Initially, THC boosted brain metabolism and synaptic protein levels, indicative of heightened cognitive processes. Subsequently, it shifted towards reducing metabolic activities in the body akin to the effects seen with caloric restriction or intensive exercise, known for their anti-aging benefits.

103 points
*

The publication itself, which seems to be legit, and well done.

Haven’t had a chance to read all of it, but it isn’t badly executed by a quick scan.

Edit: I’ve had a chance to read it in full.

About half of it is over my head. Just don’t have the biochemical background to be able to interpret much of the metabolites they were measuring.

That being said, that stuff isn’t actually important for casual interest.

Here’s the key points I found:

First, the study was mice only. While mice are excellent for this kind of work, you can’t guarantee things will be a 1:1 result in Holland p.

Second, the study was for low dose levels, and only delta-9 thc, with no other cannabinoids being used at all.

Third, the study was relatively short, with 42 days being the longer end.

Fourth, and this is the cool part, changes in the relevant metabolites and brain samples had benefit at the 14 day mark. So, if this does translate to human effects, short term, low dose use of delta-9 may be a valuable option. That’s years away before this could be confirmed as valid for humans, but the effects were significant.

All of that means that just smoking weed, you aren’t going to duplicate the conditions of the study. If you’re taking in enough to get high, you’re at a higher dose than the study, and that may cause an opposite effect long term.

This is a very focused experiment, with well defined limits and goals. The information gained can not be used as an indicator that smoking herb as an adult human will give any benefit, much less what is in the title of the article.

Think of this study as step one in maybe ten steps you get to the point where it would be useful for indicating benefits in humans, assuming everything went right along the way.

permalink
report
reply
26 points

I am glad you linked that, because the article and site itself did not inspire confidence

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Why wouldn’t you look for the study itself in ANY article like this? It’s literally linked 1/3 of the way down the actual article.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

The very opening basically repeating the name of the college twice and the stocks at the top had me immediately back out of the article as it came across as effectively trash. I then looked at the comments here and was surprised there was an actual publication linked

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Maybe I’m misreading the only plot that mentions dosing numbers anywhere. It looks like the largest dosing group is getting 3mg/kg/day. That’s a lot scaled up to a 100kg person (like 10x a normal gummy for example).

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It was three different doses, 0.3, 1, and 3 mg/kg per day

It was also delivered via subcutaneous pump, which is usually done with a mind towards a gradual dosing rather than a single push of the total amount all at once.

The kind of pump listed in the article previously linked was an osmotic pump.

Here’s an excerpt from a different paper describing the various methods for substance delivery:

Osmotic pumps are internally implanted devices that use an osmotic displacement system to infuse a preloaded substance into an animal. Use of these pumps permits constant dosing without the need to handle an animal after the initial implant surgery. Extracellular fluid is absorbed at a constant rate by an osmotic salt layer immediately beneath the permeable outer membrane. As the osmotic layer absorbs fluid, it swells and puts pressure on an impermeable reservoir in the center of the pump. The reservoir then expels the loaded substance from the pump at a constant rate through a flow moderator. The outflow can pass directly into the tissue surrounding the pump, or a cannula can be attached to the pump to direct the flow into a blood vessel or specific tissue.

Osmotic pumps are cylindrical in shape and come in sizes small enough for mice. These devices are surgically implanted either subcutaneously or intraperitoneally. The flow rate is fixed, and the duration of action varies from 3 d to 6 wk, depending on the size of the pump and the delivery rate selected. Pumps cannot be refilled but can be implanted sequentially to prolong dosing.

I’m not up on the dosing levels in humans, So I I don’t have the ability to know offhand if 3mg/kg spread over the day is unusually high (pun partially intended) or not. There’s a section I can’t find easily (I’m actually dyslexic so it takes me a while to get through this kind of dense and complicated writing) where they mentioned having a higher dose as a point of comparison.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Thanks this is a lot of great detail on the dosing mechanism that I think is really interesting. I love reading up on the experimental details and the actually components used to make these experiments work.

300mg of orally ingested THC spread out over 24 hours is about equivalent to consuming 1 typical candy/gummy every hour for 24 hours of the day. A reasonable or average or normal person would be uncomfortably high at these dosages. I also imagine the bioavailability of oral ingestion is less than the dosing mechanism you described although I’m not sure (is that getting taken up through the lymphatic system? How does it differ from oral ingestion or injection into the bloodstream?).

Fascinating stuff, thanks for sharing your knowledge.

permalink
report
parent
reply
64 points

I like hearing this so it must be true

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Found the basis for CNN and Fox News retaining viewership!

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

It can also be true independent of one’s liking it.

That little aphorism you just trotted out is a thought terminating cliche, something that contributes nothing and artificially ends discussion.

You chose it deliberately to denigrate the study with zero evidence, and 11 people agreed with you.

Disturbing for lemmy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

It really isn’t any of that, they’re just humorously pointing out confirmation bias which is definitely an issue in discussions like these

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You’re both right.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

You really don’t see how bad it’s gotten in just a year, do you?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

There was an implied /s there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

And now there’s an explicit block here, free for you.

You don’t get to ‘it’s just a prank bro’ someone else’s stupidity.

permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

Idk, I’m high right now and my memory is shit.

permalink
report
reply
24 points

Younger brains have fewer memories. This checks out.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

I didn’t know you can monkeys paw science

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

The monkey was equally surprised.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Is this why you posted the same comment twice?

Once here

And the other here

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

What? Maybe your app is broken, those links are the same.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Or is it?

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Bro is doing PI work on the horny account.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Short term vs long term

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

That’s what they mean by reversing brain aging

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

I started getting high later in life (25) and had shit memory beforehand.

It’s a bit less shit now, take that as you will.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
10 points

Have you tried modulating your intake? Too much will most definitely make you a moron. Small amounts have a positive effect on me.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I’m a moron when I’m stoned but a little bit makes my brain slow the fuck down enough that I can actually concentrate on things and get them done.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Not me. I’m pretty normal. I call it sober #2.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Like mamba #5?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

But with more Monica and Rita

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

It’s not the THC, guy.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Same lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
31 points

Same energy as “wine is good for you!” As it turns out, no. Wine is absolutely poisonous to you.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

But taking 30 minutes out of your day to relax and unwind? That’s good for you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

As in everything, moderation is good. Relax a little, but don’t make it your whole thing. Work a little, but don’t make it your whole thing. Dose a little, drink a little, dance a little, fart a little, enjoy cats and dogs a little, but my god man, change it up a little.

permalink
report
parent
reply

science

!science@lemmy.world

Create post

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren’t liked generally. I’ve posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don’t screen everything, lrn2scroll

Community stats

  • 3.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.3K

    Posts

  • 15K

    Comments