Scientists have long suspected that the protein clumps and tangles identified by Alois Alzheimer in 1907 somehow cause the disease that bears his name, probably by killing neurons. Now some researchers are blaming a much smaller form of protein, one that apparently produces memory deficits merely by binding to neurons and disrupting their ability to transmit signals. The search has begun for an antibody that would destroy these tiny proteins--or ADDLs--thereby preventing the onset of Alzheimer's disease and possibly even reversing the early symptoms. The discovery of ADDLs explains glaring anomalies in the conventional thinking about Alzheimer's, which holds that fragments of amyloid precursor protein, produced by normal neurons, aggregate into sticky, insoluble plaques that damage neurons. The problem with this theory is that virtually every older person carries some amyloid plaque, but only a few develop Alzheimer's. Conversely, those with Alzheimer's often have relatively few plaques. Another proposed culprit is the presence of tangles of tau protein, which form inside neurons and coincide with the collapse of microtubules that support the cell body and transport nutrients. The tau tangles correlate much better with the disease but tend to appear later, suggesting that they are a consequence, not a cause.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa004&articleID=00083B38-9C12-1084-983483414B7F0000

Medications exist but are problematic. The major options today, called antipsychotics, stop all symptoms in only about 20 percent of patients. (Those lucky enough to respond in this way tend to function well as long as they continue treatment; too many, however, abandon their medicines over time, usually because of side effects, a desire to be "normal" or a loss of access to mental health care). Two thirds gain some relief from antipsychotics yet remain symptomatic throughout life, and the remainder show no significant response. An inadequate arsenal of medications is only one of the obstacles to treating this tragic disorder effectively. Another is the theories guiding drug therapy. Brain cells (neurons) communicate by releasing chemicals called neurotransmitters that either excite or inhibit other neurons. For decades, theories of schizophrenia have focused on a single neurotransmitter: dopamine. In the past few years, though, it has become clear that a disturbance in dopamine levels is just a part of the story and that, for many, the main abnormalities lie elsewhere. In particular, suspicion has fallen on deficiencies in the neurotransmitter glutamate. Scientists now realize that schizophrenia affects virtually all parts of the brain and that, unlike dopamine, which plays an important role only in isolated regions, glutamate is critical virtually everywhere. As a result, investigators are searching for treatments that can reverse the underlying glutamate deficit.

http://www.gwpharm.com/research_depression.asp

http://www.gwpharm.com/research_neuroprotection.asp

They're more common on the television news; for example, if McDonald's sold its five billionth hamburger or something, one may see a "news story", with an unknown reporter giving a brief feature at the scene of the restaurant, closing with some line like "and back to the studio..." without mentioning any studio in particular. These are also made up by the company (McDonald's, in this case), to sell product by masquerading as a cultural-interest item. The station or newspaper typically plays along.

It's ethically shakey, to be sure, but it happens all the time regardless. What we have here is a communication, much like an ad or pitch from a company, from the ONDCP pretending to be an editorial or public service announcement. The paper gives it the once-over, decides that it's always a good idea to discourage "drug use", and runs it. More reputable publications may print it as a LTE, signed by whoever sent it.

That's just my pet theory on how nearly the exact same article -- with almost the EXACT SAME opening line ("The marijuana kids smoke at a [Snoop Dogg] concert today isn't the same as the marijuana their parents smoked at Woodstock." Always at Woodstock*.). Mix it in with a bunch of other platitudes, and come to the logically shaky conclusion that today's "crack cocaine of marijuana" must be eradicated at all costs, or else the sky will fall.

Damn these kids today! what with their Charleston-dancing, and their negro jazz music, and those darkies making eyes at our white women... will nobody put them niggers in their place? Bah!

(PS: I wonder how long the drug war would last if the Marijuana Tax Act debates were leaked to the NAACP or whatever the Hispanic anti-defamation league is? If I had the know-how, I should do it. Probably just get a form letter back, though...)

Today, with more potency it still killed 0.

If it is twice as strong or 10 times as strong it still can not kill YOu.

So cannabis kills 10 times as many people today as it did with Your fathers cannabis.

Zero.

The only time the potency should matter is if one is using it for medical purposes as the dosages can be better regulated.

Speaking of Medical. When they busted Tommy Chong couldn't his defence have brought up that he was providing a medical delivery system? In California not only should they be able to get their medicine but they should be allowed access to a good delivery system.

After a night of Harvey Wallbangers mixed with everclear, you see God. Been there and done that.

No matter what is said by the poor unfortunates who wasted their time in school and politics and didn't mingle with the hoi polloi, cannabis is 420 times better than alcohol.

He said that a lot of them were blue collar guys who grew up in poor households. During the 60s and 70s, they had to bust their asses to work at some lousy job and pay for college, and then law school. At the same time, a lot of their peers and friends were off growing long hair, burning draft cards, moving to communes, using drugs, etc.

In other words, these politicos weren't "cool". The hippie slackers were the darlings of their generation. These politicians thought they made much greater sacrifices to do better things and got no credit.

You aren't alone.

I have said for years that cannabis activists and Gay activists have much in common.

Before AIDS... there was the homophobia of the police that tended to make gays distrust them. Now with the gov't taking the best possible medicine from many loved ones... we have even MORE in common since AIDS hit the gay community so heavily at first.

No, all of this argues that children should not be experimenting with cannabis without adult supervision. Such supervision is difficult, if not impossible, under cannabis prohibition, which lets the black market pushers provide cannabis and other more harmful "substances" to youth.

Regulate and tax is a better "control" strategy than run and hide. Give parents the tools to guide their children by removing criminal sanctions from an adult activity. Stop criminalizing adults who toke, grow, and share cannabis responsibly. Caging people for enjoying a plant is far from harmless. Arresting sick and dying medical cannabis patients and care givers is far from harmless.

An age limit of 19 is in line with established norms for tobacco and alcohol, two legal and "socially-approved" substances that are far more harmful to society in healthcare costs, and in the case of alcohol in traffic accidents, lost productivity, and violence.

"Americans", what a joke. Americans are mostly unhealthy gluttons - our lack of personal discipline is ruining our own health. Our slovenly need for more space to accomodate our own mass and piles of useless junk is causing us to drive huge vehicles and pump AC into huge homes, killing the environment of the entire planet. Maybe they should focus on trailer-trash men that drink a case of beer every day & beat the wives & children - where are the editorials on that?

How did the notion of cannabis being harmless come about? The government and media have waged an 80 year propaganda war demonizing the plant, how could people have possibly got the idea that it's harmless into their heads? Uh-oh, maybe it's true.

No, it's much easier for those in control of this country to demonize one particular group than to actually solve problems. People OD on heroin - so they demonize medical MJ users. Terrorists attack us - yup, the MJ smokers again.

Could television and too much video games be responsible for rotting the brains of entire generation of young people? No, it's the marijuana, silly.

Keep repeating the same old lies as the endless repetition may stick as truth in the minds of enuf sheeple to keep the prohibition scam working through the next election. Then the admin can really get their way with these evil(drug)doers as they are relabled enemy terrorist combatants and then, as has been the case in Latin America over decades of fascist regime support, let the disappearances begin.

Kerry said some time ago, "These guys are the worst group of liars and thieves I've ever seen. It's really scary." Usually the last 3 words of that quote are not included. But I'll guarantee you, if senator Kerry is scared, that is one more reason for me to fear my paranoia may, unfortunately, not be paranoia after all, but solid reality based fear.