Email answer from Russ at NORML-WEED ADDICTION

[dante1]

I knew that pot was not very addictive but I used the word dependent in some replies to people claiming it was addictive. I sent a letter to NORML asking them to answer the question. I attempted to copy/paste but for some reason it wouldn't work.

Below is typed copy of the letter.

National Institute on Drug Abuse say about 9% of marijuana users develop
DEPENDENCE compared to 15% of alcohol users, 23% for cocaine and 35% for tobacco.

WD from marijuana DEPENDENCE are short-lived and mild. Symptoms include irritability, sleeplessness and anxiety. Compare that to the difficult quitting cigarettes or the possibility of death from alcohol, cocaine and heroin wd and it's no contest.

Marijuana can be addictive. At about the same level as caffeine. Question isn't whether a substance is addictive, it is whether we lock someone up and whether we have a right to force someone into compulsory sobriety.

Prison is a lousy rehab.

Hope this helps


So I would think the meaning of the email is basically that in some cases maybe
11% of smokers can become addicted, but mostly it is simply a dependency.

[dante1]

stash@norml.org

If you want to check on this, his name is Russ.

[shari91]

Awesome!! So it can be addictive which was my point. Now I wonder what the rates of caffeine addiction are?

[dante1]

Yes, but in pretty rare situations. I know not one person. I wonder how many smokers in this forum that could tell us how many of their friends are addicted. About 1 in 11. It is a very low addiction rate even compared to alcohol. The argument of addiction has very little weight.

[shari91]

Yes, but in pretty rare situations. I know not one person. I wonder how many smokers in this forum that could tell us how many of their friends are addicted. About 1 in 11. It is a very low addiction rate even compared to alcohol. The argument of addiction has very little weight.

It's not really rare if it's almost 10%. Three kids out of every primary school class. Meaning if every American smoked, there would be 35 million addicts. Regardless, I still agree it should be legal. I'm actually surprised though at how high the % actually is. To say it has very little weight to me seems a bit naive when so many proponents of legalising marijuana compare it to alcohol. In actual fact there's only a 6% difference in the rate of addicts.

[ChileCheese]

Weed is addictive just like chocolate, or TV, or the internet.
Humans have this interesting ability to become hooked on anything that makes them feel good.
Heck, even kids in China are dropping dead because they are addicted to game playing and cant feed themselves for 4 days.

[big0mar]

There is no physical addiction to THC. Any addiction is psychological.

[ChileCheese]

It's not really rare if it's almost 10%. Three kids out of every primary school class. Meaning if every American smoked, there would be 35 million addicts. Regardless, I still agree it should be legal. I'm actually surprised though at how high the % actually is. To say it has very little weight to me seems a bit naive when so many proponents of legalising marijuana compare it to alcohol. In actual fact there's only a 6% difference in the rate of addicts.

The addiction rates sort of miss the point about the legalization debate.
Where is the societal peril with a weed addict? He eats and sleeps too much???

As for the guy hooked on his JD... He most likely will be charged for Drunk Driving one day and probably beats his wife, kids or both.
Just think Shari... Do stoners ever come home and beat their wife?????

[stealthyburrito]

So am I an addict???

I smoke everyday.

[ChileCheese]

So am I an addict???

I smoke everyday.

Amen brother.

[dante1]

It's not really rare if it's almost 10%. Three kids out of every primary school class. Meaning if every American smoked, there would be 35 million addicts. Regardless, I still agree it should be legal. I'm actually surprised though at how high the % actually is. To say it has very little weight to me seems a bit naive when so many proponents of legalising marijuana compare it to alcohol. In actual fact there's only a 6% difference in the rate of addicts.

It has little weight because the people that are "addicted" commit no serious crimes or very little serious crime. Listen it isn't peppermint chewing gum, we all know that. But, to use the issue of addiction to not legalize or at least decriminalize this substance is absurd. The nuts that can't find very much negative truth about this drug will hang on to the "addiction" nonsense as a last resort. I don't hear them trying to ban alcohol which is way more addictive.

Please, give me a break with this argument.

[shari91]

The addiction rates sort of miss the point about the legalization debate. Where is the societal peril with a weed addict? He eats and sleeps too much??? As for the guy hooked on his JD... He most likely will be charged for Drunk Driving one day and probably beats his wife, kids or both. Just think Shari... Do stoners ever come home and beat their wife?????

I totally agree! I was just disputing what a few people in the other thread said as far as marijuana not being addictive. People like to bring that up in these debates and when they're presented with the facts that it actually CAN be addictive and there are physical and physiological symptoms of withdrawal, they revert to the 'well, it's still better than booze' argument. And as I said, I'm just surprised that the level of addiction between the two is that close, and more startling that marijuana addiction is that high.

But of course - I'd much rather be dealing with a total pothead than a drunk as far as worrying about my physical safety either at home or on the roads. At the end of the day though I choose to be with neither.

[stealthyburrito]

Amen brother.

serious question.

[shari91]

It has little weight because the people that are "addicted" commit no serious crimes or very little serious crime. Listen it isn't peppermint chewing gum, we all know that. But, to use the issue of addiction to not legalize or at least decriminalize this substance is absurd. The nuts that can't find very much negative truth about this drug will hang on to the "addiction" nonsense as a last resort. I don't hear them trying to ban alcohol which is way more addictive.

Please, give me a break with this argument.

Do you understand what I've said to you 20 times? I agree with making it legal. I don't agree with the people who use the 'it isn't addictive' argument because that's factually incorrect. As long as proponents of marijuana legalisation keep using arguments that are actually wrong, nothing will be accomplished because they will always be disputed and proven to be false. I'm just saying use another strategy and drop this one altogether because this one hasn't and won't work.

[big0mar]

Do you understand what I've said to you 20 times? I agree with making it legal. I don't agree with the people who use the 'it isn't addictive' argument because that's factually incorrect. As long as proponents of marijuana legalisation keep using arguments that are actually wrong, nothing will be accomplished because they will always be disputed and proven to be false. I'm just saying use another strategy and drop this one altogether because this one hasn't and won't work.

There is no evidence of physical addiction to THC

[ChileCheese]

serious question.

Oh, Well probably not.
I smoked every day for a long long time... but now because I cant really, I dont. Didnt have any withdrawal.
Im sure you are in the same boat.

[dante1]

There is no physical addiction to THC. Any addiction is psychological.

Thank you, I knew this addiction argument was bogus but just couldn't put my finger on it. A psychological addiction is very different than physical.

[andrew5]

serious question.

Addiction can also be viewed as a continued involvement with a substance or activity despite the negative consequences associated with it. Pleasure and enjoyment would have originally been sought, however over a period of time involvement with the substance or activity is needed to feel normal.[1] Some psychology professionals and many laymen now mean 'addiction' to include abnormal psychological dependency on such things as gambling, food, sex, pornography, computers, internet, work, exercise, idolising, watching TV or certain types of non-pornographic videos, spiritual obsession, cutting and shopping.[2][3][4][5]

[shari91]

There is no evidence of physical addiction to THC

Google thc addiction. I'm on my phone and can't be assed copying and pasting but you'll find your evidence in the first results. My point is people who keep saying it's not addictive sound like brainwashed cult members because there IS evidence that it is. It's just a fruitless argument that makes it hard to take seriously those who insist on using it in a debate.

[RonPaul2008]

Cannabis is NOT physically addictive, i.e. there are no withdrawal symptoms.

Psychological dependence is not addiction.

[ChileCheese]

Folks, before we go any further on the topic of addiction and research and evidence.
Read this....

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/12/13/101213fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all

For those too lazy to educate them selves. The article explains that research in itself is inherently biased and its impossible to know 100% which results are accurate.

[jkilla990]

Its possible to be mentally addicted to anything that makes you feel any sort of pleasure, so it makes sense that weed, just like anything else can be mentally addicting. I smoke almost everyday and ive gone a few months without smoking during the summer with no withdrawal or agitation from not smoking because it has zero physical addiction. So in reality when people say weed is mentally addictive its basically saying nothing because everything can be mentally addicting to any person.

[shari91]

Cannabis is NOT physically addictive, i.e. there are no withdrawal symptoms. Psychological dependence is not addiction.

Where are you getting this from because I can post 50 links stating the exact opposite. Either way guys, I'm out of the debate. It's 4:30am here and even though I'm on the side of the smoker, the debate always ends the same regardless of how many times I've had it. They say its not addictive, I say go do some research, they don't bother and then I get bored. Again, best of luck with the whole legalisation thing but you'll need to come up with something better than it's not addictive. And even the whole medical use thing is starting to get questioned because now there are studies popping up saying that 60-120mg of codeine are just as effective in the management of pain and with less side effects apparently. It'll be a hard fight and most likely will never happen in our lifetimes but good luck with it all.

[big0mar]

Google thc addiction. I'm on my phone and can't be assed copying and pasting but you'll find your evidence in the first results. My point is people who keep saying it's not addictive sound like brainwashed cult members because there IS evidence that it is. It's just a fruitless argument that makes it hard to take seriously those who insist on using it in a debate.

Just did:

"while thc may not be phsyically addictive, it can be very addictive from a behavioral and psychological perspective"

Marijuana is no more addicting than a long-term relationship

[RiverRaid]

I smoke all the time. I had to quit for a year because i was on probation(random drug test) and it was no problem.

[shari91]

Oh, and before I sleep, this is one of the articles I was reading. It's from the DOJ. This is what you're up against, including the part I quoted below. I highlighted the part that should say 'except on SBR' after it.

Almost everyone would agree that cocaine is a dangerous, addictive drug, but many would be surprised to find that the same is true of marijuana. Although it is very difficult to determine the precise number of marijuana users and addicts in the United States, one fact is clear: marijuana has become much more potent over the last twenty years. Cannabis delta 9 tetrahydrocannabinol, commonly known as "THC," is the active ingredient in marijuana and other cannabis such as hashish. The THC content in marijuana during the days of Woodstock was something less than 1%. In 1974, the average THC content of illicit marijuana was 0. 36% and by 1984 had increased to 4.40%.10 In 1992 in Alaska, marijuana was discovered thathad a THC content of 29.86%.11 Now stop and think about that for a minute. Today's marijuana may be between thirty to sixty times as potent as were the joints of the 1960's.

This observation gives one pause when we realize that THC is both dangerous and habit-forming. Marinol, a prescription drug that is very occasionally used in the treatment of nausea associated with chemotherapy, is chemically synthesized THC. Most people are familiar with the information sheets that come with prescription drugs - the pieces of paper that detail the indications and usage of the drug in question, its potential side-effects, its chemical composition, etc. The information sheet that comes with Marinol states verbatim, "MARINOL is highly abusable and can produce both physical and psychological dependence .... Patients receiving MARINOL should be closely observed."12 The company that produces Marinol goes on to explain that its THC may cause "changes in mood ... decrements in cognitive performance and memory, a decreased ability to control drives and impulses [and] . . . a full-blown picture of psychosis (psychotic organic brain syndrome) may occur in patients receiving doses within the lower portion of the therapeutic range.

Dr. Charles R. Schuster, former Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse said, "The fact that there are over 77,000 admissions a year to treatment programs for marijuana use and that annually almost 8,000 persons require emergency hospital care for marijuana use is sufficient evidence of the drugs dangerousness" Clearly, drugs such as cocaine and marijuana are, both addictive and dangerous. The legalizers likely would admit this, but counter by saying that if we legalized them we would have less of a problem. This is untrue.

[big0mar]

Shari I could find plenty of research that says THC is not physically addictive.

Have you ever seen anyone have marijuana withdrawl???

[jkilla990]

This is why i hate these arguments. People who smoke for years are more aware of the properties of marijuana and how they affect most people and many people including me have stated that quiting for long periods of time is very easy and with no symptoms, but then we have these people who dont smoke and think they know everything claiming that it is addictive. How can they even know if they've never even tried it. There has never been a documented case of someone od'ing on mj or having to be hospitalized for withdrawal.

[ChileCheese]

The bigger question should be why are any drugs illegal?
What business is it of anyone's what I like to put in my body.
The reality of illegal drugs in North America is that its big big business, especially in the US.

[chilidog]

The bigger question should be why are any drugs illegal?
What business is it of anyone's what I like to put in my body.
The reality of illegal drugs in North America is that its big big business, especially in the US.

Exactly. I have never understood the rationality that people have that they have the right to tell other adults what they can or cannot do with their own bodies, regardless of what you are consuming, or what reason you might have for doing so. With that line of reasoning, should we also ban all fast food restaurants? They're certainly not healthy, they are an addiction that people have, and the costs of obesity-related healthcare have skyrocketed. They give you short-term pleasure, but it harms others as well.

[big0mar]

The bigger question should be why are any drugs illegal? What business is it of anyone's what I like to put in my body. The reality of illegal drugs in North America is that its big big business, especially in the US.

I think if the drugs provide an inherent danger to the public then there should be some oversight. I wouldn't want to be eaten by someone on PCP.

[ChileCheese]

I think if the drugs provide an inherent danger to the public then there should be some oversight. I wouldn't want to be eaten by someone on PCP.

Yes of course. And that is the logic currently used as to why drugs need to be illegal.
But there are inherent dangers from every corner of life. Lets get rid of cars at this point. You might be driving the speed limit in the right lane... but what can u do if a sleepy driver jumps the median.

Some people work out 5x a week, and never eat an ounce of fat, but develop cancer because their drinking water is tainted because the factory down the street broke some rules...

End of the day... people die, shit happens.

[ShamsWoof10]

I don't agree with the people who use the 'it isn't addictive' argument because that's factually incorrect.

ok if that's your argument then tell us what about marj. makes it addictive? We have several here that smoke and even some that have had to stop so I'm sure getting it validated should be no problem...

let's say it's so called addictive... so what why would it be an issue...?

The THC content in marijuana during the days of Woodstock was something less than 1%. In 1974, the average THC content of illicit marijuana was 0. 36% and by 1984 had increased to 4.40%.10 In 1992 in Alaska, marijuana was discovered thathad a THC content of 29.86%.11 Now stop and think about that for a minute. Today's marijuana may be between thirty to sixty times as potent as were the joints of the 1960's.

I don't buy this sh*t for a minute... I believe it's stronger but not that much stronger... Today I don't think high grade is 30 times stronger then mid grade... They must have literally been smoking grass clippings back then... I have looked up some of the strains of weed (i.e. blue dream, cheese, sour grape haze, odessey, afgoogy, and white widow) and almost all of them say "THC content 15%-20%" so this 29.86% can take a hike and even brown frown has more then 4 f*ckin'%...

Marinol, a prescription drug that is very occasionally used in the treatment of nausea associated with chemotherapy, is chemically synthesized THC. Most people are familiar with the information sheets that come with prescription drugs - the pieces of paper that detail the indications and usage of the drug in question, its potential side-effects, its chemical composition, etc. The information sheet that comes with Marinol states verbatim, "MARINOL is highly abusable and can produce both physical and psychological dependence .... Patients receiving MARINOL should be closely observed."12 The company that produces Marinol goes on to explain that its THC may cause "changes in mood ... decrements in cognitive performance and memory, a decreased ability to control drives and impulses [and] . . . a full-blown picture of psychosis (psychotic organic brain syndrome) may occur in patients receiving doses within the lower portion of the therapeutic range.

Well it makes sense now why your perspective is so off... Your information is mostly fluff.. 12 years ago my buddy was doing rotations for his pharm D. and called in a fake perscription of Marinol which I picked up from the pharmacy and they weren't cheap either... Marinol comes in round gel tabs that you can break open. You can take it orally as instructed but my buddy theorized it's strong because most of it would be metableized... He figured we could by pass this by cracking open the gel tab and mixing it with regular weed... This worked better then we expected... The Marinol turned a low grade buzz into a super high grade buzz and nothing more and this is smoking it not eating it... The above can be stated for almost any drug and a lot of that is for liability issues... It can cause a change in mood...? so what taking vtech. last night can cause a change in mood...

Dr. Charles R. Schuster, former Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse said, "The fact that there are over 77,000 admissions a year to treatment programs for marijuana use and that annually almost 8,000 persons require emergency hospital care for marijuana use is sufficient evidence of the drugs dangerousness" Clearly, drugs such as cocaine and marijuana are, both addictive and dangerous. The legalizers likely would admit this, but counter by saying that if we legalized them we would have less of a problem. This is untrue.

This is a perfect example of using GENERAL stats to support a point... Sports writers are good at this... That 77,000 figure is composed of people being forceably sent there because they were pulled over and caught with a joint NOT neccessarly because it was medically needed as it IMPLIES by the following stat... I have smoked with at least 500 hundred people over the last 15 years and NEVER ONCE did anyone "require emergency hospital care for marijuana use"... I have an aunt who has been a nurse for 25 years and she's never experienced anyone that required emergency hospital care for marijuana use... This writer uses a few misleading GENERAL stats (there's no detail in these stats) then associates it with cocain (cocain is not the topic here it's brought up for association) then follows up with Clearly, drugs such as cocaine and marijuana are, both addictive and dangerous...

Clearly this article is useless...