Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Study Shows Marijuana Use In Teens Correlates To Decreasing IQ

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the news-for-long-term-nerds dept.

Medicine 626

retroworks writes "The BBC reports on a paper published in the U.S.'s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences showing a correlation between persistent, regular cannabis use and risk of lower IQ. The study finds the risk particularly correlates use of cannabis by teenagers who use the drug "four times a week year after year." The more people smoked, the greater the loss in IQ. Reviewers of the study at King's College Institute of Psychiatry states that the data and methodology are exceptional, but she also cautions that there may be another explanation, such as depression, which could lower IQ while stimulating marijuana use. The study does not mention or rule out 'nocebo' effects, i.e. just feeling stupid for spending your teens hanging out with potheads."

cancel ×

626 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Mods (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147513)

Tag news article 'Propaganda'

Re:Mods (5, Insightful)

i kan reed (749298) | about 2 years ago | (#41147711)

Propaganda by whom, and for what purpose? How do you identify it as propaganda instead of legitimate science? You have to answer these basic questions and support your answers with evidence before anybody is going to buy into your conspiracy theories.

Re:Mods (5, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | about 2 years ago | (#41147815)

Propaganda by whom, and for what purpose? How do you identify it as propaganda instead of legitimate science? You have to answer these basic questions and support your answers with evidence before anybody is going to buy into your conspiracy theories.

Propaganda; n. Any material which proposes to sway a reader to form a conclusion that conflicts with your own.

Re:Mods (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147969)

we should trust the experts, just like we do with the Climate Change.

no one elses opinions matter

Re:Mods (2, Interesting)

bistromath007 (1253428) | about 2 years ago | (#41147837)

The knee-jerk is a conditioned response from seeing a host of studies that clearly are propaganda. Nearly every study that says something bad is. This one is legit, but I can understand how it'd be easy to miss; the main reason I feel it's on the level is that it succeeds in muddying its own stance.

News Flash (4, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | about 2 years ago | (#41147521)

Drinking Wine or Beer 4 times a day year after year will reduce your IQ. Over use of ANYTHING will cause problems.

Re:News Flash (1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147561)

And cue the queue of stoners attempting to defend their addiction.

Re:News Flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147865)

lol "addiction."

Re:News Flash (3, Insightful)

NeoMorphy (576507) | about 2 years ago | (#41147933)

And cue the queue of stoners attempting to defend their addiction.

Desperate attempts to rationalize the use of marijuana is one of the signs of addiction. They're big on pointing out some benefits, but ignore all of the mental and physical problems associated with it.

Teenagers who are in the "I know everything" stage can be very frustrating when you try to explain the dangers.

Re:News Flash (5, Insightful)

sonamchauhan (587356) | about 2 years ago | (#41147567)

4 times a week, not 4 times a day.

Re:News Flash (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147669)

It affects reading comprehension also....

Re:News Flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147579)

Yep, all those Books god me dumb... nau i kent eevan write rite.

Re:News Flash (3, Insightful)

lengau (817416) | about 2 years ago | (#41147843)

I think this is a case of where "overdoing it" is. There are some things for which just about any amount is overdoing it (e.g. cyanide). On the other hand, reading has a much higher threshold. Unless your reading is actively hindering another part of your life (e.g. you read for days on end without eating, drinking or sleeping, thus causing medical problems), it's fine. [Note: As I am not familiar with the subject, I withhold commentary about where I believe that line to be regarding cannabis use.]

News Flash News Flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147587)

4 times a week is quite a bit different than 4 times a year.

You don't know what you are smoking... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147623)

With the additional uncertainty of extra substances in your weed, I wonder how they controlled for THAT. From lead to sugar to liquid plastics (known as Brix where I live), anything could do that to your brain.

How fitting. CAPTCHA: poisons

Re:News Flash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147685)

Overusing your dad's ass as my fuck toy hasn't caused my any problems.

Re:News Flash (1, Troll)

Antarius (542615) | about 2 years ago | (#41147999)

Sure fucked your grammar, however.

Wait... You fucked your gramma too?

Re:News Flash (1)

PenguinJeff (1248208) | about 2 years ago | (#41147759)

The problem how I see it is that as they claim they can not overdose so they just keep admitting the drug. This continues to do damage. From what I have seen they don't just smoke a little they fill the room. My only close experiance was I had to help a friend move out of a place where his room mates where lighting it up. It can be smelled a block away in most cases I have come across with how far I smell it I doubt they are doing just a little.

Re:News Flash (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147849)

From what I have seen they don't just smoke a little they fill the room

Not everytime, but when they do it's generally deliberate and called 'hot boxing' - it means they're rebreathing the smoke so they get a longer lasting high from less weed. And yes that doesn't sound like it'd be a good thing for your body.

Re:News Flash (4, Interesting)

TemperedAlchemist (2045966) | about 2 years ago | (#41147821)

Do you have any evidence to support that assertion?

The medical community has known for some time that marijuana has adverse effects. For one reason or another, the pot smoking community seems to get all defensive and denies all allegations backed by science almost as fiercely as denial of global warming or evolution.

It would be nice to see more studies like this and see if these results can be replicated.

Re:News Flash (0)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 years ago | (#41147881)

I wonder how this reconciles with the evidence that heavy marijuana use actually helps improve longterm memory formation (http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/11/marijuana-could/). I guess while you have a better long term memory, your ability to do logic and linguistical analysis drops. Interesting trade off. I know that IQ's tend to vary 10-15 points in either direction during life based on any number of factors (at least that's what they told me when I was a kid), so I wonder if that is what is being impacted on, as opposed to a direct effect of the cannabinoids. Also, as someone who has smoked since they were 18 (stopped about a year ago, around 10 years) I don't feel any dumber, and my IQ score is still in the 150's, so for me it actually went up a few points (tested in the upper 140's in elementary school), so in my particular case it may not be the best. I wonder if there are environmental confounds in the study - perhaps a bunch of folks got stoned and watched game shows all day which is enough to dumb down most people? Anecdotally I usually would smoke and go for walks, hikes, bike rides, explore nature, read, or watch discovery channel - things which kept me active. Anyone have a link to the full study? I'd like to see their methodology.

Re:News Flash (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147887)

If it makes you less intelligent, it probably makes you happier too. Ignorance is, after all, bliss.

Re:News Flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147903)

Thats a reason to also encourage people from stop drinking alcohol in excess, not a reason to continue smoking marijuana in excess. One wrong doesn't justify another.

Re:News Flash (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147929)

Over use of ANYTHING will cause problems.

Especially fiber. If that isn't a plot to have the government interfere with out assholes, I don't know what is. I think it is because that with a high fiber diet and lots of laxatives, a terrorist won't be able to hide a dirty bomb up his ass. Why do you think they give you peanuts to eat on the airplane?

Re:News Flash (1, Informative)

assertation (1255714) | about 2 years ago | (#41147965)

I agree 100%, but if you have ever listened to marijuana activist talk their message tends to be that ANYTHING less than 100% positive written about marijuana is a LIE by the powers that be.

THC (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147529)

Frsssst Tokeeeee

Re:THC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147763)

Just like a stoner to be slow, late, and misspell everything in a two word sentence.

Legalise all drugs (2, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | about 2 years ago | (#41147541)

All drugs should be legalised, there is no reason to hunt people down for smoking whatever they want, drinking whatever they want. There are already plenty of laws regarding actual acts of violence and negligence (like causing an accident while drunk or drugged). The government likes to have control over your body as well as over all of your actions. Do you think you should be free people, even free to kill your IQ or do you think you should be controlled by the state, told what to do, what not to do, thrown in jail if you refuse to comply?

Re:Legalise all drugs (2)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | about 2 years ago | (#41147681)

I think all things should be free to use as long as you're not significantly interfering with someone else's enjoyment. For example, the government should stop telling us e.g. that we can't use that empty house + land over there because it "belongs" to someone else.

People are free to kill their IQ, but should be discouraged. Putting potheads in jail is wrong because no-one is at risk of harm from potheads, not because being a pothead is somehow a grand expression of freedom. If they fail and harm themselves as a result, the state should treat them - with group freedom comes group responsibility.

Of course, your libretardian argument leads to the conclusion that drink driving is OK as long as you don't cause an accident - because, after all, money solves all problems, including the problem of dying or becoming a paraplegic.

Re:Legalise all drugs (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about 2 years ago | (#41147859)

the government should stop telling us e.g. that we can't use that empty house + land over there because it "belongs" to someone else.

- I agree, it's a private issue, not a governmental one.

not because being a pothead is somehow a grand expression of freedom. If they fail and harm themselves as a result, the state should treat them - with group freedom comes group responsibility

- of-course it's because of individual freedom and there is no such thing as 'group responsibility'.

drink driving is OK as long as you don't cause an accident

- correct. And if people cause accidents while drunk, this is also not a governmental issue. Government shouldn't be even involved in traffic control (or roads for that matter), again, all of it is a private issue that should be dealt privately. Private roads have private rules.

Re:Legalise all drugs (0)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | about 2 years ago | (#41148009)

- I agree, it's a private issue, not a governmental one.

That's good, because I come from a fairly rich family and - since it's not a governmental issue - I can just take over the land I want.

- of-course it's because of individual freedom and there is no such thing as 'group responsibility'.

That's good, because without group responsibility there is no government, and see above.

- correct. And if people cause accidents while drunk, this is also not a governmental issue.

As above. After getting drunk and driving into you, I shall pay you £25k. If you want more, you're welcome to fight me. Perhaps you can attach a spike or something to your wheelchair and try crashing into me for revenge - we're keeping the government out of this.

Private roads have private rules.

Now here I agree. If it wasn't for government wasting money on roads, we'd all be using decent, cheap public transport - private companies are completely useless at creating any sort of national infrastructure, especially one that isn't profitable.

Re:Legalise all drugs (3, Insightful)

svick (1158077) | about 2 years ago | (#41147883)

How far does that go? Can I invite all my friends into your house while you're at work? After all, why can't we use that empty house? It doesn't matter that it "belongs" to someone.

Re:Legalise all drugs (1)

buchner.johannes (1139593) | about 2 years ago | (#41147691)

All drugs should be legalised, there is no reason to hunt people down for smoking whatever they want, drinking whatever they want. There are already plenty of laws regarding actual acts of violence and negligence (like causing an accident while drunk or drugged). The government likes to have control over your body as well as over all of your actions. Do you think you should be free people, even free to kill your IQ or do you think you should be controlled by the state, told what to do, what not to do, thrown in jail if you refuse to comply?

Free people should make free choices for themselves as they wish. But the classification of something as a drug includes that you lose your free choice because of the addiction and influence.
Yes, jail for marijuana use is too much. No, not all drugs should be legalized.

Re:Legalise all drugs (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#41147989)

Yes, jail for marijuana use is too much. No, not all drugs should be legalized.

Name the drug that you think should be kept illegal, and I will explain to you why it should be legalized.

Sure, so long as you pay full medical costs (2)

Viol8 (599362) | about 2 years ago | (#41147847)

"Do you think you should be free people, even free to kill your IQ or do you think you should be controlled by the state, told what to do, what not to do, thrown in jail if you refuse to comply?"

A free society doesn't mean you have freedom to do as you damn well please no matter what and screw everyone else. If you hadn't smoked so many joints you might understand this basic fact of human civilisation which has been true since probably before we came down out of the trees since even animals don't tolerate anarchy in their packs or herds.

Re:Sure, so long as you pay full medical costs (0)

roman_mir (125474) | about 2 years ago | (#41147915)

A free society doesn't mean you have freedom to do as you damn well please no matter what and screw everyone else.

- I agree, actions have consequences. It's the government that prevents consequences for many people's actions, why are all those failed banks and other companies still in business?

If you hadn't smoked so many joints you might understand this basic fact of human civilisation

- haven't touched any drugs in my life, do you have an argument or is this going to be another one of those things, where people who can't make arguments change subject to the inconsequential personal attacks?

Re:Legalise all drugs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147851)

Epigenisis? Phenotypic plasticity? A jedi craves not these things. Just go back to sleep.

Re:Legalise all drugs (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147899)

I'm interested in your reasoning...

If someone kills their IQ, they effectively lower their "worth" to contribute to society. So, it is possible/probable to become a burden to said society. What then? Do we set up opium-type dens and let them have at? We'll have to feed them as well. Sounds like a form of retirement to me. So, let's say you get way and everybody can do anything. What are we to do with the extra burden?

I'm all for doing what you want... but I am also all for facing the consequences of your actions. If you knowingly do this, then you shouldn't get any relief from the consequences. Of course, this isn't exactly tied to the IQ aspect, just a general statement. I don't want to responsible for MORE other's poor decisions.

Re:Legalise all drugs (0)

udachny (2454394) | about 2 years ago | (#41147977)

(I just hit the quota on the first account again, but same guy here)

If someone kills their IQ, they effectively lower their "worth" to contribute to society.

- I disagree. Nothing about killing one's IQ tells us anything about their 'worth to society'. In fact intelligence is not even a prerequisite to survival. People can be very useful to society and they can be quite unintelligent still. There are many jobs, many things that people can do that absolutely do not require high levels of intelligence.

What then? Do we set up opium-type dens and let them have at?

- why should you do anything about them, are they bothering you in any way? How are they hurting you by being not as intelligent as they could be otherwise?

You are not being made responsible for other people's decisions if you leave them alone. You are being made responsible by the government, that takes people, throws them to jail and forces you to pay taxes and pay in all other ways that society pays, when it places its members into jail.

Dude! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147551)

Wait... what?

Say it isn't so (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147555)

It took a study to determine this. I think another good study would be sticking a tack in your thumb and determining if it hurts. I do like the nocebo affect though...maybe after smoking pot they could hang with some of the CERN physicists and recoup some of the lost IQ?

Reefer Madness (1)

Cpt_Kirks (37296) | about 2 years ago | (#41147569)

Updated for a new generation.

Re:Reefer Madness (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147717)

So it's propaganda if it doesn't match your world views?

Go sit on a broom handle.

Ya buddy (4, Funny)

Metabolife (961249) | about 2 years ago | (#41147571)

I was gonna go to class, before I got high
I coulda' cheated and I coulda passed, but I got high
I'm taking it next semester and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high

Work ethic... (5, Interesting)

shakezula (842399) | about 2 years ago | (#41147575)

I'd say the biggest drawback to pot smoking in teenage years is a lack of ability to find and keep a job. Being a loaf isn't conducive to paying the bills, which is the skill teenagers need to learn first and foremost. Self-sufficiency is paramount to heading off to college, or work, or simply moving on in life and I'd wager is more important than grades, social status, or if they are pot-heads or not. Its possible to smoke weed and still have a reasonable income, but the desire to be self-sufficient needs to come first or the stoner mentality wins over.

Re:Work ethic... (1)

DogDude (805747) | about 2 years ago | (#41147829)

What does smoking pot have to do with employment?

Re:Work ethic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147941)

after schooling in your adult life - if you work and are paid for your skills over simple minimum wage obedience then your work replaces school as the main IQ re enforcing brain activity.

you go to public school for free and lots got to college with partial or full help.. but after that you have to work hard to keep that job that keeps you mentally healthy.

this is just how i live, not how i think it will be for everyone.

and i smoke a whole lot, for the record.

Re:Work ethic... (5, Informative)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | about 2 years ago | (#41147947)

It demotivates you. I've lived with stoners and they were some of the most lackadaisical folks I've met. If you're not going to get up off your ass and get a job, and prove that you want to keep it, you're not going to be employed, simple as that.

My POV on the IQ loss is that there's probably a heavy component of just not exercising the mind, because you can't be bothered.

Re:Work ethic... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41148013)

ive met those types but in defense of others i will say ive had housemates where they work full time very hard and have good jobs and use marijuana to relax everyday. but yea there is definitely the other type. but sometimes i wonder that they didnt care in the first place you dont know how much weed would have made a difference in the first place.

i feel like we blame weed too much. i feel like people are still choosing to be lazy by soberly deciding to smoke a drug that can have such non motivating effects.

Re:Work ethic... (1)

DogDude (805747) | about 2 years ago | (#41148023)

Pot doesn't always demotivate. There are two different kinds with very different effects.

Re:Work ethic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147831)

this is true. in essence i think your point is that it may not so much be the drug as the lifestyle around heavy use. everything you do resolves around when you smoke. ive done it for years and ive also chose to quit for years. ive also done the occasional only when im at a party and it happens to be there.

i work, live on my own, graduated college but i can definitely tell you i would have better grades in college if id spent more time focusing on school work. anytime you are challenging your brain is good.

i know when i am in heavy smoking phases my brain tho sedated is not challenged enough everyday.

Confounding (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147583)

Does smoking pot as a teen lower your IQ, or are stupid teens more likely to smoke pot?

Re:Confounding (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | about 2 years ago | (#41147935)

Does smoking pot as a teen lower your IQ, or are stupid teens more likely to smoke pot?

You control for that by looking at the entire population IQ, and then looking at the availability of pot (some parts of the population certainly have a harder time getting hold of it). Then follow those cohorts from year to year as they age and see if there is a difference in the group that has no problem getting it (they would end up with a lower IQ ultimately).

But scientific rigor is for squares.

No surprise there (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147589)

Just listening to the incoherent babbling and giggling of stoners, this does not really come as a surprise.
Combine this with the risk of acute psychoses really strong cannabis can cause and I think some countries should rethink their lax attitudes towards cannabis use.
I am looking at you, Netherlands.
Oh, and the hight tar content of weed that will cause lung cancer.

Re:No surprise there (2)

Marxdot (2699183) | about 2 years ago | (#41147789)

Or you could stop being a busybody twat.

And people wonder why its called (0)

dywolf (2673597) | about 2 years ago | (#41147593)

"Dope".

Re:And people wonder why its called (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147909)

Because ignorant people think all illegal substances are basically the same thing?

"Dope" is heroin.

And in other news ... (1)

Tim Ward (514198) | about 2 years ago | (#41147595)

... bears shit in the woods, the pope is a catholic, ect ect.

Persuading the kids is another matter of course.

What fun! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147599)

Looking forward to seeing an otherwise intelligent readership make utter fools of themselves pretending that this study is deeply flawed and that weed is actually safe. It's amazing how many in the intellectual community buy into that fiction.

Re:What fun! (1)

bistromath007 (1253428) | about 2 years ago | (#41147863)

Yeah, it's like they believe they have a wealth of historical context to draw on or something! Ridiculous.

Summary left out important information (5, Informative)

HungryHobo (1314109) | about 2 years ago | (#41147603)

Those who started after the age of 18 did not have the same IQ decline.

"It's such a special study that I'm fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains."
-King's College professor Terrie Moffitt.

Re:Summary left out important information (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147775)

i first smoked just 2 months before i turned 19 but only really got into it a few months later... but i graduated college and hold a job and live on my own. I HOPE I MADE THE CUT!!! :P

Re:Summary left out important information (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147869)

Those who started after the age of 18 did not have the same IQ decline.

"It's such a special study that I'm fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains."
-King's College professor Terrie Moffitt.

Probably because their IQ was already low. Whoever says that it isn't dangerous are smoking themselves. I have seen enough when friends smoke it. Even had a friend get into a nasty car accident from her being high. And yes, I see the same for drinkers (why I stopped drinking myself.)

Wow (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147607)

Bet they didn't see that one coming.

Why all the sensationalism? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147615)

From the article: One member of the team, Prof Terrie Moffitt of King's College London's Institute of Psychiatry, said this study could have a significant impact on our understanding of the dangers posed by cannabis use.

Quoted as saying: "It is such a special study that I'm fairly confident that cannabis is safe for over-18 brains, but risky for under-18 brains."

No kidding. So is alcohol. But this article's hype implies that all potential future cannabis users are under 18 and therefore cannabis is a dangerous substance.
Whatever you say, BBC.

nu uh (1)

slashpot (11017) | about 2 years ago | (#41147653)

I'm still smart and I'm like almost 40 I think

that's why they call them stoners (0)

alen (225700) | about 2 years ago | (#41147655)

they are as dumb and dense as rocks

if you have nothing better to do in life than sit around and inhale a drug to "get high" and have psychodelic hallucinations then you're probably not destined for greatness

Re:that's why they call them stoners (1)

joh (27088) | about 2 years ago | (#41147713)

they are as dumb and dense as rocks

if you have nothing better to do in life than sit around and inhale a drug to "get high" and have psychodelic hallucinations then you're probably not destined for greatness

Just that nobody calls those users "stoners" who aren't stoned all day long but only enjoy a reefer now and then to relax.

It's like calling everyone a drunkard who drinks a glas of wine now and then.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147797)

BUT BUT!

Here is a list of a few famous exceptons that *proves* people who smoke this illegal drug are smart and revolutionary!!

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147799)

Yeah, and that's why this stoner works at a national research lab. Fuck off you ignorant twat.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (1)

benjfowler (239527) | about 2 years ago | (#41147917)

That's the THC psychosis talking.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147923)

Yeah, and that's why this stoner works at a national research lab. Fuck off you ignorant twat.

So how much do they pay their janitors?

Re:that's why they call them stoners (1)

DogDude (805747) | about 2 years ago | (#41147817)

you're probably not destined for greatness

I say the same thing about people who have trouble writing basic English sentences, as well.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147823)

wow, ignorant much? maybe we should all jump to conclusions on things we know nothing about. for example, i'll deduce that you posted this from your parent's basement, you are a virgin, you are overweight and have no friends. accurate?

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147885)

you should probably stay in school at least long enough to learn that marijuana doesn't cause hallucinations.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (2)

tokencode (1952944) | about 2 years ago | (#41147895)

I'd argue the psychedelics specifically can actually broaden your perspective on the world. "It must be changing something about the internal communication in my brain. Whatever my inner process is that lets me solve problems, it works differently, or maybe different parts of my brain are used, " said Herbert, 42, an early employee of Cisco Systems who says he solved his toughest technical problems while tripping to drum solos by the Grateful Dead -- who were among the many artists inspired by LSD. "When I'm on LSD and hearing something that's pure rhythm, it takes me to another world and into anther brain state where I've stopped thinking and started knowing," said Herbert who intervened to ban drug testing of technologists at Cisco Systems.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147927)

"psychodelic hallucinations"?...what kind of weed have you been smoking? I think your shit may have been laced with PCP my friend. I didnt know you like to get wet dave...

Seriously, dont knock it unless you've tried it. Or at least know wtf you are talking about.

Re:that's why they call them stoners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41148005)

Not a pot user myself (tried it once) but I'm pretty sure "psychodelic hallucinactions" aren't part of the standard marijuana experience. Not unless you have way, way too much. More usual effects are feeling relaxed, hungry, peaceful and finding really mundane stuff incredibly funny.

Even if there are risks for developing brains, I still think legalised (but taxed, regulated and age-restricted) marijuana would be immensely less harmful to society than alcohol currently is. And I support alcohol, for all its evils.

Fascinating... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147657)

And I always thought it was a smart drug. Benzo's are worse.

As `The Dude` would say (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147665)

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

Joey Ramone (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147683)

You would never know it when considering Joey...

So that's why (1)

Coisiche (2000870) | about 2 years ago | (#41147719)

Passed every exam at school with flying colours and had my first experience of failing an exam at university.

Of course that could also be explained by going into an exam hung over and sleep deprived. It's hard to say.

anti-pot message from tobacco country... (1, Interesting)

tbonefrog (739501) | about 2 years ago | (#41147723)

Study was run by a guy at Duke University in tobacco country. They have a vested interest in keeping pot illegal? Something to consider if you have any free brain cells. Not defending pot smoking, just sayin cigarettes are as bad or worse.

Re:anti-pot message from tobacco country... (1)

thePowerOfGrayskull (905905) | about 2 years ago | (#41147893)

Study was run by a guy at Duke University in tobacco country. They have a vested interest in keeping pot illegal? Something to consider if you have any free brain cells. Not defending pot smoking, just sayin cigarettes are as bad or worse.

You draw a conclusion and provide no supporting evidence. One could just as easily say that big tobacco has a vested interest in getting MJ legalized, so that they can package it and sell it.

That's, like, just your scientific opinion, man. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147727)

Or, alternatively, maybe there is some kind of effect from breathing in smoke that's generally bad for brain development. That wouldn't surprise me either. However, they did try to control for smoking of tobacco and consumption of alcohol too, so perhaps this is a distinct effect. Obviously they need to do some follow-up studies to see if this observation holds up.

rubbish study? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147743)

In before all the druggies swarm to defend their narcotic. :)

Correlation or Causation? (3, Interesting)

Shirgall (110235) | about 2 years ago | (#41147773)

Breaking the law on a regular basis with a decent chance of being caught and treated harshly by the system probably correlates with a low IQ too, doesn't it?

Re:Correlation or Causation? (1)

v1 (525388) | about 2 years ago | (#41147871)

needs more 'correlationisnotcausation" tagging methinks.

if A and B appear together (correlation) it doesn't mean A causes B, or even that B causes A. It just means that the two tend to occur together for some possibly very indirect reason.

I think in this case pot doesn't cause stupidity, but that generally speaking, stupider people tend to do more drugs. Nothing surprising nor valuable to hear about that.

Re:Correlation or Causation? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147979)

You heard it here first, kids. SMART people do what they're TOLD!

Paywall (0)

SneakyMishkin (1298729) | about 2 years ago | (#41147783)

There are so many details left of of the news stories about this report with regards to methodology I decided I would take a look at the report myself. Surely they controlled for things like, years of education, family income, geography... right? Well I went to the original study link but I am not willing to pay the $10 to read it. If anyone has a link to the pdf I would appreciate it. Until then I assume this is similar to the famous pirates vs. global average temperatures graph.

Re:Paywall (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147959)

Wow man, unwilling to pay for a $10 pdf but also unwilling to read the abstract? The people in question were followed from birth and baselines were established at age 13, prior to any habitual use of MJ. They also said that the effect was robust to years of education.

What if they just don't care? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147787)

Did they ever stop to think that maybe the pot-smoking teens just didn't care about how well or poorly they did on the tests because they were relaxed from it?

See that's the problem with such tests, they are so easily skewed by the participants.

Just forget about them, and stop trying. Shut down the whole nasty business.

Or, perhaps... (0)

DRBivens (148931) | about 2 years ago | (#41147807)

Nor did the study rule out the possibility that, once sufficiently stoned, one really has no desire to read--let alone learn--much of anything. IQ is like many things: use it or lose it.

Whenever I see something like this, I wonder: Is there a hidden agenda?

I wanna see some more data before changing my opinion. One study does not a fact make.

wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147813)

came here to get better commentary then the "you wonder why they call it dope" meme. Not gonna lie, i'm a little disappointed.

Not being a dickhead (1, Interesting)

benjfowler (239527) | about 2 years ago | (#41147877)

If I had a dollar for every time my teenage pothead friends told me that weed was harmless, I'd be a very rich man.

Thing is, none of them did anything useful with their lives, or even had jobs. And now they're all completely drug-fucked wastes of space, to a man.

A spliff or two, now and again when you're old enough to handle it, might be okay. But when you're in your late teens, the stuff will destroy your mind -- because teens are inconsiderate, obnoxious douchebags, generally because the "not being a complete cunt" part of your brain is the last part of your brain to fully develop, and pot messes with its development.

Mod me down, potheads.

Re:Not being a dickhead (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about 2 years ago | (#41147981)

Likewise I know a ton of very productive and successful people that have some THC when they go home instead of Ethanol. It doesn't mean potheads become lazy stupid people, it means that lazy stupid people smoke pot.

I'd also be interested in other methods of delivery. Does the THC do the reduction in IQ or is it the smoking? Filling your lungs with carcinogens can't be great for oxygen supply. How about a similar study on cigarette smokers vs pot smokers.

Total BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41147911)

I smoked lotsa wid in my taiem and i got mai major in linguistiqs just faine.

Collapsed headline (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | about 2 years ago | (#41147951)

The story was collapsed so the headline was so close to the previous story I saw Study shows Apple use by teens may cause lower IQ.

Since AC is going bonkers (1)

scubamage (727538) | about 2 years ago | (#41147975)

Wow, lots of AC's posting with no actual relevant discussion of the topic. I wish someone had the full study listed since the abstract doesn't mention any controls. It's pretty well established that IQ's can vary ~10 degrees in either direction throughout life from a baseline taken early on based on any number of factors, from physical activity to constant mental engagement (I know in PA they do initial IQ tests around 1st grade to get the baseline). I wonder if those factors are what is affected, vs a direct impact from exposure to cannabinoids (no one in the study seems to be the slice-and-dice-the-brain type, and everything is based on self-reporting).

It's true. (0)

earls (1367951) | about 2 years ago | (#41147985)

Yesterday, I believed in evolution.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>