Autor Tema: Two Medical Studies Find Vaporized Medical Marijuana is Safe and Effective  (Leído 1277 veces)

0 Usuarios y 1 Visitante están viendo este tema.

Desconectado 9delta

  • Moderador General
  • Erudito de la vaporización
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Mensajes: 5.094
  • Liked: 51
  • Reputación: +755/-10
  • Vaporizar es salud
Two Medical Studies Find Vaporized Medical Marijuana is Safe and Effective

 By Marijuana Policy Project - Wednesday, April 18 2007  Tags: Vaporization Avoids Exposure to Contaminants in Smoke; Associated With Reduced Respiratory Symptoms Guests can't see images. Please You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login or You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA - Two new studies, one from the University of California, San Francisco, and the other from the University at Albany, State University of New York, provide strong evidence that technology now allows medical use of marijuana with the rapid action and easy dose adjustment of inhalation, but without the respiratory hazards associated with smoking. This is considered highly important, as the risks associated with smoke inhalation have been cited by both government officials and independent experts as a major argument against medical marijuana.
 The San Francisco study, conducted by Dr. Donald Abrams and colleagues at UCSF and just published online by the journal Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, compared a commercially available vaporizer called the Volcano to smoking in 18 volunteers.
The subjects inhaled three different strengths of marijuana either as smoked cigarettes or vaporized using the Volcano. Unlike smoking, a vaporizer does not burn the plant material, but heats it just to the point at which THC and the other active components, called cannabinoids, vaporize. The vapors are collected in a detachable plastic bag with a mouthpiece for inhalation.
The researchers then measured the volunteers' plasma THC levels and the amount of expired carbon monoxide (CO), which is considered a reliable marker for the unwanted combustion products contained in smoke. The two methods produced similar THC levels, with vaporization producing somewhat higher levels, and were judged equally efficient for administration of cannabinoids.
The big difference was in expired CO. As expected, there was a sharp increase in CO levels after smoking, while "little if any" increase was detected after vaporization. "This indicates little or no exposure to gaseous combustion toxins," the researchers wrote. "Vaporization of marijuana does not result in exposure to combustion gases, and therefore is expected to be much safer than smoking marijuana cigarettes."
   
[size=80%]You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login[/size]
  A second study, by Dr. Mitch Earleywine at the University at Albany, State University of New York and published in the Harm Reduction Journal, involved an Internet survey of nearly 7,000 marijuana users.
Participants were asked to identify their primary method of using marijuana (joints, pipe, vaporizer, edibles, etc.) and were asked six questions about respiratory symptoms. After adjusting for variables such as age and cigarette use, vaporizer users were 60 percent less likely than smokers to report respiratory symptoms such as cough, chest tightness or phlegm. The effect of vaporizer use was more pronounced the larger the amount of marijuana used.
"Our study clearly suggests that the respiratory effects of marijuana use can be decreased by use of a vaporizer," Earleywine said. "In fact, because we only asked participants about their primary means of using marijuana, it's likely that people who exclusively use vaporizers will get even more benefit than our results indicate, because no doubt some in our study used vaporizers most of the time but not all of the time."
"Ten years ago, the Institute of Medicine's landmark, White House-commissioned report found that marijuana has medical value," said Rob Kampia, executive director of the Marijuana Policy Project in Washington, D.C. "In its report, the Institute of Medicine also called for the development of a non-smoked delivery system before making medical marijuana widely available. Now that we have such a delivery system, the prohibitionists' final arguments against medical marijuana have been reduced to rubble."
The Earleywine study is available online at You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login.
References
 - Abrams DI et al. Vaporization as a Smokeless Cannabis Delivery System: A Pilot Study. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2007, Apr 11; [Epub ahead of print].
 - Earleywine M and Barnwell SS. Decreased Respiratory Symptoms in Cannabis Users Who Vaporize. Harm Reduction Journal. 2007, 4:11.




You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login






Los dos estudios están colgados en el foro. Es una noticia antigua pero no viene mal que se vea también por aquí.
(Sorry, but you are not allowed to access the gallery)
(click to show/hide)

Desconectado 9delta

  • Moderador General
  • Erudito de la vaporización
  • ******
  • Join Date: Feb 2011
  • Mensajes: 5.094
  • Liked: 51
  • Reputación: +755/-10
  • Vaporizar es salud
Marijuana Vaporizer Provides Same Level Of THC, Fewer Toxins, Study Shows

ScienceDaily (May 15, 2007) — A smokeless cannabis-vaporizing device delivers the same level of active therapeutic chemical and produces the same biological effect as smoking cannabis, but without the harmful toxins, according to University of California San Francisco researchers.
 


 Results of a UCSF study, which focuses on delivery of the active ingredient delta-9-tertrahydrocannibinol, or THC, are reported in the online issue of the journal "Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics."
"We showed in a recent paper in the journal 'Neurology' that smoked cannabis can alleviate the chronic pain caused by HIV-related neuropathy, but a concern was expressed that smoking cannabis was not safe.  This study demonstrates an alternative method that gives patients the same effects and allows controlled dosing but without inhalation of the toxic products in smoke," said study lead author Donald I. Abrams, MD, UCSF professor of clinical medicine.
The research team looked at the effectiveness of a device that heats cannabis to a temperature between 180 and 200 degrees C, just short of combustion, which occurs at 230 degrees C.  Eighteen individuals were enrolled as inpatients for six days under supervision in the General Clinical Research Center at San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center.
Under the study protocol, the participants received on different days three different strengths of cannabis by two delivery methods--smoking or vaporization--three times a day.
Plasma concentrations of THC were measured along with the exhaled levels of carbon monoxide, or CO.  A toxic gas, CO served as a marker for the many other combustion-generated toxins inhaled when smoking. The plasma concentrations of THC were comparable at all strengths of cannabis between smoking and vaporization.  Smoking increased CO levels as expected, but there was little or no increase in CO levels after inhaling from the vaporizer, according to Abrams.
"Using CO as an indicator, there was virtually no exposure to harmful combustion products using the vaporizing device.  Since it replicates smoking's efficiency at producing the desired THC effect using smaller amounts of the active ingredient as opposed to pill forms, this device has great potential for improving the therapeutic utility of THC," said study co-author Neal L. Benowitz, MD, UCSF professor of medicine, psychiatry and biopharmaceutical sciences.   He added that pills tend to provide patients with more THC than they need for optimal therapeutic effect and increase side effects.
Patients rated the "high" they experienced from both smoking and vaporization and there was no difference between the two methods by patient self-report of the effect, according to study findings.  In addition, patients were asked which method they preferred.
"By a significant majority, patients preferred vaporization to smoking, choosing the route of delivery with the fewest side effects and greatest efficiency," said Benowitz.
Co-authors include Cheryl A. Jay, MD, UCSF neurology; and Starley B. Shade, MPH; Hector Vizoso, RN; and Mary Ellen Kelly, MPH, UCSF Positive Health Program at San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center.
The study was funded by the University of California's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(Sorry, but you are not allowed to access the gallery)
(click to show/hide)