Vaporizzazione: studi scientifici, vantaggi e temperature – DolceVita

Il vaporizzatore è un dispositivo che ha la capacità di riscaldare il materiale vegetalesenza bruciarlo. Fondamentalmente esistono 3 modi per assumere cannabis: l’ingestione, l’inalazione e l’assunzione topica tramite oli o tinture.
Per ciò che riguarda l’inalazione, che è uno dei metodi più antichi conosciuti dall’uomo per assumere i derivati della cannabis e di altre piante, in tempi recenti si è diffusa la pratica della vaporizzazione, tramite la quale il materiale vegetale viene riscaldato ma non bruciato. Le tecniche utilizzate per ottenere questo obiettivo sono o il riscaldamento della camera adibita al contenimento del materiale vegetale, o dell’aria che vi passa attraverso.

In generale la vaporizzazione è comunemente accettata come buona pratica per ridurre i danni derivati dalla combustione, migliore efficienza nell’assunzione dei principi attivi, e per avere dosaggi affidabili.

STUDI SCIENTIFICI
Diversi studi a livello scientifico hanno analizzato le proprietà di questi strumenti, confermando le loro potenzialità.
Uno studio pilota effettuato nel 2007 dalla University of California di San Francisco e pubblicato su Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics ha confrontato gli effetti della vaporizzazione rispetto a quelli del fumo di uno spinello e ha scoperto che vaporizzatori potrebbero fornire gli stessi livelli di THC, riducendo la quantità di monossido di carbonio che entra in circolazione nel flusso sanguigno. Lo studio ha coinvolto 18 partecipanti e nella conclusione si può leggere che “un dispositivo per la vaporizzazione di cannabis fornisce lo stesso livello di chimica attiva a livello terapeutico e produce lo stesso effetto biologico del fumo di cannabis, ma senza le tossine nocive”.

Un altro studio pubblicato nel 2007 sull’Harm Reduction Journal dai ricercatori della University of New York di Albany e la University of Southern California ha collegato la vaporizzazione di marijuana a una diminuzione problemi respiratori. Utilizzando i dati raccolti da un sondaggio su Internet, i ricercatori hanno scoperto che coloro che di solito usano il vaporizzatore hanno segnalato meno problemi polmonari come “tosse, catarro, e senso di oppressione al petto” rispetto agli altri.

Nel 2010 i ricercatori dalla University of New York di Albany sono tornati sull’argomento ed hanno pubblicato un nuovo studio sull’International Journal of Drug Policy dopo aver dato vaporizzatori ad un campione di 20 fumatori di cannabis con problemi polmonari e hanno osservato gli effetti nell’utilizzo quotidiano. Dopo un mese i partecipanti hanno mostrato “miglioramenti significativi nella funzione polmonare” che, secondo i ricercatori, erano paragonabili a quelli riscontrabili in un fumatore di tabacco che da un mese ha smesso di fumare.

Nel 2014 per 8 pazienti affetti da dolore neuropatico cronico la vaporizzazione di cannabis ha significato la riduzione dell’intensità del dolore in media del 45%. E’ il risultato di uno studio clinico aperto in fase 1, condotto da un gruppo di ricercatori israeliani con il vaporizzatore Syqe e pubblicato sul Journal of Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy. “Lo studio – concludono i ricercatori – suggerisce il potenziale utilizzo del vaporizzatore per l’assunzione senza fumo di cannabis medica, con una bassa variazione del picco di concentrazione di THC tra i pazienti e raggiungendo gli standard farmacologici dei medicinali a inalazione”.

Un nuovo studio pubblicato su Plos One nel 2016, conferma come l’uso dei vaporizzatori sia sicuro ed efficace per i pazienti che assumono cannabis.
“Gli acidi cannabinoidici”, scrivono i ricercatori svizzeri nello studio guidato da Christian Lanz, “subiscono decarbossilazione a circa 200° C e rilasciano cannabinoidi volatili neutri, che entrano nella circolazione sistemica attraverso l’assorbimento polmonare dal vapore. La vaporizzazione non pirolitica evita la formazione di prodotti pericolosi derivati dalla combustione come catrame, idrocarburi policiclici aromatici (IPA), monossido di carbonio e altre sostanze cancerogene (ad esempio benzene). Gieringer, insieme al suo team di ricercatori, ha dimostrato i vantaggi della vaporizzazione di cannabis rispetto al fumo e dimostrando che la formazione di prodotti derivati dalla combustione viene soppressa quasi completamente”.

“Pertanto”, proseguono gli autori, “l’obiettivo del presente studio è stato quello di indagare in vitro le prestazioni di 3 vaporizzatori tascabili ed uno portatile reperibili in commercio sul mercato svizzero e paragonarli al Volcano Medic® considerato come il migliore standard”. I vaporizzatori usati nello studio sono Plenty Vaporizer®, Arizer Solo®, DaVinci Vaporizer® e Vape-or-Smoke™, diversa dagli perché non riscaldata elettronicamente ma con una fiamma alimentata da gas butano, mentre sono stati utilizzati ceppi di cannabis ricchi di THC ed altri ricchi di CBD. Nel vapore dei 4 vaporizzatori elettronici sono stati trovati THC e CBD al 58.4 e 51.4%, 66.8 e 56.1%, 82.7 e 70.0% e 54.6 e 56.7% rispettivamente nel Volcano Medic®, Plenty Vaporizer®, Arizer Solo® e DaVinci Vaporizer®.

“I vaporizzatori analizzati nello studio”, si legge nelle conclusioni, “decarbossilano efficientemente i cannabinoidi acidi e rilasciano i cannabinoidi neutri nel vapore. Di conseguenza possono essere considerati come una modalità promettente per la gestione sicura ed efficiente della cannabis terapeutica e dei cannabinoidi più in generale”.

I VANTAGGI DELLA VAPORIZZAZIONE

1. Regolazione della temperatura e meno prodotti tossici
Fumando la cannabis viene bruciata a temperature che possono raggiungere i 900° C. Queste alte temperature generano una grande quantità di sottoprodotti tossici ed irritanti che dovrebbero essere evitati mentre sono proprio le basse temperature e la mancanza di pirolisi a rendere la vaporizzazione un’efficiente e salutare forma di assunzione di cannabis.
I vaporizzatori invece, a seconda del modello possono avere differenti impostazioni per quello che riguarda la temperatura e quelli con la selezione manuale di solito permettono di scegliere tra una gamma dai 40° C fino ai 230° C, temperatura a cui inizia il processo di combustione. Il THC inizia ad evaporare a temperature di 140° C ed evapora quasi interamente ai 185°, il CBD tra i 160° ed i 180°. Il CBG (cannabigerolo) invece evapora intorno ai 52° C ed il CBN intorno ai 185° C.

2. Migliore efficienza, dosi minori, maggior risparmio.
La vaporizzazione permette al consumatore di utilizzare gli stessi fiori di cannabis per più di una volta, poiché questi non vengono bruciati e ridotti in cenere dalla combustione. Per questa ragione, al raggiungimento della dose necessaria di assunzione, la stessa cannabis può essere riutilizzata per una sessione successiva.
A parità di effetti, l’utilizzo del vaporizzatore diminuisce il quantitativo necessario di materiale vegetale. Con la vaporizzazione si possono ottenere gli stessi effetti benefici dati dall’atto del fumare, ma con il vantaggio di utilizzare dosi inferiori.

3. Dosaggi affidabili.
Come succede fumando, gli effetti della vaporizzazione sono praticamente istantanei dato che i costituenti della cannabis vengono assorbiti rapidamente. Questo meccanismo è particolarmente vantaggioso per pazienti che cercano un sollievo immediato dai sintomi di una patologia. Se compariamo la vaporizzazione con la somministrazione orale di cannabis (es: estratti o prodotti edibili), la titolazione o dosaggio è più semplice. L’utente può infatti fermarsi non appena nota il raggiungimento della dose cercata.

4. Miglioramento della funzione polmonare.
Come raccontato dallo studio del 2010 pubblicato sull’International Journal of Drug Policy, i vaporizzatori hanno dimostrato come questa via di somministrazione sia efficace nel diminuire la sintomatologia respiratoria. L’uso di vaporizzatori si è dimostrato efficace nel ridurre tosse, catarro e senso di oppressione al petto ed ha dimostrato incidere sui valori di funzionalità respiratoria in senso migliorativo in meno di un mese.

SCEGLIERE UN VAPORIZZATORE
In commercio ci sono varie marche e modelli di vaporizzatori, e scegliere quello giusto può diventare una scelta complicata.

1. Conduzione o convezione?
Nel caso di un vaporizzatore, il termine conduzione sta a significare che il materiale vegetale viene inserito in una camera di riscaldamento e portato ad alte temperature. Nei vaporizzatori a convezione l’elemento riscaldante è posizionato al di e sul mercato di possono trovare anche vaporizzatori ibridi. In generale il metodo a convezione è preferito da molti per i fiori, poiché non brucia il materiale. In un vaporizzatore a conduzione, la fonte di calore è in contatto diretto con la cannabis e ciò significa che si riscalda più velocemente. I vaporizzatori a conduzione sono stati i primi sul mercato. Sono spesso meno costosi e possono essere più facili da usare mentre quelli a convezione sono considerati più efficienti e producono una migliore qualità del vapore.

2. Impostazioni della temperatura.
Sul mercato è possibile reperire modelli con regolazione di temperatura sia fissa che variabile. I secondi solitamente sono i più costosi, ma permettono anche un controllo migliore della temperatura e, quindi, del punto di calore per raggiungere il fitocomposto cercato. Questa opzione è pertanto consigliata quando si acquista un vaporizzatore per scopi terapeutici.

3. Erbe, estratti ed e-liquids.
La maggior parte dei vaporizzatori sono stati sviluppati per l’uso con piante ed erbe aromatiche, ma la recente popolarità di estratti ed e-liquids hanno spinto i produttori di vaporizzatori ad incorporare nuove caratteristiche ai loro prodotti. Nuovi modelli dispongono di contenitori, maglie e tamponi di cotone disegnati per impiegare estratti nei vaporizzatori. Alcuni modelli dispongono inoltre di parti intercambiabili a seconda della tipologia di cannabis (estratto o infiorescenze) che si desidera consumare.

Sorgente: Vaporizzazione: studi scientifici, vantaggi e temperature – DolceVita

Annunci

PODS May Aid in Transporting Growth Factors for Treatment of Multiple Sclerosis, Other Diseases

PODS (POlyhedrin Delivery System), a new technology designed to transport any protein in the human body, may open up new approaches in treating multiple sclerosis (MS) and other diseases, says its British developer, Cell Guidance Systems.

Created by Hajime Mori, a professor at Japan’s Kyoto Institute of Technology, PODS is based on a survival mechanism used by viruses.

Taking advantage of cubic microstructures formed by a protein called polyhedrin, PODS can stably transport and protect proteins across a range of extreme physical conditions. In the presence of proteases – enzymes that break down proteins – polyhedrin microcrystals are destroyed and slowly release their cargo. This allows PODS to transport unstable proteins such as growth factors, while ensuring a targeted constant release over weeks and months with only a single application.

“As with drugs, delivery mechanism for growth factors makes all the difference,” Christian Pernstich, research director at Cell Guidance Systems, said in a press release. “Standard growth factors are inflexible, sometimes unreliable and lack durability. POD technology overcomes these limitations in a very elegant way.”

The delivery of growth factors helps tissue recover in MS and many other medical conditions. Current MS treatment strategies focus mainly on relieving symptoms of the disease, and not so much on repairing the targeted destruction of central nervous system myelin that actually causes MS. The answer may lie in a new therapy that enables the efficient delivery of growth factors that which could regenerate myelin in MS patients.

Cell Guidance Systems is now conducting preclinical studies on PODS use for Parkinson’s disease, bone regeneration and other conditions.

“As well as research applications, we are actively exploring the medical potential of this technology for vaccine production and for delivery of therapeutic proteins,” said Pernstich. “We are aiming to regenerate tissues that have been damaged by diseases such as multiple sclerosis, osteoarthritis and Parkinson’s disease. It is a very promising and exciting technology.”

 

 

 

https://multiplesclerosisnewstoday.com/2017/05/17/multiple-sclerosis-treatment-could-be-advanced-by-pods-protein-delivery-system/#at_pco=tst-1.0&at_si=5ac87f60d25ec7d0&at_ab=per-2&at_pos=0&at_tot=2

Will Cannabis Change the Future of Personalized Medicine?

The State of Medicine

Things are rarely one size fits all, particularly when it comes to our health. What works for some may not work for others, and doctors often prescribe pills as a cure-all without looking at a patient’s individual needs. As the opioid epidemic continues to ravage the country, could the future of healthcare be at the intersection of cannabis and personalized medicine?

Marshall Rutman

I recently chatted with Marshall Rutman of Resolve Digital Health, a Canadian company that has worked with medical professionals and advisory boards to create the Breeze Smart Inhaler. The device contains Smart Pods™, single-use pods with an exact dosage of cannabis—sort of like a Keurig for medicine. What separates this product from other inhalers is the built-in app, and you don’t need a smartphone to operate it—perfect for older folks who may not want to purchase a phone solely to utilize a medical device.

The Power of Data

Rutman says Resolve has two main goals with the Breeze Smart Inhaler: “How do we prove the experience of medical cannabis patients, and how do we get patients off opioids.” Data can provide numbers for what is typically a subjective experience, and patients today are prescribed some fairly scary drugs post-surgery. For Rutman, the “most exciting possibility” for Resolve is to help stop the opioid crisis, and to “tear down obstacles people have surrounding cannabis.”

The device features the team is most excited about are the personalization options and the ability to share user data. If a user’s pain level varies from, say, a level two to a level eight, the device will alert users to exactly how often they should dose (as well as the dosage, the strain, etc.) The app learns about you, your very specific needs and symptoms, and adjusts accordingly. It asks your pain level before dosing, and begins to understand your patterns and behavior. If the patient so chooses, they can share that data with their doctor or caregiver, optimizing the healthcare process.

Rutman emphasized that your personal information will never be shared—“Whatever we do, we’re stripping out personal info,” he told me. That said, sharing your data findings can help the medical and cannabis community at large. “Once we have the info,” Rutman explains, “people with similar conditions and variables—we can share that with the medical community, as well as growers and processers: ‘Hey, we noticed this.’” That data can help patients suffering from the same symptoms key in on certain strains, or allow growers to better isolate certain cannabinoids and grow more of a strain patients found helpful.

 

The Future of Resolve

The product hasn’t launched yet, but will be available in the United States and Canada soon. Resolve worked with a California test group of about 50 patients from a wide variety of ages, backgrounds and ailments during beta testing. This data isn’t a miracle cure, however. As predicted, even patients with similar symptoms reacted differently to various strains and dosages. No two people could ever have an identical reaction to the same dosage and strain; depending on body fat percentage, how much sleep you’ve gotten and even how hydrated you are, your cannabis consumption (and how your body responds) is entirely unique.

The Breeze Smart Inhaler is currently aimed at medical patients, but the sky is the limit for recreational and less-debilitating medical needs. “We’re serving medical needs currently,” reveals Rutman, “because our product is unique—it solves the problems surrounding smoking. ‘What do I take?’ ‘How much do I take?’ The machine learning understands how you deal with particular strains and adjusts.” The next step, then, is wellness. “If you had social anxiety, for example—not so much that you’d need a prescription from a doctor—but, this product could help you.”

Will Big Pharma Take Cues from Cannabis?

As more medical-focused cannabis products launch, fears about intervention or exploitation from Big Pharma are understandable. Rutman doesn’t fear Big Pharma, however—he hopes they learn from Resolve. “My hope is that the work we’re doing reaches beyond cannabis,” he states. Personalized medicine, in his opinion, is happening “too slowly,” and he feels their product could “open Big Pharma’s eyes to the value of personalizing medicine. Everyone benefits.”

 

The medical community can’t continue its devastating trend of unnecessary prescriptions. We’re all unique, our pain and healing is unique; we need personalized health plans, not pain meds that keep us numb and create addictions. This product (and others like it) will add a level of control and individuality to the healing experience, and we hope Big Pharma will take note of what Resolve hopes to prove: that everyone needs personalized healthcare.

 

 

https://www.dopemagazine.com/personalized-medicine/

Cannabis Use in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury or Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in Colorado. – PubMed – NCBI

OBJECTIVE:

To describe the prevalence of cannabis use in an adult sample with spinal cord injury (SCI) or traumatic brain injury (TBI) in Colorado, and to describe the self-reported reasons and side effects of cannabis use in this sample.

DESIGN:

Mixed methods observational study, using focus group data and telephone survey SETTING: Community PARTICIPANTS: Colorado adults who have sustained SCI or moderate to severe TBI and have received services through the rehabilitation hospital conducting the study.

INTERVENTIONS:

None; Measures: Survey RESULTS: Focus group participants identified issues that were then included in the survey development. Seventy percent of the 116 surveyed reported cannabis use pre-injury (67% SCI, 74% TBI) with 48% reporting use after injury (53% SCI, 45% TBI). Overall, the most common reason for use was recreational (67%), followed by reducing stress/anxiety (62.5%), and improving sleep (59%). Among the respondents with SCI, the most common reasons for use were to reduce spasticity (70%), recreation (63%), and to improve sleep (63%). Among those with TBI, reasons endorsed were recreational (72%), reducing stress/anxiety (62%), and improving sleep (55%). Smoking was the most common method of use.

CONCLUSIONS:

A majority of this sample report using cannabis prior to injury, and approximately half report using cannabis post-injury. Both groups report recreational use, while the group with SCI also highly endorses using cannabis to address chronic medical conditions. Clinicians should be aware of the high prevalence of cannabis use in these populations and the impact such use may have on the individual’s medical management. Further research in this area is needed

Sorgente: Cannabis Use in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury or Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in Colorado. – PubMed – NCBI

GeneFo Guide Explains How Medical Cannabis Can Help MS Patients

More studies are showing that medical cannabis can alleviate symptoms of multiple sclerosis (MS), according to a company that helps patients, doctors and others understand genetic conditions better.

The observation came in GeneFo’s 2018 Guide to Clinical Effects of Medical Cannabis.

Some research has suggested that cannabis strains containing cannabidiol (CBD) levels equal to or higher than tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) can help MS patients with muscle spasticity and pain. Other studies indicate that cannabis can help MS-related gastrointestinal problems, including constipation and difficulty with digestion.

Medical cannabis can also improve sleep quality and even vision, studies have indicated. They suggest that cannabis’ anti-inflammatory properties can help reduce inflammation of the optic nerve.

Despite evidence of benefits, GeneFo is concerned that cannabis is not yet legally approved for medical purposes in all states, which restrains access to treatments that could help MS patients.

The aim of the guide is to better inform patients about medical cannabis, including offering them help to navigate the legal and health systems.

In medical cannabis states, a person with a qualifying condition needs a physician’s recommendation to obtain authorization to visit dispensaries and buy cannabis products.

As of March 2018, MS waslisted as a qualifying condition in 18 U.S. states. An additional 18 states don’t list MS as a qualifying condition but do list MS symptoms like nausea, muscle spasms and pain.

“The growing number of states that qualify MS or its symptoms for the medical use of cannabis is great news for patients, Neer Ziskind, GeneFo’s chief executive officer, said in a press release.

Neer Ziskind

“However, the process of getting a card approval is not smooth in most states, and requires gathering information and documents, clinical certifications, and administrative forms,” he said. “To assist patients and caregivers that don’t always have the time or energy, we put together a comprehensive state-by-state guide, updated to March 2018, with relevant information on patient rights, application checklist, FAQ’s, crucial links and forms to download, important tips on how you should prepare for your doctor’s visit, and lists” of medical marijuana doctors.

In states where MS is not considered a qualifying condition, the GeneFo guide offers advice on making an application based on qualifying symptoms such as spasticity and pain.

“We trust that this free resource will help more MS patients secure an additional therapeutic avenue and improve their daily living,” Ziskind said.

There is no consensus in the medical community about the use of medical cannabis, despite evidence of its benefits mounting.

In February, a study reported that medical cannabis could safely and significantly reduce chronic pain in older people with MS and a wide range of other conditions.

Most patients reported improvements in their condition, with 93.7 percent reporting a significant decrease in pain six months after starting treatment. About 60 percent of respondents reported an improved quality of life.

Also, this month the American TV personality Montel Williams announced he would speak at the 5th annual Cannabis World Congress and Business Exposition in New York City, May 30 to June 2, to discuss medical cannabis legalization.

Williams, who has MS, is a prominent medical cannabis advocate and the owner of LenitivLabs, a company he started to develop high-quality cannabis products

 

 

https://multiplesclerosisnewstoday.com/2018/03/20/genefo-medical-cannabis-guide-multiple-sclerosis/?utm_medium=desktop-push-notification&utm_source=Notifications&utm_campaign=OneSignal

#ACTRIMS2018 – Clene Nanomedicine Presents Positive Results for MS Remyelinating Therapy

Clene Nanomedicine says its pre-clinical studies demonstrate the remyelination effects of CNM-Au8, supporting its potential to treat multiple sclerosis (MS) and other demyelinating disorders.

Clene presented its data in a session, “Nanocrystalline Gold As a Novel Remyelination Therapeutic for Multiple Sclerosis,” that took place at the third annual Americas Committee for Treatment and Research in Multiple Sclerosis (ACTRIMS) Forum in, held Feb. 13 in San Diego.

In MS, demyelination — the loss of the myelin sheaths surrounding neurons — is accompanied by a disturbance in the ability of nerve cells to conduct signals to and from the brain.

CNM-Au8 is an orally administered gold nanocrystal suspension that triggers oligodendrocyte cells to produce new myelin. Oligodendrocyte precursor cells are present in adult brains and have been detected in and around MS lesions. Yet they must be activated into mature oligodendrocytes in order to produce new myelin. CNM-Au8 induces the activation and differentiation of oligodendrocyte precursor cells.

CNM-Au8 has been shown to induce remyelination in multiple animal models of MS. Researchers demyelinated these animal models either by feeding them cuprizone, a toxin, to demyelinate neurons in the central nervous system, or injecting them with lysolecithin to demyelinate spinal nerve axons.

In the lysolecithin model, through the use of Luxol fast blue (LFB) staining, CNM-Au8 was found to induce remyelination. Researchers commonly use LFB to observe myelin under a microscope. Furthermore, behavioral and fine motor assays in cuprizone-treated mice showed that CNM-Au8 restored behavioral function following demyelination.

The results also suggested that CNM-Au8 enhances cellular bioenergetic processes, which most likely helps increase myelination.

One of the major drawbacks to therapies now used to treat MS is that they don’t work to remyelinate MS lesions.

Mark S. Freedman

“Remyelination of MS lesions represents an important unmet clinical need unaddressed by current therapies,” Mark S. Freedman, neurology professor at Canada’s University of Ottawa, said in a press release. “Clene’s preclinical remyelination data are very encouraging, and the proposed mechanism of action of enhanced bioenergetics driving cellular differentiation and myelin production is unique and represents a paradigm shift in MS therapeutics.”

Added Clene’s CEO, Rob Etherington: “The therapeutic potential of CNM-Au8 for helping patients with demyelinating disorders is significant. No other drugs approved for the treatment of MS have been shown to remyelinate chronic MS-induced lesions.

For this reason, we are looking forward to the launch of our VISIONARY-MS Phase 2 trial in the summer of 2018 with oral administration of CNM-Au8 in adults with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis who suffer from chronic optic neuropathy.”

Clene, which is headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah, collaborated with Stephen D. Miller of Northwestern University and Robert H. Miller of George Washington University in these pre-clinical studies.

 

 

 

 

 

https://multiplesclerosisnewstoday.com/2018/02/07/clene-nanomedicine-announces-preclinical-results-cnm-au8-remyelinating-treatment-multiple-sclerosis/?utm_source=Multiple+Sclerosis&utm_campaign=11e7ccf96f-RSS_NON-US_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5fb7a3dae-11e7ccf96f-71362689

Medical Marijuana Constitutional Amendment Possible in Nebraska

Sen. Anna Wishart

 Yesterday, Nebraska Sen. Anna Wishart introduced Legislative Resolution 293CA. If the Legislature passes this resolution, Nebraskans will finally have the chance to vote on medical marijuana. “Tens of thousands of Nebraskans are needlessly suffering because they don’t have access to medical cannabis, including veterans, children and the terminally ill,” Sen. Wishart said. “Nebraska leaders have failed to act and provide these Nebraskans and their doctors the freedom to make decisions for their patients, without fear.”

Sen. Wishart has been a stalwart ally to patients in Nebraska, having been the primary sponsor of last year’s medical marijuana bill. The legislature failed to act on this important issue in last year’s session, but with this year’s resolution, the legislature could let the people of Nebraska make the right choice to give patients access to medicine they desperately need.

A February 2017 poll showed that 83% of Nebraskans support medical marijuana conceptually, and 77% support the ballot initiative.

 

 

 

https://blog.mpp.org/medical-marijuana/medical-marijuana-constitutional-amendment-possible-nebraska/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogmpp+%28MPP+Blog%29

Sativa vs. Indica vs. Hybrid: What’s the Difference Between Cannabis Types?

When browsing Leafly or purchasing cannabis at a shop, you may notice strains are commonly broken up into three distinct groups: indica, sativa, and hybrid. Most consumers have used these three cannabis types as a touchstone for predicting effects:

Indica strains are believed to be physically sedating, perfect for relaxing with a movie or as a nightcap before bed.
Sativas tend to provide more invigorating, uplifting cerebral effects that pair well with physical activity, social gatherings, and creative projects.
Hybrids are thought to fall somewhere in between the indica-sativa spectrum, depending on the traits they inherit from their parent strains.
This belief that indicas, sativas, and hybrids deliver distinct effects is so deeply rooted in mainstream cannabis culture that budtenders typically begin their strain recommendations by asking you which of these three types you prefer.

However, data collected by cannabis researchers suggests these categories aren’t as prescriptive as one might hope—in other words, there’s little evidence to suggest that indicas and sativas exhibit a consistent pattern of chemical profiles that would make one inherently sedating and the other uplifting. We do know that indica and sativa cannabis look different and grow differently, but this distinction is primarily useful only to cannabis cultivators.

So how exactly did the words “indica” and “sativa” make it into the vernacular of cannabis consumers worldwide, and to what extent are they meaningful when choosing a strain?

The words “indica” and “sativa” were introduced in the 18th century to describe different species of cannabis: Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica. The term sativa, named by Carl Linneaus, described hemp plants found in Europe and western Eurasia, where it was cultivated for its fiber and seeds. Cannabis indica, named by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, describes the psychoactive varieties discovered in India, where it was harvested for its seeds, fiber, and hashish production.

 

 

https://www.leafly.com/news/cannabis-101/sativa-indica-and-hybrid-differences-between-cannabis-types?utm_campaign=Roost&utm_source=Roost&utm_medium=push

Mid-term sustained relief from headaches after balloon angioplasty of the internal jugular veins in patients with multiple sclerosis

Objectives

Multiple sclerosis (MS) patients frequently suffer from headaches and fatigue, and many reports have linked headaches with intracranial and/or extracranial venous obstruction. We therefore designed a study involving MS patients diagnosed with obstructive disease of internal jugular veins (IJVs), with the aim of evaluating the impact of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) on headache and fatigue indicators.

Methods

286 MS patients (175 relapsing remitting (RR), 75 secondary progressive (SP), and 36 primary progressive (PP)), diagnosed with obstructive disease of IJVs, underwent PTA of IJVs during the period 2011–2015. This included 113 headache positive patients (82 RR, 22 SP, and 9 PP) and 277 fatigue positive patients (167 RR, 74 SP, and 36 PP). Migraine Disability Assessment(MIDAS), and the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS) were evaluated: before PTA; 3-months after PTA; and at final follow-up in 2017. Patients were evaluated with Doppler sonography of the IJVs at 1, 6 and 12 months after PTA and yearly thereafter. Non-parametric statistical analysis was performed using a combination of the Friedman test and Spearman correlation analysis.

Results

With the exception of the PP patients there were significant reductions (all p < 0.001) in the MIDAS and FSS scores in the 3-month following PTA. The improvement in MIDAS score following PTA was maintained throughout the follow-up period in both the RR (p < 0.001; mean of 3.55 years) and SP (p = 0.002; mean of 3.52 years) MS cohorts. With FSS, significant improvement was only observed at 2017 follow-up in the RR patients (p < 0.001; mean of 3.37 years). In the headache-positive patients, post-PTA MIDAS score was significantly negatively correlated with the change in the blood flow score in the left (r = -0.238, p = 0.031) and right (r = -0.250, p = 0.023) IJVs in the RR patients and left IJV (r = -0.727, p = 0.026) in the PP patients. In the fatigue-positive cohort, post-PTA FSS score was also significantly negatively correlated with the change in blood flow in the right IJV in the PP patients (r = -0.423, p = 0.010). In addition, the pre and post-PTA FSS scores were significantly positively correlated in the fatigue-positive RR (r = 0.249, p = 0.001) and SP patients (r = 0.272, p = 0.019).

 

 

 

Sorgente: Mid-term sustained relief from headaches after balloon angioplasty of the internal jugular veins in patients with multiple sclerosis