Smoking Weed as Teen Reduces Adult IQ

For years, regular marijuana users have dismissed cautionary warnings that the habit killed brain cells, believing it was some kind of urban myth. Well, now scientists have produced evidence to back up the myth: a study of more than 1,000 people in New Zealand who were followed over two decades found that those who started habitually smoking marijuana before age 18 eventually showed an 8-point drop in IQ. The study, published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, will give parents hefty ammunition in those anti-drug talks with their kids.

Because the average IQ is 100 points, a drop of just eight points in IQ would mean falling from the 50th percentile to the 29th percentile in terms of intelligence—in other words, a drop from average to way below average. The researchers started with a baseline intelligence for all study subjects, testing them when they were under 13 and hadn’t yet started smoking and then assessing them at five different points in their lives—ages 18, 21, 26, 32, and 38. They again tested IQ at age 38.

The researchers assessed marijuana use and tested intelligence. he authors also controlled for alcohol use, other drug use and education level. According to the study, the eight-point drop was found in subjects who started smoking in adolescence and persisted in “habitual smoking”—using it at least four days per week—in three or more of the five testing points. People who started smoking in adolescence but used marijuana less persistently still had a hit to their IQ’s, but it was less pronounced than the group that used it early and persistently. Those who never used marijuana actually got smarter by nearly one IQ point on average.

Madeline Meier, lead researcher and a post-doctoral associate at Duke University, said that persistent use of marijuana in adolescence appeared to blunt intelligence, attention and memory. More persistent marijuana use was associated with greater cognitive decline. “Collectively, these findings are consistent with speculation that cannabis use in adolescence, when the brain is undergoing critical development, may have neurotoxic effects,” Meier writes in the study. Alarmingly, subjects who stopped using marijuana for a year still showed the persistence of adverse effects and some neurological deficits.

But those who didn’t start smoking until after adolescence showed no adverse effects on intelligence. Experts in child development said the reasons adolescents may be more susceptible to the harmful effects of marijuana may have to do with a substance called myelin. Myelin can be thought of as a kind of insulation for nerve cells in the brain that also helps speed brain signals along — and in adolescent brains, the protective coating it forms is not yet complete. “Frontal lobe myelination is not fully completed until age 25 years or so, and the pre-myelinated brain is more susceptible to damage from neurotoxins,” says Dr. Richard Wahl, director of adolescent Medicine at the University of Arizona. “Cannabis, most likely, is a neurotoxin in high and continuous doses.”

Zambia: New Packaging for Tobacco

IT is a fact that tobacco is extremely harmful to health. However, this does not seem to deter many people from smoking. The tobacco problem is a global challenge and because we are living in a global village, trends in one country will most likely spread to others. Recently, the Australian government came up with a law to enforce plain packaging on cigarette packets. The law stipulates that all cigarette packets regardless of the brand be packaged plainly but with images of the various ailments, which tobacco causes. These ailments range from mouth cancer, lung diseases, and respiratory problems, among others.

This did not go down well with the tobacco companies that argued that the value of their trademarks would be destroyed if they were no longer able to display their distinctive colours, brand designs and logos on packets of cigarettes. They took the government to court but the Australian High Court recently upheld the Government's decision to introduce plain packaging. Thus, in December, packets will instead come in a uniformly drab shade of olive and feature dire health warnings and graphic photographs of smoking's health effects. The government, which has urged other countries to adopt similar rules, hopes the new packs will make smoking as unglamorous as possible. Zambia has a law that stops smoking in public.

However, stricter measures are needed especially that many smokers start in their teens. Many countries are now facing the pressure of following Australia's route and Zambia is no exception. Zambia Consumer Association (ZACA) executive director, Muyunda Ililonga has encouraged the Zambian Government to follow suit. According to Mr Ililonga, "the ruling in Australia is a landmark victory for public health globally. It sends a strong message that the industry can be defeated."

The new law will now make it illegal, for example, for the cigarette manufacturers to market cigarettes in 'slim' packages to women to promote the belief that smoking is a way to stay thin and control weight. The tobacco companies have opposed plain packaging more ferociously than any other tobacco control measure because they know that plain packaging would have a major impact on smoking in Australia - and in other countries that might follow Australia's lead.

"The cigarette companies hate nothing more than laws that restrict their ability to sell more cigarettes," says Mr Ililonga, adding that "their legal challenges are destined to fail because the courts accept that more cigarette sales mean more sickness and more deaths, and that governments have a duty to act to reduce these harms." Mr Ililonga advised that a Government determined to protect its people would always succeed regardless of obstacles. "We feel the Government must follow the pioneering journey undertaken by the Australian government in standing up against tobacco." His sentiments that the attractive packaging is one of the ways in which the tobacco industry advertise their deadly products are echoed by Charlie Mumba (not his real name).

E-cigarettes no threat to heart

Electronic cigarettes commonly called e-cigarette used by many trying to kick the habit acts much like a cigarette producing an inhaled vapor that generates the physical sensation, appearance and usually flavor of an inhaled cigarette with some containing nicotine. These cigarettes have been under fire for the negative health effects they produce mainly heart disease. View slideshow: E-cigarettes and health effects According to a new study researchers say their study reveals that e-cigarettes that contain nicotine have no adverse events on the heart.

In this new study researchers from Athens-based Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center had examined the heart activity of young daily smokers after one regular cigarette and compared the heart activity to 22 people who smoked electronic cigarettes for seven minutes. Dr. Konstantions Farsalinos, cardiologist (fellow) at Onasis Cardiac Surgery Center and one of the researchers related while the smokers had shown significant heart dysfunction such as heart beats or blood pressure the effects from e-cigarettes had minimal impact on the heart. Dr. Farsalinos commented "Currently available data suggest that electronic cigarettes are far less harmful, and substituting tobacco with electronic cigarettes may be beneficial to health," according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

According to researchers past studies have found that e-cigarettes would need to be smoked daily from four to twelve months to acquire the levels the carcinogen nitrosamines that are present in one cigarette. Dr. Farsalinos did note that larger studies are needed to examine the possible long term effects of electronic cigarettes. This study was presented at the annual meeting of the European Society of Cardiology. The Wall Street Journal had reported the sale of electronic cigarettes has doubled in the United States over the last five years from $250 to $500 million in total cigarettes as reported by The Heartland Institute. The debate of electronic cigarettes wages on as part of the medical community argue there are still dangers to electronic cigarettes including the delay of smoking cessation . The other side of the community advocates they could have benefits as a smoking cessation program.

Pina Colada E-Cigs Leading Push Into Smokeless Tobacco

The advertisement features a scowling granny in an Argyle cardigan. “Dear Smoking Ban,” she says, brandishing a middle finger. The ad, which has appeared in several U.S. publications, touts Blu Ecigs, a maker of electronic cigarettes acquired earlier this year by Lorillard Inc. (LO) for $135 million in cash. “Take back your freedom to smoke anywhere with blu electronic cigarettes,” the ad continues.

“It’s the most satisfying way to tell smoking bans to kiss off. OK, maybe the second-most satisfying way.” In recent years, U.S. tobacco companies have rolled out a range of smokeless products, from battery-powered e-cigarettes to lozenges laced with tobacco. Lorillard, Altria Group Inc. (MO) and Reynolds American Inc. have tried various marketing tactics, including positioning the products as a way for nicotine addicts to thumb their noses at the anti-smoking police.

Yet because it’s hard persuading smokers that an e-cig or lozenge is a substitute for lighting up, these alternative products account for about 1 percent of the $90 billion U.S. cigarette market, said David Adelman, a Morgan Stanley analyst. “Consumers like the tobacco products they currently consume,” said Adelman, who is based in New York. “This isn’t like asking someone to change their laundry detergent or the type of mop they use.”

 The industry is trying to goose sales as U.S. smokers, increasingly hemmed in by higher cigarette taxes and smoke-free zones, puff less and less each year. Cigarette volume has been falling at an annual rate of 3 percent to 4 percent. Meanwhile, sales of smokeless products, including traditional snuff, grew about 7.5 percent from 2010 to 2011, according to Euromonitor International.

Differing Legal Opinions On Cigarette Packaging Laws

Packaging of cigarettes is a subject of controversy between cigarette makers, governments, and law-makers across the world. In their zeal to protect consumers from the indisputably harmful effects of smoking, governments have imposed increasingly tougher restrictions on brand advertising through the cigarette pack, and mandated the placement of graphics that detail the health hazards in horrific detail, such as a hole in the neck, mouth ulcers, and damaged lungs.

Tobacco companies have been challenging these measures in courts, considering the adverse effect on their businesses. Interestingly, courts have differed in their pronouncements in these cases. In Australia, the country’s High Court attracted worldwide attention when it recently set aside a challenge by tobacco companies to the government’s “plain packaging” legislation, which bans the use of brand logos from cigarette packs, and instead makes it compulsory to display graphics such as those mentioned above.

Claiming that the law impinged on their intellectual property rights, tobacco giants British American Tobacco PLC (NYSEAMEX:BTI) (LON:BATS), Britain’s Imperial Tobacco, Philip Morris International Inc. (NYSE:PM), and Japan Tobacco Inc (TYO:2914) had challenged its constitutional validity in the Australian High Court. Though the full judgment is awaited, the High Court opined by a majority out of seven judges, that the laws did not violate Australia’s constitution, effectively clearing the tables for the law to take effect from December 1 – cigarette packs and tobacco products will thereafter be sold only in plain olive green packs sans branding logos, and must display warnings of the hazards to health and graphics thereof.

This historic judgment was followed by action in Australian state, Tasmania’s legislature, which unanimously voted to ban the sale of tobacco products to any person born after 2000, as reported by the NYT. The proposal was introduced in the legislature by MP Ivan Dean, who said, “This would mean that we would have a generation of people not exposed to tobacco products.”

City leaders consider smoking ban on Duluth Lakewalk

A new ban on tobacco and the smoking of products like synthetic marijuana on Duluth’s Lakewalk and adjacent parks is making its way through the City Council. A proposed ordinance was read for the first time Monday but council members won’t have their first discussion on the ban until their next meeting, Sept. 10.

The ban would apply to the Lakewalk and its connected parks, including Leif Erikson and Lake Place. All tobacco use, including chewing tobacco, would be banned under the new rule. It would also do away with the “smoking of other deleterious products,” an attempt to include products like incense sprayed with chemicals to mimic the effects of drugs like marijuana.

That’s an apparent reaction to complaints about people gathering in Lake Place Park to smoke synthetic products they purchase at the Last Place On Earth, the Superior Street shop under scrutiny from Duluth Police and the city under nuisance rules. Customers there often enter Lake Place a few steps from the shop to smoke the controversial products. Several people on the Lakewalk on Monday said they approved of cracking down on synthetic marijuana, but some were less enthusiastic about banning tobacco.

Duluth resident Christina Woods, who is Anishinaabe, thinks people should be able to smoke cigarettes on the Lakewalk because, to some, smoking is a sacred activity, and Lake Superior is a sacred place to the Anishinaabe and other native people. “Smoking a cigarette in this area is a form of prayer and spiritual connection,” she said. “If it were banned, that would limit where we are able to practice our spirituality in the community. That would include laying tobacco or smoking it. Not to say people don’t abuse it, but for the most part it’s supposed to be sacred.” She doesn’t think cigarettes and synthetic marijuana should fall under the same ban. Mick Roby, of Brainerd, doesn’t like cigarette-smoking, but doesn’t think it should be banned from the Lakewalk.

“People have rights,” he said. “But I am definitely anti-smoking.” As a tourist, he’s noticed the crowds gathered outside the Last Place on Earth. He agreed with Woods that the synthetic marijuana purchased there should be regulated. “I am not in favor of artificial marijuana,” he said. “It falls in the hands of children.” Kari Kelso of Moose Lake said she drives to Duluth to use the Lakewalk about three times a week with her border collie, Katie. She said she would support a ban on smoking on the Lakewalk for health reasons and a more pleasant atmosphere.

“It’s such a beautiful place,” she said. “You just want to enjoy the ambience and you get a whiff of some kind of smoke. I don’t think it needs to be around here. And you see cigarette butts a lot. Pollution is not the greatest thing.” Minneapolis resident Dave Petree was smoking outside his hotel in Canal Park. Another sanction put on smokers by the city would be too much, he said. “There are so many places we can’t smoke,” he said, such as restaurants, bars and hotels. The outdoors should be different. “You’re outside in the air.”

Duluth resident Tyler LaRose was standing outside the Last Place on Earth on Monday. He said he understood why such a ban would be proposed for the sake of health, but that people had the right to smoke cigarettes or synthetic marijuana wherever they wanted outside in public places. “If you’re going to smoke, smoke,” he said. “If you’re not, don’t.” Duluth has had a policy asking people not to smoke in city parks for nearly a decade, but it is not an ordinance. Signs simply ask people to not smoke.

Melbourne council bans smoking in public places

Boroondara Council, which covers suburbs including Camberwell and Kew, in the city's inner east, passed the motion in a vote last night. The ban covers playgrounds, bus and tram stops, sports grounds and all council buildings within council boundaries. Mayor Heinz Kreutz says the law was passed unanimously, but residents have nothing to fear.

"It's very much about education. We're not really interested in the fines as such," he said. "So when someone forgets about this or has a cigarette near a playground, our local laws officers [will] have a conversation with them, explain what this is about and in nine out of ten cases we've found that people simply adopt the rule."

However, Mr Kreutz says repeat offenders will be fined. He says for example if there is someone deliberately smoking near a three-year-old on a slide, who will not listen to reason, then they will be fined. "With any law there needs to be some response, so we have a penalty point system and it may be anywhere between one and five penalty points, is between $1 and $500, depending on the severity of the disregard," he said.