Harrison,
Lana D., Michael Backenheimer and James A. Inciardi (1995), Cannabis
use in the United States: Implications for policy. In: Peter Cohen &
Arjan Sas (Eds)(1996), Cannabisbeleid in Duitsland, Frankrijk en
de Verenigde Staten. Amsterdam, Centrum voor Drugsonderzoek, Universiteit
van Amsterdam. pp. 198-205.
© Copyright 1995, 1996 Centrum voor Drugsonderzoek, Universiteit
van Amsterdam. All rights reserved.
2 Pharmacology
and health
Lana
D. Harrison, Michael Backenheimer and James A. Inciardi
Pharmacology
The
isomer most experts believe responsible for the effects of marijuana[1]
is Delta-9 Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). This isomer is a viscous, noncrystalline,
water-insoluble, but highly fat soluble compound. Reported behavioral
effects of marijuana must be interpreted with caution due to differences
in dose, route of administration, social and cultural setting, and
the experience and psychological set of the user. Critically, as is
true with tobacco, the amount of active substance reaching the blood
stream is dependent, in very large measure, upon the smoking technique
being employed and the amount of substance destroyed or decomposed
by the high temperature associated with the smoking.
According to current
research, it is estimated that a marijuana cigarette when smoked with
maximum efficiency will deliver no more than 50 percent of the Delta-9
THC within it. Put another way, when smoked in the cited fashion,
only 50 percent of the Delta-9 THC will be absorbed into the lungs.
The pharmacological effects of marijuana begin almost immediately
after smoking begins, often within minutes, and blood plasma levels
of Delta-9 THC peak approximately 20 minutes after ingestion (Schuckit,
1995, p. 90). With oral administration (by mouth as opposed to smoking),
onset of effects is delayed, usually occurring thirty to sixty minutes
later. Peak effects are also delayed, often occurring in the second
or third hour after administration. These effects have been shown
to correlate well with plasma concentrations. When taken orally, the
effects of marijuana may linger up to 5 hours.
Marijuana is rapidly
metabolized. The Delta-9 THC is converted into an inactive metabolite
which is excreted in urine and feces. Peak plasma levels at first
drop quickly (half-time of minutes), followed by a much slower phase
(half-time of days). This slower phase is the body gradually metabolizing
and eliminating the Delta-9 THC from the body. Traces of the substance
exist for several days in human plasma and (from animal studies) also
in the fat and brain after a single administration. Methodologies
now exist that can detect the urinary metabolites of marijuana several
days after the smoking of only a single marijuana cigarette. Marijuana
metabolites were detected in urine in one study of heavy marijuana
users 27 days after cessation of marijuana use.
There is thus
little question that the technology exists to detect marijuana use
days after such use has ceased. The ability to attribute importance
to blood or urine concentrations of THC or its metabolites and associate
this with impaired functioning is a more difficult task. Setting a
blood or urine concentration level in the same fashion that blood
alcohol levels (BALs) are set and associating this level with impairment
is difficult, the major problem being the variability among subjects.
This difficulty is further exacerbated by the fact that marijuana
is very often used in combination with other substances, most frequently
alcohol. Thus the issue and role of drug combinations has to be considered.
Even with the cited detection technology, a positive test result stands
to mean only that the subject was exposed to marijuana at some point
in the recent past.
Health issues
One
of the major concerns surrounding marijuana use are its effects on
health. The scientific evidence is weak however, and findings from
various studies sometime contradict others. A large portion of the
research that has been performed, often for ethical reasons, has used
animal rather than human models and there is no warranty that such
models transfer automatically to humans. Nevertheless, the findings
from marijuana research on animal models do pose questions of health
concern.
Importantly, the
authors are impressed by the literature on health effects that differentiates
between 'chronic use,' 'regular use,' 'occasional use' and 'low dose'
and 'high dose.' We believe it critical to be clear on these distinctions.
The significant dimensions of the model, in our estimation, is 'What
kinds of individuals (demographics) smoke what doses of marijuana
in what quantity under what circumstances for what purposes with what
results (behavioral, health and psychological effects)?' This said,
however, there are some generalities which can and should be stated
about the physical effects of marijuana and its potential health consequences.
Smoking
To
begin with, smoking is almost the exclusive route by which marijuana
is used (administered) in the United States. This is of concern because
of potential bronchopulmonary effects. This question persists and
grows because, when smoked, marijuana is deeply inhaled, and the smoke
is kept in the lungs longer than tobacco smoke. It should also be
noted that many of the toxic elements found in tobacco are found in
marijuana. Marijuana smoke also has more irritants than tobacco smoke.
The research is also clear in showing that there are more cancer-causing
agents in marijuana smoke than in cigarette smoke. A recent study
of marijuana smokers enrolled in a Health Maintenance Organization
in California reached the conclusion that smoking marijuana on a daily
basis gives evidence of being associated with respiratory conditions
even among those who smoke marijuana but not tobacco (Journal of the
American Medical Association, 1991, p. 2796). Smoking anything is
probably bad for the lungs (Polen et al. 1993, pp. 596-601; Voelker,
1994, p. 1647). The health consequences of such damage may well be
significant and are worthy of closer scrutiny. Recent research supports
the possibility of serious potential damage to pulmonary function
particularly among marijuana users classified as 'chronic.' It has
been estimated that, because of the method of smoking, one marijuana
cigarette (joint) is as harmful to the lungs as four tobacco cigarettes
(Kleiman, 1992). It can thus, at a minimum, be said that the smoking
of marijuana is not good for the lungs and may well pose significant
health hazards to them (Tashkin and Cohen, 1988).
Motor performance
There
is almost universal agreement that a prominent danger of marijuana
is its effect on motor performance. Preclinical, clinical and even
actual driving tests under the influence of marijuana support an impairment
of motor performance. Reaction time, judgment, and the use of peripheral
vision are negatively influenced in the two to three hour period following
acute intoxication. Some negative effects may be clinically relevant
for 24 hours after the acute intoxication (Harris and Martin, 1991,
p. 136). In the 'real' world these risks and dangers are often compounded
by the fact that marijuana is very commonly smoked in association
with the use of alcohol thus dramatically increasing the potential
'harm' that could arise from the episode. With this in mind, a brief
look at marijuana and its relationship to driving may be instructive.
Driving
In
1993 there were 53,343 drivers involved in fatal crashes in the United
States. Of this number only 18.9% were tested for drugs excluding
alcohol (Schuckit, 1995, pp. 90-91). Typically, fatal crashes are
reviewed to determine whether or not alcohol is involved, not whether
marijuana is involved. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA) studied 1,882 fatally injured drivers from 13 sampling sites
located in three entire states and selected counties of four additional
states (NHTSA, 1993). Alcohol was found in 52% of the fatalities but
another drug without alcohol was determined in only 6.3% of the fatalities.
Marijuana was implicated in 6.7% of all fatalities. It was implicated
alone in 1.1% of the cases, in combination with alcohol in 5.1% of
the cases and with some other substance in 0.5% of the cases. While
the figures for marijuana are quite small, nonetheless, the most frequently
used illicit drug in these fatal crashes was marijuana. Further, the
data indicate the greater number of drugs a driver takes, the greater
the risk thus pointing to the hazard potential of marijuana when used
in combination with other substances.
The NHTSA has
conducted research to determine the extent to which marijuana impairs
driver performance (NHTSA, 1993). Three studies were conducted. In
the first study, marijuana was found to significantly impair a driver's
ability to keep a constant lateral position within a traffic lane.
The higher the marijuana dose, the greater the degree of impairment.
Comparisons with alcohol studies showed the marijuana impairment on
performance to be that produced by BALs between .03 and .07. (The
legal BAL limit for intoxication in most states is .10.) Marijuana
was not found to influence the ability to maintain constant speed.
In study two,
conducted under primary highway conditions in the presence of other
traffic, driving performance measures included changes in lateral
position in a traffic lane, average speed, and an estimate of headway
maintenance ability for a car following task. Ability to maintain
a steady lateral position within a driving lane was (as in study 1)
impaired with the exception of low doses where no significant impairment
was noted. Marijuana had minimal effect on speed maintenance and car
following ability, with the exception of low dose which produced more
cautious behavior (as measured by an increase in the distance being
maintained between vehicles).
Study 3 was a
40 minute drive through urban traffic only under low dose conditions.
A standard rating scale was used to give an overall driving performance
assessment. No effect was found between the low dose marijuana condition
and driving performance in urban traffic (however, low dose alcohol
did impair performance as related to vehicle handling and traffic
maneuvers).
Although the three
studies imply that marijuana use produces impaired driving abilities
that are less in some situations than in others, no implication should
be made that marijuana is safe with respect to driving. No crash data
were included and many of the driving situations were somewhat artificial.
It should also be noted that (some) subjects may have felt the effects
of the marijuana and compensated by increasing their level of attention
and concentration.
A 1988 NHTSA report
to the Congress noted that virtually all classes of psychoactive drugs
(with the exception of amphetamines) have been found in laboratory
studies and on-the-road research to impair driving ability (NHTSA,
1994, pp. 1-2). After alcohol, marijuana is the drug most frequently
associated with driving impairment. In Ontario, Canada a 1985 study
of 1169 fatally injured drivers tested for the presence of marijuana
and/or alcohol (NHTSA, 1988). Marijuana was found alone in 1.7% of
the cases and marijuana in combination with alcohol was found in 9%
of the cases. Alcohol alone was present in 57% of the cases.
Another study
relates to driving skills though it deals with marijuana effects on
pilot performance (Journal of the American Medical Association, 1991,
p. 2796). Separately, nine active pilots each smoked a 20 mg. THC
cigarette and a placebo cigarette. By use of a flight simulator, each
pilot 'flew' before smoking and at five intervals from 15 minutes
to 48 hours after smoking. Marijuana was found to impair performance
up to 24 hours after smoking (at which time 7 of the 9 pilots showed
some degree of impairment). The complexities of human-motor performance
do not lend themselves to marijuana smoking.
Cancer
While
no totally definitive scientific evidence exists that marijuana causes
cancer, there is considerable data that gives cause for concern. Further,
several research studies have shown a definite association between
smoking marijuana and the development of cancer. One study investigated
110 private patients with lung cancer with 13 of the patients being
under age 45 (Sridhar et al., 1994). Of the total sample 19 (17%)
had smoked marijuana at some point in their life. Noteworthy is that
all 13 patients under the age of 45 had smoked marijuana and 12 reported
current tobacco smoking. No tobacco only patients under age 45 were
noted. Dr. Paul J. Donald of the University of California Davis found
that nine of eleven young people treated for advanced head and neck
cancers had a background of smoking marijuana and five of these had
never used tobacco in any form (Donald, no date). While the cited
evidence is not conclusive and is only associational in nature, it
does beg further consideration and examination of the health consequences
of marijuana smoking.
Tolerance and
dependence
Recent
research on tolerance and dependence with respect to marijuana is
quite sparse. From earlier efforts, however, it would appear that
tolerance to marijuana is not an issue, particularly (as is true in
the vast majority of cases), if doses are small and use nonchronic.
Supporting this position is the relatively few reports of medical
problems from cessation of use. In the general population, 0.7% reported
needing, or feeling dependent on marijuana in the past year (data
from the 1992 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse). Among those
who report using marijuana in the past 30 days, 15% said they felt
dependent or that they 'needed' marijuana. However, fully 27.2% of
past month marijuana users reported using marijuana daily (SAMHSA,
1993).
Effects on fetal
development
All
systematic work in this area has obviously been conducted within the
confines of animal studies and those data do not necessarily apply
to humans. Nevertheless, the results including some studies involving
human observation do support a position confirming the potential harmfulness
of marijuana upon the fetus if used during pregnancy (Zuckerman, 1988).
Other animal research has found 'pronounced effects of THC on reproductive
hormones and on ovulation and spermatogenesis' (Schuckit, 1995, p.
91). While not universally confirmed in clinical research upon chronic
human marijuana smokers, the data suggest caution is dictated with
respect to marijuana use and fetal development (Zuckerman, 1988).
Obviously, more research is needed in this area.
Additional concerns
One
question often raised is the effect marijuana may have (or not have)
upon the human immune system. Research to date is at the animal level.
Most of the work that shows immunosuppression has been done by in
vitro studies and have been compromised by the high amounts of cannabinoids
used (Hollister, 1988, p.7). No evidence exists at this time to conclusively
support the hypothesis that 'consumption of cannabinoids predisposed
humans to immune dysfuntion. However, and in particular with respect
to AIDS and those infected with HIV, the question remains of critical
importance and the best advice of leading experts (see medicalization
section) is to avoid the use of marijuana.
Research shows
that marijuana usually produces an increase in heart rate (not an
insignificant issue to those who may have preexisting heart conditions
or disease). Of equal or greater concern is the research finding that
marijuana produces a significant increase in carbon monoxide content
'with resulting production of an altered form of the red pigment in
red blood cells necessary for transporting oxygen to the rest of the
body, including the heart' (Schuckit, 1995, p. 91). However, no conclusive
evidence exists that would implicate marijuana to cardiac problems.
Although marijuana
use has not been found to be causally predictive of criminal involvement
or violent behavior, one study found that of 268 individuals imprisoned
in New York State prisons for homicide, marijuana had played a major
part in their lives. Some 86% had used the drug at some point in their
lives and approximately 33% said they had used it on the day they
committed homicide. Of this 33%, about 70% said they were experiencing
some drug effect at the time of the homicide. Eighteen respondents
(7% of the total sample) said the homicide was related to their marijuana
use (Spunt et al., 1994). While no claim is made that marijuana caused
the homicides, the association between the two is sufficient to warrant
further investigation.
Another concern
is that the use of marijuana by adolescents might prove harmful particularly
with respect to motivation and emotional and psychosocial development.
The difficulty and ethics of doing controlled research studies upon
this important age group make such work most difficult and nearly
impossible. Marijuana is known (often at small dose levels), however,
to impair memory function, distort perception, impede judgment, and
reduce motor skills. Such effects are most often likely to manifest
their negative consequences upon the young. Research in clinical settings
has also noted loss of motivation, difficulty in concentration, apathy
and decline in school performance as being associated with the smoking
of marijuana.
Notes
- In the U.S.,
the vast majority of cannabis use is marijuana and not hashish.
The terms marijuana and cannabis are used interchangeably in this
report.
[back]
References
DONALD,
PAUL J. No Date. (University of California, Davis) as cited by Wayne
J. Roques, U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration.
DONELSON,
A.C., G. CIMBURA, R.C. BENNETT, AND D. M. LUCAS. 1985. The Ontario
Monitoring Project: Cannabis and Alcohol Use Among Drivers and Pedestrians
Fatally Injured in Motor Vehicle Accidents from March 1982 Through
July 1984. Final Report From The Traffic Injury Research Foundation
of Canada. Ottawa: The Traffic Injury Research Foundation of Canada,
January, 1985.
HARRIS,
LOUIS S. AND WILLIAM MARTIN. 1991. 'Marijuana and the Cannabinoids,'
in Alcohol, Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration Drug Abuse
and Drug Abuse Research. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services.
HOLLISTER,
LEO E. 1988. 'Marijuana and Immunity.' Journal of Psychoactive
Drugs 20:1 (Jan-Mar. 1988), p. 7.
JOURNAL
OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. 1991. 'Marijuana Carry-Over Effects
on Aircraft Pilot Performance.' Journal of the American Medical
Association V265:21, June 5, 1991.
KLEIMAN,
MARK. 1992. Against Excess. New York: Basic Books.
NATIONAL
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION. 1988. Use of Controlled
Substances and Highway Safety: A Report to Congress. Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation.
NATIONAL
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION. 1993. Data from the Fatal
Accident Reporting System. Washington, D.C.: National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.
NATIONAL
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION. 1994. 'Marijuana Effects on
Actual Driving Performance,' Traffic Tech. (62) Washington,
D.C.: U.S. Department of Transportation, February, 1994.
POLEN,
MICHAEL R., STEPHEN SIDNEY, IRENE S. TEKAWA, MARIANNE SADLER, AND
GARY D. FRIEDMAN. 1993. 'Health Care Use by Frequent Marijuana Smokers
Who Do Not Smoke Tobacco.' The Western Journal of Medicine
158:6, pp. 596-601.
SCHUCKIT,
MARC A. 1995. 'Are There Dangers to Marijuana?' in James A. Inciardi
and K. McElrath (eds), The American Drug Scene. Los Angeles:
Roxbury Publishing Co.
SPUNT,
BARRY, PAUL GOLDSTEIN, HENRY BROWNSTEIN AND MICHAEL FENDRICH. 1994.
'The Role of Marijuana in Homicide.' The International Journal
of the Addictions 29:2, pp. 195-213.
SRIDHAR,
KASI S., WILLIAM A. RAUB, JR., NORMAN L. WEATHERBY, LISA R. METSCH,
HILARY L. SURRATT, JAMES A. INCIARDI, ROBERT C. DUNCAN, ROBERT S.
ANWYL, AND CLYDE B. MCCOY. 1994. 'Possible Role of Marijuana Smoking
as a Carcinogen in the Development of Lung Cancer at a Young Age.'
Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 26:3, pp. 285-288.
SUBSTANCE
ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION. 1993. National
Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Main Findings 1992. Rockville,
MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
TASHKIN,
DONALD P. AND S. COHEN. 1988. 'Marijuana Smoking Worse for Lungs.'
Journal of the American Medical Association 259:23, p. 3384
and The American Council on Marijuana and Other Psychoactive Drugs,
Inc. 1981. Marijuana Smoking and Its Effects on the Lungs.
Rockville, MD.
VOELKER,
REBECCA. 1994. 'Medical Marijuana: A Trial of Science and Politics,'
Journal of the American Medical Association 271:21.
ZUCKERMAN,
BARRY. 1988. 'Marijuana and Cigarette smoking During Pregnancy: Neonatal
Effects,' in Ira J. Chasnoff (ed.) Drugs, Alcohol, Pregnancy, and
Parenting. Hingham, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[Previous]
[Next]