NYJetsFan.com Forums: Teen Cannabis Use Linked To Iq Loss - NYJetsFan.com Forums

Jump to content

Toggle shoutbox NYJETSFAN BANTER

Jets win 3-1. Beat dolphins so bad that philbin isnt allowed back from england.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:40 PM) This D-line reminds me of the 2011 Giants who used JPP and Tuck on the inside and Osi and Kiwanuka on the ends
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:41 PM) 4 10 sack players at 1 points in their careers and no o-line could stop them all
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:41 PM) I think this D-line will be so much better
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:43 PM) The thing that is scary is that we also have a great secondary
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:44 PM) Exactly
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:44 PM) All of our additions in the secondary look great. Darrelle Revis changes secondaries
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:44 PM) Buster Skrine has been a beast at nickel
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) Take a sack or throw it up
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) Marcus Gilchrist has been making plays in coverage at FS.
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) The Island!!!
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) Never should have let him go
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:45 PM) We could have just taken Rich at 9
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:46 PM) but o well he is back now
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:46 PM) You got to think Revis has also never had this much talent around him
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:48 PM) all 3 of our wins we pretty much dominated in
Jetsfan0099 Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:48 PM) Our defense has allowed the leagues best 13 PPG
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:49 PM) We beat us against Philly
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:50 PM) 4 turnovers and a Punt return TD
MikeGangGree... Icon : (05 October 2015 - 01:58 PM) If fitz can be smart with the ball and Marshall Decker and Ivory and stay healthy I think we can beat anyone
santana Icon : (05 October 2015 - 02:36 PM) http://www.sun-senti...1005-story.html
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:16 PM) I get it to a point why everyone is making a big deal about that missed call because difference between a win and a loss but I have never seen that call made in over 30 years of watching NFL so I guarantee that none of the fans , coaches or players new the rule. Yes the refs should know all the rules but they aren't computers and it's impossible for them to remember all the 1000's of rules. Especially an old rule no one but the officials ever heard of before. 22 new officials didn't help either. It took an old long time official now retired from officiating to tell the world the rule. Everyone and the officials will remember that rule from now on after all the media
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:27 PM) Lions fans are b*tching like hell about it. We would be if it happened to us but I think it's a bad rule any way and should be scrapped. If the defense causes the offensive player to fumble in the end zone because the defense makes a good play I personally think it would be bullshit to give the fumbling team the ball back. If the ball went out of bounds on its own or if a player tried to recover it and the ball went out of the end zone it's not a penalty. Both cases are a touchback so I feel that giving the ball back to the offense that fumbled it because of the defense batting the ball out of the end zone if the offense recovered the ball it would be a td so it would be bullshit to give them the ball back because of a simple ball bat. Rule should really be changed
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:30 PM) It's ok for the offense to deliberately take a safety to prevent a TD and only give up 2 points an benefit themselves so yeah I think it is an old out of date rule that should be thrown out. If the d makes a great play they shouldn't have to give the offense the ball back because of a stupid rule
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:30 PM) So I'm glad it wasn't called
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:31 PM) Hope it's changed next year
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:31 PM) it's been called a ton of times, they showed a montage o ESPN last night of a bunch of times it's been called
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:33 PM) just because one player made a great play, doesn't mean you can excuse someone making a bonehead play
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:34 PM) chancellor made a great play (remember when i wanted the jets to draft him?) but the LBer should have not illegally batted it, he could have tried to recover it or body blocked det from recovering.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:34 PM) Not sure what ESPN you had on ESPN China? I left ESPN on for 2 hours after the game and I never seen this montage you say. I'm calling you out as bullshit. Show me a video of proof
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:38 PM) Even the old ESPN official couldn't remember an instance of it being called. It isn't the same as the offense backing out of the end zone with the ball or being sacked in the end zone for a safety. Completely different rule and situation. I've never seen it called and I watch at least 6 games at a time a week. None of the ESPN announcer players, Ray Lewis, Dilfer, or Young even knew the rule and that's over 20 years of NFL experience. Yet none of them knew or understood the rule until it was explained in detail
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:40 PM) I've never once seen the ball given back to to offense so I challenge you to show me this montage you claim was on. If I didn't see it for two hours I after the game I'm calling bullshit on your end
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:43 PM) Say whatever you want but show me proof or just leave it be because I won't believe you without a bunch of video proof. I have a hell of a memory and if it ever was called maybe once or twice in the past 30 years but no way there is some montage
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:48 PM) Nether coach knew the rule either and they would know more of the rules than the players and fans. If not for a retired official bringing it up it probably would've never even been brought up at all
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 03:58 PM) I highly questionable is on now and they are even saying no one knew the rule or complained until they were told the rule.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 04:05 PM) I have seen plenty of games where defenders did knock the ball out of the end zone like the situation last night to prevent any possible touchdown not disputing that because that has happened a good many times. My point is I've never seen a flag thrown for it and the ball given to the offense. It's definitely an obsolete rule that should be thrown out. The NFL has made the rules so offensive friendly these days it's hard to play defense with out calls anymore. That is just one more bullshit rule to help the offense. Take the Jets Dolphins game for instance. Those bullshit pi calls against our defense for clearly uncatchable balls. Pi never should've never been called giving up like 60 yards on two calls and a td that never would've happened. At most they should've been 5 yard holding calls. Never would've been mad if they just called them holding calls.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 04:06 PM) Anyway I'm tired of all these offense friendly rules these days screwing over the defenses. It's starting to get like non touch flag football for the defenses.
ROBJETS Icon : (06 October 2015 - 04:11 PM) You know it too. Our team has been a defensive team for well over a decade and so many bullshit calls have been called against our defense because of the new offensive friendly rules. So I say screw Detroit. I'm glad it wasn't called and a defense gets a break
Jetsfan115 Icon : (06 October 2015 - 06:37 PM) call em a liar if you want, but I seen it man
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 12:52 AM) guess I should enable a character limit for the shoutbox
santana Icon : (Yesterday, 12:53 AM) getting a bit out of hand
Jetsman05 Icon : (Yesterday, 06:30 AM) Rob you're brutal
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Yesterday, 01:30 PM) Who should I start this week in fantasy football? Its a PPR league. I can start 3 of the WRs Edelman-/D-Thomas/Mike Evans/James Jones
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Yesterday, 01:30 PM) Edelman and Thomas are must start
MikeGangGree... Icon : (Yesterday, 01:31 PM) So do I start Evans against Jax or James Jones vs STL
Jetsfan115 Icon : (Yesterday, 01:45 PM) jones. winston likes jackson more then evans
Resize Shouts Area

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Teen Cannabis Use Linked To Iq Loss

#1 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,167
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 02 September 2012 - 02:54 PM



The University of Otago

Wednesday, 29 August 2012

The multi-disciplinary study showed that people who started smoking cannabis as teenagers may suffer from IQ decline when they're in their thirties.
Image: diego_cervo/iStockphoto

Persistent cannabis users who started using the drug before age 18 show an average IQ decline of 8 points and other signs of impaired mental functioning by age 38, according to world-first research emerging from the University of Otago’s long-running Dunedin Multidisciplinary Study.

The Study has followed the progress of 1000 Dunedin-born people since their birth in 1972/73 and is one of the most detailed studies of human health and development ever undertaken. The latest findings are newly published in a paper appearing in the US journal PNAS Plus co-authored by researchers from Otago, Duke University and King’s College London.

Below is a fact sheet of the study produced by the researchers.

The findings:

We studied the association between persistent cannabis use and IQ decline and asked whether IQ decline was concentrated among adolescent-onset cannabis users. Findings come from the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. The study has followed a group of 1,037 children, who were born in 1972-73 in Dunedin, New Zealand, from birth to age 38 years, with 96% of the sample taking part at age 38. IQ was tested at age 13, before cannabis use, and again at age 38, after some study members had used cannabis for many years.

We found that:

1. Adolescent-onset cannabis users, but not adult-onset cannabis users, showed marked IQ decline from childhood to adulthood. For example, individuals who started using cannabis in adolescence and used it for years thereafter showed an average 8-point IQ decline.
2. Quitting or reducing cannabis use did not appear to fully restore intellectual functioning among adolescent-onset former persistent cannabis users.
3. IQ decline could not be explained by alcohol or other drug use or by reduced years of education among persistent cannabis users.
4. Third-party informants (e.g., friends, relatives) reported noticing more attention and memory problems in everyday life among persistent cannabis users (e.g, losing focus when they should be paying attention, forgetting to do errands, return calls, pay bills).
Why are these findings important?

The importance of “before and after” IQ testing. Previous studies have suggested that adolescents may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of cannabis on IQ. However, until now, research had not been able to rule out the possibility that poorer IQ test performance among adolescent-onset cannabis users predates cannabis-use initiation. We showed that regardless of their initial (pre-cannabis) test performance, adolescent-onset cannabis users performed worse than non-users and adult-onset cannabis users later when they were tested in adulthood.

The findings are consistent with speculation that cannabis use in adolescence, when the brain is undergoing critical development, may have neurotoxic effects.

What is the size of the IQ decline? The extent of IQ decline among adolescent-onset persistent cannabis users (approximately 8 points) is non-trivial. For example, an average person has an IQ of 100, placing them in the 50th percentile for intelligence compared to their same-age peers. If this average person loses 8 IQ points, they drop from the 50th to the 29th percentile for intelligence.

Why is an 8-point decline in IQ significant? Research has shown that IQ is a strong determinant of a person’s access to a college education, their lifelong total income, their access to a good job, their performance on the job, their tendency to develop heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease, and even early death. Individuals who lose 8 points in their teens and twenties may be disadvantaged, relative to their same-age peers, in most of the important aspects of life and for years to come.

How many people does this affect? Only approximately 5% of the 1,037 individuals born in one year in Dunedin became ‘adolescent-onset’ cannabis users. Thus, any effect of cannabis on the brain is confined to a relatively small segment of the population. Nonetheless, findings are concerning given that fewer adolescents today believe that cannabis use presents a serious health risk.

How we measured cannabis use:

We measured cannabis use in two ways: cannabis dependence and regular cannabis use. Persistence of cannabis dependence was defined as the total number of study waves out of five (ages 18, 21, 26, 32, and 38) at which a study member met criteria for cannabis dependence. Study members were grouped according to their number of dependence diagnoses: (a) those who never used cannabis at any study wave and thus could not have become dependent; (b) those who used cannabis at least once at one or more study waves but never diagnosed; © those who diagnosed at one wave; (d) those who diagnosed at two waves; and (e) those who diagnosed at three or more waves.

Cannabis dependence is a substance-use disorder as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (known as DSM-IV). The purpose of the DSM-IV diagnosis is to predict a patient’s future prognosis, and to identify which patients are most in need of scarce treatment resources. A diagnosis of cannabis dependence generally reflects an individual’s continued use of cannabis despite experiencing significant health, social, and/or legal problems related to cannabis use.

Persistence of regular cannabis use. Because some people use cannabis on a regular basis but never develop problems, we also examined neuropsychological decline as a function of persistent regular cannabis use. This was defined as the total number of study waves out of five at which a study member reported using cannabis four or more days per week (the majority of days in a week). Study members were grouped as those who: (a) never used cannabis; (b) used but never regularly; © used regularly at one wave; (d) used regularly at two waves; and (e) used regularly at three or more waves.

Results were similar for persistent cannabis dependence and persistent regular cannabis use.

How we defined adolescent-onset cannabis use:

We defined adolescent-onset cannabis in two ways: 1) cannabis dependence before age 18 or 2) weekly cannabis use before age 18. Results were similar across both definitions.
How we measured IQ

We assessed intelligence in childhood (ages 7, 9, 11, and 13) and again in adulthood at age 38 using standard tests for the field.
How we measured everyday life cognitive functioning

Study members nominated people "who knew them well." These informants were mailed questionnaires and asked to complete a checklist, including whether the study member had problems with their attention (e.g., “can’t concentrate, mind wanders) and memory (e.g., forgets to do errands, return calls, pay bills) over the past year at age 38.
What additional research is needed?

Our findings suggest that cannabis use before age 18 predicts impaired mental functioning. However, we do not know how much cannabis needs to be consumed and across what ages before impairment occurs. Given that the brain undergoes dynamic changes from the onset of puberty through early adulthood, this developmental period should be the focus of future research on the age(s) at which harm occurs.

Additional research is needed to determine whether cannabis-related IQ decline is reversible. We found that adolescent-onset cannabis users performed worse in adulthood than in childhood even after they had quit or reduced their use for a year or more as adults. This suggests that quitting or reducing use does not fully restore functioning among adolescent-onset cannabis users in this time, but longer-term follow-up is needed.

Findings are limited to a cohort of individuals born in Dunedin, New Zealand in the 1970s. Additional research is needed to determine if similar effects are seen in other countries and in today’s teenagers.

Posted Image

#2 User is offline   santana Icon

  • I'm batman
  • Icon
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 7,967
  • Joined: 03-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Washington DC
  • Interests:Keeping this place from breaking... and titties.

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 03 September 2012 - 03:15 PM

Heavy Drinking Rewires Brain, Increasing Susceptibility to Anxiety Problems

Nyjetsfan.com Jets Fan Forum and Chat

#3 User is offline   azjetfan Icon

  • D Coordinator
  • Icon
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,167
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheese Land Baby
  • Interests:Football, golf, banking and home improvements

  • NFL Team:

Posted 03 September 2012 - 09:11 PM

Drugs are bad M'Kay.
Posted Image

#4 User is offline   HarlemHxC814 Icon

  • 06 Best Avatar Award / N.O.P. GUARD
  • Icon
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 5,172
  • Joined: 30-March 05
  • Gender:Male

  • NFL Team:

  • MLB:

Posted 03 September 2012 - 09:14 PM

I'm sorry. I don't do that stuff
Posted Image

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users