• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

cannabinoids & cell death

Slay

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
7,932
Location
ı-¦===l>--
i came up with this article while surfin something

http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/reprint/18/14/5322.pdf

Marijuana consumption elicits diverse physiological and psychological
effects in humans, including memory loss. Here we
report that D9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the major psychoactive
component of marijuana, is toxic for hippocampal neurons.
Treatment of cultured neurons or hippocampal slices with
THC caused shrinkage of neuronal cell bodies and nuclei as
well as genomic DNA strand breaks, hallmarks of neuronal
apoptosis. Neuron death induced by THC was inhibited by
nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including indomethacin
and aspirin, as well as vitamin E and other antioxidants. Furthermore,
treatment of neurons with THC stimulated a significant
increase in the release of arachidonic acid. We hypothesize
that THC neurotoxicity is attributable to activation of the
prostanoid synthesis pathway and generation of free radicals
by cyclooxygenase. These data suggest that some of the memory
deficits caused by cannabinoids may be caused by THC
neurotoxicity.

what concerns me is the part about apoptosis. is this mean, cannabinoid consumption may disturb apoptosis of the hippocampal cells? and since cancer is the uncontrolable reproduction of the cells, doesnt this mean it may also trigger it?

thanks:)
ps: you know im no chemistry nerd so play nice with me;)
 
It actually stimulates apoptosis, which is why it's been an effective anti-cancer agent. Non-psychoactive components do the same, though, like CBD.
 
Yes, I was told once there is a DNA test to see if an individual has ever consumed marijuana, rather just being in their system at that particular time, is that related to this? (genomic DNA strand breaks)?
 
Nagelfar said:
Yes, I was told once there is a DNA test to see if an individual has ever consumed marijuana, rather just being in their system at that particular time, is that related to this? (genomic DNA strand breaks)?
Nope, that's nonsense... There's no rational basis for such a test.
 
I'm wondering if the response of brain cells in vivo and not part of neuronal cultures or regional slices may have a different response to THC. Some studies say that marijuana doesn't even cause cognitive impairment, others that it can lead to such deficits by regulation of neurotropic factors. I don't think there's any really clear answer fto this question yet.

I don't doubt that the researchers legitimately found the results that they reported, but just because THC caused apotosis in the samples they used doesn't necessarily mean that their results can be generalized to the real world.
 
To make my point clear:
The article that Slay linked in the first post stated indeed the occurence of DNA strand breaks during in vitro tests, but first, I doubt that these were caused directly by THC (or another cannbinoid) but rather happened due to overall stress to the cell. Such breaks could be caused by several compounds and one has to be absolutely critical in drawing conclusions for 'real life'.
Second, even if THC would cause such damage to the cell, I can't imagine how these should be connected to the time when the drug was consumed. Please correct me if I'm wrong but there are no working methods at the moment that derive any time-related information from DNA-analysis, like when somebody comsumed a substance. Maybe one exception: The higher the age of a cell, the shorter the telomers. But I dunno if this is a general or just the case with certain cellt types.

Therefore I wrote before: There's no rational basis for such a test. I'm willing to change my mind if somebody proves me wrong here.

Peace! Murphy

P.S. Your story sounded more like a fairy tale from the 'business of UA testing kits, a bit advertising influenced...
 
I don't doubt that the researchers legitimately found the results that they reported, but just because THC caused apotosis in the samples they used doesn't necessarily mean that their results can be generalized to the real world.

Again, apoptosis isn't neccessarily a bad thing. Your cells evolved it for good reason. As long as it isn't really, really, enhanced, I wouldn't worry about it at all.

It is the very reason they make such great anti-cancer drugs (again though, either CBN or CBD was much stronger in this action, and had additional anti-cancer benefits).
 
my understanding is that long term marijuana use causes hippocampal lesions (resulting in short term memory problems), but that with abstinence and time, some of the damage can heal. still, fucking brain lesions... i hate it when smokers try to make marijuana use seem benign or even physically beneficial.
 
dunno, there sure is for lab rats. i'll look for a source.

edit: from cannabis in medical practice: "pubescent rats developed hippocampal lesions after chronic cannabis exposure. a theraputic window for the production of an effect was seen when 40-day old rats were more severely effected than 70-day old rats.... studies on prepubescent rhesus monkeys, using up to one year exposure to cannabis smoke, did not produce neurotoxicity as seen in rats."

sure doesn't prove my previous statement, but is relevant. maybe i spoke too rashly, the original cause for my comment is that is what my psychopharmacology professor said. isn't the same is reading the results of a peer-reviewed study, but he's a little more reliable then say a dare officer. i'll talk to him/email him about it later, and share.
 
Last edited:
edit: from cannabis in medical practice: "pubescent rats developed hippocampal lesions after chronic cannabis exposure. a theraputic window for the production of an effect was seen when 40-day old rats were more severely effected than 70-day old rats.... studies on prepubescent rhesus monkeys, using up to one year exposure to cannabis smoke, did not produce neurotoxicity as seen in rats."

Rats & primates are majorly different. You can feed rats MPTP and they're quite happy. A one off exposure for primates produces severe Parkinson's disease. That's just one example of why you can't extrapolate rodent data to humans...
 
Concerning Slay's posted article, I was sceptical since the first reading about the comparability between rats and humans... I honestly admit that I'm probably biased, being a weed-lover. I just don't want to agree without resistance that weed roasts my hippocampus this easily. Well well, lets see what I found so far.

1. Rats are indeed quite susceptible towards the neurotoxic effects of THC. For example was reported in Neuropsychopharmacology 2008, 33, p.1113:
Abstract

The current study examined whether adolescent rats are more vulnerable than adult rats to the lasting adverse effects of cannabinoid exposure on brain and behavior. Male Wistar rats were repeatedly exposed to delta9-THC (5 mg/kg i.p.) in a place-conditioning paradigm during either the adolescent (post-natal day 28+) or adult (post-natal day 60+) developmental stages. Adult rats avoided a 9-THC-paired environment after either four or eight pairings and this avoidance persisted for at least 16 days following the final 9-THC injection. In contrast, adolescent rats showed no significant place aversion. Adult 9-THC-treated rats produced more vocalizations than adolescent rats when handled during the intoxicated state, also suggesting greater drug-induced aversion. After a 10–15 day washout, both adult and adolescent 9-THC pretreated rats showed decreased social interaction, while only 9-THC pretreated adolescent rats showed significantly impaired object recognition memory. Seventeen days following their last 9-THC injection, rats were euthanased and hippocampal tissue processed using two-dimensional gel electrophoresis proteomics. There was no evidence of residual 9-THC being present in blood at this time. Proteomic analysis uncovered 27 proteins, many involved in regulating oxidative stress/mitochondrial functioning and cytoarchitecture, which were differentially expressed in adolescent 9-THC pretreated rats relative to adolescent controls. In adults, only 10 hippocampal proteins were differentially expressed in 9-THC compared to vehicle-pretreated controls. Overall these findings suggest that adolescent rats find repeated 9-THC exposure less aversive than adults, but that cannabinoid exposure causes greater lasting memory deficits and hippocampal alterations in adolescent than adult rats.
...and this was just one example out of several that I found. I'm quite convinced now that rats ain't a good model for studying THC's neurotoxicity, nor are cell cultures from rat brains. But what counts for rats doesn't necessarily count for humans in this case.

2. Now take for example this study (Eur Neuropharmacol 2007, 17, p.289):
Abstract Interest is growing in the neurotoxic potential of cannabis on human brain function. We studied non-acute effects of frequent cannabis use on hippocampus-dependent associative memory, investigated with functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) in 20 frequent cannabis users and 20 non-users matched for age, gender and IQ. Structural changes in the (para)hippocampal region were measured using voxel-based morphometry (VBM). Cannabis users displayed lower activation than non-users in brain regions involved in associative learning, particularly in the (para)hippocampal regions and the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, despite normal performance. VBM-analysis of the (para)hippocampal regions revealed no differences in brain tissue composition between cannabis users and non-users. No relation was found between (para)hippocampal tissue composition and the magnitude of brain activity in the (para)hippocampal area. Therefore, lower brain activation may not signify neurocognitive impairment, but could be the expression of a non-cognitive variable related to frequent cannabis use, for example changes in cerebral perfusion or differences in vigilance.

I get more and more the impression, that the MPTP-example that FnB stated should be seriously taken into account. There are obviously metabolic differences between the model animals and us, that exclude direct comparability of studies that used rats or rat tissue...

3. Ah yeah, and to confuse the masses completely, please take this last contribution into account: Brain Res 2007, 1128, p.61:
Abstract

Excitotoxic neuronal death underliesmany neurodegenerative disorders. Because cannabinoid receptor agonists act presynaptically to inhibit glutamate release, we examined the effects of Win55212-2, a full agonist atCB1 receptors, and Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a partial agonist, on the survival of neurons exposed to an excitotoxic pattern of synaptic activity. Reducing the extracellularMg2+ concentration ([Mg2+]o) to 0.1mMevoked an aberrant pattern of glutamatergic activity that produced synaptically mediated death of rat hippocampal neurons in culture. Neuronal viability was quantified with a multiwell fluorescence plate scanner equipped to detect propidium iodide fluorescence. Win 55212-2 (100 nM) and THC (100 nM) significantly
reduced 0.1 mM [Mg2+]o-induced cell death by 77 ± 11% and 84 ± 8%, respectively. Interestingly, the protection afforded by THC was not significantly different fromthat produced by Win 55212-2, suggesting that attenuation without a complete block of excitatory activity is sufficient for neuroprotection. The effect of prolonged drug exposure on the neuroprotection afforded by
cannabinoid receptor agonists was also studied. When cultures were pretreated for 24 h with Win 55212-2 (100 nM) or THC (100 nM), inhibition of 0.1 mM [Mg2+]o-induced toxicity was significantly reduced to 39 ± 19% and 45 ± 13%, respectively. Thus, desensitization of CB1 receptors diminishes the neuroprotective effects of cannabinoids. This study demonstrates the importance of agonist efficacy and the duration of treatment on the neuroprotective effects of cannabinoids. It will be important to consider these effects on neuronal survival when evaluating pharmacologic treatments that modulate the endocannabinoid system.
Ahahaha...'protective'?! Now guess what kind of material they used for these publication? Yeeeah: "Rat hippocampal neurons were grown in primary culture as previously described by Wang et al. (1994)."

Peace! Murphy
 
MurphyClox said:
To make my point clear:
The article that Slay linked in the first post stated indeed the occurence of DNA strand breaks during in vitro tests, but first, I doubt that these were caused directly by THC (or another cannbinoid) but rather happened due to overall stress to the cell. Such breaks could be caused by several compounds and one has to be absolutely critical in drawing conclusions for 'real life'.
Second, even if THC would cause such damage to the cell, I can't imagine how these should be connected to the time when the drug was consumed. Please correct me if I'm wrong but there are no working methods at the moment that derive any time-related information from DNA-analysis, like when somebody comsumed a substance. Maybe one exception: The higher the age of a cell, the shorter the telomers. But I dunno if this is a general or just the case with certain cellt types.

Therefore I wrote before: There's no rational basis for such a test. I'm willing to change my mind if somebody proves me wrong here.

Peace! Murphy

P.S. Your story sounded more like a fairy tale from the 'business of UA testing kits, a bit advertising influenced...

No, nothing to do with time related or advertising. Because the guy said the artificial urine people could buy bypasses UA tests, but he claimed they had DNA marijuana tests which would supposedly tell if someone has ever consumed marijuana but not when they consumed it. So it wasn't a time related test according to this individual. Of course it is possible that it was nonsense, I just wanted to add it wasn't supposedly a time related test but specifically mentioned to me that it wasn't such.
 
Last edited:
Of course the possibility exists that it was nonsense, but I just want to add it wasn't a time related test.

Ask him how it supposedly works... cells die and are replaced, so the only way such a test would work would be if it mutated the base pairs of the DNA sequence (things like intercalators wouldn't last beyond the life of a cell) and theings that change base pair sequences are potent mutagens/carcoinogens (which cannabinoids aren't). I know nerve cells in the brain arten't replaced, but then such a test would require a brain biopsy, which is a non starter as a drug testing technique.

In other words, it's bollocks :D
 
Top