Posted on 12/27/2005 7:26:46 AM PST by billorites
Marijuana--or more specifically its active ingredient, tetrahydrocannabinol--has a well-documented tendency to stimulate hunger. And while scientists have traced this property to cannabinoid receptors in the brain, they have had little understanding of the neural circuitry underlying this effect.
Understanding this circuitry has important practical implications because blocking the cannabinoid receptor, CB1, offers a promising approach to treating obesity. One such compound, rimonabant (trade name AcompliaTM) is already undergoing clinical testing.
In an article in the December 22, 2005, issue of Neuron, Young-Hwan Jo and colleagues report how the circuitry of CB1 is integrated with signaling by the appetite-suppressing hormone leptin. The CB1 receptor is normally triggered by natural regulatory molecules, called endocannabinoids.
In their studies, the researchers concentrated on the lateral hypothalamus (LH) of the brain, known to be a center of control of food intake. Their studies involved detailed electrophysiological measurements of the effects of specific neurons that they had identified in previous studies as being important in endocannabinoid signaling.
Their studies revealed that activation of CB1 receptors, as by endocannabinoid molecules, induced these neurons to be rendered more excitable by a mechanism called "depolarization-induced suppression of inhibition" (DSI).
What's more, they found that leptin inhibits DSI. However, they found that leptin did not interfere with the CB1 receptors themselves. Rather, leptin "short-circuits" the endocannabinoid effects by inhibiting pore-like channels in the neurons that regulate the flow of calcium into the neurons. Such calcium is necessary for the synthesis of endocannabinoids.
In further studies of mice genetically altered to be leptin deficient, the researchers found the DSI to be more prolonged than in normal mice. Thus, they said, the findings "implicate this mechanism for leptin receptor/endocannabinoid signaling in contributing to the maintenance of weight balance...." The researchers also included that "upregulation of endocannabinoid signaling in the LH may explain, at least in part, the increased body weight consistent with a prior report of elevated endocannabinoids" in such leptin-deficient mice.
The researchers concluded that their findings "are consistent with the hypothesis that the integration of endocannabinoid and leptin signaling regulates the excitability of neurons on appetite-related circuits."
They also wrote that "the cellular mechanisms of recently developed antiobesity drugs, such as rimonabant, may include decreased endocannabinoid signaling and hence decreased excitability of LH circuits related to appetite, even in the context of leptin insufficiency or resistance."
"I certainly don't think your FIL should have to wait for marijuana legalization."
My FIL would not use marijuana in any form, if that's what it was called. He'll take a pill, prescribed by his doctor, but his principles won't let him use marijuana.
Lots of people feel that way. So, you can wait until it's legalized, if ever. I'll be glad if this research leads to something he can take without the euphoric effects of grass.
And lest you think I'm opposed to marijuana legalization, I can tell you that I am not. I stopped smoking it back in 1974, but I have no real problem with it, when used by adults, any more than I oppose the use of alcohol by adults.
That's too bad for them.
So if they have Marinol, and Marinol is ok, why is Marijuana not ok? Oh wait, I forgot. The drug companies can't make a fortune (and therefore taxes from the drug companies) off of something that can be grown for free.
Oh, Common. Do you really believe that "Reefer Madness" nonsense. How many violent stoners do you know of? I knew several violent alcoholics and cokeheads but never stoners.
>>>This would be a real boon. Yes, I know that marijuana should be legalized or somehow be legal to use. That's not going to help my FIL, though. It's not a zero-sum game, and my FIL doesn't have years to wait.>>>
That sounds like it's your FIL's problem. Noone can help he has a stigma against something. And your FIL's hang up shouldn't affect everyone else.
The only violent stoners that I've ever seen were drunk!
Now if they can figure out why DORITOES are the munchie of choice then we can save the world!
So the remaining herb is "de-THC'ed"? How effective is the vaporizing process in removing all the THC?
Ha ha ha! Oh, gosh, that's funny! That's really funny! Do you write your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. You combined "liberal" and "Libertarian" to make a new word! You know, I've never heard anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone do that before. What a clever, smart thing you must be, to come up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. God, you're so funny!
"clinical trials included abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, euphoria, paranoid reaction, somnolence, and thinking abnormal. "
Just what a sick person needs is for the nausea medication makes them vomit. Yeah, I hear it does not work as well as other methods such as smoking it.
This is a very low-profit (if at all) item for the pharma industry. It's more of a control issue for a scheduled substance.
>>>I have kids,
That's too bad for them.>>>
That is uncalled for. Too bad you can't have a civil conversation and actually deal (at least as a decent adult) with someone disagreeing you.
Shame on you.
What specifically should I read to find support for your claim that "the 10th amendment trumps the 9th"?
States have the right to make laws for the society they want to maintain
The Constitution doesn't bar state anti-drug laws, true. (I would on a natural-rights basis encourage every state to maximize individual liberty.) Do we agree that the feds should get their noses out of it?
Using your silly scenario comparing legal behavior "alcohol use" with illegal behavior "pot use" is sophistic. Why not legalize all drugs and compare alcohol with morphine?
What I said was, "marijuana ... unlike the legal drug alcohol ... does not increase violence." Are you claiming that if marijuana were legal it would increase violence? I'd love to see your evidence for that daffy claim.
And as for morphine: it also doesn't increase violence, so elbucko's argument doesn't apply there either.
Grow up, get a job and move out of your parent's basement.
Did all that. Grow up and stop substituting personal attacks for actual arguments.
Yes--not for everyone. There are also many people who cannot smoke.
>>>This is a very low-profit (if at all) item for the pharma industry. It's more of a control issue for a scheduled substance.>>>
Then why not just legalize it for crying out loud?
hat's too bad for them.
Thanks for demonstrating the low character of the average Drug War cheerleader.
It only took until the tenth post for that childish nonsense to be puked out.
You've hit the nail on the head.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.