Nelroy Giddings Arrest

Babyboomer parents and grandparents often wonder how it is possible that their kids may suffer grave consequences from smoking pot when they themselves turned out just fine. Legal troubles aside, researchers have found plenty of new evidence that Marijuana’s health risks haven been vastly underestimated by the users of yesteryear.

Pot also packs a bigger wallop now than it did in the ’70s. Marijuana has become more potent exposing users to much higher levels of THC, the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis. The brain’s functioning is greatly impacted by increasing impact of THC on its metabolism.

Using modern brain imaging, scientists have found that vital brain activities decline with the consumption of Marijuana, and the data shows that the effects are long-lasting – if damages can be reversed is largely unknown. Another big unknown is how a person’s genes and environment may cause the development of psychiatric disorders. Some studies have concluded that people with a certain gene variant are several times more likely to develop schizophrenia after repeated Marijuana consumption.

However, there are also voices of caution among Marijuana researchers that findings of those studies cannot be applied to the public at large. Igor Grant, director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research at the University of California doesn’t believe there is any compelling evidence that people develop more psychiatric problems, anxiety, depression, or even psychosis as a result of marijuana use. He says that if there was such a causal effect, the surge of the drug’s popularity in the ’60s and ’70s should have seen a distinct increase in cases of schizophrenia – which is apparently not the case.

Whichever way you choose to look at it, the statistics give good reason to be cautious: A recent National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that among marijuana users over age 12, almost 35 percent used marijuana 20 or more days in the past month.

Advertisements

Nelroy Giddings Arrest:

Nelroy Giddings was booked in Essex County, NJ for DRIVING ON THE REVOKED LIST.

Nelroy Giddings

Mugshots.com ID3874609
GenderM
Birth date3/14/1977
HeightN/A
Weight200 lb (91 kg)
RaceN/A
Hair ColorBLACK
Hair LengthN/A
Eye ColorBROWN
ComplexionMEDIUM
Marital StatusN/A
Booking NumberJ200710501
Permanent IDJ200710501
FBI NumberN/A
Photo NumberJ200710501
CitizenN/A
SBI NumberN/A
State Prison NumberN/A
CCIS Number07-313724
COB NumberN/A
Housing SectionN/A
Cell AssignedN/A
Commitment Date5/10/2007
Housing BlockN/A
BedN/A
Release Date5/16/2007
AliasN/A
Bond AmountN/A
DetainersN/A
Charges:
Case # Description Grade Off Date Jurisdiction Comm Date Dis Date Conv Date Sent Date Sentence Sent Type
DRIVING ON THE REVOKED LIST 05/10/2007

 

 

Research reduces barriers to drug treatment

Since elected officials have repeatedly proven that they are far more likely to lock up a drug addict then offer needed help, we need to change the way we try to improve access to treatment.

There are tens of millions of Americans with substance abuse problems requiring professional intervention, and only a small percentage of these people are getting the help that they need.

While undoubtedly a significant percentage of these people have the means to afford drug treatment, and for whatever reason choose not to get it; it is estimated that about 30% of these people, or many millions of Americans, have no health insurance coverage nor have the financial capabilities to afford comprehensive drug treatment expenses.

The fact that so many millions of Americans are slipping through the health coverage cracks in our Country should appeal to our humanitarian natures and induce a desire to enact change; but even if we view the issue callously and economically, we still come out far ahead by reducing the barriers to treatment entry.

Substance abuse cost’s Americans hundreds of billions of dollars a year in criminal and justice, health care and reduced productivity costs; and conservative estimates have 1$ spent on treatment reaping an eventual 7$ savings in societal costs. Since the numbers seem so overwhelmingly in favor of enacting social and economic change towards better treatment access, why are we not spending more public tax dollars on the very sound investment of drug treatment?

"Because drug treatments don’t work"

Well actually they do work, and drug rehab programs save countless thousands of lives a year…but the nature of addiction is such that often a single period of drug treatment doesn’t induce permanent change, and thus the treatment statistics per individual rehab visit are not particularly encouraging. It’s hard for public officials to publicly commit great resources to programs with such low success rates, and since incarceration and "getting tough on crime" are so much easier to sell to the electorate, we are continually enacting short sighted and ineffective policies.

I think that ideally we should divert a massive influx of dollars into both treatment programs and addictions research, but since I don’t think that this is likely to occur lacking enormous political will; we should instead concentrate on increasing spending into addictions research. We need to develop better pharmacological and treatment interventions, and once we do have something more concrete to offer, something that does increase the recovery rates per individual rehab visit, then I feel that the political motivation to fund needed substance abuse programming will materialize.

So get out the pen and paper, and if you’ve been touched by addiction either yourself or through the pains of a loved one, empathize with those that still need help, and let your State and Federal elected officials know that the funding of addictions treatment research is important to you.

How many more billions are spent in the development of hair loss, and erectile dysfunction medications than in all addictions research combined? Not that government funded Viagra trials…but still, it’s funny how our priorities can get so distorted.

Since elected officials have repeatedly proven that they are far more likely to lock up a drug addict then offer needed help, we need to change the way we try to improve access to treatment.

There are tens of millions of Americans with substance abuse problems requiring professional intervention, and only a small percentage of these people are getting the help that they need.

While undoubtedly a significant percentage of these people have the means to afford drug treatment, and for whatever reason choose not to get it; it is estimated that about 30% of these people, or many millions of Americans, have no health insurance coverage nor have the financial capabilities to afford comprehensive drug treatment expenses.

The fact that so many millions of Americans are slipping through the health coverage cracks in our Country should appeal to our humanitarian natures and induce a desire to enact change; but even if we view the issue callously and economically, we still come out far ahead by reducing the barriers to treatment entry.

Substance abuse cost’s Americans hundreds of billions of dollars a year in criminal and justice, health care and reduced productivity costs; and conservative estimates have 1$ spent on treatment reaping an eventual 7$ savings in societal costs. Since the numbers seem so overwhelmingly in favor of enacting social and economic change towards better treatment access, why are we not spending more public tax dollars on the very sound investment of drug treatment?

"Because drug treatments don’t work"

Well actually they do work, and drug rehab programs save countless thousands of lives a year…but the nature of addiction is such that often a single period of drug treatment doesn’t induce permanent change, and thus the treatment statistics per individual rehab visit are not particularly encouraging. It’s hard for public officials to publicly commit great resources to programs with such low success rates, and since incarceration and "getting tough on crime" are so much easier to sell to the electorate, we are continually enacting short sighted and ineffective policies.

I think that ideally we should divert a massive influx of dollars into both treatment programs and addictions research, but since I don’t think that this is likely to occur lacking enormous political will; we should instead concentrate on increasing spending into addictions research. We need to develop better pharmacological and treatment interventions, and once we do have something more concrete to offer, something that does increase the recovery rates per individual rehab visit, then I feel that the political motivation to fund needed substance abuse programming will materialize.

So get out the pen and paper, and if you’ve been touched by addiction either yourself or through the pains of a loved one, empathize with those that still need help, and let your State and Federal elected officials know that the funding of addictions treatment research is important to you.

How many more billions are spent in the development of hair loss, and erectile dysfunction medications than in all addictions research combined? Not that government funded Viagra trials…but still, it’s funny how our priorities can get so distorted.

Small first time doses of ecstasy proven to damage the brain

Ecstasy has now been proven harmful, even when taken in small doses by new users.

While previous clinical studies have proven that usage of MDMA, the serotonergic acting drug commonly called ecstasy, can have profound and lasting implications; Dutch researchers have found that even initial and limited exposure to the drug causes brain damage and leads to decreases in cognitive testing performances.

Heavy ecstasy use can cause depression, insomnia, irritability, confusion, poor cognition and poor memory performance; and this is not entirely surprising since the drug acts through a process of serotonin modification, and serotonin is uniquely important for mood and memory in the brain. Researchers previously however had no idea how much ecstasy use was required to cause these deficits, and how much impact a small amount of the drug would have.

A Dutch research group aimed to change this and undertook a before and after study of 188 volunteers who had never previously tried the drug, but were deemed at a high risk to try the drug in the future. Researchers performed brain scans on the volunteers before exposure to the drug, and additionally performed cognitive and memory testing on the subjects. After 18 months, 59 of these subjects had tried ecstasy, and they had consumed an average of 6 tablets each during this time period.

The rest of the volunteers had not.

The same scanning and testing was again performed, and researchers were surprised to find that even this small and initial exposure to ecstasy had caused significant impairments in cognitive testing, particularly in verbal memory performance, as well as in blood flow to certain regions of the brain. The damage was not severe but was significantly evident, and had occurred after the consumption of relatively small amounts of the drug.

The research leaders have as a result reported that in their clinical opinion, any exposure to ecstasy is harmful, and people should avoid experimenting with the drug due to the probability of long term brain damage.

A recent survey of American high school seniors indicates that almost 5% had tried the drug, and the usage of the drug seems to be on the rise. There is a mis perception as to the safety of the drug, and the public needs to know that ecstasy is not a safe drug, that long term use can cause serious damage and greatly increases the risk of experienced depression, and additionally that the damage to the brain starts occurring even after only small doses of the drug have been used.

I’ve never tried ecstasy, I guess I’m a bit of an old timer now, but I have no doubt that I would have tried it were I a teenager today. Ecstasy is perceived as a fairly safe and non addictive drug, and it’s unfortunate that this perception is false. The risks of the drug are high, and although I’ve no doubt that it’s a lot of fun; is one night of fun worth the risk of a life time of depression and other cognitive and affective side effects? If you use ecstasy regularly, get educated as to the health consequences of use, and consider stopping, or at least reducing your usage. Ecstasy can be addictive, and professional treatment may be required in some cases.

Ecstasy has now been proven harmful, even when taken in small doses by new users.

While previous clinical studies have proven that usage of MDMA, the serotonergic acting drug commonly called ecstasy, can have profound and lasting implications; Dutch researchers have found that even initial and limited exposure to the drug causes brain damage and leads to decreases in cognitive testing performances.

Heavy ecstasy use can cause depression, insomnia, irritability, confusion, poor cognition and poor memory performance; and this is not entirely surprising since the drug acts through a process of serotonin modification, and serotonin is uniquely important for mood and memory in the brain. Researchers previously however had no idea how much ecstasy use was required to cause these deficits, and how much impact a small amount of the drug would have.

A Dutch research group aimed to change this and undertook a before and after study of 188 volunteers who had never previously tried the drug, but were deemed at a high risk to try the drug in the future. Researchers performed brain scans on the volunteers before exposure to the drug, and additionally performed cognitive and memory testing on the subjects. After 18 months, 59 of these subjects had tried ecstasy, and they had consumed an average of 6 tablets each during this time period.

The rest of the volunteers had not.

The same scanning and testing was again performed, and researchers were surprised to find that even this small and initial exposure to ecstasy had caused significant impairments in cognitive testing, particularly in verbal memory performance, as well as in blood flow to certain regions of the brain. The damage was not severe but was significantly evident, and had occurred after the consumption of relatively small amounts of the drug.

The research leaders have as a result reported that in their clinical opinion, any exposure to ecstasy is harmful, and people should avoid experimenting with the drug due to the probability of long term brain damage.

A recent survey of American high school seniors indicates that almost 5% had tried the drug, and the usage of the drug seems to be on the rise. There is a mis perception as to the safety of the drug, and the public needs to know that ecstasy is not a safe drug, that long term use can cause serious damage and greatly increases the risk of experienced depression, and additionally that the damage to the brain starts occurring even after only small doses of the drug have been used.

I’ve never tried ecstasy, I guess I’m a bit of an old timer now, but I have no doubt that I would have tried it were I a teenager today. Ecstasy is perceived as a fairly safe and non addictive drug, and it’s unfortunate that this perception is false. The risks of the drug are high, and although I’ve no doubt that it’s a lot of fun; is one night of fun worth the risk of a life time of depression and other cognitive and affective side effects? If you use ecstasy regularly, get educated as to the health consequences of use, and consider stopping, or at least reducing your usage. Ecstasy can be addictive, and professional treatment may be required in some cases.