https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16458631 “If men smoked marijuana 11 to 90 times in their lifetime, there was a 15% decrease in infant birth weight (P = .03); if this increased to more than 90 times, there was a 23% decrease (P = .01). Timing also played a role.”
“Women and men who smoked in the past 15 years, had 12% (P = .04) and 16% (P = .03) smaller infants, respectively.”
The types of “health” are related, really? Shook over here.
If only there were a physical connection we could see like some kind of fleshy vehicle of testable units, a body of some description. No, we’re floating blobs of consciousness in a cloud of feels, aren’t we?
Mutation (genetic) load is true, at least somewhat but who dares to directly study it? Instead we are left with related variables.
“The lifespan of people with severe mental illness (SMI) is shorter compared to the general population. This excess mortality is mainly due to physical illness. We report prevalence rates of different physical illnesses as well as important individual lifestyle choices, side effects of psychotropic treatment and disparities in health care access, utilization and provision that contribute to these poor physical health outcomes.”
“Nutritional and metabolic diseases, cardiovascular diseases, viral diseases, respiratory tract diseases, musculoskeletal diseases, sexual dysfunction, pregnancy complications, stomatognathic diseases, and possibly obesity-related cancers are, compared to the general population, more prevalent among people with SMI.”
People with mental problems can’t take care of themselves, really?
Not to be harsh but, is this news?
I searched, not one mention of fitness.
Ability to reproduce (here it would be impotence for age in the male) and carry (childbearing without issue for age, the female) is a significant component of it (organism fitness, for the nerds at home).
There isn’t just one thing causing the “mental” disease and another separate thing causing the “bodily” disease.
It’s all genetic! At least, moderately genetic.
And remember I said exponential risk of suck?
“Charlson Comorbidity Measure: The Charlson model predicts the risk of one-year mortality for patients with a range of comorbid illnesses. Based on administrative data, the model uses the presence/absence of 17 comorbidity definitions and assigns patients a score from one to 20, with 20 being the more complex patients with multiple comorbid conditions. It is effective for predicting future poor outcomes. This method is explained in further detail below”
You cannot fight math. You will lose.
poor outcomes = death, more or less
This is tough to read like the IQ link. I wouldn’t blame you skipping all this. You cannot unsee it.
“One thing all of these models have in common is that they are based, in some degree, on comorbidity. Understanding comorbid conditions is a critical aspect of population health management because comorbidities are known to significantly increase risk and cost. In fact, a study from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality reports that care for patients with comorbid chronic conditions costs up to seven times as much as care for those with only one chronic condition.”
Twice the condition can be seven times the cost. I’ll leave you to think about that.
Is this systemic injustice?
The body is complex, various conditions interact with one another. Not killing the patient by accident due to Condition B to treat Condition A needs time and more research and more money!
“Expenditures and gaps in health care delivery are not evenly distributed across the population, however. To improve health care quality and reduce costs, policy-makers must focus on particular subgroups who are at greatest risk. Persons with mental health and medical comorbidities represent just such a population.”
“The pathways causing comorbidity of mental and medical disorders are complex and bidirectional.
What I said.
Medical disorders may lead to mental disorders, mental conditions may place a person at risk for certain medical disorders, and mental and medical disorders may share risk factors“
“When mental and medical conditions co-occur, the combination is associated with elevated symptom burden, functional impairment, decreased length and quality of life, and increased health care costs.”
This upsets me. Just world is a fallacy.
Bear in mind the IQ/depression link in the last post:
“At the same time, major depression is a risk factor for developing chronic conditions, such as cardiovascular disease.”
If the economy is making people of a certain IQ band effectively useless, they’re going to be depressed.
Especially if “their” jobs owed by their home country are outsourced to visa people.
“Exposure to adverse childhood experiences such as trauma, abuse, and chronic stress are all associated with both mental and medical disorders, and responsible for much of the high rates of comorbidity, burden of illness, and premature death associated with chronic illness.”
It’s sad. It’s sad to read about. That is a harrowing existence.
But stress shouldn’t be lumped in with trauma and abuse.
“Many of the most common treatments for diseases may actually worsen the comorbid condition.”
You tell me where the solution is because I don’t see it.
A society of hospital patients (don’t forget aging demographics).
“This article briefly reviews the associations among alcohol dependence, major depressive disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder. Dysregulation of the brain’s and
body’s stress system (i.e., the limbic–hypothalamic–
pituitary–adrenal axis) might serve as a common mechanistic
link to explain some of the relationships among these
frequently comorbid conditions. Finally, the article examines the role of sex differences in stress circuitry. These differences
may explain why men and women differ in their risk for
developing comorbid alcoholism and stress related disorders.”
Addictions play into it too, because of course they do.
And you can’t really blame sexism for an individual’s brain circuitry.
Let’s look at one more substance and how it alters development (i.e. when children/teens/young adults use it).
An interaction of marijuana and low IQ they won’t study so here’s something odd.
“Psychotic patients who used cannabis frequently before illness onset have higher genetic predisposition to schizophrenia than those who did not”
“Our study supports an association between high SZ-PGRS and frequent cannabis use before illness onset in psychosis continuum disorders.”
Before someone points to this classic arse-covering exercise, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/01/twins-study-finds-no-evidence-marijuana-lowers-iq-teens
I linked because you wanted info on school shooters and pot use is a major factor.
Naturally the drug use wouldn’t change IQ because the IQ is the causative factor in having a childhood addiction problem.
However the study compares ongoing users to abstaining, not ongoing addicts to a twin who never did the stuff, there is no control group, making this link pointless so don’t try to send me it. I’ve seen it.
For the ‘self-medication’ lie: “The use of marijuana did not correct the brain function deficits of depression, and in some regions made them worse.”
“Of additional interest, those participants who used marijuana from a young age had highly abnormal brain function in areas related to visuo-spatial processing, memory, self-referential activity and reward processing.”
No, they cannot perceive themselves accurately.
This whole drug study in children (<25) thing is like breaking someone’s kneecaps with a baseball bat and wondering why they can’t sprint. You wouldn’t give them alcohol and tobacco, why give them anything else that’s an addictive drug and think it’s fine? Why not nice and “natural” opioids next?
[ I googled this as a joke and fuck you, America.
druggy parent trash pushing it on the kids? That’s low. ]
Why not the ankles too? Why not?
I firmly believe some of these kids have the misfortune that their parents are their worst enemy in life.
“The study found that early marijuana use was also associated with lower IQ scores.”
Associated. Which first? The lower IQ or child drug abuse?
“With past research suggesting a genetic role between marijuana use and depression, Dr. Osuch and her collaborators at Western University’s Robarts Research Institute also conducted genetic testing on participants. They discovered that a certain genetic variation of the gene that produces Brain Derived Neurotropic Factor (BDNF) was found in greater proportion in youth who used marijuana from an early age. BDNF is involved in brain development and memory, among other processes.“
Could be a race-based finding, unclear.
“This is a novel finding that suggests this genetic variation may predispose youth to early marijuana use,” said Dr. Osuch.”
So how many of you heard about it in the MSM?
Funny how they trust none of the political news but all the scientism rationalizing living like a CA Democrat member.
It doesn’t have to be good universally for you to do it, like smoking tobacco, just admit it can be bad for society and move on. Denial of biology makes it more annoying and a full ban more likely. Shaming normal people for being “squares” is what all druggies do including alcoholics.
Why link that here?
What would drug use increase, in the organism? Mutation rate. The genetic load (whatever it was) becomes heavier. So to do that before reproducing, knowing the adverse effects, the child/ren will be worse off as well. So much for “doing no harm” and “victimless crime”. Eventually parents will be sued by their children for bad lifestyle habits that damaged their personal genome (and their children’s genome etc). It’s coming.
Egyptian Salafist cleric Mazen Al-Sersawi has stirred controversy, after a video in which he suggested that Islam allows men to marry their illegitimate daughters went viral.
In the video, Al-Azhar lecturer cites prominent Muslim jurist Imam Al-Shafi’i as saying that illegitimate daughters are not officially attributed to their fathers and can thus be married to them.
This is what they do. I knew this, I am playing shocked for laughs.
Deliberately inbreed. It’s the plan.
If the West hadn’t saved them from famine multiple times, they’d all be dead.
In the 2012 video that recently resurfaced online, he said Imam Al-Shafi’i – one of the four great Imams of Islamic jurisprudence – is known for saying men may marry their own daughters that are born out of wedlock.
Bear in mind, the punishment for adultery is death.
Al-Sersawi explained that if a man has extramarital intercourse with a woman and impregnates her, he is allowed to marry his illegitimate daughter.
Attempting to rationalize the repulsive ruling, Al-Sersawi said that according to Al-Shafi’i, the girl is “not really his daughter” since she is the result of adultery.
“She is not his daughter according to Sharia. She is not officially attributed to him,” he said, adding that illegitimate daughters do not carry their fathers’ names.
A single instance is fine. This is not one family nor a one-time thing.
Repeating it and preferring it when there are other options is the taboo.
To say it’s less human than animal would be an insult to animals, who are also averse to inbreeding in many species.
Inbreeding means closer than a cousin, typically. Parent/child/siblings are all off-limits. Preferential cousin matches also count.
While Lévi-Strauss generally discounted the relevance of alliance theory in Africa, a particularly strong concern for incest is a fundamental issue among the age systems of East Africa. Here, the avoidance between men of an age-set and their daughters is altogether more intense than in any other sexual avoidance.
Africa is smarter than this. Literally, as you shall see.
But the problem isn’t exclusive to Pakistani Muslims as Woolas seems to imply, but is pandemic among Muslims across the world.
Stop supporting the stupid.
“Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death. There is no appeal, and execution is carried out automatically and without pity.” – Robert A. Heinlein
They can’t support a civilization of any order and they won’t even support themselves.
Allah is their excuse to sit around expecting whitey will be their slave forever, like the Jews consider Gentiles. In either case, these are not a people with any type of prudence and/or Darwinian longevity.
A rough estimate shows that close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred: In Pakistan, 70 percent of all marriages are between first cousins (so-called “consanguinity”) and in Turkey the amount is between 25-30 percent.
Statistical research on Arabic countries shows that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algiers are consanguine (blood related), 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (southern area in Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen.
Research shows that the IQ is 10-16 points lower in children born from related parents and that abilities related to social behavior develops slower in inbred babies:
Fair question: Why is it okay when nobility do it?
They already have HIGH IQ and they’re PRESERVING it.
Genetic load from outsiders. It’s temporary, until better matches can be found for children and grandchildren.
So all these “why do Muslims not just wait?” questions fail to understand how easy they’d be to mow down with the army, if we only had the political will.
This is a relatively consistent finding from my extensive research.
They’re already 1SD below UK average.
It isn’t racism, it’s them.
If you pit a sensible person who trains against a lazy one who sits around eating in a race, it isn’t mentally taxing to know who’ll probably win. Can you reason with that? Equality dogma is poison to console the loser. They don’t stand a chance according to Second World standards, let alone First!
They won’t stop being angry. They won’t get less angry. They can’t.
In the immortal words of Goethe, There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity.
*drops monocle, sarcastically slow claps*
Nothing. Worse. Goethe. Master.
I feel like he’d know this.
Lurk more – HBD blogs. It’s tough to be surprised after that.
A significant (p 0.001) negative association was found between inbreeding and score on the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC-C). In addition, the weighted mean IQ of inbred children )88.4 + or – 1.37) differed significant (p 0.001) from that recorded among 50 noninbred controls of similar age and socioeconomic status (99.6 + or – 2.0). The group means for both verbal and performance IQ subscales differed significantly and in the expected direction between subjects and controls…Additional surveys in other populations and for various inbreeding levels are recommended.
You can only deny this if you can’t do math.
I know it’s mean to India, but have you looked at their population boom? There’s a billion of them, they chose to be poor because resources are finite but population needs to match.
A measurable IQ of 69 was found. ~titter~
Compared to the Indian average of 82, lower than Nigeria at 84.
Going back to the most recent national IQ list I posted, that would be lower than the national stated average of Kenya, South Africa, the Congo, Botswana and the Sudan. Rwanda is 70.
69 is the IQ of Ethiopia and Malawi.
Hey, I’m sure this doesn’t mean much, right? Globally.
Muslims are projected to grow even faster and become the largest religious group in the region by mid-century. The Muslim population in Asia and the Pacific is expected to increase by almost 50% to nearly 1.5 billion in 2050.
Among the many birth defects that are the result of inbreeding are lower levels of IQ and higher levels of aggression. Yikes. That might explain the correlation for support for the brutal Islamic Law called “Sharia” and just how long a region has been Islamic.
According to Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist who has done extensive research into Muslim inbreeding, close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred:
70% of Pakistanis are inbred.
67% of Saudi Arabians are inbred.
64% of those living in Jordan and Kuwait are inbred.
63% of Sudanese are inbred.
60% of Iraqis are inbred.
54% of Muslims in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar are inbred.
25-30% of those in Turkey are inbred.
In England, at least 55% of Pakistani immigrants are married to their first cousins.
In Denmark the number of inbred Pakistani immigrants is around 40%.
IQ is a controversial subject, not because there are not loads of evidence pointing to how relevant IQ is. Rather, it is controversial because when you discuss it, you might hurt someone’s feelings. It is estimated that, worldwide, the average IQ for Muslims is 81. Research shows that intelligence can go down 10-16 points, if one’s parents are cousins.
The risk for having an IQ lower than 70, which is what we call in the West “retarded” increases by 400 percent among the offspring of first cousin marriages.
Islam is the fastest growing belief system (some call it a religion) in the world today. It is sweeping through Africa like a wildfire.
Look at African demographics. I have done posts.
It is apparent from the varied substance of the chapters in this book that aggression is an overdetermined behavior. There are genetic, constitutional, and environmental factors as well as individual learning history and specific situational events which go into determining whether a person will act in an aggressive manner at any specific time. However, the large number of possible determinants does not mean that aggressive behavior cannot be predicted or explained. Research that my colleagues and I have been doing indicates, in fact, that aggressive behavior is consistent over time and across situations despite the fact that a number of factors contribute to the behavior in varying degrees.
intellectual ability was negatively related to aggressive behavior both contemporaneously and over time, and that intellectual competence itself showed a remarkable constancy over time and across measures.
Did I mention there’s a pirate bay for academic papers?
In a 22-year study, data were collected on aggressiveness and intellectual functioning in more than 600 subjects, their parents, and their children. Both aggression and intellectual functioning are reasonably stable in a subject’s lifetime and perpetuate themselves across generations and within marriage pairs. Aggression in childhood was shown to interfere with the development of intellectual functioning and to be predictive of poorer intellectual achievement as an adult. Early IQ was related to early subject aggression but did not predict changes in aggression after age 8.
Eight, they’re set at eight.
Differences between early IQ and intellectual achievement in middle adulthood were predictable from early aggressive behavior. A dual-process model was offered to explain the relation between intellectual functioning and aggressive behavior. We hypothesized that low intelligence makes the learning of aggressive responses more likely at an early age, and this aggressive behavior makes continued intellectual development more difficult.
Incentives, as in behaviorism, do not operate in the low IQ as in the average. They are designed for regular intellects.
IQ and non-clinical psychotic symptoms in 12-year-olds: results from the ALSPAC birth cohort
There is a well-established association between pre-morbid low IQ score and schizophrenia. Psychosis-like symptoms in children may also be a risk factor for psychotic disorder but their relationship with IQ is unclear.
Over 6000 children
IQ was assessed at 8 years of age using the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (3rd UK edition).
After adjustment for confounding variables, there was a non-linear association between IQ score and psychosis-like symptoms, such that only those with below average IQ score had an increased risk of reporting such symptoms.
High IQ aren’t crazy, only the low.
An association between low IQ score and the later development of schizophrenia has been established for many years.11–16 The risk of schizophrenia increases gradually as IQ score falls, so that individuals with an average IQ score have an increased risk compared with those with the highest IQ scores.13,14,17
Knowing the Left, they’d brag about this for money.
At the World Psychiatric Association’s World Congress in Berlin on October 9, Hannelore Ehrenreich of the Max Planck Institute of Experimental Medicine presented results of a study of 1,200 people with schizophrenia. The investigation analyzed a wide range of genetic and environmental risk factors for developing the debilitating mental illness. The results — being submitted for publication — show people who had consumed cannabis before age 18 developed schizophrenia approximately 10 years earlier than others. The higher the frequency of use, the data indicated, the earlier the age of schizophrenia onset. In her study neither alcohol use nor genetics predicted an earlier time of inception, but pot did. “Cannabis use during puberty is a major risk factor for schizophrenia,” Ehrenreich says.
The strongest evidence that cannabis use may be a risk factor for later psychosis comes from a Swedish cohort study which found that heavy cannabis use at age 18 increased the risk of later schizophrenia sixfold. 12 This study could not establish whether adolescent cannabis use was a consequence of pre-existing psychotic symptoms rather than a cause. We present the first prospective longitudinal study of adolescent cannabis use as a risk factor for adult schizophreniform disorder, taking into account childhood psychotic symptoms3 antedating cannabis use
Schizophrenia and other psychoses are associated with violence and violent offending, particularly homicide. However, most of the excess risk appears to be mediated by substance abuse comorbidity. The risk in these patients with comorbidity is similar to that for substance abuse without psychosis. Public health strategies for violence reduction could consider focusing on the primary and secondary prevention of substance abuse.
The variance was significantly different only for the anger sub-scale (p<0.05).
Does nobody just check anymore?
The X chromosomal location of the MAOA gene allowed us to determine the haplotype in these male individuals without imputation.
Aggression is a complex personality trait that is likely to be associated with the action of several genes involved in brain function.3 This is the first study investigating an association between scores on the self-reporting Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire and the candidate gene, MAOA, in male subjects from Pakistan.
In the absence of whole genome sequences from South Asia…
Why is this study so shit?
Questionnaire in this population is an intriguing observation and requires replication in other population groups. It suggests that some humans may have been evolutionarily conditioned to curb their aggressive tendencies, thus enabling them to form social groupings. Such studies will help to unravel the role of candidate genes, epigenetics, gene-environment and gene-gene interactions in the development of aggressive human behaviour.29 Genome-wide association studies or whole genome sequencing of several thousand selected individuals with carefully defined behavioural phenotypes may offer several additional candidates for replication studies and functional analyses.
Our study was under-powered due to limitations in sample size and due to the fact that some samples had to be dropped because they could not be genotyped due to limited amount or poor quality of the DNA available.
Well they tried.
A better write-up.
There is strong evidence that genes play a significant role in antisocial behavior and aggression (Raine, 2002). A bulk of twin and adoption studies provides clear evidence
that about 50% of the variance in antisocial behavior is attributable to genetic influences (Moffit, 2005).
Additionally it is involved in the metabolism of many
neurochemicals such as norepinephrine, epinephrine, serotonin and dopamine, already
linked to antisocial and aggressive behavior (de Almeida et al. 2005).
Most of the common DNA variants associated with complex traits and diseases have
been studied in populations of European origin, and the possibility of altered behavior
due to different gene-gene and gene- environment interactions in the non-European
populations has remained unexplored (Yngvadottir et al, 2009).
The present study is the first attempt to explore DNA variations associated with aggressive behavior in an Asian population.
The first definitive evidence of MAOA gene involvement with aggression was
reported in a large Dutch kindred with a new form of X-linked, nondysmorphic, mild
mental retardation described as Brunner Syndrome (Brunner et al. 1993). The affected
males of this family showed abnormal behavior such as aggression, arson, attempted rape
In order to account for any potential issues arising from the ethnic stratification of the sample, the analyses were then repeated omitting the 47 cohort members of Maori, Pacific Island and Asian ethnicity.
Why are you studying Whites instead of Asians, we’ve done this. Decades now.
Grounds for Difference by Rogers Brubaker.
Collectivism, my old friend…
Is there a genetic contribution to cultural differences? Collectivism, individualism and genetic markers of social sensitivity
Monoamine oxidase A and social rejection
That’s the section they can justify politically how the crimes of non-whitey are all the fault of whitey.
this polymorphism influencing sensitivity to social input in general
Are Muslims outraged by everything? Impossible, I know.
Particularly for the sensitivity alleles of the
A118G and MAOA polymorphisms, it appears that the experience
of being excluded from the social interactions of
others can be particularly aversive
Given that there is a higher prevalence of these putative social sensitivity alleles in East Asian populations than in Caucasian populations, there may be a relationship between
the relative proportion of these alleles and the predominant
cultural forms in a population. In collectivistic cultures, relationships
are enduring due to social ties that are reified by
mutual obligations between members of the family, clan, or
religion. These relationships are so salient that the self is
defined by them. Thus, the implicit construction of the self
in members of these cultures is inherently relational (Fiske
et al., 1998)
I think you can begin to see why there isn’t much research on this topic.
It would be expensive and embarrassing when trade deals are on the table.
Since the time of Oscar Wilde, the media has tried to push drugs as something only intelligent people “try”. OK, “Try”, first off, that’s not possible.
You are a biochemical in/out machine. There is no Try. This isn’t a fucking cheese sample.
Try to put porridge in your gas tank. It isn’t supposed to be there. It throws the otherwise working parts off. Can you arrange a deep clean for your brain? No.
One meal can give you food poisoning or an infection that won’t quit. This is easy to diagnose because it’s gut. One instance of drug use can and does damage you. It may not kill you, but like puffing on one fag doesn’t instantly KaPow you with lung cancer, it does always damage you.
Something something artistic 2deep4u Byron. I’m sure the pre-existing mental illness and self-medication had nothing to do with it.
Nope. There is no evidence for that ‘genius’ connection, it’s purely anecdotal. The lazy people want to blame the drugs for less-than-ideal performance failure, a common form of self-sabotage. Do smart people sabotage out of peer pressure?
They commonly cite openness, a personality trait that smart people can be ever so slightly higher on. This is because it basically looks for intellectual curiosity, it’s a confound of the variable.
No, it doesn’t mean that ‘open’ people are smart, it isn’t truly connected.
Not to mention, but I’m gonna-
People self-rate on openness, can you imagine if we did that with IQ?
Relatively little is known about the neural bases of the Big Five personality trait Openness/Intellect. This trait is composed of two related but separable aspects
Intellect was also correlated significantly with scores on tests of intelligence and working memory capacity, but the association of Intellect with brain activity could not be entirely explained by cognitive ability.
Look at a related variable, something easy to measure. e.g.
The higher someone’s IQ, the older they are when they lose their virginity.
I don’t think they’re smoking pot. Somehow. This is just the new trendy thing to smoke anyway, look at tobacco rates for how much Millennials despise something with health warnings attached. Tricked their grandparents though.
Look at the cluster of finding. Look at related variables.
They might just say, Oh that’s it, no other effects on a person?
In adults you can damage the frontal connections. This happens with any addiction including porn and is called hypofrontality, there is reduced activity in the reasoning… levels (which are where most of the IQ stuff happens).
Well, why would pro-abortion anti-natalists be telling us to do it?
It isn’t women trying to conceive who need to be teetotal and off drugs for as long as possible (ideally never starting), there is far more cause for men to do it. Look up advice for men trying to conceive, it says exactly this.
If anything, the rules are more stringent for men.
Because it’s their sole contribution to the baby-making process.
The work comes years beforehand.
This is genetic.
Since men process sperm repeatedly, constantly, any damage from any point in their life is present and consequent on their present sperm. However, it’s hard to discern clear medical causation beyond a few months because we’ve yet to find a suitable method, not because it isn’t there. FYI, you can’t really use sperm beyond ten years, more like five would be pushing it. It isn’t a magical technology.
Sperm is purely epigenetic in men because it is one of the few body parts that constantly refreshes with a completely new code, new switches off or on. It would be immoral to damage and mutate babies deliberately to prove this.
published in the Human Reproduction journal — researchers looked at sperm samples of 1,970 men from various fertility clinics in the United Kingdom. The scientists examined how smoking and drinking habits, as well as other lifestyle factors, such as BMI, medical history and the type of underwear worn, affected sperm
Okay, you might think, but most of them are fine?
You don’t have any particular medical problems? You can afford to?
Of the men studied, 1,652 produced “normal” samples of sperm, meaning that more than 4 percent of their sperm was the right shape and size. The remaining men’s sperm was shown as “abnormal.”
A lot of men have rendered themselves infertile and don’t even know it.
There’s no such thing as free love, look at the Boomers suddenly getting pathogenic cancers.
Is it any coincidence that such drug use is common among already-low IQ populations?
How about the undeniable link to high time preference, inversely associated with IQ?
“People who abuse alcohol, nicotine, cocaine, methamphetamine and heroin experience a decreased ability to produce dopamine.”
a common indicator of addiction…
“The research suggests that people who use marijuana excessively have problems with the reward circuitry in their brains. Even when their brains produce large amounts of dopamine, marijuana abusers don’t respond to it normally. Personality tests showed that the marijuana abusers in the study were more likely to experience negative emotions, including depression, anxiety and irritability, than the controls were. This is a sign that marijuana abusers find it harder to experience pleasure than most people do.”
“It’s not clear whether excessive marijuana use damages the brain’s reward circuitry, [yes] or whether people who already have damaged reward circuitry use marijuana to make themselves feel better.” [no, clutching at straws]
They’re completely separate things.
A drug is a typically organic substance that can impair physiological functioning or kill when given to the healthy population and a drug as medicine is a chemical composition that will repair your improper bodily functioning or you will die without it in an individual body, long term. Addicts may develop non-medicinal physical dependence but medically-obligated physical dependents are not addicts per se.
A drug user with medical physical dependence only can take a processed form of their medicine without the psychological effects (commonly a high) very happily whereas an addict would require the high, the specific form of drug is merely a trigger for the brain created by past memories of use by the amygdala. These extreme-intensity usage memories create many of the symptoms of withdrawal (psychosomatic) and delude the brain into believing it genuinely needs the drug e.g. claims marijuana is as healthy as a vitamin and the push to normalize (the societal danger of addict populations, social contagion and acceptability).
The sole cause of addiction beyond a doubt is beginning use in the first place. It is impossible to be addicted to (or physically dependent on) a substance the body (and brain) has never experienced. This is a self-selecting type of stupidity (hubris/arrogance) regularly found in teenagers (immature prefrontal cortex) because such users do not think or disbelieve their mind could be compromised by addiction. Their brains already create this illusion to necessitate the anticipated reward (high) prior to initial use or they wouldn’t take it (such as the processed form with no high). The foolproof layman method to test for addiction is simple: substance deprivation for a year. Prepare for a list of excuses.
A physical dependency is often created by doctors to treat patients with chronic conditions, usually chronic pain symptoms (ongoing). Addicts try to ape this category (some sincerely, others deceptively) but are increasingly thwarted by processed (reward-weakened) variants of their poison. Specific advocates for drug legalization ignore the essential fact of escalation and compensation. As part of the brain’s hedonic treadmill, it craves increasingly more of the reward from use, compelling drug users to harder toxins (harder reward, creating deeper addiction and physical damage) and this is the biological component of addiction that makes the habitual behaviour of use so challenging to physically extinguish from the brain.
Physical dependency creates withdrawal symptoms too but the patient’s individual physical needs (inc. not dying) and substance type distinguish this from addicts e.g. insulin to a diabetic.The human brain is connected to facilitate the reward response feedback loops because they are evolutionally guided by the basic needs to survive (food, water, sex) and this is why there is no such thing as a food addict, water addict or sex addict, merely people with impulse control issues seeking a social ‘displacement of responsibility’. Beyond these essential elements for the sustenance of our individual life and species general, anything chemical creating a vacuous boost in the reward system is a drug, whether you like it or not. Drug users resent the stigma for their activities whether or not their poison is legal (ethanol/alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, cocaine etc) because the positive emotional response loop (dopamine, serotonin release) caused by their usage memories creates defensive dissonance when challenged by non-users. Even polite persistent enquiry can sometimes trigger a psychotic episode where the patient is completely detached from reality and VERY DANGEROUS. This is why trained professionals intervene. In the latter stages, the drug/s become integrated into personal identity and extraction or therapeutic measures become unlikely to resolve the issue without constant medical care (rehabilitation facilities). Moreover, this reduces the risk of sudden death caused by the somatic shock of going ‘clean’ and allows overall physiological strength to be built up (reverse what the drugs did) while the problem is gradually resolved.
If a substance exists in a natural form within, say, a foodstuff, it is not addictive because food reward circuits are natural and normal and can never be extinguished. This is why milk (dairy), sugar, chocolate, chilli, coffee and caffeine ‘addiction’ is a misnomer. However, a person habitually needing a purified artificial version of these may constitute a non-medical physical dependence or perhaps a behavioural addiction e.g. alcoholism. Behavioural addictions require holistic (whole life) perspective for diagnosis e.g. someone who works online cannot be an internet addict if those hours online constitute their occupation (add to their success and life) and they can easily disconnect for a while. Behavioural addictions where they do exist are more accurately termed compulsions and relate to personality disorders or obsessions created by unmet needs. Substitution is the norm where one behaviour is broken, another is taken up. Social contagion is a significant factor for poor impulse control. Behavioural or result-based addictions when positive are discounted for lack of stigma nor bodily harm e.g. ‘high’ grades, promotion (power/status boost), painting. However, they can display withdrawal symptoms from endogenous neurotransmittor levels e.g. low serotonin creates acute compulsiveness completing the cycle to repeat a rewarding behaviour and low dopamine creates psychomotor agitation including pacing and fidgeting, also apathy, chosen social isolation and anhedonia (nothing is enjoyable and everything fast becomes boring).
By most definitions, Sherlock Holmes is not an addict. However, he qualifies as an addictive personality with a high arousal threshold and excessively superhuman high need for cognition.
Related terms: Dosage Response Curve and (innate) Arousal Thresholds causative of addictive personality tendency.