MARIHUANA RESEARCH

FINDINGS: 1976

Editor, Robert C. Petersen, Ph.D.

NIDA RESEARCH MONOGRAPH 14 July 1977

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Public Health Service

Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration

National Institute on Drug Abuse

11400 Rockville Pike

Rockville, Maryland 20852

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Washington, D.C.

Stock No. 017–024–00622–0
The NIDA Research Monograph series is prepared by the Division of Research of

the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Its primary objective is to provide critical reviews of research problem areas and techniques, the content of state-of-the-art

conferences, integrative research reviews and significant original research. Its

dual publication emphasis is rapid and targeted dissemination to the scientific

and professional community.

Editorial Advisory Board

Avram Goldstein, M.D.

Addiction Research Foundation

Palo Alto, California

Jerome Jaffe, M.D.

College of Physicians and Surgeons

Columbia University, New York

Reese T. Jones, M.D.

Langley Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute

University of California

San Francisco, California

William McGlothlin, Ph.D.

Department of Psychology, UCLA

Los Angeles, California

Jack Mendelson, M.D.

Alcohol and Drug Abuse Research Center

Harvard Medical School

McLean Hospital

Belmont, Massachusetts

Helen Nowlis, Ph.D.

Office of Drug Education, DHEW

Washington, D.C.

Lee Robins, Ph.D.

Washington University School of Medicine

St. Louis, Missouri

NIDA Research Monograph series

Robert DuPont, M.D.

DIRECTOR, NIDA

William Pollin, M.D.

DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF RESEARCH, NIDA

Robert C. Petersen, Ph.D.

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Eunice L. Corfman, MA.

EDITOR

Rockwall Building 11400 Rockvllle Pike Rockville, Maryland 20852
MARIHUANA RESEARCH FINDINGS: 1976
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Preparation of the monograph was made possible by the

generous contribution of information by members of the

research community, which is gratefully acknowledged.

Special thanks are due several members of this community

who provided updated technical reviews. They are:

Sidney Cohen, M.D., D.Sc.

University of California at Los Angeles

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

Reese Jones, M.D.

Langley-Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute,

San Francisco

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

University of Utah, Salt Lake City

Steven Matsuyama, Ph.D., and Lissy Jarvik, M.D., Ph.D.

Veterans Administration Hospital,Brentwood

University of California at Los Angeles

William McGlothlin, Ph.D.

University of California at Los Angeles

Preparation of the report was supported by Contract

No. 271-76-3334 between the National Institute on Drug

Abuse and Koba Associates, Inc.

The NIDA Research Monograph series is indexed in Index Medicus.

Library of Congress catalog card number 77-82238

DHEW publication nwnber (ADM) 77-501

Printed 1977
FOREWORD

This report, like its five predecessors, summarizes our growing,

though still limited, knowledge of the health consequences of

marihuana use. To the over simplified question, “Is marihuana use

safe?”, we can offer a simplistic, but unequivocal, “No.” There is

good evidence that being “high” -- intoxicated by marihuana --

impairs responses ranging from driving to intellectual and interpersonal functioning.

It is hardly surprising that marihuana is not “safe” in any absolute

sense for no drug is or can be under all conditions of use. Many

substances as diverse as alcohol, tobacco, cyclamates and red dye

No. 2, do not harm all users, but may be fraught with adverse health

consequences for a significant number of them. Marihuana, too, can

be hazardous even when used occasionally.

We now know that marihuana intoxication poses a significant threat

to highway safety in much the same way that alcohol does. The exact

size of that threat remains a matter for conjecture. Many marihuana

users report driving while intoxicated and since we know driving

skills are impaired under those circumstances, the problem is real.

A related source of concern is the increasing number of Americans

who use marihuana on a daily or near daily basis. Just over 8

percent of the nation’s 1976 high school graduates reported virtually daily marihuana use. The number of 1976 graduates using

marihuana on that basis was 40 percent greater than the number

making equally frequent use of alcohol.

To date, most American marihuana users smoke relatively low potency

material and only occasionally. The apparently benign picture

presented by that type of use -- aside from possible hazards related

to functioning while intoxicated, few other specific health hazards

have been definitively identified -- may change if more frequent use

of stronger material becomes more common. If laboratory findings of

possible effects on the body’s immune response, endocrinological

functioning and cell metabolism prove to have serious clinical

implication, marihuana’s persistence in the body may make even

episodic use risky.

More realistic than the question of marihuana’s absolute safety

under all conditions of use are two questions:

1. What is the health risk at present and anticipated

levels of use in the United States?

2. What are the specific areas of health hazard and

who is at risk?

Neither of these questions can be satisfactorily answered at present. The increasing availability in the United States of large

numbers of individuals who have used marihuana over a period of

several years makes it increasingly possible to do the type of large

v
scale study that could previously only be done abroad under quite

different cultural conditions. Such studies are being planned.

Other, more specific research is planned to resolve the questions

raised by the laboratory findings across a broad spectrum.

This report emphasizes the large and apparently growing number of

Americans who have used marihuana. While this finding deserves

emphasis, it is equally important to recognize that more than half

of the Americans who have used marihuana have quit using it. Even

larger is the number of people who say that they have not used and

have no intention of using marihuana regardless of the legal status

of the drug.

In recent years, those who have had to deal with legal substances as

diverse as alcohol and red dye No. 2 have had to face the fact that

these agents are not “safe” under all circumstances and that

whatever social policy is adopted concerning their availability

must take this disquieting fact into consideration. Similarly, in

the area of illicit drugs, we now recognize that many users suffer

no apparent ill effects. The realization that significant numbers

of users of legal substances may suffer ill effects at the same time

that many users of prohibited substances have no problems with their

use, has strained our national capacity to deal rationally with the

fundamental social policy issues involved. We hope that this report

describing the current state of our knowledge of marihuana's health

consequences continues to contribute to a better understanding of

the complexity of this important social issue.

Robert L. DuPont, M.D.

Director

National Institute on Drug Abuse

vi
CONTENTS

FOREWORD

Robert L. DuPont, M.D.

SUMMARY, MARIHUANA RESEARCH FINDINGS: 1976

Robert C. Petersen, Ph.D.

References

1 EPIDEMIOLOGY OF MARIHUANA USE

William McGlothlin, Ph.D.

Present Patterns and Changes in Use

Social and Psychological Correlates

References

2 CHEMISTRY AND METABOLISM

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

Summary

Drug Sources

Analytical Techniques: Detection

Metabolism

References

55

55

57

58

59

62

3 TOXICOLOGICAL AND PHARMACOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

Toxicological Effects

Pharmacological Effects

References

4 PRECLINICAL EFFECTS: UNLEARNED BEHAVIOR

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

Gross Behavior

Activity and Exploration

Consummatory Behavior

Aggressive Behavior

References

5 PRECLINICAL EFFECTS: LEARNED BEHAVIOR

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

Avoidance Learning and Aversive Control

Reinforcement Schedules and Maze Learning

Discrimination Learning

References

6 PRECLINICAL CHRONIC EFFECTS:

UNLEARNED AND LEARNED BEHAVIOR

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

References

v

1

29

38

46

51

67

70

72

79

86

86

88

90

92

95

103

103

105

108

111

118

122
7 HUMAN EFFECTS 128

Reese Jones, M.D.

Acute Effects 128

Cannabis and Psychopathology 145

Chronic Effects 151

References 156

8 EFFECTS OF MARIHUANA ON THE GENETIC

AND IMMUNE SYSTEMS 179

Steven Matsuyama, Ph.D., and Lissy Jarvik, M.D., Ph.D.

Animal Studies 179

Human Studies 181

Summary and Conclusion 186

References 188

9 THERAPEUTIC ASPECTS 194

Sidney Cohen, M.D., D.Sc.

The Ancient Lore 196

The Middle Period 198

The Current Period 200

Conclusion 214

References 215

INDEXES

Author Index 226

Subject Index 243
MARIHUANA RESEARCH FINDINGS: 1976 is the more detailed

reference report which provided the basis for the shorter

sixth edition of the Marihuana and Health Report. While

the latter was intended for a general audience, this

more detailed review of each of the areas discussed is

more likely to be of interest to the technically trained

reader. In order to be of maximum usefulness, this monograph also includes as a summary the text of the sixth

report. This volume is provided as part of the Research

Monograph series to ensure that the full background reports

which formed the basis for the briefer report are available

to those with particular need for still more specialized

materials.

MARIHUANA RESEARCH

FINDINGS: 1976

SUMMARY

Robert C. Petersen Ph.D.

Marihuana use, which first began to involve significant numbers of

American youth in the 1960's, continues to increase. Most users

reported occasional use of low potency material. However, more

regular use of stronger materials has increased. Last year 1 in 12

high school seniors nationwide reported using marihuana 20 or more

times per month. In peak using groups, figures are still higher.

Among males 20-24 years old, about 1 in 10 uses on a daily basis. If

we restrict our analysis to those in this age group who have ever

used, nearly one in five (17 percent) does so daily.

The amount of research on chronic use remains modest. This is

especially true when considered in the light of the estimated 36

million Americans who have tried the drug and the nearly 15 million

who used it within the month preceding the last national survey.

While three carefully controlled overseas studies have compared

long term user populations to non-using populations, the actual

number of matched user/non-user pairs was small (a total of 117

users) due to the complexity of the research design. There is

considerable evidence from experience with other drugs that many

years of use by substantial numbers is required for the implications

-1-
of widespread drug use to surface. Moreover, the small samples

studied thus far would probably not have revealed some of the most

serious adverse consequences of any habit, as illustrated by cigarette smoking. Laboratory research in the United States has been

largely restricted to young males in good health as have larger U.S.

studies of psychosocial aspects of use. Marihuana’s effects on

those in poor health or older people and on females have not been

adequately examined. Despite these obvious limitations to our

knowledge, many have interpreted the preliminary findings as indicative that “marihuana is safe.”

Preliminary marihuana research evidence has been eagerly sought,

its limitations too frequently ignored and its implications often

overdrawn to provide support for one or another side of the debate

on social policy. Changes in social policy dictated by the necessity of finding a wiser, more workable drug policy concerning

personal use and possession are in danger of being interpreted as

indicating that marihuana is without significant hazard.

While the picture regarding marihuana use is far from complete, it

should be emphasized that there is good evidence that use is by no

means harmless. Such behaviors as the operation of a motor vehicle

or complex psychomotor performance are clearly impaired by marihuana use in a manner somewhat similar to that of alcohol use. A

variety of both clinical and experimental observations makes it

seem quite likely that heavy use of smoked marihuana will impair

lung function and may result in consequences similar to those of

cigarette smoking.

Marihuana is most widely used by adolescents and young adults during

critical stages in their personality development and while developing intellectual and psychosocial skills. To what extent, if any,

chronic intoxication affects development is still unknown. While

the percentage of the population which uses heavily on a daily basis

is still a small minority even in this group, any serious consequences of use may well be expected to have implications for

extended periods of their lives.

The quest for a rational social policy has resulted in a continuing

demand for a simple answer to the question, “Is marihuana harmful?”

Unfortunately, the apparent simplicity of both the question and the

desired answer are deceptive; both are complex.

A series of laboratory findings concerning the possible adverse

impact of marihuana on such areas as the body’s immune response,

basic cell metabolism and other areas of functioning has not yet

been adequately explained. Although it is possible that some of

them may ultimately prove to be without clinical significance, the

possible hazards dictate a degree of caution in prematurely concluding that we now know enough about the dangers of cannabis use.

Unlike alcohol in which many of the implications of chronic use are

well documented (and from a public health standpoint, serious),

similar parameters of risk for cannabis use have not yet been

adequately explored.

-2-
As marihuana use escalates it is highly probable, for example, that

such use will come to include more individuals with already impaired

physical or psychological functioning for whom use and particularly

regular use may have quite different implications than occasional

use by those in optimal health. Evidence on cardiac patients cited

over the past two years is one example. Similarly, the implications

of use for marginal ‘members of the society or for those having

greater problems with coping or less skills for doing so, may be

quite different from those of the more competent, advantaged student user.

Research over the past several years has markedly expanded our

knowledge of many of the effects of marihuana and its patterns of

use both here and abroad. Despite this rapid expansion in our

knowledge much remains to be learned, especially about the implications of chronic use. Most therapeutic drugs are used in pure forms

for a limited duration of time, for a specific purpose, in controlled doses and often under medical direction. Marihuana, by contrast, is quite variable in potency, not uncommonly used regularly

over extended periods of time and with no supervision to alert the

user to possible adverse effects. Given the widespread patterns of

use, it is critical that we continue to define the parameters of

risk both when used alone and in combination with other drugs. Now

that there are significant numbers of Americans who have been using

for periods of several years or more it is desirable that we study

use in a manner parallel to the overseas studies which have been

conducted, but on a much larger scale. If serious hazards are

anticipated, it is essential that they be discovered soon. With the

present trend toward increasing use, early detection of more serious health implications may discourage marihuana use before it

becomes as firmly entrenched in U.S. social customs as are alcohol

and tobacco use.

-3-
NATURE AND EXTENT OF MARIHUANA USE IN THE UNITED STATES

Marihuana use among the general U.S. population has not appreciably

changed since the issuance of the Fifth Marihuana and Health Report

(105). Concentration continues among adolescents and young adults

as shown by the most recent national survey (2) which found the

largest percentages of those who had “ever used” and now using

(defined as use within the month preceding the survey) among the 18-

25-year-olds. A majority (53 percent) of this age group has used

marihuana at some time; a quarter of the sample within the past

month.

Among older age groups (over 25), the percentage of those who have

ever used drops precipitously. Similarly, of those adults who have

used cannabis, the percentage reporting current use is considerably

lower than that of younger groups. For example, approximately onethird (36 percent) of the 26-34-year-olds report having tried

marihuana as compared to one-half of the 18-25-year-olds. But less

than one-third of the 26-34 age group who have ever used report

current use (within the month preceding the survey), while about

half of the 18-25 group who have ever used marihuana are current

users. In the over 35 age group about 1 in 20 reports having tried

the drug; but only 1 in 6 of those who had ever used, reported

current use.

Among adolescents questioned in the National Survey, the 12-13-

year-olds reported little use: 6 percent of this group report

having ever used, half of these within the past month. Among 14-15-

year-olds, one in five has used but in the 16-17-year-old group

twice as many (two in five) have tried marihuana. For all youth

groups (12-17-year-olds) about half of those who have ever used are

current users.

When the survey results are analyzed for sex differences, twice as

many men as women over 18 (29 percent vs. 14 percent respectively)

have had experience with the drug. By contrast, the sex differences

are less marked among 12-17-year-olds who have ever used (26 percent

of males vs. 19 percent of females). Once again, about half of

those who have ever used report that they are currently using.

Tables 1 and 2 provide National Survey data for the years 1971

through 1976 on marihuana use by adults (those over 18) and by youth

(the 12-17 age group). When asked about their plans for future use

of marihuana, one in five youths (the 12-17 age group) anticipated

possible future use. By contrast, one in three of those 18-25 (the

peak using age group) anticipated future use, while only one in ten

of those over 26 had similar expectations.

When comparisons are made on a national basis between current use of

marihuana and use of cigarettes and alcohol, use of the latter drugs

is considerably greater than that of marihuana. Among youth, onethird reported having drunk alcohol in the preceding month, onequarter reported use of tobacco and one-eighth marihuana use. While

60 percent of the adults reported alcohol use in the preceding month

-4-
Table 1

2 2

7 6

MARIHUANA USE AMONG ADULTS, 1971-1976

% Ever Used

1971 1972 1975 1976

All adults 15 16 19 21

Age:

18-25 39 48 53 53

26-34 19 20 29 36

35+ 7 3 4 6

Sex:

Male 21 22 24 29

Female 10 10 14 14

*Less than 0.5%

**Used during last month

% Current Use**

1971 1972 1975 1976

5 8 7 8

17 28 25 25

5 9 8 11

--* --* --* 1

7 11 9 11

3 5 5 5

Table 2

MARIHUANA USE AMONG YOUTH, 1971-1976

% Ever Used % Current Use*

1971 1972 1975 1976 1971 1972

All youth 14 14 23 22 6 7

Age:

12-13 6 4 6 6

14-15 10 10 22 21

16-17 27 29 39 40 10 16

Sex:

Male 7 9

Female 14

14 15 24 26

13 21 19 5 6

*Used during last month

1975

12

2

12

20

12

11

1976

12

3

13

21

14

11

-5-
and 40 percent had smoked tobacco during that same period, 10

percent reported current marihuana use.

A continuing concern with respect to cannabis use is a possible

shift toward the use of higher potency cannabis. One type, hashish,

is widely available in the United States where it, too, has been

most widely used by young adults. Nearly one-third (29.2 percent)

of the 18-25-year-olds reported ever using hashish, with about onefifth of these reporting use during the month preceding the survey.

Among the 18-25 age group, 19.5 percent reported that he or she

“definitely” or “might” use hashish in the future. This contrasts

with the less than one in ten for those aged 12-17 and less than 3

percent of adults 26 and over who anticipated future use of hashish.

It is not known, however, whether users preferred the hashish to

less potent forms of cannabis given a choice. (Hashish, a concentrated resin of cannabis, contains on the order of five to ten times

as much of marihuana’s principal psychoactive ingredient as marihuana itself. Typical marihuana in the United States contains 1-2

percent THC, as compared with hashish which has as much as 10

percent THC.)

Marihuana Use Among High School Seniors

In addition to the samples of youth mentioned with the National

Survey results, an annual national survey of high school seniors on

life style and values as related to drugs has been started (40).

This study is significant because it represents an attempt to

examine the change in attitudes and behavior over time during the

critical years of late adolescence and young adulthood. Since this

survey taps both drug using behavior and attitudes toward drugs, it

will hopefully provide information for predicting future trends.

Moreover, the large national, random sample (13,000 representative

high school seniors) makes it unusually sensitive to recent trends

in drug use among this age group. Although only the classes of 1975

and 1976 have been studied thus far, the results are of considerable

interest. The proportions which had ever used marihuana increased

from 47 percent in the Class of '75 to 53 percent in the Class of

'76. Those who had used within the month preceding the survey had

also increased from 27 percent to 32 percent. Because of the large

samples involved, it is unlikely that either of these increases is a

statistical artifact. Another finding of note was that the percentage of seniors who had used marihuana 20 or more times in the

preceding month (8 percent) exceeded the percentage who had used

alcohol that many times during the same period (6 percent).

The seniors’ attitudes toward marihuana had also shifted. While 55

percent disapproved of occasional marihuana use in the Class of '75,

only 48 percent felt that way in the Class of '76. While slightly

over one-quarter of 1975 seniors felt “using marihuana should be

entirely legal,” one-third of the '76 class shared this view (27.4

percent vs. 32.6 percent). An additional quarter (25.5 percent) of

the '75 class felt use “should be a minor violation -- like a

parking ticket -- but not a crime.” This proportion increased to

-6-
29.1 percent in the '76 Class. Only a quarter of the seniors

surveyed in 1976 felt that marihuana use “should be a crime.” On

the issue of whether sale of marihuana should also be legal, if use

were legalized, nearly two-thirds (63.2 percent) of the '76 class

felt it should be as contrasted with 52.3 percent. holding this

belief during the Class of ‘75 survey. Half (49.9 percent) of the

seniors would, however, restrict such sales to adults; only 13.3

percent supported the idea of unrestricted sales.

One local survey of junior and senior high school students in San

Mateo County is of interest because it has been conducted annually

(since 1968) in a county with unusually high rates of drug use (4).

As early as 1968 nearly half (48 percent) of this Northern California county’s 12th graders had used marihuana 1 or more times in the

previous year, over half of these 10 or more times. By 1971, 59

percent of the 12th graders had tried marihuana in the preceding

year. Two out of five of this group (43 percent) had used ten or

more times that year while one in three (32 percent of 12th graders)

had used fifty or more times that year.

Among ninth graders, one in four (27 percent) had used marihuana in

the year preceding the 1968 survey. Of those in the ninth grade who

were users, half (or 14 percent of the total) had used marihuana 10

or more times that year. By 1971, nearly half (44 percent) of the

ninth graders had tried marihuana the previous year, again, about

half of the users on 10 or more occasions. Slightly less than one

in five ninth graders (17 percent) had used marihuana on fifty or

more occasions that year. Since 1971 the figures for use have been

fairly consistent for both the younger and older groups at all

levels of use. About half of the ninth graders reported some use in

the previous year. Of these, approximately 60 percent had used

marihuana 10 or more times and approximately 1 in 3 of the user

group had used as many as 50 times in the preceding year. The exact

figures tracing these trends are to be found in Table 3.

Notably, in this high drug use county, male 12th graders who had

used marihuana at least 50 times in the year preceding the Spring,

1976 survey exceeded the number who had made use of tobacco that

of ten (30.0 percent had used marihuana 50 or more times compared to

23.5 percent who had used tobacco that frequently). For girls

roughly the reverse was true; about one-third had used tobacco fifty

or more times versus one in five who had used marihuana that often.

Among both boys and girls in the 12th grade, alcohol use on 50 or

more occasions only modestly exceeded marihuana use (among boys the

figures for 50 or more occasions of alcohol use was 37.6 percent vs.

30.0 percent for marihuana; for girls, comparable figures were 26.2

percent vs. 21.3 percent).

The above figures for San Mateo County are of interest because they

provide some, evidence that the use of marihuana in this high use

county may have reached a plateau and is even diminishing for some

of the other drugs (amphetamines, barbiturates, LSD and tobacco use

by males). Since California has elected to decriminalize the

personal possession of small quantities of marihuana, subsequent

-7-
Grade: 9th 12th

1968 27 45

1969 35 50

1970 34 51

1971 44 59

1972 44 61

1973 51 61

1974 49 62

1975 49 64

1976 48 61

Table 3

PERCENTAGE OFMARIHUANA USE AMONG MALE SANMATEO

COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

One or more uses Ten or more uses Fifty or more uses

in past year in past year in past year

9th 12th 9th 12th

14 26 NA NA

20 34 NA NA

20 34 11 22

26 43 17 32

27 45 16 32

32 45 20 32

30 47 20 34

30 45 20 31

27 42 17 30

-8-
results from this annual survey may serve as one measure of the

impact of this legal change on adolescent use. Thus, this county

may provide some indication of future trends in other areas of the

U.S. where drug use is still climbing or where laws are being

revised.

A study of drug use by young adult males 20-30 years old conducted

in late 1974 and early 1975 (reported in the Fifth Marihuana and

Health Report, 105) has now become available as a monograph in the

National Institute on Drug Abuse’s Research Monograph series (73).

Findings for this age group are generally quite consistent with data

from other studies. Correlates of drug use such as marital status,

employment and sizes of community of residence are also reported.

Use Trends -- An Overview

Use of marihuana has markedly increased since the late 1960's when

interest in the drug first began to accelerate. Initially, use was

confined to a small minority characterized by a counterculture

orientation and for whan it was a symbol of opposition to the

“establishment.” Users now come from a broad cross section of U.S.

youth although use, particularly regular use, remains more common

among the less conventional. In at least one age group (young

adults from 18-25) a majority have at some point tried the drug.

Among adolescents and adults under 25 about one-half of those who

have ever tried marihuana continue to use it at least occasionally.

National statistics regarding marihuana use can, however, be misleading. Average trends can mask significant local and regional

differences. Use rates continue to be positively related to sex

(male use generally exceeds that of females), age (young adult rates

higher than either younger or older age groups), size of community

(larger communities report greater use than smaller) and region

(higher in West and Northeast than in the South or Midwest). Over

the past several years many of these differences have diminished but

between 1975 and 1976 there were few changes. In one county of high

use in which surveys have been consistently conducted, use by high

school students as early as 1968 already exceeded that on most

college campuses. Thus, the more modest use picture conveyed by the

national data may mask considerably greater use among certain

geographic and demographic subgroups.

In spite of the rapid increase in cannabis use over the past decade,

its use is still largely confined to the young. Past age 25,

experimentation with marihuana and its continuing use becomes

increasingly less common. For individuals over 35, marihuana

experience and especially continued use are a rarity. These

statistics reflect the fact that the members of the first wave of

accelerated marihuana interest are only now reaching their early

30's. There is also evidence, however, that increasing age associated with the assumption of adult roles and adult responsibilities

makes marihuana use less practical and appealing. Whatever the

diminution of use brought about by new role demands, however, it

appears quite likely that there will be some increase in continued

-9-

239-715 0 - 77 - 2
marihuana use among the over-30 group as more of the young adults

with histories of cannabis use enter this age group.

While there are areas and groups in which cannabis use may be

approaching or has already reached an upper limit, overall use

levels may be expected to rise as other groups more recently

introduced to marihuana move toward a level of saturated interest.

Persistent use for nearly a decade by large numbers, despite

significant attempts to discourage marihuana use, suggests that

cannabis use is more than a fad and may well prove to be an enduring

cultural pattern in the United States.

The amounts and frequency of use in the United States are still

quite modest when compared to countries in which cannabis use is

more traditional. Use continues to be comparatively infrequent and

typically involves relatively low potency material. But there is

also evidence that users in significant numbers are beginning to use

on a daily basis. For example, among males between 20 and 30, 1 in 6

of those who have ever used marihuana continues to do so on a daily

basis. In some locales, as noted in the discussion of the San Mateo

County study, regular marihuana use may be nearly as common or even

more common than regular cigarette use.

As mentioned earlier, while marihuana use including daily use has

decidedly increased in the past decade, the attitudes and behavior

of most youth and adults continue to be relatively conservative.

Among the high school seniors discussed earlier, nearly three out of 

four (70 percent) disapproved of regular marihuana use. Half said

even were it legal to buy and use, they would not do so. Two out of

five high school seniors feel that those who smoke marihuana

regularly do so at “great risk of personal harm.” With respect to

the use of other drugs, a very large majority disapprove of even

trying them -- 9 out of 10 disapprove of trying heroin or LSD; 4 out

of 5 disapprove of trying uppers or downers.

As was emphasized in earlier reports, many users stop or markedly

diminish their use of marihuana as they take on various adult

responsibilities such as new marital, parental and work roles (8,

30, 73). Thus, while the future patterns of use of marihuana in our

society are in doubt, there is reason for believing that a variety

of considerations, including negative attitudes of many potential

users toward regular drug use, serve to moderate and discourage more

extensive use even when the drug is widely available.

Predicting Marihuana Use

Several studies were published in the past year concerning the

prediction of marihuana use based on earlier behavior, personality,

belief and attitude indicators. One study (36) found that high

school users as compared with non-users placed lower value on

achievement and higher value on independence, tended to be more

alienated and critical, more tolerant of deviance, less religious,

less influenced by parents as compared to friends, and had a lower

-10-
grade point average. Moreover, those who initiated marihuana use

between their first and second interviews tended to show shifts in

the above directions during the interval between contacts.

In a similar study (82), five year longitudinal data were collected

for students in grades 4-12. In this study of children and

adolescents, rebelliousness was the best predictor of future marihuana use. Non-users tended to describe themselves and to be

described by others as obedient, law-abiding, conscientious, trustworthy and hardworking. By contrast, those who became later

marihuana users were more likely to be rated as impulsive and less

sensitive to the feelings of others; but at the same time, more

sociable, talkative and outgoing than non-users. Such ratings were

also generally predictive of those more likely to become “early”

versus “late” marihuana users.

These high school level studies are reminiscent of college studies

reported in previous Marihuana and Health Reports (101, 105) which

indicated that college student users tended to be non-conformists

when compared to those who did not use. However, as use becomes

more typical of the group, the user generally becomes more like his

or her peers. It should also be kept in mind that predictors, while

useful in anticipating average behavior in a group, are not necessarily usable for individual cases.

Studies of parent-child relationships are of interest in providing

some indication of possible influences on use of marihuana and other

drugs by children. It has been found that while peer factors are

especially important for marihuana initiation, intrapsychic factors

and a lack of closeness of family ties are more important in

relation to more serious involvement with use of illicit drugs (43).

Given the role that marihuana use has come to play as part of the

adolescent and young adult cultures, emergent use often becomes a

part of the young person’s integration into a social subculture in

which drug use is one part.

Many of the factors which have been found to be related to drug use

including that of marihuana -- low academic performance, rebelliousness, depression or criminal activity -- appear more often to

precede rather than to follow the use of drugs.

CHEMISTRY AND METABOLISM OF CANNABIS

The chemistry and metabolism of cannabis (i.e., the ways in which

marihuana is broken down and transformed chemically by the body) are

highly technical areas which are of considerable practical importance. Reports in this series have stressed that marihuana is not a

single chemical substance. While -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-

THC) was identified early as the principal psychoactive ingredient

in cannabis, other constituents may be important in modifying the

action of THC in addition to having their own physiological implica-

-11-
tions. In this respect, marihuana is not like beverage alcohol

which is a relatively simple compound.

The detection of marihuana in the human body is an important

chemical problem with major legal and research implications. As

marihuana comes to be more widely used, it is being used increasingly while driving or under other conditions likely to endanger the user and others. Because -9-THC and other cannabis

constituents are rapidly transformed into other chemical substances

(metabolites) and because of the very small quantities involved,

detection remains a difficult scientific problem.

In 1976, a major monograph on the progress made in developing

detection methods was published by the National Institute on Drug

Abuse (98). Work is continuing on the development of simple tests,

analogous to blood alcohol determinations that might be useful at

the site of accidents and in roadside determinations of marihuana

intoxication. There are now a variety of techniques suitable for

detection by laboratories, although none is reasonably priced or

sufficiently simple to be used reliably for this purpose. It still

remains to be established, however, that such assays will be useful

for law enforcement purposes. To do so will require that there be a

demonstrated consistent correlation between the level of intoxification detected and impairment of driving abilities.

Emphasis in chemical research has also been on synthesizing the

various naturally occurring cannabis constituents, their biological

transformation products or metabolites and related chemical substances. The production of such chemically pure substances provides essential tools for determining possible effects of each

constituent alone as well as in combination with other marihuana

ingredients.

Availability of these synthetic materials in research quantities

can accelerate research on marihuana detection in body fluids as

well as other work on the pharmacological effects of marihuana. By

radioactively labelling some of the active substances involved, it

is possible to trace their passage through the body. Availability

of these constituents and related materials also has implications

for assessing the possible therapeutic value of cannabis. Since the

natural material has some undesirable side effects (e.g., accelerated heart action and an intoxication that is disturbing to some),

it would be useful to find related drugs which have the desired

therapeutic effect (such as control of nausea for cancer patients or

treatment of some forms of glaucoma), but are free from side

effects. The synthesis of chemically related substances has the

potential of achieving that end.

Some of the metabolites of marihuana are very active in themselves,

making an understanding of them important to knowledge of the parent

substance. Additionally some constituents can block important drug

metabolizing enzymes in the liver (i.e., block natural chemicals

which play an essential role in metabolizing drugs or preventing the

accumulation of potentially injurious substances). Such blocking

-12-
might cause toxic reactions were marihuana to be ingested simultaneously with other drugs normally detoxified in the liver. It is,

therefore, important to understand this aspect of marihuana’s

action.

Tests with dogs (97) and rats (12) revealed that the major marihuana

metabolites produced by the lung may be different from those

produced by the liver. This suggests that the effects of cannabis

may be partly determined by the route of administration (e.g.,

smoking vs. eating). Similar differences have been reported in

humans.

The identification of cannabis metabolites that remain in the body

for days following marihuana use (51) was an important development

because it paves the way for their synthesis and the careful

evaluation of their possible toxic implications.

The finding that there is an interaction between cannabidiol, a

major marihuana constituent, and -9-THC, marihuana’s principal

psychoactive ingredient (53) may ultimately shed light on the

common belief among users that different varieties of cannabis with

varying composition have different effects only partly related to

THC level.

ANIMAL RESEARCH

A considerable amount of animal research on the effects of marihuana

continues. Unlike humans, their genetic and learning histories can

be accurately specified enabling the researcher to separate the

role of marihuana from that of other aspects of life style and

development. Their shorter life spans also permit the study of

chronic effects over proportionately longer periods of their lives

and the use of drug dosages that would not be possible in humans.

As in previous years, much of the animal work is primarily of

interest to the research specialist; however, some of the behavioral findings are of more general importance.

Marihuana and related drugs have consistently been found to suppress aggression in animals when they are not under stress (1).

These findings concur with less systematic human observation which

suggests that marihuana is considerably less likely to facilitate

the expression of aggression than is alcohol. With animals under

stress, however, it has been found that marihuana tended to increase

aggression. This suggests that the relationship between marihuana

and aggression may be more complex than was earlier supposed.

Whether similar results would be obtained with humans in stress

situations is not known.

One recent trend in animal behavioral research has been the study of

marihuana use in social interaction. In one such experiment

reported last year (79, 80) several marihuana-related changes in

social behavior of monkeys in three to six member social groups were

noted. Given oral doses equivalent to very heavy human cannabis

-13-
use, the monkeys responded much like humans. They slept and rested

more frequently; active social interaction such as grooming of

others was reduced. Over more extended periods of administration,

the monkeys gradually showed fewer and fewer of these effects.

While aggression was initially reduced, after receiving THC for

weeks or months during the year-long study the monkeys became

irritable and aggressive (hitting, biting, chasing increased).

Another important area of animal research concerns possible long

term, chronic effects of marihuana. Two previously reported

studies failed to find any residual effects of -9-THC on learned

behavior in rats following discontinuance of the drug after 150 days

of use (23) or after seven months of intermittent administration

(22). More recently, an impairment in maze learning was found

following six months of heavy use (20). Because of the high doses,

the relevance of these findings to human experience is questionable. The possibility that heavy doses of cannabis administered

during pregnancy might impair learning in the offspring of rats has

been raised by one recent study (96). Here, too, the relevance to

human use is uncertain. In general, however, it should be emphasized, as in previous editions of this report, that the use of

cannabis by pregnant women is especially unwise since the implications of such use in humans have not been adequately explored.

HUMAN EFFECTS

Because many of the effects of marihuana have already been extensively described in previous editions of the Marihuana and Health

Report (101, 102, 103, 104, 105) and in other widely available

reviews of the literature, this report will be restricted to the

developments of the past year. Many of the more recent research

publications represent work which has already been discussed in

prior years but has only more recently appeared in the scientific

literature.

Effects on cardiovascular functioning have been extensively studied. Indeed, tachycardia (an accelerated heart rate) is the most

comon and prominent physiological response to marihuana use. Previous editions of the Report have stressed evidence that the effects

of marihuana may be dangerous for those with cardiac abnormalities.

Evidence that marihuana not only increases heart rate, but may also

temporarily weaken heart muscle contractions has led the researchers who originally studied patients with heart disease to express

concern about marihuana use among individuals with such problem

(74). The research on the effects of marihuana on patients with

angina (cardiac related chest pain) illustrates that effects on

those with any type of health problem cannot always be predicted

from studies of normal volunteers. Studies of normal young men have

not revealed any serious effects on heart functioning.

A second area which has received considerable research attention in

recent years is that of the effect of marihuana on lung functioning.

Because marihuana is characteristically smoked in the United States

- 14 -
and because of the known adverse effects of cigarette smoking, this

has been a continuing source of concern. The irritating sensation

associated with deep inhalation is well known to users and there

have been numerous clinical reports of lung and throat irritation.

Although there is now good evidence that marihuana and -9-THC

administered acutely produce an increase in the diameter of the air

passages of the lung (88, 89, 93, 94), chronic use may have quite

different implications. Previously reported research (94) has

indicated impairments in pulmonary function in chronic marihuana

smokers. More recent work (90) using still more sophisticated

measures has demonstrated detectable impairment in lung functioning

after six to eight weeks of heavy cannabis smoking. The changes

found, while still within normal limits, persisted at least one week

after smoking. This suggests that heavy chronic use could well lead

to clinically important changes similar to those found in heavy

cigarette smokers.

Special Health Problem Areas

Several areas of marihuana research findings which were highlighted

in previous years have created considerable concern over the possible biological implications of cannabis use. The possible

effects involved are:

a. Impairment of the body's natural defense system against disease -- i.e., interference with or depression of the immune

response;

b. Chromosomal alterations -- i.e., increases in the number of

abnormal chromosomes and a reduction in the number of chromosomes in some body cells;

c. Basic alterations in cell metabolism;

d. Impairment of endocrine functioning; specifically, a reduction in the male hormone testosterone and in growth hormone

levels;

e. Brain damage.

Although evidence is fragmentary and incomplete in all of these

areas, the potential seriousness of the possible consequences for

the individual and society has resulted in great interest and some

controversy over the implications of research. If the immune system

is impaired by marihuana use, the clinical consequences might

include a seriously heightened susceptibility to a wide range of

diseases. Changes in chromosomes, the material of genetic transmission, might have serious implications for both the individual

and. conceivably. future generations if abnormalities were genetically transmitted. Changes in cell metabolism, specifically in DNA

and RNA production which are basically involved in cell reproduction, might have far-reaching consequences. These include the

possibility of a failure in cell reproduction and replacement,

erratic cell growth or increased cancer susceptibility. Possible

impairment of endocrine functioning is also worrisome because it

might result in inadequate or incomplete sex differentiation in the

male fetus when a mother uses marihuana heavily while pregnant.

-15-
Alterations in testosterone and growth hormone in the developing

child or adolescent might adversely affect growth and sexual maturation. Finally, gross damage to the brain might have a wide range

of behavioral implications. The present state of the research

evidence for each of these consequences is outlined below. It

should, however, be re-emphasized that the clinical possibilities

outlined in the preceding continue to be speculative. There is as

yet no good evidence that marihuana smokers do, in fact, develop

clinical abnormalities of the type described.

The immune response: Previous Marihuana and Health Reports (104,

105) have discussed in detail earlier research concerning the

question of a possible impairment in this health-sustaining bodily

response. Two years ago a report indicated that a marked reduction

in the immune response as measured in white blood cell cultures was

found in marihuana smokers compared to non-smokers (71). This

reduction was reported to be comparable to that of patients with

known “T-cell” immunity impairment -- uremia, cancer and transplant

patients. Attempts to replicate this finding and to explore its

implications by testing for immune response depression by other

means have resulted in contradictory reports. To further complicate interpretation, it was found that marihuana smokers off the

street (i.e., not specifically part of an on-going study) showed a

reduction in the type of immune response involving T-cell or thymus

dependent lymphocytes (a type of white blood cell involved in

preventing disease). This reduction sometimes found in smokers did

not, however, persist in users smoking quality controlled marihuana

in a closed ward research setting (75). Thus, the reduction in Tcells observed in some chronic drug users may be the result of some

common factor of their life style other than marihuana use. The

relationship between a reduced number of T-cells and possible

diminished immunologic function is also doubtful because other

measures of immunologic functioning (various skin tests used to

measure the immune response in those who show clinical evidence of

diminished response) have not indicated a reduced functioning in

marihuana smokers making use of known amounts of marihuana under

controlled conditions. A recently published animal study using

high, but still humanly relevant doses of inhaled cannabis smoke,

found that it had an immune response suppressing effect in rats that

justifies further research (108).

Thus, the issue of possible impaired immune response remains unresolved. There is, as yet, no evidence that users of marihuana are

more susceptible to such diseases as viral infections and cancer,

which are known to be associated with lowered production of T-cells.

Chromosome abnormalities: There is little new evidence to report in

this area. While there have been reports of increases in chromosomal breaks and abnormalities in human cell cultures, the results

to date are inconclusive. The three positive studies in humans that

have been reported (32, 50, 87) have decided limitations. All were

retrospective -- i.e., studies of those who had already used

marihuana as ccmpared to non-users. Such variables as differences

in life style, exposure to viral infections and possible use of

-16-
other drugs, all known to affect chromosome integrity, could not be

reliably assessed. In two of the studies, the aberrations observed

were found only in a minority of the users.

Three other studies done prospectively (i.e., before and after use)

have been reported (55, 56, 72). All were negative although they,

too, can be faulted for a variety of reasons: most importantly, the

subjects of all three had at least some prior experience with

marihuana. It is possible that the baseline levels of chromosome

deficits may have been elevated by earlier casual marihuana use,

thus masking a drug-related effect.

A team investigating the effect of marihuana smoke on human lung

cells in laboratory culture has found an increase in the number of

cells containing an abnormal number of chromosomes (52). Another

investigator who previously reported a high proportion of cells in

marihuana smokers with reduced numbers of chromosomes (63) has more

recently reported that the addition of -9-THC (the principal

psychoactive ingredient of marihuana) to human white blood cell

cultures also resulted in an increased frequency of cells with

abnormally low chromosome numbers (64). The implications of these

recent findings are uncertain.

Overall, there is no convincing evidence at this time that marihuana

use causes clinically significant chromosome damage. However, it

should be emphasized that the limitations of the research conducted

thus far preclude definitive conclusions.

Alterations in cell metabolism: The implications of laboratory

findings on the inhibition of DNA, RNA and protein synthesis (all of

which are basically related to cellular reproduction and metabolism) are still unknown. In addition to work previously reported,

research last year has found that adding -9-THC to various types of

human and animal cell cultures inhibits DNA, RNA and protein

synthesis (5). This study detected no effect on DNA repair synthesis or in the uptake of the chemical precursors into the cell

although the amount of these precursors within the cells was reduced

by half.

The possibility that cannabis, or one or more of its chemical

ingredients, differentially affects the cell metabolism and reproduction of cancer cells in animals was raised by research of the

last two years. One aspect of the mechanism by which this may occur

is an inhibition of DNA metabolism in abnormal cells but not in

normal cells.

If this preferential inhibition of DNA synthesis in animal tumors

also occurs in humans, the potential value of marihuana as an anticancer drug will be explored. It should, however, again be stressed

that there is presently no evidence that cannabis or any of its

synthesized or naturally occurring constituents has definite value

in inhibiting human cancer growth. There is also the possibility,

again related to cell metabolism, that if animal findings of a

depressed cell mediated immunity response are substantiated in

-17-
humans, cannabis might assist with transplant surgery.

Endocrine functioning: The Fourth and Fifth Marihuana and Health

Reports (104, 105) discussed a reported reduction in blood levels of

testosterone in smokers and the contradictory findings. Some of the

inconsistency in these findings has been explained by the varying

time periods over which these levels were assayed. For example, one

chronic study under carefully controlled conditions found there was

no significant drop in the level of testosterone during the first

four weeks of daily use; however, a drop did occur with continued

use (48, 49). In most cases, however, the hormone levels tested

still remained well within generally accepted normal limits. One

recent report (29) indicates a decreased sperm count in otherwise

normal young cannabis smokers that may be related to use. Some

differences in the cellular characteristics of sperm of chronic

hashish users compared to nonusing controls were reported this

year, but their functional significance is unclear (107).

The question of the biological significance of the previously

reported alterations in testosterone and growth hormone levels

remains in doubt. It may well be that these findings will ultimately prove more significant for individuals with already impaired

fertility or other evidence of marginal endocrine functioning than

for normal individuals.

Recent reports of reduced testosterone levels of heavy alcohol

consumers may make the clinical separation of marihuana and alcohol

effects more difficult since both drugs are frequently used by the

same individuals.

Brain damage research: A British research report, originally

appearing in 1971 (9), attributed brain atrophy to cannabis use in a

group of young male users. This report is repeatedly cited in

popular articles on marihuana use. In the original study 10

patients, all of whom had varying histories of 3-11 years of

marihuana use, were examined by a neurological technique (air

encephalography) used to detect gross brain changes. The authors

concluded that their findings suggested that regular use of cannabis may produce brain atrophy. This research was faulted on several

grounds: all of the patients had used other drugs, making the

causal connection with marihuana use questionable; and the appropriateness of the comparison group and diagnostic technique were

questionable. The potential seriousness of the original observations did, however, lead to several subsequent studies.

In a study of chronic Greek users (86) a different technique

(echoencephalography) was employed to determine whether brain atrophy might be present in heavy users. (Air encephalography was not

used because the hazards of that technique were not ethically

justifiable for purely research purposes.) The findings from the

Greek study were negative; that is, users were not found to differ

from non-users in evidence of gross brain pathology.

Most recently two studies have been conducted in Missouri (43) and

Massachusetts (58), respectively, of two samples of young men with

-18-
histories of heavy cannabis smoking using computerized transaxial

tomography (CTT), a brain scanning technique for visualizing the

anatomy of the brain. In this technique the head is scanned by a

narrow beam of X-rays in a series of “slices.” Computer processing

of the data obtained from a large number of measurements makes it

possible to reconstruct the anatomy of the brain in a more detailed

manner and with greater precision than pneumoencephalography (the

technique used in the original British study of 1971) permits.

In the St. Louis study 12 young male subjects, aged 20-30 (mean age

= 24.1) who had smoked at least 5 joints a day (mean # = 9.0/day) for

5 or more years (mean years = 6.6) were compared to 34 neurologically normal young men of similar age who did not indicate drug use.

In the Boston study 19 heavily using young male marihuana smokers,

whose use was verified on a closed research ward, were matched with

a control series of non-using males of similar age.

In both studies, the resulting brain scans were read blindly by

experienced neuroradiologists. In neither study was there any

evidence of cerebral atrophy. Despite these negative findings,

several additional points should be emphasized. Neither study

rules out the possibility that more subtle and lasting changes of

brain function may occur as a result of heavy and continued marihuana smoking. It is entirely possible to have impairment of brain

function from toxic or other causes that is not apparent on gross

examination of the brain in the living organism. Nevertheless,

virtually all studies completed to date (late 1976) show no evidence

of impaired neuropsychologic test performance in humans at dose

levels studied so far.

A retrospective study of an Egyptian prison population in which 850

chronic cannabis users were compared to 839 non-cannabis using

controls reported slower psychomotor performance, impaired visual

coordination and impaired memory for designs in users (83). This

investigator reported that such impairment was more commonly found

in subjects from urban backgrounds who were younger and more

educated than in illiterate, rural and older subjects (84). While

this finding suggests the possibility that findings for chronic

users may differ depending on their background, the study has

obvious deficiencies. Subjects often used other drugs besides

cannabis. The study could not specify the actual levels of use,

which may have differed in the several groups. In addition, other

aspects of the users’ life styles or experiences may have affected

the outcomes rather than their cannabis use, as such.

As was reported last year, studies of college students which

compared users to non-users have not generally found decrements in

intellectual performance as measured by the grades achieved bv

users. The higher levels of motivation possibly involved in

students compared to the general user population, the typically

modest levels of use (by overseas standards) and the possible

elimination of those impaired by marihuana use at an earlier point

in their academic careers, are all limitations to a broad interpretation of these findings.

-19-
With respect to brain wave tracing (electroencephalography or EEG)

in humans, there is ample evidence that cannabis produces reversible and dose-related changes in brain waves as conventionally

measured under conditions of acute administration (24, 47). These

are not markedly different from those of other psychoactive drugs.

In Greece, studies of chronic users which employed advanced computerized EEG; analysis techniques failed to find persistent abnormalities distinguishing a heavy user group from their non-user counterparts (86). However, at least one investigator using deep planted

electrodes which measure electrical activity within the brain

rather than at its surface has reported persistent changes in

monkeys and in a small number of humans (28). Just what, if any,

behavioral or functional significance these changes may have is not

now known.

Overseas Chronic User Studies

Research on long term, chronic users of cannabis overseas where such

use has been characteristic of large numbers for many years continues to be discussed in many contexts without adequate consideration

of its many limitations. The older studies of this type suffered

from multiple scientific defects making their interpretation difficult. More recently, three studies conducted under Federal aegis in

Jamaica (76, 77), Greece (86) and Costa Rica (11) have received

considerable publicity. Although they have been discussed in

previous years, a review of the findings and their limitations is

desirable in order to place them in realistic perspective.

Reports on all three studies have now appeared in the scientific

literature (11, 76, 86). In each of the three, considerable effort

was made to match chronic users with non-users whose characteristics apart from drug use were quite similar. Such user/non-user

matching was rather carefully done in the Jamaican and Costa Rican

studies; in the Greek study precise matching was less possible. All

subjects were men because male use predominates in the three

cultures studied. The elaborate testing procedures limited the

total number studied. This is an important limitation since it is

possible that the limited sample size may have precluded the

detection of rarer consequences of cannabis use. For example,

samples of similar sizes of matched cigarette smokers and nonsmokers might not have detected some of the known serious consequences of cigarette smoking such as heightened susceptibility to

heart disease, lung cancer and emphysema.

A wide range of measures were employed in these studies to detect

physical or psychosocial consequences of use. In general, few

differences were found that could be directly attributed to cannabis use. In the Greek study, heavy hashish users examined were

significantly higher in psychopathology, particularly antisocial

personality disorder, but it was not possible to know whether this

predisposed them to heavy hashish use or whether use played a role

in producing their pathology.

-20-
Data on chromosomal assays were collected in Jamaica, and have

sometimes been cited as indicating that cannabis use has no chromsomal effects. More accurately, these data must be regarded as

inconclusive because of technical deficiencies in the methodology

for that phase of the research.

It should again be emphasized that while the results of these

studies are somewhat reassuring with regard to grossly adverse

consequences of marihuana use, they by no means demonstrate that

cannabis use is free of potentially adverse consequences. The small

numbers studied, the possibility that cultural differences may have

masked drug related performance differences and the differences in

the demands of these less industrialized societies from those of our

own, all make direct translation of the results to American conditions hazardous. Since adults with long experience in marihuana use

were studied, none of the three projects is directly relevant to the

implications of marihuana use by American adolescents at an earlier

stage of development and under different social conditions.

Psychopathology

Previous editions of the Marihuana and Health Report (102, 103, 104,

105) have discussed at some length the question of possible psychiatric aspects of cannabis use. Probably the most common adverse

psychological reaction to marihuana use among American users is the

acute panic anxiety reaction (26, 61). It represents an exaggeration of the more usual marihuana response in which the individual

loses perspective (i.e., the realization that what she or he is

experiencing is a transient drug induced distortion of reality) and

becomes acutely anxious. This reaction appears to be more common in

relatively inexperienced users although unexpectedly higher doses

of the drug can cause such a response in the more experienced as

well. Generally the symptoms respond to authoritative assurance

and diminish in a few hours as the immediate effects of acute

intoxication recede.

Transient mild paranoid feelings are common in users and it has been

suggested that those who are characterized by more paranoid defense

mechanisms are less likely to experience other acute adverse reactions (68). Earlier it was emphasized that reactions of users are

very much influenced by the set and setting of use. Set refers to

the pre-existing expectations the individual has regarding use;

setting means the physical environment during use. It is generally

conceded that anxiety and mild paranoid reactions are more likely if

the user is initially anxious about the experience and/or the

circumstances of use are anxiety producing. Some additional

research support for this clinical impression is found in a field

survey which used a questionnaire to measure acute adverse drug

reactions (70). Preliminary work has found that, in a college

population, those who are more hypochondriacal, and who feel less in

control of their own lives and more at the mercy of external events

are more likely to have adverse reactions to marihuana and other

psychoactive drugs (69).

-21-
An acute brain syndrome associated with cannabis intoxication

including such features as clouding of mental processes, disorientation, confusion and marked memory impairment has been reported.

It is thought to be dose-related (much more likely at unusually high

doses) and to be determined more by the size of the dose than by

pre-existing personality (61). This set of acute symptoms appears

to be rare in the United States, possibly because very strong

cannabis materials are less readily available here than in some

overseas locations. Acute brain syndrome also diminishes as the

toxic effects of the drug wear off.

Descriptions of a specific cannabis psychosis are to be found

principally in the Eastern literature (26, 61), from cultures where

use is typically more frequent and at higher doses than those

generally consumed in the United States. It has been difficult to

interpret such reports because diagnosis of mental illness is

partly dependent upon socio-cultural factors. In addition, the

diagnostic picture is frequently complicated by the use of other

drugs and earlier evidence of psychopathology not necessarily associated with drug use. While the recent overseas studies conducted

under U.S. auspices in Jamaica, Greece and Costa Rica did not find

such adverse consequences, the small size of the user samples

studied, together with the probable rarity of the disorder, would

have made its detection unlikely.

One recent clinical study in India contrasted the features of a

paranoid psychosis arising in the course of long term cannabis use

with that of paranoid schizophrenia (91). Twenty-five consecutive

patients admitted with each diagnosis were compared. The cannabis

users, reportedly, had used the drug for five or more years in

amounts up to several grams per day in gradually increasing quantities. Those diagnosed as having a cannabis psychosis were characterized by the authors as showing more bizarre behavior, more

violence and panic, an absence of schizophrenic thinking and

greater insight into their illness. Patients with the cannabisrelated disorder recovered rapidly upon being hospitalized and

being treated with a major tranquilizer.

In this and other clinical studies, it is difficult to distinguish

the role of cannabis from that of pre-existing psychological problems or other environmental precipitants in marihuana-related psychological difficulties. Frequently, heavy marihuana users are

also those who have had emotional problems prior to use.

Marihuana flashbacks -- spontaneous recurrences of feelings and

perceptions like those produced by the drug itself -- have been

reported (7). A survey of U.S. Army users recently published found

that flashbacks occurred in both frequent and infrequent users and

were not necessarily related to a history of LSD use (85). Such

experiences may range from the quite vivid recreation of a drug

related experience to a mild evocation of a previous experience.

The origin of such experiences is uncertain but those who have

experienced them appear to have required little or no treatment.

-22-
One source of information about possible adverse reactions to

drugs, including marihuana, is the Federally sponsored Drug Abuse

Warning Network (DAWN). This is a nationwide reporting system which

provides information about the frequency with which various drugs

in-common use are implicated in patient or client contacts with such

facilities as hospital emergency rooms and crisis centers. (A

crisis center is a facility established to provide “walk in” or

“phone in” assistance to those experiencing personal crises,

including adverse drug reactions.) Of 118,000 emergency room

episodes involving some form of drug abuse between May, 1975 and

April, 1976, marihuana ranked 16th among the drugs mentioned. But

in crisis center contacts, marihuana ranked second only to heroin as

the drug involved. While the interpretation of such figures is made

more difficult by ignorance of how the number seeking assistance

compares to the total number using a drug during the reference

period, it does indicate that marihuana is not an uncommon factor in

individuals seeking help.

In the past the Federal Client Oriented Data Acquisition Process

(CODAP), a reporting system designed to monitor Federally supported

drug treatment programs, found that a significant portion of the

effort (more than 10 percent) was being devoted to patients whose

primary drug of abuse was marihuana. When it was determined that

this was largely an artifact of court and school referrals for

administrative convenience, an effort was launched to substantially

reduce this inappropriate use of community treatment facilities.

As a result of these efforts, between October, 1975 and April, 1976,

3 out of 5 (57 percent) of the inappropriately used treatment slots

were freed for patients with more serious problems of drug abuse

(this included some slots that were being used for patients reporting alcohol or “no drug” as their basis for referral).

Complex Psychomotor Performance in Driving and Flying

Evidence that marihuana use at typical social levels definitely

impairs driving ability and related skills continues to accumulate

(17, 33, 65). There are now data indicating impairment from

laboratory assessment of driving related skills (19), driver simulator studies (16, 66), test course performance (45), actual street

driver performance (46) and, most recently, a study conducted for

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of drivers

involved in fatal accidents (100).

Unfortunately, despite the commonly expressed belief that their

driving is impaired by cannabis intoxication, there is reason for

believing that more users drive today while intoxicated than was

true a few years ago (15, 46, 92). As marihuana use becomes

increasingly common and accepted and as the risk of arrest for

simple possession decreases, it is likely that more users will risk

driving while high. In limited surveys, from 60 percent to 80

percent of marihuana users questioned indicated that they sometimes

drive while cannabis intoxicated (45, 46, 81).

-23-
Marihuana use in combination with alcohol is also quite common and

the risk of the two drugs used in combination my well be greater

than that posed by either substance alone.

A recent study of drivers involved in fatal accidents in the greater

Boston area was conducted by the Boston University Accident Investigation Team and found that marihuana smokers were overrepresented in fatal highway accidents when compared to a control

group of non-smokers of similar age and sex (100).

There are, therefore, several converging lines of evidence that

driving performance is impaired by marihuana intoxication, viz.:

users’ subjective assessments of their driving skills while high,

measures of driving related perceptual skills, driver simulator and

actual driving performance and, finally, a limited study of actual

highway fatalities.

The parameters of impairment for the average driver under various

dosages of marihuana alone or in combination with alcohol are not

yet adequately specified. There is, thus, an obvious need to

develop standards in this area for what constitutes driving under

the influence of cannabis so as to encourage more responsible use.

At present it is clearly desirable to strongly discourage driving

while marihuana intoxicated.

As indicated last year, there has been relatively little systematic

study of the relationship of marihuana smoking to possible airplane

pilot error. Nevertheless, the evidence related to psychomotor

skills in driving is partially germane. Such skills as the detection of peripheral visual stimuli and complex psychmotor coordination are at least as important in flying as driving. The inherently

greater complexity of flying. suggests that pilot performance is

even more likely to be impaired while marihuana intoxicated.

The few studies completed to date have all shown that experienced

pilots undergo marked deterioration in performance under flight

simulator test conditions while high (34, 35, 57, 99). Although

more detailed studies of pilot performance while under the influence of marihuana are desirable, flying an aircraft while marihuana

intoxicated is obviously hazardous.

A continuing danger common to both driving and flying is that some

of the perceptual or other performance decrements resulting from

marihuana use may persist for some time (possibly several hours)

beyond the period of subjective intoxication. Under such circumstances, the individual may attempt to fly or drive without realizing that his or her ability to do so is still impaired although he

or she no longer feels high.

Tolerance and Dependence

Tolerance to cannabis -- diminished response to a given repeated

drug dose -- has been substantiated by research evidence cited in

- 24 -
the Fifth Report (105). Tolerance development was originally

suspected because experienced overseas users were able to use large

quantities of the drug that would have been toxic to U.S. users

accustomed to smaller amounts of the drug. Carefully conducted

studies with known doses of marihuana or THC leave little question

that tolerance develops with prolonged use (3, 13, 41, 59, 60).

As was pointed out last year, the meaning assigned to cannabis

dependence is often vague. If it is defined as a manifestation of

physical symptom following discontinuance of the drug, there is

experimental evidence that it can occur at least under conditions of

extremely heavy research ward administration that would be atypical

of U.S. use patterns (3, 21, 41). The changes noted following drug

withdrawal under these experimental conditions include: irritability, restlessness, decreased appetite, sleep disturbance, sweating, tremor, nausea, vomiting and diarrhea. Some of these symptoms

were experienced in a similar research study by users who selected

their own smoked marihuana doses (60). Such a “withdrawal syndrome”

is uncommon and has rarely been reported clinically. Only one

research report, from Germany, has noted it (106).

THERAPEUTIC ASPECTS

A significant part of the new biology of marihuana research has been

the revival of interest in its possible therapeutic value. As

earlier editions of these reports have indicated, cannabis has an

ancient history of medicinal use which has persisted in the folk

medicine of many countries.

While there have been no new therapeutic applications of cannabis or

of its synthesized constituents recently, there has been some

additional research on earlier cited applications. One of the more

promising medicinal uses is based on the observation that in both

normals and in patients suffering from glaucoma, marihuana serves

to reduce intraocular pressure (31). -9-THC shows definite promise of becoming an effective agent for the management of glaucoma.

An eye drop preparation has been developed and is currently undergoing testing in animals preliminary to human trials. Such a preparation has been successfully employed with rabbits (25).

A second area that continues to show promise is the use of -9-

THC as a means of reducing or eliminating the nausea, vomiting and

loss of appetite in cancer patients following chemotherapy (75).

Since present anti-emetics are of ten unsuccessful in controlling

such symptoms in these patients, an improved treatment for this

purpose would be desirable.

A third area in which marihuana research has shown promise of

developing improved treatment methods is in the management of

asthmatics. Synthetic -9-THC produces a desirable temporary

increase in the size of the air conducting passages. Facilitating

breathing in these patients (94, 95). While the natural material

-25-

239-715 0 - 77 - 3 
has a similar effect, it is undesirable because it also has a direct

irritant effect on lung tissue. There are some indications that

persistent smoking of marihuana itself, like cigarette smoking, may

lead to lung pathology (cf., Human Effects).

A book published during 1976 reports on a conference on the therapeutic potential of marihuana and serves as a detailed summary of

the work of researchers in this area (14).

Despite the promise that marihuana and/or its synthesized constituents have shown as potential therapeutic agents, it should once

again be emphasized that much additional work is necessary before

such agents become generally approved as standard medications.

Marihuana and its constituents continue to have adverse side

effects. The increase in heart rate produced is obviously undesirable with the elderly or the cardiac impaired. The psychological

effects recreationally sought by many are often disturbing and

disruptive to patients.

If consistently useful medical applications for marihuana are

found, it is quite likely that the product or products resulting

will be chemically related but not identical to the natural material’s constituents. Cannabis, which was used therapeutically earlier in Western medicine for a variety of reasons, was eventually

abandoned because of such problems as variable potency -- it often

ranged from being inert to being much more powerful than the

prescriber intended -- and undependable shelf life.

Whether or not cannabis, one of its synthesized constituents or a

chemically related compound once again finds a place in modern

medicine depends on several considerations. One problem is that

pharmaceutically desirable effects may not be persistently useful

for chronic disorders. Tolerance undoubtedly develops for a number

of the effects of the natural material. This may also be true for

new chemically related compounds. Like any other new medication,

chemically related materials must be carefully tested for toxicity

and for therapeutic effectiveness. This process is time consuming

and many new pharmaceuticals showing initial promise are ultimately

discarded as unanticipated drawbacks and limitations arise.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

Cannabis research has made impressive progress since the inception

of priority emphasis in the late 1960's. We have become increasingly sophisticated in areas as diverse as the chemical characteristics of the material and the psychosocial implications of use.

Some of what has been learned has served to allay many of the

emotionally based fears of the past. While it now appears that

infrequent, experimental use at typical U.S. levels is usually

without significant hazard, more frequent, and especially chronic

use, may have quite different implications.

-26-
Despite some popular assertions to the contrary, much remains to be

learned about this drug which has come to play an increasingly

important role in the life of American youth. Our studies of

chronic use are decidedly limited and are surely insufficient

guides to the implications of use by large numbers of Americans.

There is an obvious need to study larger samples more carefully to

determine the impact of cannabis use on health and the psychosocial

functioning of users. Such long-term studies preferably beginning

before use and continuing over extended periods are now possible in

the United States although the planning and launching of this

research is a major undertaking. Because once a large scale

longitudinal study is launched, it is often not possible to modify

it without compromising the research, planning must be especially

painstaking. Such planning is now underway.

Adequately specifying the parameters of risk posed by marihuana is a

difficult task. Obviously, it is important to know with some

precision what levels of marihuana intoxication pose threats in

such areas as highway safety and the operation of potentially

hazardous machinery. Since marihuana is often used in conjunction

with alcohol and a wide range of less common over-the-counter and

prescriptive drugs, it is also important to know under what circumstances significant interactions occur. There has been a range of

research concerning biological consequences in such areas as the

imune response, endocrine functioning and basic cell metabolism.

While there are some who are inclined to dismiss some of the more

disquieting results as artifactual and without significant clinical

implications, it is important that they be followed up and the

issues they raise resolved.

Unlike many other drug substances, marihuana’s metabolites tend to

be relatively persistent with residuals remaining in the body fat

for days or even weeks. This has led to concern that even irregular

use might have inadequately foreseen consequences if any of the more

serious laboratory findings of possible hazard prove to be clinically significant. Here, too, more must be learned.

Changes in social policy concerning marihuana that have now occurred in eight states provide a kind of natural laboratory for

determining some of the impacts of law and social policy on use

patterns. A better understanding of use patterns and their implications for functioning may enable us to develop means of discouraging

all forms of drug abuse including that of marihuana without resorting to primarily legal measures.

The rise in use among adolescents has generated concern about

possible consequences of use in this group especially when such use

becomes an escape from the demands of preparing for later life.

Some progress has been made in identifying those in this age group

who are likely to become more heavily involved with marihuana use.

A better understanding of the motivations for heavy use may permit

the development of means for early intervention to avert possible

life-long patterns of drug dependency.

-27-
Although marihuana use does not “cause” other drug use in the way

once simplistically believed, it is often associated with other

drug use. Exploration of preventive approaches which encourage

individuals to avoid patterns of drug dependency (both licit and

illicit) is needed.

Progress in the marihuana research program has made us aware that as

our knowledge has increased so has our awareness of our need for

more subtle understanding of marihuana use and its possible implications.

-28-
REFERENCES

1. Abel, E.L. Cannabis and aggression in animals. Behavioral

Biology, 14:1-20 (1975).

2. Abelson, H. and Fishburne, P.M. Nonmedical Use of Psychoactive

Substances. Princeton, NJ: Response Analysis Corporation, 1976.

3. Benowitz, N.L. and Jones, R.T. Cardiovascular effects of prolonged -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ingestion. Clinical

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18:287-297 (1975).

4. Blackford, L. Student Drug Use Surveys - San Mateo County,

California 1968-1976. San Mateo, CA: Department of

Public Health and Welfare, 1976.

5. Blevins, R.D. and Regan, J.D. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol:

Effect on macrcmolecular synthesis in human and other

mammalian cells. Archives of Toxicology, 35:127-135

(1976).

6. Brill, N.Q. and Christie, R.L. Marihuana use and psychosocial

adaptation. Follow-up study of a collegiate population.

Archives of General Psychiatry, 31(5):713-719 (1974).

7. Brown, A. and Stickgold, A. Self-diagnosed marihuana flashbacks. Clinical Research, 22(3):316A (1974).

8. Brown, J.W. Turning off: Cessation of marijuana use after

college. Social Problems, 21:527-538 (1974).

9. Campbell, A.M.G., Evans, M., Thompson, J.L.G. and Williams,

M.R. Cerebral atrophy in young cannabis smokers.

Lancet, 1219 (1971).

10. Carchman, R.A., Harris, L.S. and Munson, A.E. The inhibition of

DNA synthesis by cannabinoids. Cancer Research, 36:95-

100 (1976).

11. Coggins, W.J. Costa Rica Cannabis project: An interim report

on the medical aspects. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marijuana. New York: Raven

Press, 1976, pp. 667-670.

12. Cohen, G.M. Pulmonary metabolism of inhaled substances and

possible relationship with carcinogenicity and toxicity.

In Junod, A.F. and de Haller, R. (eds.), Lung Metabolism.

New York, NY: Academic Press, 1975, pp. 185-200.

13. Cohen, S., Lessin, P.J., Hahn, P.M. and Tyrrell, E.D. A 94-day

cannabis study. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976,

pp. 621-626.

-29-
14. Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.) The Therapeutic Potential

of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976.

15. Dalton, W.S., Martz, R., Lemberger, L., Rodda, B.E. and Forney,

R.B. Effects of marijuana combined with secobarbital.

Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18(3):298-304

(1975).

16. Dott, A.B. Effect of marijuana on aggression and risk acceptance in an automotive simulator. Clinical Toxicology,

7:289 (1974).

17. Ehrlich, D. Marijuana smoking young drivers more accident

prone: ARF study. The Journal (Addiction Research

Foundation), 3(1):5 (1974).

18. Elinson, J. Antecedents and consequences of teenage drug

behavior. Paper presented at the Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico,

April, 1976.

19. Ellingstad, V.S., McFarling, L.H. and Struckman, D.L. Alcohol,

marijuana, and risk taking. Contract No. DOT-HS-191-2-

301, University of South Dakota, Vermillion (1973).

20. Fehr, K.A., Kalant, H. and LeBlanc, A.E. Residual learning

deficit after heavy exposure to cannabis or alcohol in

rats. Science, 192:1249-1251 (1976).

21. Feinberg, I., Jones, R.T., Walker, J.M., Cavness, C. and March,

J. Effects of high dosage -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on

sleep patterns in man. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 17(4):458-464 (1975).

22. Ferraro, D.P. and Grilly, D.M. Marihuana extract in chimpanzees: Absence of long-term effects on operant behavior. Psychological Reports, 32:473-474 (1973).

23. Ferraro, D.P. and Grilly, D.M. Effects of chronic exposure to

-9-tetrahydrooannabinol on delayed matching-to-sample

in chimpanzees. Psychopharmacologia, 37:127-138 (1974).

24. Fink, M., Volavka, J., Panagiotopoulos, C.P. and Stefanis, C.

Quantitative EEG studies of marihuana, -9-THC, and

hashish in man. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976,

pp. 383-392.

25. Green, K., Kim, K. and Bowman, K. Ocular effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C.

(eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New

York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 49-62.

- 30 -
26. Halikas, J.A. Marijuana use and psychiatric illness. In

Miller, L.L. (ed.), Marijuana: Effects on Human Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1974, pp. 265-302.

27. Harris, L.S., Munson, A.E., Friedman, M.A. and Dewey, W.L.

Retardation of tumor growth by -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

( -9-THC). Pharmacologist, 16:259 (1974).

28. Heath, R.G. Marihuana and -9-THC: Acute and chronic effects

on brain function of monkeys. In Braude, M.C. and Szara,

S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven

Press, 1976, pp. 345-356.

29. Hembree, W.C., Nahas, G.G., Zeidenberg, P. and Dyrenfurth, I.

Marihuana effects upon the human testis. Clinical

Research, 24(3):272A (1976).

30. Henley, J.R. and Adams, L.D. Marihuana use in post-collegiate

cohorts: Correlates of use, prevalence patterns, and

factors associated with cessation. Social Problems,

20:514-520 (1973).

31. Hepler, R.S. and Frank, I.M. Marihuana smoking and intraocular

pressure. Journal of the American Medical Association,

217:1392 (1971).

32. Herha, J. and Obe, G. Chromosomal damage in chronic users of

cannabis. Pharmakopsychiatrie, 7:328-337 (1974).

33. Isrealstam, S. and Lambert, S. (eds.) Alcohol, Drugs and

Traffic Safety. Proceedings of the Sixth International

Conference on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, Toronto,

September, 1974.

34. Janowsky, D.S., Meacham, M.P., Blaine, J.D., Schorr, M. and

Bozzetti, L.P. Simulated flying performance after marihuana intoxication. Aviation, Space and Environmental

Medicine, 47(2):124-128 (1976a).

35. Janowsky, D.S., Meacham, M.P., Blaine, J.D., Schorr, M. and

Bozzetti, L.P. Marijuana effects on simulated flying

(1976b). American Journal of Psychiatry, 133(4):384-388

36. Jessor, R. Predicting time of onset of marijuana use: A

development study of high school youth. Journal of

Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 44:125-134 (1976).

37. Jessor, R. and Jessor, S.L. Theory testing in longitudinal drug

research. Paper presented at Conference on Strategies of

Longitudinal Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April,

1976.

38. Johnston, L.D. Drugs and American Youth. University of

Michigan, 1973.

- 31 -
39. Johnston, L.D. Drug use during and after high school: Results

of a national longitudinal study. American Journal of

Public Health, 64(Supp) :29-37 (1974).

40. Johnston, L.D. Monitoring the future: Continuing study of life

styles and values of youth. University of Michigan, Ann

Arbor, 1976, Personal communication.

41. Jones, R.T. and Benowitz, N. The 30-day trip - Clinical studies

of cannabis tolerance and dependence. In Braude, M.C.

and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmcology of Marihuana. New

York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 627-642.

42. Kandel, D. Inter- and intragenerational influences on adolescent marijuana use. Journal of Social Issues,

30(2):107-135 (1974).

43. Co, B.T., Goodwin, D.W., Gado, M., Mikhael, M. and Hill, S.Y.

Absence of cerebral atrophy in chronic cannabis users by

computerized transaxial tomography. Journal of the

American Medical Association, in press.

44. Kandel, D., Kessler, R. and Margulies, R. Adolescent initiation into stages of drug use: A sequential analysis.

Paper presented at the Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976.

45. Klonoff, H. Marijuana and driving in real-life situations.

Science, 186:317-324 (1974a).

46. Klonoff, H. Effects of marijuana on driving in a restricted

area and on city streets: Driving performance and physiological changes. In Miller, L.L. (ed.), Marijuana:

Effects on Human Behavior. New York: Academic Press,

1974b, pp. 359-397.

47. Klonoff, H. and Low, M.D. Psychological and neurophysiological

effects of marijuana in man: An interaction model. In

Miller, L.L. (ed.), Marijuana: Effects on Human Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1974, pp. 121-155.

48. Kolodny, R.C. Paper presented at the International Academy of

Sex Research meeting, Stony Brook, New York, September,

1975.

49. Kolodny, R.C., Lessin, P., Toro, G., Masters, W.H. and Cohen, S.

Depression of plasma testosterone with acute marihuana

administration. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976,

pp. 217-225.

50. Kumar, S. and Kunwar, K.B. Chromosome abnormalities in cannabis addicts. Journal of the Association of Physicians of

India, 19:193-195 (1972).

- 32 -
51. Leighty, E.G., Fentiman, A.F., and Foltz, R.L. Long-retained

metabolites of -9- and -8-tetrahydrocannabinols identified as novel fatty acid conjugates. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 14:13-28

(1976).

52. Leuchtenberger, C. and Leuchtenberger, R. Correlated cytological and cytochemical studies of the effects of fresh

smoke from marijuana cigarettes on growth and DNA metabolism of animal and human lung cultures. In Braude, M.C.

and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New

York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 595-612.

53. Levy, S. and McCallum, N.K. Cannabidiol and its pharmacokinetic interaction with -1-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Experientia, 31:1268-1269 (1975).

54. Lucas, W.L., Grupp, S.E. and Schmitt, R.L. Predicting who will

turn on: A four-year follow-up. The International

Journal of the Addictions, 10:305-326 (1975).

55. Matsuyama, S.S., Jarvik, L.F., Fu, T.K. and Yen, F.S. Chromosome studies before and after supervised marijuana smoking. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology

of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 723-729.

56. Matsuyama, S.S., Yen, F.S., Jarvik, L.F., Sparkes, R.S., Fu,

T.K., Fisher, H., Reccius, N. and Frank, I.M. In vivo

marijuana exposure and human lymphocyte chromosomes.

Mutation Research, in press.

57. Meacham, M.P., Janowsky, D.S., Blaine, J.D., Bozzetti, L.P.

and Schorr, M. Effects of marihuana on flying ability.

(1974) of the American Medical Association, 230(9):1258

58. Kuehnle, J., Mendelson, J.H., Davis, K.R. and New, P.F.J.

Computed tanographic examination of heavy marihuana

smokers. Journal of the American Medical Association, in

press.

59. Mendelson, J.H., Kuehnle, J.C., Greenberg, I. and Mello, N. The

effects of marihuana use on human operant behavior:

Individual data. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976,

PP. 643-653.

60. Mendelson, J.H., Rossi, A.M. and Meyer, R.E. (eds.) The Use of

Marihuana, a Psychological and Physiological Inquiry.

New York: Plenum Press, 1974.

61. Meyer, R.E. Psychiatric consequences of marihuana use: The

state of the evidence. In Tinklenberg, J.R. (ed.),

Marijuana and Health Hazards: Methodologic Issues in

Current Research. New York: Academic Press, 1975, pp.

133-152.

- 33 -
62. Mitra, G., Poddar, M.K. and Ghosh, J.J. In vivo and in vitro

effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on rat liver microsomal drug-metabolizing enzymes. Toxicology and Applied

Pharmacology, 35:523-530 (1976).

63. Morishima, A. Testimony presented in Marijuana-hashish epidemic and its impact on United States Security. Hearings

before the Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration

of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security

Laws of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States

Senate. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,

1974.

64. Morishima, A., Milstein, M., Henrich, R.T. and Nahas, G.G.

Effects of marijuana smoking, cannabinoids and olivetol

on replication of human lymphocytes: Formation of micronuclei. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, 711-

722.

65. Moskowitz, H. Marihuana and driving. Accident Analysis and

Prevention, 8(1):21-26 (1976).

66. Moskowitz, H., McGlothlin, W. and Hulbert, S. The effects of

marijuana dosage on driver performance. Contract No.

DOT-HS-150-2-236, University of California, Los Angeles

(1973).

67. Munson, A.E., Harris, L.S., Friedman, M.A., Dewey, W.L. and

Carchman, R.A. Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 55:597-602

(1975).

68. Naditch, M.P. Acute adverse reaotions to psychoactive drugs,

drug usage, and psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal

Psychology, 83(4):394-403 (1974).

69. Naditch, M.P. Progress Report to NIDA, 1976.

70. Naditch, M.P., Alker, P.C. and Joffe, P. Individual differences and setting as determinants of acute adverse reactions to psychoactive drugs. Journal of Nervous and

Mental Disease, 161(5):326-335 (1975).

71. Nahas, G.G., Suciu-Foca, N., Armand, J.P. and Morishima, A.

Inhibition of cellular mediated immunity in marijuana

smokers. Science, 183:419-420 (1974).

72. Nichols, W.W., Miller, R.C., Heneen, W., Bradt, C., Hollister,

L. and Kanter, S. Cytogenetic studies on human subjects

receiving marijuana and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Mutation Research, 26:413-417 (1974).

- 34 -
73. O'Donnell, J.A., Voss, H.L., Clayton, R.R., Slatin, G.T. and

Room, R.G.W. Young men and drugs -- A nationwide survey.

Research Monograph No. 5. Rockville, MD: National

Institute on Drug Abuse, 1975.

74. Prakash, R. and Aronow, W.S. Effects of marijuana in coronary

disease. Reply. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,

19(1):94-95 (1976).

75. Rachelefsky, G.S., Opelz, G., Mickey, M.R., Lessin, P., Kinchi,

M., Silverstein, M.J. and Stiehm, E.R. Intact Humoral

and Cell-Mediated Immunity in Chronic Marihuana Smoking.

Contract report (HSM 42-71-83) June, 1975.

76. Rubin, V. and Comitas, L. Ganja in Jamaica: A medical anthropological study of chronic marihuana use. The Hague:

Mouton, 1975.

77. Rubin, V. and Comitas, L. Ganja in Jamaica: The Effects of

Marihuana. New York, NY: Anchor/Doubleday, 1976.

78. Sallan, S.E., Zinberg, N.E. and Frei, E. Antiemetic effect of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients receiving cancer

chemotherapy. New England Journal of Medicine,

293(16):795-797 (1975).

79. Sassenrath, E.N. and Chapman, L.F. Tetrahydrocannabinolinduced manifestations of the “marihuana syndrome” in

group-living macaques. Federation Proceedings, 34:1666-

1670 (1975).

80. Sassenrath, E.N. and Chapman, L.F. Primate social behavior as a

method of analysis of drug action: Studies with THC in

monkeys. Federation Proceedings, 35:2238-2244 (1976).

81. Smart, R.G. Marihuana and driving risk among college students.

Journal of Safety Research, 6(4):155-158 (1974).

82. Smith, G.M. and Fogg, C.P. Longitudinal study of teenage drug

use. Paper presented at Conference on Strategies of

Longitudinal Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April,

1976.

83. Soueif, M.I. Chronic cannabis users: Further analysis of

objective test results. Bulletin on Narcotics, 27(4):1-

26 (1975).

84. Soueif, M.I. Some determinants of psychological deficits associated with chronic cannabis consumption. Bulletin on

Narcotics, 28(1):25-42 (1976).

85. Stanton, M.D., Mintz, J. and Franklin, R.M. Drug flashbacks.

II. Some additional findings. International Journal of

the Addictions, 11(1):53-69 (1976).

- 35 -
86. Stefanis, C., Boulougouris, J. and Liakos, A. Clinical and

psychophysiological effects of cannabis in long-term

users. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

659-665.

87. Stenchever, M.A., Kunysz, T.J. and Allen, M.A. Chromosome

breakage in users of marijuana. American Journal of

Obstetrics and Gynecology, 118:106-113 (1974).

88. Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J. and Frank, I.M. Acute bronchial

effects of smoked marijuana (MJ) and oral -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in asthmatic subjects. Clinical

Research, 22(3):512A (1974).

89. Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J. and Frank, I.M. Acute effects of

marihuana on airway dynamics in spontaneous and experimentally induced bronchial asthma. In Braude, M.C. and

Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York:

Raven Press, 1976a, pp. 785-802.

90. Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J., Lee, Y.E. and Harper, C.E. Subacute effects of heavy marihuana smoking on pulmonary

function in healthy men. New England Journal of Medicine, 294(3):125-129 (1976b).

91. Thacore, V.R. and Shukla, S.R.P. Cannabis psychosis and paranoid schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry,

33(3):383-386 (1976).

92. Thompson, P. “Stoned” driving is unpleasant, say marijuana

smokers. The Journal (Addiction Research Foundation),

4(1):13 (1975).

93. Vachon, L., Mikus, P., Morrissey, W., Fitzgerald, M. and

Gaensler, E. Bronchial effect of marihuana smoke in

asthma. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976a, pp.

777-784.

94. Vachon, L., Robins, A. and Gaensler, E. Airways response to

aerosolized -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Preliminary

report. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The

Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum,

1976b, pp. 111-122.

95. Vachon, L., Robins, A. and Gaensler, E.A. Airways response to

micro-aerosolized -8-tetrahydrocannabinol. Chest,

70:444 (1976c).

96. Vardaris, R.M., Weisz, D.J., Fazel, A. and Rawitch, A.B. Chronic administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol to pregnant

rats: Studies of pup behavior and placental transfer.

Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 4:249-254

- 36 -
97. Widman, M., Nordqvist, M., Dollery, C.T. and Briant, R.H.

Metabolism of -1-tetrahydrocannabinol by the isolated

perfused dog lung. Comparison with in vitro liver metabolism: Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 27:842-848

(1975).

98. Willette, R.E. (ed.) Cannabinoid Assays in Humans. National

Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph No. 7.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.

99. Zeller, A.F. Joint committee on aviation pathology. IX.

Alcohol and other drugs in aircraft accidents. Aviation,

Space and Environmental Medicine, 46(10):1271-1274

(1975).

100. Sterling-Smith, Robert S. A special study of drivers most

responsible in fatal accidents. Summary for Management

Report, Contract No. DOT HS 310-3-595, April, 1976.

101. Marihuana and Health, Report to Congress from the Secretary of

Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1971.

102. Marihuana and Health, Second Annual Report to Congress from

the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.

Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1972.

103. Marihuana and Health, Third Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington,

DC: Government Printing Office, 1973.

104. Marihuana and Health, Fourth Annual Report to Congress from

the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare.

Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1974.

105. Marihuana and Health, Fifth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington,

DC: Government Printing Office, 1975.

106. Kielholz, P. and Ladewig, E. Uber Drogenabhangigkeit bei

Jugendlichen. Deutsche Medizin Wochenschrift, 95:101-105

(1970).

107. Stefanis, C.N. and Issicorides, M.R. Cellular effects of

chronic cannabis use in man. In Nahas, G.G. (ed.),

Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Cellular Effects.

New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1976.

108. Rosenkrantz, H. The immune response and marihuana. In Nahas,

G.G. (ed.), Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry and

Cellular Effects. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1976.

- 37 -
Chapter 1

EPIDEMIOLOGY OF MARIHUANA USE

William McGlothlin, Ph.D.

PRESENT PATTERNS AND CHANGES IN USE

National Household Surveys (Adult)

The National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse sponsored

national household surveys of marihuana and other drug use in 1971

and 1972 (Abelson et al., 1972, 1973). A third national survey was

conducted during late 1974 - early 1975 (Abelson & Atkinson, 1975);

and a fourth during late 1975 - early 1976 (Abelson & Fishburne,

1976). Table A-1 provides the trends of use as tabulated by age and

sex.

Another national survey conducted for the Drug Abuse Council in 1974

produced very similar results. The percentages of adults (18 and

over) reporting ever having used and currently using were 18 and 8

percent respectively (Opinion Research Corporation, 1974). As can

be seen in Table A-1, the number of adults currently using marihuana

has not changed appreciably in the past four years with usage

continuing to be concentrated in the 18-25 age bracket. Use remains

about twice as frequent for males as females.

Current usage is similar for white and non-white groups and is

positively associated with education -- 12 percent for college

graduates versus 4 percent for those not completing high school. It

continues to be higher in the West (11 percent) and lowest in the

South (6 percent), and higher in large metropolitan areas (9

percent) than in non-metropolitan regions (4 percent). However,

all of these racial/ethnic, educational and regional differences

have become less pronounced during the past four years.

Because of the relatively small numbers involved, national general

population surveys do not provide very accurate estimates of

changes in heavy marihuana use. The 1971 Marihuana Commission

survey reported daily or more frequent use among adults at 0.5

percent, while the comparable value for 1972 was 1.4 percent. The

1974 Drug Abuse Council national survey found 1.5 percent of the

adult sample used marihuana daily or more frequently.

National Household Surveys (Youth)

The results of the Marihuana Commission and subsequent national

surveys of youth ages 12-17 are presented in Table A-2. Usage has

substantially increased in the last four years, with proportion-

- 38 -
Table A-1

MARIHUANA USE AMONG ADULTS , 1971-1976

% Ever Used % Current Use**

1971 1972 1975 1976

All adults 15 16 19 21

Age:

18-25 39 48 53 53

26-34 19 20 29 3 6

35+ 7 3 4 6

Sex:

Male 21 22 24 29

Female 10 10 14 14

*Less than 0.5%

**Used during last month

1971 1972 1975 1976

5 8 7 8

17 28 25 25

5 9 8 11

--* --* --* 1

7 11 9 11

3 5 5 5

Table A-2

MARIHUANA USE AMONG YOUTH, 1971-1976

% Ever Used % Current Use*

1971 1972 1975 1976 1971 1972

All youth 14 14 23 22 6 7

Age:

12-13

14-15

6 4 6 6 2 1

10 10 22 21 7 6

16-17 27 29 39 40 10 16

Sex:

Male 14 15 24 26 7 9

Female 14 13 21 19 5 6

*Used during last month

1975

12

2

12

20

12

11

1976

12

3

13

21

14

11

- 39 -
Table A-3

Ever Used

PERCENTAGE OF MARIHUANA USE

AMONG A NATIONAL SAMPLE OF HIGH SCHOOL MALES

Any use in

prior year

Daily or weekly

sometime in

prior year

Daily use sometime in prior

year

One Year Five Years

After After

Senior Year Graduation Graduation

1969 1970 1974

20 35 62

20 33

6 9

1 2

52

21

9

Table A-4

PERCENTAGE OF MARIHUANA USE REPORTED IN 22 HIGH SCHOOLS

Ever used

Ever used 60 or more

times

Junior H.S. Senior H.S.

1971 1973 1971 1973

15 19 38 48

2 4 11 17

Used in past two

months 11 13 27 36

Used 60 or more times

in past two months 1 1 2 4

- 40 -
ately larger gains among the younger age groups. Another set of

national household data collected in a Columbia University study

produced quite similar results (Josephson, 1974; Elinson, 1975):

% Ever Used

1971 1972 1973 1974-75

Age:

12-17 15 15 17 22

16-17 28 31 32 40

The Marihuana Commission surveys in 1971 and 1972 reported daily

marihuana usage for the 12-17 age group at 0.6 percent and 1.3

percent respectively. The 1974-75 national survey for the Columbia

University study found that 2 percent of youth 12-17, and 4 percent

of those 16-17 reported using marihuana 60 or more times in the past

two months. The percentage of daily use was not recorded for the

earlier years. The 1974 Drug Abuse Council survey reported daily or

more frequent usage at 1 percent of the 12-17 age group and 3

percent for those 16-17.

Student Surveys

A longitudinal study of high school males followed from the senior

year to five years after graduation provides an indication of

changes in marihuana usage over time in the same group (Johnston,

1974, 1976). The sample of over 2,000 was selected from 87 public

high schools so as to be representative of U.S. males entering high

school in 1966. (Data arrayed in Table A-3.)

Another study surveyed drug usage in 22 selected high schools

throughout the country in 1971 and 1973 (Josephson, 1974). These

data are not necessarily representative of the student population,

but do provide an indication of changes in marihuana use over the

two-year period (Table A-4).

Surveys of approximately 13,000 male and female high school seniors

in 130 schools were conducted in 1975 and again in 1976 (Johnston,

1976). The schools were selected to be representative of public and

private high schools throughout the country and the survey is to be

repeated annually. The percentage of high school seniors reporting

marihuana usage in 1975 and 1976 were:

- 41 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 4
1975 1976

Ever used 47 % 53 %

Used in last 12 months 40 45

Used in last month 27 32

Used 20 or more times

in last month 6 8

The only regularly conducted national survey of marihuana use among

college students is that prepared by Gallup (Gallup Opinion Index,

1974). The percentages reporting having ever used for the periods

1967-74 are:

Year % Ever Used

1967 5

1969 22

1970 42

1971 51

1974 55

In one other national student survey conducted in 1974-75 for the

Drug Abuse Council, 48 percent of high school and 64 percent of

college students reported having used marihuana (Yankelovich,

1975a 1975b). The corresponding percentages for daily use were 6

percent and 8 percent.

One local survey of particular interest is that annually conducted

among high school students in San Mateo County, California since

1968 (Blackford, 1976). Table A-5 shows the percentage of 9th and

12th grade male students reporting 1 or more, 10 or more, and 50 or

more uses of marihuana during the preceding year. It will be noted

that use in this locale has been stable for the past five or six

years with some slight decline in 1976. San Mateo County is

adjacent to San Francisco, and, thus, had an earlier and more

pronounced exposure to the counterculture movement and associated

drug use than did most other areas of the U.S. This is particularly

evident in the late 1960's. For instance, one year after Gallup

found only 5 percent of nationwide college students had used

marihuana (1967), the comparable percentage for senior males in San

Mateo County high schools was 45 percent. While the percentage of

San Mateo seniors (male and female) using marihuana in 1976 (58

percent) is still above the national level (45 percent), the

differences are not nearly so large. It is interesting to speculate

- 42 -
Table A-5

PERCENTAGE OF MARIHUANA USE AMONG MALE SAN MATEO

COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS

One or more uses Ten or more uses Fifty or more uses

in past year in past year in past year

Grade: 9th 12th

1968 27 45

1969 35 50

1970 34 51

1971 44 59

1972 44 61

1973 51 61

1974 49 62

1975 49 64

1976 48 61

9th

14

20

20

26

27

32

30

30

27

12th

26

34

34

43

45

45

47

45

42

9th

NA

NA

11

17

16

20

20

20

17

12th

NA

NA

22

32

32

32

34

31

30

- 43 -
on the reasons for the narrowing gap. Perhaps the growth of

marihuana use in San Mateo schools has reached its limit, and the

apparent plateau is actually a ceiling.

In summary, at the national level, marihuana use appears to have

significantly increased among youth during the past three to four

years, as indicated by the trend in national household surveys as

well as surveys of various high school student populations. Similarly, daily marihuana use has apparently increased among youth,

although the available data on changes in daily use remain fairly

limited.

Marihuana Use Among Males, Aged 20-30

One of the most significant recent epidemiological studies involved

the interviewing of 2,500 respondents selected to be representative

of the 19,000,000 U.S. males in the 20-30 age group (O’Donnell et

al., 1976). This group reports the highest rate of drug use, and

the in-depth interviewing of a relatively large representative

sample provided more reliable information on marihuana and other

drug-using behavior than had previously been available.

The data were collected between October 1974 and May 1975 and showed

that 55 percent of those interviewed had used marihuana at some

time. Defining as current use any use in the year 1974-1975, the

study reported 38 percent current users. Daily or almost daily

marihuana use at some time was reported by 15 percent of those

interviewed. The proportions of the sample reporting having used

marihuana 1,000 or more times, and having used the drug within the

past 24 hours were the same, 11 percent. Use of hashish at some

time was reported by 29 percent and the use of hashish oil by 11

percent. Surprisingly, 11 percent of the total sample and 41

percent of those described as heavy users reported growing marihuana for their own use.

When particular age categories within this group are examined, the

data show that 37 percent of the men who were 29-30 at the time of

the interview had used marihuana in comparison to 63 percent of the

20-24 age group. When those described as light or experimental

marihuana users are excluded, the differences are even more striking: 12 percent of those 29-30 reported use in comparison to 37

percent of those 20-24. These results indicate that males now in

their late 20's are less likely to have tried marihuana than men 5-

10 years younger, and are considerably less likely to adopt marihuana use as a frequent behavior. Similar or more pronounced

differences probably exist for those over 30. For instance, the

1974 follow-on to the Marihuana Commission Survey found 7 percent of

males and females aged 34-49 reported having used marihuana, but

only 1 percent had done so within the past month.

The peak year of first marihuana use for the sample of males between

20 and 30 was 1969; however, the peak year for any use during any

one calendar year was 1974 when the rate for this group reached 37

- 44 -
percent. The authors concluded that the data were clearly consistent with an upward trend in marihuana use.

This study also revealed that the differences in marihuana use as a

function of various demographic characteristics were not as pronounced in the group sampled as those reported in the general

population. In the male 20-30 age group, 70 percent of those living

in cities of over 1,000,000 population had used marihuana in

comparison to 43 percent of those in communities of fewer than

2,500. In terms of education, the percentage reporting some use of

marihuana was almost identical for those with less than high school

education, high school graduates and college graduates. This

contrasts sharply with the positive correlation between marihuana

use and educational level reported for the general adult population. Those who had attended college without graduating showed a

higher rate. For those aged 20-23 at the time of the interview, the

percent having used marihuana was virtually the same for those still

in school and those not. A higher percentage of blacks (65 percent)

than whites (54 percent) reported some use, but the inverse relation

of marihuana use to age was not as apparent in the black group.

Blacks and other ethnic minorities showed a higher prevalence of

marihuana use prior to the late 1960's, but minority youth were less

influenced by the recent epidemic (Bloom et al., 1974).

A Synthesis

The overall survey results indicate that marihuana use has not

significantly penetrated the portion of the adult population over

30 years of age. Where use has occurred in this group, the

frequency has bean mostly of an experimental nature. However, the

plateau in current marihuana use among adults found in national

survey results may be deceptive in predicting future usage. As the

more frequently using younger groups enter the adult age range, the

overall rates are likely to increase.

Results from both household surveys and student studies indicate

that marihuana use is still increasing among youth at the national

level, although usage appears to have stabilized in certain areas

which reached a relatively high level in the early 1970's. Most of

the data on youth also indicate that daily or near-daily usage has

increased in the past two to four years.

If recent marihuana usage in the United States is compared with

usage patterns prior to the “epidemic” which began in the late

1960's and with patterns of use in countries where cannabis use has

been indigenous for many years, some useful perspectives emerge.

Much of the recent American usage is comparatively minimal, both in

terms of frequency of use and amount consumed (McGlothlin, 1975;

Rubin & Comitas, 1975). The recent American patterns of use often

seem to be based more on the adoption of a fad or life style than on

an attraction to the pharmacological properties of the drug. However, once introduced as a fad, it is quite possible that marihuana

use will be sustained because of its pharmacological effects.

- 45 -
Based on currently available survey data, it appears that around 2

percent of youth, aged 12-17, or about 8 percent of those who have

tried marihuana, are currently using the drug daily. For those 17-

year-olds, around 4-5 percent are probably daily users. For males

of this same age group, the percentage using marihuana daily is

approximately 6-7 percent, or about 13 percent of those having tried

it.

For adults, the overall daily use is probably only 1 or 2 percent,

but a more meaningful percentage is that for the age groups primarily involved. As described earlier, the percentage of daily use

among males 20-30 years old is around 8-9 percent, or 15 percent of

those who have tried marihuana. For males 20-24 years of age,

current daily use is around 10 or 11 percent, or about 17 percent of

those having ever used the drug.

SOCIAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL CORRELATES

Antecedents of Marihuana Use

Numerous researchers have compared personality and behavioral

traits of students using and not using marihuana. Most studies have

been cross-sectional (data collected at one point in time); however, several longitudinal studies have investigated the phenomenon

over two or more points in time. The latter approach has the

advantage of examining individuals prior to marihuana use and

determining those variables which predict subsequent initiation.

In one such study of high school students, Jessor (1976) has shown

that those individuals who initiate marihuana use can be predicted

from various personality, belief and attitude measures. When

compared with non-users, those beginning use demonstrated generally

less conventional attributes prior to onset. They showed lower

values on achievement and higher values on independence, were more

alienated and more socially critical, more tolerant of deviance,

less religious, less influenced by parents than by friends, more

deviant with respect to other behavior, and had a lower grade point

average. Furthermore, the group initiating marihuana use between

the first and second data collection periods showed some significant changes in the above directions during the same period. Jessor

interprets such changes as increasing Transition proneness,” and

has found similar results with regard to the initiation of alcohol

drinking and sexual behavior.

Smith and Fogg (1975, 1976) collected longitudinal data over a 5-

year period for students in grades 4-12. Measures of personality

and behavior were based on both self-report and peer ratings. In

both instances, the best predictor of future involvement in marihuana use was rebelliousness -- those who did not initiate use were

described as obedient, law-abiding, conscientious, trustworthy and

hardworking. Non-users also received higher grades in school

(Smith, 1973). Future marihuana users were rated by their peers as

being more impulsive and less sensitive to the feelings of others;

- 46 -
but, at the same time, more sociable, talkative and outgoing. In

general, the scales which differentiated users and non-users were

also predictive of early versus late use. The authors interpret the

results in terms of degree of socialization -- early users being at

the low end of the scale, late users at the intermediate range and

non-users at the high end.

Haagen (1970) conducted an early study of male college students with

extensive data collected at the time of admission (1965), when

virtually none had used marihuana, and three years later, when 59

percent reported some use. At the time of admission, the group that

subsequently used marihuana scored slightly higher than the nonuser group on a series of aptitude and achievement tests. On the

other hand, the group that later became frequent marihuana users had

poorer study habits in high school, were less likely to describe

themselves as hard workers, were more dissatisfied with school, and

made lower grades than did the non-user group. At the time they

entered college, 56 percent of the subsequent frequent users were

undecided as to their intended major study as compared to 7 percent

of the non-users. Users were initially more accepting of a nonconformist philosophy and moved further in this direction during

college. Psychological tests administered at the time of college

admission showed distinctly different patterns among the subsequent

frequent , infrequent and non-users. Non-users were more optimistic, self-confident and disciplined, emphasizing rationality and

suppressing emotional impulses in favor of regularity and responsibility. In contrast, students who subsequently became frequent

users described themselves as more pessimistic and insecure with

behavior and mood states and were more restless, erratic and

unpredictable. They found routine especially distasteful. The

characteristics of the infrequent users were intermediate between

the two other groups; they were flexible, confident and interested

in trying new experiences.

The above studies are quite consistent in showing potential marihuana users to be low in what Kandel et al. (1976) term an index of

conformity to adult expectations.2 However, in assessing these

results, it is important to keep in mind the changing context in

which the behavior occurs. A few years ago marihuana use was much

more indicative of social deviance and general lack of conformity

than is presently the case. As seen in the tables in the previous

1Two other recent studies have employed psychological tests to

measure personality differences between marihuana users and nonusers. Segal (1975) confirmed earlier findings that marihuana

users score higher on sensation-seeking scales. Naditch (1975)

found users more open to experience and more prone to use regression

as an ego defense.

2A number of other studies have reported findings generally consistent with the three studies outlined above (Brill & Christie, 1974;

Gulas & King, 1976; Johnston, 1974; Kandel et al., 1976; O'Malley,

1975).

- 47 -
section, use at some time is currently the statistical norm for

certain age groups. In some groups, the fact that an individual has

never tried marihuana may be more predictive of other traits than is

the opposite behavior. In this connection, it is interesting to

note that the measures Jessor found to predict the onset of marihuana in high school students were not predictive of use among a

college sample conducted in 1970 and 1971 (Jessor et al., 1973). He

interprets this as being due to marihuana becoming the norm in the

college environment, with initiation being due more to accidental

associations than to a systematic set of personality and belief

variables. However, as he points out, behavioral norms are related

to age, and the initiation of marihuana use during early adolescence

is likely to continue to be related to a larger pattern of nonconformity. The same is true for early initiation of drinking or

sexual behavior.

Factors Influencing Transition from Non-Use to Use

Several studies have investigated the role of child-rearing practices and parents' drug-using behavior in the initiation of adolescent drug use. Kandel et al. (1976) found that parents' use of

alcohol was related to adolescent use of alcohol but not marihuana.

Other studies have found weak relations between the parents' use of

prescription drugs such as tranquilizers, stimulants and sedatives

and the child's use of marihuana (Kandel, 1974; Prendergast, 1974;

Smart & Fejer, 1971).

One study found perceived laissez-faire parent-child relationships

led to high marihuana usage among the offspring; an autocratic

relationship led to medium usage; and quasi-democratic or democratic relationships led to low usage (Hunt, 1974). Others have found

lower adolescent usage with strong parental disapproval compared to

a tolerant attitude (Kandel et al., 1976; Prendergast, 1974). Lack

of closeness with parents was found to be somewhat predictive of

marihuana use, but more strongly related to serious involvement

with other illicit drugs (Kandel et al., 1976).

Whatever the influence of child-rearing practices, they are generally minor in comparison to peer influences. This emphasis on

peer influence is in accord with the thesis of Suchman and others

that student marihuana and other drug use is largely determined by

the integration into a social subculture in which drug use is a part

(Suchman, 1968; Thomas et al., 1975).

As would be expected, the initiation of marihuana use tends to be

preceded by increasingly favorable attitudes toward the behavior

1Elinson, 1976; Jessor & Jessor, 1976; Johnston, 1973; Kandel,

1974; Kandel et al., 1976; Lucas et al., 1975.

- 48 -
and beliefs as to the lack of associated harm.1

One social environment, the military, has apparently proved to have

less influence on marihuana and other drug use than was initially

believed. O'Donnell et al. (1976) in their study of 20-30-year-old

males found that neither domestic nor overseas service had any

effect on marihuana use. Robins (1975) has also found that Vietnam

veterans' marihuana use after return was not significantly

increased over that for a comparison group who did not enter the

military.

Since marihuana use is known to generally precede other illicit drug

usage, the question is often raised as to the role of marihuana in

facilitating the transition or progression to more dangerous drugs.

While not specifically answering this question, Kandel and associates have determined that the temporal sequence along the legalillegal drug continuum is consistent (Kandel & Faust, 1975; Single

et al., 1974). By conducting longitudinal studies of two large

samples of high school students, they were able to determine the

order in which the various drugs were used. Only 1 percent of the

sample began using illicit drugs without first using a legal drug.

Beer and wine collectively constituted by far the most common “entry

drug” (28 percent) with cigarettes accounting for 6 percent and hard

liquor 3 percent. In addition to the fact that legal drug use

virtually always preceded illicit use, heavy use of both liquor

(weekly) and cigarettes (over a pack a day) resulted in a high

percentage (40 percent) moving from non-use to use of illicit drugs

in a five month period. Only 2-3 percent of adolescent legal drug

users progressed to other illicit drugs without first trying marihuana. If the individual progressed beyond marihuana, the next step

was generally pills. Subsequent steps were psychedelics, cocaine

and heroin, in that order; but, of course, only a small percentage

progressed to the higher levels of the sequence. Heavy use of

marihuana or other drugs along the sequence was more often followed

by progression to the next step, and also by a higher probability of

moving two or more steps during a single time period.

Correlates of Marihuana Use

The two previous subsections have dealt primarily with the antecedents of marihuana use. Obviously, since they precede the behavior

of interest, there is no possibility of their being caused by

marihuana usage. Research which simply shows a correlation between

marihuana use and other behavior leaves the question of causality

unresolved. It should be stressed that, while research on social

and psychological correlates can sometimes rule out causality

between two variables that are statistically correlated, it can

rarely, if ever, establish that one is the consequence of the other.

1Elinson, 1976; Jessor, 1976; Kandel et al., 1976; Lucas et al.,

1975; Smith & Fogg, 1976; Sadava, 1973.

- 49 -
Current living arrangement is one correlate of marihuana use that is

apparently related to the general pattern of unconventionality

described earlier. In their national study of males, ages 20-30,

O'Donnell et al. (1976) found that the proportions currently using

marihuana were as follows: married, 25 percent; living with

parents, 38 percent; living independently, 56 percent; consensual

union (living with a woman but not married), 68 percent.

The same study (O'Donnell et al., 1976) found 72 percent of those

unemployed at the time of the interview had used marihuana in

comparison to 52 percent of those employed. In another study of Air

Force personnel, those reporting marihuana use showed somewhat

poorer work performance than a comparison group of non-users

(Mullins et al., 1975).

Several studies have found a positive relation between marihuana

use and self-reported criminal acts and/or contacts with the criminal justice system. However, the one longitudinal study which has

extensively examined the association found no evidence that nonaddictive drug use causes crime (Johnston et al., 1976). The study

involved a representative sample of 2,200 10th grade males first

contacted in 1966, when very few had used illicit drugs. There were

four subsequent follow-ups through 1974. The study found a static

relationship between drug use and crime; i.e., drug users reported

more crime than non-users at each data collection point, although

those using only marihuana were less delinquent than other drugusing groups. The longitudinal data showed that “the preponderance

of the delinquency differences among the non-users and various

drug-user groups existed before drug usage.” Other analyses showed

that groups that increased drug use over the period did not show a

parallel increase in criminal behavior.

Similar results have been found with respect to drug use and

dropping out of high school and college (Carlin & Post, 1974;

Johnston, 1973; Mellinger et al., 1976a), and career indecision

(Brill & Christie, 1974; Haagen, 1970; Mellinger et al., 1976b).

Drug users show a higher drop-out rate and more career indecision.

However, the differences generally disappear when pre-use factors

such as academic motivation and family background are controlled

(Mellinger et al., 1976a, 1976b). This is especially true for those

students using only marihuana.

In summary, it is clear that marihuana usage is frequently part of a

larger pattern of non-conformity, but where longitudinal data have

permitted adequate multivariate analyses, the results have generally suggested the lack of any causal effects.

William McGlothlin, Ph.D.

University of California at

Los Angeles

1Brill and Christie, 1974; Jessor & Jessor, 1976; Johnston et al.,

1976; Kandel et al., 1976; O'Donnell et al., 1976.

- 50 -
REFERENCES

Epidemiology of Marihuana Use

Abelson, H. and Atkinson, R.B. Public Experience with Psychoactive

Substances. Princeton, NJ: Response Analysis Corporation,

1975.

Abelson, H., Cohen, R. and Schrayer, D. A nationwide study of

beliefs, information and experience. In National Commission

on Marihuana and Drug Abuse; Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding. Appendix Volume II. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1972, pp. 855-1119.

Abelson, H., Cohen, R., Schrayer, D. and Rappeport, M. Drug

experience, attitudes and related behavior among adolescents

and adults. In National Commission on Marihuana and Drug

Abuse; Drug Use in America: Problem in Perspective. Appendix

Volume I. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1973,

pp. 488-871.

Abelson, H. and Fishburne, P.M. Nonmedical Use of Psychoactive

Substances. Princeton, NJ: Response Analysis Corporation,

1976.

Blackford, L. Student Drug Use Surveys - San Mateo County, California 1968-1976. San Mateo, CA: Department of Public Health

and Welfare, 1976.

Bloan, R., Hays, J.R. and Winburn, M.G. Marihuana use in urban

secondary schools: A three year comparison. The International Journal of the Addictions, 9:329-335 (1974).

Brill, N.Q. and Christie, R.L. Marihuana use and psychosocial

adaptation. Follow-up study of a collegiate population.

Archives of General Psychiatry, 31:713-719 (1974).

Carlin, A.S. and Post, R.D. Drug use and achievement. The International Journal of the Addictions, 9:401-410 (1974).

Elinson, J. A Study of Teenage Drug Behavior. NIDA Grant DA 00043.

Columbia University School of Public Health, New York, NY,

October, 1975. Personal communication.

Elinson, J. Antecedents and consequences of teenage drug behavior.

Paper presented at the Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976.

Gallup Opinion Index. Volume 109 (Part 4). Princeton, NJ: American Institute of Public Opinion, 1974.

Gulas, I. and King, F.W. On the question of pre-existing personality differences between users and nonusers of drugs. The

Journal of Psychology, 92:65-69 (1976).

- 51 -
Haagen, C.H. Social and psychological characteristics associated

with the use of marihuana by college men. Unpublished

manuscript, Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT, 1970.

Hunt, D.G. Parental permissiveness as perceived by the offspring

and the degree of marijuana usage among offspring. Human

Relations, 27(3):267-285 (1974).

Jessor, R. Predicting time of onset of marijuana use: A development study of high school youth. Journal of Consulting and

Clinical Psychology, 44:125-134 (1976).

Jessor, R. and Jessor, S.L. Theory testing in longitudinal drug

research. Paper presented at Conference on Strategies of

Longitudinal Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976.

Jessor, R., Jessor, S.L. and Finney, J. A social psychology of

marijuana use: Longitudinal studies of high school and

college youth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

26:1-15 (1973).

Johnson, B. Marihuana Users and Drug Subculture. New York: Wiley,

1973.

Johnston, L.D. Drugs and American Youth. University of Michigan,

1973.

Johnston, L.D. Drug use during and after high school: Results of a

national longitudinal study. American Journal of Public

Health, 64(Supplement):29-37 (1974).

Johnston, L.D. Monitoring the future: Continuing study of life

styles and values of youth. University of Michigan, Ann

Arbor, October, 1976. Personal communication.

Johnston, L., O'Malley, P.M. and Eveland, L.K. Drugs and delinquency: A search for causal connections. Paper presented at

the Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal Research in Drug

Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976.

Josephson, E. Trends in adolescent marijuana use. In Josephson, E.

and Carroll, E. (eds.), Drug Use: Epidemiological and Sociological Approaches. Washington, DC: Hemisphere Publishing

Corporation, 1974.

Kandel, D. Inter- and intragenerational influences on adolescent

marijuana use. Journal of Social Issues, 30(2):107-135

(1974).

Kandel, D. and Faust, R. Sequence and stages in patterns of

adolescent drug use. Archives of General Psychiatry, 32:923-

932 (1975).

- 52 -
Kandel, D., Kessler, R. and Margulies, R. Adolescent initiation

into stages of drug use: A sequential analysis. Paper

presented at the Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal

Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976.

Lucas, W.L., Grupp, S.E. and Schmitt, R.L. Predicting who will turn

on: A four-year follow-up. The International Journal of the

Addictions, 10:305-326 (1975).

McGlothlin, W.H. Drug use and abuse. Annual Review of Psychology,

26:45-64 (1975).

Mellinger, G.D., Somers, R.H., Davidson, S.T. and Manheimer, D.I.

The amotivational syndrome and the college student. Paper

presented at the Conference on Chronic Cannabis Use, New

York, NY, January, 1976a.

Mellinger, G.D., Somers, R.H., Davidson, S.T. and Manheimer, D.I.

Drug use, academic performance and career indecision: Longitudinal data in search of a model. Paper presented at

Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal Research in Drug

Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976b.

Mullins, C.J., Vitola, B.M. and Michelson, A.E. Variables related

to cannabis use. The International Journal of the Addictions, 10(3):481-502 (1975).

Naditch, M.P. Ego mechanisms and marihuana usage. In Lettieri,

D.J. (ed.), Predicting Adolescent Drug Abuse: A Review of

Issues, Methods and Correlates. NIDA Research Issues Series,

Volume 11. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office,

1975, pp. 207-222.

O'Donnell, J.A., Voss, H.L., Clayton, R.R., Slatin, G.T. and Room,

R.G.W. Young men and drugs -- A nationwide survey. Research

Monograph No. 5. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug

Abuse, 1976.

O'Malley, P.M. Correlates and consequences of illicit drug use.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan,

1975.

Opinion Research Corporation. Use of Marijuana and Views on Related

Penalties Among Teens and the General Public. Commissioned

by the Drug Abuse Council, Washington, DC, October, 1974.

Prendergast, T.J. Family characteristics associated with marijuana

use among adolescents. The International Journal of the

Addictions, 9(6):827-839 (1974).

Robins, L.N. Veterans Drug Use Three Years After Vietnam. Special

Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention Grant DA 3AC680, NIDA

Grant DA 01120, and NIMH Grant MH 36,598, 1975.

- 53 -
Rubin, V. and Comitas, L. Ganja in Jamaica: Medical Anthropological Study of Chronic Marihuana Use. The Hague: Mouton,

1975.

Sadava, S.W. Patterns of college student drug use: A longitudinal

social learning study. Pychological Reports, 33:75-86

(1973).

Segal, B. Personality factors related to drug and alcohol use. In

Lettieri, D.J. (ed.), Predicting Adolescent Drug Abuse: A

Review of Issues, Methods and Correlates. NIDA Research

Issues Series, Volume 11. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1975, pp. 165-191.

Single, E., Kandel, D. and Faust, R. Patterns of multiple drug use

in high school. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,

15(4):344-357 (1974).

Smart, R.G. and Fejer, D. Recent trends in illicit drug use among

adolescents. Bi-monthly Journal of the Department of

National Health and Welfare. Ottawa, Canada: Canada's

Mental Health Supplement No. 68, 1971.

Smith, G.E. Early precursors of teenage drug use. Paper presented

at the 35th Annual Scientific Meeting, Committee on Problems

of Drug Dependence, Chapel Hill, NC, 1973.

Smith, G.M. and Fogg, C.P. Teenage drug use: A search for causes

and consequences. In Lettieri, D.J. (ed.), Predicting Adolescent Drug Abuse: A Review of Issues, Methods and Correlates. NIDA Research Issues Series, Volume 11. Washington,

DC: Government Printing Office, 1975, pp., 279-282.

Smith, G.M. and Fogg, C.P. Longitudinal study of teenage drug use.

Paper presented at Conference on Strategies of Longitudinal

Research in Drug Use, Puerto Rico, April, 1976.

Suchman, E. The hang-loose ethic and the spirit of drug use.

Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 9:146-155 (1968).

Thomas, C.W., Petersen, D.M. and Zinggraff, M.T. Student drug use:

A re-examination of the “hang-loose ethic” hypothesis. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 16(1):63-73 (1975).

Yankelovich, D. Drug users vs. drug abusers - how students control

their drug crises. Psychology Today, 9(5):39-42 (1975a).

Yankelovich, D. Yankelovich, Skelly and White, Inc., New York, NY,

October, 1975b. Personal communication.

- 54 -
Chapter 2

CHEMISTRY AND METABOLISM

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

SUMMARY

The continuing research into the chemistry of marihuana has focused

on two approaches -- chemical analysis and synthesis -- aimed at

some fundamental problems. There are, first, the analytical problems which exist because marihuana is a complex mixture of substances present in variable amounts, and the constituents must be

defined so that their individual properties may be related to those

of marihuana itself; in addition, such definition may provide, for

forensic purposes, a means of identifying the origin of marihuana

samples. Secondly, the analysis of marihuana must be extended

beyond the mere identification of its constituents to the experimental situation in which the drug's metabolic products are described in body tissues and fluids. The goal of such studies is,

obviously, to relate the fate of the drugs in the body to their

effects. The techniques generally used to solve these problems have

been chromatography, mass spectrometry and radiolabelled drugs.

The objective of the synthesis research is to produce naturally

occurring cannabinoids as well as their metabolites and synthetic

congeners or surrogates. This ongoing synthesis provides pharmacologists with adequate supplies of pure drugs whose properties can

then be evaluated relative to marihuana; additionally, such syntheses produce a variety of congeners to be screened for their pharmacological properties so that the therapeutic potential of the

cannabinoids may be assessed with some degree of reliability.

Indeed, the synthesis of many of the human metabolites of -9-THC --

the major psychotoxic constituent of marihuana -- has now been

achieved, and the consequently greater availability of these drugs

will enable pharmacologists to study the role of the metabolites in

the pharmacology and toxicology of marihuana on a much broader

scale. For example, a simplified, but small-scale, synthesis of

several cannabinoids was described within the past year. An

increased availability of pure -- although very small -- metabolite

samples can bridge a serious prevailing analytical gap vis-a-vis

the experimental situations that require a positive identification

of the substances in order to determine their fate in the body.

Moreover, synthetic cannabinoids were the subject of numerous publications whose main thrust was the development of marihuana surrogates with greater pharmacological selectivity. Most potential

therapeutic uses of marihuana can be realized only if concomitant

toxic manifestations can be eliminated, or at least minimized, by

molecular modifications of the naturally occurring cannabinoids.

- 55 -
To this end, many new derivatives must be synthesized and then

screened using the pharmacological criteria customarily applied to

any new class of drugs. Clearly, the large numbers of synthesis

studies cited in the present report attempt to fulfill this purpose.

The chemical analysis of marihuana continued to define some toxicological problems. The recognition that cannabichromene (CBC) is

a major constituent of most samples of marihuana is a case in point,

for, although it has been identified, certain questions must now be

posed: What are CBC's properties and does its presence contribute

to the effects characteristically produced by marihuana? In fact,

there is at present very little known about the pharmacology of CBC.

The continuing refinement of established analytical techniques for

cannabinoids has been most noteworthy in gas and thin-layer chromatography. However, two relatively new techniques have received

some attention: plasma chromatography and high-pressure liquid

chromatography. The former method offers a new and very sensitive

approach to the analysis of cannabinoids. High-pressure liquid

chromatography holds great promise because of its potential for

physically separating closely related cannabinoids and because the

method is inherently simpler than gas chromatography in that it

obviates the need for derivatization prior to analysis.

The ongoing metabolic studies are significant primarily for two

reasons: First, some of the metabolites of these drugs are

extremely active pharmacologically; thus, their identification and

subsequent investigation are necessary for an understanding of the

pharmacology of marihuana. Secondly, some of the constituents of

marihuana can block the important drug metabolizing enzymes in the

liver, which creates the possibility of toxic interaction with

other drugs (including other marihuana constituents) by altering

their normal rate of hepatic metabolism or inactivation. Numerous

contributions to the elucidation of cannabinoid metabolism have

been made in the past year. The finding that in both dogs and rats

the major metabolites produced by the lung are different from those

produced by the liver is noteworthy because it implies that the

effects of marihuana may, in part, be determined by its route of

administration. It is now important to determine in humans whether

there are corresponding differences in tissue metabolism, or whether the route of administration affects the nature of the elicited

pharmacological reactions.

A report also appeared on the identification of cannabis metabolites that persist in tissues for many days after drug exposure, a

characteristic of great potential toxicological significance. The

identification of these metabolites leads the way to their synthesis and subsequent evaluation for toxicity.

Finally, a kinetic interaction was reported between cannabinol and

-9-THC which may account for previous descriptions of a cannabinol

antagonism of some effects of -9-THC. This finding lends some

credence to the suggestion that the cannabinoids in marihuana can

interact with one another; therefore, their relative concentrations

- 56 -
may be critical in the pharmacological manifestations of any given

marihuana preparation.

DRUG SOURCES

A new procedure for the determination of the source or origin of

illicit marihuana samples has been devised by Novotny et al.

(1976b) who used a combination of gas chromatography and mass

spectrometry to isolate and identify 38 non-polar constituents of

marihuana, thereby providing a “fingerprint” of the composition of

any given sample of cannabis. This detailed analysis of marihuana

may be superior to the more conventional procedure of limiting such

measurements to the relative concentrations of the so-called “main

cannabinoids”: cannabidiol (CBD), -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-

THC) and cannabinol (CBN). The technique reported in the Fifth

Marihuana and Health Report (1975) for the quantification of the CBD

and CBC content of marihuana has now been extended to the analysis

of numerous cannabis samples of known geographical origin (Halley

et al., 1975). The results indicate that for most variants of

cannabis, CBC is present in greater amounts than is CBD. Consistent

with these data is the finding that a potent Mexican variant

contains much more CBC than CBD (Turner et al., 1975). Whether the

presence of CBC influences the pharmacological activity of -9-THC,

as has been reported for CBD and CBN, remains to be determined.

The continuing chemical elucidation of the constituents of cannabis

has produced several results: Two new neutral cannabinoids, cannabichromevarin and cannabigerovarin -- propyl homologues of CBD and

cannabigerol -- have been found (Shoyama et al., 1975); the butyl

homologues of -9-THC, CBN and CBD have also been identified in

cannabis (Harvey, 1976), as well as the mono- and sesqui-terpene

constituents (Hendriks et al., 1975); the chemistry of both the

terpene substances of cannabis and the nitrogen-containing compounds has been reviewed by Hanus (1975a, 1975b); meanwhile,

Novotny et al. (1976a) have undertaken additional work on marihuana

sterol constituents which are of particular interest because they

may act as precursors of carcinogenic hydrocarbons.

The stability of cannabis preparations, including pure cannabinoids, under various conditions has been described by Fairbairn

et al. (1976) who report that exposure to light is the greatest

single factor in the loss of cannabinoids: The decomposition of -

9-THC by light does not yield CBN, but air oxidation does. The

results demonstrate that cannabinoids stored in solution in the

dark at room temperature are reasonably stable for one to two years.

More new cannabinoids have been synthesized and studied for pharmacological activity. Another report describes the rapid synthesis

1Kraatz & Korte, 1976a, 1976b; Kurth et al., 1976a, 1976b; Lemberger

& Rowe, 1975; Pars et al., 1976; Razdan & Dalzell, 1976; Razdan et

al., 1976a, 1976b, 1976c, 1976d; Weiner & Zilkha, 1975; Winn et al.;

1976.

- 57 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 5
of small quantities of 32 different cannabinoids, including the

major naturally occurring agents (Crombie & Crombie, 1975). Such

small quantities can be useful as reference standards for the

qualitative analysis of unknown samples of cannabinoids. The

synthesis of human metabolites continues to be important because of

the demonstrated activity of some of these substances. New syntheses of the 11-hydroxy-, 8- -, and 8-ß-hydroxy metabolites of -9-

THC have been reported as well as the first synthesis of the 8-

ll-, the 8-ß,11-dihydroxy and the 11-nor- -9-THC-9-carboxylic acid

metabolites (Pitt et al., 1975). Additionally, Lander et al. (1976)

described another synthesis of CBD and the first syntheses of some

of its metabolites.

The pharmacological properties of the various types of marihuana

preparation are not known, but numerous reports have suggested some

differences. For example, marihuana prepared by a boiling water

treatment was found to be significantly enriched in cannabinoids,

including -9-THC (Segelman et al. , 1975), which may account for the

apparent increased activity of such preparations. The residual

marihuana “teas” (boiled-water extracts) may also exhibit some

pharmacological activity; however, a water-soluble fraction

obtained by smoking cannabis through a water pipe was found to be

inactive in a variety of pharmacological tests (Savaki et al.,

1976).

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES: DETECTION

Various techniques continue to be developed for the analysis of

cannabinoids in cannabis preparations and in experimental animal

tissues. Gas-liquid chromatography with a solid injection procedure (Rasmussen, 1975a) has been combined with an on-column silylation of cannabinoids (Rasmussen, 1975b) in order to obviate the need

for extraction. Thus, the volatile constituents released from the

injected material are cold trapped and the derivatives of the

trapped compounds are formed directly on the column.

A combination of liquid, thin-layer and gas chromatography has been

used to separate synthetic mixtures of the major naturally occurring cannabinoids and their mono-oxygenated metabolites (Fonseka &

Widman, 1976). In a similar study, the mono- and dihydroxy cannabinoids were determined by combined gas chromatography and mass

spectrometry (Harvey & Paton, 1975), and good chromatographic separations of the hydroxylated derivatives were obtained with the

formation of homologous trialkylsilyl derivatives. In another

report, the first mass fragmentographic assay for 11-hydroxy- -9-

THC was based on the derivatization of the phenol moiety by extractive alkylation (Rosenfeld & Taguchi, 1976).

High-pressure liquid chromatography has been used for the comparative analysis of cannabis samples (Smith, 1975; Wheals & Smith,

1975; Wheals, 1976) and the investigators maintain that this technique is superior to gas-liquid chromatography because both acid

- 58 -
and neutral cannabinoids can be quantitated without prior derivatization. A relatively simple thin-layer chromatographic technique

using silica gel plates impregnated with a tertiary amine, triethylamine, yielded good resolution of the major cannabinoids

(Vinson & Hooyman, 1975), and the plates were shown to be little

affected by storage for 10 weeks. In addition, a new and potentially very sensitive chromatographic technique, plasma chromatography, has been used to measure -9-THC (Karasek et al., 1975).

The Rutgers Identification for Marihuana test appears to be relatively specific, since a total of 526 non-marihuana plant samples

representing 427 different plant species failed to yield any false

positive results (Segelman & Segelman, 1976). Fluorescent techniques for cannabinoid analyses also continue to be developed.

Simple heating can convert the major naturally occurring cannabinoids into fluorescent products (Dionyssion-Asterion & Miras,

1975) and the test is sensitive enough to detect cannabinoid

substances in the urine of marihuana users. Bourdon (1976) has used

another fluorometric method to determine -9-THC and its metabolites in urine.

It should also be noted that two major reviews in this area have

appeared this year: Mechoulam et al. (1976) and Nahas et al.

(1976).

METABOLISM

Investigations of the biological disposition of the cannabinoids

continue to yield a greater understanding of factors affecting

their metabolism, the nature of the metabolites, their distribution

in the body and, finally, the routes of their excretion.

The in‘ vitro metabolism studies of the cannabinoids have been

pursued because adequate cannabinoid concentrations can be recovered from such reaction systems, thereby facilitating the identification of some cannabinoid matabolites, which are of interest

because of their potential pharmacological activity. The metabolism of -9-THC has been compared in the isolated, perfused dog lung

with that in a dog liver microsomal preparation (Widman et al.,

1975). The major metabolites produced by the liver microsomes were

8- - and 8-ß-hydroxy- -9-THC; in contrast, the major metabolites

recovered in the dog lung experiments were 3"- and 4"-hydroxy- -9-

THC. This is the first report of the formation of these side-chain

hydroxylated compounds. The differential results of these experiments may provide an explanation of the impression that the route of

administration can influence some pharmacological and toxicological

effects of marihuana. The potential role of the pulmonary metabolism of cannabinoids in their pharmacology and toxicology is also

emphasized by the report that rat lung homogenates metabolize -9-

THC differently than does rat liver; hence, the characteristic

activity of the drug may depend on the mute of administration

(Cohen, 1975).

- 59 -
The in vitro metabolism of CBN has been compared in rat and in

rabbit liver preparations (Widman, 1975). In both of these species,

the 11-hydroxy derivative is a major metabolite and side-chain

hydroxylated compounds also form; the latter are minor in the rat,

but in the rabbit 4"-hydroxy-CBN is a major product. In general,

the metabolism of CBN resembles that of -9-THC because hydroxylations occur in the C-11 position and in various positions in the

pentyl side chain. In a similar study of the in vitro metabolism of

CBD by rat liver microsomes, eight monohydroxylated metabolites

were isolated (Martin et al., 1976). As reported previously, the

major metabolite was 11-hydroxy-CBD, and the second most important

was 8- -hydroxy-CBD. Hydroxylations also occurred in all positions

of the pentyl side chain.

Some in vivo and in vitro effects of -9-THC have been reported on

drug metabolism by rat liver microsomes (Mitra et al., 1976). In

doses of 50 mg/kg, six hours after intraperitoneal administration,

-9-THC inhibited microsomal metabolism, as measured by the activity of two demethylases and aniline hydroxylase. Repeated treatment (21 days) with a daily dose of 10 mg/kg resulted in complete

inhibition of the two demethylases without any effect on the

hydroxylase. In vitro, 2, 4, and 8 mcg drug/mg protein inhibited

both demethylases and the hydroxylase. In vivo and acutely, the

inhibition was of the mixed type for the two demethylases but only

non-competitive for the hydroxylase. With repeated treatment, the

inhibition of the demethylases was only of the competitive type,

which is similar to the results obtained in vitro. In the latter

instance, however, the inhibition of aniline hydmxylase activity

was of the mixed type.

Previous investigators have demonstrated the long persistence of

cannabinoids in tissues after their administration and the nature

of the long-retained metabolites has now been defined (Leighty et

al., 1976): They are 11-acyloxy derivatives, primarily conjugates

of palmitic and stearic acids, which accounts for their decreased

polarity relative to the parent drugs. The long retention of these

metabolites implies kinetically that they will accumulate with

repeated drug exposure; however, because the pharmacological properties of these metabolites are unknown, the biological significance of such an accumulation is difficult to determine.

Using a method combining gas chromatography and mass spectrometry

for measuring cannabis metabolites in urine, Kelley and Arnold

(1976) were able to identify both CBN and 11-hydroxy- -9-THC samples obtained from marihuana users. This identification required

the use of hydrolized urine samples and selected ion monitoring.

The limit of detection of the cannabinoids was about 1 mcg/ml urine.

The general problems associated with the detection of cannabinoids

in body fluids have been summarized by Lemberger (1976).

The kinetic interaction between -9-THC and CBD and -9-THC and CBN

has also been described. The simultaneous intravenous administration of CBD and -9-THC does not affect the elimination rate of

either of the individual cannabinoids; in contrast, in the presence

- 60 -
of CBN the rate of clearance of -9-THC was greatly enhanced,

although that of CBN remained unchanged (Levy & McCallum, 1975).

This kinetic interaction may account for the previously reported

antagonism between CBN and -9-THC.

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

University of Utah

- 61 -
REFERENCES

Chemistry and Metabolism

Bourdon, R. Fluorometric determination of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

and its metabolites in urine. European Journal of Toxicology, 9:11-21 (1976).

Cohen, G.M. Pulmonary metabolism of inhaled substances and possible relationship with carcinogenicity and toxicity. In

Junod, A.F. and de Haller, R. (eds.), Lung Metabolism. New

York, NY: Academic Press, 1975, pp. 185-200.

Crombie, L. and Crombie, W.M.L. Cannabinoid bis-homologues: Miniaturized synthesis and GLC study. Phytochemistry, 14:213-

220 (1975).

Dionyssion-Asterion, A. and Miras, C.J. Fluorescence of cannabinoids. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 27: 135-137

(1975).

Fairbairn, J.W., Liebmann, J.A. and Rowan, M.G. The stability of

cannabis and its preparation on storage. Journal of Pharmacy

and Pharmacology, 28:1-7 (1976).

Fonseka, K. and Widman, M. Chromatographic separation of cannabinoids and their monooxygenated derivatives. Journal of

Chromatography, 120:343-348 (1976).

Hanus, L. The present state of knowledge of the chemistry of

substances of cannabis sativa L. III. Terpenoid substances.

Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis, 73:233-239

(1975a).

Hanus, L. The present state of knowledge of the chemistry of

substances of cannabis sativa L. IV. Nitrogen containing

compounds. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis,

73:241-244 (1975b).

Harvey, D.J. Characterization of the butyl homologues of -1-

tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabinol and cannabidiol in samples

of cannabis by combined gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 28:280-285

(1976).

Harvey, D.J. and Paton, W.D.M. Use of trimethylsilyl and other

homologous trialkylsilyl derivatives for the separation and

characterization of mono- and dihydroxycannabinoids by combined gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. Journal of

Chromatography, 109:73-80 (1975).

Hendriks, H., Malingre, T.M., Batterman, S. and Bos, R. Mono-and

sesqui-terpene hydrocarbons of the essential oil of cannabis

sativa. Phytochemistry, 14:814-815 (1975).

- 62 -
Holley, J.H., Hadley, K.W. and Turner, C.E. Constituents of

cannabis sativa L. XI. Cannabidiol and cannabichromene in

samples of known geographical origin. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 64:892-895 (1975).

Karasek, F.W., Karasek, D.E. and Kim, S.H. Detection of lysergic

acid and diethylamide, -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and related

compounds by plasma chromatography. Journal of Chromatography, 105:345-352 (1975).

Kelley, J.A. and Arnold, K.P. Detection of urinary cannabis

metabolites: A preliminary investigation. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 21:252-262 (1976).

Kraatz, U. and Korte, F. Synthesis of 1-deoxy- -8-tetrahydrocannabinol: Structure-activity relationship of -8-tetrahydrocannabinol. Tetrahedron, 23:1977-1978 (1976a).

Kraatz, U. and Korte, F. Synthesis of 8-methyl- -8-tetrahydrocannabinols. Chemische Berichte, 109:24852489 (1976b).

Kurth, H.J., Kraatz, U. and Korte, F. Synthesis of thio-cannabinoids. Chemische Berichte, 109:2164-2174 (1976a).

Kurth, H.J., Kraatz, U. and Korte, F. Synthesis of 1-mercapto

cannabinoids. J. Ann. Chem., 7-8:1313-1318 (1976b).

Lander, N., Ben-Zvi, Z., Mechoulam, R., Martin, B., Nordqvist, M.

and Agurell, S. Total syntheses of cannabidiol and -1-

tetrahydrocannabinol metabolites. Journal of the Chemical

Society, 1:8-16 (1976).

Leighty, E.G., Fentiman, A.F. and Foltz, R.L. Long-retained metabolites of -9- and -8-tetrahydrocannabinols identified as

novel fatty acid conjugates. Research Communications in

Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 14:13-28 (1976).

Lemberger , L . Pharmacokinetics of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and its

metabolites: Importance and relationship in developing methods for detecting cannabis in biological fluids. In Nahas,

G.G., Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Cellular

Effects. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1976, pp. 169-178.

Lemberger, L. and Rowe, H. Clinical pharmacology of nabilone, a

cannabinol derivative. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18:720-726 (1975).

Levy, S. and McCallum, N.K. Cannabidiol and its pharmacokinetic

interaction with -1-tetrahydmcannabinol. Experientia,

31:1268-1269 (1975).

Marihuana and Health, Fifth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1975.

- 63 -
Martin, B., Nordqvist, M., Agurell, S., Lindgren, J.W., Leander, K.

and Binder, M. Identification of monohydroxylated metabolites of cannabidiol formed by rat liver. Journal of

Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 28:275-279 (1976).

Mechoulam, R., McCallum, N.K. and Burstein, S. Recent advances in

the chemistry and biochemistry of cannabis. Chemical Reviews, 76:75-112 (1976).

Mitra, G., Poddar, M.K. and Ghosh, J.J. In vivo and in vitro

effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on rat liver microsomal

drug-metabolizing enzymes. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 35:523-530 (1976).

Nahas, G.G., Paton, W.D.M. and Idanpaan-Heikkila, J.E. (eds.) Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Cellular Effects. New

York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1976.

Novotny, M., Lee, M.L., Low, C.-E. and Maskarinec, M.P. Highresolution gas chromatography/mass spectrometric analysis of

tobacco and marijuana sterols. Steroids, 27:665-673 (1976a).

Novotny, M., Lee, M.L., Low, C.-E. and Raymond, A. Analysis of

marijuana samples from different origins by high-resolution

gas-liquid chromatography for forensic application. Analytical Chemistry, 48:24-29 (1976b).

Pars, H.G., Granchelli, F.E., Razdan, R.K., Keller, J.K., Teiger,

D.C., Rosenberg, F.J. and Harris, L.S. Drugs derived from

cannabinoids. 1. Nitrogen analogs, benzopyranopyridines and

benzopyranopyrroles. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:445-

454 (1976).

Pitt, C.G., Fowler, M.S., Sathe, S., Srivastava, S.C. and Williams,

D.L. Synthesis of metabolites of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Journal of the American Chemical Society, 97:3798-3802

(1975).

Rasmussen, K.E. Analysis of cannabinoids in cannabis by means of

gas-liquid chromatography and solid injection. Journal of

Chromatography, 109:175-176 (1975a).

Rasmussen, K.E. On-column silylation of cannabinoids after injection of solid plant material and cold trapping. Journal of

Chromatography, 114:250-254 (1975b).

Razdan, R.K. and Dalzell, H.C. Drugs derived from cannabinoids. 6.

Synthesis of cyclic analogues of dimethylheptylpyran. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:719-721 (1976).

Razdan, R.K., Handrick, G.R., Dalzell, H.C., Howes, J.F., Winn, M.,

Plotnikoff, N.P., Dodge, P.W. and Dren, A.T. Drugs derived

from cannabinoids. 4. Effect of alkyl substitution in sulfur

and carbocyclic analogs. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry,

19:552-554 (1976a).

- 64 -
Razdan, R.K., Howes, J.F., Uliss, D.B., Dalzell, H.C., Handrick,

G.R. and Dewey, W.L. (-)-8-ß-hydroxymethyl- -1-tetrahydrocannabinol: A novel physiologically active analog of -1-

tetrahydrocannabinol. Experientia, 32:416-417 (1976b).

Razdan, R.K., Terris, B.Z., Handrick, G.R., Dalzell, H.C., Pars,

H.G., Howes, J.F., Plotnikoff, N., Dodge, P., Dren, A.,

Kyncl, J., Shoer, L. and Thompson, W.R. Drugs derived from

cannabinoids. 3. Sulfur analogs, thiopyranobenzopyrans and

thienobenzopyrans. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:549-

551 (1976c).

Razdan, R.K., Terris, B.Z., Pars, H.G., Plotnikoff, N.P., Dodge,

P.W., Dren, A.T., Kyncl, J. and Somani, P. Drugs derived from

cannabinoids. 2. Basic esters of nitrogen and carbocyclic

analogs. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:454-460 (1976d).

Rosenfeld, J.M. and Taguchi, V.Y. Mass fragmentographic assay for

11-hydroxy- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol from plasma. Analytical

Chemistry, 48:726-729 (1976).

Savaki, H.E., Cunha, J., Carlini, E.A. and Kephalas, T.A. Pharmacological activity of three fractions obtained by smoking

cannabis through a water pipe. Bulletin on Narcotics, 28:49-

56 (1976).

Segelman, A.B. and Segelman, F.H. The relative specificity of the

RIM test. Journal of Chromatography, 123:79-100 (1976).

Segelman, A.B., Sofia, R.D. and Segelman, F.H. Cannabis sativa L.

(Marihuana). VI. Variations in marihuana preparations and

usage -- chemical and pharmacological consequences. In

Rubin, V. (ed.), Cannabis and Culture. The Hague: Mouton,

1975.

Shoyama, Y., Hirano, H., Oda, M., Somehara, T. and Nishioka, I.

Cannabichromevarin and cannabigerovarin, two pmpyl homologues of cannabichromene and cannabigerol. Chemical and

Pharmaceutical Bulletin, 23:1894-1895 (1975).

Smith, R.N. High-pressure liquid chromatography of cannabis.

Identification of separated constituents. Journal of Chromatography, 115:101-106 (1975).

Turner, C.E., Fetterman, P.S., Hadley, K.W. and Urbanek, J.E.

Constituents of Cannabis sativa L. X. Cannabinoid profile of

a Mexican variant and its possible correlation to pharmacological activity. Acta Pharmaceutics Jugoslavica, 25:7-15

(1975).

Vinson, J.A. and Hooyman, J.E. Simple thin-layer chromatographic

system for the separation of cannabinoids. Journal of Chromatography, 106:196-199 (1975).

- 65 -
Weiner, B.-Z and Zilkha, A. Monomers and polymers of -1-(6)-

tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Chimica Therapeutica

(European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry), 10:79-83 (1975).

Wheals, B.B. Forensic aspects of high-pressure liquid chromatography. Journal of Chromatography, 122:85-105 (1976).

Wheals, B.B. and Smith, R.N. Comparative cannabis analysis. A

comparison of high-pressure liquid chromatography with other

chromatographic techniques. Journal of Chromatography,

105:396-400 (1975).

Widman, M. In vitro metabolism of cannabinol in rat and rabbit

liver. Acta Pharmaceutics Suecica, 12:385-392 (1975).

Widman, M., Nordqvist, M., Dollery, C.T. and Briant, R.H. Metabolism of -1-tetrahydrocannabinol by the isolated perfused

dog lung. Comparison with in vitro liver metabolism. Journal

of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 27:842-848 (1975).

Winn, M., Arendsen, D., Dodge, P., Dren, A., Dunnigan, D., Hallas,

R., Hwang, K., Kyncl, J., Lee, Y.-H., Plotnikoff, N., Young,

P., Zaugg, H., Dalzell, H. and Razdan, R.K. Drugs derived

from cannabinoids. 5. -6a,10a-tetrahydrocannabinol and

heterocyclic analogs containing aromatic side chains. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:461-471 (1976).

- 66 -
Chapter 3

TOXICOLOGlCAL AND

PHARMACOLOGlCAL EFFECTS

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

The toxicological research reviewed in the present Marihuana and

Health Report generally represents extensions of some previous

lines of investigation. For example, the toxicity of the cannabinoids has been determined with high and low doses, by different

routes of administration, under both acute and chronic conditions.

The conclusions from these studies are consistent with those drawn

from other experiments; that is, marihuana or its principal psychoactive constituent, -9-THC, produces a variety of reversible

effects, but they do not cause any irreversible pathological

changes. These observations do not preclude the possibility that

marihuana may produce some irreversible functional changes,

although no such evidence has yet been presented.

The toxicological assessment of marihuana must, by necessity, consider the known adverse effects of tobacco smoke on the lung and on

the cardiovascular system. Experimentally discernible effects on

the lung were reportedly produced by chronic exposure of both rats

and dogs to marihuana smoke. In fact, the lung is the only organ to

display pathological changes as a consequence of chronic exposure

to marihuana smoke. Chronic administration of the drug by other

routes of administration does not produce any demonstrable pathology, emphasizing that the direct effects of marihuana smoke on the

lung represent a potential toxic factor in humans. The problem is

that the toxic effects of marihuana, like those of tobacco, cannot

be completely evaluated in animal studies because they, too, may

require many years of exposure to manifest themselves. On the basis

of the human experience with chronic exposure to tobacco smoke,

however, similar toxic effects can be expected in response to

marihuana smoke. Whether these toxic effects will be more or less

prominent with marihuana use than they are with tobacco is not

known. Of immediate interest in this regard is the report that the

carcinogenic hydrocarbon content of marihuana smoke is greater than

that of tobacco smoke. This observation suggests the possibility

that chronic, long-term use of marihuana carries as great, or

greater, carcinogenic liability than does the use of tobacco.

The current Report cites numerous publications dealing with the

teratogenic potential of -9-THC. Despite some earlier claims to

the contrary, there is general agreement that the drug is not

teratogenic, except possibly in high doses. There is, however, a

growing body of evidence from a wide variety of experimental

situations that -9-THC has the potential, especially in high

doses, for the disruption of cellular processes involved in growth

and development. Whether this is a unique property of marihuana or

whether it is an effect that is characteristic of high doses of any

- 67 -
cellular depressant is not known.

The results described below from the studies of the influence of

9-THC on the activity of the adrenal cortex are of special interest

because of the species differences observed. In rats the drug

produced a marked increase in the activity of the adrenal cortex,

but no such effect occurred in the rabbit. The difference in

response between species emphasizes that results obtained in animal

studies are at best only suggestive of potential effects in humans.

The complexity of the effects of -9-THC on an endocrine function is

further illustrated by the reports of antiestrogenic activity on

the uterus of normal rats but estrogenic activity on the uterus of

ovariectomized animals. The apparent contradiction remains to be

resolved.

Various aspects of the pharmacology of marihuana and its constituents continued to be examined in detail; and during the past year

some important contributions were made to our understanding of: 1)

factors that affect the fate of the drugs in the body; 2) the

interactions of marihuana constituents with the effects of other

drugs; and 3) the pharmacological effects of the constituents. A

study of the nature of the binding of -9-THC to plasma proteins

indicated that the drug is bound by lipoproteins and by albumin.

The binding to lipoproteins does not appear to be related to the

drug's lipid solubility because other lipid soluble drugs are not

necessarily bound to this plasma protein fraction. The influence of

some experimental variables on the fate of -9-THC in the body was

also studied. The vehicle and the route of administration affected

absorption, tissue distribution and excretion; the vehicle alone

even influenced tissue distribution following intravenous administration, as did repeated daily treatment. These results, like those

of earlier similar studies, emphasize the importance of these

variables in determining the fate of cannabinoids in the body. In

turn, their fate may influence their pharmacological and toxicological manifestations.

Little attention has been given in the past to the means by which

cannabinoids are removed from the brain. The report described below

on the ability of the choroid plexus to actively accumulate -9-THC

suggests that this organ may transport the cannabinoids from the

brain into the cerebral spinal fluid. Whether this is, in fact, a

fate of the cannabinoids in the brain remains to be shown.

The Report contains additional descriptions of the central nervous

system effects. The anticonvulsant activity and its therapeutic

potential continue to be examined in different antiseizure tests

involving a variety of species. The results presented are generally

consistent with those of previous studies: The cannabinoids are

effective anticonvulsants in some seizure test systems but not in

others, and -9-THC exhibits excitatory properties, which distinguish it from cannabidiol (CBD). The results of these investigations again emphasize the similarities between CBD and diphenylhydantoin-like drugs, suggesting that the cannabinoids may be

effective clinically against grand mal but not absence seizures.

- 68 -
The cannabinoids' effects on a variety of neurochemical factors are

also noted. The basic assumption of such studies is that the

central nervous system effects of marihuana must have some neurochemical correlates. Chronic exposure of animals to marihuana

smoke produced changes in brain RNA and acetylcholinesterase activity, both of which coincided with behavioral changes. These results

are also significant because they essentially duplicate those previously obtained following oral administration of the drug. More

data are also presented to support previous contentions that some of

-9-THC's effects are mediated by an anticholinergic mechanism.

Physostigmine reversed some effects of -9-THC on the EEG; and -9-

THC inhibited acetylcholine synthesis, which may be associated with

a decreased turnover of acetylcholine. The effects of cannabinoids

on other putative transmitter systems, such as gamma-aminobutyric

acid, 5-hydroxytryptamine, norepinephrine, dopamine and monoamine

oxidase activity were also investigated in various experimental

situations; however, in most, but not all, instances, changes in

these neurotransmitter systems could not be related to central

effects.

In the cardiovascular studies, tolerance to the effect on cardiac

rate and on blood pressure continues to be reported; tolerance

developed to the hypotensive activity in hypertensive animals. The

results of a brain-blood flow study suggest that -9-THC can

significantly reduce blood flow to certain areas of the brain; such

alterations in flow may reflect regional functional changes. The

constriction of cranial blood vessels by -9-THC raises the possibility that there may be a pharmacological basis for the suggested

use of marihuana in the treatment of migraine.

A structure-activity study of the analgesic properties of cannabinoids has revealed that the 11-hydroxy metabolite of -9-THC is

many times more potent than is the parent compound; the activity of

the metabolite in a hot-plate test approaches that of morphine.

Naloxone, an opiate antagonist, also antagonizes this effect of the

cannabinoids. Another pharmacological relationship between the

cannabinoids and the opiates appears to exist: -9-THC attenuates

the naloxone-precipitated morphine-abstinence syndrome, an effect

noted in the 1975 Marihuana and Health Report, and confirmed by the

two investigations described in the current Report. CBD alone was

found to be ineffective in this test, but in combination with -9-

THC, it enhanced the abstinence-attenuation properties of -9-THC.

The effect of -9-THC on the abstinence syndrome may be selective

for the opiates because the drug was shown to exacerbate the

ethanol-abstinence reactions.

In addition to the drug interactions described above, -9-THC was

also observed to prolong ether anesthesia, which is antagonized by

CBD. Many cannabinoid-drug interactions probably result from the

ability of the cannabinoids to interfere with hepatic drug metabolism; however, since the duration of action of ether is not

limited by drug metabolism, the cannabinoid effects on ether anesthesia suggest a central nervous system locus of interaction. In

- 69 -
general, the cannabinoids are not anesthetics, but a potential for.

this effect is demonstrated by dimethylheptylpyran, which is an

anesthetic in dogs. This potential may account for the observed

cannabinoid interaction with ether.

TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS

Investigators have continued to evaluate the toxicity associated

with repeated exposure to high and low doses of cannabinoids

administered to different species by different routes of administration. One such study, which is similar to another report

(Thompson et al., 1975), was designed to determine systemic toxicity of -9-THC (dosages: 3-100 mg/kg/day) administered subcutaneously for 13 days to female rabbits (Banerjee et al., 1976). Some

metabolic effects were noted at both high and low doses; but, except

for anorexia and some local dermal irritation, -9-THC did not

produce any significant toxicity.

A previous study of marihuana inhalation toxicity in rats

(Rosenkrantz & Braude, 1974) has been extended from 23 days of

exposure to 87 days (Fleischman et al., 1975a). This is the first

report on the chronic effect of marihuana under conditions comparable to human use. Animals were exposed to daily doses of either

0.7, 2.0, or 4.0 mg/kg. The results demonstrated that rats exposed

daily to relatively low doses of -9-THC display a cumulative lethal

toxicity and that lethality was sex-linked to males. Cumulative

drug-related morphological changes were observed only in the lungs;

these changes included focal pneumonitis with the accmulation of

alveolar macrophages, polymorphonuclear leukocytes, and lymphocytes. Similar results were obtained in female dogs chronically

exposed (over 900 days) to inhalation of marihuana and tobacco smoke

(Roy et al., 1976). The ability of marihuana to affect adversely

pulmonary and peritoneal macrophages has also been studied (Huber

et al., 1975; Raz & Goldman, 1976).

As a means of facilitating the investigation of the carcinogenic

potential of marihuana smoke, a technique for the preparation of

marihuana cigarettes and for monitoring marihuana smoke condensate

samples has been reported by Patel and Gori (1975). An extensive

comparative analysis of the polynuclear hydrocarbon fractions of

marihuana smoke condensates indicates that there are more than 150

different such compounds present in marihuana smoke (Lee et al.,

1976). Similar results were obtained from the analysis of tobacco

smoke; marihuana smoke, however, contains higher amounts of the

carcinogenic hydrocarbons (Novotny et al., 1976) and evidence is

presented to show that the greater hydrocarbon content of marihuana

smoke may be due to the pyrolysis of cannabinoids.

Numerous reports concerning the teratogenic potential of -9-THC

have been published and three of these involve non-mammalian models

-- the zebra fish embryo (Thomas, 1975), chick embryo (Jakubovic et

al., 1976), and Tetrahymena pyriformis (McClean & Zimmerman, 1976).

- 70 -
In the zebra fish study, -9-THC produced morphological alterations

in the concentration range of 2.0 ppm, but in the chick embryo the

drug, in combination with ethanol, was non-teratogenic. -9-THC

did, however, depress growth or cell division and the synthesis of

protein and nucleic acids in both the chick embryo and in Tetrahymena. The relationship of these effects in non-mammalian systems

to teratogenicity in humans is not certain; however, it appears that

-9-THC has a potential for disruption of the cellular processes

involved in normal growth and development.

In past mammalian studies of marihuana teratogenicity, some conflicting results have been reported, probably because of species

differences, of differences in marihuana preparations, in dose,

route and time of administration during embryogenesis. Generally

speaking, however, -9-THC does not appear to be teratogenic in

mammals, except in high doses, These conclusions have been borne

out by several recent studies. The early reports of teratogenicity

in animals may have been related to impurities in marihuana preparations rather than to the use of high doses of -9-THC. The subject

of teratogenicity is reviewed by Fleischman et al. (1975b) and by

Joneja (1976).

In studies on the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal and -adrenal systems, -9-THC, both acutely and chronically, stimulates the adrenal

cortex in rats (Biswas et al., 1976); in the chronic experiments,

the stimulation of adrenocortical function is manifested by

increased functional properties in the fasciculata-reticularis

regions, as well as marked hypertrophy of the adrenals. These

findings are consistent with previous reports that -9-THC acutely

increases ACTH and corticosterone secretions in the rat. In another

study, the adrenal stimulatory effect of the cannabinoids in rats

was confirmed, and the effect abolished by hypophysectomy, implicating ACTH release as the mediator of the response (Maier & Maitre,

1975). The cannabinoids, however, did not affect adrenal function

in the rabbit.

In studies of the mode of the endocrine actions of -9-THC, microgram quantities of the drug were injected daily for one week into

the lateral ventricle of the brains of two groups of rats, prepuberal and mature males (Collu, 1976). The main purpose of the

investigation was to determine whether endocrine effects produced

by -9-THC are central in origin or are direct effects on target

organs. In prepuberal animals, prostate weights were reduced and

plasma and pituitary amounts of growth hormone were increased.

Pituitary concentrations of prolactin were increased in both groups

of rats, whereas adrenal weights and plasma corticosterone levels

were increased only in adults. The results demonstrate that -9-THC

can affect some endocrine functions by a central mechanism of

action. Furthermore, young and adult animals may respond differ1Banerjee et al., 1975a; Fleischman et al., 1975b; Joneja, 1976;

Mantilla-Plata et al., 1975.

- 71 -
ently to repeated drug exposure.

In order to elucidate the antiovulatory and decreased lactation

effects of -9-THC and their relationship to serum concentrations

of luteinizing hormone and of prolactin, rat experiments were

undertaken in which the drug was administered acutely in a high dose

(50 mg/kg) at the beginning of estrus (Chakravarty, 1975b). Under

these conditions, -9-THC produced a drastic reduction in serum

concentration of both hormones, which may account for the previously noted effects on ovulation and lactation.

Several studies have focused on cannabis effects on the uterus. The

acute and chronic administration of a cannabis extract to female

rats and mice (Chakravarty et al., 1975a; Dixit et al., 1975) and to

female gerbils (Dixit et al., 1976) results in antiestrogenic

effects on the uterus. The antiestrogen activity of cannabis was

also manifested on the monoamine oxidase activity in the rat uterus.

Estradiol decreases the activity, whereas cannabis extract

increases it in both control and estradiol-treated animals

(Chakravarty et al., 1976). In direct contrast to these antiestrogen observations, -9-THC (1-10 mg/day for 14 days) was shown

to have estrogen-like activity on the uterus of ovariectomized rats

(Solomon et al., 1976).

Effects on bone marrow activity have previously been noted, but

generally these effects have been observed in high-dose studies; -

9-THC (1 mg/kg/day) given to rats from the 2nd-30th day of life,

however, produced a significant myeloid hyperplasia with an accompanying blood granulocytosis, and, in the growing animal, it was

found that this effect persisted for up to four months after the end

of treatment (Giusti & Carnevale, 1975).

PHARMACOLOGICAL EFFECTS

The tissue distribution of -9-THC has been the general subject of

various investigations: Thus, the binding of -9-THC to rat and

human plasma proteins has been studied with the use of zonal

ultracentrifugation (Klausner et al., 1975). About 60 percent of

the drug in plasma was found to be associated with the lipoproteins,

the remaining 40 percent is bound to albumin; in addition to -9-

THC, several other lipid soluble drugs were bound by plasma proteins, but these drugs, unlike -9-THC, did not associate with the

lipoproteins. Therefore, the lipoprotein- -9-THC interaction is

not related simply to the drug's lipid solubility, and the nature of

the interaction remains to be determined.

In another study, the investigators evaluated the influence of

vehicle, route of administration and duration of treatment on the

tissue distribution and excretion of 14C- -9-THC (Mantilla-Plata &

Harbison, 1975). The vehicles were either saline with Tween 80,

bovine serum albumin, propylene glycol, or corn oil. Total 14C

content was measured in plasma, liver, brain, lung and fat. Both

vehicle and route of administration affected absorption and distri-

- 72 -
bution of the drug; furthermore, the results of intravenous administration showed that the vehicle alone influenced tissue distribution. Daily intravenous administration, compared with a single

such administration, resulted in relatively high concentrations of

14C in some tissues, but lower in others; such results emphasize

that valid comparisons of pharmacological and toxicological data

can only be made if the vehicle, route of administration, and

treatment schedules are the same.

Brain concentrations of many drugs are known to be regulated, in

part, by active transport processes in the choroid plexus; such may

also be the case for -9-THC, which has been shown to be actively

accumulated by this organ (Agnew et al., 1976). The uptake of -9-

THC is notable because it is much greater than for many other drugs

actively transported by the choroid plexus.

The subcellular tissue distribution of -9-THC and its metabolites

has been studied in relation to the effect of the drug on motor

activity (Malor et al., 1976) and in relation to the development of

tolerance (Martin et al., 1976). The results of the correlation

with motor activity indicate that there is no preferential intracellular site of accumulation and that there is, as a function of

time, a decrease in the relative specific activities of -9-THC and

its 11-hydroxy metabolite, with a concomitant increase in the

quantity of polar metabolites in all subcellular fractions. The

data suggest that the termination of the depressant effect on motor

activity is a consequence of the metabolism of -9-THC to pharmacologically inactive metabolites. The tolerance study revealed that,

in the dog, tolerance is not generally associated with any significant changes in the rate of metabolism, in peripheral tissue

distribution, in distribution between different areas of the brain,

or in intracellular distribution. The only impressive change in

intracellular distribution was found in the synaptic vesicle fraction, which contained 40 percent less radioactivity than did the

corresponding fraction from non-tolerant dogs. How this change

relates, if at all, to the mechanism of tolerance is not immediately

obvious.

The anticonvulsant properties of the cannabinoids continue to be

investigated in a variety of seizure models. -9-THC is effective

against photically induced seizures in acutely treated epileptic

chickens (Johnson et al., 1975). Dose-response data, however,

indicate that the drug has limited efficacy in this test. Against

pentylenetetrazol-induced seizures, -9-THC was ineffective in both

normal and epileptic chickens. The anticonvulsant effect of -9-

THC in gerbils that exhibit spontaneous seizures was also studied

(Ten Ham et al., 1975), and it was found that, acutely, these

seizures were abolished by -9-THC: however, there was a rapid

development of tolerance to the effect but not to the motor toxicity, which was exacerbated by repeated daily administration.

Another seizure model, the baboon, has been used to assess the

anticonvulsant properties of -8- and -9-THC against two different

types of seizure -- photogenic and kindled amygdaloid seizures

- 73 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 6
(Wada et al., 1975). The results show a differential effect: The

cannabinoids suppressed the kindled convulsions but had no effect

on susceptibility to photogenic seizures. In still another study,

this time in the rat, the effect of anticonvulsant doses of -9-THC

and CBD on the after-discharge potentials of the visually evoked

response was determined (Turkanis et al., in press). These potentials, like some of those associated with epileptic activity, are

known to be differentially sensitive to the major types of antiepileptics. In this test system, the potentials were suppressed

only by trimethadione-like drugs; they were unaffected by CBD and

diphenylhydantoin, but they were markedly augmented by either -9-

THC or pentylenetetrazol. The similarity in action between CBD and

diphenylhydantoin was described in other tests, as was the CNS

excitatory activity of anticonvulsant doses of -9-THC (Karler &

Turkanis, 1976a).

Finally, there is a report on an anticonvulsant benefit derived from

smoking marihuana (Consroe et al., 1975). This is a case history of

a 24-year-old with grand mal epilepsy who empirically determined

that he could control his seizures by combining marihuana use with

his therapeutic doses of phenobarbital and diphenylhydantoin.

Karler and Turkanis (1976b) have reviewed the antiepileptic potential of the cannabinoids.

In the area of cannabinoid effects on EEG; and other electrophysiological parameters, the role of cholinergic mechanisms in the

actions of -9-THC was tested by measuring the influence of physostigmine on the EEG response to -9-THC and on behavior in the

rabbit (Jones et al., 1975). -9-THC increased the mean cortical

voltage output, an effect reversed by physostigmine. Furthermore,

physostigmine restored the -9-THC-induced disruption of hippocampal theta rhythm, and antagonized the behavioral effects produced by -9-THC. In another study, -9-THC and pentobarbital were

shown to exert opposite effects on the activity of neurons in the

post-arcuate cortex (Boyd et al., 1975). Pentobarbital depressed

the activity, whereas -9-THC augmented it. These data are consistent with the authors' previous suggestion that the marihuanacaused distortions in sensory perception are related to the effects

o f -9-THC on the polysensory area of the cortex. Transmission at

the neuromuscular junction is also affected by -9-THC: Both

frequency and amplitude of miniature end-plate potentials are

increased, as is the duration of end-plate potentials; there is no

effect on the resting membrane potential of muscle fibers (Hoekman

et al., 1976). These findings suggest that the drug acts presynaptically in the manner of a local anesthetic. The work on -9-THC's

effects on nerve action potentials of single cells in Aplysia has

shown that the drug causes a depression in nerve cell excitability,

as measured by a reduction in the amplitude of action potentials and

an increase in the lability of spike conduction (Acosta-Urquidi &

Chase, 1975). These results are at variance with the previously

published negative effects of -9-THC on squid axons (Brady &

Carbone, 1973), but they are in agreement with the effect on rabbit

nonmyelinated peripheral nerve (Byck & Ritchie, 1973).

- 74 -
Among the numerous neurochemical studies which have been reported

is an investigation of the role of the gamma-aminobutyric acid

(GABA) system in rat cerebellum in relation to cannabinoid-induced

catalepsy (Edery & Gottesfeld, 1975). It was determined that the

GABA system was only affected by repeated drug administration;

therefore, the motor impairment produced by the cannabinoids is not

associated with changes in this transmitter system in the cerebellum. Other investigators studying the effect of -9-THC on monoamine oxidase activity of rat tissues (Banerjee et al., 1975b) have

found that in both acute and chronic treatment experiments the

enzyme activity of whole brain and hypothalamus was markedly

increased. Because of the effect on the hypothalamus, which is rich

in adrenergic neurons, the authors hypothesize that these neurons

may be an important site of action of -9-THC. Such a conclusion,

however, is not supported by another report of the failure of

relatively large doses of -9-THC to alter either rat brain concentrations of 5-HT, noradrenaline or dopamine, or the turnover of the

latter two amines (Bracs et al., 1975). A peripheral interaction

between -9-THC and adrenergic neurons, nevertheless, may occur.

Previous studies of the influence of cannabinoids on the uptake and

release of norepinephrine by isolated tissues have been extended to

a description of the mechanism of -9-THC accumulation by tissues

(Egan et al., 1976). In this work, the amount of -9-THC accumulated by the vas deferens was not affected in vitro by desmethylimipramine but was affected by the pretreatment of the animal with

6-hydroxydopamine. These results suggest that the tissue uptake

involves, at least in part, functionally competent adrenergic neurons, but that different mechanisms exist for the neuronal uptake of

-9-THC and norepinephrine.

The influence of subchronic and chronic exposure to marihuana smoke

on some cerebral and cerebellar neurochemical parameters has been

compared with earlier results obtained from the oral administration

of the drug (Luthra et al., 1976). The report shows that there are

changes in brain RNA and in acetylcholinesterase activity which

coincide with behavioral changes and that some of the effects

extended into the recovery period. In general, these results are

similar to those previously noted with oral administration of the

drug.

The effect of cannabinoids on the cholinergic system has been

examined in another study (Friedman et al., 1976) in which both -8-

and -9-THC were shown to inhibit acetylcholine synthesis in cortical, hypothalamic and striatal rat brain slices from animals pretreated with the drugs. The effect generally persisted after

repeated daily drug administration (five days). CBD, on the other

hand, did not affect acetylcholine synthesis. The mechanism of the

depression produced by -8- and -9-THC was unrelated to either

changes in choline acetyltransferase activity or the high-affinity

uptake system for choline, but the effect was antagonized by K+. In

contrast to an earlier report, these authors found that -8- and -

9-THC did not change the acetylcholine content of the brain;

therefore, they concluded that these cannabinoids depress the turnover of brain acetylcholine, which supports the proposal of various

- 75 -
investigators that the actions of -9-THC are, in part, anticholinergic.

The effect of -9-THC and 18 of its analogues on the high-affinity

uptake of serotonin into synaptosomes was investigated (Johnson et

al., 1976) and it was found that the cannabinoids in general

inhibited the serotonin uptake, but that the activity varied with

the different compounds. This action, however, was not restricted

only to those drugs that produce typical marihuana-like effects.

The authors concluded that the diverse pharmacological properties

of the cannabinoids may be a manifestation of composite effects on

many neurochemical systems, only one of which is the synaptic uptake

of serotonin.

The continuing interest in the cardiovascular effects of the cannabinoids has yielded one study of dogs in which -9-THC failed to

produce bradycardia in conscious animals after repeated administration (twice daily for seven days) (Jandhyala et al., 1976); although

the drug induced bradycardia in these animals under pentobarbital

anesthesia. The investigators propose that so-caused bradycardia

may be due to a -9-THC antagonism of the inhibitory action of

pentobarbital on central vagal centers. In another study, the

influence of 28 days of pretreatment with -9-THC (10 mg/kg

i.p./day) on body weight, body temperature, spontaneous motor

activity and cardiovascular responses in rats was measured (Adams

et al., 1976a). Tolerance developed to the effects on body weight

and temperature; however, the suppression of spontaneous motor

activity persisted. With respect to the cardiovascular effects,

tolerance developed to the hypotensive response and the bradycardia

normally elicited by -9-THC given intravenously to urethane-anesthetized rats. Nevertheless, tolerance did not develop to the

transient pressor response to intravenous -9-THC in these animals.

A study of the effects of cannabinoids on the isolated perfused rat

heart indicated that -8- and -9-THC, CBD and CBN, in bath concentrations of 10-30 mcm, all depressed myocardial contractility

(Smiley et al., 1976). Their effects on rate were variable: -8-

THC produced arrhythmias; -9-THC and CBN caused tachycardia; CBD

caused bradycardia, arrhythmias and asystole. The drugs accumulated in the heart; consequently, relatively high tissue concentrations were associated with the direct cardiac effects. The effects

of chronic -9-THC treatment on the blood pressure of metacorticoid

and renal hypertensive rats have also been described (Varma &

Goldbaum, 1975). Acutely, -9-THC produced a significant decrease

in systolic pressure and heart rate, whereas in chronically treated

animals (1-2 mg/kg s.c./day for 3-5 weeks) tolerance developed to

both of these effects.

Other studies of the effects of -9-THC on the vascular system have

also been reported. Blood flow to various areas of the brain was

measured in conscious, unrestrained rats (Goldman et al., 1975).

After -9-THC (1 mg/kg i.v.), animals displayed cataleptoid behavior; blood flow during this response was reduced significantly to

the dorsal hippocampus, hypothalamus, cerebellum and basal ganglia

- 76 -
but was unaffected to cortical areas. The authors suggest that the

observed blood flow changes reflect changes in functional and,

therefore, metabolic activity. Adams et al. (1976b) examined the

relationship of the vasoconstrictor effect of cannabinoids to the

peripheral sympathetic nervous system. Intravenously, -8- and -

9-THC produce, in the urethane-anesthetized rat, a transient pressor response followed by a prolonged hypotension; but intra-arterially, the drugs produce vasoconstriction in perfused hindquarters.

The pharmacological evidence presented suggests that this latter

response may be mediated by a release of norepinephrine from

adrenergic nerve terminals.

The past year has seen the appearance of another study on cannabis's

respiratory effects. In anesthetized dogs, -9-THC caused a marked

decrease in ventilatory response to carbon dioxide (Moss &

Friedman, 1976). Such a depression of respiratory function raises

the question of a possible toxic consequence of the use of marihuana

in combination with other respiratory depressants, such as ethanol.

Two reports have appeared on the antineoplastic activity of the

cannabinoids. -9- and -8-THC and CBN, but not CBD, retard the

growth of the Lewis lung adenocarcinoma in a dose-dependent fashion

(Munson et al. , 1975). -9-THC was ineffective against L1210 murine

leukemia, but was effective against Friend leukemia. It should be

noted that these tests involved the use of very high doses of the

cannabinoids (e.g., 200 mg/kg). In another study the mechanism of

the antitumor activity was investigated (White et al., 1976) and the

drug was shown to inhibit growth in tissue-cultured Lewis lung

adenocarcinoma cells and to decrease, in a dose-dependent manner,

DNA synthesis in the cultured cells. The inhibition occurs at some

point beyond the uptake of 3-H-thymidine.

Cur understanding of the analgesic property of the cannabinoids has

been extended with the results of a structure-activity analysis by

Wilson and May (1975). They evaluated the activity of a variety of

cannabinoids, including -8- and -9-THC and some of their metabolites with the hot-plate test. Their findings establish the fact

that the 11-hydroxy metabolites are many times more potent than the

parent compounds, and imply that the metabolites are responsible

for most, if not all, of the analgesic activity of -8- and -9-THC.

The potency of the metabolites in this test is nearly equal to that

of morphine. A mechanistic relationship to morphine may even exist

because the cannabinoid-caused analgesia is antagonized by

naloxone.

A relationship between the cannabinoids, morphine and naloxone was

noted in the Fifth Marihuana and Health Report (1975). -9-THC was

shown to attenuate the naloxone-precipitated morphine abstinence

syndrome. This property has now been confirmed in mice (Bhargava,

1976). Hine et al. (1975) have extended their original investigation of the effect to a study of the influence of CBD pretreatment

o n -9-THC antagonism of the abstinence syndrome. CBD alone had

little effect on the abstinence reactions, but it significantly

increased the abstinence-attenuation properties of -9-THC. The

- 77 -
effect of the cannabinoids on the abstinence syndrome may be

selective for the opiates because -9-THC has been shown to exacerbate abstinence reactions associated with withdrawal from ethanol

(Kralik et al., 1976).

In another cannabinoid-drug interaction study, pretreatment of mice

with either CBD or -9-THC prolonged methaqualone-induced sleep

time (Stone et al., 1976); the -9-THC effect was significantly

greater than that of CBD. Ether anesthesia is also prolonged by -

9-THC and to a more limited degree by CBN, but appears to be

antagonized by CBD (Malor et al., 1975).

The cannabinoids have been linked to a diversity of other pharmacological effects, including antitussive activity (Gordon et al.,

1976), antihistaminic activity (Turker et al., 1975), antibacterial

activity (Van Klingeren & Ten Ham, 1976), and a reduction in

platelet count (Levy & Livne, 1976) and in twitch tension of the

isolated guinea pig ileum (Rosell & Agurell, 1975).

A variety of subcellular effects have been investigated in relation

to the mechanisms of action of the cannabinoids. The psychoactive

cannabinoids exert an effect on spin-labelled liposomes similar to

that produced by subanesthetic doses of general anesthetics

(Lawrence & Gill, 1975). The cannabinoids have also been shown to

produce a transient decrease in the electrical resistance of black

lipid membranes generated from lecithin but not from a negatively

charged phospholipid membrane of phosphatidyl serine (Bach et al.,

1976). -9-THC in vitro causes a marked inhibition of monoamine

oxidase activity (MAO) in porcine brain mitochondria (Schurr &

Livne, 1976). Equal concentrations of CBD are inactive in this test

system, although when a combination of the two cannabinoids was

tested, CBD blocked the -9-THC effect. The individual cannabinoids were ineffective against MAO activity in liver mitochondria. These differential effects illustrate at a biochemical level

both drug and tissue selectivity of action. -9-THC administered to

rats both acutely and daily (10 mg/kg/day for 21 days) inhibited

liver microsomal lipid peroxidation (Mitra et al., 1975). The

effect was also obtained in vitro in control microsomes, as well as

in carbon tetrachloride-induced microsomes. -9-THC also elevates

plasma concentrations of non-esterified fatty acids in the mouse

(Malor et al., 1976). Unlike the response to epinephrine, the

mobilization of fat by -9-THC was not blocked by propranolol.

Several cannabinoids were previously shown to inhibit prostaglandin

synthesis in vitro, and this effect can also be caused by essential

oil components of marihuana (Burstein et al., 1975).

During the past year, two books on marihuana were published. They

both contain chapters specifically relevant to the pharmacology and

toxicology of marihuana (Braude & Szara, 1976; Nahas et al., 1976).

Ralph Karler, Ph.D.

University of Utah

- 78 -
REFERENCES

Toxicological and Pharmacological Effects

Acosta-Urquidi, J. and Chase, R. The effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on action potentials in the mollusc Aplysia.

Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology, 53:793-798

(1975).

Adams, M.D., Chait, L.D. and Earnhardt, J.T. Tolerance to the

cardiovascular effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the

rat. British Journal of Pharmacology, 56:43-48 (1976a).

Adams, M.D., Earnhardt, J.T., Dewey, W.L. and Harris, L.S. Vasoconstrictor actions of -8- and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in

the rat. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 196:649-656 (1976b).

Agnew, W.F., Rumbaugh, C.L. and Cheng, J.T. The uptake of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol in choroid plexus and brain cortex in

vitro and in vivo. Brain Research, 109:355-366 (1976).

Bach, D., Raz, A. and Goldman, R. The interaction of hashish

compounds with planar lipid bilayer membranes (BLM). Biochemical Pharmacology, 25:1241-1244 (1976).

Banerjee, A., Poddar, M.K., Saha, S. and Ghosh, J.J. Effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on monoamine oxidase activity of rat

tissue in vivo. Biochemical Pharmacology, 24: 1435-1436

(1975b).

Banerjee, B.N., Galbreath, C. and Sofia, R.D. Terotologic evaluation of synthetic -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in rats. Teratology, 11:99-102 (1975a).

Banerjee, B.N., Sofia, R.D., Erickson, D. and Ivins, N.J. Toxicity

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) administered subcutaneously for 13 days to female rabbits. Journal of Toxicology

and Environmental Health, 1:769-776 (1976).

Bhargava, H.N. Inhibition of naloxone-induced withdrawal in morphine dependent mice by 1-trans- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

European Journal of Pharmacology, 36:259-262 (1976).

Biswas, B., Dey, S.K. and Ghosh, J.J. Adrenocortical changes in

rats during acute and chronic administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Endocrinologia Experimentalis, 10:139-148

(1976).

Boyd, E.H., Boyd, E.S. and Brown, L.E. Differential effects of a

tetrahydrocannabinol and pentobarbital on cerebral cortical

neurones. Neuropharmacology, 14:533-536 (1975).

- 79 -
Brats, P., Jackson, D.M. and Chesher, G.B. The effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on brain amine concentration and turnover in whole rat brain and in various regions of the brain.

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 27:713-715 (1975).

Brady, R.O. and Carbone, E. Comparison of the effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol, 11-hydroxy- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol,

and ethanol on the electrophysiological activity of the giant

axon of the squid. Neuropharmacology, 12:601-605 (1973).

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.) Pharmacology of Marihuana. New

York, NY: Raven Press, 1976.

Burstein, S., Varanelli, C. and Slade, L.T. Prostaglandins and

cannabis. III. Inhibition of biosynthesis by essential oil

components of marihuana. Biochemical Pharmacology, 24:1053-

1054 (1975).

Byck, R. and Ritchie, J.M. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Effects on

mammalian nonmyelinated nerve fibers. Science, 180:84-85

(1973).

Chakravarty, I., Sengupta, D., Bhattacharya, P. and Ghosh, J.J.

Effect of treatment with cannabis extract on the water and

glycogen contents of the uterus in normal and estradioltreated prepubertal rats. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 34:513-516 (1975a).

Chakravarty, I., Sengupta, D., Bhattacharya, P. and Ghosh, J.J.

Effect of cannabis extract on the uterine monoamine oxidase

activity of normal and estradiol treated rats. Biochemical

Pharmacology, 25:377-378 (1976).

Chakravarty, I., Sheth, S.R. and Ghosh, J.J. Effect of acute -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol treatment on serum luteinizing hormone

and prolactin levels in adult female rats. Fertility and

Sterility, 26:947-948 (1975b).

Cohen, G.M. Pulmonary metabolism of inhaled substances and possible relationship with carcinogenicity and toxicity. In

Junod, A.F. and de Haller, R. (eds.), Lung Metabolism. New

York, NY: Academic Press, 1975.

Collu, R. Endocrine effects of chronic intraventricular administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol to prepuberal and adult

male rats. Life Sciences, 18:223-230 (1976).

Consroe, P.F., Wood, G.C. and Buchsbaum, H. Anticonvulsant nature

of marihuana smoking. Journal of the American Medical Association, 234:306-307 (1975).

Dixit, V.P., Arya, M. and Lohiya, N.K. The effect of chronically

administered cannabis extract on the female genital tract of

mice and rats. Endocrinologia, 66:365-368 (1975).

- 80 -
Dixit, V.P., Arya, M. and Lohiya, N.K. Mechanism of action of

chronically administered cannabis extract on the female genital tract of gerbils. Indian Journal of Physiology and

Pharmacology, 20:38-41 (1976).

Edery, H. and Gottesfeld, Z. The gamma-aminobutyric acid system in

rat cerebellum during cannabinoid-induced cataleptoid state.

British Journal of Pharmacology, 54:406-408 (1975).

Egan, S.M., Graham, J.D.P. and Lewis, M.J. The uptake of tritiated

-1-tetrahydrocannabinol by the isolated vas deferens of the

rat. British Journal of Pharmacology, 56:413-416 (1976).

Feinberg, I., Jones, R., Walker, J., Cavness, C. and Floyd, T.

Effects of marihuana extract and tetrahydrocannabinol on

electroencephalographic sleep patterns. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 19:782-794 (1976).

Fleischman, R.W., Hayden, D.W., Braude, M.C. and Rosenkrantz, H.

Chronic inhalation toxicity in rats. Toxicology and Applied

Pharmacology, 34:467-478 (1975a).

Fleischman, R.W., Hayden, D.W., Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C.

Terotologic evaluation of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice,

including a review of the literature. Teratology, 12:47-50

(1975b).

Friedman, E., Hanin, I. and Gershon, S. Effect of tetrahydrocannabinols on 3-H-acetylcholine biosynthesis in various rat

brain slices. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental

Therapeutics, 196:339-345 (1976).

Giusti, G.W. and Carnevale, A. Myeloid hyperplasia in growing rats

after chronic treatment with -9-THC at behavioral doses.

Archives of Toxicology, 34:169-172 (1975).

Goldman, H., Dagirmanjian, R., Drew, W.G. and Murphy, S. -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol alters flow of blood to subcortical

areas of the conscious rat brain. Life Sciences, 17:477-482

(1975).

Gordon, R., Gordon, R.J. and Sofia, R.D. Antitussive activity of

some naturally occurring cannabinoids in anesthetized cats.

European Journal of Pharmacology, 35:309-313 (1976).

Hine, B., Torrelio, M. and Gershon, S. Interactions between

cannabidiol and -9-THC during abstinence in morphinedependent rats. Life Sciences, 17:851-858 (1975).

Hoekman, T.B., Dettbarn, W.-D. and Klausner, H.A. Actions of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on neuromuscular transmission in the rat

diaphragm. Neuropharmacology, 15:315-319 (1976).

- 81 -
Huber, G.L., Simmons, G.A., McCarthy, C.R., Cutting, M.B.,

Laguarda, R. and Pereira, W. Depressant effect of marihuana

smoke on antibacterial activity of pulmonary alveolar macrophages. Chest, 68:769-773 (1975).

Jakubovic, A., McGeer, P.L. and Fitzsimmons, R.C. Effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and ethanol on body weight, protein and

nucleic acid synthesis in chick embryos. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, 1:441-447 (1976).

Jandhyala, B.S., Mallory, K.P. and Buckley, J.P. Effects of chronic

administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on the heart rate

of mongrel dogs. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 14:201-204 (1976).

Johnson, D.D., McNeill, J.R., Crawford, R.D. and Wilcox, W.C.

Epileptiform seizures in domestic fowl. V. The anticonvulsant activity of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Canadian Journal

of Physiology and Pharmacology, 53:1007-1013 (1975).

Johnson, K.M., Dewey, W.L. and Harris, L.S. Some structural

requirements for inhibition of high-affinity synaptosomal

serotonin uptake by cannabinoids. Molecular Pharmacology,

12:345-352 (1976).

Joneja, M.G. A study of teratological effects of intravenous,

subcutaneous and intragastric administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 36:151-162 (1976).

Jones, B.C., Consroe, P.F. and Akins, F. Physostigmine-induced

reversal of EEG and behavioral effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 6:204-206

(1975).

Karler, R. and Turkanis, S.A. The development of tolerance and

“reverse tolerance” to the anticonvulsant activity of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. In Braude, M.C. and

Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York, NY:

Raven Press, 1976a, pp. 299-312.

Karler, R. and Turkanis, S.A. The antiepileptic potential of the

cannabinoids. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R. (eds.), The

Therapeutic Potential of Cannabis. New York, NY: Plenum,

(1976b), pp. 383-398.

Klausner, H.A., Wilcox, H.G. and Dingell, J.V. The use of zonal

ultracentrifugation on the investigation of the binding of -

9-tetrahydrocannabinol by plasma lipoproteins. Drug Metabolism and Disposition, 3:314-319 (1975).

Kralik, P., Ho, B.T. and Matthews, H.R. Effect of -9-THC on

ethanol withdrawal in mice. Experientia, 32:723-725 (1976).

- 82 -
Lawrence, D.K. and Gill, E.W. The effects of -1-tetrahydrocannabinol and other cannabinoids on spin-labeled liposomes

and their relationship to mechanisms of general anesthesia.

Molecular Pharmacology, 11:595-602 (1975).

Lee, M.L., Novotny, M. and Bartle, K.D. Gas chromatography/mass

spectrometric and nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometric

studies of carcinogenic polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon in

tobacco and marijuana smoke condensates. Analytical Chemistry, 48:405-416 (1976).

Levy, R., and Livne, A. Mode of action of hashish compounds in

reducing blood platelet count. Biochemical Pharmacology,

25:359-360 (1976).

Luthra, Y.K., Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C. Cerebral and

cerebellar neurochemical changes and behavioral manifestations in rats chronically exposed to marijuana smoke. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 35:455-465 (1976).

Maier, R. and Maitre, L. Steroidogenic and lipolytic effects of

cannabinols in the rat and the rabbit. Biochemical Pharmacology, 24:1695-1699 (1975).

Malor, R., Chesher, G.B. and Jackson, D.M. The effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on plasma concentrations of nonesterified fatty acids in the mouse. Journal of Pharmacy and

Pharmacology, 28:652-654 (1976).

Valor, R., Jackson, D.M. and Chesher, G.B. The effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol and cannabinol on ether

anesthesia in mice. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology,

27:610-612 (1975).

Mantilla-Plats, B., Clewe, G.L. and Harbison, R.D. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol-induced changes in prenatal growth and development of mice. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 33:333-

340 (1975).

Mantilla-Plata, B. and Harbison, R.D. Distribution studies of

(

14C) -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice: Effect of vehicle,

route of administration, and duration of treatment. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 34:292-300 (1975).

Marihuana and Health, Fifth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1975.

Martin, B.R., Dewey, W.L., Harris, L.S. and Beckner, J.S. 3H- -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol tissue and subcellular distribution in

the central nervous system and tissue distribution in peripheral organs of tolerant and nontolerant dogs. Journal of

Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 196:128-143

(1976).

- 83 -
McClean, D.K. and Zimmerman, A.M. Action of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on cell division and macromolecular synthesis in

division-synchronized protozoa. Pharmacology, 14:307-321

(1976).

Mitra, G., Poddar, M.K. and Ghosh, J.J. Effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on rat liver microsomal lipid peroxidation. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 34:525-528 (1975).

Moss, I.R. and Friedman, E. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: depression

of ventilatory regulation; other respiratory and cardiovascular effects. Life Sciences, 19:99-104 (1976).

Munson, A.E., Harris, L.S., Friedman, M.A., Dewey, W.L. and Carchman, R.A. Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids. Journal

of the National Cancer Institute, 55:597-602 (1975).

Nahas, G.G., Paton, W.D.M. and Idanpaan-Heikkila, J.E. (eds.) Marihuana. Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Cellular Effects. New

York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1976.

Novotny, M., Lee, M.L. and Bartle, K.D. A possible chemical basis

for the higher mutagenicity of marijuana smoke as compared

with tobacco smoke. Experientia, 32:280-282 (1976).

Patel, A.R. and Gori, G.B. Preparation and monitoring of marijuana

smoke condensate samples. Bulletin on Narcotics, 27:47-54

(1975).

Raz, A. and Goldman, R. Effect of hashish compounds on mouse

peritoneal macrophages. Laboratory Investigation, 34:69-76

(1976).

Rosell, S. and Agurell, S. Effects of 7-hydroxy- -6-tetrahydrocannabinol and some related cannabinoids on the guinea pig

isolated ileum. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica, 94:142-144

(1975).

Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C. Acute, subacute and 23-day chronic

marihuana inhalation toxicities in the rat. Toxicology and

Applied Pharmacology, 28:428-441 (1974).

Roy, P.E., Magnan-Lapointe, F., Huy, N.D. and Boutet, M. Chronic

inhalation of marijuana and tobacco in dogs: pulmonary

pathology. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and

Pharmacology, 14:305-317 (1976).

Schurr, A. and Livne, A. Differential inhibition of mitochondrial

monoamine oxidase from brain by hashish components. Biochemical Pharmacology, 25:1201-1203 (1976).

Smiley, K.A., Karler, R. and Turkanis, S.A. Effects of cannabinoids

on the perfused rat heart. Research Communications in

Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 14:659-675 (1976).

- 84 -
Solomon, J., Cocchia, M.A., Gray, R., Shattuck, D. and Vossmer, A.

Uterotrophic effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in ovariectomized rats. Science, 192:559-561 (1976).

Stone, C.J., McCoy, D.J. and Forney, R.B. Combined effect of

methaqualone and two cannabinoids. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 21:108-111 (1976).

Ten Ham, M., Loskota, W.J. and Lomax, P. Acute and chronic effects

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on seizures in the gerbil. European Journal of Pharmacology, 31:148-152 (1975).

Thomas, R.J. The toxicologic and teratologic effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol in the zebrafish embryo. Toxicology and

Applied Pharmacology, 32:184-190 (1975).

Thompson, G.R., Rosenkrantz, H., Fleischman, R.W. and Braude, M.C.

Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol administered subcutaneously to rabbits for 28 days. Toxicology, 4:41-51 (1975).

Turkanis, S.A., Chiu, P. and Karler, R. Influence of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol on photically evoked afterdischarge potentials. Psychopharmacologia, in press.

Turker, R.K., Kaymakcalan, S. and Ercan, Z.S. Antihistaminic

action of (-)-trans- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Archives

Internationales de Pharmacodynamie et de Therapie, 214:254-

262 (1975).

Van Klingeren, B. and Ten Ham, M. Antibacterial activity of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Antonie Van

Leeuwenhock, 42:9-12 (1976).

Varma, D.R. and Goldbaum, D. Effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on

experimental hypertension in rats. Journal of Pharmacy and

Pharmacology, 27:790-791 (1975).

Wada, J.A., Osawa, T. and Corcoran, M.E. Effects of tetrahydrocannabinols on kindled amygdaloid seizures and photogenic

seizures in Senegalese baboons, Papio papio. Epilepsia,

16:439-448 (1975).

White, A.C., Munson, J.A., Munson, A.E. and Carchman, R.A. Effects

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in Lewis lung adenocarcinoma

cells in tissue culture. Journal of the National Cancer

Institute, 56:655-658 (1976).

Wilson, R.S. and May, E.L. Analgesic properties of the tetrahydrocannabinols, their metabolites, and analogs. Journal of

Medicinal Chemistry, 18:700-703 (1975).

- 85 -
Chapter 4

PRECLINICAL EFFECTS:

UNLEARNED BEHAVIOR

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

The cannabinoids produce a variety of effects on unlearned behavior

in different animal species. The voluminous literature pertaining

to cannabis and unlearned behavior has been reviewed in the five

previous Marihuana and Health Reports (1971 through 1975). The

present chapter relies heavily on these previous reports for background and focuses primarily on the relevant literature which has

appeared during the past two years, although a continuing attempt is

made to consider the more recent literature in the context of

previous findings. As in the 1975 Marihuana and Health Report, the

present chapter is organized for expository purposes around four

categories of unlearned behavior: gross behavior; activity and

exploration; consummatory behavior; and aggressive behavior.

GROSS BEHAVIOR

The bulk of the early preclinical research with cannabinoids investigated the effects of these drugs on the gross behavior of a wide

range of animal species. As has been discussed in previous Marihuana and Health Reports and recent reviews of the animal literature

(Miller & Drew, 1974), a variety of gross behavioral changes are

induced in animals by the cannabinoids. Included among these

effects are: catalepsy, ataxia, tonic immobility, abnormal body

postures, hypersensitivity and hyperactivity (e.g., Goldman et al.,

1975; Maser et al., 1975). Subsequent to this earlier work on gross

behavioral changes, much of the preclinical work with cannabinoids

pertained to learned rather than unlearned behavior. Most recently, however, there has been a renewed interest in the gross behavioral changes induced in animals by cannabinoids. One primary

reason for this has been the recognition that complex pharmacological interactions may occur among the cannabinoids.

The majority of cannabinoid research on unlearned behavior has used

-9-THC or -8-THC since these particular cannabinoids have been

established as the major active components of cannabis samples

(Mechoulam, 1970). However, several researchers reported that the

pharmacological activity of cannabis samples is not always entirely

explained by the tetrahydrocannabinol content of the samples

(Borgen et al., 1973b; Karniol & Carlini, 1972; Poddar & Ghosh,

1972). These reports have led to several suggestions: 1) that noncannabinoid behaviorally active components occur in marihuana

(Truitt et al., 1975); and 2) that interactions between THC and

other cannabinoid constituents of cannabis -- namely cannabidiol

(CBD), cannabinol (CBN), and cannabichromene (CBC) -- may be impor-

- 86 -
tant in animals as well as in humans (e.g., Dalton et al., 1976;

Hollister & Gillespie, 1975). The latter suggestion is buttressed

by previous findings that CBD inhibits the metabolism of -9-THC

(Fernandes et al., 1973; Jones & Pertwee, 1972; Kupfer et al.,

1973).

Experiments dealing with interactions of cannabinoids on gross

unlearned behavior are still few in number. Furthermore, those

interactions which have been observed appear, at this time, to be

complex and not always consistent. For example, in testing the

effects of cannabinoids on catalepsy in rodents, investigators have

found CBD or CBN administered alone to be either active (Karniol &

Carlini, 1973; Takahashi & Karniol, 1975) or inactive (Fernandes et

al., 1974). Savaki et al. (1975) suggest that the CBN/CBD ratio in

cannabis samples can be an important determinant of cannabis induced catatonia. However, when administered in combination with -

9-THC, CBN has been reported either to have no effect on catalepsy

(Fernandes et al., 1974) or to potentiate -9-THC-induced catalepsy

(Takahashi & Karniol, 1975). Furthermore, CBD in combination with

-9-THC has been reported to prolong (Fernandes et al., 1974) or to

enhance (Karniol & Carlini, 1973) catalepsy induced by -9-THC.

The interactions between the cannabinoids on drug-induced loss of

the righting reflex (anesthesia, sleeping-time) seem to be particularly complex. For example, CBN antagonizes -9-THC effects on

pentobarbitone- (Krantz et al., 1971) and hexobarbitone-

(Fernandes et al., 1973) induced loss of the righting reflex but

potentiates -9-THC-ether effects on the same unlearned response

system in the same animal species (Malor et al., 1975). The.

complexity of these and other interactions (Chesher et al., 1975)

will most likely be better understood with additional research. In

particular, research to distinguish between drug interactions involving CNS activity and those involving cannabinoid-induced

changes in tetrahydrocannabinol metabolism is needed.

As would be expected, THC interacts with drugs other than the

cannabinoids to affect unlearned gross behavior. Recent experiments have shown that -8-THC potentiates the loss of righting

reflex induced in rats by alcohol (Friedman & Gershon, 1974) while

-9-THC potentiates some, and antagonizes other, amphetamineinduced postural and activity behaviors in rats (Gough & Olley,

1975) and rabbits (Consroe et al., 1975a). Alternatively, caffeine

and methamphetamine reverse, whereas cocaine and apomorphine enhance, -9-THC-induced sprawling behavior in rabbits (Laird et al.,

1975). Physostigmine also antagonizes -9-THC-induced alterations

of postural and activity behaviors in rabbits (Jones et al., 1975).

A second major reason for the renewed interest in the effects of

cannabinoids on unlearned behavior is the recent derivation of

drugs from cannabinoids (e.g., Pars et al., 1976; Razdan et al.,

1Chesher et al., 1974, 1975; Fernandes et al., 1973; Karniol &

Carlini, 1973; Krantz et al., 1971; Malor et al., 1975; Takahashi &

Karniol, 1975.

- 87 -
1976b) and tne need for a preclinical test to determine the activity

of these derivatives. For example, Razdan et al. (1976a) found an

ataxia test in dogs to be very useful for establishing marihuanalike activity of a novel analog of -9-THC, namely (-)-8ß-hydroxymethyl- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Similarly, Martin et al. (1975)

used an ataxia test in dogs to establish cannabinoid activity for

11-methyl- -8-, 9-nor- -8-, and 9-nor- -9-THC.

It has been suggested that the 1 I-hydroxy metabolites of -8- and -

9-THC largely account for the pharmacological activity of the -8-

and -9-THC constituents of marihuana. The findings that 11-

methyl- -8-, 9-nor- -8- and 9-nor- -9-THC have marihuana-like

activity (Ford & Balster, 1975; Martin et al., 1975) are relevant to

this suggestion since these latter compounds are not 11-hydroxylated in vivo. Indeed, the findings suggest that the 11-hydroxy

metabolites of -8- and -9-THC do not solely account for the

activity of tetrahydrocannabiols.

ACTIVITY AND EXPLORATION

The literature reviewed in past Marihuana and Health Reports has

supported the conclusion that cannabinoids generally suppress the

spontaneous motor activity and exploration of animals, although

findings regarding these effects must be qualified, as always, by

drug route, time-effect and dose-response considerations. The

suppression effect of -9-THC on spontaneous motor activity is as

apparent in recent experiments (e.g., Adams et al., 1976; Anderson

et al., 1975; Fried, 1976; Pryor & Braude, 1975) as it was in

earlier experiments (e.g., Drew et al., 1973; Fried & Nieman, 1973).

In one of these recent studies (Anderson et al., 1975), oral doses

of -9-THC ranging from 1.25 mg/kg to 40.0 mg/kg were administered

acutely to mice. The lowest drug dose produced a significant

increase in activity while the remaining drug doses produced a dosedependent suppression of activity. Other mice were used to investigate tolerance to the suppressive effects of 40 mg/kg of -9-THC

(p.o.) on spontaneous activity. Complete tolerance developed after

one dose and had a duration of less than four days.

Another aspect of this latter study (Anderson et al., 1975) deserves

mention. Specifically, the activity of mice that had been previously habituated to the experimental apparatus was not suppressed by a

40 mg/kg dose of -9-THC. This finding is in accord with other

research (Consroe et al., 1975b; Drew & Miller, 1973) which shows

that prior habituation to an experimental situation can alter the

effects of THC on motor activity in animals. Further, Adams et al.

(1976) found that tolerance failed to develop to the suppression of

spontaneous motor activity produced by 10 mg/kg administered i.p.

for 28 days to rats that had not been previously habituated to the

apparatus used to measure activity. Alternatively, Fried (1976)

obtained tolerance to cannabis smoke-induced decrements in activity

after his rats had received 13 exposures to the cannabis smoke.

- 88 -
Interestingly, in the latter (Fried, 1976) experiment, when the

cannabis-smoke tolerant rats were given an i.p. injection of 4 mg/kg

-9-THC, male rats significantly increased their activity whereas

the females did not alter their activity relative to the last

exposure to cannabis smoke. Importantly, cross-tolerance was demonstrated for activity effects between inhaled cannabis and i.p.

injections of -9-THC. In contrast to the above effects, rats that

had previously been exposed only to placebo smoke significantly

decreased their activity after receiving the i.p. injection of -9-

THC.

Several novel analogs of -8- and -9-THC have been shown to produce

marihuana-like reductions in spontaneous motor activity in mice

(Martin et al., 1975; Razdan et al., 1976a). Indeed, 11-methyl- -8-

THC is more effective, and 9-nor- -8-THC is as effective, as -8-THC

in decreasing spontaneous motor activity in mice (Martin et al.,

1975).

The spontaneous activity of rats has been used to study the drug

interaction between -9-THC and phencyclidine (Pryor & Braude,

1975). It was found that an increase in activity produced by 5

mg/kg intraperitoneal injections of phencyclidine was antagonized

by oral doses of -9-THC, ranging from 2.5 to 10.0 mg/kg, in a doserelated manner. The drug interactions between -9-THC and other

cannabinoids have not been studied using the spontaneous activity

of animals as the referent response. However, exploratory behavior

and performance on simple unlearned motor tasks have been subjected

to the drug interactions of -9-THC with other cannabinoids. Primarily, it has been reported that CBD and cannabichromene (CBC), in

inhaled doses from 1-2 mg/kg, decrease exploratory behavior of rats

in a dose-related manner (Rosenkrantz & Braude, 1975; Rosenkrantz

et al., 1976) while CBN (10 mg/kg i.p. injection) significantly

increased exploration-ambulation in rats (Takahashi & Karniol,

1975). However, CBD did not affect the motor coordination of mice

over a wide range of i.p. doses (Ten Ham & DeJong, 1975). In

combination with -9-THC, both CBD (Karniol & Carlini, 1973) and CBN

(Takahaski & Karniol, 1975) produce a pharmacological interaction

on exploratory behavior in rats, although -9-THC and CBD do not

seem to interact to affect motor coordination in mice (Ten Ham &

DeJong, 1975).

Cannabinoids are known to transfer the placental barrier (e.g.,

Borgen et al., 1973; Vardaris et al., 1976). Consequently, the

existence of any effects on unlearned behaviors in offspring caused

by placentally-transferred cannabis has been investigated. The

data available to date are somewhat mixed on this topic. For

example, Uyeno (1975) administered subcutaneous -9-THC doses of

30, 60 and 120 mg/kg to pregnant rats on the fourth day of

gestation. He found that -9-THC produced an increase in abnormal

pregnancies, but that it had no significant effect on the locomotor

activity or on the maze learning of the offspring. These latter

findings are at odds with two previous experiments (Borgen et al.,

1973a; Gianutsos & Abbatiello, 1972). In the first of these,

disruptive effects were observed on the unlearned behavior of

- 89 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 7
offspring from pregnant rats that had been administered -9-THC

subcutaneously during the 10th-12th days of gestation. In the

Gianutsos and Abbatiello (1972) experiment, female rats were injected subcutaneously with 250 mg of a cannabis resin extract during

the 8th-11th days of gestation. The offspring of these cannabisinjected rats showed little evidence of stunting but did exhibit an

impairment in maze learning. In a more recent experiment, Vardaris

et al. (1976) orally administered pregnant rats 2 mg/kg/day of

tritiated -9-THC throughout pregnancy. No teratogenicity was

observed nor was any consistent effect observed in the exploratory

behavior of the rat pup offspring of the drugged mothers. However,

the pups did show a deficit in learning a passive avoidance response

at 21 days of age. This deficit apparently was transient since it

was not evident when the pups were retested at 90 days of age.

It was suggested in the Fifth Marihuana and Health Report (1975)

that “additional research is needed to determine whether -9-THC

has a direct action on the developing fetus which becomes manifest

in the unlearned behavior of offspring.” This same suggestion

remains appropriate this year. The behavioral manifestations of

cannabinoid action, in terms of unlearned gross responses and

activity and exploration, are sufficiently well established now so

as to be useful in investigating the as yet relatively unknown

effects of cannabinoids.

CONSUMMATORY BEHAVIOR

A review of the previous Marihuana and Health Reports as well as

other summaries of the relevant literature (e.g., Abel, 1975b)

leaves little doubt that the vast majority of preclinical animal

studies have demonstrated that -8-THC, -9-THC, hashish resin and

pyrahexyl produce reductions in food and water intake, with a

consequent loss in weight when administered acutely. Under continued administration of these cannabinoids, some tolerance to the

drug-induced effects on consummatory behavior is usually observed,

although there are clear cut exceptions where no tolerance has been

observed (e.g., Sofia & Barry, 1974). At any rate, studies published this year using an oral or intraperitoneal route of administration in rats (e.g., Ferraro et al., 1976; Sofia & Knobloch, 1976)

have generally supported the earlier findings of -9-THC-induced

decrements in food and water consumption.

The data pertaining to the effects of other cannabinoid constituents of marihuana such as CBN, CBD and CBC are quite mixed in

comparison to the data for -8- and -9-THC. For example, inhaled

doses of CBD and CBC have been shown both to decrease (Rosenkrantz &

Braude, 1975) and to increase (Rosenkrantz et al., 1976) food and

water consumption in a dose related manner. On the other hand,

Fernandes et al. (1974) did not obtain any CBN or CBD produced

effects on food and water consumption in the rat over a range of

i.p. doses up to 80 mg/kg, although CBD -- but not CBN -- enhanced

the suppressive effects on consummatory behavior produced by -9-

- 90 -
THC. Beyond this, Sofia & Knobloch (1976) produced consistent

decrements in food, sucrose, and water consumption in rats given 50

mg/kg i.p. doses of CBN and CBD or 2.5 and 5.0 mg/kg doses of -9-

THC. Quite interestingly in the Sofia and Knobloch (1976) experiment, sucrose intake was less affected by each cannabinoid than was

food and water intake. These data indicate that the rats had a

preference for sweet calories; a preference reported in humans

following the use of cannabis.

Actually, the general finding of a cannabinoid-induced suppression

of consummatory behavior stands in stark contrast to the findings

that marihuana or hashish will increase the human appetite for food

(Abel, 1971; Hollister, 1971; Greenberg et al., 1976). Several

possible explanations have been offered to account for the discrepancy between the effects of cannabis on animal and human consummatory behavior (cf., Abel, 1975b). To briefly. summarize some of

these here, Sofia and Barry (1974) have suggested that since pure -

9-THC has not typically been used with humans, the appetitestimulant effect of marihuana might be due to a marihuana constituent other than THC. The recent findings regarding the effects on

consummatory behavior of CBN, CBD and CBC reported above (e.g. ,

Rosenkrantz et al., 1976; Sofia & Knobloch, 1976) are sufficiently

mixed to hold this suggestion in abeyance. It has also been

suggested that, since most animal studies have not taken continuous

measurements of consummatory behavior, increases in consumption may

have been overlooked. However, in a recent experiment with rats

where such continuous measures were taken (Ferraro et al., 1976),

dose-related -9-THC decreases in consummatory behavior were confirmed. There is some evidence (Glick & Milloy, 1972) to support

the contention (Elsmore & Fletcher, 1972) that the discrepancy

between animal and human consummatory behavior is due to the higher

cannabinoid doses, relative to body weight, administered to animals

than to humans. Furthermore, the possibility that the discrepancy

is related to humans' adaptation to a long-term deprivation regimen

(most experimental animals are either non-deprived or acutely deprived) has also received empirical support (Gluck & Ferraro,

1974). Finally, there is the suggestion that route of drug administration may play an important role in determining the direction of

the drug effects on consummatory behavior in animals. At least

three recent studies have shown that when cannabinoids are administered to animals by the inhalation route, increases in consummatory

behavior result (Huy & Roy, 1976; Rosenkrantz & Braude, 1974;

Rosenkrantz et al., 1976). Neverthelsss, the discrepancy between

animal and human experiments is still inadequately explained.

There is, of course, the possibility that the differences are due

solely to between-species differences. If so, consummatory behavior will stand as a rare instance in which preclinical animal

research with cannabinoids has not served reliably as a predictor of

cannabinoid effects in humans.

- 91 -
If aggression is taken as a uniform behavior of threatening or

attacking another animal, then conflicting findings regarding the

effects of cannabinoids on aggressive behavior exist in the literature. However, a variety of procedures has been used to study the

aggressive interactions between animals under the influence of

cannabinoids, each of which tends to involve a different kind of

aggressive behavior. In fact, when separated by aggression paradigms, the literature regarding cannabinoid effects on aggressive

behavior is quite consistent. In general, the conclusion from both

the recent Marihuana and Health Reports (1974, 1975) and an extensive review of the cannabis and aggression literature in animals

(Abel, 1975a) is that cannabinoids suppress aggressiveness in nonstressed animals but increase stress-induced aggression. This

conclusion applied to acute cannabinoid experiments but may not

hold true for chronic experiments. At least three recent studies

(Luthra et al., 1976; Matte, 1975; Miczek, 1976) have demonstrated

an induction in aggression following long-term administration of

THC to rats that were not apparently otherwise stressed. Of course,

if long-term drug administration is viewed as being in itself

stressful, then the conclusion that cannabinoids increase aggression in stressed animals becomes more general. Be that as it may,

the effects of cannabinoids on aggressive behavior will be discussed under the categories of stress-induced and non-stress-induced aggression, with the latter category being subdivided into

isolation-induced aggression, competitive aggression and predatory

aggression.

AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR

As indicated, when stressed animals are put under the influence of

cannabinoids the usual outcome is an increase in aggressiveness.

This outcome seems to be independent of the nature of the stressor

used. Increased aggression under cannabinoids has been reported

for such stressors as: starvation (Carlini & Masur, 1970), low

temperature (Carlini & Masur, 1969), REM sleep deprivation (Carlini

& Lindsey, 1974; Carlini et al., 1976; Monti & Carlini, 1975),

withdrawal from morphine (Carlini & Gonzalez, 1972), septal lesions

(Dubinsky et al., 1973), electric shock (Carder & Olson, 1972) and

ovariectomy (Palermo-Neto et al., 1975).

Takahashi and Karniol (1975) have investigated the interaction

between CBN and -9-THC with respect to stress-induced aggression.

Generally, this experiment produced results comparable to a similar

previous investigation of the interactive effects of CBD and -9-

THC on aggression induced by REM sleep deprivation (Karniol &

Carlini, 1973). Intraperitoneal injections of 20 mg/kg -9-THC and

80 mg/kg CBN induced aggressiveness in the stressed rats. Interestingly, however, when the same doses of CBN and -9-THC were concurrently administered, the amount of aggressiveness was less than

that produced by -9-THC alone (Takahashi & Karniol, 1975).

- 92 -
Isolation-Induced Aggression

Several experiments have shown that -9-THC and cannabis extract

will suppress isolation-induced aggression in rats which have not

also been subjected to stress (Dubinsky et al., 1973; Santos et al.,

1966). Other studies have shown that this cannabinoid-induced

suppression of aggression is not a result of motor impairment

(Kilbey, 1971) nor does it exhibit tolerance (Ten Ham & van

Noordwijk, 1973).

The interaction between -9-THC and CBD on isolation-induced

aggression was investigated last year in mice (Ten Ham & DeJong,

1975). Intraperitoneal doses of 2.5 mg/kg -9-THC and 40.0 mg/kg

CBD individually suppressed aggressiveness although the interaction

between these two cannabinoids was not significant.

Competitive Aggression

Most recent findings are in accord with previous results (Jones et

al., 1974; Miczek & Barry, 1974; Uyeno, 1973, 1974) showing that -

9-THC reduced dominance and social competition in animals. Cutler

and her associates have run a series of experiments relating

cannabinoids to the social behavior of animals (Cutler &

Mackintosh, 1975; Cutler et al., 1975a, 1975b, 1975c). In two of

these experiments (Cutler & Mackintosh, 1975; Cutler et al., 1975c)

male mice and rats received i.p. injections of either a cannabis

resin or -9-THC and then were placed with unfamiliar and undrugged

male partners. The drug did not affect non-social behavior or

social investigaton but it did produce dose-related increases in

immobility and flight relative to aggression. A similar finding was

recently obtained by Dorr and Steinberg (1976). Cutler et al.

(1975b) further found that drugged male mice placed with unfamiliar

and undrugged female partners reduced the number of mounts and

attempts to mount the female and also exhibited a concomitant

increase in immobility.

Ely et al. (1975) demonstrated the importance of the existing social

structure in their examinations of cannabinoid effects on animal

aggression. Doses of 0.5, 2.0 and 20.0 mg/kg of -9-THC were

intravenously injected into mice whose dominant or subordinate

status in their colonies was either relatively stable or whose

dominance was threatened either by a rival or an intruder. In the

stable colonies the only behavioral change noted was a limited

period of reduced activity by the dominant males. Dominant mice

confronted with a rival exhibited a reduction of activity and a

consequent loss of their daninant status. Dominant mice confronted

with an intruder made fewer attacks on the intruder than non-drugged

dominant mice, but their aggressiveness returned to the predrug

baseline level after 24 hours.

Dose effects of -9-THC on aggressive behaviors of resident and

intruder rats were examined by Miczek (1976). This investigator

varied i.p. dose level from 0.125 to 4.0 mg/kg and found that as the

- 93 -
dose was increased, attack and threat behaviors of the dominant

resident rat decreased. Only at the highest dose level of 4.0 mg/kg

did -9-THC interfere with the defensive and submissive behaviors

of the intruder.

Cutler et al. (1975a) fed cannabis in the diet of either dominant or

subordinate male mice. Dominant males reduced non-social activity

and increased flight behavior while subordinate males were not

markedly affected by the cannabis diet. After withdrawal of

cannabis, the dominant males showed an increase in aggressiveness.

A long-term increase in aggressiveness in social situations has

also been observed by Sassenrath and Chapman (1975, 1976). These

researchers drugged monkeys living in group situations with oral

doses of 2.4 mg/kg/day of -9-THC. Initially under the influence of

the drug, daninant monkeys displayed less aggression and less nonsocial behavior. Subsequently, a tolerance to the suppressive

effects of -9-THC developed and an increase in aggressiveness was

observed. This later increase in aggressiveness was sometimes

accompanied by an increase in dominance ranking within the group.

Predatory Aggression

Most research supports the conclusion that cannabinoids reduce

predatory aggression in non-stressed animals (Abel, 1975a).

Although one study (Alves & Carlini, 1973) indicated that THC could

produce muricidal behavior in rats which did not previously display

such behavior, it was not possible to conclusively determine whether stress induced by food deprivation or the administration of the

cannabinoid over a 40-day period was responsible for this result.

However, a recent study by Miczek (1976) indicates that the longterm administration period may have been the crucial factor. This

investigator found that during an administration period of 60 days,

previously non-muricidal rats given sufficient food and water so as

not to lose weight and an intraperitoneal -9-THC dose of 10 or 20

mg/kg/day developed mouse-killing behavior.

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

University of New Mexico

- 94 -
REFERENCES

Preclinical Effects: Unlearned Behavior

Abel, E.L. Effects of marihuana on the solution of anagrams, memory

and appetite. Nature, 231:260-261 (1971).

Abel, E.L. Cannabis and aggression in animals. Behavioral Biology,

14:1-20 (1975a).

Abel, E.L. Cannabis: Effects on hunger and thirst. Behavioral

Biology, 15:255-281 (1975b).

Abel, E.L., Cooper, C.W. and Harris, L.S. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on body weight and brain electrolytes in the

chicken. Psychopharmacologia, 35:335-339 (1974).

Adams, M.D., Chait, L.D. and Earnhardt, J.T. Tolerance to the

cardiovascular effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the

rat. British Journal of Pharmacology, 56:43-48 (1976).

Alves, C.N. and Carlini, E.A. Effects of chronic and acute administration of cannabis sativa extract on the mouse killing

behavior of rats. Life Sciences, 13:75 (1973).

Alves, C.N., Goyos, A.C. and Carlini, E.A. Aggressiveness induced

by marihuana and other psychotropic drugs in REM sleep

deprived rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior,

1:183-189 (1973).

Anderson, P.F., Jackson, D.M., Chesher, G.B. and Malor, R. Tolerance to the effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice on

intestinal motility, temperature, and locomotor activity.

Psychopharmacologia, 43:31-36 (1975).

Borgen, L.A., Davis, W.M. and Pace, H.B. Effects of prenatal -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on the development of rat offspring.

Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 1:203-206 (1973a).

Borgen, L.A., Lott, G.C. and Davis, W.M. Cannabis induced hypothermia: A dose effect comparison of crude marihuana extract

and synthetic -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in male and female

rats. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and

Pharmacology, 5:621-627 (1973b).

Carder, B. and Olson, J. Marihuana and shock induced aggression in

rats. Physiology and Behavior, 8:599-602 (1972).

Carlini, E.A. and Gonzalez, S.C. Aggressive behavior induced by

marihuana compounds and amphetamine in rats previously made

dependent on morphine. Experientia, 28:542-544 (1972).

- 95 -
Carlini, E.A. and Lindsey, C.J. Pharmacological manipulations of

brain catecholamines and the agressive behavior induced by

marihuana in REM-sleep-deprived rats. Aggressive Behavior,

1:81-99 (1974).

Carlini, E.A., Lindsey, C.J., Musty, R.E. and Monti, J.M. Marihuana

aggressiveness in REM-sleep-deprived rats: Neurochemical and

neurophysiological correlates. In Braude, M.C. and Szara,

S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, pp. 515-530.

Carlini, E.A. and Masur, J. Development of aggressive behavior in

rats by chronic administration of cannabis sativa (marihuana). Life Sciences, 8:607-620 (1969).

Carlini, E.A. and Masur, J. Development of fighting behavior in

starved rats by chronic administration of (-)- -9-transtetrahydrocannabinol and cannabis extracts. Communications

in Behavioral Biology, 5:57-61 (1970).

Chesher, G.B., Jackson, D.M. and Malor, R.M. Interaction of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol with phenobarbitone in

protecting mice from electrically induced convulsions. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 27:608-609 (1975).

Chesher, G.B., Jackson, D.M. and Stormer, G.A. Interaction of

cannabis and general anaesthetic agents in mice. British

Journal of Pharmacology, 50:593-599 (1974).

Consroe, P.F., Jones, B.C. and Akins, F. -9-tetrahydrocannabinolmethamphetamine interaction in the rabbit. Neuropharmacology, 14:377-383 (1975a).

Consroe, P.F., Jones, B.C. and Chin, L. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol,

EEG and behavior: The importance of adaptation to the testing

milieu. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:173-177

(1975b).

Cutler, M.G. and Mackintosh, J.H. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on social behavior in the laboratory mouse and rat.

Psychopharmacologia, 44:287-289 (1975).

Cutler, M.G., Mackintosh, J.H. and Chance, M.R.A. Behavioural

changes in laboratory mice during cannabis feeding and withdrawal. Psychopharmacologia, 44:173-177 (1975a).

Cutler, M.G., Mackintosh, J.H. and Chance, M.R.A. Cannabis resin

and sexual behaviour in the laboratory mouse. Psychopharmacologia, 45:129-131 (1975b).

Cutler, M.G., Mackintosh, J.H. and Chance, M.R.A. Effects of

cannabis resin on social behavior in the laboratory mouse.

Psychopharmacologia, 41:371-376 (1975c).

- 96 -
Dalton, W.S., Martz, R., Lemberger, L., Rodda, B.E. and Forney, R.B.

Influence of cannabidiol on -9-tetrahydrocannabinol effects.

Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 19:300-309 (1976).

Dorr, M. and Steinberg, H. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on

social behaviour in mice. Psychopharmacology, 47:87-91

(1976).

Drew, W.G. and Miller, L.L. Differential effects of -9-THC on

locomotor behavior in activity wheel habituated and

nonhabituated rats. Pharmacology, 9:41-51 (1973).

Drew, W.G., Miller, L.L. and Baugh, E.L. Effects of -9-THC, LSD-25

and scopolamine on continuous spontaneous alternation in the

Y-maze. Psychopharmacologia, 32:171-182 (1973).

Dubinsky, B., Robichaud, R.C. and Goldberg, M.E. Effects of (-)- -

9-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol and its selectivity in several

models of aggressive behavior. Pharmacology, 9:204-216

(1973).

Elsmore, T.F. and Fletcher, G.V. -9-tetrahydrccannabinol: Aversive effects in rat at high doses. Science, 175:911-912

(1972).

Ely, D.L., Henry, J.P. and Jarosz, C.J. Effects of marihuana ( -9-

THC) on behavior patterns and social roles in colonies of CBA

mice. Behavioral Biology, 13:263-276 (1975).

Fernandes, M., Schabarek, A., Coper, H. and Hill, R. Modification

of -9-THC actions by cannabinol and cannabidiol in the rat.

Psychopharmacologia, 38:329-338 (1974).

Fernandes, M., Worning, N., Christ, W. and Hill, R. Interactions of

several cannabinoids with the hepatic drug metabolizing

system. Biochemical Pharmacology, 22:2981-2987 (1973).

Ferraro, D.P., Huthsing, K.B. and Fetterolf, D.J. Time course of -

9-THC effects on water consumption in rats. Behavioral

Biology, 17:567-572 (1976).

Ford, R.D. and Balster, R.L. The discriminative stimulus properties of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC): Generalization

to some metabolites and derivatives. Federation Proceedings,

34:743 (1975).

Fried, P.A. Cross-tolerance between inhaled cannabis and intraperitoneal injections of -9-THC. Pharmacology, Biochemistry

and Behavior, 4:635-638 (1976).

Fried, P.A. and Nieman, G.W. Inhalation of cannabis smoke in rats.

Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 1:371-378 (1973).

- 97 -
Friedman, E. and Gershon, S. Effect of -9-THC on alcohol-induced

sleeping time in the rat. Psychopharmacologia, 39:193-198

(1974).

Gianutsos, G., and Abbatiello, E.R. The effect of prenatal cannabis

sativa on maze learning ability in the rat. Psychopharmacologia, 27:117 (1972).

Glick, S.D. and Milloy, S. Increased and decreased eating

following THC administration. Psychonomic Science, 29:6

(1972).

Gluck, J.P. and Ferraro, D.P. Effects of -9-THC on food and water

intake of deprivation experienced rats. Behavioral Biology,

11:395-401 (1974).

Goldman, H., Dagirmanjian, R., Drew, W.G., Murphy, S. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol alters flow of blood to subcortical areas of

the conscious rat brain. Life Sciences, 17:477-482 (1975).

Gough, A.L. and Olley, J.E. Cannabis and amphetamine-induced

stereotypy in rats. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology,

27:62-63 (1975).

Greenberg, I., Kuehnle, J., Mendelson, J.H. and Bernstein, J.G.

Effects of marihuana use on body weight and caloric intake in

humans. Psychopharmacology, 49:79-84 (1976).

Hollister, L.E. Hunger and appetite after single doses of marihuana, alcohol and dextroamphetamine. Clinical Pharmacology

and Therapeutics, 12:44-49 (1971).

Hollister, L.E. and Gillespie, H. Interactions in man of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18:80-83 (1975).

Huy, N.D. and Roy, P.E. Inhalation of tobacco and marijuana in dog

over a period of 30 months: Effect on body weight, food

intake and organ weight. Research Communications in Chemical

Pathology and Pharmacology, 13:465-470 (1976).

Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.G. Acute effects of two tetrahydrocannabinols ( -9-THC and -8-THC) on water intake in

deprived rats: Implications for behavioral studies of marihuana compounds. Psychopharmacologia, 30:315-322 (1973).

Jones, B.C., Clark, D.L., Consroe, P.F. and Smith, H.J. Effects of

(-)- -9-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol on social behavior of

squirrel monkey dyads in a water competition situation. Psychopharmacologia, 37:37-43 (1974).

Jones, B.C., Consroe, P.F. and Akins, F. Physostigmine-induced

reversal of EEG; and behavioral effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 6:204-206

(1975).

- 98 -
Jones, G. and Pertwee, R.G. A metabolic interaction in vivo between

cannabidiol and -1-tetrahydrocannabinol. British Journal of

Pharmacology, 45:375-377 (1972).

Karniol, I.G. and Carlini, E.A. The content of (-)- -9-transtetrahydrocannabinol does not explain all biological activity

of some Brazilian marihuana samples. Journal of Pharmacy and

Pharmacology, 24:833-835 (1972).

Karniol, I.G. and Carlini, E.A. Pharmacologic interaction between

cannabidiol and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Psychopharmacologia, 33:53-70 (1973).

Kilbey, M.M. The effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on innate and

instrumental fighting behavior in the mouse. Paper presented

at the Southwestern Psychological Association, 1971.

Kilbey, M.M., Forbes, W.B. and Olivetti, C. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Inhibition of deprivation and carbacol-induced water

consumption in the rat after central and peripheral administration. Behavioral Biology, 8:679-685 (1973a).

Kilbey, M.M., Moore, J.W. and Hall, M. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

induced inhibition of predatory aggression in the rat. Psychopharmacologia, 31:157-166 (1973b).

Krantz, J.C., Berger, H.J. and Welch, B.L. Blockage of (-)-trans- -

8-tetrahydrocannabinol depressant effect by cannabinol in

mice. American Journal of Pharmacology, 143:149-152 (1971).

Kupfer, D., Levin, E. and Burstein, S.H. Studies on the effects of

-1-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -1-THC) and DDT on the hepatic

microsomal metabolism of -1-THC and other compounds in the

rat. Chemical Biological Interactions, 6:59-66 (1973).

Laird, H.E., Consroe, P.F., Jones, B.C. and Picchioni, A.L. Stimulant drug antagonism of EEG and behavioral effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol. Federation Proceedings, 34:743 (1975).

Luthra, Y.K., Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C. Cerebral and

cerebellar neurochemical changes and behavioral manifestations in rats chronically exposed to marijuana smoke. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 35:455-467 (1976).

Malor, R., Jackson, D.M. and Chesher, G.B. The effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol, cannabidiol and cannabinol on ether

anaesthesia in mice. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology,

27:610-612 (1975).

Marihuana and Health, Report to Congress from the Secretary of

Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office, 1971.

- 99 -
Marihuana and Health, Second Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1972.

Marihuana and Health, Third Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1973.

Marihuana and Health, Fourth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1974.

Marihuana and Health, Fifth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1975.

Martin, B.R., Dewey, W.L., Harris, L.S., Beckner, J., Wilson, R.S.

and May, E.L. Marihuana-like activity of new synthetic

tetrahydrocannabinols. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:849-853 (1975).

Maser, J.D., Gallup, G.G., Thorn, W.R. and Edson, P.H. Relative

potency of tetrahydrocannabinol derivatives on tonic immobility in chickens. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior,

3:1069-1072 (1975).

Matte, A.C. Effects of hashish on isolation induced aggression in

wild mice. Psychopharmacologia, 45:125-128 (1975).

McDonough, J.H., Manning, F.J. and Elsmore, T.F. Reduction of

predatory aggression of rats following administration of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol. Life Sciences, 11:103-111 (1972).

Mechoulam, R. Marihuana chemistry. Science, 168:1159-1160 (1970).

Miczek, K.A. Mouse-killing and motor activity: Effects of chronic

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and pilocarpine. Psychopharmacology, 47:59-64 (1976).

Miczek, K.A. and Barry, H. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and aggressive

behavior in rats. Behavioral Biology, 11:261-267 (1974).

Miller, L.L. and Drew, W.G. Cannabis: Review of behavioral effects

in animals. Psychological Bulletin, 81:401-417 (1974).

Monti, J.M. and Carlini, E.A. Spontaneous behavior and sleepwakefulness cycle in isolated and paired REM sleep deprivedmarihuana treated rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and

Behavior, 3:1025-1029 (1975).

Musty, R.E., Lindsey, C.J. and Carlini, E.A. 6-hydroxydopamine and

the aggressive behavior induced by marihuana in REM sleepdeprived rats. Psychopharmacology, 48:175-179 (1976).

- 100 -
Palermo-Neto, J., Nunes, J.F. and Corvalho, F.V. The effects of

chronic cannabis treatment upon brain 5-hydroxytryptamine,

plasma corticosterone and aggressive behavior in female rats

with different hormonal status. Psychopharmacologia, 42:195-

200 (1975).

Pars, H.G., Granchelli, F.E., Razdan, R.K., Keller, J.K., Teiger,

D.G., Rosenberg, F.J. and Harris, L.S. Drugs derived from

cannabinoids. I. Nitrogen analogs, benzopyranopyridines and

benzopyranopyrroles. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:445-

454 (1976).

Poddar, M.K. and Ghosh, J.J. Effect of cannabis extract, -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and lysergic acid diethylamide on rat

liver enzymes. Biochemical Pharmacology, 21:3301-3303

(1972).

Pryor, G.T. and Braude, M.C. Interactions between -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and phencyclidine (PC). The Pharmacologist,

17:182 (1975).

Razdan, R.K., Howes, J.F., Uliss, D.B., Dalzell, H.C., Handrick,

G.R. and Dewey, W.L. (-)-8ß-hydroxymethyl- -1-tetrahydrocannabinol: A novel physiologically active analog of -1-

tetrahydrocannabinol. Experientia, 32:416-417 (1976a).

Razdan, R.K., Terris, B.Z., Pass, H.G., Plotnikoff, N.P., Dodge,

P.W., Dren, A.T., Kyncl, J. and Somani, P. Drugs derived from

cannabinoids. 2. Basic esters of nitrogen and carbocyclic

analogs. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 19:454-461 (1976b).

Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C. Acute, subacute and 23-day chronic

marihuana inhalation toxicities in the rat. Toxicology and

Applied Pharmacology, 28:428-441 (1974).

Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C. Rat inhalation toxicity of Turkish

marihuana. The Pharmacologist, 17:181 (1975).

Rosenkrantz, H., Hayden, D. and Braude, M.C. Inhalation toxicity of

Turkish marihuana, cannabichromene (CBCH) and cannabidiol

(CBD) in rats. Federation Proceedings, 35:643 (1976).

Santos, M., Sampaio, M.R.P., Fernandes, N.S. and Carlini, E.A.

Effects of cannabis sativa (marihuana) on the fighting behavior of mice. Psychopharmacologia, 8:437-444 (1966).

Sassenrath, E.N. and Chapman, L.F. Tetrahydrocannabinol-induced

manifestations of the "marihuana syndrome" in group-living

macaques. Federation Proceedings, 34:1666-1670 (1975).

Sassenrath, E.N. and Chapman, L.F. Primate social behavior as a

method of analysis of drug action: Studies with THC in

monkeys. Federation Proceedings, 35:2238-2244 (1976).

- 101 -
Savaki, H.E., Cunha, J., Carlini, E.A. Pharmacological activity of

three fractions obtained by smoking cannabis through a water

pipe. Bulletin on Narcotics, 28:49-56 (1975).

Sjoden, P.O., Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.G. Influence of

tetrahydrocannabinols ( -8-THC and -9-THC) on body weight,

food, and water intake in rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry

and Behavior, 1:395-399 (1973).

Sofia, R.D. and Barry, H. Acute and chronic effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on food intake by rats. Psychopharmacologia,

39:213-222 (1974).

Sofia, R.D. and Knobloch, L.C. Comparative effects of various

naturally occurring cannabinoids on food, sucrose and water

consumption by rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 4:591-599 (1976).

Takahashi, R.N. and Karniol, I.G. Pharmacological interactions

between cannabinol and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Psychopharmacologia, 41:277-284 (1975).

Ten Ham, M. and De Jong, Y. Absence of interaction between -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) in

aggression, muscle control and body temperature experiments

in mice. Psychopharmacologia, 41:169-174 (1975).

Ten Ham, M. and van Noordwijk, J. Lack of tolerance to the effect

of two tetrahydrocannabinols on aggressiveness. Psychopharmacologia, 29:171-176 (1973).

Truitt, E.B., Glenn, W.K. and Berla, J.M. Behavioral activity in

various fractions of marihuana smoke condensate in the rat.

Federation Proceedings, 34:743 (1975).

Uyeno, E.T. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on dominance

behavior of the rat. Federation Proceedings, 32:725 (1973).

Uyeno, E.T. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and the competitive behavior

of the rat. Federation Proceedings, 33:540 (1974).

Uyeno, E.T. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol administered to pregnant

rats. The Pharmacologist, 17:181 (1975).

Vardaris, R.M., Weisz, D.J., Fazel, A. and Rawitch, A.B. Chronic

administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol to pregnant rats:

Studies of pup behavior and placental transfer. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 4:249-254 (1976).

- 102 -
Chapter 5

PRECLINICAL EFFECTS:

LEARNED BEHAVIOR

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

A review of the previous Marihuana and Health Reports (1971-1975)

reveals that an extensive array of experimental procedures and

contexts have been used to study the effects of cannabinoids on the

performance of learned behavior in animals. These preclinical

behavioral experiments have provided a framework for, and guided

the design of, subsequent human experimentation. Compared to

previous years, only a few experiments pertaining to cannabinoids

and learned behavior have appeared during the past two years. By

and large these more recent experiments confirm previous findings;

no particularly novel procedures have been explored nor have there

been dramatically unpredictable results. In part, the decrease in

activity in cannabinoid preclinical animal research on learned

behavior indicates an increase in human cannabinoid-learning investigations.

Several detailed taxonomies of learned behavior are possible. However, for the purposes of the present report, learned behaviors will

be categorized into those involving: avoidance learning and aversive control; reinforcement schedules and maze learning; and discrimination learning.

AVOIDANCE LEARNING AND AVERSIVE CONTROL

Previous research has shown that cannabinoids can enhance, depress,

or fail to affect the acquisition of avoidance behavior depending

upon the cannabinoid time-course of action (Miller & Drew, 1974) and

dose (Goldberg et al., 1973) as well as on the particular cannabinoid (Izquierdo and Nasselo, 1973) and type of avoidance task used

(Robichaud et al., 1973). More recent research has tended to

confirm the previous findings by demonstrating further that the

effects of cannabinoids, particularly -9-THC, on avoidance acquisition are dependent upon drug and task parameters. For example,

Weisz and Vardaris (1976) obtained no effect on shuttle box avoidance acquisition in rats by administering oral -9-THC doses of 2,

4, or 6 mg/kg. On the other hand, Waser et al. (1976) produced an

increase in avoidance learning in a Y maze by injecting rats i.p.

with 3 and 9 mg/kg -9-THC, and Pandina and Musty (1975) increased

rats' acquisition of a 2-way active avoidance task by giving i.v.

injections of 0.75, 1.5, and 3.0 mg/kg of -9-THC.

In contrast to the variable outcomes obtained when the acquisition

of avoidance learning is studied, cannabinoids have been found to

have consistent disruptive effects when the behavior investigated

- 103 -
is the maintained performance of an already learned avoidance task

(Davis et al., 1973; Houser, 1975; Newman et al., 1974). Additional

reports of cannabinoid-induced impairment of established avoidance

behavior have cane from Tayal et al. (1974) and Pryor and Braude

(1975). In the latter study, it was further reported that -9-THC

had a more than additive interaction with phencyclidine, over a wide

range of doses for both drugs, in impairing conditioned avoidance

behavior. The Tayal et al. (1974) experiment also found that

tolerance develops to the disruption in avoidance performance induced by an alcoholic extract of cannabis. This finding of tolerance confirms and extends previous reports of cannabinoid tolerance

development under learned avoidance tasks (Houser, 1975; Manning,

1974b). No new research has appeared to add to the finding (Newman

et al., 1974) that -9-THC is cross-tolerant with ethyl alcohol but

not with morphine or chlorpromazine in a shuttle box avoidance task.

However, -9-THC does exhibit cross tolerance to a reserpine congener in a swimming escape task (Carder & Deikel, 1976).

With respect to aversive control situations other than avoidance or

escape learning, -9-THC does not seem to affect the suppressive

effect produced on licking behavior in the rat by electric shock

punishment (Schoenfeld, 1976). There have been several reports

that cannabinoids reduce the conditioned emotional response of

animals to a stimulus previously associated with an unavoidable

electric shock, regardless of whether an appetitive or aversive

situation is used to maintain baseline responding (e.g., Gonzalez

et al., 1972; Houser, 1975). The usual interpretation of this

finding is that cannabinoids act to reduce fear or anxiety. However, a fear-reduction interpretation is not always supported by

human research (Pillard et al., 1974). Moreover, it has been shown

(Ferraro & Bruce, 1975) that a reduction in the conditioned emotional response under -9-THC can be, in part, confounded by drugstate changes which occur between the training and testing phase of

experiments. Indeed, when the conditioned emotional responses of

rats who had received all of their training and testing under 2

mg/kg -9-THC (i.p.) was studied, it was found that -9-THC produced

an increase in the conditioned emotional response (Ferraro & Bruce,

1975). This latter finding suggests that -9-THC does not reduce

fear. A similar interpretation can be provided for the finding that

hashish resin can increase the resistance to extinction of rats in a

shock avoidance situation (Jaffe & Baum, 1971).

Another factor which may be considered to temper the interpretation

that cannabinoids reduce fear in aversive control situations is

that -9-THC has been found to have an analgesic effect in animals

(Kaymakcalan et al., 1974) and humans (Noyes et al., 1975a, 1975b).

This was demonstrated by Dykstra and McMillan (1974) who used a

titration procedure to determine the intensity at which monkeys

would maintain a continuously applied electric shock. It was found

that an injection of 15 mg/kg -8-THC caused the monkeys to adjust

the shock to a higher intensity than they had in the absence of the

drug.

With respect to cannabinoids other than -9-THC, CBN has been found

- 104 -
to increase the reaction time of mice in a hot-plate test (Takahashi

& Karniol, 1975) and to raise the pain threshold of the inflamed

hind paw of the rat (Sofia et al., 1975). Furthermore, CBN produces

additive effects with -9-THC in suppressing the abdominal constriction response of mice to formic acid (Welburn et al., 1976).

However, CBN appears to be devoid of antitussive activity in

anesthetized cats (Gordon et al., 1976). More generally, it has

been concluded the CBN has non-narcotic type analgesic activity

like that of aspirin, while -9-THC has narcotic-like analgesic

activity similar to morphine or codeine (Cordon et al., 1976; Sofia

et al., 1975). In contrast, CBD does not appear to display any

analgesic, antitussive, or abdominal constriction effects (Gordon

et al., 1976; Sofia et al., 1975; Welburn et al., 1976), although

CBD does antagonize the antinociceptive effects of both -9-THC and

CBN in a dose-dependent manner (Welburn et al., 1976).

In still another aversive control context, Corcoran et al. (1974)

have extended previous findings that -9-THC (Elsmore & Fletcher,

1972) and hashish extract (Corcoran, 1973) produce “bait shyness”

in rats when paired with novel tastes. In the Corcoran et al.

(1974) study, -8-THC, CBD, and cannabigerol (CBS) all produced

bait shyness. However, cannabichromene (CBC) did not produce a

conditioned taste aversion in this aversive control situation.

More recently, Kay (1975) has extended the finding of “bait shyness”

to situations involving repeated injections of -9-THC.

REINFORCEMENT SCHEDULES AND MAZE LEARNING

Both operant and instrumental conditioning paradigms have been used

to study the effects of cannabinoids on appetitively reinforced

learned behavior in animals. In the operant conditioning context,

schedules of reinforcement have received the most study. In the

instrumental conditioning context, maze or alley learning has been

the usual baseline for determining cannabinoid effects.

Following the outline established in the Fourth and Fifth Marihuana

and Health Reports, experiments dealing with cannabinoid-reinforcement schedule interactions will be categorized into two major

types: Type I experiments which focus on changes in schedule

controlled responses, and Type II experiments in which responses

merely provide a baseline for the study of drug-related parameters.

The bulk of the earlier cannabinoid research with reinforcement

schedules was of Type I. What little research of this type there

has been in the past few years (Davis et al., 1973; Frankenheim,

1974; Wagner et al., 1973) has mainly tended to replicate and

confirm the findings from the earlier research even where more

canplicated reinforcement schedules have been used (Adams &

Barratt, 1974). Taken together, the research demonstrates that

behavior under reinforcement schedule control is reactive to -9-

THC and -8-THC as well as to other constituents of cannabis (Davis

& Borgen, 1974; Frankenheim et al., 1971). In general, such

- 105 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 8
behavior is depressed in a dose-related manner by cannabinoids,

although under schedules which tend to generate low response rates,

a bi-phasic dose-response function or an alternation between periods of no responding and increased rates of responding are sometimes

observed (e.g., Boyd et al., 1976). Recently, Type I experiments

with schedules of reinforcement have been shown to be useful in

preclinical marihuana studies in humans (Mendelson et al., 1976).

Although only limited attention has been given to the effects of

cannabinoids on the acquisition and extinction of operant behaviors

(Ferraro et al., 1974a; Drewnowski & Gray, 1975), the now extensive

literature on the relationship between cannabinoids and performance

of schedule controlled responses has stimulated the use of such

responses as baselines in Type II studies of drug-related parameters.

Among other things, reinforcement schedule baselines have been used

in the past two years to study: between-cannabinoid comparisons

(Kosersky et al., 1974); the effects of inter-injection interval on

the development of tolerance to -9-THC (Davis & Borgen, 1975);

cross tolerance between cannabinoids and other drugs (Newman et

al., 1974); and differences between drug vehicles and routes of

cannabinoid administration (Abel et al., 1974; Elsmore & Manning,

1974; Ferraro & Gluck, 1974). An operant paradigm has also been

used to investigate the interaction between -9-THC and cannabidiol. Davis and Borgen (1974) found that intraperitoneal injections of 3 mg/kg -9-THC suppressed schedule controlled responding

in rats while 25 mg/kg CBD did not. Similarly, intramuscular

injections of 1 mg/kg -9-THC suppressed responding in pigeons

while 50 mg/kg CBD did not. However, when animals were pretreated

with their respective CBD doses, the THC-induced suppression of

responding was reduced.

A further instance of the Type II reinforcement schedule experiment

was performed by Dykstra et al. (1975). These researchers injected

pigeons responding under variable interval, fixed ratio and fixed

interval schedules with a range of -9-THC and SP-III doses (0.3 to

18.0 mg/kg intramuscular injection administered either one or two

hours before the start of the experimental session). SP-III is a

water soluble ester of -9-THC which bears a basic amino function

(Zitko et al., 1972). Both drugs produced a dose-related suppression of reinforcement schedule responding although -9-THC was

three to six times more potent than SP-III and had a faster time of

onset. A still more recent study (Ford et al., 1976) has investigated the effects of acute and chronic i.p. injections of 0.1 to

10.0 mg/kg -9-THC and its 11-OH metabolite on rats responding under

fixed interval and differential reinforcement of low rate schedules

of reinforcement. 11-OH- -9-THC was about three times as potent as

-9-THC and had a faster time of onset and a shorter duration of

effects than -9-THC. However, tolerance and cross-tolerance

developed at the same rate to equipotent doses of the two drugs.

Ford et al. (1976) viewed their results as being consistent with the

hypothesis that 11-OH- -9-THC is responsible for the behavioral

effects of -9-THC.

- 106 -
A large number of both types of reinforcement schedule experiments

have investigated the development of tolerance under the cannabinoids. These experiments have uniformly shown that tolerance

readily develops in animals to cannabinoid-induced suppressant

effects on operant responding. However, two studies have shown

that, in this situation, tolerance development to -9-THC is due to

the animals responding under the influence of the drug rather than

to the mere exposure of the animals to -9-THC (Bruce & Ferraro,

1975; Manning, 1974a). Moreover, Frankenheim (1974) observed that

repeated i.p. injections of -8-THC (13.0 and 17.8 mg/kg) tended to

increase the sensitivity of rats to a response rate-increasing

effect of the drug under a differential reinforcement of low rate

schedule of reinforcement. This increased sensitivity was likened

by Frankenheim (1974) to the reverse tolerance sometimes reported

for marihuana effects in humans.

Compared to operant reinforcement schedule research, the effects of

cannabinoids on the acquisition and performance of instrumental

maze or alley-way responding have not received extensive study.

Based on previously published literature, it may be concluded that

the cannabinoids impair reinforced and latent learning in a variety

of instrumental conditioning situations including the Y maze,

Lashley III maze and straight alley.2

The straight alley has also been used to investigate the influence

of i.p. injections of 0.5 mg/kg of -9-THC on partial reinforcement

effects in rats (Drewnowski & Gray, 1975). Both the partial

reinforcement acquisition effect (i.e., the higher running speed

reached by animals trained on partial reinforcement as compared to

continuous reinforcement) and the partial reinforcement extinction

effect (i.e., the greater resistance to extinction of animals

trained on partial reinforcement) were abolished by -9-THC. These

data suggest that cannabinoids may have antifrustrational properties (Drewnowski & Gray, 1975).

Residual learning deficits in a Hebb-Williams maze were investigated in rats following chronic exposure to cannabis extract by Fehr

et al. (1976). Initially, these investigators established that an

oral dose of 10 mg/kg of THC acutely impaired maze learning.

Following a chronic dose regimen in which the same dose was administered for up to three months, no residual learning impairment was

found after a 25-day drug-free period. However, significant residual impairment of maze learning was produced two months or more

after a six-month period of daily oral administration of 20 mg/kg

THC.

1Abel et al., 1974; Adams & Barratt, 1974; Davis & Borgen, 1975;

Ford et al., 1976; Frankenheim, 1974; Kosersky et al., 1974;

Manning, 1974a; Newman et al., 1974.

2Drew et al., 1973; Jarbe & Henriksson, 1973; Miller & Drew, 1973;

Miller et al., 1973; Uyeno, 1973.

- 107 -
DISCRIMINATION LEARNING

The effects of cannabinoids on discrimination learning may be

conveniently discussed under two subtopics: 1) the effects of

cannabinoids on the performance of discriminations based on exteroceptive stimuli, and 2) the acquisition of stimulus control of

behavior based on the presence or absence of cannabinoids. Since

only a few recent experiments describing the effects of cannabinoids on discrimination learning with extercoeptive stimuli have

been published, this subtopic will be treated only briefly.

In general, the effects of cannabinoids on established stimulus

discriminations are influenced by the same variables as determine

the effects of other psychotropic drugs on discrimination performance. More specifically, disruption of discrimination performance by cannabinoids is more likely if the discrimination is

complex rather than simple and if the discrimination is successive

rather than simultaneous. The typical cannabinoid-induced disruption of discrimination performance is the result of dose-related

decreases in responses to the stimulus associated with reinforcement and corresponding increases in responses to the stimulus

associated with non-reinforcement (cf., Marihuana and Health,

1974). Quite recently, Miller and Deets (1976) have shown that -9-

THC can enhance the discriminative ability of rhesus monkeys in a

social learning context. Alternatively, Adams and Barratt (1976)

have shown that a low dose of orally administered marihuana extract

will impair color and form discriminations in monkeys, and that no

tolerance develops to the accuracy impairment effects of the drug

although response time impairments do exhibit tolerance. Lewis et

al. (1976) reported that altitudes of 8,000 and 12,000 feet do not

potentiate the effects of -9-THC, based on the accuracy of a

complex discrimination, but do markedly reduce response speeds

under the influence of the drug as compared to drugged performance

at ground level. Apparently, some behavioral impairments produced

by marihuana can be potentiated by hypoxia.

In a similar context -- and in accord with the effects of most

psychotropic drugs -- during generalization testing, -9-THC usually reduces total response output but does not typically alter the

slope of the generalization gradient. An exception to this was

reported by Weisz and Vardaris (1975) who investigated auditory

generalization in rats performing under a shuttle box avoidance

task. It was found that oral doses of 4 and 6 mg/kg -9-THC

affected the slope of the auditory generalization gradient which

was obtained in extinction.

Research prior to 1975 established that animals can learn to

discriminate between the presence of cannabinoids and a vehicle

control solution.1 Still more recent research has served to confirm

1Barry & Kubena, 1972; Ferraro et al., 1974b; Henriksson & Jarbe,

1972; Jarbe & Henriksson, 1973c, 1974; Kubena & Barry, 1972.

- 108 -
and to extend this earlier work.1

 Jarbe et al. (1975) used an

experimental procedure which is prototypic of research on this

topic. Gerbils trained in a T maze were required to make discriminative choices based on whether -9-THC or drug vehicle alone had

been injected prior to the training session. As is the usual

outcome in cannabinoid stimlus studies of this sort, it was found

that the -9-THC discrimination was acquired in a dose-related

manner (from 0.5 to 16.0 mg/kg, i.p.). Furthermore, decreasing the

dose or increasing the injection-test interval from that used in

training led to a decrease in -9-THC associated choices. One

unique aspect of this study is that pentobarbital (20 mg/kg)

interacted in a more than additive fashion with -9-THC to determine

drug versus control solution choice responses.

The -9-THC discrimination paradigm has been used to compare the

potency of different routes of drug administration (Barry &

Krimmer, 1975, 1976; Jarbe & Henriksson, 1974). As compared to

intraperitoneal administration, -9-THC administered orally or by

inhalation has stronger stimulus properties while lesser stimulus

properties are manifest after intravenous administration of -9-

THC.

Although sane quantitative differences exist, it now appears that

the stimulus properties of -9-THC are interchangeable with -8-

THC, cannabis extract and hashish smoke (Barry & Krimmer, 1975;

Jarbe & Henriksson, 1974) as well as with the metabolites 11-OH- -8-

and 11-OH- -9-THC (Barry & Krimmer, 1976; Ford & Balster, 1975) and

with the analog 9-nor-9ß-OH-hexahydrocannabinol. On the other

hand, CBN and CBD do not seem to produce THC-like stimulus properties (Barry & Kubena, 1972; Henriksson et al., 1975; Jarbe &

Henriksson, 1974), although Bueno et al. (1976) recently reported

that CBN -- but not CBD -- induces -9-THC-like responses in a drug

discriminative stimulus-generalization test. Further, a wide range

of drugs fran several pharmacological classes have been shown not to

be interchangeable, in terms of stimulus properties, with -9-THC

(e.g., Greenberg et al., 1975). Thus, there is support for a

hypothesis that the active cannabinoids may have a unique mode of

pharmacological action.

One final aspect of the cannabinoid-stimulus discrimination paradigm merits further study: whether or not tolerance develops to the

drug-stimulus properties of -9-THC. There have been four studies

which address this concern. One study supports the development of

tolerance (Hirschhorn & Rosencrans, 1974), another provides indirect evidence supporting tolerance development (Jarbe & Henriksson,

1973b), while the other two provide data indirectly supporting a

lack of tolerance development (Bueno & Carlini, 1972; Bueno et al.,

1976). Until additional experiments are performed, one can tenta1Barry & Krimmer, 1975, 1976; Bueno et al., 1976; Ford & Balster,

1975; Greenberg et al., 1975; Henriksson et al., 1975; Jarbe et al.,

1975, 1976.

- 109 -
tively conclude that a slow, and perhaps partial, tolerance develops to the stimulus properties of -9-THC.

State-dependent learning refers to the phenanenon that animals

perform better if trained and tested under the influence of a drug

than if a drug-state change occurs between the training and testing

phases of an experiment. State-dependent learning has been shown

for -8-THC and -9-THC (e.g., Waser et al., 1976). However, it is

not clear from the THC literature whether or not symmetric disruptive effects are obtained between a change from a drugged to a nondrugged state (D-ND) and a change from a non-drugged to a drugged

state (ND-D). Both symmetric and asymmetric state-dependent

effects have been reported for THC (Henriksson & Jarbe, 1971). In

the case of asymmetric effects, a change from the D to ND state

produces greater impairment of responding than does a change from

the ND to D state (Goldberg et al., 1973). Johansson et al. (1974)

have shown that -8-THC will reliably induce asymmetric state

dependency of this latter type if animals are first made tolerant to

the acute disruptive effects of the drug.

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

University of New Mexico

- 110 -
REFERENCES

Preclinical Effects: Learned Behavior

Abel, E.L., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Effects of route of administration on onset and

duration of activity and tolerance development. Psychopharmacologia, 35:29-38 (1974).

Adams, P.M. and Barratt, E.S. Effects of acute and chronic marijuana on the performance of a complex reinforcement schedule

in the squirrel monkey. Clinical Toxicology, 7:267-268

(1974).

Adams, P.M. and Barratt, E.S. The effects of a marijuana extract on

two-choice discrimination learning in the squirrel monkey.

Physiological Psychology, 4:155-158 (1976).

Barry, H. and Krimmer, E.C. Discriminative -9-tetrahydrocannabinol stimulus tested with several doses, routes, intervals

and Federation Proceedings, 34:743 (1975).

Barry, H. and Krimmer, E.C. Discriminative -9-tetrahydrocannabinol stimulus tested with several doses, routes, intervals

and a marihuana extract. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, pp. 535-538.

Barry, H. and Kubena, R.K. Discriminative stimulus characteristics

of alcohol, marihuana, and atropine. In Singh, J.M., Miller,

L. and Lal, H. (eds.), Drug Addiction, Vol. 1. New York:

Futura, 1972.

Beautrais, A.L. and Marks, D.F. A test of state dependency effects

in marihuana intoxication for the learning of psychomotor

tasks. Psychopharmacologia, 46:37-40 (1976).

Boyd, E.S., Boyd, E.H. and Brown, L.E. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and pentobarbital on a cortical response evoked

during conditioning. Psychopharmacology, 47:119-122 (1976).

Bruce, P.D. and Ferraro, D.P. Learned tolerance to -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in pigeons. Paper presented at the Rocky

Mountain Psychological Association, Salt Lake, 1975.

Bueno, O.F.A. and Carlini, E.A. Dissociation of learning in marihuana tolerant rats. Psychopharmacologia, 25:49-56 (1972).

Bueno, O.F.A., Carlini, E.A., Finkelfarb, E. and Suzuki, J.S. -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol, ethanol, and amphetamine as discriminative stimuli; generalization tests with other drugs. Psychopharmacology, 46:235-243 (1976).

- 111 -
Carder, B. and Deikel, S.M. Similarities between -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC) and reserpine-like drugs. Behavioral

Biology, 17:313-332 (1976).

Corcoran, M.E. Role of drug novelty and metabolism in the aversive

effects of hashish injections in rats. Life Sciences, 12:63-

72 (1973).

Corcoran, M.E., Bolotow, I., Amit, Z. and McCaughran, J. Conditioned taste aversions produced by active and inactive cannabinoids. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 6:725-728

(1974).

Davis, T.R.A., Kensler, C.J. and Dews, P.B. Comparison of behavioral effects of nicotine, d-amphetamine, caffeine and

dimethyleptyl tetrahydrocannabinol in squirrel monkeys. Psychopharmacologia, 32:51-65 (1973).

Davis, W.M. and Borgen, L.A. Effects of cannabidiol and -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on operant behavior. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 9:453-462

Davis, W.M. and Borgen, L.A. Tolerance development to the effect of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on conditioned behavior: Role of

treatment interval and influence of microsomal metabolism.

Archives Internationales de Pharmacodynamie et de Therapie,

213:97-112 (1975).

Drew, W.G., Miller, L.L. and Baugh, E.L. Effects of -9-THC, LSD-25

and scopolamine on continuous spontaneous alternation in the

Y-maze. Psychopharmacologia, 32:171-182 (1973).

Drewnowski, A. and Gray, J.A. Influence of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on partial reinforcement effects. Psychopharmacologia,

43:233-237 (1975).

Dykstra, L. and McMillan, D.E. Shockintensity adjustment by

squirrel monkeys under a titration procedure following administration of morphine, nalorphine, pentazocine, propoxyphene,

-8-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -8-THC) or chlorpromazine. Federation Proceedings, 33:516 (1974).

Dykstra, L.A., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. Effects of -9-THC

and a water soluble ester of -9-THC on schedule-controlled

behavior. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:29-32

(1975).

Elsmore, T.F. and Fletcher, G.V. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Aversive effects in rat at high doses. Science, 175:911-912

(1972).

- 112 -
Elsmore, T.F. and Manning, F.J. Time course and dose-response

effects of orally administered -9-THC on interval schedule

performance of the rat. Life Sciences, 15:481-489 (1974).

Fehr, K.A., Kalant, H. and LeBlanc, A.E. Residual learning deficit

after heavy exposure to cannabis or alcohol in rats. Science,

192:1249-1251 (1976).

Ferraro, D.P. and Bruce, P.D. Marihuana-induced enhancement of a

conditioned emotional response. Paper presented at the Rocky

Mountain Psychological Association, Salt Lake, 1975.

Ferraro, D.P. and Gluck, J.P. Effects of oral -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on operant reinforcement schedule performance in

rats. Pharmacology, 11:65-69 (1974).

Ferraro, D.P., Gluck, J.P. and Herndon, G.B. Acquisition and

extinction of variable interval schedule behavior by rats

under -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Pharmacology, Biochemistry

and Behavior, 2:487-491 (1974a).

Ferraro, D.P., Gluck, J.P. and Morrow, C.W. Temporally related

stimulus properties of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in monkeys.

Psychopharmacologia, 35:305-316 (1974b).

Ford, R.D. and Balster, R.L. The discriminative stimulus properties of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC): Generalization to some metabolites and derivatives. Federation Proceedings, 34:743 (1975).

Ford, R.D., Balster, R.L. and Beckner, J.S. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC) and 11-OH- -9-THC: Onset, pattern and duration of behavioral effects and tolerance in rats. Federation

Proceedings, 35:644 (1976).

Frankenheim, J.M. Effects of repeated doses of L- -8-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol on schedule-controlled temporally-spaced

responding of rats. Psychopharmacologia, 38:125-144 (1974).

Frankenheim, J.M., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. Effects of -9-

and -8-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabinol on schedule-controlled behavior of pigeons and rats. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 178:241-253 (1971).

Goldberg, M.E., Hefner, M.A., Robichaud, R.C. and Dubinsky, B.

Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and chlordiazepoxide (CDP) on state-dependent learning: Evidence for asymmetrical dissociation. Psychopharmacologia, 30:173-184

(1973).

Gonzalez, S.C., Karniol, I.G. and Carlini, E.A. Effect of cannabis

sativa extract on conditioned fear. Behavioral Biology,

7:83-94 (1972).

- 113 -
Gordon, R., Gordon, R.J. and Sofia, R.D. Antitussive activity of

some naturally occurring cannabinoids in anesthetized cats.

European Journal of Pharmacology, 35:309-313 (1976).

Greenberg, I., Kuhn, D. and Appel, J.B. Comparison of the discriminative stimulus properties of -9-THC and psilocybin in

rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:931-934

(1975).

Henriksson, B.G. and Jarbe, T. The effect of two tetrahydrocannabinols ( -9-THC and -8-THC) on conditioned avoidance

learning in rats and its transfer to normal state conditions.

Psychopharmacologia, 22:23-30 (1971).

Henriksson, B.G. and Jarbe, T. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol used as a

discriminative stimulus for rats in position learning in a Tshaped water maze. Psychonomic Science, 27:25-26 (1972).

Henriksson, B.G., Johansson, J.O. and Jarbe, T.U.C. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol produced discrimination in pigeons. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:771-774 (1975).

Hill, S.Y., Schwin, R., Powell, B. and Goodwin, P.W. State-dependent effects of marijuana on human memory. Nature, 243:241-

242 (1973).

Hirschhorn, I.D. and Rosencrans, J.A. Morphine and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Tolerance to the stimulus effects. Psychopharmacologia, 36:243-253 (1974).

Houser, V.P. The effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol upon fearmotivated behavior in squirrel monkeys. Physiological Psychology, 3:157-161 (1975).

Izquierdo, I. and Nasselo, A.G. Effects of cannabidiol and of

diphenylhydantoin on the hippocampus and learning. Psychopharmacologia, 31:321-332 (1973).

Jaffe, P.G. and Baum, M. Increased resistance to extinction of an

avoidance response in rats following administration of

hashish resin. Psychopharmacologia, 20:97-102 (1971).

Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.G. Effects of -8-THC and -9-THC

on the acquisition of a discriminated positional habit in

rats. Psychopharmacologia, 31:321-332 (1973a).

Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.C. Open-field behavior and acquisition of discriminative response control in -9-THC tolerant rats. Experientia, 29:1251-1253 (1973b).

Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.G. State dependent learning with

tetrahydrocannabinols and other drugs. Ciencia E Cultura,

25:752 (1973c).

- 114 -
Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.G. Discriminative response control

produced with hashish, tetrahydrocannabinols ( -8-THC and -

9-THC), and other drugs. Psychopharmacologia, 40:1-16

(1974).

Jarbe, T.U.C., Johansson, J.O. and Henriksson, B.G. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and pentobarbital as discriminative cues in

the Mongolian gerbil (Meriones unguiculatus). Pharmacology,

Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:403-410 (1975).

Jarbe, T.U.C., Johansson, J.O. and Henriksson, B.G. Characteristics of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-produced discrimination

in rats. Psychopharmacology, 48:181-187 (1976).

Johansson, J.O., Henriksson, B.G. and Jarbe, T.U.C. Effects of -8-

THC on dissociation of conditioned avoidance responding in

tolerant and nontolerant rats. Physiological Psychology,

2:431-432 (1974).

Kay, E.J. Aversive effects of repeated injections of THC in rats.

Psychological Reports, 37:1051-1054 (1975).

Kaymakcalan, S., Turker, R.K. and Turker, M.N. Analgesic effect of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the dog. Psychopharmacologia,

35:123-128 (1974).

Kosersky, D.S., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and 11-hydroxy- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Behavioral effects and tolerance development. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 189:61-65 (1974).

Kubena, R.K. and Barry, H. Stimulus characteristics of marijuana

components. Nature, 235:397-398 (1972).

Lewis, M.F., Ferraro, D.P., Mertens, H.W. and Steen, J.A. Interaction between marihuana and attitude on a complex behavioral

taskinbaboons. Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine,

47:121-123 (1976).

Manning, F.J. Acute tolerance to the effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on spaced responding in rhesus monkeys. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 2:603-607 (1974a).

Manning, F.J. Tolerance to effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

(THC) on free-operant shock avoidance. Federation Proceedings, 33:481 (1974b).

Marihuana and Health, Report to Congress from the Secretary of

Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office, 1971.

- 115 -
Marihuana and Health, Second Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1972.

Marihuana and Health, Third Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1973.

Marihuana and Health, Fourth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1974.

Marihuana and Health, Fifth Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1975.

Mendelson, J.H., Kuehnle, J.C., Greenberg, I. and Mello, N.K.

Operant acquisition of marihuana in man. The Journal of

Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 198:42-53 (1976).

Miller, R.E. and Deets, A.C. -9-THC and nonverbal communication in

monkeys. Psychopharmacology, 48:53-58 (1976).

Miller, L.L. and Drew, W.G. Impairment of latent learning in the

rat by a marihuana component. Nature, 8:421-426 (1973).

Miller, L.L. and Drew, W.G. Cannabis: Review of behavioral effects

in animals. Psychological Bulletin, 81:401-417 (1974).

Miller, L.L., Drew, W.G. and Wikler, A. Comparison of -9-THC, LSD25 and scopolamine on non-spatial single alternation performance in the runway. Psychopharmacologia, 28:1-11 (1973).

Newman, L.M., Lutz, M.P. and Domino, E.F. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

and some CNS depressants: Evidence for cross tolerance in the

rat. Archives Internationales de Pharmacodynamie et de

Therapie, 207:254-259 (1974).

Noyes, R., Brunk, S.F., Avery, D.H. and Canter, A. The analgesic

properties of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and codeine. Clinical

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18:84-89 (1975a).

Noyes, R., Brunk, S.F., Baram, D.A. and Canter, A. Analgesic effect

o f -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 15:134-143 (1975b).

Pandina, R.J. and Musty, R.E. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

on active avoidance acquisition and passive avoidance retention in rats with amygdaloid lesions. Pharmacology, 13:297-

308 (1975).

Pillard, R.C., McNair, D.M. and Fisher, S. Does marihuana enhance

experimentally induced anxiety? Psychopharmacologia, 40:205-

210 (1974).

- 116 -
Pryor, G.T. and Braude, M.C. Interactions between -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and phencyclidine (PC). The Pharmacologist,

17:182 (1975).

Robichaud, R.C., Hefner, M.A., Anderson, J.E. and Goldberg, M.E.

Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) on several rodent

learning paradigms. Pharmacology, 10:1-11 (1973).

Schoenfeld, R.I. Lysergic acid diethylamide- and mescaline-induced

attenuation of the effect of punishment in the rat. Science,

192:801-803 (1976).

Sofia, R.D., Vassar, H.B. and Knobloch, L.C. Comparative analgesic

activity of various naturally occurring cannabinoids in mice

and rats. Psychopharmacologia, 40:285-295 (1975).

Takahashi, R.N. and Karniol, I. Pharmacological interaction

between cannabinol and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Psychopharmacologia, 41:277-284 (1975).

Tayal, G., Gupta, L., Agarwal, S.S. and Arora, R.B. Effects of

cannabis on conditioned avoidance response and brain monoamine oxidase activity in rats. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology, 12:375-376 (1974).

Uyeno, E.T. Disruption of maze performance by -9-THC. Proceedings of the American Psychological Association, 997-998

(1973).

Wagner, M.J., Greenberg, I., Fraley, S. and Fisher, S. Effects of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and ethyl alcohol on adjunctive

behavior and the lateral hypothalamus. Physiology and Behavior, 10:109-132 (1973).

Waser, P.G., Martin, A. and Heer-Carcano, L. The effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and LSD on the acquisition of an active

avoidance response in the rat. Psychopharmacologia, 46:249-

254 (1976).

Weisz, D.J. and Vardaris, R.M. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

on the slope of auditory generalization gradients in rats.

Physiological Psychology, 4:145-148 (1976).

Welburn, P.J., Stormer, G.A., Chesher, G.B. and Jackson, D.M.

Effect of cannabinoids on the abdominal constriction response

in mice: Within cannabinoid interactions. Psychopharmacologia, 46:83-85 (1976).

Zitko, B.A., Howes, J.F., Razdan, R.K., Dalzell, H.C., Sheehan,

J.C. and Pars, H.G. Water soluble derivatives of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Science, 177:442 (1972).

- 117 -
Chapter 6

PRECLINICAL CHRONIC EFFECTS:

UNLEARNED AND LEARNED BEHAVIOR

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

Whether or not tolerance develops to cannabinoid-induced effects on

unlearned and learned behavior cannot be answered unequivocally.

In certain response systems, tolerance clearly develops and is

characterized by its rapid development and extended length. Indeed, in the past few years tolerance has been demonstrated for both

unlearned and learned responses in a range of animal species under a

variety of drug conditions in studies examining: unlearned motor

responses in rats (Barnes & Fried, 1974); spontaneous activity in

rats and mice (Anderson et al., 1975; Fried, 1976); conditioned

avoidance performance in rodents and monkeys (Houser, 1975;

Manning, 1976; Waser et al., 1976); dominance status in monkeys

(Sassenrath & Chapman, 1975); analgesia in dogs (Kaymakcalan et

al., 1974); discrimination performance in monkeys (Adams & Barratt,

1976); and reinforcement schedule performance in pigeons, monkeys

and rats.

In addition to demonstrations that tolerance to the cannabinoids

can develop in unlearned and learned behavioral situations, several

experiments have elucidated some of the determinants -- both pharmacological and extrapharmacological -- of cannabinoid tolerance

development. These latter experiments encanpass a wide variety of

situations and parameters and, in some instances, suggest constraints on the generality or pervasiveness of tolerance. The

studies described below are representative of these experiments.

Abel et al. (1974) have shown that tolerance to the effects of -9-

THC on reinforcement schedule responding develops in pigeons at

about the same rate after intramuscular, intravenous or peroral

administration. Cross-tolerance between inhaled cannabis and

intraperitoneal injections of -9-THC was obtained for the spontaneous motor activity of rats by Fried (1976). Tolerance to the

depressant effects of -9-THC on reinforcement schedule performance

was directly related to the number of administrations of the drug,

but was inversely related to the tneatment interval, i.e., the

amount of time separating successive drug administration (Davis &

Borgen, 1975). Tolerance follows a similar course for -9-THC and

its metabolite 11-OH- -9-THC (Kosersky et al., 1974). Additionally, Fernandes et al. (1974) have suggested that CBD interacts with

THC to enhance the tolerance development to THC.

1Adams & Barratt, 1974; Bruce & Ferraro, 1975; Davis & Borgen, 1975;

Frankenheim, 1974.

- 118 -
Barnes and Fried (1974) have shown that the age of the subject at

the time of first exposure to -9-THC is a factor in later tolerance

development. Rats who first received -9-THC when immature developed tolerance more rapidly as adults than did rats who were adults

when first drugged.

Rate of tolerance appears to depend as well on: the amount of prior

training on a learning task (Olson & Carder, 1974); and the type

(Adams & Barratt, 1976; Bueno et al., 1976; Newman et al., 1974),

parameter values (Ferraro et al., 1374; Houser, 1975; Manning,

1976) and canplexity of the learned task (Ferraro & Grilly, 1973a;

Snyder et al., 1975). In general, as the amount of prior training

is decreased and the difficulty of the learned task is increased,

tolerance develops more slowly or does not develop at all. Another

behavioral variable that seems to determine the rate of tolerance

development is the behavioral consequences produced by -9-THC

(Ferraro, 1972; Manning, 1974b). For example, in one recent

experiment (Manning, 1976), tolerance developed to -9-THC much

more rapidly if -9-THC acted to increase the number of shocks

received by rats working under a conditioned avoidance task. In

this same learning context, it appears that the development of -9-

THC tolerance in appetitive reinforcement situations is facilitated

if animals are given the opportunity to respond under the influence

of the drug rather than merely exposing them to the drug. This

latter finding has been reported for rats (Carder & Olson, 1973),

pigeons (Bruce & Ferraro, 1975), monkeys (Manning, 1974a) and

chimpanzees (Ferraro & Grilly, 1974).

On the basis of findings such as those above, Ferraro (1976) has

followed the lead of others (Elsmore, 1972; Harris et al., 1972) in

proposing a behavioral model of marihuana tolerance. The essence of

this position is that learning or drug-behavior interactions

account, in part, for sane of the characteristics of tolerance

development to -9-THC. The pharmacological mechanism underlying

tolerance development to the cannabinoids is not definitively known

(cf., McMillan et al., 1971). However, there is evidence suggesting

that the development of tolerance to -9-THC may proceed by more

than one pharmacodynamic mechanism of action. For example,

Anderson et al. (1975) found that both the time of onset and the

duration of tolerance to -9-THC differed in mice with respect to

drug effects on intestinal motility, temperature and locomotor

activity. As these researchers concluded, it seems unlikely that

any one mechanism, such as metabolic tolerance, could account for

the obtained differences in tolerance development over so wide a

range of response systems. However, Davis and Borgen (1975) have

obtained data which suggest a metabolic mechanism of tolerance

development. Still other experimenters (Dewey et al., 1973;

McMillan et al., 1973; Martin et al., 1976) have argued that -9-THC

tolerance is not solely metabolic or drug distributional. Another

recent hypothesis regarding toleranoe development to -9-THCproduced behavioral effects has been offered by Deikel and Carder

(1976). These workers suggest that stress augments tolerance

development in such a way that the rate and extent of tolerance

development to -9-THC is directly related to the amount of stress

- 119 -
present in the drug situation. Obviously , additional research is

still necessary in order to specify definitively just what pharmacodynamic and learning factors are important in determining the

development of tolerance to marihuana.

Admittedly, it is not possible to make direct comparisons among

different cannabinoid tolerance experiments since they often differ

in non-systematic ways with respect to such variables as number,

level and distribution of drug doses, behavioral task and species of

subject. Nevertheless, it must be noted that the literature

contains a fair number of experiments where a lack of tolerance

development to the cannabinoids has been reported. This has been

found for rodents and monkeys in a wide variety of situations such

as: open-field behavior (Sjoden et al., 1973); isolation-induced

aggression (Dubinsky et al 1973); food and water consumption

(Gluck & Ferraro, 1974; Sofia & Barry, 1974); free-operant shook

avoidance (Manning, 1976); performance under a schedule of positive

reinforcement (Snyder et al., 1975); and discrimination learning

based on exteroceptive (Adams & Barratt, 1976; Fetterolf & Ferraro,

1975) or drug-produced stimuli (Bueno et al., 1976). By contrast,

Frankenheim (1974) has reported that repeated injections of -8-THC

produce an increased sensitivity to some of the effects produced by

this drug on reinforcement schedule-controlled responding in rats.

This increased sensitivity was likened by the investigator to a

reverse tolerance effect.

With respect to other chronic effects of the cannabinoids, two

experiments have failed to find any residual effects on learned

behavior following discontinuance of -9-THC previously administered for 150 consecutive days (Ferraro & Grilly, 1974) or aperiodically for seven months (Ferraro & Grilly, 1973b). More recently,

residual learning deficits have been reported in rats after heavy

exposure to a cannabis extract. Fehr et al. (1976) observed a

significant residual impairment of maze learning two months following a six month long drug regimen in which rats were administered a

THC oral dose of 20 mg/kg daily. In the context of behavioral

teratogenesis (Coyle et al., 1976), a learning deficit has been

reported in the offspring of rats whose mothers were orally administered 2 mg/kg/day of tritiated -9-THC throughout pregnancy

(Vardaris et al., 1976). The learning deficit was in the acquisition of an avoidance response and occurred when the offspring were

observed in a competitive-aggression situation where it was found

21 days of age, but not 90 days of age. More permanent effects were

that rats whose mothers had received the drug were more aggressive

than control rats across the 90-day testing period. Further, with

respect to aggressiveness, Luthra et al. (1976) found a return to

normal aggressiveness in rats following cessation of treatment with

marihuana smoke under a chronic drug treatment of up to 87 days at

inhaled -9-THC doses of 4 mg/kg. In contrast, post- -9-THC

treatment increases in aggressiveness have been observed in mice

(Cutler et al., 1975) and in monkeys (Sassenrath & Chapman, 1975),

although no other behavioral manifestations of abstinence from the

drug were apparent in these experiments.

- 120 -
With the exception of two experiments (Deneau & Kaymakcalan, 1971;

Pickens et al., 1972), animals have not been observed to selfadminister cannabinoids. More specifically, monkeys do not selfadminister -9-THC after receiving the drug for a month or when

offered it as a substitute for cocaine (Harris et al., 1974). Rats

forced to drink cannabis extract or hashish suspensions for long

periods of time (up to 126 days) reject the drug in favor of a

control solution (Corcoran & Amit, 1974; Leite & Carlini, 1974).

Finally, mice are reluctant to consume food pellets containing -9-

THC even after subsisting on the pellets for over two months (Maker

et al., 1974; Cutler et al., 1975). It is noteworthy that no

behavioral symptoms of abstinence or withdrawal were reported in

the above experiments at the termination of the forced drug regimens

used. One further experiment by Chesher and Jackson (1974) reported

the absence of an abstinence syndrome after withdrawal of cannabis

extract administered in oral doses equivalent to up to 80 mg/kg -9-

THC for 11, 13 and 28 days. In this study, mice were tested for

their convulsive thresholds to pentylenetetrazol between six hours

and six days following termination of the cannabis drug regimen. No

differences were found between drug and control animals.

Despite the above evidence to the contrary, two reports in the

literature suggest -9-THC produced dependence and abstinence symptans (Hirschhorn & Rosencrans, 1974; Stadnicki et al., 1974). In

the better controlled of these experiments (Stadnicki et al., 1974)

rats were administered naloxone hydrochloride after a five-week

pretreatment period with -9-THC (8 to 32 mg/kg, i.p.). The rats

exhibited narcotic-like withdrawal symptoms including diarrhea,

teeth chattering and “wet dog” shakes.

Three experiments have demonstrated that -9-THC, -8-THC and its

metabolite 11-OH- -8-THC reduce the abstinence symptoms precipitated by naloxone hydrochloride in morphine-dependent rats

(Bhargava, 1976; Hine et al., 1975a, 1975b). In one of these (Hine

et al., 1975a), -9-THC doses of 5 and 10 mg/kg administered by the

intraperitoneal route one hour before naloxone administration significantly reduced the frequency of wet shakes and diarrhea in the

morphine treated rats. Other research (Bhargava, 1976) has shown

that CBD and CBN can also inhibit naloxone-precipitated morphine

withdrawal symptoms and that CBN and CBD interact with -9-THC to

further attenuate these withdrawal symptoms (Hine et al. , 1975b).

Data such as these have led to the conclusion that tetrahydrocannabinols may have sane therapeutic utility in clinical narcotic

detoxification programs. The same conclusion may not be appropriate for alcohol withdrawal situations. Kralik et al. (1976) have

reported that 10 mg/kg -9-THC administered i.p. to mice immediately after withdrawal from a 3-day exposure to ethanol vapor

intensifies the alcohol-withdrawal syndrome.

Douglas Peter Ferraro, Ph.D.

University of New Mexico

- 121 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 9
REFERENCES

Preclinical Chronic Effects: Unlearned and Learned Behavior

Abel, E.L., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Effects of route of administration on onset and

duration of activity and tolerance development. Psychopharmacologia, 35:29-38 (1974).

Adams, M.D., Chait, L.D. and Earnhardt, J.T. Tolerance to the

cardiovascular effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the

rat. British Journal of Pharmacology, 56:43-48 (1976).

Adams, P.M. and Barratt, E.S. Effects of acute and chronic marijuana on the performance of a complex reinforcement schedule

in the squirrel monkey. Clinical Toxicology, 7:267-268

(1974).

Adams, P.M. and Barratt, E.S. The effects of a marijuana extract on

two-choice discrimination learning in the squirrel monkey.

Physiological Psychology, 4:155-158 (1976).

Anderson, P.F., Jackson, D.M., Chesher, G.B. and Malor, R. Tolerance to the effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice on

intestinal motility, temperature, and locomotor activity.

Psychopharmacologia, 43:31-36 (1975).

Barnes, C. and Fried, P.A. Tolerance to -9-THC in adult rats with

differential -9-THC exposure when immature or during early

adulthood. Psychopharmacologia, 34:181-190 (1974).

Bhargava, H.N. Naloxone-induced withdrawal in morphine-dependent

mice: Influence of cannabinoids and tetrahydrocannabinols.

The Pharmacologist, 18:236 (1976).

Bruce, P.D. and Ferraro, D.P. Learned tolerance to -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in pigeons. Paper presented at the Rocky

Mountain Psychological Association, Salt Lake, 1975.

Bueno, O.F.A. and Carlini, E.A. Dissociation of learning in marihuana tolerant rats. Psychopharmacologia, 25:49-56 (1972).

Bueno, O.F.A., Carlini, E.A., Finkelfarb, E. and Suzuki, J.S. -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol, ethanol, and amphetamine as discriminative stimuli; generalization tests with other drugs. Psychopharmacologia, 46:235-243 (1976).

Carder, B. and Olson, J. Learned behavioral tolerance to marihuana

in rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 1:73-76

(1973).

Chesher, G.B. and Jackson, D.M. The effect of withdrawal from

cannabis on pentylenetetrazol convulsive threshold in mice.

Psychopharmacologia, 40: 129-135 (1974).

- 122 -
Corcoran, M.E. and Amit, Z. Reluctance of rats to drink hashish

suspensions: Free-choice and forced consumption, and the

effects of hypothalamic stimulation. Psychopharmacologia,

35: 129-147 (1974).

Coyle, I., Wayner, M.J. and Singer, G. Behavioral teratogenesis: A

critical evaluation. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 4:191-200 (1976).

Cutler, M.G., Mackintosh, J.H. and Chance, M.R.A. Behavioural

changes in laboratory mice during cannabis feeding and withdrawal. Psychopharmacologia, 44:173-177 (1975).

Davis, W.M. and Borgen, L.A. Tolerance development to the effect of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on conditioned behavior: Role of

treatment interval and influence of microsomal metabolism.

Archives Internationales de Pharmacodynamie et de Therapie,

213:97-112 (1975).

Deikel, S.M. and Carder, B. Shock-induced antagonism of -9-THC

effects in rats. Paper presented at Psychoncmic Society

Meetings, St. Louis, 1976.

Deneau, G.A. and Kaymakcalan, S. Physiological and psychological

dependence to synthetic -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in

rhesus monkeys. Pharmacologist, 13:246 (1971).

Dewey, W.L., McMillan, D.E., Harris, L.S. and Turk, R.F. Distribution of radioactivity in brain of tolerant -and nontolerant

pigeons treated with 3H- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Biochemical Pharmacology, 22:399-405 (1973).

Dubinsky, B., Robichaud, R.C. and Goldberg, M.E. Effects of (-)- -

9-trans-tetrahydrocannabinol and its selectivity in several

models of aggressive behavior. Pharmacology, 9:204-216

(1973).

Elsmore, T.F. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on temporal and

auditory discrimination performance of monkeys. Psychopharmacologia, 26:62-72 (1972).

Fehr, K.A., Kalant, H. and LeBlanc, A.E. Residual learning deficit

after heavy exposure to cannabis or alcohol in rats. Science,

192:1249-1251 (1976).

Fernandes, M., Schabarek, A., Coper, H. and Hill, R. Modification

o f -9-THC actions by cannabinol and cannabidiol in the rat.

Psychopharmacologia, 38:329-338 (1974).

Ferraro, D.P. Effects of -9-tetrahydrooannabinol on simple and

complex learned behavior in animals. In Lewis, M.F. (ed.),

Current Research in Marijuana. New York: Academic Press,

1972.

- 123 -
Ferraro, D.P. A behavioral model of marihuana tolerance. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), The Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976.

Ferraro, D.P. and Grilly, D.M. Lack of tolerance to -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in chimpanzees. Science, 179:490-492.(1973a).

Ferraro, D.P. and Grilly, D.M. Marihuana extract in chimpanzees:

Absence of long-term effects on operant behavior. Psychological Reports, 32:473-474 (1973b).

Ferraro, D.P. and Grilly, D.M. Effects of chronic exposure to -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol on delayed matching-to-sample in chimpanzees. Psychopharmacologia, 37:127-138 (1974).

Ferraro, D.P., Grilly, D.M. and Grisham, M.G. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and delayed matching-to-sample in chimpanzees. In

Singh, J.M. and Lal, H. (eds.), Drug Addiction, Vol. III. New

York: Symposia Specialists, 1974.

Fetterolf, D.J. and Ferraro, D.P. Retardation of the acquisition of

a successive discrimination by -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in

rats. Paper presented at the Rocky Mountain Psychological

Association, Salt Lake, 1975.

Frankenheim, J.M. Effects of repeated doses of levorotatory- -8-

trans-tetrahydrocannabinol on schedule-controlled temporally-spaced responding of rats. Psychopharmacologia, 38:125-

144 (1974).

Frankenheim, J.M., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. Effects of -9-

and -8-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabinol on schedule-controlled behavior of pigeons and rats. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 178:241-253 (1971).

Fried, P.A. Cross-tolerance between inhaled cannabis and intraperitoneal injections of -9-THC. Pharmacology, Biochemistry

and Behavior, 4:635-638 (1976).

Gluck, J.P. and Ferraro, D.P. Effects of -9-THC on food and water

intake of deprivation experienced rats. Behavioral Biology,

11:395-401 (1974).

Grilly, D.M., Ferraro, D.P. and Marriott, R.G. Long-term interactions of marijuana and behavior in chimpanzees. Nature,

242:119-120 (1973).

Harris, R.T., Waters, W. and McLendon, D. Behavioral effects in

rhesus monkeys of repeated intravenous doses of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Psychopharmacologia, 26:297-306 (1972).

Harris, R.T., Waters, W. and McLendon, D. Evaluation of reinforcing

capability of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in rhesus monkeys.

Psychopharmacologia, 37:23-29 (1974).

- 124 -
Hine, B., Friedman, E., Torrelio, M. and Gershon, S. Morphinedependent rats: Blockade of precipitated abstinence by

tetrahydrocannabinol. Science, 187:443-445 (1975a).

Hine, B., Friedman, E., Torrelio, M. and Gershon, S. Tetrahydrocannabinol-attenuated abstinence and induced rotation in

morphine-dependent rats: Possible involvement of dopamine.

Neuropharmacology, 14:607-610 (1975b).

Hine, B., Torrelio, M. and Gershon, S. Differential effect of

cannabinol and cannabidiol on THC-induced responses during

abstinence in morphine-dependent rats. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 12:185-188

(1975c).

Hirschhorn, I.D. and Rosencrans, J.A. Morphine and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Tolerance to the stimulus effects. Psychopharmacologia, 36:243-253 (1974).

Houser, V.P. The effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol upon fearmotivated behavior in squirrel monkeys. Physiological Psychology, 3:157-161 (1975).

Kaymakcalan, S., Turker, R.K. and Turker, M.N. Analgesic effect of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol in the dog. Psychopharmacologia,

35:123-128 (1974).

Kosersky, D.S., McMillan, D.E. and Harris, L.S. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and 11-hydroxy- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Behavioral effects and tolerance development. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 189:61-65 (1974).

Kralik, P.M., Ho, B.T. and Matthews, H.R. Effect of -9-THC on

ethanol withdrawal in mice. Experientia, 15:723-725 (1976).

Leite, J.R. and Carlini, E.A. Failure to obtain “cannabis-directed

behavior” and abstinence syndrome in rats chronically treated

with cannabis sativa extracts. Psychopharmacologia, 36:133-

145 (1974):

Luthra, Y.K., Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C. Cerebral and

cerebellar neurochemical changes and behavioral manifestations in rats chronically exposed to marijuana smoke. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 35:455-467 (1976).

Maker, H.S., Khan, M.A. and Lehrer, G.M. The effect of selfregulated -9-tetrahydrocannabinol consumption on pregnant

mice and offspring. Federation Proceedings, 33:540 (1974).

Manning, F.J. Acute tolerance to the effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on spaced responding in rhesus monkeys. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 2:603-607 (1974a).

- 125 -
Manning, F.J. Tolerance to effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

(THC) on free-operant shock avoidance. Federation Proceedings, 33:481 (1974b).

Manning, F.J. Chronic -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Transient and

lasting effects on avoidance behavior. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 4:17-21 (1976).

Martin, B.R., Dewey, W.L., Harris, L.S. and Beckner, J.S. H-3- -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol tissue and subcellular distribution in

the central nervous system and tissue distribution in peripheral organs of tolerant and nontolerant dogs. The Journal of

Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 196:128-144

(1976).

McMillan, D.E., Dewey, W.L. and Harris, L.S. Characteristics of

tetrahydrccannabinol tolerance. Annals of the New York

Academy of Sciences, 191:89-99 (1971).

McMillan, D.E., Dewey, W.L., Turk, R.F., Harris, L.S. and McNeil,

J.H. Blood levels of 3H- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and its

metabolites in tolerant and nontolerant pigeons. Biochemical

Pharmacology, 22:383-397 (1973).

Newman, L.M., Lutz, M.P. and Domino, E.F. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

and some CNS depressants: Evidence for cross tolerance in the

rat. Archives Internationales de Pharmacodynamie et de

Therapie, 207:254-259 (1974).

Olson, J. and Carder, B. Behavioral tolerance to marihuana as a

function of amount of prior training. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 2:243-247 (1974).

Pickens, R., Thompson, T. and Muchov, D. Cannabis and phencyclidine

self-administration by animals. Paper presented at Bayer

Symposium on Psychic Dependence, Grosse Sedder, 1972.

Sassenrath, E.N. and Chapman, L.F. Tetrahydrocannabinol-induced

manifestations of the “marihuana syndrome” in group-living

macaques. Federation Proceedings, 34:1666-1670 (1975).

Sjoden, P.O., Jarbe, T.U.C. and Henriksson, B.G. Effects of long

term administration and withdrawal of tetrahydrocannabinols

( -8-THC and -9-THC) on open field behavior in rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 1:243-249 (1973).

Snyder, E.W., Lewis, E.G., Beck, E.C. and Dustman, R.E. Lack of

behavioral tolerance to -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in stumptailed macaques. Proceedings of the American Psychological

Association, 995-996 (1973).

Snyder, E.W., Lewis, E.G., Dustman, R.E. and Beck, E.C. Sustained

ingestion of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and the operant behavior of stump-tailed macaques. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and

Behavior, 3:1129-1132 (1975).

- 126 -
Sofia, R.D. and Barry, H. Acute and chronic effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on food intake by rats. Psychopharmacologia,

39:213-222 (1974).

Stadnicki, S.W., Schaeppi, U., Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C.

Crude marihuana extract: EEG and behavioral effects of

chronic oral administration in rhesus monkeys. Psychopharmacologia, 37:225-233 (1974).

Tayal, G., Gupta, L., Agarwal, S.S. and Arora, R.B. Effects of

cannabis on conditioned avoidance response and brain monoamine oxidase activity in rats. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology, 12:375-376 (1974).

Vardaris, R.M., Weisz, D.J., Fazel, A. and Rawitch, A.B. Chronic

administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol to pregnant rats:

Studies of pup behavior and placental transfer. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 4:249-254 (1976).

Waser, P.G., Martin, A. and Heer-Corcano, L. The effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and LSD on the acquisition of an active

avoidance response in the rat. Psychopharmacologia, 46:249-

254 (1976).

- 127 -
Chapter 7

HUMAN EFFECTS

Reese Jones, M.D.

ACUTE EFFECTS

A person ingesting or smoking cannabis experiences a fairly predictable sequence of physiologic and psychologic changes which last a

few hours and then gradually disappear. Although dose administered

and individual differences in personality, expectations, setting

and past drug experience all contribute to varied consequences from

a given dose of cannabis, the variability in acute effects from

cannabis seems no greater than with any other psychoactive drug.

Recently, a number of reviews and collections of papers have

appeared which attempt to cover the vast amount of information

accumulating about the acute and chronic effects of cannabis. Some

authors have attempted to consider the research findings in the

context of political-social decisions (Edwards, 1974; Pillard,

1974) and point out the lacunae in the data as well as the well

established facts (Edwards, 1974). Other reviews tend to emphasize

possible adverse effects (Nahas, 1975a, 1975b; Kaymakcalan, 1975),

legal vs. health issues (Brecher, 1975) or the chemistry of cannabis

(Lemberger & Rubin, 1975; Mechoulam et al., 1976). The continuing

research efforts this past year have attempted to fill some of the

gaps. Research papers on cannabis are appearing at an average rate

of more than one per day and about a third of them deal with effects

in humans. Thus, a single detailed review of the literature is

becoming an almost impossible task.

Activity of Natural and Synthetic Cannabinoids

Detailed pharmacokinetic studies of -8-THC in man using mass

fragmentographic techniques indicate a similar time course and

clearance pattern to that seen with -9-THC (Agurell et al., 1976).

A very rapid a phase was followed by a slower phase. While blood

levels did not always predict physiological and psychological

effects, they paralleled heart rate changes well.

DMHP, a synthetic cannabinoid, differs from -9-THC by having a

double bond in the 6a, 10a positions. Intravenous administration in

1Beth et al., 1974; Brecher, 1975; Committee on Drugs, 1975;

Edwards, 1974; Hollister, 1974a;. Kalant & Kalant, 1974;

Kaymakcalan, 1975; Lemberger & Rubin, 1975; McGlothlin, 1975;

Mechoulam et al., 1976; Miller, 1974; Nahas, 1975a, 1975b.

- 128 -
man produced profound cardiovascular effects but only minimal psychological effects (Lemberger et al., 1976). As is the case with

natural cannabinoids, hydroxylation seemed to be the major metabolic pathway.

A report of an early phase I clinical trial of Nabilone, a synthetic

cannabinoid-like compound, is probably one of the first of many

investigations with drugs of novel chemical structures that resemble cannabinoids (Lemberger & Rowe, 1975). Nabilone and other

synthetics, such as a series of benzopyrans (Mechoulam et al.,

1976), have many advantages over natural cannabinoids in terms of

stability, water solubility, etc. Most important, they have more

specific pharmacologic actions. That is, it seems possible to

develop compounds with more cardiovascular effects and less central

nervous system effects or vice versa. Compounds with analgesic,

sedative, hypnotic, and anticonvulsant activity are undergoing

preclinical and early clinical trials. Some of these are discussed

in the chapter on Therapeutic Aspects (cf. Chapter 9). If there is

any clinical application of cannabinoid-like drugs, it is likely

they will come from these newer synthetics rather than from the

administration of cannabis sativa to people.

Metabolism of Cannabinoids and Biochemistry

Metabolites. Although studies of a major metabolite of -9-THC, 11-

hydroxy-THC, indicate it is pharmacologically active, some question

remains whether it is the only metabolite or whether -9-THC needs

to be hydroxylated to 11-hydroxy-THC before the THC is active

(Hollister & Gillespie, 1975a; Lemberger & Rubin, 1975; Mechoulam

et al., 1976). In an attempt to clarify these issues, Hollister and

Gillespie sorted people into fast and slow hydroxylators on the

basis of antipyrine and phenylbutazone plasma disappearance rates.

THC and these drugs are metabolized by the same liver microsomal

enzyme system (Wall et al., 1976). There was no difference in speed

of onset, intensity or duration of effects after intravenous injection of -9-THC when the two groups were compared. Such results

suggest 11-hydroxy-THC may not be the sole source of -9-THC

effects. Another group of investigators found 11-hydroxy-THC to

leave the plasma more rapidly than THC, suggesting THC may, in fact,

be more potent (Perez-Reyes et al., 1976).

A number of additional marihuana metabolites have been reported in a

series of studies (Kanter et al., 1974a, 1974b, 1975) and for the

first time, unchanged -9-THC was identified in the urine using

conventional thin layer chromatographic techniques in amounts estimated at 0.01-0.005 percent of the dose (Hollister et al., 1974).

New extraction procedures revealed a previously ignored fraction

containing abundant metabolites (Kanter et al., 1974b) including

many polar metabolites (Kanter et al., 1974a). The exact identity

and activity has yet to be determined. In a review of structure

activity relationships of cannabinoids in humans, Hollister (1974b)

concluded that the potency of the THC molecule is altered by

changing length of side chains, or by metabolic hydroxylations. No

- 129 -
material has yet been formed in nature, in cannabis itself or in THC

metabolites which differs qualitatively from THC. There is now

evidence indicating the human small intestinal mucosa, as well as

the liver, can hydroxylate THC (Greene & Saunders, 1974).

Cannabinoid Interactions. Studies of the possible interaction

between -9-THC and the other two major cannabinoids of marihuana --

cannabinol (CBN) and cannabidiol(CBD) -- are not completely consistent in their conclusions. Hollister and Gillespie (1975a) found

only slight interaction between THC and CBD. After administration

of CBD, there was a delayed onset and prolonged effects of THC that

were slightly more intense. The magnitude of the interactions was

so small as to be clinically insignificant. A similar study using

smoked plant material found diminished euphoria when CBD was mixed

with THC, as well as a trend toward decreased THC effects on

psychomotor impairments (Dalton et al., 1976). CBD smoked alone was

inactive. Other experiments in man with samples of marihuana plant

material containing varied amounts of CBN and CBD found differences

in effects possibly due to differing proportions of CBN, CBD and THC

(Carlini et al., 1974). In subsequent studies by the same group,

large doses of CBD blocked many of the effects of THC (Karniol et

al., 1974) and oral doses of CBN slightly increased THC effects on

some physiological and psychological processes (Karniol et al.,

1975). One possible complicating factor in cannabinoid interaction

studies is the question of relative stability of various synthetic

and naturally occurring cannabinoids (Turner & Henry, 1975). Some

are more stable than others. There is little question that interactions occur, although at this point they seem to be inconsistent and

of limited magnitude.

Interactions with Other Drugs. Besides CBD and CBN, other drug

interactions with THC have been investigated in man. Secobarbital

and smoked marihuana had additive effects on subjective responses

and psychomotor impairment (Dalton et al., 1975). Subjects had

difficulty distinguishing 150 mg of secobarbital from 25 micrograms

of THC/kg. When the effects of amphetamine and smoked marihuana

were combined, additive effects of heart rate and blood pressure and

subjective symptoms were observed, but no interaction effect on

psychomotor performance was found (Evans et al., 1974). Based on

the assumption that THC interferes with cholinergic brain mechanisms, physostigmine was administered after THC and decreased the

tachycardia and conjunctival injection, but had little effect on

psychological changes (Freemon et al., 1975). Little potentiation

of narcotic drug effects was noted in a study evaluating THC as a

pre-anesthetic agent (Johnstone et al., 1974). Animal studies

indicate that whatever the drug combination, the depressant effects

of THC tend to predominate (Pryor, 1976). Effects of alcohol and

cannabis were similar in their impairment of a divided attention

performance task (MacAvoy & Marks, 1975). When combined the drugs

had synergistic effects in non-users users, at least at lower doses

of alcohol.

Assay Techniques. A great deal of effort has gone into the development of practical assays of cannabinoid levels in man. Such

- 130 -
measures are needed not only for research purposes, but would be

useful clinically and in law enforcement (particularly in cases

where intoxication while driving an automobile is an issue). A

number of techniques using saliva and THC with mass spectrometry

(Just et al., 1974), radioimmunoassay of blood and urine (Marks et

al., 1975; Teale et al., 1974), and gas chromatography of blood

McCallum, 1974) have been developed. The problems regarding

sensitivity, specificity and reliability of assays have been partially solved and some methods can now be employed in a routine

manner. The tight binding of THC to plasma protein (Widman et al.,

1974) is only one of the many problems in the development of

sensitive, reliable tissue level assays (cf. Analytical Techniques:

Detection, in Chapter 2, Chemistry and Metabolism).

A report “Cannabinoid Assays in Humans” from a recent conference

sponsored by the National Institute on Drug Abuse describes the

tremendous progress in assay techniques made over the past few years

(Willette, 1976). Investigators from ten different laboratories in

the United States and abroad reported on the results of a variety of

analytic techniques -- radioimmunoassays, high-pressure gas chromatography, thin-layer chromatography and gas chromatographic/mass

spectrometry. No single technique is the best, with each having

advantages or disadvantages depending on the purpose of the analysis, the type of body fluid or tissue, the drug levels of interest,

etc. The monograph describes many of the characteristics of

cannabinoids that make sensitive, specific and reliable assays

difficult. Cannabinoids are lipophilic drugs, tightly bound to

lipoproteins; selected antibodies for the various cannabinoids are

difficult to obtain as are radioligands with high specificity.

Unidentified factors in human plasma appear to interfere with

assays even though animal studies are satisfactory. Interlaboratory comparisons are risky since sensitivity to test conditions is

great and standardized test procedures are just developing. The

most precise and sensitive techniques still require cumbersome and

expensive equipment. The radioimmunoassays may ultimately be ideal

for routine clinical tests but they still have not lived up to their

potential. However, the monograph, written for those with highly

specialized backgrounds, reports a number of optimistic studies

indicating that practical and sensitive assays will soon be available for routine application in clinical, research and medicallegal situations.

Cardiovascular Effects

Cannabis has long been known to have marked cardiovascular effects

(Clark? 1975; Savary et al., 1974). Previous reports reviewed

preliminary data which resulted in some expressed concern about

electrocardiographic changes during acute intoxication. The subsequent publication of a number of studies where cardiovascular

dynamics were studied some time after administration of large doses

of THC indicates that cannabis produces only minimal EKG changes in

young healthy subjects (Benowitz & Jones, 1975; Clark et al., 1974;

Johnstone et al., 1974; Malit et al., 1975). Nonspecific P or T

- 131 -
changes are most commonly noted. Occasional premature beats also

occur. Tachycardia continues to be the most common and prominent

physiological response to acute doses (Schaefer et al., 1975b). In

a study of prolonged administration of oral doses of 30 mg -9-THC

given every four hours, heart rate slowing and blood pressure drops

developed (Benowitz & Jones, 1975). Blunting of peripheral vascular reflexes developed along with plasma volume expansion.

Although tolerance developed to the orthostatic hypotension, the

supine hypotensive effects persisted throughout the period of drug

administration. These changes commonly seen in laboratory animals

but not previously noted in man suggest a biphasic action of THC in

humans with an increase in sympathetic activity involving the heart

and peripheral blood vessels at low doses and a centrally mediated

sympathetic inhibition at higher doses (Hardman & Hosko, 1976).

Similar biphasic cardiovascular effects were noted after intravenous THC was given as a premeditation for oral surgery (Gregg et

al., 1976a). The slightly increased supine blood pressure following drug administration would be consistent with this mechanism

(Clark et al., 1974; Johnstone et al., 1974; Malit et al., 1975).

Forearm blood flow increases and total peripheral resistance

decreases slightly with acute doses (Malit et al., 1975; Johnstone

et al., 1974) consistent with ß-adrenergic stimulation. The great

individual variability in response to large intravenous doses has,

however, led one group to suggest an indirect episodic activation of

the sympathetic system secondary to psychological arousal in addition to the ß-adrenergic stimulation (Malit et al., 1975). Cardiovascular and psychological mechanisms of action may be independent

as is suggested by the observation that DMHP, a synthetic cannabinoid, produces profound cardiovascular but few psychological

effects (Lemberger et al., 1976).

A study with hospitalized volunteers investigated cardiovascular

responses to isoproterenol, phenylephrine, atropine and propranolol

before and after 14 days of chronic cannabis intoxication (Benowitz

& Jones, in press). There was no significant change in response to

isoproterenol or phenylephrine. Heart rate and blood pressure

increase after atropine was greater during THC ingestion. The

pattern of changes suggested enhanced parasympathetic activity

along with sympathetic insufficiency. The interaction with atropine may represent a clinically significant event in chronic high

dose cannabis users presenting as patients. Such an interaction

might explain the prolonged postoperative tachycardia in marihuana

smokers given atropine prior to general anesthesia (Gregg et al.,

1976a).

A series of reports on the cardiovascular effects of cannabis

smoking in persons with coronary disease are consistent with the

preliminary report cited several years ago (Angelico & Brown, 1974;

Aronow & Cassidy, 1975; Prakash et al., 1975). Smoking either

marihuana or high nicotine cigarettes decreased exercise performance prior to the onset of angina by increasing myocardial oxygen

demand and decreasing myocardial oxygen delivery (Aronow & Cassidy,

1975). Cardiovascular hemodynamics were evaluated by echocardiography (Prakash et al., 1975). After marihuana, stroke index and

- 132 -
ejection fraction decreased. Elevated carboxyhemoglobin levels

probably produced some changes after both smoked marihuana and

placebo. There was some disagreement between experts as to the

explanation for the observed cannabis effects. One group favored an

explanation in which the diminished cardiac performance was secondary to THC-induced increase in heart rate and afterload rather than

a direct negative inotropic effect of THC (Kanakis, 1976) and cited

data from cannabis studies with normal people suggesting enhanced

cardiac performance and an increase in cardiac index (Kanakis et

al., 1976a, 1976b; Malit et al., 1975). The group who did the

original study with coronary diseased patients remains concerned

about negative inotropic effects of THC (Prakash & Aronow, 1976).

Whatever the mechanism, these studies demonstrate that marihuana

effects may differ in individuals with pre-existing disease from

those in normals. Most cannabis research thus far has, of course,

been done on youthful, carefully selected, normal volunteers.

Effects in various disease states cannot always be predicted from

studies in healthy populations of research subjects.

Pulmonary Effects

Because smoking is the most common means of cannabis consumption in

this country, the effects of cannabinoids and marihuana smoke on

pulmonary function have been of continuing interest. The Fifth

Marihuana and Health Report described bronchodilating effects with

possible therapeutic implications after marihuana smoking. Previous reports have described mainly adverse findings in frequent

and chronic cannabis smokers including bronchitis, obstructive

pulmonary defects, and chronic cough (Abramson, 1974).

Two groups have published reports of cannabis’ effects in people

with asthma (Shapiro & Tashkin, 1976; Tashkin et al., 1974, 1976a;

Vachon et al., 1976). In these studies, acute administration of

either smoked marihuana or oral doses of THC produced statistically

significant increases in bronchodilation and reversed experimentally induced bronchospasm in young adults with bronchial asthma

(Tashkin et al., 1974, 1976a; Vachon et al., 1976). Indications are

that the mechanism is independent of ß-adrenergic or antimuscarinic

effects (Shapiro & Tashkin, 1976). In contrast to these promising

reports, a British group (Davies et al., 1975; Graham et al., 1976)

found that measures of forced vital capacity, peak expiratory flow

rate and other clinically useful measures of pulmonary function did

not improve in a group of patients with reversible airway obstruction given 10 mg doses of oral THC. One possible reason for these

discrepant findings may be that the groups reporting cannabisinduced bronchodilation (Shapiro & Tashkin, 1976; Tashkin et al.,

1974) used whole body plethysmography, an exceedingly sensitive

measure that will detect very small changes in pulmonary function,

whereas the less optimistic reports came from a group using less

sensitive, although clinically relevant, measurement techniques.

Chronic smoking may produce different and less useful effects than

acute administration, as indicated by pulmonary function changes

- 133 -
during periods of chronic administration. Mendelson et al. (1974b)

found significant impairments in pulmonary function tests (vital

capacity, or FEV 1.0) in a group of chronic marihuana smokers.

Further reduction in pulmonary function test performance developed

during this study in which the volunteers smoked 3-10 marihuana

cigarettes daily for 21 days. Using more sophisticated measures,

another group found decreases in maximal mid-expiratory flow rates

and specific airway conductance after six to eight weeks of heavy

cannabis smoking (Tashkin et al., 1975, 1976b). Although still

within the limits of normality, the changes persisted at least one

week after smoking and suggest that a longer period of smoking could

lead to clinically important changes. An outpatient study of young

adults with varying tobacco cigarette habits found more improvement

in pulmonary function during an eight-week period of no smoking in

the cannabis smoker subgroup (Backhouse, 1975). An in vitro study

suggests that the water soluble components of marihuana smoke may

contain substances toxic to the defense network of the lung other

than -9-THC or other cannabinoids (Cutting et al., 1974). Studies

using high doses of THC given intravenously noted only modest

changes in minute ventilation and the ventilatory response to CO2

equivalent to that produced by 5 mg doses of morphine (Johnstone et

al., 1974; Malit et al., 1975). However, a more sensitive technique

produced evidence of a small degree of respiratory depression

(Wiberg et al., 1975).

Another study of the respiratory effects of smoked marihuana and

orally ingested -9-THC has examined the effects of the drugs on the

respiratory response curve. Both the synthetic and natural material produced a respiratory depression in a group of previously

chronic users. Although the effect was found to be slight, the

authors recommended further study because of the possible relevance

of this effect to patients with chronic lung disease or central

nervous system impairment of respiratory regulation (Bellville et

al., 1975b).

A clinical study of patients with pneumomediastinum identified a

small group of patients who had a common history of repeated and

sustained Valsalva’a maneuvers during marihuana smoking or heroin

injection and no other obvious explanation for the mediastinal or

cervical emphysema (Mattox, 1976). The author suggested that the

forceful Valsalva’s maneuver used during marihuana smoking may have

been an etiologic factor.

Endocrine and Metabolic Effects

The report of depressed plasma testosterone levels in chronic

marihuana smokers (Kolodny et al., 1974a) and the report of a

failure to find such a change in marihuana smokers receiving the

drug daily over a 21-day period (Mendelson et al., 1974a) or in a

sample of college student smokers (Cushman, 1975) have led to

- 134 -
further studies and discussion.1

 Kolodny (1975a) reviewed the

numerous problems confounding the study of drug effects on the

hypothalamic-pituitary-testicular axis in man and discussed possible biologic implications of lowered testosterone levels. He

presented data (Kolodny, 1975b; Kolodny et al., 1976) showing

significant drops in plasma testosterone levels and luteinizing

hormone levels two and three hours after smoking a single marihuana

cigarette. In a chronic administration study, subjects showed no

significant drop in levels after the first four weeks of daily

marihuana smoking; but with continued smoking they had significant

drops in luteinizing hormone, followed by falling testosterone

levels and follicle stimulating hormone levels. Thus, the data from

research finding no marihuana-related hormone changes2 are quite

consistent with studies that do (Kolodny, 1975b; Kolodny et al.,

1974a, 1976) if the different time periods of marihuana use are

taken into account. The biological significance of these changes is

unclear and Kolodny (1975a) is appropriately cautious in his interpretation of their importance. In most cases the plasma hormone

levels remain well within the usually accepted normal limits.

However, a recent study (Hembree et al., 1976) confirmed a decreased

sperm count in otherwise normal marihuana smokers. Such hormone

alterations might be expected to be more important for prepubertal

or pubertal males or males with already impaired sexual functioning. Corresponding endocrine changes in females have not been

studied. There might also be adverse effects on sexual differentiation of the fetus of expectant mothers using cannabis. In the

absence of clinical evidence for these consequences, such concern

is at present only speculative. Since recent reports (Gordon et

al., 1976; Stitmmel, 1975) suggest alcohol may have similar effects,

interpretation of many clinical findings will be complicated, since

cannabis and alcohol are usually both used by cannabis users.

One surgeon has attempted to link such hormonal changes to the

development of gynecomastia in male marihuana users (Harmon &

Aliapoulios, 1974; Hill, 1975). He was able to stimulate the

development of rat breast tissue by -9-THC administration (Harmon

& Aliapoulios, 1974). Other investigators (Lemberger et al., 1975)

have not found changes in serum prolactin levels in men given THC

experimentally. The absence of prolactin changes is surprising

since many centrally acting drugs alter prolactin levels. The

reported gynecomastia was postulated to result from a prolactin

dependent mechanism.

In a previous Marihuana and Health Report, a study by Hollister and

Reaven (1974) was mentioned which described glucose intolerance in

a small group of subjects given intravenous doses of -9-THC. A

1Friedman, 1975; Koff, 1974; Kolodny, 1975a; Kolodny, 1975b;

Kolodny et al., 1974b, 1976; Lemberger et al., 1975.

2Cushman, 1975; Hembree et al., 1976; Koff, 1974; Mendelson et al.,

1974a; Schaefer et al., 1975a.

- 135 -
lower dose of THC given as smoked hashish had no effect on blood

glucose though blood lactic acid decreased (Papadakis et al.,

1974). Glucose efflux from human erythrocytes was inhibited by THC

and cannabidiol, suggesting some drug effects on glucose transport

mechanisms (Schurr et al., 1974). It would, however, be quite

speculative to try to relate these changes to the craving for sweets

often reported by cannabis users. A more recent study (Permutt et

al., 1976) found no changes in carbohydrate metabolism in marihuana

users.

A depressed growth hormone and cortisol response to insulin hypoglycemia was found after a period of prolonged THC ingestion in

hospitalized volunteers (Benowitz et al., 1976). As was the case

with the testosterone changes described above, the decreased growth

hormone levels were still within acceptable limits of normality.

The findings are consistent with others suggesting suppression of

the hypothalamic-pituitary axis after prolonged THC administration.

Sexual Functioning

Reports discussed in the above section entitled “Endocrine and

Metabolic Effects” describe sex hormone changes related to cannabis

use. Although anecdotal accounts describe cases of sexual dysfunction possibly associated with such changes, properly controlled

studies are needed to confirm them (Kolodny, 1975a; Kolodny et al.,

1976). A number of accounts report enhanced sexual activity

associated with cannabis use.1 However, the psychological, social

and pharmacologic factors associated with sexual activity probably

interact in complicated ways as is true with most other drug effects

on sexual behavior (Chausow & Saper, 1974; Ellinwood & Rockwell,

1975; Hollister, 1976; Koff, 1974). For example, with cannabis, as

with alcohol, dose is important. Small to moderate doses appear to

be most effective as releasers of inhibitions (Koff, 1974). Larger

doses and/or chronic use of marihuana may actually diminish sexual

interest and potency in males. Adequate data elucidating the effect

of marihuana use on sexual functioning are not yet available.

Neurological Effects

Perceptual, cognitive and mood changes are presumably reflected in

changes in nervous system activity. Thus there is no question as to

the presence of neurological effects. As with any psychoactive

drug, however, simple one-to-one correlations between behavioral

changes and brain activity are rare (Jones, 1973). The most

important questions have to do with how long the effects persist:

for hours, days, weeks or are they permanent?

1Brill & Christie, 1974; Chausow & Saper, 1974; Fisher & Steckler,

1974; Hager, 1975; Koff, 1974.

- 136 -
Most recently two studies have been conducted in Missouri (Co et

al., in press) and Massachusetts (Kuehnle et al., in press),

respectively, of two samples of young men with histories of heavy

cannabis smoking using computerized transaxial tomography (CTT), a

brain scanning technique for visualizing the anatomy of the brain.

In this technique the head is scanned by a narrow beam of X-rays in

a series of “slices.” Computer processing of the data obtained from

a large number of measurements makes it possible to reconstruct the

anatomy of the brain in a more detailed manner and with greater

precision than pneumoencephalography.

In the St. Louis study 12 young male subjects, aged 20-30 (mean age

= 24.1) who had smoked at least 5 joints a day (mean # = 9.0/day) for

5 or more years (mean years = 6.6) were compared to 34 neurologitally normal young men of similar age who did not indicate drug use.

In the Cambridge study 19 heavily using young male marihuana

smokers, whose use was verified on a closed research ward, were

matched with a control series of non-using males of similar age.

In both studies, the resulting brain scans were read blindly by

experienced neuroradiologists. In neither study was there any

evidence of cerebral atrophy. Despite these negative findings,

several additional points should be emphasized. Neither study

rules out the possibility that more subtle changes of brain function

may occur as a result of heavy and continued marihuana smoking. It

is entirely possible to have impairment of brain function from toxic

or other causes that is not apparent on gross examination of the

brain in the living organism. Nevertheless, virtually all studies

completed to date (late 1976) show no evidence of impaired neuropsychologic test performance in humans at dose levels studied so

far.

Other recent studies are extensions of or attempts to replicate

findings reported previously. Smoked cannabis produces acute,

reversible, dose-related changes in brain waves as measured by

computer-analyzed EEG (Fink et al., 1976; Klonoff & Low, 1974).

Following ordinarily used doses, the changes are modest, consisting

mostly of wave slowing and are not indicative of any particular

pathology. Cannabis does not appear to have unique qualities among

CNS active drugs as measured by scalp EEGs. Changes in EEG recorded

from deep brain structures, consisting of slow wave and spiking

activity, have not, however, been seen with any other drug (Heath,

1976). These changes have been well-described in monkeys. Similar

changes have been reported in a small number of humans (Heath,

1976). The behavioral significance of these lasting neurological

changes is yet to be determined (Jones, 1973). Drew and Miller

(1974), in a review of possible neural mechanisms of cannabis,

suggest the hippocampus and other deep structures may be important

sites of action, at least in animals.

Scalp EEG and evoked potentials showed marked changes in subjects

given very large smoked doses of THC or marihuana (Tassinari et al.,

1974, 1976). abundance increased with posterior slow wave

activity becoming prominent. Ataxia, hypersomnia, increased deep

- 137 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 10
tendon reflexes, tremor, tonic muscle contractions and myoclonus

followed these 1 mg/kg doses of THC. In contrast, Seyf eddininpur

(1975) administered 2 gm of hashish to subjects and found no

pathological changes in scalp EEG; even though the dose produced

profound hypotension, anxiety and ataxia.

Loss of REM sleep appears to be a predictable effect of cannabis

(Tassinari et al., 1974, 1976). Total sleep time increases, while

stage 4 or slow wave sleep is relatively unaffected. In this

respect cannabis is unlike any sedative-hypnotic drug studied thus

far (Feinberg et al., 1975). When the drug is stopped after a

period of prolonged administration, REM sleep stage and eye movement show a rebound above baseline levels. In contrast to the

relatively small changes in waking EEGs after the drug is given,

sleep EEG changes are very dramatic and large -- both when the drug

is acutely or chronically administered (Feinberg et al., 1975,

1976).

Changes in the slow cortical potentials recorded from the scalp

(contingent negative variation or CNV) after cannabis are of particular interest since this measure is said to be sensitive to

changes in motivation and attention deployment, among other factors . A recent study of the CNV (Braden et al., 1974) obtained

somewhat different results from those reported earlier. Like many

neurophysiologic measures, it appears the CNV is far more complicated than was originally assumed. It appears the CNV may get

larger or smaller after cannabis or it may not change at all (Roth

et al., in press), depending on the level of intoxication, the task

demands, the motivation of the subject and changes in attention;

The group originally reporting CNV changes associated with cannabis

intoxication now reports another EEG evoked potential component,

P300 or the positive going wave at about 300 milliseconds after the

stimulus, as being the component most sensitive to cannabis and

ethanol (Roth et al., in press). The researchers suggest that P300

is sensitive to both subjective probability judgments and response

set attention. Both cannabis and alcohol intoxication were associated with decreased P300 waves. However, their own work as well as

other reports suggests that to view the cannabis-induced CNV or P300

changes as any direct measure of attention deployment or motivation

is probably an oversimplication (Braden et al., 1974).

Coleman et al. (1976) reported cranial nerve damage; specifically,

a paresis of the fourth cranial nerve leading to superior oblique

muscle weakness, headache and hyperphoria. The only common denominator of the 83 percent of drug treatment clinic patients showing

this somewhat unusual condition was heavy cannabis use. The

investigator thought the trochlear nerve may be more sensitive to

toxic drug effects because of its anatomy. A study of peripheral

nerve function using electrostimulation produced no evidence of

conduction defects in marihuana smokers (DiBenedetto, 1976).

- 138 -
Effects on Cell-Mediated Immunity

Conflicting opinions as to the possible effects of cannabis on the

cell-mediated immune response continue to appear (Segelman et al.,

1974). (These are reviewed more fully in the section on Genetic and

Immune Systems, Chapter 8.) In the previous Marihuana and Health

Reports, the observation that chronic marihuana users had decreased

in vitro lymphocyte response to allogeneic cells and to a mitogen

was described (Nahas et al., 1976). This original observation led

to extensive in vitro and animal studies described elsewhere in this

report. Related studies in humans published in the past few years

provide partial support for the notion of an immune system or

thymus-derived cell alteration in people who smoke marihuana.1

However, Silverstein and Lessin (1976), using an in vivo skin

testing procedure, found no evidence of impairment of cell-mediated

immunity in chronic marihuana users. Petersen et al. (1974) found

that marihuana smokers had less T cell response to phytohemagglutin

stimulation and decreased PMH phagocytic capacity; however, they

caution that the clinical significance of these findings is uncertain. In possibly related in vivo studies, the white blood cells

from both cannabis users and non-users showed similar dose-related

inhibition of migration when exposed to THC and extracts of cannabis

(Schwartzfarb et al., 1974). However, substances other than THC in

the crude extract may have effects on this test system.

Administration of THC or cannabis to controlled populations, with

before and after testing, is underway and may provide useful

information in clarifying the etiology of the cell-mediated immune

effects (Nichols et al., 1974) as was the case with the supposed

chromosome breakage, One such controlled study with hospitalized

volunteers found no alterations in lymphocyte responses to phytohemagglutinin after subjects received a substantial oral dose of

THC for 18 days (Lau et al., 1976).

The problem of interpreting data from groups of cannabis users

indicating high rates of infection arises from the possibility that

uncontrolled factors such as living habits and shared drugs may

contribute to such events rather than some defect in the immune

system (Drachler, 1975).

Other Physiologic Effects

Cannabis has many effects on the eye and on visual functioning

(Dawson, 1976). Previous findings associated cannabis intoxication

with decreases in intraocular pressure. The possible therapeutic

implication of this unexpected effect is discussed in the chapter on

therapeutic applications (Chapter 9). More extensive studies in

normal volunteer subjects indicate a non-dose-related pressure drop

1Cushman et al., 1974; Cushman & Khurana, 1975; Nahas et al., 1976;

Petersen et al., 1974, 1975a, 1975b.

- 139 -
from four to five hours (Hepler et al., 1976; Purnell & Gregg,

1975). The magnitude of the eye pressure decrease (about 30

percent) was the same whether the person smoked 1 or 22 marihuana

cigarettes. Effects on other aspects of eye physiology (acuity,

refractive error, biomicroscopy, fundus changes, visual fields,

ophthalmodynamometry, electroretinography and orthoptic evaluation) were minimal or absent. Other investigators concluded that

the observed eye pressure decreases were more likely a consequence

of drug-induced relaxation and sedation rather than specific cannabis effects on the eye, since other sedative drugs produced similar

changes in eye pressure (Flom et al., 1975). Results of studies of

the effects of smoked marihuana on galvanic skin response are

consistent with drug-induced reduction in level of autonomic nervous system arousal (Cohen et al., 1975). However, recent findings

seem to contradict this interpretation (cf. Therapeutic Aspects).

Intravenous administration of water infusions of cannabis plant

material fortunately seems to be rarely used (Farber & Huertas,

1976; Payne & Brand, 1975). In the few cases reported, gastroenteritis, hypoalbuminemia, hepatitis and many cardiovascular

changes secondary to hypovolemia or renal insufficiency, thrombocytopenia and rhabdomyolysis are severe and require vigorous treatment (Payne & Brand, 1975). The syndrome is quite different from

that following intravenous administration of medically pure and

sterile cannabis components mentioned elsewhere in this report.

Many of the consequences of injections of crude extracts seem to be

more the effect of injected foreign plant material, particulate

matter and bacteremia.

Given the probable potency of marihuana plant material as allergins

there are surprisingly few reports of allergic reactions associated

with the handling of the substance (Shapiro et al., 1975; Lewis &

Slavin, 1975).

Acute Effects on Mental and Psychomotor Performance

As in previous years a host of studies have reported impaired

functioning on a variety of cognitive and performance tasks while

marihuana intoxicated. For the most part, impairments were doserelated. As research designs become more sophisticated, evidence

is accumulating that interactions between dose and task difficulty

are such that performance on some cognitive tasks might even improve

when low doses are used (Weckowicz et al., 1975). This study also

looked for selective brain laterality effects and surprisingly

found more impairment on non-dominant hemisphere related tasks.

Greater appreciation has developed for the need to study a range of

doses on a variety of cognitive tasks before trying to describe the

effect of cannabis. There are apt to be multiple cannabis effects

depending on dose and the exact demands of the task. Prior practice

on a task (Beautrais & Marks, 1976; Peeke et al., 1976) may or may

not alter the effects of a given dose of cannabis depending on the

type of task. Incentives to perform well (more money for correct

- 140 -
responses) can decrease some marihuana effects (Casswell, 1975).

In general, investigators using the smallest doses of marihuana

have reported the fewest effects. Impaired memory1 , altered time

sense (Borg & Gershon, 1975; Vachon et al., 1974) and decrements in

performance on a number of tasks -- such as those involving reaction

time, concept formation, learning, perceptual motor coordination,

attention and signal detection -- are commonly described in the

literature.2

A number of discussions of the locus of the memory impairment are

available (Darley et al., 1974; Dornbush, 1974; Tinklenberg &

Darley, 1976). There is a growing consensus that the memory defect

is due to an alteration in storage rather than acquisition or

retrieval. In most laboratory studies, the duration of measurable

memory alterations is a few hours after a smoked marihuana cigarette. However, preliminary study by Gianutsos and Litwack (1976)

suggests lasting problems with transfer of new information into

long term memory storage for some marihuana smokers.

There has been concern that cannabis may increase the suggestibility of those using it. In laboratory studies marihuana smoking had

no effect on hypnotic susceptibility (Beahrs et al., 1974).

Effects on Sensory Function

One of the more commonly reported effects of cannabis is a subjective change in sensation, often a feeling of enhanced sensations. A

number of groups investigated drug effects on various aspects of

sensory functioning. None has reported improved or enhanced sensitivity. Although subjective impressions of changes in skin sensitivity are commonly associated with cannabis intoxication, no

objective or measurable change in cutaneous sensitivity using a

number of measures was noted (Milstein et al., 1974). The decrease

in auditory signal detection while intoxicated appeared to be due to

a decrease in sensitivity rather than a change in criteria

(Moskowitz & McGlothlin, 1974). This finding contrasts with the

usual subjective reports of enhanced auditory sensitivity. The

characteristics of preferred tone frequency were shifted while

intoxicated (DeSouza et al., 1974).

1Borg & Gershon, 1975; Darley et al., 1974; Domino et al., 1976;

Dornbush, 1974; Vachon et al., 1974.

2Borg & Gershon, 1975; Cohen & Rickles, 1974; Cohen et al., 1975;

Dalton et al., 1975; DeSouza et al., 1974; Dittrich et al., 1975;

Linton et al., 1975; Milstein et al., 1974, 1975b; Moskowitz &

McGlothlin, 1974; Moskowitz et al., 1973, 1974; Roth et al,, 1975;

Salvendy & McCabe, 1975; Sharma & Moskowitz, 1974; Steadward &

Singh, 1975; Stoller et al., 1976; Thoden et al., 1974.

- 141 -
A number of aspects of visual functioning seem to be altered by

cannabis. Visual acuity for detection of a small moving target was

decreased by smoked marihuana (Brown et al., 1975). Alcohol had an

even greater effect, however. Reduced dynamic acuity may be a

factor in traffic accidents. Static visual acuity, an easier task,

was not altered by alcohol or cannabis (Adams et al., 1975).

Significant dose related impairments in color discrimination were

produced by both alcohol and smoked cannabis (Adams et al., 1976).

The transient changes were similar to those seen in retinal disease

and were of a magnitude such that tasks where stable color perception is important could be affected by the drugs.

THC given to patients suffering from pain demonstrated mild analgesic effects but 20 mg doses administered orally produced many

unpleasant side effects -- somnolence, dizziness, ataxia, blurred

vision, etc. (Noyes et al., 1975a, 1975b). The experience of

experimentally induced pain in normal subjects was also diminished

by smoked marihuana (Milstein et al., 1975a; Payer, 1974). Pain

secondary to spinal cord injury was decreased by cannabis use (Dunn

& Davis, 1974).

Automobile Driving Performance

More evidence has accumulated indicating that driving ability and

related skills are impaired by cannabis at doses likely to be

commonly used in the United States.1 Despite their commonly

expressed belief that their driving ability is impaired when intoxicated (Dalton et al., 1975; Klonoff, 1974b; Thompson, 1975), more

cannabis users appear to drive today while intoxicated than was the

case a few years ago. In limited surveys 60-80 percent of the users

questioned reported driving soon after marihuana use (Klonoff,

1974b; Smart, 1974). The use of alcohol in combination with

marihuana before driving was reported by 64 percent of one sample

and during driving by 20 percent of the sample (Klonoff, 1974b). As

the risks of arrest for possession decrease, one might expect more

users will take the chance of being caught while intoxicated and

driving (Smart, 1974).

A recent study of drivers involved in fatal accidents in the greater

Boston area was conducted by the Boston University Accident Investigation Team for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The study found that marihuana smokers were overrepresented in fatal highway accidents when compared to a control

group of non-smokers of similar age and sex (Sterling-Smith, 1976).

A more detailed report of a Canadian driving study (Klonoff, 1974a,

1974b) revealed data that clearly demonstrated that marihuana, in

relatively low doses (cigarettes containing approximately 5 and 8

1Ehrlich, 1974; Isrealstam & Lambert, 1974; Klonoff, 1974a, 1974b;

Moskowitz, 1976; Moskowitz et al., 1973.

- 142 -
mg of THC), typically had a detrimental effect on driving skills and

performance not only on a test course but also under more usual city

driving conditions. However, as is true with alcohol, effects were

not uniform with all drivers. Some, particularly at the lower dose,

actually improved their performance. Thus, the problem of individual differences that has complicated developing and enforcing

“drunk driving” laws will probably recur when medical and legal

discussions of the minimal allowable dose or blood level of cannabinoids begin.

Compared to most of the behavioral tasks studied in the laboratory,

automobile driving is more complex. The relative importance of the

various perceptual, cognitive and psychomotor functions in determining driving ability is not completely understood. For example,

in some situations the cognitive impairment produced by cannabis

may have only limited impact on actual driving performance due to

concomitant drug-induced changes in risk acceptance or feelings of

aggression. In a laboratory simulation of driving, cannabisintoxicated subjects took longer to decide whether to pass another

car, seemed less likely to accept the risks of passing and seemed

less aggressive than alcohol-intoxicated subjects (Dott, 1974;

Ellingstad et al., 1973). Other laboratory simulator studies have

found that, while some driving skills are relatively unaffected by

marihuana, there is a dose-related impairment in the ability to

attend to peripheral stimuli while driving (Moskowitz et al., 1973,

1976). Such an impairment might interfere with such things as a

driver’s, response to a car suddenly emerging from a side street even

though tracking and car control are not impaired.

Because of the many inherent inadequacies’ of laboratory driving

simulator studies (Klonoff, 1974b), cannabis-related driving risks

will ultimately have to be assessed on the basis of studies of

actual accident rates for users compared to non-users. This has

been difficult in the study of alcohol. It promises to be still

more difficult with cannabis because of the problems of measuring

tissue levels of the cannabinoids, the longer excretion times, the

more complicated metabolism and the often combined use of cannabis

and alcohol while driving, making the relative contribution of

either drug uncertain (Garriott & Latman, 1976; Klonoff, 1974b;

Smart, 1974). Blood and urine analysis for cannabinoids revealed

extremely high levels in an automobile driver killed in a head-on

collision (Teale & Marks, 1976). Cannabis leaf and a pipe were

found in the car. No alcohol was found in the blood, nor were other

explanations found for the erratic driving prior to the accident.

How common this pattern of events is can only be determined when

practical assays for cannabinoids in body fluids become available.

Flying an airplane demands still more complex skills than does

driving. There is little information concerning possible pilot

error or impairment in performance as a result of having used

marihuana (Zeller, 1975). Several studies have shown that under

flight simulator test conditions experienced pilots showed marked.

deterioration in performance following smoking marihuana containing

6 mg of THC (Meacham et al., 1974), 0.9 mg/kg -9-tetrahydrocanna-

- 143 -
binol (Janowsky et al., 1976a), and 2.1 percent -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in 0.09 mg/kg (Janowsky et al., 1976b). More detailed

studies are planned to follow up these initial observations.

Non-Pharmacologic Determinants of Subjective Response

Sociocultural factors (Adamec et al., 1976; Klonoff & Clark, 1976;

Orcutt & Biggs, 1975) appear to interact with such pharmacologic

aspects as dose and route of administration so as to modify marihuana’s subjective effects. To some extent what happens during

cannabis intoxication is determined by the individual’s expectations, as is the case with most psychoactive drugs. Sometimes even

students in a professional health field are misinformed as to what

can happen (Seiden et al., 1975). Some of these factors were

explored in previous studies.

Laboratory studies are often criticized because a sterile, scientific laboratory setting may alter the response to the drug so that

findings have little relevance to more typical conditions of use.

This does not necessarily seem to be the case. Hollister et al.

(1975) randomly assigned a group of subjects to smoke marihuana (16

mg THC) either in a typical medical research laboratory or a private

living room designed to facilitate a pleasurable drug experience.

Although there were great differences between subjects in their

subjective responses to the smoked marihuana, the effect of the very

different settings was negligible. A similar study using only a

subjective level of intoxication as an index of drug effects found a

psychedelic environment was associated with greater intoxication at

intermediate dose levels, but not at the highest (16 mg THC) dose

employed (Cappell & Kuchar, 1974). Another attribute of the setting

in which cannabis is often used is the possible effect other

intoxicated friends have on a person’s “high.” However, in a study

testing the effect of modeling, subjects smoking marihuana for the

first time were relatively unaffected by the presence of an actor

modeling a marihuana high (Carlin et al., 1974). The results of

this study suggest that previous experience with cannabis is a

complicated socialization process in which individuals learn from

friends and others to discriminate and label various aspects of the

drug state (Carlin et al., 1974).

The mood one is in before smoking is sometimes thought to interact

with the drug effects to produce varied outcomes. A laboratory

study found no difference in subjective response to low doses of

smoked marihuana and no difference in level of anxiety in groups of

subjects made anxious by exposure to laboratory stresses (Pillard

et al., 1974). Finally, Cappell and Pliner (1974) found that the

dose of cannabis consumed in an experimental laboratory setting was

determined by many factors (size of cigarettes, past drug experience) other than pharmacologic potency of the drug. A similar study

by the same group (Cappell & Kuchar, 1974) found that controlling

the amount of drug consumed in accord with its varying strength was

difficult for subjects, again suggesting that non-pharmacologic

considerations are important in affecting the amounts consumed.

- 144 -
CANNABIS AND PSYCHOPATHOLOGY

The association of cannabis use with psychiatric illness raises

complex questions for which no completely satisfactory answers are

yet available. Two reviews of past research point out the many

methodological and theoretical shortcomings of existing work

(Halikas, 1974; Meyer, 1975). A variety of psychiatric disorders

are clearly associated with the use of cannabis; however, whether

the psychopathology is an antecedent to use, a consequence or a mere

coincidence is still very much open to question. There are some

hints that those using cannabis with therapeutic intent experience

more adverse reactions (Naditch, 1974). A “best guess” is that

cannabis use, like that of many other psychoactive drugs, will

sometimes be an antecedent, a consequence or a coincidence psychopathology, depending on the person and many other variables.1

As is often true in medicine, the ambiguity in diagnostic classification and definitions adds to the confusion concerning adverse

psychological reactions associated with cannabis use. The classification of the subsections below has been adopted to impose some

order on the literature (Halikas, 1974; Meyer, 1975).

Acute Panic Anxiety Reactions

The acute panic anxiety reaction has been noted by many reviewers to

be the most common adverse reaction to cannabis use (Halikas, 1974;

Meyer, 1975). The symptoms and signs are usually exaggerations of

normal cannabis effects more generally described by users. Anxiety

is often focused on fears of “going crazy.” This reaction appears

most likely to occur in novices and after consuming more potent

materials. Personality variables that make for poorer coping

skills play a role. The symptoms diminish with authoritative

reassurance or in a few hours when the immediate drug effects have

worn off . A number of reports illustrate these considerations.2

Patients with chronic pain (Noyes et al., 1975a) and depression

(Ablon & Goodwin, 1974; Regelson et al., 1976) given low doses of

THC in therapeutic trials had far more dysphoric and acute panic

episodes than would be expected if the same doses were given to

typically youthful cannabis users. These older people presumably

found it difficult to accept the drug-induced mental changes as

desirable. Younger, but equally inexperienced, “cannabis experi1Abruzzi, 1975; El Guebaly, 1975; Kroll, 1975; Meyer, 1975; Segal &

Merenda, 1975; Stefanis et al., 1976b; Tennant et al., 1975;

Westermeyer & Walzer, 1975.

2Ablon & Goodwin, 1974; Keeler & Moore, 1974; Mirin & McKenna, 1975;

Naditch, 1974; Noyes et al., 1975a; Tinklenberg & Darley, 1976;

Tylden, 1974.

- 145 -
menters” often react similarly (Mirin & McKenna, 1975; Tinklenberg

& Darley, 1976) as do people under stress (Bridger, 1975; Gregg et

al., 1976b).

Cannabis-induced mild paranoid feelings in student and “counter

culture” users of marihuana are common and usually not a source of

undue concern to them (Keeler & Moore, 1974). About two-thirds of a

student group and 95 percent of a counterculture group studied

described suspicion of being subjected to a police raid or having

friends tricking them while intoxicated. Inability to test reality

concerning these suspicions was reported by over half of the

subjects. Another field survey found that individuals with a

tendency to use paranoid defense mechanisms experienced fewer acute

anxiety reactions after cannabis (Naditch, 1974). The authors

thought that the more sophisticated defenses represented in paranoid functioning may be effective in preventing acute adverse

reactions. The same study found that persons with high scores on

the schizophrenia subscale of the MMPI tended to have more problems

with adverse psychological reactions indicating (as have a host of

previous studies) that pre-existing psychopathology is an important

factor in such reactions. The same survey (Naditch et al., 1975)

suggested that the setting in which the drug is consumed may be a

less important determinant of adverse reactions.

Cannabis-Induced Acute-Brain Syndrome or Toxic Delirium

The clinical features of the acute brain syndrome associated with

cannabis intoxication -- such as clouding of mental processes,

disorientation, confusion and marked memory impairment -- are similar to those produced by other exogenous toxins (Halikas, 1974;

Meyer, 1975). The syndrome is most likely to occur at high doses

and to be dose-related, whereas the panic reactions may occur at any

dose unfamiliar to the user (Halikas, 1974; Jones, 1975; Meyer,

1975). The toxic delirium is likely to follow the time course of

other drug effects. This syndrome appears to be relatively rare in

the United States.

A four-year-old child presumably ate some cannabis resin (up to

1.5 g) and was found thereafter alternately stuporous and excited

with inappropriate laughing and ataxia. Body temperature was

markedly lowered and respiration rate decreased. Residue on the

child’s teeth was identified as cannabis material. All symptoms and

signs cleared in about a day (Bro et al., 1975). Two cases from

Nigeria involved children given smoked cannabis (Binitie, 1975).

One child was perspiring and restless and didn’t sleep. Hyperactive

and destructive behavior continued for four months. The second

child manifested more of a toxic psychosis with hyperactivity

lasting for some weeks. One must assume that a large dose was

involved in these latter cases in addition to preexisting problems

given the duration of symptoms. Such case reports are rarely

definitive, but can point the way for more controlled surveys and

clinical studies.

In clinical studies where patients were given substantial intra-

- 146 -
venous doses of THC prior to surgery, many experienced dysphoria and

psychotic-like shifts from euphoria to dysphoria, panic and paranoid thinking (Gregg et al., 1976b). The stress of surgery was, of

course, a factor as was the large dose of intravenous THC, but the

study does point out that such reactions are possible and even

common under certain conditions even with healthy, relatively welladjusted people.

Prolonged Reactions

Possible prolonged psychological effects of cannabis use are an

area of serious concern and much controversy. These include not

only psychotic reactions but also personality change, change in

life style, a possible “amotivational syndrome,” “flashbacks” and a

possible causal relationship between marihuana use and use of other

drugs. Here it is even more difficult to establish precise cause

and effect because the close temporal relationship between ingestion of the drug and acute effects is lacking.

Descriptions of a specific long lasting cannabis psychosis appear

largely in the Eastern literature, and, thus, are largely drawn from

a culture where use is generally more frequent, and at higher dose

levels, than is typical for the United States. This acute “cannabis

psychosis” is generally associated with very frequent use and

reportedly lasts one to six weeks or longer (Halikas, 1974; Meyer,

1975). Recent studies abroad, in Jamaica (Rubin & Comitas, 1975),

Greece (Stefanis et al., 1976a) and Costa Rica (Coggins, 1976) where

frequent users of high potency cannabis were examined failed to

document the existence of a specific cannabis psychosis. However,

small sample sizes were involved and a relatively rare occurrence

could well have been missed.

In contrast, a clinical study done in India contrasted the features

of a paranoid psychosis arising in the course of long term cannabis

use with paranoid schizophrenia (Thacore & Shukla, 1976). The study

compared 25 consecutive admissions for each diagnosis. The majority of cannabis users had used bhang daily for five or more years in

doses up to several grams, gradually increasing dose. The cannabis

psychosis, in contrast to the paranoid schizophrenia, was characterized by more bizarre behavior, more violence and panic, an

absence of schizophrenic thought disorder and more insight. The

cannabis psychosis cleared rapidly after hospitalization and phenothiazine treatment. Patients relapsed only when cannabis administration was reinitiated.

A few years ago a clinical report by Kolansky and Moore (1971)

described 8 psychotic reactions in a group of 39 marihuana smokers

in this country and attempted to demonstrate a cause-and-effect

relationship to their marihuana use. A more recent clinical study

demonstrates how correlations between various behaviors and subsequent psychiatric disorders can be misleading (Altman & Evenson,

1973). Consecutive first admissions to a psychiatric hospital were

evaluated. Thirty-eight patients who had used marihuana prior to

- 147 -
the onset of psychiatric problems were studied. Indeed, apathy,

poor judgment, confusion and depression followed marihuana smoking,

but the correlations between marihuana use and subsequent illness

was less than with such presumably causally unrelated variables as

having masturbated, having experienced sex education, and having

drunk beer. In this clinical study marihuana use could not be

singled out as a prime factor leading to psychiatric illness.

Marihuana flashbacks -- spontaneous recurrences of feelings and

perceptions similar to those produced by the drug -- continue to be

reported (Brown & Stickgold, 1974). Data from a survey of drug

users in the Army indicate flashbacks attributed to marihuana occur

in infrequent as well as frequent users and are experienced by

people who have never had LSD (Stanton et al., 1976). The etiology

of such flashbacks remains obscure, but most of those who experience

them seem to require minimal treatment if any.

Non-Psychotic Prolonged Adverse Reactions

Surveys of user and non-user populations provide some information

as to neuropsychological changes, changes in life style and the socalled amotivational syndrome associated by some with cannabis use.

As was pointed out in Chapter 1, when discussing issues related to

marihuana use it is difficult to distinguish between antecedents

and consequences of cannabis use. Therefore, the question of

causality remains unresolved in many studies. In an all too rare

prospective study, Culver and King (1974) compared groups of LSDmescaline users with marihuana, hashish users and non-drug using

controls. The investigators used a sophisticated psychological

test battery including the Halsted-Reitan tests, the Wechsler Adult

Intelligence Scale and tests of spatial perceptual abilities. When

tested a year later, the LSD-mescaline group scored least well on

the trail making test but the performance of all three groups fell

within normal limits. No evidence could be found for the existence

of a neuropsychological deficit with either light or frequent

cannabis use. Another study of heavy drug users using a similar

test battery arrived at similar conclusions (Bruhn & Maage, 1975).

However, the authors of the study remind their readers that one

should not conclude that no organic changes occurred since psychological test data are inferential and definitive statements as to

organic changes can only be based on radiological or pathological

evidence. One study of multiple drug users in the Navy (Gunderson

et al., 1975) found a large number of psychiatric symptoms reported

by them on the Cornell Medical Index; but because of the variety of

drugs habitually used, it was impossible to single out marihuana use

as an important factor.

The possible effects of cannabis on student performance have been a

major concern because of the extensive use by that group. A

longitudinal study of a sample of 1,970 college students examined

the relationship between cannabis use and psychosocial adaptation

and academic performance (Brill & Christie, 1974). Users and nonusers did not differ in grade point average or in educational

- 148 -
achievement, but the marihuana users seemed to have more difficulty

in deciding on career goals and dropped out of college more often to

reassess goals. A smaller percentage of regular users planned to

seek advanced or professional degrees. There was, in the opinion of

the users themselves, a poorer academic adjustment among the most

frequent users than among infrequent or non-users. Only 6 percent

of non-users reported a worsening of their emotional state since

beginning college but 20 percent of the long duration users reported

negative changes in emotional state. A problem with the study was

that a significant percentage of the initial sample was lost over

the three year period. If the loss was from the group who failed

out or dropped cut, those most likely to show loss of motivation or

intellectual functions may have been automatically excluded from

the study. Also, the study merely reported the students’ own

assessment of their adaptation since no interviews were attempted.

Investigations of why people stop using marihuana can give hints as

to possible adverse effects. In a follow-up on the longitudinal

survey of marihuana quitters described above, continuing users and

never users were compared (Pack et al., 1976). The quitters had

used marihuana less frequently than the continuing users. It was

used more often as a mild intoxicant than a consciousness alterer.

More had experienced adverse effects. Fear of punishment was not a

reason for quitting. Quitters had more experience with psychotherapy. For one group of quitters, cannabis use was mostly a

social accident; they were in the right place at the right time to

obtain the drug. A second type was the ex-rebel who changed

identity and quit. The third group seemed to be emotionally fragile

people who were psychologically threatened by the drug.

Other questionnaire surveys reported differences between users and

non-users but the question of causation remains and the mental

health significance of some of the findings is unclear. In a study

of high school students marihuana users were intermediate between

non-users and hard drug users on grades, absenteeism, suspensions

and likelihood of graduation (Smith & Fogg, 1976). Another study

found little difference between marihuana users and non-users in

terms of their responses on personality inventories although users

of other drugs differed from non-users (Richek et al., 1975). Simon

(1974) found that non-users scored higher on need for achievement

and order and, thus, not surprisingly, had higher grades. Other

surveys found marihuana users to be more dissatisfied, disillusioned and alienated (Cunningham et al., 1974), more oriented

towards the past (King & Manaster, 1975); but, also, to be more

creative and adventuresome (Grossman et al., 1974). They also had

lower levels of achievement (Carlin & Post, 1974), and heavy users

dropped out of school more often (Kahn & Kulick, 1975).

A comparison of 850 chronic cannabis users and 839 non-cannabis

using controls recruited from Egyptian prisons revealed slower

psychomotor performance, defective visual-motor coordination and

impaired memory for designs in the cannabis users (Soueif, 1975).

Most were presumably not using the drug at the time of testing.

When literate and illiterate and urban and rural users and non-users

- 149 -
were compared, Soueif (1976) found more evidence of drug induced

impairment in the subjects with literate and urban backgrounds. He

presents a working hypothesis and some data suggesting that there is

less functional impairment after cannabis use in the illiterate,

rural and older subjects. Of course, if such a hypothesis proves

true, then the results of studies of chronic users in less sophisticated and more rural countries (Rubin & Comitas, 1975) may not apply

to other populations -- particularly in highly literate, urban and

young populations.

The ability of cannabis users to work in non-academic contexts has

been examined in attempts to see if a measurable “amotivational

syndrome” exists (Mendelson et al., 1976a, 1976b; Miles et al.,

1974). In a study of frequent and infrequent users smoking cannabis

while living on a research ward, work output decreased as marihuana

consumption increased (Mendelson et al., 1976a, 1976b). However,

the investigators noted that “motivation” is a function of situational variables as well as drug factors. These authors reasoned

that to term the decrement in work output “amotivational” would

imply that the users in the experiment had lost interest in working

for money. However, if the work decrement resulted from a druginduced impairment of performance, it would not be proper to term it

a motivational effect. They found the change in work output to be

due more to the latter than the former drug effects. In a similar

Canadian study (Miles et al., 1974), a decrease in productivity

(making stools) followed the smoking of cannabis. The decreased

productivity appeared to be due to less time spent working rather

than to reduced efficiency. The authors interpret this as indicative of an “amotivational syndrome,” present at least during the

period of drug use. To the extent that these types of studies

involve artificial work conditions and tasks dissimilar to more

usual employment, it is hazardous to draw more general conclusions

regarding the role of cannabis in a more generalized amotivational

picture. Moreover, these studies involved intensive daily use. The

relationship of their findings to episodic or less frequent use in

altering motivation is unknown. However, uncontrolled clinical

reports from countries where cannabis is readily available continue

to report decreased work output and initiative in chronic cannabis

users (Sharma, 1975). Thus, further studies are important.

An assumed relationship between cannabis use and the use of other

drugs (mainly opiates) has been a source of concern. The best

predictor of marihuana and other illicit drug use may be early

(before age 12) tobacco and alcohol use (Tennant & Detels, 1976).

The progression hypothesis is a good example of a theoretical

construct repeated so many times by so many people that it has

become verified by repetition rather than by facts (Tee, 1974). The

patterns of the shifts from one drug to another seem to be changing

with more of a “progression” to “polydrugs,” excluding heroin

(Could & Kleber, 1974). In both military and civilian populations,

the pattern of drug use and selection of drugs were determined more

by availability, peer pressure and drug use fads than by pharmacologic or personality variables (Nace et al., 1975; Tzeng & Skafidas,

1975). Cannabis users are, however, very likely to use other licit

- 150 -
and illicit drugs with a positive correlation between level of

cannabis use and the variety of drugs used (Mullins et al., 1975).

Criminal and Aggressive Behavior

The often discussed possible link between cannabis use and crime or

aggressive behavior has been the topic of reviews (Goode, 1974;

Knudten & Meade, 1974) and experimental studies (Colaiuta & Breed,

1974; McGuire & Megargee, 1974; Salzman et al., 1975). Both reviews

concluded that evidence showing marihuana to cause crime is virtually nonexistent. McGuire and Megargee (1974) compared young

prisoners who varied in their degree of marihuana use on a number of

personality measures (e.g., MMPI, CPI). Non-users and occasional

users had typical criminal profiles. Regular users of only

marihuana were better socialized and adjusted, though more deviant

than collegiate marihuana users. Prisoners who used marihuana plus

other drugs were the most deviant.

In addition to concern about marihuana use and criminality, the

association between marihuana intoxication and hostile human behavior has been a topic of great interest and discussion. Surveys of

California adolescents noted that aggressive and sexually assaultive behavior was more commonly associated with ethanol intoxication even though the adolescents used marihuana almost as frequently (Tinklenberg, 1974). The results of observation and self reports

of hostile, aggressive feelings from subjects acutely or chronically intoxicated with cannabis in laboratory experiments suggest

the usual effects are to decrease expressed and experienced hostility (Jones & Benowitz, 1976; Mendelson et al., 1974b; Salzman et

al., 1975). In one laboratory study, college undergraduates were

placed in a situation in which they could aggressively interact with

another person. Those intoxicated with alcohol instigated more

intense aggression than similar students intoxicated with THC

(Taylor et al., 1976). Yet, in other cultures, for example, in

India, violent behavior is commonly associated with cannabis psychosis (Thacore & Shukla, 1976).

CHRONIC EFFECTS

Tolerance

Marked tolerance to the effects of cannabis doses commonly consumed

in this country is not usually evident, presumably because of

relatively infrequent use and the generally low doses of active

material. However, as data accumulate from countries where more

frequent use of high doses is common,1 it is apparent that tolerance

1Coggins, 1976; Fink et al., 1976; Rubin & Comitas, 1975; Stefanis

et al., 1976a.

- 151 -
must develop to many of the psychological and physiological

effects. In controlled experimental situations where prolonged

administration of THC or marihuana to volunteer subjects has been

undertaken what appears to be dose-related tolerance develops

rapidly,1 as judged by behavioral, psychologic and physiologic

measures. At lower doses (one cigarette per day) a longer period of

administration (27 days) is necessary for clear cut tolerance to

develop (Gibbins et al., 1976).

In outpatient studies where frequent and infrequent users or other

populations with differing drug histories are compared in their

response to a given dose of cannabis, the results are less consistent. Marked tolerance to measured effects is rarely obvious, if

evident at all.2 However, when sensitive and reliable measures are

used, even infrequent use may produce evidence of some degree of

tolerance on outpatient laboratory tests (Borg & Gershon, 1975;

Cohen & Rickles, 1974). Tolerance in humans is apparently a doserelated effect as it is in animals (Dewey et al., 1976). Although

tolerance regularly develops when cannabis is given experimentally

for periods of time, changes in drug seeking behavior do not seem to

be clearly related to degree of tolerance (Babor et al., 1975). The

determinants of just how many cigarettes per day are smoked appear

to be altered by many factors besides the presence or absence of

drug tolerance.

Dependence

When volunteers were given 30 mg doses of THC orally every 4 hours

for 10-20 days, sudden cessation of the drug was associated with the

appearance of irritability, restlessness, decreased appetite,

marked sleep disturbance (including sleep EEG; alterations), sweating, salivation, tremor, weight loss, nausea and vomiting, diarrhea

and, in general, a clinical picture similar to that following

chronic administration at moderate doses of many sedative-hypnotic

drugs (Benowitz & Jones, 1975; Feinberg et al., 1975; Jones &

Benowitz, 1976). Such psychologic and physiologic changes have not

been ccmmonly observed in other chronic administration studies in

this country, although it has been reported once in a German paper

(Kielholz & Ladewig, 1970). Restlessness, anorexia and a sudden 12

lb. weight loss were reported by one group in an inpatient volunteer

study at the end of a 21-day smoking period (Mendelson et al.,

1974b; Greenberg et al., 1976). Drug-seeking behavior has not been

associated with the withdrawal syndrome, but the presence or absence of such behavior is difficult to assess in the laboratory. A

withdrawal syndrome has not been described in recent investigations

1Benowitz & Jones, 1975; Cohen et al., 1976; Jones & Benowitz, 1976;

Mendelson et al., 1974b, 1976b.

2Dornbush & Kokkevi , 1976; Perez-Reyes et al., 1974; Renault et al.,

1974; Stefanis et al., 1976a.

- 152 -
of chronic users abroad (Coggins, 1976; Fink et al., 1976; Rubin &

Comitas, 1975).

Field Studies of Chronic Users

Several field studies of populations of frequent long-term users

have searched for possible adverse or other effects associated with

chronic use.1 These were all concerned with users in countries in

which high potency cannabis is more readily available than in the

United States.

The results of a chronic user study discussed in two previous

reports were recently published in book form (Rubin & Comitas,

1975). The 30 experimental subjects had been smoking high potency

cannabis almost daily for 10 years or more. Many of the noncannabis smokers in the control groups did use cannabis tea. This

type of drug use was not controlled for; thus, both cannabis smokers

and many non-smokers were cannabis users. Few psychological or

physiological differences between the cannabis smokers and nonsmokers were evident. There was no evidence for liver, kidney or

cardiovascular malfunction. While no differences in chromosomal

abnormalities were found, the results must be regarded as inconclusive because of various technical deficiencies of the study. Modest

decreases in pulmonary function and altered hemoglobin levels were

the only physiologic differences evident. The impact of tobacco use

by the subjects on these findings is uncertain. After smoking

cannabis, a small group of workers produced less work (weeding,

hoeing, digging) with more movements, but otherwise showed no

evidence of “amotivation.” The importance of cultural differences

in the interpretation of drug effects is evident in that people in

Jamaica did not find their appetite increased by cannabis and, in

fact, seemed often to use it to decrease appetite. This is, of

course, not the expected effect in the United States (Abel, 1975).

They did not think their hearing was enhanced nor their time sense

altered, and, in fact, said they used cannabis to work better.

Although reassuring, the findings should also be judged in perspective. They were derived from a small group of selected users, so

that rare consequences (if they did occur) such as brain atrophy or

psychosis might not have been detected. The subjects were laborers

and farmers in a very different culture, so that intellectual

impairment may have been relatively difficult to detect. Soueif

(1976) has argued that such subjects may show fewer cannabis effects

than urban and literate subjects.

A similar although larger and more complex study is underway in

Costa Rica. Coggins (1976) presented a preliminary report. Eighty

daily marihuana users and matched non-cannabis-using controls were

evaluated with extensive medical examinations, laboratory studies,

1Coggins, 1976; Fink et al., 1976; Dornbush & Kokkevi, 1976; Rubin &

Comitas, 1975.

- 153 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 11
X-rays, EEG, EKG and neuropsychological testing. Although the

study is still in progress, no evidence for a greater incidence of

disease or deterioration among the cannabis users has yet been

found. 

In studies of Greek and chronic hashish users approximately 47

chronic users were compared with 40 control non-users on a variety

of EEG, echoencephalographic, neuropsychologic and experimental

laboratory tests (Fink et al., 1976; Dornbush & Kokkevi, 1976;

Stefanis et al., 1976a). Conventional clinical measures of brain

damage (EEG, echo-EEG;) showed no evidence of abnormality in the

chronic users. Tolerance to administered doses rapidly developed

on the EEG indices. No evidence of withdrawal symptoms after three

days of chronic administration was evident. When given high doses

of THC, some of these very experienced subjects developed unpleasant psychological symptoms when their tolerance level was exceeded.

These were all outpatients so no precise control over drug use

outside of the laboratory was possible. A slightly higher incidence

of personality disorders in the hashish-using group was better

explained by psychosocial variables than by marihuana use.

Thus, these three field studies of users abroad do not report brain

damage, psychosis or an “amotivational syndrome.” However, the

cultures are different, and the sample populations are relatively

small so such drug effects cannot be ruled out. Such adverse

effects may be simply uncommon or difficult to measure, should they

exist.

Chronic Effects -- Laboratory Studies

A number of groups have studied the effects of daily cannabis use in

paid volunteer subjects consuming cannabis for up to 72-day periods

while hospitalized.1 Although even 72 days is not really chronic

use, such studies complement the more commonly performed acute

outpatient studies. In general, in all these chronic or subchronic

studies, subjects have tolerated the drug treatment phase well and

very few dropouts, psychoses, or other blatant manifestations of

distress were revealed. Except for the pulmonary function impairment noted in two studies (Mendelson et al., 1974b; Tashkin et al.,

1975, 1976b), drug effects on mental, behavioral and physiologic

functions seem to disappear rapidly on cessation of drug administration and have been, in general, similar to those seen in acute

studies. Tolerance is evident at lower doses2 and obvious at higher

doses (Jones & Benowitz, 1976).

1Benowitz & Jones, 1975; Feinberg et al., 1975; Cohen et al., 1976;

Jones & Benowitz, 1976; Mendelson et al., 1974b, 1976b; Miles et

al., 1974.

2Babor et al., 1975; Bellville et al., 1975a; Cohen et al., 1976;

Mendelson et al., 1974b.

- 154 -
Adverse Physiologic Effects Associated with Chronic Use

Mention has already been made of the endocrine and immunologic

changes reported in some populations of users. Mutagenesis and

teratogenesis are discussed elsewhere in this report.

A discussion of the report of brain ventricle changes was presented

in a previous report. A paper describing the same group of subjects

appeared subsequently (Evans, 1974), but no similar reports have

followed. The difficulty of performing pneumoencephalograms in

neurologically normal volunteers makes survey studies impossible.

A number of groups are testing cannabis users with non-invasive

techniques for measuring brain ventricle size (computerized tomography) and preliminary results should be available soon. An

investigator who reported the electrical changes in the deep brain

structures of a human smoking marihuana has now completed chronic

studies in monkeys, finding similar electrical changes. The slow

wave activity persists for months after the cessation of a chronic

period of smoking. The behavioral and biological significance of

the changes in humans is uncertain.

Reese Jones, M.D.

Langley-Porter Neuropsychiatric

Institute

San Francisco, California

- 155 -
REFERENCES

Human Effects

Abel, E.L. Cannabis: Effects on hunger and thirst. Behavioral

Biology, 15:255-281 (1975).

Ablon, S.L. and Goodwin, F.K. High frequency of dysphoric reactions to tetrahydrocannabinol among depressed patients.

American Journal of Psychiatry, 131(4):448-453 (1974).

Abramson, H.A. Respiratory disorders and marijuana use. Journal of

Asthma Research, 11(3):97 (1974).

Abruzzi, W. Drug-induced psychosis -- or schizophrenia? American

Journal of Psychoanalysis, 35(4):329-342 (1975).

Adamec, C., Pihl, R.O. and Leiter, L. An analysis of the subjective

marihuana experience. International Journal of the Addictions, 11(2):295-307 (1976).

Adams, A.J., Brown, B., Flom, M.C., Jones, R.T. and Jampolsky, A.

Alcohol and marijuana effects on static visual acuity. American Journal of Optometry and Physiologic Optics, 52:729-735

(1975).

Adams, A.J., Brown, B., Hagerstrom-Portnoy, G., Flom, M.C. and

Jones, R.T. Evidence for acute effects of alcohol and

marijuana on color discrimination. Perception and Psychophysics, 20(2):119-124 (1976).

Agurell, S., Levander, S., Binder, M., Bader-Bartfai, A.,

Gustafsson, B., Leander, K., Lindgren, J.E., Ohlsson, A. and

Tobisson, B. Pharmacokinetics of -8-THC in man after smoking: Relations to physiological and psychological effects.

In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 49-61.

Altman, H. and Evenson, R.C. Marijuana use and subsequent psychiatric symptoms: A replication. Comprehensive Psychiatry,

14:415-420 (1973).

Angelico, I. and Brown, J. Marihuana and angina pectoris. New

England Journal of Medicine, 191(15):800 (1974).

Aronow, W.S. and Cassidy, J. Effect of smoking marihuana and of a

high-nicotine cigarette on angina pectoris. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 17(5):549-554 (1975).

Babor, T.F., Mendelson, J.H., Greenberg, I. and Kuehnle, J.C.

Marijuana consumption and tolerance to physiological and

subjective effects. Archives of General Psychiatry,

32(12):1548-1552 (1975).

- 156 -
Backhouse, C.I. Peak expiratory flow in youths with varying

cigarette smoking habits. British Medical Journal, 1:360-362

(1975).

Beahrs, J.O., Carlin, A.S. and Shehorn, J. Impact of psychoactive

drugs on hypnotizability. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 16(4):267-269 (1974).

Beautrais, A.L. and Marks, D.F. A test of state dependency effects

in marihuana intoxication for the learning of psychomotor

tasks. Psychopharmacologia, 46(1):37-40 (1976).

Beth, P., Rafaelsen, L. and Rafaelsen, O.J. Cannabis: A psychopharmacological review. Danish Medical Bulletin, 21(3):106-

120 (1974).

Bellville, J.W., Gasser, J.C., Miyake, T. and Aqleh, K. Tolerance

to the respiratory depression of marijuana. Pharmacologist,

17(2):180 (1975a).

Bellville, J.W., Swanson, G.D. and Kamel, A.A. Respiratory effects

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 17(5):541-548 (1975b).

Benowitz, N.L. and Jones, R.T. Cardiovascular effects of prolonged

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol ingestion. Clinical Pharmacology

and Therapeutics, 18:287-297 (1975).

Benowitz, N.L. and Jones, R.T. Prolonged -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

ingestion: Effects of sympathomimetic amines and autonomic

blockades. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, in press.

Benowitz, N.L., Jones, R.T. and Lerner, C.G. Depression of growth

hormone and cortisol response to insulin-induced hypoglycemia

after prolonged oral -9-tetrahydrocannabinol administration

in man. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism,

42(5):938-941 (1976).

Binitie, A. Psychosis following ingestion of hemp in children.

Psychopharmacologia, 44(3):301-302 (1975).

Borg, J. and Gershon, S. Dose effects of smoked marihuana on human

cognitive and motor functions. Psychopharmacologia, 42:211-

218 (1975).

Braden, W., Stillman, R.C. and Wyatt, R.J. Effects of marijuana on

contingent negative variation and reaction time. Archives of

General Psychiatry, 31(4):537-541 (1974).

Brecher, E.M. Marijuana: The health questions/the legal question.

Contemporary Drug Problems, 4(2):115-140 (1975).

- 157 -
Bridger, W.H. Good trip or bad trip: The roles of tolerance and

stress in hallucinogenic drug action. Advances in Biochemical Psychopharmacology, 13:287-38 (1975).

Brill, N.Q. and Christie, R.L. Marihuana use and psychosocial

adaptation. Follow-up study of a collegiate population.

Archives of General Psychiatry, 31(5):713-719 (1974).

Bro, P., Schou, J. and Topp, G. Cannabis poisoning with analytical

verification. New England Journal of Medicine, 293(20):1049-

1050 (1975).

Brown, A. and Stickgold, A. Self-diagnosed marihuana flashbacks.

Clinical Research, 22(3):316A (1974).

Brown, B., Adams, A.J., Hagerstrom-Portnoy, G., Jones, R.T. and

Flom, M.C. Effects of alcohol and marijuana on dynamic visual

acuity: I. Threshold measurements. Perception and Psychophysics, 18(6):441-446 (1975).

Bruhn, P. and Maage, N. Intellectual and neuropsychological functions in young men with heavy and long-term patterns of drug

abuse. American Journal of Psychiatry, 132(4):397-401

(1975).

Cappell, H. and Kuchar, E. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic

factors in marijuana intoxication. Clinical Toxicology,

7(3):315 (1974).

Cappell , H. and Pliner, P. Regulation of the self-administration of

marijuana by psychological and pharmacological variables.

Psychopharmacologia, 40(1):65-76 (1974).

Carlin, A.S. and Post, R.D. Drug use and achievement. International Journal of the Addictions, 9(3):401-410 (1974).

Carlin, A.S., Post, R.D., Bakker, C.B. and Halpern, L.M. The role

of modeling and previous experience in the facilitation of

marijuana intoxication. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 159(4):275-281 (1974).

Carlini, E.A., Karniol, I.G., Renault, P.F. and Schuster, C.R.

Effects of marijuana in laboratory animals and in man. British Journal of Pharmacology, 50:229-309 (1974).

Casswell , S. Cannabis intoxication: Effects of monetary incentive

on performance, a controlled investigation of behavioral

tolerance in moderate users of cannabis. Perceptual and

Motor Skills, 41(2):423-434 (1975).

Castillo, J.D., Anderson, M. and Rubottom, G.M. Marijuana,

absinthe and the central nervous system. Nature, 253:365-366

(1975).

- 158 -
Chausow, A.M. and Saper, C.B. Marihuana and sex. New England

Journal of Medicine, 291(6):308 (1974).

Clark, S.C. Marihuana and the cardiovascular system. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:299-306 (1975).

Clark, S.C., Greene, C., Karr, G.W., MacCannell, K.L. and Milstein,

S.L. Cardiovascular effects of marihuana in man. Canadian

Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology, 52(3):706-719 (1974).

Co, B.T., Goodwin, D.W., Gado, M., Mikhael, M. and Hill, S.Y.

Absence of cerebral atrophy in chronic cannabis users by

computerized transaxial tomography. Journal of the American

Medical Association, in press.

Coggins, W.J. Costa Rica cannabis project: An interim report on

the medical aspects. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

667-670.

Cohen, M.J. and Rickles, W.H. Performance on a verbal learning task

by subjects of heavy past marijuana usage. Psychopharmacologia, 37:323-330 (1974).

Cohen, M.J., Rickles, W.H. and Naliboff, B.D. Marijuana influenced

changes in GSR activation peaking during paired-associate

learning. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:195-200

(1975).

Cohen, S., Lessin, P.J., Hahn, P.M. and Tyrrell, E.D. A 94-day

cannabis study. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 621-

626.

Colaiuta, V. and Breed, G. Development of scales to measure

attitudes toward marijuana and marijuana users. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 59(3):398-400 (1974).

Coleman, J.H., Tacker, H.L., Evans, W.E., Lemmi, H. and Britton,

E.L. Neurological manifestations of chronic marijuana intoxication. Part I: Paresis of the fourth cranial nerve.

Diseases of the Nervous System, 37(1):29 (1976).

Committee on Drugs, American Academy of Pediatrics. Effects of

marihuana on man. Pediatrics, 56:134-144 (1975).

Culver, C.M. and King, F.W. Neuropsychological assessment of

undergraduate marihuana and LSD users. Archives of General

Psychiatry, 31:707-711 (1974).

Cunningham, W.H., Cunningham, I.C.M. and English, W.D. Sociopsychological characteristics of undergraduate marijuana

users. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 125:3-12 (1974).

- 159 -
Cushman, P. Plasma testosterone levels in healthy male marijuana

smokers. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse,

1(2):269-275 (1975).

Cushman, P., Grieco, M. and Gupta, S. Impaired rosette forming Tcells in chronic marijuana smokers. International Journal of

Clinical Pharmacology, Therapy and Toxicology, 10(2):154

(1974).

Cushman, P. and Khurana, R. Marijuana smoking and T-lymphocyte

rosette formation in vitro. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 15(7):556-557 (1975).

Cutting, M., Goodenough, S., Simmons, G., Watson, A., Laguarda, R.

and Andhuber, G. Marihuana and pulmonary antibacterial

defenses: Depression of alveolar macrophage function following experimental exposure to marijuana smoke. Chest,

66(3):321-322 (1974).

Dalton, W.S., Martz, R., Lemberger, L., Rodda, B.E. and Forney, R.B.

Effects of marijuana combined with secobarbital. Clinical

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18(3):298-304 (1975).

Dalton, W.S., Martz, R., Lemberger, L., Rodda, B.E. and Forney, R.B.

Influence of cannabidiol on -9-tetrahydrocannabinol effects.

Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 19(3):300-309 (1976).

Darley, C.F., Tinklenberg, J.R., Roth, W.T. and Atkinson, R.C. The

nature of storage deficits and state-dependent retrieval

under marihuana. Psychopharmacologia, 37:139-149 (1974).

Davies, B.H., Radcliffe, S., Seaton, A. and Graham, J.D.P. A trial

of oral -1-(trans)-tetrahydrocannabinol in reversible airways obstruction. Thorax, 30:80-85 (1975).

Dawson, W.W. Cannabis and eye function. Investigative Ophthalmology, 15(4):243-245 (1976).

DeSouza, M.R.C., Karniol, I.G. and Ventura, D.F. Human tonal

preferences as a function of frequency under -8-tetrahydrocannabinol. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior,

2(5):607-611 (1974).

Dewey, W.L., Martin, B.R. and Harris, L.S. Chronic effect of -9-

THC in animals: Tolerance and biochemical changes. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 585-594.

DiBenedetto, M. Electrodiagnostic evidence of subclinical disease

states in drug abusers. Archives of Physical Medicine and

Rehabilitation, 57(2):62-66 (1976).

- 160 -
Dittrich, A., Bickel, P. and Zimmer, D. Effekte von (-) -9-transtetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC) auf Psychotizismus-Tests.

Psychopharmacologia, 40:351-358 (1975).

Domino, E.F., Rennick, P. and Pearl, J.H. Short term neuropsychopharmacological effects of marijuana smoking in experienced

male users. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 393-

412.

Dornbush, R.L. Marijuana and memory: Effects of smoking on

storage. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences,

Series 11, 36(1):94-100 (1974).

Dornbush, R.L. and Kokkevi, A. The acute effects of various

cannabis substances on cognitive, perceptual and motor performance in very long-term hashish users. In Braude, M.C. and

Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven

Press, 1976, pp. 421-427.

Dott, A.B. Effect of marijuana on aggression and risk acceptance in

an automotive simulator. Clinical Toxicology, 7(3):289

(1974).

Drachler, D.H. Hashish and the transmission of hepatitis. New

England Journal of Medicine, 33(13):667 (1975).

Drew, W.G. and Miller, L.L. Cannabis: Neural mechanisms and

behavior - a theoretical review. Pharmacology, 11(1):12-32

(1974).

Dunn, M. and Davis, R. The perceived effects of marijuana on spinal

cord injured males. Paraplegia, 12(3):175 (1974).

Edwards, G. Cannabis and the criteria for legalization of a

currently prohibited recreational drug: Groundwork for a

debate. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 251(Supp):1-62

(1974).

Ehrlich, D. Marijuana smoking young drivers more accident prone:

ARF study. The Journal (Addiction Research Foundation),

3(1):5 (1974).

El Guebaly, N. Manic depressive psychosis and drug abuse. Canadian

Psychiatric Association Journal, 20:595-598 (1975).

Ellingstad, V.S., McFarling, L.H. and Struckman, D.L. Alcohol,

marijuana and risk taking. Contract No. DOT-HS-191-2-301,

University of South Dakota, Vermillion (1973).

Ellinwood, E.H. and Rockwell, W.J. Effect of drug use on sexual

behavior. Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality, 9(3):10-32

(1975).

- 161 -
Evans, M. Cannabis and cerebral atrophy. Royal Society of Health

Journal, 94(1):15-18 (1974).

Evans, M.A., Martz, R., Lemberger, L., Rodda, B.E. and Forney, R.B.

Clinical effects of marihuana dextroamphetamine combination.

Pharmacologist, 16(2):281 (1974).

Farber, S.J. and Huertas, V.E. Intravenously injected marihuana

syndrome. Archives of Internal Medicine, 136(3):337-339

(1976).

Feinberg, I., Jones, R.T., Walker, J.M., Cavness, C. and Floyd, T.

Marijuana extract and THC: Similarity of effects on EEG sleep

patterns in man. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,

19:782-794 (1976).

Feinberg, I., Jones, R.T., Walker, J.M., Cavness, C. and March, J.

Effects of high dosage -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on sleep

patterns in man. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,

17(4):458-464 (1975).

Fink, M., Volavka, J., Panagiotopoulos, C.P. and Stefanis, C.

Quantitative EEG studies of marihuana, -9-THC, and hashish

in man. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of

Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 383-392.

Fisher, G. Harmful effects of marihuana use: Experiences and

opinions of current and past marihuana users. British Journal of Addiction, 69(1):75-84 (1974).

Fisher, G. and Steckler, A. Psychological effects, personality and

behavioral changes attributed to marijuana use. International Journal of the Addictions, 9(1):101-126 (1974).

Flom, M.C., Adams, A.J. and Jones, R.T. Marijuana smoking and

reduced pressure in human eyes: Drug action or epiphenomenon? Investigative Ophthalmology, 14(1):52-55 (1975).

Freemon, F.R., Rosenblatt, J.E. and El-Yousef, M.K. Interaction of

physostigmine and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in man. Clinical

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 17(2):121-126 (1975).

Friedman, J.G. Marihuana and testosterone levels. New England

Journal of Medicine, 292(9):484 (1975).

Garriott, J.C. and Latman, N. Drug detection in cases of “driving

under the influence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences,

21(2):398-415 (1976).

Gianutsos, R. and Litwack, A.R. Chronic marijuana smokers show

reduced coding into long-term storage. Bulletin of the

Psychonomic Society, 7(3):277-279 (1976).

- 162 -
Gibbins, R.J., McDougall, J., Miles, C.G. and Marshman, J.A. Tolerance to marijuana-induced tachycardia in man. Acta Pharmacologia et Toxicologia, 39:65-76 (1976).

Goode, E. The criminogenics of marijuana. Addictive Diseases,

1(3):297-322 (1974).

Gordon, G.G., Altman, K., Southren, A.L., Rubin, E. and Lieber, C.S.

Effect of alcohol (ethanol) administration on sex hormone

metabolism in normal men. New England Journal of Medicine,

295(15):793-797 (1976).

Gould, L.C. and Kleber, H.D. Changing patterns of multiple drug use

among applicants to a multimodality drug treatment program.

Archives of General Psychiatry, 31:408-413 (1974).

Graham, J.D.P., Davies, B.H., Seaton, A. and Weatherstone, R.M.

Bronchodilator action of extract of cannabis and -1-THC. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 269-286.

Greenberg, I., Kuehnle, J., Mendelson, J.H. and Bernstein, J.G.

Effects of marihuana use on body weight and caloric intake in

humans. Psychopharmacology, 49:79-84 (1976).

Greene, M.L. and Saunders, D.R. Metabolism of tetrahydrocannabinol

by the small intestine. Gastroenterology, 66(3):365-372

(1974).

Gregg, J.M., Campbell, R.L., Levin, K.J., Ghia, J. and Elliott,

R.A. Cardiovascular effects of cannabinol during oral

surgery. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 55(2):203-213 (1976a).

Gregg, J.M., Small, E.W., Moore, R., Raft, D. and Toomey, T.C.

Emotional response to intravenous -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

during oral surgery. Journal of Oral Surgery, 34(4):301-313

Grossman, J.C., Goldstein, R. and Eisenman, R. Undergraduate

marijuana and drug use as related to openness to experience.

Psychiatric Quarterly, 48(1):86-92 (1974).

Gunderson, E.K.E., Nail, R.L. and Kolb, D. Health status of drug

abusers as measured by the Cornell Medical Index. Journal of

Community Psychology, 3(1):58-67 (1975).

Hager, M. To enhance sex, marijuana is “unparalleled.” The Journal

(Addiction Research Foundation), 4(2):1,5 (1975).

Halikas, J.A. Marijuana use and psychiatric illness. In Miller,

L.L. (ed.), Marijuana: Effects on Human Behavior. New York:

Academic Press, 1974, pp. 265-302.

- 163 -
Hardman, H.F. and Hosko, M.J. An overview of the cardiovascularautonomic actions of cannabis. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, pp. 231-238.

Harmon, J.W. and Aliapoulios, M.A. Marijuana-induced gynecomastia:

Clinical and laboratory experience. Surgical Forum, 25:423-

425 (1974).

Heath, R.G. Marihuana and -9-THC: Acute and chronic effects on

brain function of monkeys. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, pp. 345-356.

Hembree, W.C. Effects of marihuana on gonadal function in man.

Paper presented at the Satellite Symposium on Marihuana of

the Sixth International Congress of Pharmacology, Helsinki,

Finland, July, 1975.

Hembree, W.C., Nahas, G.G., Zeidenberg, P. and Dyrenfurth, I.

Marihuana effects upon the human testis. Clinical Research,

24(3):272A (1976).

Hepler, R.S., Frank, I.M. and Petrus, R. Ocular effects of marijuana. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of

Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 815-824.

Hill, T.W. Breast growth for male pot smokers. The Journal

(Addiction Research Foundation), 4(1):1,2 (1975).

Hollister, L.E. Clinical pharmacology of marihuana. In Gibbons,

R.J., Israel, Y., Kalant, R.E., Popham, R.E., Schmidt, W. and

Smart, R.G. (eds.), Research Advances in Alcohol and Drug

Problems. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1974a, pp. 243-266.

Hollister, L.E. Structure-activity relationships of cannabis constituents in man. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,

15(2):208-209 (1974b).

Hollister, L.E. Drugs and sexual behavior in man. Life Sciences,

17:661-668 (1976).

Hollister, L.E. and Gillespie, H.K. Interactions in man of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol. II. Cannabinol and cannabidiol. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18(1):80-83 (1975a).

Hollister, L.E. and Gillespie, H.K. Action of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC): An approach to the active metabolite

hypothesis. Personal communication, 1975b.

Hollister, L.E., Kanter, S.L., Board, R.D. and Green, D.E. Marihuana metabolites in urine of man. III. Unchanged -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol. Research Communications in Chemical

Pathology and Pharmacology, 8(4):579-584 (1974).

- 164 -
Hollister, L.E., Overall, J.E. and Gerber, M.L. Marihuana and

setting. Archives of General Psychiatry, 32:798-801 (1975).

Hollister, L.E. and Reaven, G.M. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and

glucose tolerance. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,

16(2):297-302 (1974).

Isrealstam, S. and Lambert, S. (eds.) Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic

Safety. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on

Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety, Toronto, September, 1974.

Janowsky, D.S., Meacham, M.P., Blaine, J.D., Schorr, M. and

Bozzetti, L.P. Simulated flying performance after marihuana

intoxication. Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine,

47(2):124-128 (1976a).

Janowsky, D.S., Meacham, M.P., Blaine, J.D., Schorr, M. and

Bozzetti, L.P. Marijuana effects on simulated flying ability. American Journal of Psychiatry, 133(4):384-388 (1976b).

Johnstone, R.E., Lief, P.L., Kulp, R.A. and Smith, T.C. Combination

o f -9-tetrahydrocannabinol with oxymorphone or pentobarbital: Effects on ventilatory control and cardiovascular

dynamics. Anesthesiology, 42(6):674-684 (1974).

Jones, R.T. Drug models of schizophrenia - cannabis. In Cole,

J.O., Freedman, A.M. and Friedhoff, A.J. (eds.), Psychopathology and Psychopharmacology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins

Press, 1973, pp. 71-86.

Jones, R.T. Effects of marihuana on the mind. In Tinklenberg, J.R.

(ed.), Marihuana and Health Hazards: Methodological Issues

in Current Marihuana Research. New York: Academic Press

1975, pp. 115-120.

Jones, R.T. and Benowitz, N. The 30-day trip - Clinical studies of

cannabis tolerance and dependence. In Braude, M.C. and

Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven

Press, 1976, pp. 627-642.

Just, W.W., Filipovic, N. and Werber, G. Detection of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in saliva of men by means of thin-layer

chromatography and mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography, 96:189-194 (1974).

Kahn, M. and Kulick, F. Relationship of drug involvement to

dropping out of college. Psychological Reports, 37(3, part

2):1095-1098 (1975).

Kalant, H. and Kalant, O.J. Cannabis - Some new answers to old

questions. Addictions, 21(3):48-61 (1974).

- 165 -
Kanakis, C. Effects of marijuana in coronary disease. Clinical

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 19(1):94 (1976).

Kanakis, C., Pouget, J.M. and Rosen, K.M. The effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol (cannabis) on cardiac performance with

and without ß blockade. Circulation, 53(4):703-707 (1976a).

Kanakis, C., Pouget, J.M. and Rosen, K.M. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (cannabis) on cardiac performance as measured

by echocardiography. Clinical Research, 24(3):255A (1976b).

Kanter, S.L., Hollister, L.E. and Moore, F. Marihuana metabolites

in urine of man. V. Characterization and separation of polar

metabolites of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Research Communications Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 10(2):215-219

(1975).

Kanter, S.L., Hollister, L.E., Moore, F. and Green, D.E. Marihuana

metabolites in urine of man. II. Undescribed metabolite

following oral ingestion of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 7:79-84 (1974a).

Kanter, S.L., Hollister, L.E., Moore, F. and Green, D.E. Marihuana

metabolites in urine of man. IV. Extraction procedures using

diethyl ether. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology

and Pharmacology, 9(2):205-213 (1974b).

Karniol, I.G., Shirakawa, I., Kasinski, N., Pfeferman, A. and

Carlini, E.A. Cannabidiol interferes with the effects of -

9-tetrahydrocannabinol in man. European Journal of Pharmacology, 28:172-177 (1974).

Karniol, I.G., Shirakawa, I., Takahashi, R.N., Knobel, E. and

Musty, R.E. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabinol in man. Pharmacology, 13:502-512 (1975).

Kaymakcalan, S. Potential dangers of cannabis. International

Journal of the Addictions, 10(4):721-735 (1975).

Keeler, M.H. and Moore, E. Paranoid reactions while using marijuana. Diseases of the Nervous System, 35(11):535-536

(1974).

Kielholz, P. and Ladewig, E. Uber Drogenabhangigkeit bei Jugendlichen. Deutsche Medizin Wochenschrift, 95:101-105 (1970).

King, M.R. and Manaster, G.J. Time perspective correlates of

collegiate marijuana use. Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Psychology, 43(1):99 (1975).

Klonoff, H. Marijuana and driving in real-life situations. Science, 186:317-324 (1974a)

- 166 -
Klonoff, H. Effects of marijuana on driving in a restricted area

and on city streets: Driving performance and physiological

changes. In Miller, L.L. (ed.), Marijuana: Effects on Human

Behavior. New York: Academic Press, 1974b, pp. 359-397.

Klonoff, H. and Clark, C. Drug patterns in the chronic marijuana

user. International Journal of the Addictions, 11(1):71-80

(1976).

Klonoff, H. and Low, M.D. Psychological and neurophysiological

effects of marijuana in man: An interaction model. In

Miller, L.L. (ed.), Marijuana: Effects on Human Behavior.

New York: Academic Press, 1974, pp. 121-155.

Knudten, R.D. and Meade, A.C. Marijuana and social policy. Addictive Diseases, 1(3):323-351 (1974).

Koff, W. Marijuana and sexual activity. Journal of Sex Research,

10(3):194-204 (1974).

Kolansky, H. and Moore, W.T. Effects of marihuana on adolescents

and you adults. Journal of the American Medical Association, 216:486-492 (1971).

Kolodny, R.C. Research issues in the study of marijuana and male

reproductive physiology in humans. In Tinklenberg, J.R.

(ed.), Marijuana and Health Hazards: Methodological Issues

in Current Research. New York: Academic Press, 1975a, pp.

71-81.

Kolodny, R.C. Paper presented at the International Academy of Sex

Research meeting, Stony Brook, New York, September, 1975b.

Kolodny, R.C., Lessin, P., Toro, G., Masters, W.H. and Cohen, S.

Depression of plasma testosterone with acute marihuana administration. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 217-225.

Kolodny, R.C., Masters, W.H., Kolodner, R.M. and Toro, G. Depression of plasma testosterone levels after chronic intensive

marihuana use. New England Journal of Medicine, 290:872-874

(1974a).

Kolodny, R.C., Masters, W.H. and Toro, G. Marihuana and sex. New

England Journal of Medicine, 291(6):310 (1974b).

Kroll, P. Psychoses associated with marijuana use in Thailand.

Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 161(3):149-156 (1975).

Kuehnle, J., Mendelson, J.H., Davis, K.R. and New, P.F.J. Computerized tomographic examination of heavy marihuana smokers.

Journal of the American Medical Association, in press.

- 167 -
Lau, R.J., Tubergen, D.G., Barr, M., Domino, E.F., Benowitz, N. and

Jones, R.T. Phytohemagglutinin-induced lymphocyte transformation in humans receiving -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Science, 192:805-807 (1976).

Lemberger, L., Crabtree, R., Rowe, H. and Clemens, J. Tetrahydrocannabinols and serum prolactin levels in man. Life Sciences, 16(8):1339-1343 (1975).

Lemberger, L., McMahon, R. and Archer, R. The role of metabolic

conversion on the mechanism of action of cannabinoids. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 125-132.

Lemberger, L. and Rowe, H. Clinical pharmacology of nabilone, a

cannabinol derivative. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18(6):720-726 (1975).

Lemberger, L. and Rubin, A. The physiologic disposition of marihuana in man. Life Sciences, 17(11):1637-1742 (1975).

Lewis, C.R. and Slavin, R.G. Allergy to marijuana: A clinical and

skin testing study. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 55(2):131-132 (1975).

Linton, P.H., Kuechenmeister, C.A., White, H.B. and Travis, R.P.

Marijuana: Heart rate and EEG response. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 10:201-214

(1975).

MacAvoy, M.G. and Marks, D.F. Divided attention performance of

cannabis users and non-users following cannabis and alcohol.

Psychopharmacologia, 44(2):147-152 (1975).

Malit, L.A., Johnstone, R.E., Bourke, D.I., Kulp, R.A., Klein, V.

and Smith, T.C. Intravenous -9-tetrahydrocannabinol:

Effects on ventilatory control and cardiovascular dynamics.

Anesthesiology, 42(6):666-673 (1975).

Marks, V., Teale, D., and Fry, D. Detection of cannabis products in

urine by radioimmunoassay. British Medical Journal, 3:348-

349 (1975).

Mattox, K.L. Pneumomediastinum in heroin and marijuana users.

Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians,

5(1):26-28 (1976).

McCallum, N.K. The determination of cannabinol levels in the blood

and interpretation of their significance. Pharmacology,

11:33-37 (1974).

McGlothlin, W.H. Drug use and abuse. Annual Review of Psychology,

26:45-64 (1975).

- 168 -
McGuire, J.S. and Megargee, E.I. Personality correlates of marijuana use among youthful offenders. Journal of Consulting

and Clinical Psychology, 42(1):124-133 (1974).

Meacham, M.P., Janowsky, D.S., Blaine, J.D., Bozzetti, L.P. and

Schorr, M. Effects of marihuana on flying ability. Journal

of the American Medical Association, 230(9):1258 (1974).

Mechoulam, R., McCallum, N.K. and Berstein, S. Recent advances in

the chemistry and biochemistry of cannabis. Chemical

Reviews, 76(1):75-112 (1976).

Mendelson, J.H., Kuehnle, J.C., Ellingboe, J. and Babor, T.F.

Plasma testosterone levels before, during and after chronic

marihuana smoking. New England Journal of Medicine, 291(20):

1051-1055 (1974a).

Mendelson, J.H., Kuehnle, J.C., Greenberg, I. and Mello, N. Operant

acquisition of marihuana in man. Journal of Pharmacology and

Experimental Therapeutics, 198(1):42-53 (1976a).

Mendelson, J.H., Kuehnle, J.C., Greenberg, I. and Mello, N. The

effects of marihuana use on human operant behavior: Individual data. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology

of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976b, pp. 643-653.

Mendelson, J.H., Rossi, A.M. and Meyer, R.E. (eds.) The Use of

Marihuana, a Psychological and Physiological Inquiry. New

York: Plenum Press, 1974b.

Meyer, R.E. Psychiatric consequences of marihuana use: The state

of the evidence. In Tinklenberg, J.R. (ed.), Marijuana and

Health Hazards: Methodologic Issues in Current Research.

New York: Academic Press, 1975, pp. 133-152.

Miles, C.G., Congreve, G.R.S., Gibbins, R.J., Marshman, J.,

Devenyi, P. and Hicks, R.C. An experimental study of the

effects of daily cannabis smoking on behaviour patterns.

Acta Pharmacologica et Toxocologica, 34(Suppl):1-44 (1974).

Miller, L.L. (ed.) Marijuana: Effects on Human Behavior. New

York: Academic Press, 1974.

Milstein, S.L., MacCannell, K.L., Karr, G. and Clark, S. Marijuana

produced changes in cutaneous sensitivity and affect: Users

and non-users. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior,

2(3):367-374 (1974).

Milstein, S.L., MacCannell, K., Karr, G. and Clark, S. Marijuanaproduced changes in pain tolerance. Experienced and nonexperienced subjects. International Pharmacopsychiatry,

10(3):177-182 (1975a).

- 169 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 12
Milstein, S.L., MacCannell, K., Karr, G. and Clark, S. Marijuanaproduced impairments in coordination. Journal of Nervous and

Mental Disease, 161(1):26-31 (1975b).

Mirin, S.M. and McKenna, G.J. Combat zone adjustment: The role of

marijuana use. Military Medicine, 140(7):482-485 (1975).

Moskowitz, H. Marihuana and driving. Accident Analysis and

Prevention, 8(1):21-26 (1976).

Moskowitz, H., Hulbert, S. and McGlothlin, W.H. Marihuana: Effects

on simulated driving performance. Accident Analysis and

Prevention, 8(1):45-50 (1976).

Moskowitz, H. and McGlothlin, W. Effects of marihuana on auditory

signal detection. Psychopharmacologia, 40(2):137-145 (1974).

Moskowitz, H., McGlothlin, W. and Hulbert, S. The effects of

marijuana dosage on driver performance. Contract No. DOT-HS150-2-236, University of California, Los Angeles (1973).

Moskowitz, H., Shea, R. and Burns, M. Effect of marihuana on the

psychological refractory period. Perceptual and Motor

Skills, 38:959-962 (1974).

Mullins, C.J., Vitola, B.M. and Michelson, A.E. Variables related

to cannabis use. International Journal of the Addictions,

10(3):481-502 (1975).

Nace, E.P., Meyers, A.L., Rothberg, J.M. and Maleson, F. Addicted

and nonaddicted drug users - a comparison of drug usage

patterns. Archives of General Psychiatry, 32:77-80 (1975).

Naditch, M.P. Acute adverse reactions to psychoactive drugs, drug

usage, and psychopathology. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,

83(4):394-403 (1974).

Naditch, M.P. Relation of motives for drug use and psychopathology

in the development of acute adverse reactions to psychoactive

drugs. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 84(4):374-385 (1975).

Naditch, M.P., Alker, P.C. and Joffe, P. Individual differences and

setting as determinants of acute adverse reactions to psychoactive drugs. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease,

161(5):326-335 (1975).

Nahas, G.G. Marihuana. Journal of the American Medical Association, 233(1):80 (1975a).

Nahas, G.G. Marihuana - Deceptive Weed. New York: Raven Press,

1975b.

- 170 -
Nahas, G.G., DeSoize, B., Armand, J.P., Hsu, J. and Morishima, A.

Natural cannabinoids: Apparent depression of nucleic acids

and protein synthesis in cultured human lymphocytes. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 177-186.

Nichols, W.W., Miller, R.C., Heneen, W., Bradt, C., Hollister, L.

and Kanter, S. Cytogenetic studies on human subjects receiving marihuana and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Mutation

Research, 26(5):413-417 (1974).

Noyes, R., Brunk, S.F., Avery, D.H. and Canter, A. The analgesic

properties of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and codeine. Clinical

Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18(1):84-89 (1975a).

Noyes, R., Brunk, S.F., Baram, D.A. and Canter, A. Analgesic effect

o f -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 15(2&3):139-143 (1975b).

Orcutt, J.D. Social determinants of alcohol and marijuana effects:

A systematic theory. International Journal of the Addictions, 10(6):1021-1033 (1975).

Orcutt, J.D. and Biggs, D.A. Recreational effects of marijuana and

alcohol: Some descriptive dimensions. International Journal

of the Addictions, 10(2):229-239 (1975).

Pack, A.T., Brill, N.Q. and Christie, R.L. Quitting marijuana.

Diseases of the Nervous System, 37(4):205-209 (1976).

Papadakis, D.P., Michael, C.M., Kephalas, T.A. and Miras, C.J.

Effects of cannabis smoking in blood lactic acid and glucose

in humans. Experientia, 30(10):1183-1184 (1974).

Payer, L. Marijuana increases pain tolerance. The Journal (Addiction Research Foundation), 3(12):4 (1974).

Payne, R.J. and Brand, S.N. The toxicity of intravenously used

marijuana. Journal of the American Medical Association,

233(4):351-354 (1975).

Peeke, S.C., Jones, R.T. and Stone, G.C. Effects of practice on

marijuana induced changes in reaction time. Psychopharmacology, 48:159-163 (1976).

Perez-Reyes, M., Timmons, M.C. and Wall, M.E. Long-term use of

marijuana and the development of tolerance or sensitivity to

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Archives of General Psychiatry,

31:89-91 (1974).

Perez-Reyes, M., Wagner, D., Brine, D.R., Christensen, H.D., Davis,

K.H. and Wall, M.E. Tetrahydrocannabinols: Plasma disappearance in man and rate of penetration to mouse brain. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 117-123.

- 171 -
Permutt, M.A., Goodwin, D.W., Schwin, R. and Hill, S.Y. The effect

of marijuana on carbohydrate metabolism. American Journal of

Psychiatry, 133(2):220-221 (1976).

Petersen, B.H., Graham, J. and Lemberger, L. Marihuana, tetrahydrocannabinol and T-cell formation. Clinical Research,

23(4):477A (1975a).

Petersen, B.H., Graham, J., Lemberger, L. and Dalton, B. Studies of

the immune response in chronic marihuana smokers. Pharmacologist, 16(2):259 (1974).

Petersen, B.H., Lemberger, L., Graham, J. and Dalton, B. Alterations in the cellular-mediated immune responsiveness of

chronic marihuana smokers. Psychopharmacology Comnunications, 1(1):67-74 (1975b).

Pillard, R.C. Marihuana is not a public health menace: It is time

to relax our social policy. In Ingelfinger, F.J., Finland,

M., Relman, A. and Elbert, R. (eds.), Controversy in Internal

Medicine II. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders and Co., 1974, pp.

762-768.

Pillard, R.C., McNair, D.M. and Fisher, S. Does marijuana enhance

experimentally induced anxiety? Psychopharmacologia,

40(3):205-210 (1974).

Prakash, R. and Aronow, W.S. Effects of marijuana in coronary

disease. Reply. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics,

19(1):94-95 (1976).

Prakash, R., Aronow, W.S., Warren, M., Laverty, W. and Gottschalk,

L.A. Effects of marihuana and placebo marihuana smoking on

hemodynamics in coronary disease. Clinical Pharmacology and

Therapeutics, 18(1):90-95 (19751.

Pryor, G.T. Acute and subacute behavioral and pharmacological

interactions of -9-THC with other drugs. In Braude, M.C.

and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York:

Raven Press, 1976, pp. 543-554.

Purnell, W.D. and Gregg, J.M. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol, euphoria

and intraocular pressure in man. Annals of Ophthalmology,

7(7):921-923 (1975).

Regelson, W., Butler, J.R., Schulz, J., Kirk, T., Peek, L. and

Green, M.L. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol as an effective antidepressant and appetite-stimulating agent in advanced cancer

patients. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology

of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 763-776.

Renault, P.F., Schuster, CR., Freedman, D.X., Sikic, B., deMello,

D.N. and Halaris, A. Repeat administration of marihuana

smoke to humans. Archives of General Psychiatry, 31:95-102

(1974).

- 172 -
Richek, H.G., Angle, J.F., McAdams, W.S. and D'Angelo, J. Personality/mental health correlates of drug use by high school

students. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 160(6):

435-442 (1975).

Roth, W.T., Rosenbloom, M.J., Darley, C.F., Tinklenberg, J.R. and

Kopell, B.S. Marijuana effects on TAT form and content.

Psychopharmacologia, 43:261-266 (1975).

Roth, W.T., Tinklenberg, .J.R. and Kopell, B.S. Ethanol and marijuana effects on event related potentials in a memory

retrieval paradigm. Electroencephalography and Clinical

Neurophysiology, in press.

Rubin, V. and Comitas, L. Ganja in Jamaica: A medical anthropological study of chronic marihuana use. The Hague: Mouton,

1975.

Salvendy, G. and McCabe, G.P. Marijuana and human performance.

Human Factors, 17:229-235 (1975).

Salzman, C., Van der Kolk, B.A. and Shader, R.I. Marijuana and

hostility in a small group setting. Paper presented at the

American Psychiatric Association Meeting, May, 1975.

Savary, P., Laurenceau, J.L., DeLean, A., Roy, P. and Marquis, Y.

Acute cardiovascular effects of inhaled cannabis sativa smoke

in man. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology,

Therapy and Toxicology, 10(2):150 (1974).

Schaefer, C.F., Gunn, C.G. and Dubowski, K.M. Normal plasma

testosterone concentrations after marihuana smoking. New

England Journal of Medicine, 292(16):867-868 (1975a).

Schaefer, C.F., Gunn, C.G. and Dubowski, K.M. Marihuana dosage

control through heart rate. New England Journal of Medicine,

293(2):101 (1975b).

Schnoll, S.H. Male sex organ function in drug users. New England

Journal of Medicine, 293(4):202 (1975).

Schurr, A., Sheffer, N., Graziani, Y. and Livne, A. Inhibition of

glucose efflux from human erythrocytes by hashish components.

Biochemical Pharmacology, 23:2005-2009 (1974).

Schwartzfarb, L., Needle, M. and Chavez-Chase, M. Dose-related

inhibition of leukocyte migration by marihuana and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in vitro. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 14(1):35-41 (1974).

Segal, B. and Merenda, P.F. Locus of control, sensation seeking,

and drug and alcohol use in college students. Drug Forum,

4(4):349-369 (1975).

- 173 -
Segelman, A.B., Segelman, F.P., Nahas, G.G., Suciu-Foca, N.,

DeSoize, B., Armand, J.P. and Morishima, A. Possible noninhibition of cellular-mediated immunity in marihuana

smokers. Science, 185(4150):543-544 (1974).

Seiden, R.H., Tomlinson, K.R. and O'Carroll, M. Patterns of

marijuana use among public health students. American Journal

of Public Health, 65(6):613-621 (1975).

Seyfeddininpur, N. Clinical and electroencephalographic observations during the acute action of hashish. Munchener

Medizinische Wochenschrift, 117(12):477-482 (1975).

Shapiro, B.J. and Tashkin, D.P. Effects of ß-adrenergic blockage

and muscarinic stimulation on cannabis bronchodilation. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 277-286.

Shapiro, C.M., Orlina, A.R., Unger, P.J., Telfer, M. and Billings,

A.A. Marihuana induced antibody response and laboratory

correlates. Clinical Research, 23(4):488A (1975).

Sharma, B.P. Cannabis and its users in Nepal. British Journal of

Psychiatry, 127:550-552 (1975).

Sharma, S. and Moskowitz, H. Effects of two levels of attention

demand on vigilance performance under marihuana. Perceptual

and Motor Skills, 38(3):967-970 (1974).

Silverstein, M.J. and Lessin, P.J. DNCB skin testing in chronic

marihuana users. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

199-203.

Simon, W.E. Psychological needs, academic achievement and marijuana consumption. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 30(4):

496-498 (1974).

Simon, W.E., Simon, M.G., Primavera, L.H. and Orndoff, R.K. A

comparison of marijuana users and nonusers on a number of

personality variables. Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Psychology, 42(6):917-918 (1974).

Smart, R.G. Marihuana and driving risk among college students.

Journal of Safety Research, 6(4):155-158 (1974).

Smith, G.M. and Fogg, C.P. High school performance and behavior

before and after initiation of illicit drug use. Federation

Proceedings, 35(3):564 (1976).

Soueif, M.I. Chronic cannabis users: Further analysis of objective

test results. Bulletin on Narcotics, 27(4):1-26 (1975).

- 174 -
Soueif, M.I. Some determinants of psychological deficits associated with chronic cannabis consumption. Bulletin on Narcotics, 28(1):25-42 (1976).

Stanton, M.D., Mintz, J. and Franklin, R.M. Drug flashbacks. II.

Some additional findings. International Journal of the

Addictions, 11(1):53-69 (1976).

Steadward, R.D. and Singh, M. The effects of smoking marihuana on

physical performance. Medicine and Science in Sports,

7(4):309-311 (1975).

Stefanis, C., Boulougouris, J. and Liakos, A. Clinical and psychophysiological effects of cannabis in long-term users. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976a, pp. 659-665.

Stefanis, C., Liakos, A., Boulougouris, J., Fink, M. and Freedman,

A.M. Chronic hashish use and mental disorder. American

Journal of Psychiatry, 133(2):225-227 (1976b).

Sterling-Smith, R.S. A special study of drivers most responsible in

fatal accidents. Summary for Management Report, Contract No.

DOT HS 310-3-595, April, 1976.

Stimmel, B. Male sex organ function in drug users. New England

Journal of Medicine, 293(4):202 (1975).

Staller, K., Swanson, G.D. and Bellville, J.W. Effects on visual

tracking of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and pentobarbital.

Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 16(5-6):271-275 (1976).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J. and Frank, I.M. Acute bronchial

effects of smoked marijuana (MJ) and oral -9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) in asthmatic subjects. Clinical Research,

22(3):512A (1974).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J. and Frank, I.M. Acute effects of

marihuana on airway dynamics in spontaneous and experimentally induced bronchial asthma. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976a, pp. 785-802.

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J., Lee, Y.E. and Harper, C.E. Subacute

effects of heavy marihuana smoking on pulmonary function in

healthy men. New England Journal of Medicine, 294(3):125-129

(1976b).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J., Rosenthal, D. and McLatchie, C.

Chronic effects of heavy marijuana smoking on pulmonary function and sputum cytology in healthy, young men. American

Review of Respiratory Disease, 111(6):895 (1975).

- 175 -
Tassinari, C.A., Ambrosetto, G., Peraita-Adrados, M.R. and Gastaut,

H. The neuropsychiatric syndrome of -9-THC and cannabis

intoxication in naive subjects. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, PP. 357-375.

Tassinari, C.A., Peraita-Adrados, M.R., Ambrosetto, G. and Gastaut,

H. Effects of marihuana and -9-THC at high doses in man. A

polygraphic study. Electroencephalography and Clinical

Neurophysiology, 36(1):94 (1974).

Taylor, S.P., Vardaris, R.M., Rawtich, A.B., Gammon, C.B.,

Cranston, J.W. and Lubetkin, A.I. The effects of alcohol and

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on human physical aggression.

Aggressive Behavior, 2:153-161 (1976).

Teale, J.D., King, L.J., Forman, E.J. and Marks, V. Radioimmunoassay of cannabinoids in blood and urine. Lancet, 2(7880):

553-555 (1974).

Teale, J.D. and Marks, V. A fatal motor car accident and cannabis

use: Investigation by radioimmunoassay. Lancet, 1(7965):

884-885 (1976).

Tec, N. Marihuana and other illegal drugs. International Journal

of Social Psychiatry, 20(3-4):173-179 (1974).

Tennant, F.S. and Detels, R. Relationship of alcohol, cigarette,

and drug abuse in adulthood with alcohol, cigarette and

coffee consumption in childhood. Preventive Medicine,

5(1):70-77 (1976).

Tennant, F.S., Detels, R. and Clark, V. Some childhood antecedents

of drug and alcohol abuse. American Journal of Epidemiology,

102(5):377-385 (1975).

Thacore, V.R. and Shukla, S.R.P. Cannabis psychosis and paranoid

schizophrenia. Archives of General Psychiatry, 33(3):383-386

(1976).

Thoden, J.S., Mosher, R., MacConaill, M. and Ling, G. Effects of

marihuana on treadmill performance. Medicine and Science in

Sports, 6(1):81 (1974).

Thompson, P. “Stoned” driving is unpleasant, say marijuana

smokers. The Journal (Addiction Research Foundation),

4(1):13 (1975).

Tinklenberg, J.R. Marijuana and human aggression. In Miller, L.L.

(ed.), Marijuana: Effects on Human Behavior. New York:

Academic Press, 1974, pp. 339-357.

- 176 -
Tinklenberg, J.R. and Darley, C.F. A model of marihuana's cognitive

effects. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology

of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 429-439.

Turner, C.E. and Henry, J.T. Constituents of cannabis sativa L.

IX. Stability of synthetic and naturally occurring cannabinoids in chloroform. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences,

64(2):357-359 (1975).

Tylden, E. The clinical features of cannabis use. Practitioner,

212(1272):810-814 (1974).

Tzeng, O.C.S. and Skafidas, T. Differentiation of psychoactive

drug users and non-users and prediction of their using intention. Journal of Drug Education, 5(3):261-273 (1975).

Vachon, L., Mikus, P., Morrissey, W., Fitzgerald, M. and Gaensler,

E. Bronchial effect of marihuana smoke in asthma. In Braude,

M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New

York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 777-784.

Vachon. L.. Sulkowski. A. and Rich. E. Marihuana effects on

learning, attention and time estimation. Psychopharmacologia, 39(1):1-11 (1974).

Wall, M.E., Brine, D.R. and Perez-Reyes, M. Metabolism of cannabinoids in man. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

93-113.

Weckowicz, T.E., Fedora, O., Mason, J., Radstaak, D., Bay, K.S. and

Yonge, K.A. Effect of marijuana on divergent and convergent

production cognitive tests. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,

84(4):386-398 (1975).

Westermeyer, J. and Walzer, V. Sociopathy and drug use in a young

psychiatric population. Diseases of the Nervous System,

36(12):673-677 (1975).

Wiberg, D.M., Swanson, G.D. and Bellville, J.W. Respiratory

effects of marijuana characterized by dynamic end-tidal forcing. Pharmacologist, 17(2):180 (1975).

Widman, M., Agurell, S., Ehrnebo, M. and Jones, G. Binding of (+)-

and (-)- -1-tetrahydrocannabinols and (-)-7-hydroxy- -1-

tetrahydrocannabinol to blood cells and plasma proteins in

man. Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 26(11):914-916

(1974).

Willette, R.E. (ed.) Cannabinoid Assays in Humans. National

Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph No. 7.

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.

- 177 -
Zeller, A.F. Joint committee on aviation pathology. IX. Alcohol

and other drugs in aircraft accidents. Aviation, Space and

Environmental Medicine, 46(10):1271-1274 (1975).

- 178 -
Chapter 8

EFFECTS OF MARIHUANA ON THE

GENETIC AND IMMUNE SYSTEMS

Steven Matsuyama, Ph.D. and Lissy Jarvik, M.D., Ph.D.

With the continued widespread abuse of marihuana and the potential

use of marihuana as a therapeutic agent being widely discussed, it

becomes important to assess the effects of marihuana and other

cannabis preparations on the immune mechanisms and the genetic

material. This chapter integrates recent findings with those in the

Fifth Marihuana and Health Report (1975) to provide a wider data

base from which conclusions may be drawn. Animal studies and human

studies are considered separately because it is not known to what

extent, if at all, results from animal studies can be directly

extrapolated to man.

ANIMAL STUDIES

Chromosome Analyses

Of the two reports of chromosome studies in animals, one in rats and

one in hamsters, both have been negative (Martin, 1969; Pace et al.,

1971). However, cytological examinations of hamster lung cultures

(Leuchtenberger & Leuchtenberger, 1976) exposed to smoke from marihuana and tobacco cigarettes were reported to show multiple effects

(i.e., inhibition of DNA synthesis and cell division, abnormalities

in mitosis, and variable DNA content of chromosomes).

Immune Responses

The effect of marihuana on various aspects of the host defense

system of animals has been intensively investigated. In an in vitro

bioassay system, fresh marihuana smoke was found to impair in a

dose-related manner the antibactericidal activity of pulmonary

alveolar macrophages obtained from rats (Huber et al., 1975;

McCarthy et al., 1976). However, smoke from tobacco cigarettes and

placebo marihuana cigarettes (all tetrahydrocannabinols removed)

also impaired macrophage function. By contrast, purified tetrahydrocannabinol introduced directly to the bioassay system did not

affect the macrophage bactericidal activity. Thus, it appears that

the psychoactive agent in marihuana is not the agent that impairs

alveolar macrophage function. In another study, in vitro exposure

of mouse peritoneal macrophages to -9-THC and cannabidiol resulted

in cell death (Raz & Goldman, 1976). This finding is consistent

with Mann et al. (1971), who noted a decrease in alveolar macrophages in marihuana smokers compared to non-smokers. Gaul and

Mellors (1975) reported that intraperitoneal injection of -9-THC

- 179 -
to immunized rats suppressed the macrophage migration inhibition

factor (MIF) activity. (MIF is a lymphokine released by sensitized

T lymphocytes and is a measure of cell-mediated immunity.)

In a prospective study, Daul and Heath (1975) evaluated the immunological competence of rhesus monkeys prior to and following six

months of chronic marihuana usage (at three different dosages) and

detected reduced immunoglobulin levels as well as decreased in

vitro lymphocyte responsiveness. Their report, however, must be

viewed with caution because of the small number of animals studied:

one each in the high and medium dose groups, three in the low dose

group and one in the control group, totalling only six monkeys.

Lefkowitz and Chiang (1975) administered -9-THC to mice and found

that it reduced the number of splenic lymphocytes and leukocytes and

inhibited the hemolytic plaque forming cell response (a measure of

antibody producing cells). In another study by Johnson and Wiersema

(1974), an increase in lymphocytes in rat bone marrow accompanied

the inhibition of myelopoiesis following -9-THC administration.

Other reports (Carchman et al., 1976; Harris et al., 1974; Munson et

al., 1975) noted that -9-THC administered orally to mice retarded

tumor growth and increased survival 36 percent. These studies have

found that -9-THC, -8-THC and cannabinol inhibited growth of

Lewis lung adenocarcinoma both in vivo and in vitro. More importantly, differential sensitivity was reported with -9-THC decreasing 3H-thymidine uptake into the DNA of tumor cells but not into the

DNA of bone marrow, spleen, testes or brain cells. This was not the

case for -8-THC and cannabinol. It was also reported that -9-THC

inhibited Friend leukemia virus (FLV), induced splenomegaly, but

did not have an effect against mice hosting L1210 murine luekemia

(Munson, et al., 1975).

If the acute administration of -9-THC preferentially inhibits DNA

synthesis in tumor cells in humans as well as in mice, the potential

usefulness of marihuana as an antineoplastic agent will have to be

evaluated. There is, however, a problem of increasing tumor

insensitivity over time, the reasons for which are unclear at this

time. Marihuana may also have potential therapeutic use an an

immunosuppressant in transplantation surgery if the findings that

it depresses cell-mediated immunity in rodents1 are substantiated

in human studies.

Early studies of marihuana indicated teratogenic activity in rats,

rabbits, mice and hamsters.2 Recently, Mantilla-Plats et al.

(1973) and Fournier et al. (1976) confirmed the findings in mice and

1Levy et al. , 1974; Munson et al., 1976; Nahas et al., 1973;

Rosenkrantz, 1976.

2Geber & Schramm, 1969a, 1969b; Persaud & Ellington, 1967, 1968.

- 180 -
rabbits, respectively. A significant teratogenic effect was reported in mice following intragastric (but not intravenous or

subcutaneous) administration of large doses of -9-THC on a specific gestational day (Joneja, 1976). Another team of investigators (Mantilla-Plats et al., 1973; Mantilla-Plata & Harbison, 1976)

reported that the teratogenicity of -9-THC in mice could be

modified by pretreatment with phenobarbital and SKF525 A. Phenobarbital partially antagonized THC-induced reduction of fetal body

weight while SKF525 A either antagonized or potentiated reduction

of fetal body weight depending on the gestational age at which it

was administered. In addition, SKF525 A significantly increased

the incidence of THC-induced fetal resorptions. By contrast, the

studies conducted on rats, mice, rabbits and chimpanzees by the

National Institute on Drug Abuse1 did not show deleterious effects

of marihuana on either the pregnant mother or the fetus. Another

negative finding was reported by Banerjee et al. (1975), who found

that -9-THC produced a dose related increase in the incidence of

spongy spinal cords and a decrease in maternal weight gain but was

not considered to have a teratogenic effect. Jakubovic et al.

(1976) failed to find visible teratogenic effects following -9-THC

administration to developing chick embryos. Finally, there is the

negative report by Legator et al. (1976). A battery of tests

(including the host-mediated assay, microsomal activation, blood

and urine studies, dominant lethal and cytogenetic -- micronucleus

-- examinations) failed to detect any effect of -9-THC administered orally in the one mouse strain used in all of these studies.

By contrast, Uyeno (1973) reported increasing complications associated with -9-THC administration to pregnant rats. Unfortunately,

results of a later study (Uyeno, 1975) are not interpretable for

lack of controls.

The conflicting reports on teratogenic effects may be due to a

number of variables including dosage, route and time of administration as well as the specific strain used. Well-designed research

projects are needed to determine under what circumstances marihuana

acts as a teratogen in animals and how these findings may be applied

to humans. To date, aside from occasional case reports, no systematic human studies on the teratogenic effect of marihuana have been

carried out.

HUMAN STUDIES

Chromosome Analyses

The assessment of genetic effects in man has been exclusively based

on cytogenetic analysis; specifically, the examination of human

chromosomes. In vitro cytogenetic studies did not show an increase

1Fleischman et al., 1976; Grilly et al., 1973; Haley et al., 1973;

Keplinger et al., 1973; Marihuana and Health, 1973.

- 181 -
in the frequency of chromosome breaks following the addition of -8-

THC (Neu et al., 1970), -9-THC (Stenchever & Allen, 1972) and

cannabis resin (Martin et al., 1973) to lymphocyte cultures, but did

show dose dependent mitotic inhibition. Cytogenetic analyses of

lymphocyte cultures from chronic marihuana smokers have been contradictory. The majority of these studies have been retrospective

with comparisons made between marihuana smokers and controls.

Seven studies of this type have been published. Negative findings

were reported by Martin et al. (1973) on a Jamaican population and

by Dorrance et al. (1970) on light marihuana users. Gilmour et al.

(1971) also reported that light marihuana users did not show an

increased frequency of cells with aberrations but that polydrug

users, all of whom used marihuana heavily, did show a significant

increase in abnormal cells. However, the use of other drugs makes

it impossible to interpret this increase as due specifically to

marihuana. Nahas et al. (1974) mentioned increased chromosome

damage in chronic marihuana smokers but did not provide further

information. According to Morishima (1975), this increase was not

statistically significant.

The three positive studies of marihuana effects on chromosomes

should be interpreted with caution. Stenchever et al. (1974)

reported a significant increase in the number of cells with breaks

in marihuana users as compared to controls (3.4 percent vs. 1.2

percent). However as stated in the Fourth Marihuana and Health

Report (1974), “the biological significance of the findings

remained unclear because of several methodological and sampling

questions raised by the authors themselves.” Herha and Obe (1974)

reported increased exchange-type aberrations (dicentrics and translocations) in chronic cannabis users. Close inspection of their

data shows that 5 of the 9 aberrations they observed occurred in

only 1 of the 11 subjects. Further, chromatid and chromosome

breaks, the most commonly reported type of aberrations, were not

included in their analysis; when these are considered, there is no

longer any difference between users and controls. In the third

study (Kumar & Kunwar, 1972) -- the only one to examine chromosomes

from direct bone marrow preparations -- the authors reported a

statistically significant increase in the frequency of breaks.

Again, the increase was accounted for by two of the seven heavy

cannabis users; the others showed no breaks. In addition, the total

number of cells examined was small, 157 cells for all of the 7

subjects. (In drug studies, 50-100 cells per subject are customarily considered minimal.) Since information on the number of cells

analyzed for each subject was not provided, it cannot be determined

whether the number was evenly distributed among all subjects.

Retrospective studies such as those cited above, with their many

uncontrolled variables, make definitive interpretations and conclusions difficult, if not impossible. To resolve the controversy,

prospective studies are needed.

So far, the results of three prospective studies with subjects

serving as their own controls have become available, and all have

been essentially negative. Nichols et al. (1974) did not detect an

- 182 -
increase in the percentage of cells with breaks following the oral

administration of hashish extract (containing THC, CBN and CBD),

marihuana extract ( -9-THC alone) and synthetic -9-THC to 30

subjects following a variety of schedules. The second study (a 94-

day study with 72 days of unlimited smoking of marihuana cigarettes

containing approximately 2.2 percent -9-THC) found no increase in

the break frequency when baseline and post-exposure values were

compared (Matsuyama et al., 1976). In the third study, three groups

of volunteers smoked placebo (1 percent or 2 percent natural blend

marihuana cigarettes, 1 per day, for 28 days). A temporal sequential design for chromosome analyses was utilized with blood samples

taken before, during and after the 28-day smoking schedule

(Matsuyama et al., in press). This study is of further interest

since it compared the results of independent cultures and analyses

by two cytogenetic laboratories which analyzed blood samples from a

single venipuncture drawn from a limited number of subjects with a

subsequent exchange of slides for reanalysis. Although striking

differences in break frequencies between laboratories were observed

and differences were demonstrated for both techniques of cell

culture and metaphase analysis neither laboratory detected a significant increase in chromosome aberrations with marihuana smoking.

However, subjects in these three studies were all marihuana users

and their baseline values may already have been elevated above those

of non-drug using controls. Thus, even these prospective findings

are not definitive.

Effects on chromosome complements have also been published.

Leuchtenberger and associates (Leuchtenberger & Leuchtenberger,

1976; Leuchtenberger et al., 1973), using an in vitro exposure of

human lung cells, reported a relative increase in aneuploid cells.

Even more strikingly, Morishima (1974) reported that in marihuana

smokers, a high proportion of cells (30.6 percent) contained from 5-

30 chromosomes instead of the normal 46. In a subsequent study

(Morishima et al., 1976), the in vitro addition of -9-THC to

leukocyte cultures was found to increase the frequency of cells with

abnormally low chromosome numbers. The possibility that these

types of cells have been overlooked by other investigators as

technical artifacts, or that these cells may indeed be technical

artifacts, is not settled. Since it markedly reduces the potential

for technical artifacts, use of the flow microfluorometry technique

to measure DNA content in intact lymphocytes from marihuana smokers

and to compare it with DNA content of nonusers may resolve this

question.

At this time, there is no conclusive evidence that the consumption

of marihuana causes chromosome damage. Indeed, the three prospective studies carried out as part of large biobehavioral investigations on the effects of marihuana did not show increased break

frequencies with marihuana consumption. There are no data available, however, on the long-term consequences of marihuana use.

- 183 -
Immune Responses

The immune system of man is compartmentalized into two parts: cellmediated immunity and humoral- or antibody-mediated immunity. Each

is dependent upon a major subpopulation of lymphocytes, the T- or

thymus dependent cells and the B- or thymus independent cells,

respectively. The initial publication in this area was that of

Nahas and associates (1974) reporting that in vitro cell-mediated

immunity, as assessed by mitogenic (phytohemagglutinin) and allogeneic cell stimulation, was significantly depressed in 51 chronic

marihuana users compared to 81 controls. Indeed, it was depressed

to a level similar to that seen in patients with known T-cell

immunity impairment (uremia, cancer and transplant patients).

Investigations attempting to replicate this finding have led to

contradictory reports. Gupta et al. (1974) compared, by rosette

formation, the circulating populations of T- and B-cells in 23

healthy chronic marihuana smokers and 23 normal controls. They

found that the mean percentage of T-cells forming rosettes was

significantly lower in the marihuana smokers while the percentage

of B-cells forming rosettes was similar in both populations. One

might conclude, therefore, that smoking impaired T-cell function.

Intradermal testing, however, on a limited subsample of marihuana

smokers (including those with low or normal percentages of rosette

forming T-cells) revealed no correlation with the presence or

absence of a positive reaction to one or more antigens tested.

Therefore, the results of this study concerning T-cell function are

equivocal: When measured by rosette-formation, T-cell function was

impaired; when measured by intradermal challenge, it was not. In a

follow-up study, the in vitro addition of -9-THC, cannabinol and

cannabidiol to control lymphocytes gave a dose related reduction in

T-cell rosettes (Cushman, 1976; Cushman & Khurana, 1975). Petersen

et al. (1975) also reported significantly lower percentages of

rosette-forming T-cells in marihuana smokers, while B-cells

remained normal. Although the responsiveness to phytohemagglutinin

was not significantly different from that of controls, in that same

study the cells from smokers did tend to be less responsive suggesting possible impairment of T-cell function. Serum levels of

immunoglobulins G, A and M (a measure of B-cell function) were

similar in marihuana smokers and non-smokers. Further, the capability of polymorphonuclear leukocytes to phagocytize killed yeast

cells was reduced in smokers (phagocytic activity of polymorphonuclear leukocytes is a necessary prerequisite for the transformation of lymphocytes into macrophages which process antigens in the

immune system).

The effects on macromolecular synthesis (i.e., DNA, RNA and protein

synthesis) in lymphocyte cultures from normal controls exposed in

vitro to many of the natural cannabinoids have been investigated.

DeSoize et al. (1975) reported that in vitro addition of the natural

cannabinoids ( -9-THC, -8-THC, cannabinol, cannabidiol, cannabichromene, and cannabicyclol) to human lymphocyte cultures all

affected DNA, RNA and protein synthesis as measured by uptake of 3Hthymidine, 3H-uridine, and 3H-leucine, respectively. Results

- 184 -
obtained by Blevins and Regan (1976) confirmed inhibition of DNA,

RNA and protein synthesis following the in vitro addition of -9-THC

to human diploid fibroblast, neuroblastoma cells and mouse neuroblastoma cells in culture. Further analysis detected no effect on

either DNA repair synthesis or uptake of radioactively labelled

precursors into the cell, but did demonstrate that the intracellular pool sizes of these precursors were depressed 50 percent.

This last finding could account for the reduced synthesis reported

by others.

All of the studies discussed so far point to impairment of cellmediated immunity in marihuana users. There are others, however,

which failed to confirm such impairment. Silverstein and Lessin

(1974) in an in vivo study evaluated the immunocompetence of 22

chronic marihuana smokers compared to 60 controls by the gross

criterion of ability to be sensitized to DNCB (2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene) and found no differences. White et al. (1975) using both

PHA and pokeweed mitogens in an in vitro study, also reported no

impairment of mitogen-induced blastogenic response in 12 chronic

marihuana users as compared to 12 matched controls. Lau et al.

(1975, 1976), in a prospective study, could detect no differences in

either peak level of response to PHA or concentration of PHA at

which the maximal blastogenic response occurred. However, they did

find that in cultures without PHA, the level of 3H-thymidine

incorporation was higher in marihuana smokers than in controls.

These investigators carried out assessments before and after 14

days of oral doses of 210 mg/day -9-THC and at a one-week followup. Rachelefsky et al. (1975) in a prospective study evaluated the

immune system of 12 chronic marihuana smokers before and after 64

consecutive days of smoking unlimited quantities of marihuana

cigarettes containing approximately 2.2 percent -9-THC. They

found that baseline total T-cells and B-cells were significantly

lower than controls but increased to normal by the 63rd day,

suggesting that factors other than marihuana smoking may have

caused the depression seen at baseline. Response to PHA and

allogeneic cells was normal and did not change over time; serum

levels of immunoglobulins G, A and M were also within normal limits

in their study.

Some progress toward reconciling these contradictory findings will

be possible when the impact of certain subtle procedural variations

becomes known. For example, Nahas et al. (1976b) found that the

cytotoxic effect of -9-THC added to 72-hour lymphocyte cultures

for the initial 24 hours could be reversed by prolonged washing of

the cells with the nutrient medium RPMI. That is, the level of

incorporation of tritiated thymidine at 72 hours was the same in

treated and non-treated cultures. They surmised that the negative

findings by White et al. (1975) may have been the result of the

washing procedure used in the isolation of lymphocytes; the cellbound THC may have been washed away. Nahas et al. (1976b) also

found that THC-induced inhibition of thymidine incorporation

increased as the serum concentration of the culture medium

decreased. This, they suggested, could help resolve an apparent

inconsistency between two earlier findings: the Nahas et al.

results summarized above (1974), which showed marked inhibition of

- 185 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 13
DNA synthesis in a medium with a serum concentration of 10 percent,

and a later study (Nahas et al., 1976a) which examined the effect of

THC on healthy blood in vitro and found the inhibition to be

considerably less with a serum concentration of 20 percent. However, even this may not be an adequate explanation since in the

first study fetal calf serum was used and in the second, pooled

human serum.

There is general agreement among investigators that marihuana

smokers taken off the street and tested have a reduced number of Tcells as measured by rosette formation. In light of the report by

Rachelef sky et al. (1975) that the initially low level of T-cells

returned to normal while subjects were confined on a ward smoking

quality controlled marihuana cigarettes, it may be concluded that

some as yet unidentified variable, and not marihuana, may be the

cause of the reduced number of T-cells seen in chronic drug users.

The relationship between reduced T-cell rosette formation and

immunologic function, as assessed by mitogen and/or allogeneic cell

stimulation, is not clear since Petersen et al. (1975) reported a

significantly lower mean percentage of T-cells in marihuana smokers

than controls, but no statistically significant differences in PHA

responsiveness. There is as yet no evidence that marihuana smokers

are more susceptible to diseases known to be associated with lower

percentages of T-cells (e.g., cancer, viral infections) and/or

reduced responsivity to mitogens. Also, skin testing of chronic

marihuana smokers indicates intact and normal T-cell functions. Bcell function, too, appears to be normal regardless of how assessed.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The retrospective design and other methodological imperfections of

most human studies, whether chromosomal or immune, leave much to be

desired and preclude definitive conclusions concerning the effects

of marihuana on the genetic and immune systems. For example,

information on nutrition, health care, recent radiation exposure

and drug use pattern -- all of which are variables known to affect

both the genetic and immune systems -- is generally obtained

retrospectively from the participating subjects and is, therefore,

of dubious validity. The potential inaccuracy of such information

may doom any attempt to identify a deleterious effect of a specific

drug, like marihuana, even were the composition of illicitly

obtained marihuana known. Many of the other methodological questions now plaguing researchers could be settled by the collaboration of several laboratories, particularly those reporting contradictory findings, in a single prospective double-blind research

design with appropriate control groups.

There is no information on the teratogenic effects in humans and it

may take several generations to detect them. The reports on

teratogenic effects in animals are contradictory and further

rigidly designed experimental studies are needed to supplement the

few done so far.

- 186 -
Bearing in mind the limitations of the studies discussed in this

report, there is at this time no conclusive evidence that the

consumption of marihuana causes chromosome damage. The studies

which have been most carefully controlled have failed to show such

damage, but insufficient research has been conducted to allow any

definitive conclusions.

A number of investigators have reported results indicating that

marihuana may interfere with cell-mediated immunity, but until the

inconsistencies between these findings and the negative results

which have also been reported are resolved, and until the implications of particular procedural variations are more clearly understood, the question of whether or not THC impairs cell-mediated

immunity in humans remains a moot one. There is preliminary

evidence, however, that in certain rodents -9-THC depresses cellmediated immunity and preferentially inhibits DNA synthesis in

tumor cells as compared to cells of normal tissue. It is important,

therefore, to verify the antiimmune and antitumor activity of -9-

THC in animals since, if these findings are confirmed and found to

hold true for humans, -9-THC may have potential as an immunosuppressing and antineoplastic agent.

Drs. Steven Matsuyama and

Lissy Jarvik

Veterans Administration Hospital

Brentwood, and

University of California at

Los Angeles

- 187 -
REFERENCES

Effects of Marihuana on the Genetic and Immune Systems

Banerjee, B.C., Galbreath, C. and Sofia, R.D. Tertologic evaluation of synthetic -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in rats.

Teratology, 11:99-101 (1975).

Blevins, R.D. and Regan, J.D. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Effect on

macromolecular synthesis in human and other mammalian cells.

Archives of Toxicology, 35:127-135 (1976).

Carchman, R.A., Harris, L.S. and Munson, A.E. The inhibition of DNA

synthesis by cannabinoids. Cancer Research, 36:95-100

(1976).

Cushman, P. Cannabinols and the rosette forming properties of

lymphocytes in vitro. Life Sciences, 19:875-886 (1976).

Cushman, P. and Khurana, R. Effects of marihuana smoking and

tetrahydrocannabinol on T cell rosettes. Federation Proceedings, 34:783 (1975).

Daul, C.B. and Heath, R.G. The effect of chronic marihuana usage on

the immunlogical status of rhesus monkeys. Life Sciences,

17:875-882 (1975).

DeSoize, B., Hsu, J., Nahas, G.G. and Morishima, A. Inhibition of

human lymphocyte transformation in vitro by natural cannabinoids and olivetol. Federation Proceedings, 34:783 (1975).

Dorrance, D., Janiger, O. and Teplitz, R.L. In vivo effects of

illicit hallucinogens on human lymphocyte chromosomes. Journal of the American Medical Association, 212:1488-1491

(1970).

Fleischman, R.W., Hayden, D.W., Rosenkrantz, H. and Braude, M.C.

Teratologic evaluation of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice,

including a review of the literature. Teratology, 12:47-50

(1976).

Fournier, E., Rosenberg, E., Hardy, N. and Nahas, G. Teratologic

effects of cannabis extracts in rabbits: A preliminary

study. In Nahas, G.G. (ed.), Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Cellular Effects. New York: Springer-Verlag,

1976, pp. 457-468.

Gaul, C.C. and Mellors, A. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and decreased

macrophage migration inhibition activity. Research Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 10:559-564

(1975).

- 188 -
Geber, W.F. and Schramm, L.C. Effect of marijuana extract on fetal

hamsters and rabbits. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology,

14:276-282 (1969a).

Geber, W.F. and Schramm, L.C. Teratogenicity of marijuana extract

as influenced by plant origin and seasonal variation.

Archives Internationales de Pharmacodynamie et de Therapie,

177:224-230 (1969b).

Gilmour, D.G., Bloom, A.D., Lele, K.P., Robbins, E.S. and

Maximillian, C. Chromosomal aberrations in users of psychoactive drugs. Archives of General Psychiatry, 24:268-272

(1971).

Grilly, D.M., Ferraro, D.P. and Braude, M.C. Observations on the

reproductive activity of chimpanzees following long-term

exposure to marihuana. Pharmacology, 11:304-307 (1973).

Gupta, S., Grieco, M. and Cushman, P. Impairment of rosetteforming T lymphocytes in chronic marihuana smokers. New

England Journal of Medicine, 291:874-877 (1974).

Haley, S.L., Wright, P.L., Plank, J.B., Keplinger, M.L., Braude,

M.C. and Calandra, J.C. The effect of natural and synthetic

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on fetal development. Toxicology

and Applied Pharmacology, 25:450 (1973).

Harris, L.S., Munson, A.E. and Carchman, R.A. Antitumor properties

of cannabinoids. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

749-762.

Harris, L.S., Munson, A.E., Friedman, M.A. and Dewey, W.L. Retardation of tumor growth by -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC),

Pharmacologist, 16:259 (1974).

Herha, J. and Obe, G. Chromosomal damage in chronical users of

cannabis. Pharmakopsychiatrie, 7:328-337 (1974).

Huber, G.L., Simmons, G.A., McCarthy, C.R., Cutting, M.B.,

Laguarda, R. and Pereira, W. Depressant effect of marihuana

smoke on antibactericidal activity of pulmonary alveolar

macrophages. Chest, 68:769-773 (1975).

Jakubovic, A., McGeer, P.L. and Fitzsimmons, R.C. Effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and ethanol on body weight protein and

nucleic acid synthesis in chick embryos. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, 1:441-447 (1976).

Johnson, R.J. and Wiersema, V. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

( -9-THC) metabolite on bone marrow myelopoiesis. Research

Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 8:393-

396 (1974).

- 189 -
Joneja, M.G. A study of teratological effects of intravenous,

subcutaneous, and intragastric administration of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 36:151-162 (1976).

Keplinger, M.L., Wright, P.L., Haley, S.L., Plank, J.B., Braude,

M.C. and Calandra, J.C. The effect of natural and synthetic

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on reproductive and lactation performance in albino rats. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, 25:449 (1973).

Kumar, S. and Kunwar, K.B. Chromosome abnormalities in cannabis

addicts. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India,

19:193-195 (1972).

Lau, R.J., Lerner, C.B., Tubergen, D.G., Benowitz, N., Domino, E.F.

and Jones, R.T. Non-inhibition of phytohemagglutinin (PHA)

induced lymphocyte transformation in humans by -9-tetrahydrocannabinol ( -9-THC). Federation Proceedings, 34:783

(1975).

Lau, R.J., Tubergen, D.G., Barr, M., Domino, E.F., Benowitz, N. and

Jones, R.T. Phytohemagglutinin-induced lymphocyte transformation in humans receiving -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Science, 192:805-807 (1976).

Lefkowitz, S.S. and Chiang, C.Y. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on mouse spleens. Research Communications in Chemical

Pathology and Pharmacology, 11:659-662 (1975).

Legator, M.S., Weber, E., Connor, T. and Stoeckel, M. Failure to

detect mutagenic effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in dominant lethal, host-mediated assay, blood-urine studies and

cytogenetic evaluation with mice. In Braude, M.C. and Szara,

S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, pp. 699-710.

Leuchtenberger, C. and Leuchtenberger, R. Correlated cytological

and cytochemical studies of the effects of fresh smoke from

marijuana cigarettes on growth and DNA metabolism of animal

and human lung cultures. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S.

(eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press,

1976, pp. 595-612.

Leuchtenberger, C., Leuchtenberger, R., Ritter, U. and Inui, N.

Effects of marijuana and tobacco smoke on DNA and chromosomal

complement in human lung explants. Nature, 242:403-404

(1973).

Levy, J.A., Munson, A.E., Harris, L.S. and Dewey, W.L. Effects of

-8- and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on the immune response in

mice. Pharmacologist, 16:259 (1974).

- 190 -
Mann, P.E.G., Cohen, A.B., Finley, T.N. and Ladman, A.J. Alveolar

macrophages, structural and functional differences between

nonsmokers and smokers of marijuana and tobacco. Laboratory

Investigation, 25:111 (1971).

Mantilla-Plata, B., Clewe, C.L. and Harbison, R.D. Teratogenic and

mutagenic studies of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in mice. Federation Proceedings, 32:746 (1973).

Mantilla-Plats, B. and Harbison, R.D. Influence of alteration of

the metabolism on THC-induced teratogenesis. In Braude, M.C.

and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York:

Raven Press, 1976, pp. 733-742.

Marihuana and Health, Third Annual Report to Congress from the

Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. Washington, DC:

Government Printing Office, 1973.

Martin, P. Cannabis and chromosomes. Lancet, 1(1):370 (1969).

Martin, P.A., Thorburn, M.J. and Bryant, S.A. In vivo and in vitro

studies of the cytogenetic effects of cannabis sativa in rats

and men. Teratology, 9:81-86 (1973).

Mabtsuyama, S.S., Jarvik, L.F., Fu, T.K. and Yen, F.S. Chromosome

studies before and after supervised marijuana smoking. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 723-729.

Matsuyama, S.S., Yen, F.S., Jarvik, L.F., Sparkes, R.S., Fu, T.K.,

Fisher, H., Reccius, N. and Frank, I.M. In vivo marijuana

exposure and human lymphocyte chromosomes. Mutation

Research, in press.

McCarthy, C.R., Cutting, M.B., Simmons, G.A., Pereira, W.,

Laguarda, R. and Huber, G.L. The effect of marihuana on the

in vitro function of pulmonary alveolar macrophages. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 211-216.

Morishima, A. Testimony presented in Marijuana-hashish epidemic

and its impact on United States Security. Hearings before the

Subcommittee to Investigate the Administration of the Internal Security Act and Other Internal Security Laws of the

Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1974.

Morishima, A. Personal communication, 1975.

Morishima, A., Milstein, M., Henrich, R.T. and Nahas, G.G. Effects

of marijuana smoking, cannabinoids and olivetol on replication of human lymphocytes: Formation of micronuclei. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976, 711-722.

- 191 -
Munson, A.E., Harris, L.S.; Friedman, M.A., Dewey, W.L. and

Carchman, R.A. Antineoplastic activity of cannabinoids.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 55:597-602 (1975).

Munson, A.E., Levy, J.A., Harris, L.S. and Dewey, W.L. Effects of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol on the immune system. In Braude,

M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New

York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 187-197.

Nahas, G.G., DeSoize, B., Armand, J.P., Hsu, J. and Morishima, A.

Natural cannabinoids: Apparent depression of nucleic acids

and protein synthesis in cultured human lymphocytes. In

Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana.

New York: Raven Press, 1976a, pp. 177-186.

Nahas, G.G., DeSoize, B., Hsu, J., Morishima, A. and Srinivisan,

P.R. Inhibitory effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on

nucleic acid synthesis and proteins in cultured lymphocytes.

In Nahas, G.G. (ed.), Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry and

Cellular Effects. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1976b, pp.

299-312.

Nahas, G.G., Suciu-Foca, N., Armand, J.P. and Morishima, A. Inhibition of cellular mediated immunity in marijuana smokers.

Science, 183:419-420 (1974).

Nahas, G.G., Zagury, D., Schwartz, I.W. and Nagel, M.D. Evidence

for the possible immunogenicity of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

(THC) in rodents. Nature, 243:407-408 (1973).

Neu, R.L., Powers, H.O., King, S. and Gardner, L.I. -8- and -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol effects on cultured human leukocytes.

Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 10:228-230 (1970).

Nichols, W.W., Miller, R.C., Heneen, W., Bradt, C., Hollister, L.

and Kanter, S. Cytogenetic studies on human subjects receiving marijuana and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Mutation

Resarch, 26:413-417 (1974).

Pace, H.B., Davis, M. and Borgen, L.A. Teratogenesis and marijuana.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 191:123-131

(1971).

Persaud, T.V.N. and Ellington, A.F. Cannabis in early pregnancy.

Lancet, 2(2):1306 (1967).

Persaud, T.V.N. and Ellington, A.F. Teratogenic activity of cannabis resin. Lancet, 2(1):406 (1968).

Petersen, B.H., Lemberger, L., Graham, J. and Dalton, B. Alterations in the cellular-mediated immune responsiveness of

chronic marijuana smokers. Psychopharmacology Communications, 1:67-74 (1975).

- 192 -
Rachelefsky, G.S., Opelz, G., Mickey, M.R., Lessin, P., Kinchi, M.,

Silverstein, M.J. and Stiehm, E.R. Intact Humoral and CellMediated Immunity in Chronic Marihuana Smoking. Contract

report (HSM 42-71-89) June, 1975.

Raz, A. and Goldman, R. Effect of hashish compounds on mouse

peritoneal macrophages. Laboratory Investigation, 34:6976

(1976).

Rosenkrantz, H. The immune response and marihuana. In Nahas, G.G.

(ed.), Marihuana: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Cellular

Effects. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1976, pp. 441-456.

Silverstein, M.D. and Lessin, P.J. Normal skin test response in

chronic marijuana users. Science, 186:740-742 (1974).

Stenchever, M.A. and Allen, M. The effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on the chromosomes of human lymphocytes in vitro.

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 114:821

(1972).

Stenchever, M.A., Kunysz, T.J. and Allen, M.A. Chromosome breakage

in users of marijuana. American Journal of Obstetrics and

Gynecology, 118:106-113 (1974).

Uyeno, E.T. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol administration during pregnancy of the rat. Proceedings of the Western Pharmacology

Society, 16:64-67 (1973).

Uyeno, E.T. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol administered to pregnant

rats. Pharmacologist, 17(2):181 (1975).

White, S.C., Brin, S.S. and Janicki, B.W. Mitogen-induced blastogenic responses of lymphocytes from marijuana smokers. Science, 188:71-72 (1975).

- 193 -
Chapter 9

THERAPEUTIC ASPECTS

Sidney Cohen, M.D., D.Sc.

While cannabis is one of the most ancient of drugs used for medicinal purposes, this is no reason to expect that it would pass

today’s stringent tests of efficacy and toxicity. Nor should one

summarily dismiss the possibility that cannabis may have some

therapeutic utility simply because the plant is currently the

subject of socio-political controversy. The controversy makes its

impartial evaluation more difficult, but its potential benefits

should be studied with the same careful pre-marketing procedures

used for other investigational drugs.

Furthermore, if some substantial utility is found, marihuana itself

will not be the marketed product; it is a complex mixture of over a

dozen cannabinoids, about 30 terpenes, assorted sterols and other

substances, most of which do not contribute to a desired therapeutic

effect. Even its active cannabinoids can be improved upon for

specific indications by synthetic chemists. The benzopyran structure is an unique one, and it can be modified at many positions on

the molecule: if the psychological effects are not desired, they

can be eliminated; if water solubility or a longer shelf life is

preferred, that can be achieved. Although much more testing is

needed, there is promise that certain of the pharmacologic actions

of cannabis and its derivatives can be helpful for specific conditions.

As we survey those specific indications for which cannabis may be

useful, some appear more promising than others. It is now reasonable to believe that intraocular pressure is reduced by cannabis in

both normal subjects and in glaucoma patients with ocular hypertension. -9-THC is the most potent agent for this purpose, and when a

safe, topically-instilled ophthalmic preparation is developed, it

may come to be a helpful medication in the management of some wideangle glaucoma patients. Although satisfactory antiglaucoma preparations are now available, there is a suggestion that an occasional

patient responds better to -9-THC than to those drugs currently in

use.

Both asthmatics and normal subjects respond with bronchodilation to

aerosolized, smoked or oral -9-THC as well as they do to the

conventional antiasthmatic medications. A next logical step will

be the development of a non-intoxicating pharmaceutical preparation

such as an aerosol or a non-intoxicating congener with bronchodilating properties. Marihuana itself, although a bronchodilator,

is unsatisfactory because of its direct irritant effect upon pulmonary tissues.

- 194 -
Further studies will determine whether -9-THC is sufficiently

useful clinically in ameliorating the anorexia, nausea and vomiting

of cancer chemotherapy patients. In such patients, the standard

antiemetics are only partially effective, and a superior, new

compound would be quite desirable. Patients in such investigations

could also be studied to evaluate the appetite enhancing and

antianxiety effects of -9-THC.

Except for isolated case reports, no recent work has been reported

in which a cannabinoid was employed for the treatment of epilepsy in

humans. The animal data are encouraging, but the finding that -9-

THC is also a convulsant in certain animal strains requires caution.

Cannabidiol or one of the synthetics may turn out to be the

preferred agent in certain convulsive disorders if the animal work

can be extrapolated to the convulsant syndromes in humans.

In a number of conditions, the evidence of the clinical effectiveness of the cannabinoids remains either preliminary or ambiguous. These include the utility of -9-THC as an hypnotic, as a

treatment for depression and as an antitumor agent. It appears to

offer no advantage over existing pre-anesthetic agents. On the

basis of available studies, its analgesic efficacy remains in

doubt, despite its widespread use in folk medicine for this purpose.

In addition, it would have to compete in the marketplace with

existing effective and stable analgesic compounds. No evidence

exists that the cannabinoids are superior to available preparations

now in use in the detoxification of drug or alcohol dependent

persons. The possibility that hemp may have topical antibiotic

activity should be pursued.

In addition to the possibility that therapeutic benefits may, one

day, accrue, another reason for studying the potential medicinal

value of the cannabinoids is the possibility that their mechanisms

of action may be different from the currently available medicaments. In this case, the elucidation of these mechanisms would be

even more significant than the mere discovery of another therapeutic agent. A possible explanation for cannabis’ precise mode of

action is its inhibitory action on prostaglandin synthetase. Adrenergic stimulation has also been noted at certain end organs, a

finding which has led to the investigation of the influence of the

cannabinoids on various neurotransmitters; no definitive findings

have been reported, however.

Recently, a large series of synthetic benzopyrans have been produced by modifying the cannabinoid structure. These or related

analogues may come to be the preferred therapeutic substances. They

have been designed to provide a selective action either with or

without the psychic effects of cannabis. Some of the synthetic

benzopyrans are water soluble, permitting more reliable gastrointestinal absorption and making parenteral administration less

difficult.

A promising start has been made in the scientific exploration of the

therapeutic potential of the cannabinoids although much more work

- 195 -
is needed before any compound will be approved for general medical

use for any indication.

A noteworthy effort in assessing the therapeutic potential of

marihuana and its constituents was made at the first conference

assembled for that purpose during November, 1975 at the Asilomar

Conference Center, Monterey, California. Sponsored by the National

Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), the conference included 28 papers

related to preclinical or clinical therapeutics (Cohen & Stillman,

1976).

THE ANCIENT LORE

The use of cannabis for purposes of healing predates recorded

history. The earliest written reference is found in the 15th

century B.C. Chinese Pharmacopeia, the Rh-Ya (Emboden, 1972).

Cannabis had many uses as a medicinal herb in China; these are

mentioned in the first or second century A.D. Pen Ts’oo Ching

(Rubin, 1976) and are based upon traditions passed down from

prehistoric times. In this ancient pharmacopeia, a boiled hemp

compound given to surgical patients as an anesthetic is described.

From the Chinese plateau, the use of hemp as a folk medicine, ritual

potion, condiment and intoxicating agent spread to India, the

Middle East and beyond.

Rubin has reviewed the cross-cultural uses of cannabis, some of

which are repetitive, but others are unusual. In Viet Nam, for

example, cannabis was used to prevent memory loss and mental

confusion, to eliminate blood wastes and to treat gynecological and

obstetrical problems, such as dysmenorrhea. Allergies and rheumatism were treated by a preparation made by pulverizing roasted

cannabis kernels (seeds?) in baby’s urine and taking a small glass

of the extract three times a day. It was also employed as a cure for

falling hair and tapeworm.

In Cambodia, ganja was used for other purposes, such as restoring

appetite. Hemp cigarettes, smoked daily, were also supposed to

reduce polyps of the nose and relieve asthma. The Cambodians also

administered hemp preparations to facilitate contractions during

difficult childbirth.

An examination of the multiple, diverse claims made for the therapeutic benefits of cannabis during earlier epochs reveals that many

cannot be justified from our current knowledge of its pharmacologic

activity. For example, it had a purported effectiveness in cases of

leprosy, gonorrhea and arsenic poisoning. The smoke was tried as an

enema for strangulated hernia and juice of the leaves was recommended for dandruff, vermin infestation and for a variety of other

skin conditions, usually as a lotion or poultice.

On the other hand, some justification can be found for certain of

the ancient medical applications. Cannabis was frequently used for

- 196 -
painful conditions like neuralgia, dysmenorrhea and toothache.

Because of its analgesic effect, only partially supported by recent

research findings, it also found service in minor operations like

circumcision and boil lancing. Its relaxant and euphoriant properties may have been exploited in the management of psychological

problems, such as melancholia and hysteria.

A number of therapeutic references can be found involving the seeds

of Cannabis sativa L. (Grinspoon, 1971). For example, seventh

century Scythians inhaled and bathed in the vapors of hemp seeds

thrown on hot coals, and “they howled with joy.” This apparently

euphoriant effect is doubtful, however, since the seeds contain

essentially no -9-THC, and are usually discarded when marihuana is

“manicured.” Whatever joy the Scythians experienced must have been

due to the effects of the sauna. Interestingly, the inhalation of

hemp vapors remains a popular form of administering cannabis for

toothache in parts of the Ukraine, the same region where Scythians

once lived.

Earlier and more recent reports about an aphrodisiac property are

not as easily evaluated. Much seems to depend upon the mental set

of the consumer. If it is taken for that purpose, sexual interest,

activity and enjoyment are likely to be enhanced. However, cannabis

was also utilized by sexually abstinent Buddhist monks to diminish

sex drives and aid in meditation. While marihuana may enhance

sensory perception, prolong the subjective experience of time and

reduce inhibitions, thus intensifying the sexual experience, it

appears to have no direct effect upon sexual drive states (Cohen,

1975). In fact, in view of reports of lowered plasma testosterone

levels after chronic, heavy smoking, there remains the possibility

that potency could actually be reduced (Kolodny et al., 1976).

One interesting effect of bhang and ganja mentioned in the Report of

the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission (1969) and, more recently, in the

Jamaican (Rubin & Comitas, 1975) and Colombian field studies

(Rubin, 1976), is the assertion that it is a “creator of energy,”

that it increases staying power, relieves fatigue and acts as a

stimulant. The Jamaican report tells of its use as an energizer and

motivator to work. Ganja breaks in the Jamaican hinterland seem to

be the equivalent of North American coffee breaks. Employers have

been known to supply their employees with ganja to get more work out

of them. In Colombia, marihuana is smoked by day-laborers and

peasants to reduce fatigue and to give “spirit for working.” This

energizing effect is the principal motivation for use reported by

Jamaican working class males and is in sharp contrast to American

concerns about the marihuana-induced “amotivational syndrome.”

These conflicting effects are probably reflections of the importance of expectations in determining which pharmacologic effects

will become manifest.

Rubin (1976) also points out another facet of the preponderant

impact of psychophysiologic set over pharmacologic action of a drug

like cannabis when taken in moderate dosages. As mentioned above,

it is used as a stimulant during the day among unskilled laborers in

- 197 -
Jamaica, but is also taken for its sedative effect at night to

promote sleep. We should not be confused about this apparent

paradox, since we do the same with our most popular intoxicant,

alcohol. Americans drink at social gatherings to achieve a stimulating effect and take a nightcap a few hours later to produce

drowsiness. This practice is our contribution to the power of

expectation in determining drug action.

Cannabis was one of the more important drugs in the Indian Materia

Medica at the turn of the century. It was, and still is, widely

used in rural areas of the Indian subcontinent for asthma, bronchitis and loss of appetite. Although a bronchodilator action has

recently been quite well established (Tashkin et al., 1974; Vachon

et al., 1976b), cannabis is likely to be a cause of, rather than a

cure for, bronchitis. Its appetite-stimulating activity is confirmed in numerous subjective reports, although no precise mode of

action for this effect is known.

THE MIDDLE PERIOD

During the latter half of the 19th century, a resurgent interest in

the medical usefulness of the hemp plant developed. Over 100 papers

appeared on the subject in the medical journals of the day, some of

which are worth citing briefly.

In Calcutta, O'Shaughnessy (1842) administered cannabis to patients

with a variety of ailments, including tetanus, rabies, epilepsy and

rheumatism. He reported favorably on its anticonvulsant, analgesic

and muscle-relaxing properties. His article sparked a flurry of

clinical studies, including those of M'Meens (1860), who considered

the drug to be a sedative-hypnotic and of value in such diverse

disorders as neuralgia, dysmenorrhea, asthma and sciatica. Other

favorable papers appeared, including those of Birch (1889) and

Mattison (1891) who recommended cannabis enthusiastically for the

treatment of morphinism, alcoholism and other addictions. Reynolds

(1890) wrote of its value in senile insomnia and in tic doloureux

(trigeminal neuralgia). During this same period, Moreau de Tours

(1857) used cannabis successfully to treat a variety of psychiatric

syndromes, including melancholia and obsessive-compulsive neurosis.

His positive findings in managing mental disorders were confirmed

by some investigators, and challenged by others.

Despite these encouraging testimonials, cannabis began to slip into

disuse. By the beginning of the 20th century, several factors had

combined to account for its neglect by Western medicine:

1) A standardized preparation was not available. Different

batches of the plant had widely varying potencies, from

essentially inactive to much stronger than the prescriber

anticipated.

2) The drug had an unsatisfactory shelf life. Some of the

- 198 -
extracts and fluid extracts were practically inert if they

were dispensed a few years after they were obtained from the

pharmaceutical firm. -9-THC gradually breaks down into

inert cannabinol when stored at room temperature and exposed

to light and air. The dried leaves of Cannabis sativa L. and

its pharmaceutical preparations were quite unreliable after

storage, and some of the contradictory clinical results might

be explained on this basis.

3) -9-THC is completely insoluble in water and is absorbed

across the gastrointestinal mucosa with some difficulty.

Therefore, the oral route of administration is not completely

reliable. This may be the reason that swallowed -9-THC is

two to three times less effective by weight than the smoked

drug.

4) By the early 1900's, a series of synthetic, water soluble

analgesics and sedatives with a much more stable and predictable pharmacologic action had begun to appear. This resulted

in a diminished need for and use of cannabis and other

botanicals.

5) The final blow to interest in marihuana as a therapeutic

agent was the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 which classified the

drug as a narcotic. By that year, however, it was essentially

no longer prescribed in the United States.

Even after the first synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol, pyrahexyl

(Synhexyl), was produced in 1940, it was not widely employed,

although it was tried in the treatment of the depressions, the

epilepsies and the addictive states. Some work was done with this

synthetic by Thompson and Proctor (1967), who treated certain drug

withdrawal syndromes with some success. In what may have been the

first double blind study with a cannabinoid, Parker and Wrigley

(1950) gave pyrahexyl or a placebo to 57 depressed patients, but

were unable to demonstrate a significant difference between the

experimental and control groups. Later this study was criticized by

Grinspoon (1971) for having used an inadequate dosage level. At any

rate, both favorable and unfavorable reports with pyrahexyl are to

be found in the literature.

The value of these earlier reports is questionable, except perhaps

as preliminary clinical explorations. They were usually uncontrolled and impressionistic, and were not carefully designed.

Still, they did provide certain clues that were helpful to subsequent investigators.

Between 1950 and 1965, a series of 30 papers on cannabis were

published by Czechoslovakian scientists, principally from the

Medical Faculty of the Palacky University of Olomouc. Eighteen of

the reports1 dealt with the use of cannabis as a topical antibiotic.

1Hubacek, 1955; Kabelik, 1955, 1957; Kabelik et al., 1960; Krejci

1950, 1952, 1955, 1958, 1961a, 1961b; Krejci & Heczko, 1958; Krejci

et al., 1959; Krejci & Vybiral, 1962; Navratil, 1955; Procek, 1955;

Simek, 1955; Sirek, 1955; Soldan, 1955.

- 199 -
Kabelik et al. (1960) surveyed thousands of plant varieties for

their antibiotic activity and reported that more than 500 cases of

herpes labialis and ulcerous gingivitis were successfully treated

with a hemp salve or spray. Hubacek (1955) used cannabis in

otorhinolaryngological conditions including otitis media, chronic

sinusitis and tonsilopharyngitis with good results. The Czechoslovakian orthopedists injected cannabis solutions into a few osteomyelitic fistulas with healing results in some cases. An analgesic

effect is often mentioned in these papers, as in two cases of second

degree burns. The reports are not widely known, nor have they been

confirmed, partly due to their publication in journals that are not

widely circulated outside of Czechoslovakia.

THE CURRENT PERIOD

The systematic study of the clinical pharmacology of cannabis did

not evolve until the last decade. A number of scientific accomplishments and administrative decisions were required before a

modern scientific program could develop. These events included:

1) The total synthesis of -9-THC by Mechoulam and Gaoni

(1965), permitting the manufacture of sufficient supplies of

pure material for investigators.

2) The elucidation of the relationship between the pharmacology of cannabis and -9-THC indicating that the latter

was responsible for most of the activity of the whole plant

(Mechoulam et al., 1970).

3) The development of a reliable source of uniform, assayed

marihuana grown at the University of Mississippi (Quimby et

al., 1973) under contract to NIDA.

4) The availability of a reliable quantitative procedure for

-9-THC and other cannabinoids.

5) The development of satisfactory controls for obtaining

cannabis or a variety of cannabinoids from NIDA for research

purposes.

6) A forward plan designed to fund grants and contracts that

would clarify the physiologic, pharmacologic and psychologic

properties of cannabis.

7) The recent development of assay procedures for the

qualitative analysis of cannabinoids in biological fluids

(Agurell et al., 1973).

In the overall pharmacological assessment of cannabis, the drug was

found to have effects that were potentially therapeutic. The areas

of possible therapeutic application can be placed into two general

groups: those that utilize the psychologic changes induced by the

- 200 -
drug, and those that do not. In the latter instance, the well-known

subjective symptoms are often considered undesired side effects by

the patient.

The therapeutic uses that do not utilize the mental effects of the

drug include intraocular pressure reduction, bronchodilation, anticonvulsant action and tumor growth retardation. Those therapeutic

trials that rely on the mental changes include the evaluation of

marihuana’s effectiveness as a sedative-hypnotic, analgesic, antidepressant, tranquilizer, pre-anesthetic, antinauseant, antiemetic, antianorexiant as well as its utility in the areas of drug

and alcohol dependence.

Intraocular Pressure (IOP) Reduction

Hepler and Frank (1971) studied the spectrum of physiologic ocular

changes produced by smoking marihuana. Among their early findings

was a consistent, dose-related, clinically significant reduction of

intraocular pressure (IOP) in normal subjects. The IOP was also

reduced with doses of oral -9-THC, -8-THC and, to a much lesser

degree, with cannabinol and cannabidiol. Publications by Shapiro

(1974), Purnell and Gregg (1975), and Green and Podos (1974) have

confirmed the IOP-reducing effect of marihuana and the tetrahydrocannabinols. Flom et al. (1975) suggested that the lowering of IOP

was apparently secondary to a relaxing and euphoriant effect.

However, when Hepler gave subjects full doses of diazepam (Valium)

blind, he found that the IOP reduction was not significantly

different from the effect of a placebo.

Twelve open angle glaucoma patients were studied by the UCLA group

(Hepler et al., 1976). In 10 of the 12, impressive reductions in

ocular hypertension were achieved. The reduction averaged 30

percent and lasted 4-5 hours. In two instances, however, the smoked

marihuana or ingested -9-THC failed to induce a pressure reduction. The IOP-reducing effects of cannabis appear to be additive to

the conventional glaucoma medications. In a preliminary study of a

topically applied eye drop preparation of -9-THC in sesame oil, 12

rabbits showed a 40 percent IOP reduction when compared to those

treated with sesame oil alone.

Green (1975) and his associates (Green & Kim, 1976, 1973; Green et

al., 1976) demonstrated a decrease in the IOP of rabbits given

intravenous -9-THC. They postulated that -9-THC interacts with

the adrenergic innervation system of the eye; in other words, that

-adrenergic blockade would dampen the -9-THC effect. Apparently,

ß-adrenergic blockade also partly inhibits the -9-THC effect. The

end result of the adrenergic stimulation by -9-THC appears to be a

dilation of the efferent blood vessels, modulated by an inhibition

of prostaglandin synthetase. Green and Kim (1973) have concluded

that the outflow facility may be regulated by adrenergic receptors

with -9-THC acting as a vasodilator of the outflow blood vessels of

the anterior uvea. There is also the possibility that cannabis acts

to constrict afferent episcleral plexus vessels.

- 201 -
In further studies in rabbits, Green et al. (1976) found that -9-

THC dissolved in light or heavy mineral oil penetrates ocular

tissues better than Tween 80 or sesame oil. A 0.1 percent solution

of -9-THC produced an IOP reduction approximately equal to one

marihuana cigarette. When the ophthalmic solution was applied to

one eye, Green et al. found that the second eye had a lesser

pressure reduction with a later onset, indicating systemic absorption of the drug.

Cooler and Gregg (1976) compared intravenous doses of 1.5 mg and 3

mg of -9-THC, 10 mg diazepam and a placebo in 10 normal volunteers.

IOP was diminished 29 percent with the low and 37 percent with the

high dosages of -9-THC. Diazepam lowered pressures 10 percent and

the placebo 2 percent. These investigators also measured analgesia

and noted no cutaneous or periosteal analgesic effects. The anxiety

and dysphoria levels increased at both strengths of -9-THC, but not

with diazepam or the placebo. Intravenous -9-THC appears to evoke

anxiety much more often than when administered by the smoked or oral

route.

Mechoulam et al. (1976) produced ocular hypertension in rabbits by

means of -chymotrypsin injections into the eyeball. They tested a

series of compounds and observed that 2 percent pilocarpine and

0.001 percent -9-THC were comparably potent while cannabidiol and

cannabinol showed practically no effects.

As a matter of interest, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),

with the cooperation of NIDA and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), has recently granted permission for a patient with

glaucoma to be treated with marihuana cigarettes under an Investigational New Drug application from an ophthalmologist at Howard

University. The subject was one of the patients in the previously

cited study of Hepler et al. (1976), and was found to respond better

to -9-THC than to the traditional antiglaucoma medications.

Bronchodilation

Two lines of research, that of the Vachon group and the work of

Tashkin and his collaborators, have clarified a number of questions

about the effects of cannabis upon bronchial diameter. Vachon et

al. (1973) observed the effects of a single administration of smoked

marihuana on normal subjects and on asthmatic patients. They found

that airway resistance decreased significantly in the normal group,

permitting specific airway conductance and mean expiratory flow

rates to increase. In the asthmatics bronchoconstriction was

reversed for hours. From subsequent animal work, Vachon et al.

(1976a) assume that the bronchodilation that follows -9-THC administration involves the adrenergic system. Recently, Vachon et al.

(1976b, 1976c) used a microaerosolized -9-THC spray in 10 asthma

This aerosol was found to decrease airway resistance by an

average of 16 percent at 90 minutes and increase flow rates without

any significant tachycardia or high.

- 202 -
Tashkin et al. (1973) conducted a double blind study of 32 non-naive

male subjects randomly assigned to groups smoking a placebo, using 1

percent -9-THC and 2 percent -9-THC. They found that both

experimental dosages decreased airway resistance with a peak occurring 15 minutes after administration. Activity was still present

after an hour. In a later study (1974), they examined dose-response

curves with oral placebo, 10, 15 and 20 mg of -9-THC. Peak effects

for the active drug were obtained at three hours with persisting

effects for six hours.

Tashkin et al. (1975) also induced bronchospasm in asthmatics with

either methacholine or exercise. Utilizing a single blind method,

10 mg of smoked -9-THC was compared with 1.25 mg of inhaled

isoproterenol (Isuprel), both drugs having appropriate placebo

controls. Bronchospasm was promptly relieved by both active drugs

and not by their placebos. The isoproterenol had a quicker and

higher peak effect, while -9-THC had a longer duration of action.

Tashkin et al. (1976b) also tried to clarify the mechanism of

marihuana’s bronchodilator action. In one set of experiments, 16

normal young males were either injected with atropine or smoked a

cigarette containing 10 mg of -9-THC, and then received a methacholine challenge. In contrast to atropine, the -9-THC-induced

increase in specific airway conductance was not blocked by methacholine.

In succeeding experiments, combinations of propanolol and -9-THC

induced increases in specific airway conductance. This bronchodilator effect of cannabis may be independent of ß-adrenergic or

antimuscarinic mechanisms.

In a recent article, Abboud and Sanders (1976) report on a double

blind study involving six asthmatics and six control patients who

were given oral -9-THC in 10 mg doses. They concluded that oral

administration of -9-THC is unlikely to be of therapeutic value in

asthma since its bronchodilator action is mild and inconstant. In

addition, it is associated with significant CNS effects (mild

depression and hangover). Moreover, one asthmatic patient in the

study developed severe bronchoconstriction following the ingestion

o f -9-THC.

Tashkin et al. (1976b) and Olsen et al. (1975) have attempted to

improve the delivery of -9-THC to the bronchioles by using an

inhalation aerosol, since the use of marihuana cigarettes for this

purpose is considered undesirable because of irritants, and possibly even carcinogens, in the smoke. Furthermore, the tachycardia

end the psychic effects may not be desirable in asthmatics. A dose

of 10 mg of -9-THC in a specially prepared aerosol produced substantial therapeutic levels of bronchodilation with lesser degrees

of tachycardia and high than with a comparable oral amount. Unfortunately, the aerosol has a localized irritant effect that makes use

in its current form undersirable.

Despite its bronchodilating effect, marihuana smoke is an irritant

- 203 -
and, thus, interferes with other aspects of bronchial dynamics

(Tashkin et al., 1976a). In addition, Huber et al. (1975) noted

that alveolar macrophages harvested from rats by lavage, later

incubated with Staphylococcus albus and graded amounts of marihuana

smoke, caused a sustained dose-related depression of bactericidal

activity. The reduction in bacterial macrophage activity was

present in the gas phase and was water soluble. Further studies

with purified -9-THC indicated that the impairment in alveolar

macrophage function was not related to either the psychic or the

bronchodilating components of marihuana.

Anticonvulsant

Most of the work investigating the anticonvulsant properties of

cannabis has been preclinical. The effects of cannabinoids on

animal seizures induced by pentylentetrazol (Metrazol), audiogenic

or electrical stimulation have been recently examined. Consroe and

his associates (Consroe et al., 1973, 1975b; Consroe & Man, 1973)

found that -8- and -9-THC blocked all three types of seizures in a

dose-related manner. These drugs were qualitatively comparable to

diphenylhydantoin (Dilantin). Boggan et al. (1973) also confirmed

the effect of -9-THC in mice with induced audiogenic seizures.

Dwivedi and Harbison (1975) found that -8- and -9-THC, marihuana

extract and uridine protected against pentylentetrazol-induced convulsions in mice. None of these drugs protected against maximal

electroshock-induced convulsions. The authors found that their

anticonvulsant effects were not additive to diphenylhydantoin, but

were additive to phenobarbital. Therefore, their mechanism of

action may be similar to that of diphenylhydantoin but different

from that of phenobarbital.

Sofia et al. (1976) determined that both -9-THC and diphenylhydantoin decrease polysynaptic transmission and post-tetanic

potentiation. They concluded from their experiments on mice that

there may be a clinical usefulness for a compound such as -9-THC

which combines some degree of the anticonvulsant specificity of

diphenylhydantoin with the general sedative effects of phenobarbital and chlordiazepoxide.

Rat hippocampal seizures precipitated by afferent electrical stimulation were studied by Feeney et al. (1973) to determine whether a

series of cannabinoids would be effective. The cannabinoids were

found to be more effective than diphenylhydantoin in diminishing

the seizure discharges. Cannabidiol was the most potent, followed

in order of effectiveness by cannabinol, -9-THC and -8-THC. In

this study, the psychologically inactive cannabinoids outperformed

the active ones.

Karler et al. (1973, 1974a, 1974b) demonstrated that tolerance

developed to the antiseizure property in the maximal electroshock

test. Their subjects were rats treated with -9-THC and mice

treated with -9-THC, cannabidiol, diphenylhydantoin and pheno-

- 204 -
barbital. In other electrical seizure models, tolerance was variable and specific for each model. Karler et al. considered it

possible that cannabidiol, which has no psychotoxicity or cardiotoxicity, has the further advantage of being a better anticonvulsant than -9-THC. Turkanis and Karler (1975) investigated the

post-tetanic potentiation of bullfrog paravertebral ganglia in

vitro using 7-hydroxy-THC, 6 -7-dihydroxy-THC, -9-THC, cannabidiol, diphenylhydantoin and phenobarbital. Both hydroxy-THC

metabolites and cannabidiol markedly depressed the post-tetanic

potential at 30 to 90 minutes. Diphenylhydantoin depressed it

moderately and -9-THC and phenobarbital had no effect. In this

instance, the hydroxylated metabolites showed activity different

from that of the parent compound.

Carlini et al. (1975) confirmed that cannabidiol may be the best

cannabinoid anticonvulsant. Albino mice were administered transcorneal electroshocks and treated with either cannabidiol, cannabidiol-aldehyde acetate, 6-oxo-cannabidiol acetate, 6-hydroxycannabidiol triacetate or 9-hydroxy-cannabidiol triacetate. Cannabidiol and 6-oxo-cannabidiol acetate had the best anticonvulsant

effect and therefore merit further study.

Johnson et al. (1975) determined the anticonvulsant activity of

intravenous -9-THC in epileptic chickens by intermittent photic

stimulation and pentylentetrazol. Cannabis reduced the severity

and incidence of seizures produced by intermittent photic stimulation. A reduction in frequency of inter-ictal, slow-wave, high

voltage EEG; activity and an absence of spiking was also noted. -9-

THC had no effect on the incidence of pentylentetrazol-induced

seizures.

Ten Ham et al. (1975) gave 20 mg/kg of -9-THC for six days to

gerbils with spontaneous epileptiform seizures. No effect was seen

on the latency, duration or severity of the seizures. At a 50 mg/kg

dose level, seizures were completely abolished after a single

injection, but tolerance developed within six days. Severe

toxicity occurred at the 50 mg/kg dosage level.

Wada et al. (1975) reported that -8-THC and -9-THC failed to

affect the myoclonic response to photic stimulation in the

Senegalese baboon. However, both drugs exerted dose-related antiepileptic effects upon established kindled convulsions provoked by

electrical stimulation of the amygdala. The antiepileptic action

of the two THC isomers appears to be caused by a suppression of

propagation of the induced afterdischarge to distant cerebral

structures, although high doses also suppress the afterdischarge at

the site of stimulation. In previous investigations, Wada et al.

(1974) and Corcoran et al. (1973) had reported that -9-THC transiently suppresses the clinical and EEG seizure manifestations

caused by subcortical stimulation in rats and cats.

Convulsant as well as anticonvulsant activity can be demonstrated

with cannabinoids. The former is usually noted when toxic or high,

chronic doses are used. However, Consroe et al. (1976) have bred a

- 205 -
strain of New Zealand rabbit that is quite susceptible to -9-THC

seizures. Doses of 0.1-0.8 mg/kg i.v. produced behavioral seizures

regularly in these animals. In addition, spontaneously epileptic

beagles were given varying doses of -9-THC, cannabidiol or a

placebo for 20 days. Myoclonic jerks and generalized seizures were

observed in those dogs receiving 3-5 mg/kg of -9-THC orally (Feeney

et al. 1976).

Little work has been done in humans with cerebral dysrhythmias. The

Davis and Ramsey (1949) study was a pilot effort that examined the

effect of tetrahydrocannabinols in epileptic, hospitalized children

who had been receiving diphenylhydantoin or mephenytoin

(Mesantoin). Two children showed improvement on one cannabinoid,

but transfer to a second cannabinoid gave mixed results. PerezReyes and Wingf ield (1974), in a case report, mentioned that

intravenously infused cannabidiol did not reduce, and may have

increased, the abnormal EEG; activity of a 24-year-old man with

centricephalic epilepsy. In this case, symmetrical spike and wave

activity appeared only during light sleep. The 40 mg cannabidiol

injection may have increased the dysrhythmia even though it produced a diminution in its intensity after awakening. Another case

report (Consroe et al., 1975b) suggests that smoked marihuana may

have a beneficial action in some types of human epilepsy. On the

other hand, Keeler and Reifler (1967) suggest that marihuana may be

detrimental in epileptics with grand mal convulsions. Feeney

(1976) surveyed epileptics concerning illegal drug use. Practically none over 30 years of age reported illicit drug use, but 29

percent under 30 mentioned marihuana smoking. Only 4 percent had

discussed the matter with their physicians. Most reported that it

had no effect; one stated that it decreased epileptic seizures and

another said that it caused his seizures.

The problems encountered with -9-THC (insolubility, variable oral

absorption, psychotoxicity, tachycardia and the possibility of a

convulsant capability) have resulted in the production of a series

of synthesized benzopyrans. In particular, three analogues of

dimethylheptylpyran (DMHP) were found to exhibit significant anticonvulsant activity against audiogenic, supramaximal electroshock

and maximal pentylentetrazol-induced seizures in mice (Plotnikoff,

1976). In rats, these compounds were found to be more active than

diphenylhydantoin in the supramaximal electroshock test. One of

them, SP-175, showed a different profile of anticonvulsant activity

than DMHP or -9-THC. On the basis of five-day studies of diphenylhydantoin, phenobarbital, DMHP and SP-175 in mice, tolerance was

not found to develop.

Retardation of Tumor Growth

Harris et al. (1976) have reported that mice innoculated with Lewis

lung adenocarcinoma showed tumor size reductions ranging from 25-82

percent depending on the dose and duration of treatment with oral -

8-THC, -9-THC and cannabinol. No reductions were found with

cannabidiol. The effective cannabinoids increased survival time

- 206 -
from one-quarter to one-third compared to a 50 percent increase with

cyclophosphamide. Friend leukemia virus growth was inhibited by -

9-THC, but L1210 murine leukemia was not. In vitro experiments

confirmed the inhibition of neoplastic growth in mice, leading the

authors to conclude that certain cannabinoids possess antineoplastic properties by virtue of their interference with RNA and DNA

synthesis. In a later study (Harris, 1976), other tumor systems and

other cannabinoids were tested. He found that cannabidiol seems to

have a growth-enhancing, rather than reducing, effect on the Lewis

lung tumor.

White et al. (1976), working with Lewis lung cell cultures exposed

to -9-THC concluded that at non-toxic doses, the drug inhibits

replication after thymidine uptake. This cytotoxicity may be

related to -9-THC’s extreme lipophilia, and, therefore, the

results are related to effects on membrane function.

Antibacterial Activity

In an effort to replicate the work of Kabelik (1957) and Krejci

(1958) mentioned earlier, van Klingeren and ten Ham (1976) tested

the antibacterial activity of -9-THC and cannabidiol. Broth

cultures of staphylococci and streptococci were innoculated with

varying concentrations of -9-THC and cannabidiol. They found that

both substances were bacteriostatic and bactericidal, but were

ineffective against gram negative bacilli. When horse serum was

incorporated, the antibacterial effect was greatly reduced, presumably due to protein binding. The utility of these cannabinoids as a

topical antibacterial, as suggested by Krejci, seems to have been

confirmed on an in vitro basis.

Those therapeutic studies that utilize the psychologic effects of

marihuana follow.

Sedative-Hypnotic Action

Sofia and Knobloch (1973) demonstrated that pretreatment of laboratory animals with -9-THC reduces the dose of barbiturates needed

for hypnosis and increases total sleep time. Freemon (1974)

confirmed the observation of other investigators that -9-THC, like

most hypnosedatives, reduces REM time. However, in contrast to

other hypnotics, the abrupt withdrawal of -9-THC after six consecutive nights of usage failed to produce a REM rebound, although

mild insomnia was observed.

Feinberg et al. (1976), using both marihuana extract and -9-THC,

found that both drugs reduced REM activity and increased Stage IV

sleep. Abrupt withdrawal led to considerably increased amounts of

REM sleep and a transient decrease in Stage IV sleep. The difference in these findings from those of Freemon and others may be due

to the large amounts of -9-THC given the subjects. Feinberg’s

subjects received from 70-210 mg per day.

- 207 -
In an attempt to exploit the well known relaxing and sedating

effects of cannabis, two studies were performed by Neu et al.

(1976). In the first study, nine subjects with sleep difficulties

were given 10, 20 or 30 mg. of -9-THC or a placebo at weekly

intervals using a double blind method. The drug, as compared to the

placebo, significantly reduced sleep latency. Furthermore, sleep

was less interrupted during the drug nights. Side effects were

mild, but they increased with increasing dosage. The chief complaint was a hangover the next day. In the second study, the -9-

THC doses were reduced to 5, 10 and 15 mg in order to avoid side

effects. These were compared to a placebo and to 500 mg of chloral

hydrate, a well-established hypnotic. Surprisingly, neither the

chloral hydrate nor the -9-THC facilitated sleep induction or

extended the duration of sleep as compared to the placebo. At the

15 mg dose level, a few complaints of hangover were noted. The

authors suggested that difficulties in controlling the room temperature during the winter may have sufficiently interfered with sleep

to negate any possible hypnotic effects of the active substances.

Tassinari et al. (1976) reported increases in total sleep time in

eight volunteer subjects. Stage II sleep was increased while REM

sleep was reduced. The dosages used were rather large (0.7- 1.0

mg/kg of -9-THC), however.

Analgesia

One of the earliest folk uses for cannabis was for pain relief. A

series of preclinical investigations by Kaymakcalan et al. (1974)

tended to confirm this analgesic effect. After having received

intravenous administrations of 1 mg/kg -9-THC, dogs received electric stimulation through an implanted dental electrode. The cannabinoid produced a definite analgesic effect, as shown by a fourfold

increase in pain thresholds. Tolerance to analgesia, sedation and

ataxia occurred in eight days.

In another study, -9-THC produced pain reduction in mice and rats

as measured by tail flick and writhing tests, and in rabbits

receiving sciatic nerve stimulation. The analgesia produced with

the doses used was equivalent to morphine analgesia -- in fact, in

rats, a cross tolerance between -9-THC and morphine was found. An

earlier study (Parker & Dubas, 1973) measured the effect of -9-THC

on rats with electrodes implanted in aversive brain sites. A nondose related elevation of the pain threshold and an attenuation of

the escape response were also recorded.

Sofia et al. (1975) tested the analgesic effectiveness of -9-THC,

crude marihuana extract, cannabinol, cannabidiol, morphine and

aspirin orally in mice using the acetic-induced writhing and the hot

plate tests. They also exposed rats to the Randall-Selito paw

pressure test. -9-THC and morphine were equipotent except in the

paw pressure test in which morphine exceeded -9-THC in elevating

the pain threshhold. The crude marihuana extract was as effective

in all tests except in the acetic writhing test where it was three

- 208 -
times more potent. Cannabinol resembled aspirin in that it was only

efficacious in the writhing test.

A double blind Canadian study by Milstein et al. (1975) revealed a

significant increase in pain tolerance among those who had smoked

marihuana. Using a pressure algometer, the experimenter found that

experienced subjects obtained greater analgesia than non-experienced subjects, although the increased pain tolerance was found

only in the preferred hand. No effects on sensitivity to pain

sensation were noted.

In another human study, Hill et al. (1974) recorded opposite

results. Here, 26 subjects received blind, either marihuana smoke

containing 12 mg of -9-THC from a spirometer or a marihuana

placebo. They were then given electrical skin stimulation. The THC

was found to decrease tolerance and heighten sensitivity to pain.

In an impressionistic report, Dunn and Davis (1974) questioned 10

paraplegics hospitalized in a V.A. hospital, all of whom had

admitted using marihuana in the past. Four reported that it

produced a decrease in phantom pain sensations, five mentioned a

decrease in spasticity and five noted a decrease in headache pain

and an increase in pleasant sensations.

Cancer patients in pain were studied by Noyes et al. (1975).

Patients were given either -9-THC in 5, 10, 15 or 20 mg doses or a

placebo. Pain reduction was greater at all -9-THC levels than in

the placebo condition. Significant pain reduction was noted at the

15 and 20 mg THC levels. These researchers felt that the pain

relief was not due to the sedative or euphoriant effects; and,

therefore, attempted to compare the analgesic effect of 10 and 20 mg

o f -9-THC with 60 and 120 mg of codeine in a group of cancer

patients with moderate pain. At the higher doses of both drugs,

significant levels of analgesia were reported. The 20 mg dose of -

9-THC produced marked sedation, and even the 10 mg dose was associated with considerable drowsiness. The sedation and mental

effects of 20 mg of -9-THC preclude its therapeutic usefulness, but

the investigators concluded that -9-THC has mild analgesic activity.

In a letter to the editor (Neiburg et al., 1976) in response to the

Sallan et al. (1975) article on amelioration of nausea and vomiting

by -9-THC in cancer chemotherapy patients, the writers tell of two

patients with malignancies who had to stop smoking marihuana

because of increased bone pain.

Wilson and May (1974) postulated ‘that the analgesic activity of -8-

and -9-THC resides primarily in their 11-hydroxy metabolites, the

latter being three times more potent than the former. They based

this assumption on the observation that 9-nor derivatives (which

cannot be transformed into 11-hydroxy metabolites) lacked significant analgesic activity. These do exhibit dog ataxia and cardiovascular profiles nearly identical to -8- and -9-THC. This

finding led to the preparation of 9-nor-9-ß-hydroxyhexahydrocanna-

- 209 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 14
binol which proved to be an analgesic in the mouse hot plate test

nearly equal to morphine. Whether or not the analgesia occurs over

an opiate receptor site is unresolved.

Harris (1976) was not able to confirm the analgesic effect of -9-

THC using the standard analgesic test procedures. He did find the

9-nor-9-ßhydroxyhexahydrocannabinol to be a potent antinocioceptive

agent, confirming Wilson and May’s work.

Pre-Anesthetic

A number of studies have examined the role that -9-THC can play as

a pre-anesthetic agent, with mixed results. When it was given prior

to inhalation anesthesia, the requirement for cyclopropane and

halothane was decreased (Paton & Temple, 1973; Stoelting et al.,

1973). Smith (1976) found that normal volunteers given 200 mcg/kg

THC intravenously experienced marked sedation with minimal respiratory depression. Also salivation was diminished, bronchodilation

occurred and cardiac output increased on the basis of the expected

tachycardia. Although the author cautioned that some of the

observed effects may have been due to the alcohol in which the -9-

THC was dissolved, the amount of the drug given intravenously could

easily have provided the manifestations recorded. Whether -9-THC

has a potential usefulness in anesthesiology will depend on findings from additional studies.

Having searched for suitable pre-anesthetic combinations, Smith

reported that 5 mg of -9-THC intravenously produced fear in a

number of patients. In combination with an opioid it provided

useful sedation, but with a marked decrease in carbon dioxide

sensitivity. When combined with a barbiturate, the CNS depression

was unpleasant and associated with some restlessness, but the

response to carbon dioxide was unchanged. With diazepam, definite

drowsiness and other depressive effects were notable, and the

ventilatory response to carbon dioxide was decreased. The investigator suggested that the combination of marihuana with pre-anesthetic or anesthetic medications could lead to undesirable results.

Gregg and Small (1974) found two dosage levels of intravenous -9-

THC ineffective in controlling anxiety in oral surgery patients. In

fact, in low doses it elevated anxiety, sometimes to a marked

degree. Intravenous diazepam out-performed the drug under investigation.

In an expansion of this study, Gregg et al. (1976b) found that the

combination of presurgical stress and intravenous -9-THC produced

dysphoria and a tendency to syncopal hypotension. No measurable

effect on pain tolerance could be detected. The investigators

concluded that surgical stress plus marihuana use immediately prior

to the surgery might lead to psychophysiologic reactions.

Johnstone et al. (1975) also examined -9-THC in combination with

other drugs. It was administered intravenously after subjects had

- 210 -
been pretreated with oxymorphone (OXM) or pentobarbital (PBL). The

sedative effects of OXM were increased by -9-THC, but the cannabinoid also increased respiratory depression. The combination of

PBL and -9-THC did not cause respiratory depression but produced

such intense anxiety and psychotomimetic reactions that four of the

seven subjects receiving this combination were not given the full

course of five doses. The investigators concluded that neither

combination was a desirable anesthetic premeditation. They also

expressed reservations about the value of -9-THC alone for such a

purpose.

A number of reports in this area mention the cardio-accelerating

effect of -9-THC as an undesirable feature of its activity. When

it is combined with other drugs like atropine, and with the stress

of pending surgery, syncopal hypotension can result. From a

different perspective, Gregg and associates (1976a) mention that

patients given general anesthesia within 72 hours of smoking marihuana sustained abnormal heart rate increases when compared with

control non-smokers. They speculate that it could have resulted

from an interaction between the stored cannabinoid metabolites and

the various other elements of the surgical state that are conducive

to tachycardia.

Antidepressant

Since marihuana tends to elevate mood, it follows that an evaluation

of its antidepressant potential would be sought. Kotin et al.

(1973) administered 0.3 mg/kg of -9-THC or a matching placebo twice

daily to eight patients who required hospitalization for their

affective disorder. The patients were all considered moderately or

severely depressed. Treatment lasted a week, with placebos substituted for the active drug thereafter. No evidence of a significant

affectual change could be demonstrated. In chronic depressive

states, a longer duration of drug administration is sometimes

needed before improvement is noted.

A group at the Medical College of Virginia (Regelson et al., 1976)

performed a double blind study with cancer patients receiving

chemotherapy. An initial starting dose of 0.1 mg/kg t.i.d. was

used. The dosage was raised only if previous doses were welltolerated. On a battery of personality tests and mood scales, the

-9-THC acted as a mood elevator and tranquilizer producing

significant improvement on two of three Zung depression scales.

Cognitive functioning was unimpaired and appetite enhancement and

retardation of weight loss were noted from clinical records. The

need for narcotics was decreased, and patients had the impression

that some pain relief resulted.

Antinauseant, Antiemetic and Appetite Enhancer

The double blind Regelson study at the Medical College of Virginia

is mentioned above in the section on antidepressant effects, but the

- 211 -
researchers believed that the principal benefits seen in their

cancer chemotherapy patients were the improvement of appetite and

lack of the expected weight loss. Increased sociability and

tranquilization were achieved by many patients according to the

check lists used. Sedation, which could be desirable in this group

of patients, was a frequent side effect. Nausea and vomiting were

brought under control significantly more often by -9-THC than with

the placebo.

Sallan et al. (1975) gave either oral -9-THC in 10 mg/sq. meter

body surface or a placebo to 20 patients with each serving as his

own control. An antiemetic effect was observed in 14 of the 20 drug

courses, but not in the placebo courses. The antiemetic effect

paralleled the subjective high. Studies comparing -9-THC with a

standard antiemetic, prochlorperazine (Compazine), are underway at

a few centers.

Treatment of Alcohol and Drug Dependence

Rosenberg (1976) has studied the response of a group of alcoholics

and normal volunteers to marihuana cigarettes (0.4 gm/50 lb. body

weight) and to alcohol (2 ml vodka/kg.). This investigator found

that sober alcoholics tended to be less responsive to stresses

(mental arithmetic and talking to a videocamera) and were more

likely to withdraw from a stress situation than the normals.

Alcoholics became more angry and depressed after alcohol ingestion

as measured by mood scales. Marihuana produced a more positive mood

state and did not interfere with the arousal reaction, although it

greatly increased heart rate and produced an acute paranoid or

confusional state in 3 of the 27 subjects. This investigator also

found that disulfiram (Antabuse) and marihuana could be given

safely together in the treatment of alcoholism. The study is

continuing, but the early findings indicate that marihuana may be a

suitable therapeutic adjunct for some alcoholics as a reward to

encourage them to take disulfiram.

Hine and colleagues (1975a) implanted morphine pellets in rats. -

9-THC in 1, 2, 5 and 10 mg/kg doses were injected intraperitoneally

71 hours later. An hour afterwards, 4 mg/kg of naloxone (Narcan)

was delivered into the same site. Attenuation of abstinence was

achieved with a dose of 2 mg/kg and higher. Cannabidiol significantly potentiated the -9-THC effect on diarrhea and wet shakes.

In a letter, Carder (1975) criticized the paper by Hine on suppression of naloxone-precipitated morphine abstinence. He pointed out

that only two of nine symptoms were reduced (wet shakes and defecations). It was suggested that this could simply be a non-specific

depressant effect . In reply, Hine et al. (1975b) stated that the

decrease in wet shakes, diarrhea and bolus counts was dose related.

The relative importance of one abstinence symptom over another is

difficult to evaluate. Hine et al. retain the belief that a

clinical trial of -9-THC in opiate detoxification is justified.

Bhargava (1976) has performed a similar study in mice. The naloxone

- 212 -
precipitated jumping response was inhibited, and two other signs of

morphine withdrawal (defecation and rearing behavior) were also

suppressed by -9-THC. The author considers the jumping response to

be a major sign of withdrawal.

The Synthetics

A long series of synthetic compounds has been developed over the

past few years. They represent attempts to intensify certain

desired activities of the tetrahydrocannabinols while avoiding the

unwanted effects. Pars and Razdan (1976) have described. a series of

nitrogen and sulfur substituted benzopyrans. Dren (1976) has

studied the neuropharmacology of three nitrogen-containing heterocyclic benzopyrans and reported tranquilizing, analgesic, sedativehypnotic and intraocular pressure lowering activity. Plotnikoff et

al. (1975) states that these nitrogen analogues have anticonvulsant

properties in mice and rats. Nabilone, which has a ketone instead

of a methyl on the 9 position of -9-THC, was investigated by

Lemberger and Rowe (1976). It produced relaxation and sedative

effects in humans. Little euphoria or tachycardia occurred, but in

high doses postural hypotension developed. Tolerance to the

euphoria and postural hypotension took place rapidly.

Mechanism of Therapeutic Action

The precise mechanism by which cannabis exerts its pharmacologic

effects remains unknown. Burstein and Raz (1972) and Burstein et

al. (1973) have gathered a considerable amount of indirect evidence

that some of the actions are mediated via a prostaglandin-cyclic AMP

system. He found that -9-THC reduced prostaglandin formation by

inhibiting prostaglandin synthetase. Other cannabinoids have this

effect as does olivetol from which -9-THC is synthesized. PGE2 and

PGE1 are two of the prostaglandins affected. Prostaglandin inhibition could account for the intraocular pressure reducing and the

bronchodilating actions.

The influence of cannabinoids upon neurotransmitters has been examined, but the results are inconsistent. Banerjee et al. (1975)

have shown in vitro that -8- and -9-THC and their hydroxylated

metabolites inhibit the uptake of norepinephrine and serotonin in

hypothalamic synaptosome preparations and of dopamine in the corpus

striatum. Gamma-aminobutyric acid uptake in cerebral cortical

preparations is also inhibited. The latter may explain the anticonvulsant properties of some of the cannabinoids. Drew and Miller

(1974) believe that cholinergic dominance best explains the mental

effects. The adrenergic activity of cannabis mentioned earlier

(Green & Kim, 1976) is not inconsistent with the prostaglandincyclic AMP hypothesis; rather, it may be an antecedent reaction to

the release of adrenergic amines. Selective monoamine oxidase

inhibitory activity is also a possible feature of some activity of

the cannabinoids (Schurr and Livne, 1975).

- 213 -
CONCLUSION

The further study of the cannabinoids for various therapeutic

applications seems worthwhile. A large number of synthetic cannabinoids have begun to appear which do not have some of the disadvantages intrinsic in the naturally occurring ones. Therapeutic

efficacy could be enhanced by certain molecular manipulations.

Thus, it is likely that if any cannabinoid ever achieves clinical

acceptance, it will be a synthetic.

The cannabinoid configuration would be important to human therapeutics because: 1) there is a wide safety margin between effective

and lethal doses, and 2) in certain instances, the mechanism of

action appears to differ from the standard medications now

employed.

It should be noted that successful clinical trials of cannabis or

its constituents do not provide sufficient justification for

removal of the drug from Schedule I (no medical usefulness, high

abuse potential) to a less restricted scheduled. Only when the

substance has gone through the entire investigational process of

testing, and the FDA has approved its New Drug Application, would

its rescheduling be considered by the regulatory agencies.

Sidney Cohen, M.D., D.Sc.

University of California

at Los Angeles

- 214 -
REFERENCES

Therapeutic Aspects

Abboud, R.T. and Sanders, H.D. Effect of oral administration of -

9-tetrahydrocannabinol on airway mechanics in normal and

asthmatic subjects. Chest, 70:480-485 (1976).

Agurell, S., Gustafsson, B., Holmstedt, B., Leander, K., Lindgren,

J.-E., Nilsson, I., Sandberg, F. and Asberg, M. Quantitation

of 1-tetrahydrocannabinol in plasma from cannabis smokers.

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 25:554-558 (1973).

Banerjee, S.P., Snyder, S.H. and Mechoulam, R. Cannabinoids:

Influence on neurotransmitter uptake in rat brain synaptosomes. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 194:74-81 (1975).

Bhargava, H.N. Inhibition of naloxone-induced withdrawal in morphine dependent mice by 1-trans- -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

European Journal of Pharmacology, 38:259-262 (1976).

Birch, E.A. The use of Indian hemp in the treatment of chronic

chloral and chronic opium poisoning. Lancet, 1:625 (1889).

Boggan, W.O., Steele, R.A. and Freedman, D.X. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol effect on audiogenic seizure susceptibility. Psychopharmacologia, 29:101-106 (1973).

Burstein, S., Levin, E. and Varanelli, C. Prostaglandins and

cannabis: Inhibition of biosynthesis by the naturally occurring cannabinoids. Biochemical Pharmacology, 22:2905-2910

(1973).

Burstein, S. and Raz, A. Inhibition of Prostaglandin E2 biosynthesis by -9-THC. Prostaglandins, 2:369-374 (1972).

Carder, B. Blockade of morphine abstinence by -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Science, 190:590 (1975).

Carlini, E.A., Mechoulam, R. and Lander, N. Anticonvulsant activity of four oxygenated cannabidiol derivatives. Research

Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology,

12(1):1-15 (1975).

Cohen, S. The sex-pot controversy. Drug Abuse and Alcoholism

Newsletter, 6(4):1-4 (1975).

Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.) The Therapeutic Potential of

Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976.

Consroe, P.F., Jones, B.C. and Chin, L. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol,

EEG and behavior: The importance of adaptation to the testing

milieu. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 3:173-177

(1975a).

- 215 -
Consroe, P.F., Jones, B.C., Laird, H. and Reinking, J. Anticonvulsant-convulsant effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic

Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 343-362.

Consroe, P.F. and Man, D.P. Effects of -8- and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on experimentally induced seizures. Life Sciences, 13:429-439 (1973).

Consroe, P.F., Man, D.P., Chin, L. and Picchioni, A.L. Reduction of

audiogenic seizures by -8- and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 25:764-765 (1973).

Consroe, P.F., Wood, G.C. and Buchsbaum, H. Anticonvulsant nature

of marihuana smoking. Journal of the American Medical Association, 234:306-307 (1975b).

Cooler, P. and Gregg, J.M. The effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

on intraocular pressure in humans. In Cohen, S. and Stillman,

R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New

York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 77-88.

Corcoran, M.E., McCaughran, J.A. and Wada, J.A. Acute antiepileptic effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol in rats with kindled

seizures. Experimental Neurology, 40:471-483 (1973).

Davis, J.P. and Ramsey, H.H. Antiepileptic action of marihuana

active substances. Federation Proceedings, 8:284-285 (1949).

Dren, A.T. Preclinical neuropharmacology of three nitrogen-containing heterocyclic benzopyrans derived from the cannabinoid

nucleus. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp.

439-456.

Drew, W.G. and Miller, L.L. Cannabis: Neural mechanisms and

behavior, a theoretical review. Pharmacology, 11:12-13

(1974).

Dunn, D. and Davis, R. The perceived effects of marihuana in spinal

cord injuries. Paraplegia, 12:175 (1974).

Dwivedi, C. and Harbison, R.D. Anticonvulsant activities of -8-

and -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and uridine. Toxicology and

Applied Pharmacology, 31:452-458 (1975).

Emboden, W.A.V. Ritual use of cannabis sativa L.: A historical

ethnographic survey. In Furst, P. (ed.), Flesh of the Gods.

New York: Praeger, 1972.

Feeney, D.M. Marihuana use among epileptics. Journal of the

American Medical Association, 235:1105 (1976).

- 216 -
Feeney, D.M., Spiker, M. and Weiss, G.K. Marihuana and epilepsy:

Activation of symptoms by -9-THC. In Cohen, S. and Stillman,

R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New

York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 343-362.

Feeney, D.M., Wagner, H.R., McNamara, M.C. and Weiss, G. Effects of

tetrahydrocannabinol on hippocampal evoked after discharges

in cats. Experimental Neurology, 41:357-365 (1973).

Feinberg, I., Jones, R., Walker, J., Cavness, C. and Floyd, T.

Effects of marihuana extract and tetrahydrocannabinol on

electroencephalographic sleep patterns. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 19:782-794 (1976).

Flom, M.C., Adams, A.J. and Jones, R.T. Marihuana smoking and

reduced pressure in human eyes: Drug action or epiphenomenon? Investigative Ophthalmology, 14:52-55 (1975).

Freemon, F.R. The effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on sleep.

Psychopharmacologia, 35:39-44 (1974).

Green, K. Marihuana and the eye. Investigative Ophthalmology,

14:261-263 (1975).

Green, K. and Kim, K. Interaction of adrenergic blocking agents

with prostaglandin E2 and tetrahydrocannabinol in the eye.

Experimental Eye Research, 15:499-507 (1973).

Green, K. and Kim, K. Interaction of adrenergic antagonists with

prostaglandin E2 and tetrahydrocannabinol in the eye. Investigative Ophthalmology, 15:102-111 (1976).

Green, K., Kim, K. and Bowman, K. Ocular effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The

Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976,

pp. 49-62.

Green, K. and Podos, S.M. Antagonism of arachidonic acid-induced

ocular effects by -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Investigative

Ophthalmology, 13:422-429 (1974).

Gregg, J.M., Campbell, R.L., Levin, K.J., Ghia, J. and Elliott,

R.A. Cardiovascular effects of cannabinol during oral

surgery. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 55:203-213 (1976a).

Gregg, J.M. and Small, E.W. The control of anxiety in oral surgery

patients with -9-THC and diazepam. NIH Record, 26:8 (1974).

Gregg, J.M., Small, E.W., Moore, R., Raft, D. and Toomey, T.C.

Emotional response to intravenous -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

during oral surgery. Journal of Oral Surgery, 34:301-313

(1976b).

- 217 -
Grinspoon, L. Marihuana Reconsidered. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.

Harris, L.S. Analgesic and antitumor potential of the cannabinoids. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 299-

312.

Harris, L.S., Munson, A.E. and Carchman, R.A. Anti-tumor properties of cannabinoids. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

749-762.

Hepler, R.S. and Frank, I.M. Marihuana smoking and intraocular

pressure. Journal of the American Medical Association,

217:1392 (1971).

Hepler, R.S., Frank, I.M., and Petrus, R. Ocular effects of

marihuana smoking. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

815-824.

Hill, S.Y., Schwin, R., Goodwin, D.W. and Powell, B.J. Marihuana

and pain. Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, 188:415-418 (1974).

Hine, B., Friedman, E., Torrelio, M. and Gershon, S. Morphinedependent rats: Blockade of precipitated abstinence by

tetrahydrocannabinol. Science, 187:443-446 (1975a).

Hine, B., Friedman, E., Torrelio, M. and Gershon, S. Blockade of

precipitated abstinence by tetrahydrocannabinol. Science,

190:591 (1975b).

Hubacek, J. Study of the effect of cannabis indica in oto-rhinolaryngology. Acta Univ. Olomuc. Fac. Med., 6:83-86 (1955).

Huber, G.L., Simmons, G.A., McCarthy, C.R., Cutting, M.B.,

Laguarda, R. and Pereira, W. Depressant effects of marihuana

smoke on antibacterial activity of pulmonary alveolar macrophages. Chest, 68:769-773 (1975).

Johnson, D.D., McNeil, J.R., Crawford, R.D. and Wilcox, W.C. Epileptiform seizures in domestic fowl: Anticonvulsant activity

o f -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Canadian Journal of Physiology

and Pharmacology, 53:1007-1013 (1975).

Johnstone, R.E., Lief, P.L., Kulp, R.A. and Smith, T.C. Combination

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol with oxymorphone or phenobarbital: Effects on ventilatory control and cardiovascular

dynamics. Anesthesiology, 42:674-684 (1975).

- 218 -
Kabelik, J.O. Hemp - its history - traditional and popular application. Acta Univ. Olomuc Fac. Med., 6:31-41 (1955).

Kabelik, J.O. Hanf (cannabis sativa) - antibiotishes heilmittel.

1. Mitteilung: hanf in der alt - und volksmedizin. Die

Pharmazie, 12:439 (1957).

Kabelik, J.O., Krejci, Z. and Santavy, F. Hemp as a medicament.

Bulletin on Narcotics, 12:5-22 (1960).

Karler, R., Cely, W. and Turkanis, S.A. The anticonvulsant activity

of cannabidiol and cannabinol. Life Sciences, 13:1527-1531

(1973).

Karler, R., Cely, W. and Turkanis, S.A. Anticonvulsant properties

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and other cannabinoids. Life

Sciences, 15:931-947 (1974a).

Karler, R., Cely, W. and Turkanis, S.A. A study of the development

of tolerance to an anticonvulsant effect of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Research Communications in

Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology, 9:23-39 (1974b).

Kaymakcalan, S., Turker, R.K. and Turker, M.N. Analgesic effect of

-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and development of tolerance to this

effect in the dog. Psychopharmacologia, 35:123-128 (1974).

Keeler, M.H. and Reifler, C.F. Grand mal convulsions subsequent to

marihuana use. Diseases of the Nervous System, 28:474-475

(1967).

Kolodny, R.C., Lessin, P., Toro, G., Masters, W.H. and Cohen, S.

Depression of plasma testosterone with acute marihuana

administration. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 217-

225.

Kotin, J., Post, R.M. and Goodwin, F.K. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

in depressed patients. Archives of General Psychiatry,

28:345-348 (1973).

Krejci, Z. The antibiotic effect of cannabis indica. Dissertation

(Masaryk University, Brno), (1950).

Krejci, Z. The antibacterial effect of cannabis indica. Lekarske

Listy, 1(20):500-503 (1952).

Krejci, Z. The antibacterial effect of cannabis indica. Acta Univ.

Olomuc. Fac. Med., 6:43-57 (1955).

Krejci, Z. Hanf (cannabis sativa) - antibiotishes heilmittel. 2.

Mitteilung: Methodik und ergebnisse der bakteriologishen

untersuchung und vorlaufige klinishe erfahrugen. Die Pharmazie, 13:155-156 (1958).

- 219 -
Krejci, Z. Antibacterial substances of cannabis used in the

prevention and therapy of infections. Dissertation, 259

(1961a).

Krejci, Z. To the problem of substances with antibacterial and

hashish effect in hemp. Casopis Lekaru Ceskych, 43:1351-1354

(1961b).

Krejci, Z. and Heczko, P. On the treatment of the papilla rhagades

in suckling puerperial mothers and on the prevention of

mastitis caused by staphylococci. Acta Univ. Olomuc. Fac.

Med., 14:277-282 (1958).

Krejci, Z., Horok, M. and Santavy, F.I. Hanf (cannabis sativa) -

antibiotishes heilmittel. 3. Mitteilung: Isolierung und

Konstitution zweier aus cannabis sativa gewonnener sauren.

Die Pharmazie, 14:349-355 (1959).

Krejci, Z. and Vybiral, L. Thin layer (aluminum oxide) chromatographic isolation of biological active substances from cannabis sativa L. and the biological retention of antibacterially

active substances. Scr. Med. Brno., 35:71-72 (1962).

Lemberger, L. and Rowe, H. Clinical pharmacology of nabilone, a

cannabinol derivative. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 18:720-726 (1976).

Mattison, J.B. Cannabis indica as an anodyne and hypnotic. St.

Louis Medical and Surgical Journal, 61:265-271 (1891).

Mechoulam, R. and Gaoni, Y. A total synthesis of dl- -1-tetrahydrocannabinol, the active constituent in hashish. Journal of

the American Chemical Society, 87:3273-3275 (1965).

Mechoulam, R., Lander, N., Dikstein, S., Carlini, E. and

Blumenthal, M. On the therapeutic possibilities of some

cannabinoids. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The

Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976,

pp. 35-48.

Mechoulam, R., Shani, A., Edery, H. and Grunfeld, Y. Chemical basis

of hashish activity. Science, 169:611-612 (1970).

Milstein, S.L., MacCannell, K., Karr, G. and Clark, S. Marihuanaproduced changes in pain tolerance: Experienced and nonexperienced subjects. International Pharmacopsychiatry

(Basel), 10:177-182 (1975).

M'Meens, R.R. Report on the Committee on cannabis indica. Transactions of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Ohio State

Medical Society, 15:75-100 (1860).

- 220 -
Moreau de Tours, J.J. Psychotic depression with stupor tendency to

dementia: Treatment with an extract of cannabis indica.

Lancette Hospital Gazette, 30:391 (1857).

Navratil, J. Effectiveness of cannabis indica on chronic otitis

media. Acta Univ. Olomuc. Fac. Med., 6:87-89 (1955).

Neiburg, H.A., Margolin, F. and Seligman, B.R. Tetrahydrocannabinol and Chemotherapy. New England Journal of Medicine,

294: 168 (1976).

Neu, C., DiMascio, A., and Zwilling, G. Hypnotic properties of THC:

Experimental comparison of THC with chloral hydrate and

placebo. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp.

153-160.

Noyes, R., Brunk, S.F., Baram, D.A. and Canter, A. Analgesic effect

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 15:139-143 (1975).

Olsen, J.L., Lodge, J.W., Shapiro, B.J. and Tashkin, D.P. An

inhalation aerosol of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. Journal of

Pharmacy and Pharmacology, 28:86 (1975).

O'Shaughnessy, W.B. On the preparation of the Indian hemp or Gunjah

(cannabis indica). Transactions of the Medical and Physical

Society of Bombay, 8:421-461 (1842).

Parker, C.S. and Wrigley, F. Synthetic cannabis preparations in

psychiatry: Synhexyl. Journal of Mental Science, 96:276-279

(1950).

Parker, J.M. and Dubas, T.C. Automatic determination of the pain

threshold to electroshock and the effects of -9-THC. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Therapy and Toxicology, 7(1):75-81 (1973).

Pars, H. and Razdan, R. Heterocyclic analogues of the cannabinoids.

In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic

Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 419-488.

Paton, W.D.M. and Temple, D.M. Effects of chronic and acute

cannabis treatment upon thiopentane anesthesia in rabbits.

Proceedings of the British Pharmacological Society (1973).

Perez-Reyes, M. and Wingfield, M. Cannabidiol and electroencephalographic epileptic activity. Journal of the American

Medical Association, 230:1635 (1974).

Plotnikoff, N.P. New benzopyrans: Anticonvulsant activities. In

Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp. 475-494.

- 221 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 15
Plotnikoff, N.P., Zaugg, H.E., Petersen, A.C., Arendsen, D.L. and

Anderson, R.F. New benzopyrans: Anticonvulsant activities.

Life Sciences, 17:97-104 (1975).

Procek, J. Preliminary study on the local effect of cannabis

indica: A remedy for specific fistulas. Acta Univ. Olomuc.

Fac. Med., 6:91-92 (1955).

Purnell, W.D. and Gregg, J.M. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol, euphoria

and intraocular pressure in man. Annals of Ophthalmology,

7:921-923 (1975).

Quimby, M.W., Doorenbos, N.J., Turner, C.E. and Masoud, A. Mississippi grown marihuana cannabis sativa: Cultivation and

observed morphological variations. Economic Botany, 27:117-

127 (1973).

Regelson, W., Butler, J.R., Schultz, J., Kirk, T., Peck, L., Green,

M.L. and Zakis, O. -9-tetrahydrocannabinol as an effective

antidepressant and appetite stimulating agent in advanced

cancer patients. In Braude, M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.),

Pharmacology of Marihuana. New York: Raven Press, 1976, pp.

763-776.

Report of the Indian Hemp Drugs Commission, 1893-1894. Reprinted

Silver Spring, MD: Thomas Jefferson Press, 1969.

Reynolds, J.R. Therapeutic uses and toxic effects of cannabis

indica. Lancet, 1:637-638 (1890).

Rosenberg, C.M. The use of marihuana in the treatment of alcoholism. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976, pp.

173-182.

Rubin, V. Cross-cultural perspectives on therapeutic uses of

cannabis. In Cohen, S. and Stillmen, R.C. (eds.), The

Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976,

pp. 1-18.

Rubin, V. and Comitas, L. Ganja in Jamaica. The Hague: Mouton,

1975.

Sallan, S.E., Zinberg, N.E. and Frei, E. Antiemetic effect of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy. New England Journal of Medicine, 293(16):795-797

(1975).

Schurr, A. and Livne, A. Differential inhibition of mitochondrial

monoamine oxidase from brain by hashish components. Israeli

Journal of Medical Sciences, 11:1188 (1975).

- 222 -
Shapiro, D. The ocular manifestations of the cannabinols. Ophthalmologica, 168:366-369 (1974).

Simek, J. Application of the cannabis indica extract in preserving

stomatology. Acta Univ. Olcmuc. Fac. Med., 6:79-82 (1955).

Sirek, J. Importance of hempseeds in the tuburculosis therapy.

Acta Univ. Olomuc Fac. Med., 6:93-108 (1955).

Smith, T.C. Respiratory and cardiovascular effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol alone and in combination with oxymorphone,

pentobarbital and diazepma. In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C.

(eds.), The Therapeutic Potential of Marihuana. New York:

Plenum, 1976, pp. 123-132.

Sofia, R.D. and Knobloch, L.C. The interaction of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol pretreatment with various sedative-hypnotic

drugs. Psychopharmacologia, 30:185-194 (1973).

Sofia, R., Soloman, T. and Perry, H. Anticonvulsant activity of -

9-THC compared with three other drugs. European Journal of

Pharmacology, 35:7-10 (1976).

Sofia, R.D., Vassar, H.B. and Knobloch, L.C. Comparative analgesic

activity of various naturally occurring cannabinoids in mice

and rats. Psychopharmacologia , 40:285-295 (1975).

Soldan, J. Therapeutic results in stomatology after application of

substances obtained from cannabis indica. Acta Univ.

Olomuc. Fac. Med., 6:73-78 (1955).

Stoelting, R.K., Martz, R.C., Gartner, J., Creasser, C., Brown,

D.J. and Forney, R.B. Effects of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on

halothane MAC in dogs. Anesthesiology, 38:521-523 (1973).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B. J. and Frank, I.M. Acute pulmonary

physiologic effects of smoked marihuana and oral -9-tetrahydrocannabinol. New England Journal of Medicine, 289:336-

341 (1973).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J. and Frank, I.M. Acute effects of

smoked marihuana and oral -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Mechanisms of increased specific airway conductance in asthmatic

subjects. American Review of Respiratory Disease, 109:420-

428 (1974).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B. J., Lee, Y.E. and Harper, C.E. Effects of

smoked marijuana in experimentally induced asthma. American

Review of Respiratory Disease, 112:377-387 (1975).

Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J., Lee, Y.E. and Harper, C.E. Subacute

effects of heavy marihuana smoking on pulmonary function in

healthy men. New England Journal of Medicine, 294:125-129

(1976a).

- 223 -
Tashkin, D.P., Shapiro, B.J., Reiss, S., Olsen, J. and Lodge, J.

Bronchial effects of aerosolized -9-tetrahydrocannabinol.

In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic

Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976b, pp. 97-110.

Tassinari, C.A., Ambrosetto, G., Peraita-Adrados, M.R. and Gastaut,

H. The neuropsychiatric syndrome of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol

and cannabis intoxication in naive subjects: A clinical and

polygraphic study during wakefulness and sleep. In Braude,

M.C. and Szara, S. (eds.), Pharmacology of Marihuana. New

York: Raven Press, 1976, pp. 357-375.

Ten Ham, M., Loskota, W.J. and Lomax, P. Acute and chronic effects

of -9-tetrahydrocannabinol on seizures in the gerbil.

European Journal of Pharmacology, 31:148-152. (1975).

Thompson, L.J. and Proctor, R.C. Pyrahexyl in the treatment of

alcoholic and drug withdrawal conditions. North Carolina

Medical Journal, 14:520-523 (1967).

Turkanis, S. and Karler, P. Influence of anticonvulsant cannabinoids in posttetanic potentiation at isolated bullfrog

ganglia. Life Sciences, 17:569-578 (1975).

Vachon, L., FitzGerald, M.X., Solliday, N.H., Gould, I.A. and

Gaensler, E.A. Single dose effect of marihuana smoke. New

England Journal of Medicine, 288:985-989 (1973).

Vachon, L., Malthe, A. and Weissman, B. Effect of -9-THC on the

catecholamine content of the guinea pig lung. Research

Communications in Chemical Pathology and Pharmacology,

13:345-348 (1976a).

Vachon, L., Robins, A. and Gaensler, E. Airways response to

aerosolized -9-tetrahydrocannabinol: Preliminary report.

In Cohen, S. and Stillman, R.C. (eds.), The Therapeutic

Potential of Marihuana. New York: Plenum, 1976b, pp. 111-

122.

Vachon, L., Robins, A. and Gaensler, E.A. Airways response to

micro-aerosolized -8-tetrahydrocannabinol. Chest, 70:444

(1976c).

van Klingeren, B. and Ten Ham, M. Antibacterial activity of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Antonie van

Leeuwenhoek, 42:9-11 (1976).

Wada, J.A., Asawa, T. and Corcoran, M.E. Effects of tetrahydrocannabinols on kindled amygdaloid seizures and photogenic

seizures in Senegalese baboons, Papio papio. Epilepsia,

16:439-448 (1975).

- 224 -
Wada, J.A., Sato, M., Green, J. and Troupin, A. Anticonvulsive and

prophylactic potency of antiepileptic agents assessed by

amygdaloid kindling in cats. Epilepsia, 15:276 (1974).

White, A., Munson, J., Munson, A. and Carchman, R. Effects of -9-

tetrahydrocannabinol in Lewis lung adenocarcinoma cells in

tissue culture. Journal of the National Cancer Institute,

56:655-658 (1976).

Wilson, R.S. and May, E.L. 9-nor- -8-tetrahydrocannabinol: A

cannabinoid of metabolic interest. Journal of Medical Chemistry, 17:475-476 (1974).

- 225 -
INDEXES

AUTHOR INDEX

Abbatiello, E.R., 89-90, 98

Abboud, R.T., 203, 215

Abel, E.L., 13, 29, 90, 91,

92, 94, 95, 106, 107, 111,

118, 122, 153, 156

Abelson, H., 4, 29, 38, 51

Ablon, S.L., 145, 156

Abramson, H.A., 133, 156

Abruzzi, W., 145, 156

Acosta-Urquidi, J., 74, 79

Adamec, C., 144, 156

Adams, A.J., 140, 142, 156,

158, 162, 201, 217

Adams, L.D., 10, 31

Adams, M.D., 77, 79, 88, 95,

122

Adams, P.M., 105, 107, 108,

111, 118, 119, 120, 122

Agarwal, S.S., 104, 117, 127

Agnew, W.F., 73, 79

Agurell, S., 58, 60, 63, 64,

78, 84, 128, 131, 156, 177,

200, 215

Akins,F., 74, 82, 87, 96, 98

Aliapoulios, M.A., 135, 164

Alker, P.C., 21, 34, 146

Allen, M., 182, 193

Allen, M.A., 16, 36, 182, 193

Altman, H., 147, 156

Altman, K., 135, 163

Alves, C.N., 94, 95

Ambrosetto, G., 137, 138, 176,

208, 224

Amit, Z., 105, 112, 121, 123

Anderson, J.E., 103, 117

Anderson, M., 158

Anderson, P.F., 88, 95, 118,

119, 122

Anderson, R.F., 213, 222

Andhuber, G., 134, 160

Angle, J.F., 149, 173

Angelico, I., 132, 156

Appel, J.B., 109, 114

Aqleh, K., 154, 157

Archer, R., 129, 132, 168

Arendsen, D., 57, 66

Arendsen, D.L., 213, 222

Armand, J.P., 16, 34, 139, 171,

174, 182, 184, 185, 186, 192

Arnold, K.P., 60, 63

Aronow, W.S., 14, 35, 132, 133,

156, 172

Arora,.R.B., 104, 117, 127

Arya, M., 72, 80, 81

Asawa, T., 205, 224

Asberg, M., 200, 215

Atkinson, R.B., 38, 51

Atkinson, R.C., 141, 160

Avery, D.H., 104, 116, 142,

144, 171

Babor, T.F., 134, 135, 152,

154, 156, 169

Bach D., 78, 79

Backhouse, C.I., 134, 157

Bader-Bartfai, A., 128, 156

Bakker, C.B., 144, 158

Balster, R.L., 88, 97, 106,

107, 109, 113

Banerjee, A., 75, 79

Banerjee, B.C., 181, 188

Banerjee, B.N., 70, 71, 79

Banerjee, S.P., 213, 215

Baram, D.A., 104, 116, 142, 171,

209, 221

Barnes, C., 118, 119, 122

Barr, M., 139, 168, 185, 190

Barratt, E.S., 105, 107, 108,

111, 118, 119, 120, 122

Barry, H., 90, 91, 93, 100,

102, 108, 109, 111, 115,

120, 127

Bartle, K.D., 70, 83, 84

Batterman, S., 57, 62

Baugh, E.L. 88, 97, 105, 107,

112

Baum, M., 104, 114

Bay, K.S., 140, 177

Beahrs, J.O., 141, 157

Beautrais, A.L., 111, 140, 157

Bech, P., 128, 157

Beck, E.C., 119, 120, 126

Beckner, J., 88, 89, 100

Beckner, J.S., 73, 83, 106,

107, 113, 119, 126

Bellville, J.W., 134, 141, 154,

157, 175, 177

Benowitz, N., 139, 151, 152,

154, 165, 168, 185, 190

- 226 -
Benowitz, N.L., 25, 29, 32,

131, 132, 136, 152, 154,

157

Ben-Zvi, Z., 58, 63

Berger, H.J., 87, 99

Berla, J.M., 86, 102

Bernstein, J.G., 91, 98, 152,

163

Berstein, S., 128, 129, 169

Bhargava, H.N., 77, 79, 121,

122, 212, 215

Bhattacharya, P., 72, 80

Bickel, P., 141, 161

Biggs, D.A., 144, 171

Billings, A.A., 140, 174

Binder, M., 60, 64, 128, 156

Binitie, A., 146, 157

Birch, E.A., 198, 215

Biswas, B., 71, 79

Blackford, L., 7, 29, 42, 51

Blaine, J.D., 24, 31, 33, 143,

144, 165, 169

Blevins, R.D., 17, 29, 185,

188

Bloom, A.D., 182, 189

Bloom, R., 45, 51

Blumenthal, M., 202, 220

Board, R.D., 129, 164

Boggan, W.O., 204, 215

Bolotow, I., 105, 112

Borg, J., 141, 152, 157

Bergen, L.A., 86, 89, 95, 105,

106, 107, 112, 118, 119,

123, 179, 192

Bos, R., 57, 62

Boulougouris, J., 18, 20, 36,

145, 147, 151, 152, 154,

175

Bourdon, R., 59, 62

Bourke, D.I., 131, 132, 133,

134, 168

Boutet, M., 70, 84

Bowman, K., 25, 30, 201, 202,

217

Boyd, E.H., 74, 79, 106, 111

Boyd, E.S., 74, 79, 106, 111

Bozzetti, L.P., 24, 31, 33,

143, 144, 165, 169

Bracs, P., 75, 80

Braden, W., 138, 157

Bradt,.C., 17, 34, 139, 171,

182, 192

Brady, R.O., 74, 80

Brand, S.N., 140, 171

Braude, M.C., 70, 71, 75, 78,

80, 81, 83, 84, 85, 88, 89,

90, 91, 92, 99, 101, 104,

117, 120, 121, 125, 127,

181, 188, 189, 190

Brecher, E.M., 128, 157

Breed, G., 151, 159

Briant, R.H., 13, 37, 59, 66

Bridger, W.H., 146, 158

Brill, N.Q., 29, 47, 50, 51,

136, 148, 149, 158, 171

Brin, S.S., 185, 193

Brine, D.R., 129, 171, 177

Britton, E.L., 138, 159

Bro, P. 146, 158

Brown, A., 22, 29, 148, 158

Brown, B., 142, 156, 158

Brown, D.J., 210, 223

Brown, J., 132, 156

Brown, J.W., 10, 29

Brown, L.E., 74, 79, 106, 111

Bruce, P.D., 104, 107, 111,

113, 118, 119, 122

Bruhn, P., 148, 158

Brunk, S.F., 104, 116, 142,

144, 171, 209, 221

Bryant, S.A., 182, 191

Buchsbaum, H., 74, 80, 204,

206, 216.

Buckley, J.P., 76, 82

120, 122

Bueno, O.F.A, 109, 111, 119,

Burns, M., 141, 170

Burstein, S., 59, 64, 78, 80,

213, 215

Burstein, S.H., 87, 99

Butler, J.R., 145, 172, 211,

222

Byck, R., 74, 80

Calandra, J.C., 181, 189, 190

Campbell, A.M.G., 18, 29

Campbell, R.L., 132, 163, 211,

217

Canter, A., 104, 116, 142, 144,

171, 209, 221

Cappell, H., 144, 158

Carbone, E., 74, 80

Carchman, R., 207, 225

Carchman, R.A., 29, 34, 77,

84, 85, 180, 188, 189, 192,

206, 218

- 227 -
Carder, B., 92, 95, 104, 112,

119, 122, 123, 126, 212,

215

Carlin, A.S., 50, 51, 141, 144,

149, 157, 158

Carlini, E., 202, 220

Carlini, E.A., 58, 65, 86,

87, 89, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96,

99, 100, 101, 102, 104, 109,

111, 113, 119, 120, 121,

122, 125, 130, 158, 166,

205, 215

Carnevale, A., 72, 81

Cassidy, J., 132, 156

Casswell, S., 158

Castillo, J.D., 158

Cavness, c., 25, 30, 81, 138,

152, 154, 162, 207, 217

Cely, W., 204, 219

Chait, L.D., 79, 88, 95

Chakravarty, I., 72, 80

Chance, M.R.A., 93, 94, 96,

120, 121, 121

Chapman, L.F., 13, 35, 94, 101,

118, 120, 126

Chase, R., 74, 79

Chausow, A.M., 136, 159

Chavez-Chase, M., 139, 173

Cheng, J.T., 73, 79

Chesher, G.B., 73, 75, 80, 83,

87, 88, 95, 96, 99, 105,

117, 118, 119, 121, 122

Chiang, C.Y., 180, 190

Chin, L., 88, 96, 204, 215,

216

Chiu, P., 74, 85

Christ, W., 87, 97

Christensen, H.D., 129, 171

Christie, R.L., 29, 47, 50,

51, 136, 148, 149, 158, 171

Clark, C., 144, 167

Clark, D.L., 93, 98

209, 220

Clark, S. 141, 142, 169, 170,

Clark, S.C., 131, 132, 159

Clark, V., 145, 176

Clayton, R.R., 9, 10, 35, 44,

49, 50, 53

Clemens, J., 135, 168

Clewe, C.L., 180, 181, 191

Clewe, G.L., 71, 83

Co, B.T., 11, 18, 32, 137, 159

Cocchia, M.A., 72, 85

Coggins, W.J., 20, 29, 147,

151, 153, 159

Cohen, A.B., 179, 191

Cohen, G.M., 13, 29, 59, 62,

8 0

Cohen, M.J., 140, 141, 152,

159

Cohen, R., 38, 51

Cohen, S., 18, 25, 26, 29, 30,

32, 135, 136, 152, 154, 159,

167, 196, 197, 215, 219

Colaiuta, V., 151, 159

Coleman, J.H., 138, 159

Collu, R., 71, 80

Coinitas, L., 20, 35, 45, 54,

147, 150, 151, 153, 173,

197, 222

Committee on Drugs, 128, 159

Congreve, G.R.S., 150, 154,

169

Connor, T., 181, 190

Consroe, P.F., 74, 80, 82, 87,

88, 93, 96, 98, 99, 204,

205, 206, 215, 216

Cooler, P. 202, 216

Cooper, C.W., 95

Coper, H., 87, 90, 97, 118,

123

Corcoran, M.E., 74, 85, 105,

112, 205, 216, 224

Corvalho, F.V., 92, 101

Coyle, I., 120, 123

Crabtree, R., 135, 168

Cranston, J.W., 151, 176

Crawford, R.D., 73, 82, 205,

218

Creasser, C., 210, 223

Crombie, L., 58, 62

Crombie, W.M.L., 58, 62

Culver, C.M., 148, 159

Cunha, J., 58, 65, 87, 102

Cunningham, I.C.M., 149, 159

Cunningham, W.H., 149, 159

Cushman, P., 134, 135, 139,

160, 184, 188, 189

Cutler, M.G., 93, 94, 96, 120,

121, 123

Cutting, M., 134, 160

Cutting, M.B., 70, 82, 179,

189, 191, 204, 218

- 228 -
Dagirmanjian, R., 76, 81, 86, Dodge, P., 57, 65, 66

98

Dalton, B., 139, 172, 184, 186,

Dodge, P.W., 57, 64, 65, 87,

88, 101

192 Dollery, C.T., 13, 37, 59, 66

Dalton, W.S., 23, 30, 87, 97, Domino, E.F., 104, 106, 107,

130, 141, 142, 160 116, 119, 126, 139, 141,

Dalzell, H., 57, 66 161, 168, 185, 190

Dalzell, H.C., 57, 65, 69, 88, Doorenbos, N.J., 200, 222

89, 101, 106, 117 Dornbush, R.L., 141, 152, 153,

D'Angelo, J., 149, 173 154. 161

Darley, C.F., 141, 145, 146, Dorr, M., 93, 97

160, 173, 177 Dorrance, D., 182, 188

Daul, C.B., 180, 188 Dott, A.B., 23, 30, 143, 161

Davidson, S.T., 50, 53 Drachler, D.H., 139, 161

Davies, B.H., 133, 160, 163 Dren, A., 57, 65. 66

Davis, J.P., 206, 216 Dren, A.T., 57, 64, 65, 87,

Davis, K.H., 129, 171 88, 101, 213, 216

Davis, K.R., 18, 33, 137, 167 Drew, W.G., 76, 81, 86, 88,

Davis, M., 179, 192 97, 98, 100, 103, 105, 107,

Davis, R., 142, 161, 209, 216 112, 116, 137, 161, 213,

Davis, T.R.A., 104, 112 216

Davis, W.M., 86, 89, 95, 105, Drewnowski, A., 106, 107, 112

106, 107, 112, 118, 119, Dubas, T.C., 208, 221

123 Dubinsky, B., 92, 93, 97, 103,

Dawson, W.W., 139, 160 110, 113, 120, 123

Deets, A.C., 108, 116 Dubowski, K.M., 132, 135, 173

Deikel, S.M., 104, 112, 119, Dunn, D., 209, 216

123 Dunn, M., 142, 161

De Jong, Y., 89, 93, 102 Dunnigan, D., 57, 66

DeLean, A., 131, 173 Dustman, R.E., 119, 120, 126

deMello, D.N., 152, 172 Dwivedi, C., 204, 216

Deneau, G.A., 121, 123 Dykstra, L., 104, 112

DeSoize, B., 139, 171, 174, Dykstra, L.A., 106, 112

184, 185, 186, 188, 192 Dyrenfurth, I., 18, 31, 135,

DeSouza, M.R., 141, 160 164

Detels, R., 145, 150, 176

Dettbarn, W.-D., 74, 81

Devenyi, P., 150, 154, 169

Earnhardt, J.T., 77, 79, 88,

95,122

Dewey, W.L., 31, 34, 57, 65, Edery, H., 75, 81, 220, 220

73, 76, 77, 79, 82, 83, 84,

88, 89, 100, 101, 119, 123,

Edson, P.H., 86, 100

Edwards, G., 128, 161

126, 152, 160, 180, 189, Egan, S.M., 75, 81

190, 192 Ehrlich, D., 23, 30, 142, 161

Dews, P.B., 104, 112 Ehrnebo, M., 131, 177

Dey, S.K.,71, 79

DiBenedetio, M., 138, 160

Eisenman, R., 149, 163

Dikstein, S., 202, 220

El Guebaly, N., 145, 161

DiMascio, A., 208, 221

Elinson, J., 30, 41, 48, 49,

51

Dingell, J.V., 72, 82 Ellingboe, J., 134, 135, 169

Dionyssion-Asterion, A., 59,

62

Ellingstad, V.S., 23, 30,

143, 161

Dittrich, A., 141, 161 Ellington, A.F., 180, 192

Dixit, V.P., 72, 80, 81 Ellinwood, E.H., 136, 161

- 229 -
Elliott, R.A., 132, 163, 211, 217

Ely, D.L., 93, 97

El-Yousef, M.K., 130, 162

Emboden, W.A.V., 196, 216

English, W.D., 149, 159

Ercan, Z.S., 78, 85

Erickson, D., 70, 79

Evans, M., 18, 29, '55, 162

Evans, M.A., 130, 162

Evans, W.E., 138, 159

Eveland, L.K., 50, 52

Evenson, R.C., 147, 156

Fairbairn, J.W., 57, 62

Farber, S.J., 140, 162

Faust, R., 49, 52, 54

Fazel, A., 14, 36, 89, 90, 102,

120, 127

Fedora, O., 140, 177

Feeney, D.M., 204, 206, 216,

217

Fehr, K.A., 14, 30, 107, 113,

120, 123

Feinberg, I., 25, 30, 81, 138,

152, 154, 162, 207, 217

Fejer, D., 48, 54

Fentiman, A.F., 13, 33, 60,

63

Fernandes, M., 87, 90, 97, 118,

123

Fernandes, N.S., 93, 101

Ferraro, D.P., 14, 30, 90, 91,

97, 98, 104, 106, 107, 108,

111, 113, 115, 118, 119,

120, 122, 123, 124, 181,

189

Fetterman, P.S., 57, 65

Fetterolf, D.J., 90, 91, 97,

120, 124

Filipovic, N., 131, 165

Fink, M., 20, 30, 137, 145,

151, 153, 154, 162, 175

Finkelfarb, E., 190, 111, 119,

120, 122

Finley, T.N., 179, 191

Finney, J., 48, 52

Fishburne, P.M., 4, 29, 38,

51

Fisher, G., 136, 162

Fisher, H., 17, 33, 183, 191

Fisher, S., 104, 105, 116, 117,

144, 172

Fitzgerald, M., 15, 36, 133,

177

FitzGerald, M.X., 202, 224

Fitzsimmons, R.C., 70, 82, 181,

189

Fleischman, R.W., 70, 71, 81,

85, 181, 188

Fletcher, G.V., 91, 97, 105,

112

Flom, M.C., 140, 142, 156, 158,

162, 201, 217

Floyd, T., 81, 138, 162, 207,

217

Fogg, C.P., 11, 35, 46, 49,

54, 149, 174

Foltz; R.L, 13, 33, 60, 63

Fonseka, K., 58, 62

Forbes, W.B., 99

Ford, R.D., 88, 97, 106, 107,

109, 113

Forman, E.J., 131, 176

Forney, R.B., 23, 30, 78, 85,

87, 97, 130, 141, 142, 160,

162, 210, 221

Fournier, E., 180, 188

Fowler, M.S., 58, 64

Fraley, S., 105, 117

Frank, I.M., 15, 17, 25, 31,

33, 36, 133, 140, 164, 175,

183, 191, 198, 201, 202,

203, 218, 223

Frankenheim, J.M., 105, 107,

113, 118, 120, 124

Franklin, R.M., 22, 35, 148,

175

Freedman, A.M., 145, 175

Freedman, D.X., 152, 172, 204,

215

Freemon, F.R., 130, 762, 207,

2'7

Frei, E., 35, 209, 212, 222

Fried, P.A., 88-89, 97, 118,

119, 122, 124

Friedman, E., 75, 77, 81, 84,

87, 98, 121, 125, 212, 218

Friedman, J.G., 135, 162

Friedman, M.A., 31, 34, 77,

84, 180, 189, 192

Fry, D., 131, 168

 Fu, T.K., 17, 33, 183, 191

Gado, M., 11, 18, 32, 137, 159

Gaensler, E., 15, 25, 36, 133,

177, 198, 202, 224

Galbreath, C., 71, 79, 181,

188

- 230 -
Gallup, G.G., 86, 100

Gallup Opinion Index, 42, 51

Gammon, C.B., 151, 176

Gaoni, Y., 200, 220

Gardner, L.I., 182, 192

Garriott, J.C., 143, 162

Gartner, J., 210, 223

Gasser, J.C., 154, 157

Gastaut, H., 137, 138, 176,

208, 224

Gaul, C.C., 179, 188

Geber, W.F., 180, 189

Gerber, M.L., 144, 165

Gershon, S., 75, 77, 81, 87,

98, 121, 125, 141, 152, 157,

212, 218

Ghia, J., 132, 163, 211, 217

Ghosh, J.J., 34, 60, 64, 71,

72, 75, 78, 79, 80, 84, 86,

101

Gianutsos, G., 89-90, 98

Gianutsos. R., 141, 162

Gibbins, R.J., 150, 152, 154,

163, 169

Gill, E.W., 78, 83

Gillespie, H., 87, 98

Gillespie, H.K., 129, 130, 164

Gilmour, D.G., 182, 189

Giusti, G.W., 72, 81

Glenn, W.K., 86, 102

Glick, D.C., 91, 98

Gluck, J.P. 91, 98, 106, 108,

113, 120, 124

Goldbaum, D., 76, 85

Goldberg, M.E., 92, 93, 97,

103, 110, 113, 117, 120,

123

Goldman, H., 76, 81, 86, 98

Goldman, R., 70, 78, 79, 84,

179, 193

Goldstein, R., 149, 163

Gonzalez, S.C., 92, 95, 104,

113

Goode, E., 151, 163

Goodenough, S., 134, 160

Goodwin, D.W., 11, 18, 32, 136,

137, 159, 172, 209, 218

Goodwin, F.K., 145, 156, 211,

219

Goodwin, P.W., 114

Gordon, G.G., 135, 163

Gordon, R., 78, 81, 105, 114

Gordon, R.J., 78, 81, 105, 114

Gori, G.B., 70, 84

Gottschalk, L.A., 132, 172

Gottesfeld, Z., 75, 81

Gough, A.L., 87, 98

Gould, I.A., 202, 224

Gould, L.C., 150, 163

Goyos, A.C., 95

Graham, J., 139, 172, 184, 186,

192

Graham, J.D.P., 75, 81, 133,

160, 163

Granchelli, F.E., 57, 64, 87, 101

Gray, J.A., 106, 107, 112

Gray, R., 72, 85

Graziani, Y., 136, 173

Green, D.E., 129, 164, 166

Green, J., 205, 225

Green, K., 25, 30, 201, 202,

213, 217

Green, M.L., 145, 172, 211,

222

Greenberg, I., 25, 33, 91, 98,

105, 106, 109, 114, 116,

117, 150, 152, 154, 156,

163,169

Greene: C., 131, 132, 159

Greene, M.L., 130, 163

Gregg, J.M., 132, 140, 146,

147, 163, 172, 202, 210,

211, 216, 217, 222

Grieco, M., 139, 160, 184, 189

Grilly, D.M., 14, 30, 119, 120,

124, 181, 189

Grinspoon, L., 197, 199, 218

Grisham, M.G., 119, 124

Grossman, J.C., 149, 163

Grunfeld, Y., 200, 220

Grupp, S.E., 33, 48, 49, 53

Gulas, I., 47, 51

Gunderson, E.K.E., 148, 163

Gunn, C.G., 132, 135, 173

Gupta, L., 104, 117, 127

Gupta, S., 139, 160, 184, 189

Gustafsson, B., 128, 156, 200,

215

Haagen, C.H., 47, 50, 52

Hadley, K.W., 57, 63, 65

Hager, M., 136, 163

Hagerstrom-Portnoy, G., 142,

156, 158

Hahn, P.M., 25, 29, 152, 154,

159

Halaris, A., 152, 172

Haley, S.L., 181, 189, 190

- 231 -
Halikas, J.A., 21, 22, 31, 145,

146, 147, 163

88, 89, 101

Hall, M., 99

Hallas, R., 57, 66

Halpern, L.M., 144, 158

Handrick, G.R., 57, 64, 65,

Hanin, I., 75, 81

Hanus, L., 57, 62

Harbison, R.D., 71, 72, 83,

180, 181, 191, 204, 216

Hardman, H.F., 132, 164

Hardy, N., 180, 188

Harmon, J.W., 135, 164

Harper, C.E., 15, 36, 134, 154,

175, 203, 204, 223

Harris, L.S., 29, 31, 34, 57,

64, 73, 76, 77, 79, 82, 83,

84, 87, 88, 89, 95, 100,

101, 105, 106, 107, 111,

112, 113, 115, 118, 119,

122, 123, 124, 125, 126,

152, 160, 180, 188, 189,

190, 192, 206, 207, 210,

218

Harris, R.T., 119, 121, 124

Harvey, D.J., 57, 58, 62

Hayden, D., 89, 90, 91, 101

Hayden, D.W., 70, 71, 81, 181,

188

Hays, J.R., 45, 51

Heath, R.G., 20, 31, 137, 164,

180, 188

Heer-Carcano, L., 103, 110,

117, 118, 127

Hefner, M.A., 103, 110, 113,

117

Hembree, W.C., 18, 31, 135,

164

Hendriks, H., 57, 62

Heneen, W., 17, 34, 139, 171,

182, 192

Henley, J.R., 10, 31

Henrich, R.T., 17, 34, 183,

191

Henriksson, B.G., 98, 102, 107,

108, 109, 110, 114, 115,

120, 126

Henry, J.P., 93, 97

Henry, J.T., 130, 177

Hepler, R.S., 25, 131, 140,

164, 201, 202, 218

Herha, J., 16, 31, 182, 189

Herndon, G.B., 106, 113

Hicks, R.C., 150, 154, 169

Hill, R., 87, 90, 97, 118, 123

Hill, S.Y., 11, 18, 32, 114,

136, 137, 159, 172, 209,

218

Hill, T.W., 135, 164

Hine, B., 77, 81, 121, 125,

212, 218

Hirano, H., 57, 65

Hirschhorn, I.D., 109, 114,

121, 125

Ho, B.T., 78, 82, 121, 125

Hoekman, T.B., 74, 81

Holley, J.H., 57, 63

Hollister, L., 17, 34, 139,

171, 182, 192

Hollister, L.E., 87, 91, 98,

128, 129, 130, 135, 136,

144, 164, 165, 166

Holmstedt, B., 200, 215

Hooyman, J.E., 59, 65

Horok, M., 199, 220

Hosko, M.J., 132, 164

Houser, V.P., 104, 114, 118,

119, 125

Howes, J.F., 57, 64, 65, 88,

89, 101, 106, 117

Hsu, J., 139, 171, 184, 185,

186, 188, 192

Hubacek, J., 199, 200, 218

Huber, G.L., 70, 82, 179, 189,

191, 204, 218

Huertas, V.E., 140, 162

Hulbert, S., 23, 34, 141, 142,

143, 170

Hunt, D.G., 48, 52

Huthsing, K.B., 90, 91, 97

Huy, N.D., 70, 84, 91, 98

Hwang, K., 57, 66

Idanpaan-Heikkila, J.E., 59,

64, 78, 84

Inui, N., 183, 190

Isrealstam, S., 23, 31, 142,

165

Ivins, N.J., 70, 79

Izquierdo, I., 103, 114

Jackson, D.M., 73, 75, 78, 80,

83, 87, 88, 95, 96, 99, 105,

117, 118, 119, 121, 122

Jaffe, P.G., 104, 114

- 232 -
Jakubovic, A., 70, 82, 181,

189

Jampolsky, A., 142, 156

Jandhyala, B.S., 76, 82

Janicki, B.W., 185, 193

Janiger, O., 182, 188

Janowsky, D.S., 24, 31, 33,

143, 144, 165, 169

Jarbe, T., 108, 110, 114

Jarbe, T.U.C., 98, 102, 107,

108, 109, 110, 114, 115,

120, 126

Jarosz, C.J., 93, 97

Jarvik, L.F., 17, 33, 183, 191

Jessor, R., 10, 31, 46, 48,

49, 50, 52

Jessor, S.L., 31 48 50, 52

Joffe, P., 21, 34, 146

Johansson, J.O., 109, 110, 114,

115

Johnson, B., 53

Johnson, D.D., 73, 82, 205,

218

Johnson, K.M., 76, 82

Johnson, R.J., 189

Johnston, L., 50, 52

Johnston, L.D., 6, 31, 32, 41,

47, 48, 50, 52

Johnstone, R.E., 130, 131, 132,

133, 134, 165, 168, 210,

218

Joneja, M.G., 71, 82, 181, 190

Jones, B.C., 74, 82, 87, 88,

93, 96, 98, 99, 205, 215,

216

Jones, F., 131, 177

Jones, G., 87, 99

Jones, R., 81

Jones, R.T., 25, 29, 30, 32,

131, 132, 136, 137, 138,

139, 140, 142, 151, 152,

154, 156, 157, 158, 162,

165, 168, 171, 185, 190,

201, 207, 217

Josephson, E., 41, 52

Just, W.W., 131, 165

Kabelik, J.O., 199, 200, 207,

219

Kahn, M., 149, 165

Kalant, H., 14, 30, 107, 113,

120, 123, 128, 165

Kalant, O.J., 128, 165

Kamel, A.A., 134, 157

Kanakis, C., 133, 166

Kandel, D., 32, 47, 48, 49,

50, 52, 53, 54

Kanter, S., 17, 34, 139, 171,

182, 192

Kanter, S.L., 129, 164, 166

Karasek, D.E., 59, 63

Karasek, F.W., 59, 63

Karler, P., 205, 224

Karler, R., 74, 76, 82, 84,

85, 204, 219

Karniol, I., 105, 117

Karniol, I.G., 86, 87, 89, 92,

99, 102, 104, 113, 130, 141,

158, 160, 166

Karr, G., 141, 142, 169, 170,

209, 220

Karr, G.W., 131, 132, 159

Kasinski, N., 130, 166

Kay, E.J., 105, 115

Kaymakcalan, S., 78, 85, 104,

115, 118, 121, 123, 125,

128, 166, 208, 219

Keeler, M.H., 145, 146, 166,

206, 219

Keller, J.K., 57, 64, 87, 101

Kelley, J.A., 60, 63

Kensler, C.J., 104, 112

Kephalas, T.A., 58, 65, 136,

171

Keplinger, M.L., 181, 189, 190

Kessler, R., 32, 47, 48, 49,

50, 53

Khurana, R., 139, 160, 184,

188

Khan, M.A., 121, 125

Kielholz, P., 152, 166

Kilbey, M.M., 93, 99

Kim, K., 25, 30, 201, 213, 217

Kim, S.H., 59, 63

Kinchi, M., 16, 25, 35

King, F.W., 47, 51, 148, 159

King, L.J., 131, 176

King, M.R., 149, 166

King, S., 182, 192

Kirk, T., 145, 172, 211, 222

Klausner, H.A., 72, 74, 81,

82

Kleber, H.D., 150, 163

Klein, V., 131, 132, 133, 134,

168

- 233 -
Klonoff, H., 20, 23, 32, 137,

142, 143, 144, 166, 167

Knobel, E., 130, 166

Knobloch, L.C., 90, 91, 102,

105, 117, 207, 208, 223

Knudten, R.D., 151, 167

Koff, W., 135, 136, 167

Kokkevi, A., 152, 153, 154,

161

Kolansky, H., 147, 167

Kolb, D., 148, 163

Kolodner, R.M., 134, 135, 167

Kolodny, R.C., 18, 32, 134,

135, 136, 167, 197, 219

Kopell, B.S., 138, 141, 173

Korte, F., 57, 63

Kosersky, D.S., 106, 107, 115,

118, 125

Kotin, J., 211, 219

Kraatz, U., 57, 63

Kralik, P., 78, 82

Kralik, P.M., 121, 125

Krantz, J.C., 87, 99

Krejci, Z., 199, 200, 207, 219,

220

Krimmer, E.C., 109, 111

Kroll, P., 145, 167

Kubena, R.K., 108, 109, 111,

115

Kuchar, E., 144, 158

Kuechenmeister, C.A., 141, 168

Kuehnle, J., 91, 98, 106, 116,

137, 152, 163, 167

Kuehnle, J.C., 18, 25, 33, 134,

135, 150, 152, 154, 156,

169

Kuhn, D., 109, 114

Kulick, F., 149, 165

Kulp, R.A., 130, 131, 132, 133,

134, 165, 168, 210, 218

Kumar, S., 16, 32, 182, 190

Kunwar, K.B., 16, 32, 182, 190

Kunysz, T.J., 16, 36, 182, 193

Kupfer, D., 87, 99

Kurth, H.J., 57, 63

Kyncl, J., 57, 65, 66, 87-88

101

Ladewig, E., 152, 166

Ladman, A.J., 179, 191

Laguarda, R., 70, 82, 134, 160,

179, 189, 191, 204, 218

Laird, H., 205, 216

Laird, H.E., 87, 99

Lambert, S., 23, 31, 142, 165

Lander, N., 58, 63, 202, 205,

215, 220

Latman, N., 143, 162

Lau, R.J., 139, 168, 185, 190

Laurenceau, J.L., 131, 173

Laverty, W., 132, 172

Lawrence, D.K., 78, 83

Leander, K., 60, 64, 128, 156,

200, 215

LeBlanc, A.E., 14, 30, 107,

113, 120, 123

Lee, M.L., 57, 64, 70, 83, 84

Lee, Y.E., 15, 36, 134, 154,

175, 203, 204, 223

Lee, Y.-H., 57. 66

Lefkowitz, S.S., 180, 190

Legator, M.S., 181, 190

Lehrer, G.M., 121, 125

Leighty, E.G., 13, 33, 60, 63

Leite, J.R., 121, 125

Leiter, L., 144, 156

Lele, K.P., 182. 189

Lemberger, L., 23, 30, 57, 60,

63, 87, 97, 128, 129, 130,

132, 135, 139, 141, 142,

160, 162, 168, 172, 184,

186, 192, 213, 220

Lemmi, H., 138, 159

Lerner, C.B., 185, 190

Lerner, C.G., 136, 157

Lessin, P., 135, 136, 167, 185,

186, 193, 197, 219

Lessin, P.J., 16, 18, 25, 29,

32, 35, 139, 152, 154, 159,

174

Leuchtenberger, C., 17, 33,

179, 183, 190

Leuchtenberger, R., 17, 33,

179, 183, 190

Levander, S., 128, 156

Levin, E., 87, 99

Levin, K.J., 132, 163, 211,

217

Levin, S., 213, 215

Levy, J.A., 180, 190, 192

Levy, R., 78, 83

Levy, S., 13, 33, 61, 63

Lewis, C.R., 140, 168

Lewis, E.G., 119, 120, 126

Lewis, M.F., 108, 115

Lewis, M.J., 75, 81

Liakos, A., 18, 20, 36, 145,

147, 151, 152, 154, 175

- 234 -
Lieber, C.S., 135, 163

Liebmann, J.A., 57, 62

Lief, P.L., 130, 131, 132, 134,

165, 210, 218

Lindgren, J.E., 128, 156, 200,

215

Lindgren, J.W., 60, 64

Lindsey, C.J., 92, 96, 100

Ling, G., 141, 176

Linton, P.H., 141, 168

Litwack, A.R., 141, 162

Livne, A., 78, 83, 84, 136,

173, 213, 222

Lodge, J., 203, 224

Lodge, J.W., 203, 221

Lohiya, N.K., 72, 80, 81

Lomax, P., 73, 85, 205, 224

Loskota, W.J., 73, 85, 205,

224

Lott, G.C., 86, 95

Low, C.-E., 57, 64

Low, M.D., 20, 32, 137, 167

Lubetkin, A.I., 151, 176

Lucas, W.L., 33, 48, 49, 52

Luthra, Y.K., 75, 83, 92, 99,

120,125

Lutz, M.P., 104, 106, 107, 116,

119, 126

Maage, N., 148, 158

MacAvoy, M.G., 130, 168, 171

MacCannell, K., 141, 142, 169,

170, 209, 220

MacCannell, K.L., 131, 132,

159

MacConaill, M., 141, 176

Mackintosh, J.H., 93, 94, 96,

120, 121, 123

Magnan-Lapointe, F., 70, 84

Maier, R., 71, 83

Maitre, L., 71, 83

Maker, H.S., 121, 125

Maleson, F., 150, 170

Malingre, T.M., 57, 62

Malit, L.A., 131, 132, 133,

134, 168

Mallory, K.P., 76, 82

Malor, R., 73, 78, 83, 87, 88,

95, 99, 118, 119, 122

Malor, R.M., 87, 96

Malthe, A., 202, 224

Man, D.P., 204, 216

Manaster, G.J., 149, 166

Manheimer, D.I., 50, 53

Mann, P.E.G., 179, 191

Manning, F.J., 100, 104, 106,

107, 113, 115, 118, 119,

120, 125, 126

Mantilla-Plata, B., 71, 72,

83, 180, 181, 191

March, J., 25, 30, 138, 152,

154, 162

Margolin, F., 209, 221

Margulies, R., 32, 47, 48, 49,

50, 53

Marks, D.F., 111, 130, 140,

157, 168, 171

Marks,V., 131, 168, 176

Marquis, Y., 131, 173

Marriott, R.G., 124

Marshman, J., 150, 154, 169

Marshman, J.A., 152, 163

Martin, A., 103, 110, 117, 118,

127

Martin, B., 58, 60, 63, 64

Martin, B.R., 73, 83, 88, 89,

100, 119, 126, 152, 160

Martin, P. 179, 191

Martin, P.A., 182, 191

Martz, R., 23, 30, 87, 97, 130,

141, 142, 160, 162

Martz, R.C., 210, 223

Maskarinec, M.P., 57, 64

Maser, J.D., 86, 100

Mason, J., 140, 177

Masoud, A., 200, 222

Masters, W.H., 18, 32, 134,

135, 136, 167, 197, 219

Masur, J., 92, 96

Matsuyama, S.S., 17, 33, 183,

191

Matte, A.C., 92, 100

Matthews, H.R., 78, 82, 121,

125

Mattison, J.B., 198, 220

Mattox, K.L., 134, 168

Maximillian, C., 182, 189

May, E.L., 77, 85, 88, 89, 100,

209, 225

McAdams, W.S., 149, 173

McCabe, G.P., 141, 173

McCallum, N.K., 13, 33, 59,

61, 63, 64, 128, 129, 131,

168, 169

McCarthy, C.R., 70, 82, 179,

189, 191, 204, 218

- 235 -
McCaughran, J., 105, 112

McCaughran, J.A., 205, 216

McClean, D.K., 70, 84

McCoy, D.J., 78, 85

McDougall, J., 152, 163

McDonough, J.H., 100

McFarling, L.H., 23, 30, 143,

161

McGeer, P.L., 70, 82, 181, 189

McGlothlin, W., 23, 34, 141,

142, 143, 170

McGlothlin, W.H., 45, 53, 128,

143, 168, 170

McGuire, J.S., 151, 169

McKenna, G.J., 145, 146, 170

McLatchie, C., 134, 154, 175

McLendon, D., 119, 121, 124

McMahon, R., 129, 132, 168

M'Meens, R.R., 198, 220

McMillan, D.E., 104, 105, 106,

107, 111, 112, 113, 115,

118, 119, 122, 123, 124,

125, 126

McNair, D.M., 104, 116, 144,

172

McNamara, M.C., 204, 217

McNeil, J.H., 119, 126

McNeill, J.R., 73, 82, 205,

218

Meacham, M.P., 24, 31, 33, 143,

144, 165, 169

Meade, A.D., 151, 167

Mechoulam, R., 58, 59, 63, 64,

86, 100, 128, 129, 169, 200,

202, 205, 213, 215, 220

Megargee, E.I., 151, 169

Mellinger, G.D., 50, 53

Mello, N., 25, 33, 150, 152,

154, 169

Mello, N.K., 106, 116

Mellors, A., 179, 188

Mendelson, J.H., 18, 25, 33,

91, 98, 106, 116, 134, 135,

137, 150, 151, 152, 154,

156, 163, 167, 169

Merenda, P.F., 145, 173

Mertens, H.W., 108, 115

Meyer, R.E., 21, 22, 25, 33,

134, 145, 146, 147, 151,

152, 154, 169

Meyers, A.L., 150, 170

Michael, C.M., 136, 171

Michelson, A.E., 50, 53, 151,

170

Mickey, M.R., 16, 25, 35, 185,

186, 193

Miczek, K.A., 92, 93, 94, 100

Mikhael, M., 11, 18, 32, 137,

159

Mikus, P., 15, 36, 133, 177

Miles, C.G., 150, 152, 154,

163, 169

Miller, L.L., 86, 88, 97, 100,

103, 105, 107, 112, 116,

128, 137, 161, 169, 213,

216

Miller, R.C., 17, 34, 139, 171,

182, 192

Miller, R.E., 108, 116

Milstein, M., 17, 34

Milloy, S., 91, 98

Milstein, S.L., 131, 132, 141,

142, 169, 170, 183, 191,

209, 220

Mintz, J., 22, 35, 148, 175

Miras, C.J., 59, 62, 136, 171

Mirin, S.M., 145, 146, 170

Mitra, G., 34, 60, 64, 78,

84

Miyake, T., 154, 157

Monti, J.M., 92, 96, 100

Moore, E., 145, 146, 166

Moore, F., 129, 166

Moore, J.W., 99

Moore, R., 146, 147, 163, 210,

217

Moore, W.T., 147, 167

Moreau de Tours, J.J., 198,

221

Morishima, A., 16, 17, 34, 139,

171, 174, 182, 183, 184,

185, 186, 188, 191, 192

Morrissey, W., 15, 36, 133,

177

Morrow, C.W., 108, 113

Mosher, R., 141, 176

Moskowitz, H., 23, 34, 141,

142, 143, 170, 174

Moss, I.R., 77, 84

Mullins, C.J., 50, 53, 151,

170

Muchov, D., 121, 126

Munson, A.E., 29, 31, 34, 77,

84, 85, 180, 188, 189, 190,

192, 206, 207, 218, 225

Munson, J., 207, 225

Munson, J.A., 77, 85

- 236 -
Murphy, S., 76, 81, 86, 98

Musty, R.E., 92, 96, 100, 103,

116, 130, 166

Nace, E.P., 150, 170

Naditch, M.P., 21, 34, 47, 53,

145, 146, 170

Nagel, M.D., 180, 192

Nahas, G.G., 16, 17, 18, 31,

34, 59, 64, 78, 84, 135,

139, 164, 170, 171, 174,

180, 182, 183, 184, 185,

186, 188, 191, 192

Nail, R.L., 148, 163

Naliboff, B.D., 140, 141, 159

Nasselo, A.G., 103, 114

Navratil, J., 199, 221

Needle, M., 139, 173

Neiburg, H.A., 209, 221

Neu, C., 208. 221

Neu, R.L., 182, 192

New, P.F.J., 18, 33, 137, 167

Newman, L.M., 104, 106, 107,

116, 119, 126

Nichols, W.W., 17, 34, 139,

171, 182, 192

Nieman, G.W., 88, 97

Nilsson, I., 200, 215

Nishioka, I., 57, 65

Nordqvist, M., 13, 37, 58, 59,

60, 63, 64, 66

Novotny, M., 57, 64, 70, 83,

84

Noyes, R., 104, 116, 142, 144,

171, 209, 221

Nunes, J.F., 92, 101

Obe, G., 16, 31, 182, 189

O'Carroll, M., 144, 174

Oda, M., 57, 65

O'Donnell, J.A., 9, 10, 35,

44, 49, 50, 53

Ohlsson, A., 128, 156

Olivetti, C., 99

Olley, J.E., 87, 98

Olsen, J., 92, 95, 119, 122,

126, 203, 221, 224

O'Malley, P.M., 47, 50, 52,

53

Opelz, G., 16, 25, 35, 185,

186, 193

Opinion Research Corporation,

38, 53

Orcutt, J.D., 144, 171

Orlina, A.R., 140, 174

Orndoff, R.K., 174

Osawa, T., 74, 85

O'Shaughnessy, W.B., 198, 221

Overall, J.E., 144, 165

Pace, H.B., 89, 95, 179, 192

Pack, A.T.. 149. 171

Palermo-Neto J., 92, 101

Panagiotopoulos, C.P., 20, 30,

137, 151, 151, 154, 162

Pandina, R.J., 103, 116

Papadakis, D.P., 136, 171

Parker, C.S., 199, 221

Parker, J.M., 208, 221

Pars, H., 213, 221

Pars, H.G., 57, 64, 65, 87,

101, 106, 117

Pass, H.G., 87-88, 101

Patel, A.R., 70, 84

Paton, W.D.M., 58, 59, 62, 64,

78, 84, 210, 221

Payer, L., 142, 171

Payne, R.J., 140, 171

Pearl, J.H., 141, 161

Peck, L., 211, 222

Peek, L., 145, 172

Peeke, S.C., 140, 171

Peraita-Adrados, M.R., 137,

138, 176, 208, 224

Pereira, W., 70, 82, 179, 189,

191, 204, 218

Perez-Reyes, M., 129, 152,

171, 177, 206, 221

Permutt, M.A., 136, 172

Perry, H., 204, 223

Persaud, T.V.N., 180, 192

Pertwee, R.G., 87, 99

Petersen, B.H., 139, 172, 184,

186, 192

Petersen, P.C., 213, 222

Petersen D.M., 48, 54

218

Petrus, R., 140, 164, 201, 202,

Pfeferman, A., 130, 166

Picchioni, A.L., 87, 99, 204,

216

Pickens, R., 121, 126

Pihl, R.O., 144, 156

Pillard, R.C., 104, 116, 128,

144, 172

- 237 -

239-715 0 - 77 - 16
Pitt, C.G., 58, 64

Plank, J.B., 181, 189, 190

Pliner, P., 144, 158

Plotnikoff, N., 57, 65, 66

Plotnikoff, N.P., 57, 64, 65,

87-88, 101, 206, 213, 221,

222

Poddar, M.K., 34, 60, 64, 75,

78, 79, 84, 86, 101

Podos, S.M., 201, 217

Post, R.D., 50, 51, 144, 149,

158

Post, R.M., 211, 219

Pouget, J.M., 133, 166

Powell, B., 114

Powell, B.J., 209, 218

Powers, H.O., 182, 192

Prakash, R., 14, 35, 132, 133,

172

Prendergast, T.J., 48, 53

Primavera, L.H., 174

Procek, J., 199, 222

Proctor, R.C., 199, 224

Pryor, G.T., 88, 89, 101, 104,

117, 130, 172

Purnell, W.D., 140, 172, 201,

222

Quimby, M.W., 200, 222

Rachelefsky, G.S., 16, 25,

35, 185, 186, 193

Radcliffe, S., 133, 160

Radstaak, D., 140, 177

Rafaelsen, L., 128, 157

Rafaelsen, O.J., 128, 157

Raft, D., 146, 147, 163, 210,

217

Ramsey, H.H., 206, 216

Rappeport, M., 38, 51

Rasmussen, K.E., 58, 64

Rawitch, A.B., 14, 36, 89, 90,

102, 120, 127, 151, 176

Raymond, A., 57, 64

Raz, A., 70, 78, 79, 84, 179,

193, 213, 215

Razdan, R., 213, 221

Razdan, R.K., 57, 64, 65, 66,

87, 88, 89, 101, 106, 117

Reaven, G.M., 135, 165

Reccius, N., 17, 33, 183, 191

Regan, J.D., 17, 29, 185, 188

Regelson, W., 145, 172, 211,

222

Reifler, C.F., 206, 219

Reinking, J., 205, 216

Reiss, S., 203, 224

Renault, P.F., 130, 152, 158,

172

Rennick, P., 141, 161

Reynolds, J.R., 198, 222

Rich, E., 141, 177

Richek, H.G., 149, 173

Rickles, W.H., 140, 141, 152,

159

Ritchie, J.M., 74, 80

Ritter, U., 183, 190

Robbins, E.S., 182, 189

Robichaud, R.C., 92, 93, 97,

103, 110, 113, 117, 120,

123

Robins, A., 15, 25, 36, 198,

202, 224

Robins; L.N., 49, 53

Rockwell, W.J., 136, 161

Rodda, B.E., 23, 30, 87, 97,

130, 141, 142, 160, 162

Room, R.G.W., 9, 10, 35, 44,

49, 50, 53

Rosell, S., 78, 84

Rosen, K.M., 133, 166

Rosenberg, C.M., 212, 222

Rosenberg, E., 180, 188

Rosenberg, F.J., 57, 64, 87,

101

Rosenblatt, J.E., 130, 162

Rosenbloom, M.F., 141, 173

Rosencrans, J.A., 109, 114,

121, 125

Rosenfeld, J.M., 58, 65

Rosenkrantz, H., 70, 71, 75,

81, 83, 84, 85, 89, 90, 91,

92, 99, 101, 121, 125, 127,

180, 181, 188, 193

Rosenthal, D., 134, 154, 175

Rossi, A.M., 25, 33, 134, 151,

152, 154, 169

Roth, W.T., 138, 141, 160, 173

Rothberg, J.M., 150, 170

Rowan, M.G., 57, 62

Rowe, H., 57, 63, 129, 135,

168, 213, 220

Roy, P., 131, 173

Roy, P.E., 70, 84, 91, 98

Rubin, A., 128, 129, 168

Rubin, E., 135, 163

- 238 -
Rubin, V., 20, 35, 45, 54, 147,

150, 151, 153, 173,

197, 222

Rubottom, G.M., 158

Rumbaugh, C.L., 73, 79

Sadava, S.W., 49, 54

Saha, S., 75, 79

Sallan, S.E., 35, 209, 212,

222

Salvendy, G., 141, 173

Salzman, C., 151, 173

Sampaio, M.R.P., 93, 101

Sandberg, F., 200, 215

Sanders, H.D., 203, 215

Santavy, F., 199, 200, 219,

220

Santos, M., 93, 101

Saper, C.B., 136, 159

Sassenrath, E.N., 13, 35, 94,

101, 118, 120, 126

Sathe, S., 58, 64

Sato, M., 205, 225

Saunders, D.R., 130, 163

Savaki, H.E., 58, 65, 87, 102

Savary, P., 131, 173

Schabarek, A., 87, 90, 97, 118,

123

Schaefer, C.F., 132, 135,

173

Schaeppi, U., 121, 127

Schmitt, R.L., 33, 48, 49, 53

Schnoll, S.H., 173

Schoenfeld, R.I., 104, 117

Schorr, M., 24, 31, 33, 143,

144, 165, 169

Schou, J., 146, 158

Schramm, L.C., 180, 189

Schrayer, D., 38, 51

Schulz, J., 145, 172, 211, 222

Schurr, A., 78, 84, 136, 173,

213, 222

Schuster, C.R., 130, 152, 158,

172

Schwartz, I.W., 180, 192

Schwartzfarb, L., 139, 173

Schwin, R., 114, 136, 172, 209,

218

Seaton, A., 133, 160, 163

Segal, B., 47, 54, 145, 173

Segelman, A.B., 58, 59, 65,

139, 174

Segelman, F.H., 58, 59, 65

Segelman, F.P., 139, 174

Seiden, R.H., 144, 174

Seligman, B.R., 209, 221

Sengupta, D., 72, 80

Seyfeddininpur, N., 138, 174

Shader, R.I., 151, 173

Shani, A., 200, 220

Shapiro, B.J., 15, 36, 133,

134, 154, 174, 175, 198,

203, 204, 221, 223, 224

Shapiro, C.M., 140, 174

Sharma, B.P., 174

Sharma, S., 141, 174

Shattuck, D., 72, 85

Shea, R., 141, 170

Sheehan, J.C., 106, 117

Sheffer, N., 136, 173

Shehorn, J., 141, 157

Sheth, S.R., 72, 80

Shirakawa, I., 130, 166

Shoer, L., 57, 65

Shoyama, Y., 57, 65

Shukla, S.R.P., 22, 36, 147,

151, 176

Sikic, B., 152, 172

Silverstein, M.D., 185, 193

Silverstein, M.J., 16. 25, 35,

139, 174, 185, 186, 193

Simek, J., 199, 223

Sirek, J., 199, 223

Simmons, G., 134, 160

Simmons, G.A., 70, 82, 179,

189, 191, 204, 218

Simon, M.G., 174

Simon, W.E., 174

Singer, G., 120, 123

Singh, M., 141, 175

Single, E., 49, 54

Sjoden, P.O., 102, 120, 126

Skafidas, T., 150, 177

Slade, L.T., 78, 80

Slatin, G.T., 9, 10, 35, 44,

49, 50, 53

Slavin, R.G., 140, 168

Small, E.W., 146, 147, 163,

210, 217

Smart, R.G., 23, 35, 48, 54,

142, 143, 174

Smiley, K.A., 76, 84

Smith, G.E., 46, 54

Smith, G.M., 11, 35, 46, 49,

54, 149, 174

Smith, H.J., 93, 98

- 239 -
Smith, R.N., 58, 65, 66

Smith, T.C., 130, 131, 132,

133, 134, 165, 168, 210,

218, 223

Snyder, E.W., 119, 120, 126

Snyder, S.H., 213, 215

Sofia, R.D., 58, 65, 70, 71,

78, 79, 81, 90, 91, 102,

105, 114, 117, 120, 127,

181, 188, 204, 207, 208,

223

Soldan, J., 199, 223

Solliday, N.H., 202, 224

Soloman, T., 204, 223

Solomon, J., 72, 85

Somani, P., 57, 65, 87, 88,

101

Somehara, T., 57, 65

Somers, R.H., 50, 53

Soueif, M.I., 149, 150, 153,

174, 175

Southren, A.L., 135, 163

Sparkes, R.S., 17, 33, 183,

191

Spiker, M., 206, 217

Srinivisan, P.R., 185, 192

Srivastava, S.C., 58, 64

Stadnicki, W.S., 121, 127

Stanton, M.D., 22, 35, 148,

175

Steadward, R.D., 141, 175

Steckler, A., 136, 162

Steele, R.A., 204, 215

Steen, J.A., 108, 115

Stefanis, C., 18, 20, 30, 36,

137, 145, 147, 151, 152,

153, 154, 162, 175

Steinberg, H., 93, 97

Stenchever, M.A., 16, 36, 182,

193

Sterling-Smith, R.S., 23, 24,

37, 142, 175

Stickgold, A., 22, 29, 148,

158

Stiehm, E.R., 16, 25, 35, 185,

186, 193

Stillman, R.C., 26, 30, 138,

157, 196, 215

Stimmel, B., 135, 175

Stoeckel, M., 181, 190

Stoelting, R.K., 210, 223

Stoller, K., 141, 175

Stone, C.J., 78, 85

Stone, G.C., 140, 171

Stormer, G.A., 105, 117

Struckman, D.L., 23, 30, 143,

161

Suchman, E., 48, 54

Suciu-Foca, N., 16, 34, 139,

174, 182, 184, 185, 192

Sulkowski, A., 141, 177

Suzuki, J.S., 109, 111, 119,

120, 122

Swanson, G.D., 134, 141, 157,

175, 177

Szara, S., 78, 80

Tacker, H.L., 138, 159

Taguchi, V.Y., 58, 65

Takahashi, R.N., 87, 89, 92,

102, 105, 117, 130, 166

Tashkin, D.P., 15, 36, 133,

134, 154, 174, 175, 198,

203, 204, 221, 223

Tassinari, C.A., 137, 138, 176,

208, 224

Tayal, G., 104, 117, 127

Taylor, S.P., 151, 176

Teale, D., 131, 168

Teale, J.D., 131, 143, 176

Tec, N., 150, 176

Teiger, D.C., 57, 64

Teiger, D.G., 87, 101

Telfer, M., 140, 174

Temple, D.M., 210, 221

Ten Ham, M., 73, 78, 85, 89,

93, 102, 205, 207, 224

Tennant, F.S., 145, 150, 176

Teplitz, R.L., 182, 188

Terris, B.Z., 57, 65, 87, 88,

101

Thacore, V.R., 22, 36, 147,

151, 176

Thoden, J.S., 141, 176

Thomas, C.W., 48, 54

Thomas, R.J., 70, 85

Thompson, G.R., 70, 85

Thompson, J.L.G., 18, 29

Thompson, L.J., 199, 224

Thompson, P., 36, 142, 176

Thompson, T., 121, 126

Thompson, W.R., 57, 65

Thorburn, M.J., 182, 191

Thorn, W.R., 86, 100

Timmons, M.C., 152, 171

- 240 -
Tinklenberg, J.R., 138, 141,

145, 146, 151, 160, 173,

176, 177

Tobisson, B., 128, 156

Tomlinson, K.R., 144, 174

Toomey, T.C., 146, 147, 163,

210, 217

Topp, G., 146, 158

Toro, G., 18, 32, 134, 135,

136, 167, 197, 219

Torrelio, M., 77, 81, 121, 125,

212, 218

Travis, R.P., 141, 168

Troupin, A., 205, 225

Truitt, E.B., 86, 102

Tubergen, D.G., 139, 168, 185,

190

Turk, R.F., 119, 123, 126

Turkanis, S.A., 74, 76, 82

84, 85, 204, 205, 219, 224

Turker, M.N., 104, 115, 118,

125

Turker, R.K., 78, 85, 104, 115,

118, 125, 208, 219

Turner, C.E., 57, 63, 65, 130,

177. 200. 222

Tyrrell, E.D., 25, 29, 152,

154, 159

Tylden, E., 145, 177

Tzeng, O.C.S., 150, 177

Uliss, D.B., 57, 65, 88, 89,

101

Unger, P.J., 140, 174

Urbanek, J.E., 57, 65

Uyeno, E.T., 89, 93, 102, 107,

117, 181, 193

Vachon, L., 15, 25, 36, 133,

141, 177, 198, 202, 224

Van der Kolk, B.A., 151, 173

Van Klingeren, B., 78, 85, 207,

224

van Noordwijk, J., 93, 102

Varanelli, C., 78, 80, 213,

215

Vardaris, R.M., 14, 36, 89,

90, 102, 103, 108, 117, 120,

127, 151, 176

Varma, D.R., 76, 85

Vassar, H.B., 105, 117, 208,

223

Ventura, D.F., 141, 160

Vinson, J.A., 59, 65

Vitola, B.M., 50, 53, 151, 170

Volavka, J., 20, 30, 137, 151,

153, 154, 162

Voss, H.L., 9, 10, 35, 44, 49,

50, 53

Vossmer, A., 72, 85

Vybiral, L., 199, 220

Wada, J.A., 74, 85, 205, 216,

224, 225

Wagner, D., 129, 171

Wagner, H.R., 204, 217

Wagner, M.J., 105, 117

Walker, J., 81, 207. 217

Walker; J.M., 25, 30, 118, 152,

154, 162

Wall, M.E., 129, 152, 171, 177

Walzer, V., 145, 177

Warren, M., 132, 172

Waser, P.G., 103, 110, 117,

118, 127

Waters, W., 119, 121, 124

Watson, A., 134, 160

Wayner, M.J., 120, 123

Weatherstone, R.M., 133,

163

Weber, E., 181, 190

Weckowicz, T.E., 140, 177

Weiner, B.-Z., 57, 66

Weiss, G., 204, 206, 217

Weissman, B., 202, 224

Weisz, D.J., 14, 36, 89, 90,

102, 103, 108, 117, 120,

127

Welburn, P.J., 105, 117

Welch, B.L., 87, 99

Werber, A., 131, 165

Westermeyer, J., 145, 177

Wheals, B.B., 58, 66

White, A., 207, 225

White, A.C., 77, 85

White: S.C., 185, 193

White, H.B., 141, 168

Wiberg, D.M., 134, 177

Widman, M., 13, 37, 58, 59,

60, 62, 66, 131, 177

Wiersema, V., 189

Wikler, A., 107, 116

Wilcox, H.G., 72, 82

Wilcox, W.C., 73, 82, 205, 218

- 241 -
Willette, R.E., 12, 37, 131,

177

Williams, D.L., 58, 64

Williams, M.R., 18, 29

Wilson, R.S., 77, 85, 88, 89,

100, 209, 225

Winburn, M.G., 45, 51

Wingfield, M., 206, 221

Winn, M., 57, 64, 66

Wood, G.C., 74, 80, 204, 206,

216

Worning, N., 87, 97

Wright, P.L., 181, 189, 190

Wrigley, F., 199, 221

Wyatt, R.J., 138, 157

Yankelovich, D., 42, 54

Yen, F.S., 17, 33, 183, 191

Yonge, K.A., 140, 177

Young, P., 57, 66

Zaguy, D., 180, 192

Zakis, O., 211, 222

Zaugg, H., 57, 66

Zaugg, H.E., 213, 222

Zeidenberg, P., 18, 31, 135,

164

Zeller, A.F., 24, 37, 143, 178

Zilkha, A., 57, 66

Zimmer, D., 141, 161

Zimmerman, A.M., 70, 84

Zinberg, N.E., 35, 209, 212,

222

Zinggraff, M.T., 48, 54

Zitko, B.A., 106, 117

Zwilling, G., 208, 221

- 242 -
SUBJECT INDEX

abstinence-attenuation

properties, 69, 77

acetylcholinesterase activity,

69, 75

acute effects, 128-144

acute panic anxiety reaction,

21, 145-146

adolescent use, 2, 4-9,

11, 21, 27, 38, 39-44

(see also patterns of

use, student use, trends

in use of marihuana,

use of marihuana)

adrenal cortex, marihuana

effects on the, 68

adult use, 4, 5, 9, 21,

38, 39, 44-45

(see also overseas studies,

patterns of use, trends

in marihuana use, U.S.

Army studies, use of

marihuana)

age of marihuana users, 45-46

(see also adolescent

use, adult use, student

use, young adult use)

aggression and marihuana,

13, 14, 92-94, 151

air encephalography, 18

airplane flying, 143

(see also flying an airplane,

pilot performance)

alcohol use, 3, 4, 12, 23,

49, 135, 142, 143, 150

compared to marihuana,

4, 7, 13, 46, 48, 142

with marihuana, 24

allergic reactions to, 140

alveolar macrophage function, 179

amotivational syndrome,

20, 147, 148, 150, 153,

154, 197

amphetamines (uppers), 7, 10

analgesic properties, 69,

77, 104, 105, 118, 129,

195, 197, 198, 202, 208-

210, 213

analytical techniques, 58-59

(see also individual methods)

anesthetic effects, 69,

74, 87, 195, 210

angina, 14

(see also cardiovascular

effects, heart disease)

antecedents of marihuana use,

46-48

antibacterial activity,

78, 179, 207

antibiotic, topical, 199-200

antibody-mediated immunitv, 184

(see also humoral-mediated

immunity)

anticonvulsant activity

of marihuana, 68, 73,

74, 129, 195, 198, 204-

206, 213

antidepressant activity,

195, 197, 211

antiemetics, 12, 25, 195,

209, 211-212

antihistaminic activity,

see respiratory effects

antinauseant 201, 211-212

antineoplastic actvity,

77, 180, 187

antinocioceptive properties, 210

antitumor activity, 77, 180,

187, 195, 201, 206-207

(see also antineonlastic

activity, carcinogenic

potential of marihuana)

antitussive activity, 78, 105

appetite-stimulant effect, 91,

195, 198, 211-212

arrhythmias, 76

(see also cardiovascular

effects)

assay techniques, 130-131

(see also detection)

asthma, 25, 133, 194, 198, 202

(see also bronchodilation)

asystole, 76

(see also cardiovascular

effects)

attitudes toward marihuana,

6

automobile driving, 142-144

(see also driver performance)

aversive control, 103-105

avoidance response, 90, 103-

105, 118, 119

- 243 -
bait shyness, 105

barbiturates (downers), 7, 10

bhang, 197

blood glucose, effects on, 135-136

blood pressure, 69, 132

bone marrow activity, effects

on, 72

Boston University Accident Investigation Team, 24

bradycardia, 76

(see also cardiovascular

effects)

brain, effects on, 72

brain atrophy, see brain damage

brain damage, 15, 16, 18, 19,

154

brain scans, 19, 20, 137

(see also air encephalography,

computerized transaxial tomography, echoencephalography,

electroencephalography, pneumoencephalography)

bronchitis, 198

bronchodilation, 133, 194, 198,

201, 202-204, 213

(see also pulmonary effects)

cancer patients and marihuana,

16, 17, 20, 25, 195, 209,

211

cannabichromene (CBC), 56, 86,

89, 90, 105, 184

cannabichromevarin, 57

cannabicyclol, 184

cannabidiol (CBD), 13, 57, 58,

68, 69, 76, 77, 78, 86, 87

89, 90, 92, 93, 105, 106,

109, 110, 121, 136, 179,

184, 201, 204, 205, 206,

207, 208

cannabigerol (CBG), 57, 105

cannabigerovarin, 57

cannabinoid-drug interactions,

69, 77, 78, 87, 89, 104,

121, 129

cannabinoid interactions, 86,

93, 105, 118, 129

cannabinoids, see cannabichromene,

cannabichromevarin, cannabidiol,

cannabigerol, cannabigerovarin,

cannabinol, -8-THC, -9-

THC, etc.

cannabinol (CBN), 57, 60, 76,

77, 86, 87, 89, 90, 92, 104,

109, 121, 180, 184, 201,

204, 206, 208, 209

cannabis, see cannabidiol, -

9-THC, hashish, THC

cannabis psychosis, 147

(see also psychosis)

carcinogenic potential of marihuana

67, 70

cardiovascular effects, 3, 14,

67, 69, 76, 129, 131-133, 211

tolerance to, 69, 76

(see also angina; heart

disease)

catalepsy, 87

causal relationship to other

drug use, 49, 50, 147, 149

cell-mediated immunity, 184-

185, 187

cell metabolism, 2, 15, 17-18, 27

(see also RNA)

cell reproduction, 15

(see also DNA, RNA)

central nervous svstem effects.

68, 69, 129, 138

chemistry of marihuana, 11-13,

26, 55-66

child-rearing practices and

marihuana use, 48

chromosomes, effects on, 15,

16-17, 21, 179-180, 181-184

chromatography, 55

(see also gas chromatography,

high-pressure liquid chromatography, plasma hromatography

and thin-layer chromatography)

chronic use (heavy use), 1,

2, 14, 15, 20-21, 22, 26,

118-121, 133, 134-135, 139,

151-154, 180

(see also daily use)

cigarette use, see tobacco use

Client Oriented Data Acquisition

Process (CODAP), 23

cocaine use, 49

college student use, see student

use

Colombian study, 197

Columbia University studv, 41

competition, 93-94, 120

(see also aggression and

marihuana)

- 244 -
computerized transaxial tomography

(CTT), 18-19

constituents of marihuana see

cannabinoids or cannabichromene,

cannabichromevarin, cannabidiol,

cannabigerol, cannabigerovarin,

cannabinol, -8-THC, -9-THC

consummatory behavior, 90-92,

120

correlates of marihuana use,

9, 46-50

Costa Rican studies, 20, 22,

153

(see also overseas studies)

counterculture, use among the,

9, 42. 146

crime and marihuana, 151

cultural factors and marihuana

use, 11, 153-154

Czechoslovakian use of marihuana,

199-200

daily use, 2, 10, 41, 42, 44, 150

(see also chronic use)

-8-THC, 73, 75, 76, 77, 86,

87, 89, 90, 104, 105, 109,

110, 120, 121, 128, 180,

182, 184, 201, 204, 206,

209

-9-THC ( -9-tetrahydrocannabinol), 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,

17, 25, 55, 68, 69, 73, 74,

75, 76, 77, 78, 86, 87, 88,

89, 90, 92, 93, 104, 105,

106, 107, 109, 110, 118,

119, 120, 121, 128, 179,

180, 184, 201, 204, 206,

207, 208, 209

demographic characteristics

of marihuana users, 45

(see also education, racial/

ethnic, regional, urban/rural)

dependence, 24-25, 27, 28, 152-153

detection, 12, 58-59, 60

comparison of methods, 56

detoxification, 197, 212-213

discrimination learning, 108-

110, 118, 120

DMHP, 128-129

DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid),

15, 17; 77, 180, 184-185,

186, 187

(see also cell reproduction)

dominance, 93, 118

driver performance, 2, 12, 24-

25, 142-144

(see also psychomotor performance)

Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN),

23

drug dependence, see dependence

echoencephalography, 18, 154

educational differences of users.

38, 45

Egyptian users, 19, 149-150

(see also overseas studies)

8- -9-THC, 58, 59

8-ß-hydroxy- -9-THC , 58, 59

electrocardiograms (EKG), 131

electroencephalography (EEG),

20, 74, 137, 138, 154

11-dihydroxy- -9-THC, 58

11-hydroxy- -8-THC, 88

11-hydroxy- -9-THC (11-OH- -

9-THC), 58, 59, 69, 77, 106,

109, 118, 121, 129

11-methyl- -8-THC, 88, 89

11-nor- -9-THC-9-carboxylic

acid, 58

emphysema, 20

endocrine functioning and marihuana,

15, 16, 27, 68, 71, 134-136,

155

epileptic activity, 74, 195

(see also anticonvulsant

effects)

estrogen, marihuana and, 68

exploratory behavior, 88-90

extercceptive stimuli, 108, 120

(see also discrimination

learning)

eye, marihuana effects on the,

139-140

(see also intraocular pressure,

visual functioning)

field studies, 153-154, 197

fixed interval schedules, 106

(see also Type II experiments)

fixed ratio reinforcement schedule,

106

(see also Type II experiments)

flashbacks, 22, 147, 148

fluorometric methods of marihuana

analysis, 59

- 245 -
flying performance, 23-24, 143-144

(see also pilot performance,

psychomotor performance)

Friend leukemia, 77, 180, 207

(see also carcinogenic

potential of marihuana)

ganja, 196, 197

gas chromatography, 56, 57,

131

gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS), 60, 131

gas-liquid chromatography (GLC),

58

genetic effects, 15, 179-187

(see also chromosomes, effects

on)

glaucoma, 12, 25, 194, 201

(see also intraocular pressure)

Greek studies, 18, 20, 22, 154

(see also overseas studies)

gross behavior, 86-88

growth hormones, 15, 16, 18

(see also endocrine effects)

gynecomastia, 135

hashish, 6, 44, 90, 104, 109,

121, 136, 138, 154, 183

heart disease, 20, 132-133

(see also cardiovascular

effects)

heroin, 10, 49

high-pressure liquid chromatography, 56, 58

high school seniors, see student

use

history of therapeutic uses,

196-200

hormonal effects, 71

(see also endocrine functioning)

household surveys, 38, 44

humoral-mediated immunity, 184

(see also antibody-mediated

immunity)

hydroxylation, 59-60, 88, 129

hypnotic effects, 129, 195,

207-208, 213

immune response, effects on,

15, 16, 17, 27, 139, 155,

179-187

immunosuppressant, 180, 187

Indian studies, 22, 147

(see also overseas studies)

instrumental conditioning, 105-107

(see also maze learning)

intellectual performance, effects

on, 19

interactions, cannabinoid-drug,

69, 77

intraocular pressure (IOP),

25, 139-140, 194, 201-202,

213

(see also glaucoma)

isolation-induced aggression,

93, 120

(see also aggression and

marihuana)

Jamaican studies, 20, 22, 153,

197, 198

(see also overseas studies)

kinetic interactions, 56-57,

60-61

learned behavior, 103-110

Lewis lung adenocarcinoma, 77,

180, 206

(see also carcinogenic

potential of marihuana)

liquid chromatography, 58

liver, effects on the, 12, 72

metabolism by the, 56

L1210 murine leukemia, 207

longitudinal studies, 11, 41,

46, 49, 50, 149

LSD, 7, 10, 22

lung, effects on, 2, 13, 14,

15, 17, 20, 25, 26, 67, 72

(see also pulmonary effects)

lung, metabolism in the, 56, 59

lymphocyte responses, 139, 180

macromolecular synthesis, 184-185

(see also DNA, RNA and protein

synthesis)

male use, 20

male vs. female use, 4, 7, 9

(see also sex differences)

marihuana tea, 58

marihuana users vs. non-users,

10, 19, 20

mass fragmentography, 128

- 246 -
mass spectrometry, 55, 57, 58,

131

maze learning, 14, 90, 105-107,

120

mechanisms of action, 195, 213

memory, 19

metabolism of marihuana, 11,

12, 59-66, 77, 87, 129-131

metabolites, 12, 13, 27, 129

(see also 8- -9-THC, 8-

ß-hydroxy- -9-THC, 11-hydroxy-

-9-THC, 11-nor- -9-THCcarboxylic acid)

military, use among, see U.S.

Army studies

modeling behavior, 144

morphological alterations, 71

(see also teratogenicity and

marihuana)

motor activity effects of marihuana on, 73, 75, 76

(see also spontaneous motor

activity)

National Highway Traffic Safety

Administration (NHTSA), 23

National Institute on Drug Abuse

(NIDA), 9, 12

National Survey, 4, 6, 38

neurochemical factors, 69, 75

neurological effects, 136-139

neuropsychologic effects, 19,

137, 148, 154

9-nor- -8-THC, 88, 89

9-nor- -9-THC, 88

operant conditioning, 105-107

(see also reinforcement

schedules)

overseas studies (of marihuana

use), 1, 3, 20-21, 25

(see also Costa Rican studies,

Egyptian studies, Greek

studies, Indian studies,

Jamaican studies)

pain tolerance, 209

paranoia, 21, 22, 146

parent-child relationships (and

marihuana use), 11

patterns of use, 3, 38-50

in U.S., 3, 4-11, 25, 26, 46-47

peak using groups, 1

peers, relationship to marihuana

use, 11, 48, 150

peritoneal effects, 70

personality traits of marihuana

users, 46-48

pharmacokinetic studies, 128

pharmacological effects of marihuana, 12, 67-70, 72-78

physiological implications of

marihuana, 11, 14

pilot performance, 143-144

plasma chromatography, 56, 59

pneumoencephalography, 19,

potency, 3, 6, 26, 129

predatory aggression, 94

predictors of marihuana use,

10, 11, 46-48, 150-151

pregnancy, marihuana and, 14,

89-90, 120, 135, 181

protein synthesis, 184-185

psychedelics, 49

psychiatric aspects, 21

(see also psychopathology)

psychological correlates of

marihuana use, 46-50

psychological effects, 200-201,

207-213

(see also subjective effects)

psychomotor performance, 2,

19, 23-24, 141-142

psychopathology, 20, 21-23,

145-151

psychosis, 22, 147, 154

psychosocial aspects, 2, 26

pulmonary effects, 15, 25, 70,

133-134, 153, 154

(see also lung, effects on)

pulmonary metabolism, 59

(see also lung, metabolism

in the)

pyrahexyl, 199

racial/ethnic characteristics

of users, 38, 45

radioactive labelling, 12, 55,

131

(see also detection)

regional differences in use, 38

reinforcement schedules, 105-

107, 118

relaxant properties, 208, 213

REM sleep, marihuana effects

on, 207

- 247 -
research, future marihuana,

26-28

Research Monograph Series (NIDA),

9, 12

respiratory effects, 77, 134

(see also pulmonary effects)

righting reflex, 87

RNA (ribonucleic acid), 17,

69, 75, 184-185

(see also cell metabolism,

cell reproduction)

route of administration. effects

of, 59, 68, 69, 70, 71, 73,

91, 106, 144

Rutgers Identification of Marihuana Test, 59

San Mateo County studies, 7-9,

10, 42-44

(see also student use)

schedule-controlled responses,

105-107

schizophrenia, 22

(see also psychopathology)

sedative effects, 129, 208, 213

sex differences, 4, 7

(see also male vs. female

use)

sexual functioning, 136

serotonin uptake, 76

set, marihuana use and, 144

setting, marihuana use and,

144

shuttle box task, 103, 108

(see also avoidance response)

side effects, 12

SKF525A, 181

social correlates of marihuana

use, 46-50

social interaction, effects

on, 13, 14, 93-94

social policy, 2, 27

socialization and marihuana

use, 47

sociocultural factors and marihuana use, 144

source, determination of the,

57-58

sperm count, effects on, 18

spontaneous motor activity,

88-90

state-dependent learning, 110

stress-induced aggression,

92-93

(see also aggression and

marihuana)

student use, 11, 41-44

high school, 6-9, 10, 38-

44, 46

college, 19, 21, 38, 42

(see also adolescent use,

young adult use)

subcellular effects, 78

subjective response to marihuana, 144, 201

synthesis of marihuana, 12,

26, 55, 129, 195, 199, 200,

206, 213

tachycardia, 14, 76, 132, 202,

213

(see also cardiovascular

effects)

target groups, see peak using

groups

T-cell immunitv, effects on.

16, 184

teratogenicity and marihuana,

67, 70, 71, 120, 180-181, 186

testosterone, 15, 16, 18, 134-

135

(see also endocrine functioning)

THC (tetrahydrocannabinol),

6, 25

(see also -9-THC)

therapeutic potential, 12,

17, 25-26, 68, 121, 133,

194-214

(see also anticonvulsant

activity, antiemetics,

asthma, cancer, glaucoma,

intraoular pressure, pulmonary

effects)

thin-layer chromatography,

56, 58, 59, 129

tissue distribution of cannabis,

72

tobacco use, 3, 4, 15, 150

compared to marihuana use,

4, 7, 10, 67, 70

tolerance, 24-25, 26, 73, 76,

90, 106, 107, 109, 118,

119, 151-152, 154, 206,

208, 213

- 248 -
toxic delirium, 146-147

toxicity, 13, 19, 22, 26

(see also toxicological

effects)

toxicological effects of marihuana, 67-72

tranquilizing properties, 213

(see also hypnotic, relaxant

properties, sedative)

transition from use to nonuse, 48-50

treatment schedules, differences

in marihuana, 73

trends in marihuana use, 9-

10, 48-50

(see also patterns of marihuana

use)

Type I-experiments, 105-107

(see also schedule-controlled

responses)

Type II experiments, 105-107

U.S. Army studies, 22

use of marihuana, 1, 3, 4-11,

38-50

(see also patterns of use,

trends in marihuana use)

variable interval reinforcement

schedule, 106

(see also Type II experiments)

vasoconstrictor effect, 77

vehicle of administration,

68, 72, 73, 106, 108-169

viral infections, 16

visual functioning, 19, 139,

142

withdrawal symptoms, 25, 121,

152-153, 213

young adult use (18-25-yearolds), 1, 2, 4-6, 9, 38

(see also drug-related responses) (see also patterns of use,

trends in marihuana use,

unlearned behavior, 86-94 use of marihuana)

urban/rural differences in

usage patterns, 38

- 249 -
Monographs can be ordered from either the U.S. Government Printing Office

(GPO) or from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) at the

addresses below. NTIS prices given are for papercopy and are subject to

change. Microfiche copies at $3 are also available from NTIS.

GPO NTIS

Superintendent of Documents National Tech. Info. Service

U.S. Government Printing Office U.S. Department of Commerce

Washington, D.C. 20402 Springfield, Virginia 22161

1 FINDINGS OF DRUG ABUSE RESEARCH. An annotated bibliography of NIMH and

NIDA-supported extramural grant research, 1967-74. Volume 1, 384 pp.;

Volume 2, 377 pp. Not available from NTIS

Vol.1: GPO Stock #017-024-0467 $7.00; Vol.2: #017-024-0466-9 $5.05

2 OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS IN SOCIO-BEHAVIORAL DRUG USE RESEARCH 1975.

Editors: Jack Elinson, Ph.D., and David Nurco, Ph.D. Task Force articles

proposing consensual definitions of concepts and terms used in psychosocial

research to achieve operational comparability. 167 pp.

GPO Stock #017-024-0048-4-7 $2.50 NTIS PB #246 338 $6.75

3 AMINERGIC HYPOTHESES OF BEHAVIOR: REALITY OR CLICHE? Editor: Bruce

J. Bernard, Ph.D. Articles examining the relation of the brain monoamines

to a range of animal and human behaviors. 149 pp.

GPO Stock #017-024-0048-6-3 $2.25 NTIS PB #246 687 $6.25

4 NARCOTIC ANTAGONISTS: THE SEARCH FOR LONG-ACTING PREPARATIONS.

Editor: Robert Willette, Ph.D. Articles reporting current alternative

inserted sustained-release of long-acting drug devices.

GPO Stock #017-024-00488-0 $1.10 NTIS PB #247 096 $4.00

5 YOUNG MEN AND DRUGS: A NATIONWIDE SURVEY. Authors: John A. O'Donnell,

Ph.D., et al. Report of a national survey of drug use by men 20-30 years

in 1974-5.

GPO Stock #017-024-00511-8 $2.25 NTIS PB #247 446 $6.75

6 EFFECTS OF LABELING THE “DRUG-ABUSER” - AN INQUIRY. Author: Jay R.

Williams, Ph.D. Analysis and review of the literature examining effects

of drug use apprehension or arrest on the adolescent.

GPO Stock #017-024-00512-6 $1.05 NTIS PB #249 092 $4.00

250

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1977 0 - 239-715
7 CANNABINOID ASSAYS IN HUMANS. Editor: Robert Willette, Ph.D.

Articles describing current developments in methods for measuring

cannabinoid levels in the human body by immunoassay, liquid and

dual column chromatography and mass spectroscopy techniques. 120 pp.

GPO Stock #017-024-00510-0 $1.95 NTIS PB #251 905 $6.00

8 Rx 3 TIMES/WK LAAM - METHADONE ALTERNATIVE. Editors: Jack

Blaine, M.D., and Pierre Renault, M.D. Comprehensive summary of

development of LAAM (Levo-alpha-acetyl methodol), a new drug for

treatment of narcotic addiction. 127 pp.

Not available from GPO NTIS PB #253 763 $6.00

9 NARCOTIC ANTAGONISTS: NALTREXONE. Editors: Demetrios Julius, M.D.,

and Pierre Renault, M.D. Progress report of development, pre-clinical

and clinical studies of naltrexone, a new drug for treatment of narcotic

addiction. 182 pp.

GPO Stock #017-024-00721-5 $2.55 NTIS PB #255 833 $7.50

10 EPIDEMIOLOGY OF DRUG ABUSE: CURRENT ISSUES. Editors: Louise G.

Richards, Ph.D., and Louise B. Blevens. Conference Proceedings.

Examination of methodological problems in surveys and data collection.

GPO Stock #017-024-00571-1 $2.60 NTIS PB #266 691 $9.00

11 DRUGS AND DRIVING. Editor: Robert Willette, Ph.D. State-of-the-art

review of current research on the effects of different drugs on

performance impairment particularly on driving. 137 pp.

GPO Stock #017-024-00567-2 $1.70 NTIS # to be assigned

12 PSYCHODYNAMICS OF DRUG DEPENDENCE. Editors: Jack D. Blaine, M.D.,

and Demetrios A. Juli s, M.D. A pioneering collection of papers to

discover the part played by individual psychodynamics in drug dependence.

In Press

13 COCAINE: 1977. Editor: Robert C. Petersen, Ph.D., and Richard C.

Stillman, M.D. A series of reports developing a picture of the extent

and limits of current knowledge of the drug, its use and misuse. 223 pp.

GPO Stock #017-024-00592-4 $3.00 NTIS # to be assigned

251