Will Posted March 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 I'm no doctor, but I'll agree with Biochemist on the depressant thing. I know that it's classified as a depressant, and from my experience with people who are high, the high always ends with them being extremely mellow. I myself have found that when taking marijuana I've just become very relaxed.. it's helped me sleep a couple times. I wasn't depressed, but I think that downer experience I felt may be considered part of a depressive state, as opposed to some drugs which i hear will keep you high for a while, and then just cut out.. without the depressive state; or whatever you'll call it. But marijuana's low from my experience is nothing like alcohol's low. Alcohol's low can be brutal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 Marijuana is classed as a central nervous system depressant.)wow that totally surprises me, learned something new today!couple questions then..when was it classified as this?and i guess that's my only question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 Speaking outside my realm, but on this depressant/stimulant discussion, my son was diagnosed with ADHD and was prescribed a stimulant. I thought, "What the heck?!?!?! That's all he needs, to be stimulated more". But then I learned that ADHD can be caused by 'low arousal'. My understanding (not very deep) is that such ADHD people stimulate themselves by physical activity to get their 'arousal' up to normal: that's why they are hyperactive. So giving them a stimulant brings them up to normal chemically and allows them to return to a normal level of physical activity. Maybe the thing with marijuana is similar, but in reverse??? It IS a depressant but appears to act like a stimulant, at least to some people? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 telemad that makes a lot of sense. it's good to have people around here that actually know things more than just observations, unlike me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 when was it classified as this? Actually, I don't know, but it is as least 30 years ago, since that is the oldest reference text I own. I suspect it has been classifed as a CNS depressenat since at least the 1930's (marijuana use was common during Prohibition) but I do not know the initial classification date for certain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 my son was diagnosed with ADHD and was prescribed a stimulant. I thought, "What the heck?!?!?! That's all he needs, to be stimulated more". But then I learned that ADHD can be caused by 'low arousal'...... TM makes a good point here, but it is usualy good to separate the specific use of a drug from its classification. Lots of drugs have bona fide paradoxical effects in certain circumstances, but that does not change their classification. There is debate about whether the use of stimulants in ADD or ADHD is a regular stimulant effect or a paradoxical effect, but that does not obviate the fact that methylpenidate (for example) is a stimlate in most users. The classification is generally based on the pharamacology of the main indication. Lots of drugs have more tha one indication as well, but they will usually retain only one classification. Benadryl (diphenhydramine) is an antihistamine (classification) that has drowsiness as a "side" effect. Diphenhydramine is also the main ingredient in a couple of over-the-counter sleep aids. In that usage, antihistaminic activity is the "side" effect. Some folks also get paradoxical stimulation from diphenhydramine, even though it is often used as a sleep aid. Gracious these homo sapiens are complicated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted March 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 i know some people who have been classified as having ADD or ADHD, and as i understand it the stuff they're on is similar to speed. is that correct? also, how does someone get diagnosed with ADHD? most of my friends can't focus on anything, but we assumed it was just because we were highschool kids who cared more about our social lives than learning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted March 24, 2005 Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 i know some people who have been classified as having ADD or ADHD, and as i understand it the stuff they're on is similar to speed. is that correct? yes. how does someone get diagnosed with ADHD? most of my friends can't focus on anything, but we assumed it was just because we were highschool kids who cared more about our social lives than learning. There is a broad range of opinion on this. I do believe that ADD and ADHD are overdiagnosed, but the underlying symptomatology is pretty real. I am sure Telemad could offer an informed opinion about this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted March 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 24, 2005 well i'd be curious to hear his opinion, only because its been my personal experience that the kids who are diagnosed with ADD or ADHD shouldn't be. some of my friends' heads are far higher in the clouds than these kids i've known with ADD or ADHD (while off the medication). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 I don't have A&P text with me at the moment, so I can't give details, but at least one fungus normally lives in our lungs. But for a healthy person it is kept under control. Finally have my A&P text here. "The most common pneumonia that develops in individuals with AIDS results from infection by the fungus Pneumocystis carinii. This fungus normally inhabits the alveoli, but the respiratory defenses of healthy individuals are able to prevent infection and tissue damage." (Fundamentals of Anatomy & Physiology: Sixth Edition, Bejamin Cummings/Prentice Hall, 2004, p842) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 There is a broad range of opinion on this. I do believe that ADD and ADHD are overdiagnosed, but the underlying symptomatology is pretty real. I am sure Telemad could offer an informed opinion about this. Not too sure about that. After starting his medication, my son did do better in school. However, that could be a placebo effect. I remember once when he didn't get his pill in the morning, on the way to school he said that he just knew he couldn't be good at school that day. And sure enough, he got in trouble, just as he expected. I didn't like the idea of medicating my son and found evidence, in scientific journals, of its doing harm. But then I saw other scientific material that said the other scientific material was being alarmist and that there was no actual evidence of harm. I simply don't know, but I believe it's better to be safe than sorry so didn't want him medicated. However, it was up to his mother (who has "possesion" in the joint custody). She continued the treatment. The pediatrician monitored our son's growth and he started lagging, falling into the lower percentages because of the medication (which decreases appetite). Finally the doctor took him off his medication. Even off his medication he seems to behave well in school now. So what does all of this actual, real life experience show? WHO KNOWS?!?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Even off his medication he seems to behave well in school now...So what does all of this actual, real life experience show? WHO KNOWS?!?!?!Thansk for sharing this stuff TM. I suspect the experience was pretty traumatic for all of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted March 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Yeah, see. Thats what I figured. I know this is just another personal experience and there is no proof of anything, but I think that ADHD is a bit of a scam. As for that stuff about fungus in the lungs. That is absolutely disgusting.. so do smokers develop that?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Yeah...havn't you seen pictures of smokers lungs?completely black. *pukes* here's one:http://www.cancer-info.com/badlung.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biochemist Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Yeah, see. Thats what I figured. I know this is just another personal experience and there is no proof of anything, but I think that ADHD is a bit of a scam. I don't want anything I say to obviate TM' s points above but there is a really is a syndrome (that is, a set of symptoms) in young folks, usually boys, that have difficulty paying attention in class. It is also undeniably true that administration of stimulants increases attention span (even though the mechanism is a bit of conjecture). The question is whether the child's behavior should generally be characterized as normal. If some of it is not, it is usually best to establish some sort of objective measure of non-normal. For most psychological conditions, the boundary of normal is not necessarily important. If an adult seems neurotic, and his/her psychiatrist prescribes some anxiolytic (like Valium) we tend not to care much because it is an adult decision. In the case of ADD/ADHD, there is a significant problem in that the school system often pressure the parents to treat to get the child "under control" in the classroom. This is often for the teacher's convenience not because of any objective clinical measure. IrishEyes had a long portion of a thread on this recently. As for that stuff about fungus in the lungs. That is absolutely disgusting.. so do smokers develop that??Usually not. There are a number in indigenous fungi, some of which are actually normal flora in the lungs. Pneumocystis is one. Nocardia is another. As TM said, these are often implicated in the terminal events of AIDS patients. There are other fungi that are not usually pathogens, but are "opportunistic" in that they can make you sick if a) the innoculum is extraordinarily high, or 2) you are immunocompromised and exposed. Aspergillis and Coccidioddes Immitus are two examples. Aspergillis is around lots of places, and tends to pop up when you rebuiild your bathroom. Cocci is endemic in central California (i.e., "San Joaquin Valley Fever") and will tend to spike in incidence during a California dust storm. Smokers are slightly more at risk for any lung infection because they clear junk out of their lungs less successfully (nicotine paralyzes cilia, particulates clog the system, etc.) However, acquiring a fungal lung infection is still rare unless the smoker is immunocompromised. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queso Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 and if you ever want to smoke a cleaner tobacco, you can always use bongs for what they're supposively for, and what they are sold for. i've never even heard of people using bongs for tobacco ever, it would be interesting if people actually did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Posted March 26, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 haha.. i think i've heard of bongs used for smoking flavoured tobacco, but yeah.. i love how they're sold with the blatant purpose of smoking weed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.