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."
No.
However those who are severely mentally ill do not do well on marijuana. As I've posted before, when society has a handle on the mentally ill, even if it's only re-institutionalizing them, I might agree to a limited use of pot. But if you think I am going to concede to anyone being able to cruise on down to the 7-11 for a pack of nugs, you're wrong. Take another hit, man.
I have been told (and this may be hooey, as I freely admit) that if there was a quick roadside test for marijuana intoxication it would be legalized. Think about hundreds of thousands of stoned-out drivers on the road...
Nor alcohol, nor many other legal nonchemical stimuli. Should they ALL be banned because of their effect on the severely mentally ill? If not, why single out marijuana?
It's hooey ... that's just a smokescreen (no pun intended). Pre-Breathalyzer roadside sobriety tests would do quite well.
It's not that WODies lack character. It's just their arguments that suck.
This post delivers.
Rodney Dangerfield: I tried marijuana once but it made me so hungry. How hungry? I smoked half a joint and ate the other half.
Many of them have displayed Clint N. Suhks' low character ... and I can't offhand think of one who hasn't resorted to personal attacks (albeit not all are as low as Clint's).
>>>However those who are severely mentally ill do not do well on marijuana. As I've posted before, when society has a handle on the mentally ill, even if it's only re-institutionalizing them, I might agree to a limited use of pot. But if you think I am going to concede to anyone being able to cruise on down to the 7-11 for a pack of nugs, you're wrong. Take another hit, man.>>>
I think that is quite possibly the lamest argument I've seen. There are alot of people who drink and drive, or who get violent on alchohol, so we should deny everyone else a glass of wine?
Medication called Marinol
He smoked quite a bit of pot, btw.
Yawn. Isn't a little early for the seventh grade comments?
See post #29.
>>>I have been told (and this may be hooey, as I freely admit) that if there was a quick roadside test for marijuana intoxication it would be legalized. Think about hundreds of thousands of stoned-out drivers on the road...>>>
Yes, I would like to see a roadside test too. Mostly because if a person is drug tested and there is presence of marijuana they are considered DWI. Even if that intoxication occured last week sometime, it still shows in your system.
They're home from school this week.
That drug already exists too. It's called getting off your dead butt for some exercise and pushing away from the table before you feel full.
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.