Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 20:34, 27 April 2012

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cannabis (drug) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

	Cannabis (drug) was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 29, 2005 Peer review Reviewed March 9, 2006 Peer review Reviewed April 19, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted May 27, 2006 Good article nominee Listed October 3, 2007 Good article reassessment Delisted April 7, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed Current status: Delisted good article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs (defunct) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsWikipedia:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsTemplate:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational DrugsPsychoactive and Recreational Drugs Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Cannabis Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cannabis, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cannabis on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CannabisWikipedia:WikiProject CannabisTemplate:WikiProject CannabisCannabis Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Pharmacology High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Neuroscience High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Neuroscience, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Neuroscience on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NeuroscienceWikipedia:WikiProject NeuroscienceTemplate:WikiProject Neuroscienceneuroscience High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Archives

Archive index Cannabis archive 1 Cannabis archive 2 Cannabis (drug) archive 1 Cannabis (drug) archive 2 Cannabis (drug) Archive 3 Cannabis (drug) Archive 4 Cannabis (drug) Archive 5 Cannabis (drug) Archive 6 Talk:Cannabis (drug)/Tobacco discussion Taken from Talk:cannabis to explain the existence of this article. Please see this and Talk:Cannabis/Archive 1 Talk:Cannabis/Archive 2 for the sources and discussions of this article. Squiquifox 18:11, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cannabis (drug) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Marijuana: From Mexican Spanish?

Why does it say that the word marijuana comes from the Mexican Spanish word marihuana? I am a native Spanish speaker (not from Mexico), and, as far as I know, the word marihuana is used by Spanish speakers all around the world. At least I am sure that it is also used by speakers in Argentina, Colombia, and Spain, and it is actually the most usual word to refer to it in these three countries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.156.105.135 (talk) 23:36, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Cannabis ("drug"); hot burning photo deletion

Because the prevailingly misinformed public believes cannabis is a drug, this present title is instrumental in guiding readers to whatever has merit in the article, which has many more hits per day than any other cannabis-related WP source. However, there ought to be discussion, up to and including refutation, of the false attribution to cannabis use of health and behavior issues that arise from grossly improper hot burning use procedures which have been promoted by cigarette industry advertising for over a century and bolstered by anti-cannabis laws which make an easy-to-hide joint safer to possess than easy-to-detect harm reduction equipment.

Opposition to listing, in the photo captions, approximate dosage sizes (in milligrams) that give an indication of the gross disparity between a 25-mg. serving size (as in a miniature pipe) and a 500-mg. serving size (as in a hot-burning joint) appears to be based on the unfortunate fact that to date no studies can be cited addressing this issue or that of burning temperature (which has been found to be up to 700°-C. in a tobacco cigarette; the combustion points of tobacco and cannabis are not far apart). Absence of funding for such a study may suggest that the worldwide tobacco industry has enough power to prevent publication of any findings which would (a) discredit the profitable cigarette dosage size or (b) suggest that a substitution of cannabis for tobacco is in any user's interest.

Therefore the question remains, whether any inclusion of a photo of a joint serves any purpose other than that of advertising spam for the tobacco industry which benefits from the role of the joint in helping orient youngsters worldwide to a mythical notion of the normalcy of a 500-mg. joint rather than a 25-mg. low temperature serving device for cannabis use, from which many "graduate" to tobacco addiction (especially in Europe and the middle East where many are taught to mix cannabis with tobacco in the same joint).

Photos of a joint, including how to make one, are properly included in the article Joint, to which links are presently provided.

NPOV??

While there is some phrasing issues I don't see how this article presents a non neutral point of view. The only thing wikipedia can do about a subject such as this is describe the drug as it stands is society which this article does. However some will never accept this goal. Presenting a non neutral point of view is not difficult there are just too many opinions on this subject to generate a legitimate article free from tags of bias and assertions of other problems.

Nabiximols (Sativex): is it cannabis in UK law?

I have yet to find any UK government statement that nabiximols is cannabis for purposes of either the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (MDA), where cannabis is class B, or the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 (MDRs), where cannabis is schedule 1, and government departments seem reluctant to respond to freedom of information requests on the issue

Generally, G W Pharma and the UK government are creating the impression that nabiximols is not cannabis, but for MDA and MDR purposes there seems to be nothing else it can be

See also Which ‘Controlled Drug’ is Sativex? at http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/which_controlled_drug_is_sativex, Is Sativex cannabis? at http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/is_sativex_cannabis and Sativex ingredients at http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/sativex_ingredients_2

The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) has been adbvising since 2003 that 'Sativex' should be in schedule 4 part I of the MDRs

The MDRs are intended to regulate medicinal use of drugs classified as ‘controlled drugs’ in the MDA, and have five schedules, such that the degree of regulation is very high for schedule 1 drugs and very low for schedule 5 drugs

The opiates codeine and dihydrocodeine in ‘undivided doses’ of not more than 100mg, for example, are class B in the MDA and schedule 5 in the MDRs

There seems to be no crime of simple possession for schedule 5 drugs or schedule 4 part II drugs

Laurel Bush (talk) 12:55, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


See also my Sativex: a new tincture of cannabis article at http://www.spanglefish.com/laurelbush/index.asp?pageid=375588
Laurel Bush (talk) 12:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Second hand smoke

The "Detection" section needs to be expanded to include discussion as to whether second hand smoke from marijuana can be detected. I just did a Google search and the results are about 50/50 yes and no, depending on the site (and often its bias). There is precedent where an Olympic athlete successfully defended his medals after being almost stripped of them during a Winter Olympics after he claimed he was exposed to second-hand marijuana smoke. There is also debate over whether a "contact high" is possible. I think adding this information is vital because with so many legalization efforts underway, it is inevitable that this issue will come up. And while it would be covered in the article on the topic of second hand smoke, I feel it's germaine to this topic too. There's certainly enough reputable sources and research out there to present it in an NPOV manner. 70.72.223.215 (talk) 15:25, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Request for an addition

I am not able to edit this article, but there is an addition that you may find worthy of inclusion. This sentence appears in the "zinc" article - "In 2011, researchers at John Jay College of Criminal Justice reported that dietary zinc supplements can mask the presence of drugs in urine. Similar claims have been made in web forums on that topic." The reference is to a published report from a respected clinical journal and done by a very reputable school. Here is the reference: http://jat.oxfordjournals.org/content/35/6/333.short — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenhl15 (talk • contribs) 17:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Inaccurate side effects subsection.

The subsection side effects has questionable info from only one source. Cannabis is known to reduce nausea and vomiting. The part about leukemia is from a secondary source and not actually from the cancer research institute. Information needs to be checked or removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.29.55 (talk) 09:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

The section was created yesterday and cites a single, tertiary source (Medscape, a subsidiary of WebMD) that does not provide links to substantiating primary or secondary sources. Per WP:RSMED (emphases added), "Peer reviewed medical information resources such as WebMD... are usually acceptable sources in themselves, and can be useful guides about the relevant medical literature and how much weight to give different sources; however, as much as possible Misplaced Pages articles should cite the more established literature directly." As contentious as the cannabis debate is, I think any proposed Side Effect section must reference verifiable and peer-reviewed sources that readers can use. I also have grave doubts about the section name; cannabis has no "on-label" uses, so how do we delineate between effects and "side" effects? I am parking the section here until reliable, secondary, verifiable sources can be added. Let's find some solid evidence and come to consensus on whether (and where) this info should go in the article. Please do not re-add this section or this info to the article without discussion here. Cheers, Kevin/Last1in (talk) 19:09, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

• While cannabis has many medical uses, it also has many severely negative side effects. These include but are not limited to; Vomiting, Nausea, Anxiety, Paranoia, Hallucinations, Fatigue, Dizziness, Anorexia, Tooth discoloration, and Diarrhea.
• The Children’s Cancer Study Group reported a 10-fold increase of Leukemia among children whose mothers used cannabis while pregnant.

discusses Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Syndrome, which includes nausea and vomiting as symptoms. The Children's Cancer Study is real, but which came to the opposite conclusion. There's plenty of information on pot causing anxiety and paranoia. I didn't see anything showing a positive association between marijuana use and anorexia (just the opposite, actually.) I found a small study on chronic, heavy users experiencing hallucinations, but would like to see more on this. I didn't look for fatigue or dizziness, but I'm guessing it could be found.

In short, I think what was posted is mostly accurate, but needs to be reworded and we can add better citations.

Side-effect doesn't have to be used in the clinical sense. I don't think anyone uses pot because they want to feel nausuous, so I think it'd be safe to label that a side-effect. But, if that's an issue, we can just label everything as a "potential effect" or something along those lines.

Finally, I've said it before and I'll say it again -- there appear to be editors on this page who seem to fall into one of two camps: Those who think pot is evil, highly addictive, and must be publicly denounced; and those who think pot is completely benign, and will cure a host of illnesses, solve deforestation issues, etc. etc. The science shows both of these arguments to be false. Pot has active ingredients, some of which are harmful to humans; there is also evidence that it can have some positive impacts for certain illnesses. If you disagree with this statement, you shouldn't be editing this page because you lack objectivity on this issue. (I am NOT directing this rant to any one in particular, just a general statement to any editors working on this page.)JoelWhy (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed on all points, especially the last. Contentious articles seem to have been polarised over the last couple years. Where previously there were a dozen positions jostling for neutrality, everyone has suddenly decided to pick either "us" or "them" and fight to the death. Black-and-white thinking is incredibly dangerous in a particolour world - I use the neologism Wikibivalence for it's prevalence here. On this article, I lean toward a rather Prefectian view on cannabis. However, I mainly care about keeping invective (on both sides) out and trying to find valid science to support whatever ends up here.

I am allergic to the pseudoscientific propaganda (on both sides) that seem to clog the debate. I distrust studies funded by any group (like NORML or the post-1937 US Government) with a vested stake in the outcome. I pulled & parked the new info because the single source reeks with hints it falls into that category. <snark> Begin snarky comments; feel free to ignore: Medscape lists hypotension and hypertension as well as diarrhea and constipation as adverse effects. Cannabis causes AND cures the same condition? Cool! They also list drugs where cannabis should be avoided or closely monitored. The list is over 450 drugs long. Seriously? No one can find a single reliable source for carboxyhemoglobin (which is something of a given with any inhaled smoke) but Medscape has definitive proof of "Significant" interference between cannabis and Temsirolimus - a drug that didn't even exist six years ago? Sorry, but I don't buy it without reputable sources that I can read for myself, and I shy away from anything that does not offer the reader a way to evaluate their conclusions. </snark> I think that cannabis has definite effects, some of which are inimical or undesired; I just don't think that this cite is a valid foundation on which to build a section. Cheers & Thanks, Kevin/Last1in (talk) 00:52, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The editing by Jakebarrington (talk · contribs) is pushing a negative POV with sources that don't meet WP:RSMED.

1. The medscape source, who knows where that info comes from. Do they accept user submitted content? Because I don't see any evidence backing up those claims.
2. EGetGoing, a website dedicated to drug treatment. Not NPOV.
3. Livestrong, which we all know is dedicated to cancer, which cites references that are clearly anti-cannabis.
4. This Harvard source appears to be someone affiliated with the universities' personal web page, and not based on hard science. It also references some articles with a clear anti-cannabis slant and nothing to balance it out.
5. A California government source that rehashes some evidence in a political manner. We don't know that the politicians involved assessed all of the evidence, or selected only the anti-cannabis data. The research articles it references could be included, but not this report.

– Muboshgu (talk) 20:34, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

1. http://reference.medscape.com/drug/cannabis-ganja-marijuana-343687#4
2. http://reference.medscape.com/drug/cannabis-ganja-marijuana-343687#6

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• Delisted good articles
• Old requests for peer review
• Former good article nominees
• All unassessed articles
• WikiProject templates with unknown parameters
• B-Class Cannabis articles
• Top-importance Cannabis articles
• WikiProject Cannabis articles
• B-Class pharmacology articles
• High-importance pharmacology articles
• WikiProject Pharmacology articles
• B-Class neuroscience articles
• High-importance neuroscience articles