and clear – cannabis use is not harmless. Legalisation and normalisation of cannabis use will only exacerbate the mental risks and impacts on our young people.

We must continue to resist efforts to legalise and decriminalise this drug, which carries long-term consequences not only for young people but for society as a whole.

**Written by Family First staff writers**

Link to study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460325002977?via%3Dihub#s0095

While the NZ media continue their campaign for drugs and to legalise marijuana – yes, they’re still trying, I’ll show you some recent examples shortly – we continue to see highly alarming outcomes from legalising cannabis in US states, including “spiralling addiction, psychotic illnesses and hospitals facing a deluge of poisonings”.

Remember the claims made by pro-drug activists in support of cannabis legalisation in New Zealand. According to the Government, the Green Party, NZ Drug Foundation and Helen Clark Foundation, we were supposed believe that legalising recreational cannabis would lead to significant health benefits, reduced black market, no increase in usage, reduction in mental health issues, reduced crime and so on. Thankfully, 51.2% of us weren’t fooled into believing this, just enough Kiwis to vote down the proposed cannabis legalisation bill.

And there is continued mounting evidence refuting those pro-cannabis claims.

Scientists overwhelmingly conclude that frequent use of the drug is not worth the risks.

Here’s three major studies that have just been released:

From Smart Approaches to Marijuana (also known as SAM), they report with regard to the first states that legalised marijuana in the US – Colorado, Washington, Alaska and Oregon:

The National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) is the nation’s premier survey that assesses the prevalence of substance use and substance use disorder.  

The prevalence of past-month marijuana use among 18–25-year-olds has increased in the first four states that legalized recreational marijuana: Colorado and Washington legalized during the 2012 election cycle and Alaska and Oregon legalized in the 2014 cycle. Past-month use––as opposed to lifetime or past-year use––is indicative of heavier, more frequent use. Marijuana is also not legal for use until age 21, meaning many of these individuals are underage users.

So there are frequent users – not just a one-off or a very occasional dabble.

While 30–35% of 18–25-year-olds in the first states that legalized recreational marijuana were past-month users of marijuana in 2021–2022, this was closer to 18–22% in the states that have not legalized marijuana.

So keeping the drug illegal keeps the use down in this age group. Probably don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure this out eh.

This trend is especially concerning for the 18–25-year-old demographic, given that their brains are developing. The CDC warns, “The teen brain is actively developing and continues to develop until around age 25. Cannabis use during adolescence and young adulthood may harm the developing brain.” 

So that’s not good.

Remember NZ was going to make the age limit at 20 thinking they could somehow prevent younger people increasing their usage. In the US it’s 21 – yet they’re still having difficulties. It would have been worse for New Zealand.

The second study was reported in The Centrist last week. It said:

A new study, published in JAMA Pediatrics, analysed data from 355 women at Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, showing that children exposed to cannabis during pregnancy had “poorer task-based planning ability” and exhibited “more observed aggression” by age five. 

These developmental impacts may hinder children’s long-term academic success.

Cannabis use in pregnancy, often turned to for relief from stress, nausea, or sleep issues, may have lasting implications. Lead researcher Sarah Keim advised against it, despite cannabis being “a natural product,” due to its “many risks.” Keim noted, “Our findings…confirm and expand on longstanding evidence.”

Alongside cannabis, many participants were exposed to other substances, such as tobacco and alcohol, with many living below the poverty line. This added complexity to understanding cannabis’s specific impact on child development.

Another aspect of the study highlights additional physical risks. Pregnant women who use cannabis face a higher risk of conditions like pregnancy-induced hypertension, with one study noting a 19% chance of placenta detachment. 

Research also links cannabis exposure to brain development issues in the prefrontal cortex, essential for learning. “It is recommended that pregnant persons do not use cannabis,” the CDC warned, reinforcing that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) can pass through the mother to the baby, impacting their health across multiple areas.

Once again, don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand this.

But because the baby is a separate human life dependent on the mother and subject to her lifestyle, these decisions of the mother don’t just affect the mother!

One more.

Two weeks ago, and once again thanks to our friends at SAM for reporting this:

[A] massive new study was published in one of the most prestigious journals in the pediatric world, the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The study found that state legalization of recreational marijuana increases the likelihood of marijuana use in the past month among youth and young adults. Past-month use is a much clearer indicator of frequent use than “lifetime use” or “past-year use.” 

The systematic review titled “Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Medical and Recreational Cannabis Legalization and Cannabis Use Among Youth in the United States” found that recreational marijuana legalization increases the odds of past-month marijuana use by 13% among youth and 22% among young adults.  

This is not just one study saying that use goes up after legalization, this is a systematic review of the published data on this topic. Because systematic reviews take an exhaustive look at available research and use a transparent, repeatable approach to review studies, they minimize bias and are highly regarded among researchers.   

This study directly contradicts the marijuana industry talking point that legalization does not increase youth use. 

Sorry – just one more. It’s relevant. You’ll see why.

According to the Minnesota Department of Health, from 2018 to 2023, the number of marijuana hospital-treated poisonings for children aged 4 and under increased by 733%:

Cannabis is now legal for adults 21 and older to use and possess in Minnesota. The bill was signed into law on May 30, 2023, by none other than Governor Tim Walz  – yep, Kamala Harris’ running mate.

Now, what’s happening in NZ.

Well, the media continue to campaign for legalisation despite not being able to win the referendum in 2020. They’re still sulking. Derek Cheng at the NZ Herald is regularly writing about the issue. In fact, in our analysis of the media coverage of the cannabis referendum, he was one of the worst culprits in his coverage with a 70 / 30 bias in favour of a yes vote from his 9 articles.

And he was back this week

New study says 60% of cannabis and alcohol users say weed makes them drink less. So, should we legalise cannabis?

 Would legalising cannabis lead to an overall reduction in substance-related harm?

This is the “tantalising” prospect teased in a new study into whether cannabis is a substitute or complement for alcohol: 60% of those using both said their cannabis use resulted in drinking less on a “typical occasion”, and also drinking less frequently.

The demographic groups more likely to be among this group include Māori (19% more likely than non-Māori), men (14% more likely), and adults older than 21 (28% more likely for the 21-25 age group, compared to the control group of those aged 35+).

A significant proportion also substituted cannabis for methamphetamine: 40% of co-users said using cannabis led to less meth consumption.

“If cannabis was legal, it wouldn’t stop people drinking. But if they reduced the quantity of alcohol they drank, that would be quite a considerable public health gain,” said Massey University Associate Professor Chris Wilkins, co-author of the paper Exploring the substitution of cannabis for alcohol and other drugs.

It shows the harms of drugs – and note which one is causing the most harm. The legal one – alcohol.

If you go on the argument that legalising cannabis will lessen the harm (in the orange circle) then why don’t we legalise cocaine and ecstasy (as shown in the yellow circles) because the harm is less.

The logic in this argument is appaling.

In fact, once you get past the grand title and the introductory text, you then get to this admission

[The researcher is] quick to stress that it’s much more complicated than simply legalising cannabis and then welcoming less overall drug harm.

The paper didn’t measure hazardous drug use, so it sheds no light on how much the substitution effect might reduce the most harmful alcohol or methamphetamine use. Nor does it have any insight into any potential increase in harmful cannabis use.

The substitution effect is also far from universal. In the 16-20 age group, for example, some said their cannabis use led to less drinking, while for others it led to more.

“It’s not a one-size-fits-all solution,” Wilkins said.

“You might say that if we legalise cannabis, we’re going to get less alcohol use. This paper says, ‘that depends’. If I’m an older adult and want to reduce my alcohol use, this could help. But in other groups, it’s going to have the opposite effect.”

Nor is cannabis universally less harmful than alcohol, or methamphetamine. A lot depends on an individual’s genetics, physiology, and circumstances.

“Say I’ve got pre-existing mental health problems, or delinquency in adolescence, then this is not going to help me at all,” Wilkins said.

“It’s quite tricky to realise those benefits, depending on people’s different life stages, different lifestyles, and different ethnicities. It’s hard to legalise cannabis for some people and not for others, or try and control unintended side effects.”

Keep reading and you find out even more dodgy stuff

The paper is based on a 2020 online survey of 23,500 people (26,000 minus 2500 following a quality audit) interested in activities associated with drug use, including drinking.

They were asked about their drug use… The most prevalent drug used by respondents in the previous six months was alcohol (87% of respondents), followed by cannabis (68%), tobacco (57%), MDMA (45%), LSD (26%), cocaine (12%), methamphetamine (7%), 

68% using cannabis. 45% using ecstasy. 12% on cocaine. 7% on meth.

OK – that’s not a normal population, is it.

Online. Drug community. No control group. It’s crappy “research”.

These are hard core drug users. They’re trying to make us think that legalising cannabis is going to somehow drive all these people from harder drugs. In their dreams.

There is currently no appetite from the Government to revisit legalising cannabis, following the referendum in 2020 that rejected making recreational use legal.

But the findings of the paper could be useful in other ways, Wilkins said.

“You could try some experiments where you allowed people to get a prescription for medicinal cannabis, if it meant reducing the use of other more harmful drugs like methamphetamine, alcohol, opiates.

Let me just quickly rebut that one.

A 20-year study out of Australia, recently published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, has found “no evidence to suggest cannabis reduces illicit opioid use, and it may not be an effective long-term method of reducing harm for those with an opioid use disorder or problematic use of opioids.”

But note the heading of the NZ Herald. Many people won’t get past this. And that’s the intention of the NZ Herald.

Slowly but surely sucking you in.

And finally our good friends at 1News.

They were very concerned.

More Kiwis are facing charges for cannabis possession offences even after police were directed five years ago not to prosecute unless it was in the public interest to do so.

In 2019, the Misuse of Drugs Amendment was passed into law, giving police discretion on whether to prosecute when someone is found in possession of an illicit drug for personal use.

Police were directed to consider whether prosecution is required in the public interest or if a health-centred approach would be more beneficial.

And from the graph, it appears that the police do believe that prosecution is in the public interest.

Labour police spokesperson Ginny Andersen said the increase in prosecution “doesn’t seem fair”.

11 Vietnamese nationals were arrested and deported by Immigration NZ following a recent bust where a total of 3385 cannabis plants and 48kg of dried buds were found in rented homes in Auckland. The drugs seized were worth around $18m. The argument was that it’s better and cheaper to boot them out of the country rather than put them in prison at cost to the taxpayer.

Sounds a good decision to me. But Benedict Collins can’t quite understand it.

Well at least the Green MP admits what the real agenda is eh

What 1News and Ginny Anderson and other drug activists never acknowledge is that all the research shows that most convictions are not for the drug use per se – but for drug related offences, that is, crimes committed while on drugs (murder, armed robbery, theft, assault, child abuse, etc.) or crimes committed in order to obtain drugs. Or for dealing drugs and putting our families and communities at risk.

If that line in the graph has to continue to go up to protect families, so be it. NZ made a great decision in 2020 by voting no to legalising cannabis – despite the ongoing wailing of the media, drug advocates and certain politicians.

But don’t expect the media or the drug activists to go quiet on this issue any time soon.

And neither will we.

A recent study from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience at King’s College London and the University of Exeter has revealed that frequent use of high-potency cannabis alters DNA, particularly affecting genes related to energy and immune function. This research, published in Molecular Psychiatry, is the first to demonstrate a distinct DNA imprint associated with high-potency cannabis, defined as containing 10% or more Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC).

The findings indicate that DNA changes vary between individuals experiencing their first episode of psychosis and those without such experiences. This suggests potential for DNA blood tests to identify cannabis users at risk for developing psychosis, which could inform preventative strategies. Most participants reported using high-potency cannabis frequently and had begun using it around age 16.

Senior author Marta Di Forti emphasized the need to understand the biological impacts of high-potency cannabis, noting the significance of the study in linking cannabis use with changes in DNA methylation—a process that affects gene expression without altering the DNA sequence. The research involved analyzing blood samples from 682 participants, including those with and without psychosis, revealing specific changes in genes like CAVIN1, which are linked to mitochondrial and immune functions.

Dr. Emma Dempster, Senior Lecturer at the University of Exeter and the study’s first author, said: “This is the first study to show that frequent use of high-potency cannabis leaves a distinct molecular mark on DNA, particularly affecting genes related to energy and immune function. Our findings provide important insights into how cannabis use may alter biological processes.” This research provides insights into how cannabis may influence mental health through biological pathways, particularly through lifestyle-related epigenetic changes.

Original story here:https://scitechdaily.com/startling-study-shows-high-potency-cannabis-alters-dna/

A recent study on cannabis use and women from France found that women who frequently use cannabis have a significantly higher risk of death from cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to non-users. The study involved nearly 122,000 British participants, categorized into low, moderate, and heavy cannabis users based on their reported lifetime usage. Over a 13-year follow-up period, 2,375 deaths were recorded, with 1,411 from CVD.

Heavy cannabis users were more likely to be younger, use tobacco, and have lower alcohol consumption, hypertension, high cholesterol, obesity, diabetes, high education, and income levels. The study’s findings highlighted a significant link between heavy cannabis use and CVD death among women, particularly those who also used tobacco. This was not the case for male users. The study’s researchers stressed that the association between death and cannabis use remains unclear. However, they theorized that chemicals in cannabis may cause inflammation and arterial issues, and carbon monoxide exposure from smoking may contribute.

The study noted limitations such as self-reported cannabis use without biological verification and unknown specifics regarding cannabis dosage and consumption methods. The findings coincide with data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which reports that cannabis is the most popular illicit drug in the US, with 19% of Americans using it at least once in 2021. Additionally, the prevalence of cardiovascular disease is expected to rise due to increasing rates of high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity.

Original and full article here

Bertha Madras, 81, a psychobiology professor at Harvard Medical School and one of the foremost experts on marijuana with over 60 years of research experience, warns against the move to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug. She emphasizes the risks associated with marijuana, including addiction potential, cognitive impairment, psychosis, car accidents, and lasting damage to the brain, particularly in young users. Ms Madras highlights the lack of strong evidence for its medicinal benefits and calls for rigorous research instead of legalization. Ms Madras highlights that it is pointless to spend more on addiction treatment and harm reduction whilst weakening laws that act to prevent people from addictions. She expresses concern about the cultural normalization of marijuana and its potential precedent for other drugs. Madras advocates for defending public health against the risks of drug use at all ages. She quotes “This is not a war on drugs. It’s a defence of the human brain at every possible age from in utero to old age.”

Check out the full story here https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-you-arent-reading-about-marijuana-permanent-brain-damage-biden-schedule-iii-9660395e?st=da45ugo08uv00v1&reflink=article_email_share