Does Weed Smoking Decrease Performance

[The Bear 10]

Results Of A Comprehensive Study of Cannabis Use and Psychosis in Later Life

 

August 1, 2007  A systematic review of longitudinal studies suggests there is sufficient new evidence that the use of cannabis (marijuana) increases the risk for later psychotic illness by roughly 40%. The study showed a trend towards an increased risk for depression in people who had used cannabis, but the evidence was not as strong.

 

The article by Theresa H.M. Moore, MSc, from the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom, and colleagues is published in the July 28 issue of The Lancet.

 

Study author Stanley Zammit, PhD, from Cardiff University in Wales, told Medscape that individuals who used cannabis on a weekly or daily basis had about a 2- to 3-fold increase in risk for psychotic outcomes, independent of transient intoxication or other confounding factors. He added, "We looked at the quality of the studies quite rigorously and feel the evidence is strong enough to warrant advising everyone, particularly young people, that the use of cannabis does potentially have some health risks, especially if they are using it on a regular basis."

 

Cannabis is the most commonly used illegal substance in most countries, the authors write, adding that in the United Kingdom and New Zealand, about 1 in 5 young people report using cannabis weekly or having used it more than 100 times. Previous studies have suggested that cannabis use can produce transient, usually mild, psychotic and affective experiences, but whether it increases the incidence of mental health outcomes such as schizophrenia or depression is unclear.

 

The group searched for population-based longitudinal studies that looked at the relationship between cannabis use and subsequent psychotic and affective outcomes. They found 11 studies from 7 cohorts that looked at psychotic outcomes and 24 studies from 15 cohorts that looked at affective outcomes.

 

Increased Risk, Dose-Response Effect

The researchers found a consistent increased risk for psychotic outcomes in the people who had ever used cannabis (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20 - 1.65), with a greater risk in individuals who had used it most frequently (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.54 - 2.84).

 

Most studies excluded people with psychosis at baseline, so this association between cannabis use and psychosis is unlikely to result from reverse causation, the group writes. The studies also adjusted for about 60 confounding factors. "People who use cannabis might be different from other people in a number of factors and some of those might increase their risk of mental health disease, but even once we had adjusted for these factors, there was still an association," Dr. Zammit said.

 

The evidence that cannabis use leads to depression, suicidal thoughts, and anxiety outcomes was less consistent. "Overall, the quality of the studies wasn't as robust as the studies for psychosis," said Dr. Zammit, adding that for example, many of the studies did not try to adjust for confounding factors.

 

Although an individual's lifetime risk of developing a serious psychotic illness is only about 2% or 3%, he added, cannabis can be expected to have a large impact at a population level because exposure to this drug is so common.

 

"The overall message is that people who use cannabis on a regular basis need to be aware of this risk, so they can make an informed judgement about whether they want to continue using it, or perhaps try to cut down their use," or seek treatment of dependency, he concluded.

 

Merete Nordentoft, MD, and Carsten Hjorthøj, from Copenhagen University Hospital in Denmark, write that the study is the most comprehensive meta-analysis to date of this possible causal relationship and the adjustment for confounding factors and transient effects "is done more thoroughly than in previous reviews." They report, "We therefore agree with the authors' conclusion that there is sufficient evidence to warn young people that cannabis use will increase the risk of psychosis later in life."The general public has considered cannabis to be relatively harmless in comparison with alcohol and opioids, they note, cautioning that, "however, the potential long-term hazardous effects of cannabis with regard to psychosis seem to have been overlooked, and there is a need to warn the public of these dangers, as well as to establish treatment to help young frequent cannabis users.

Thanks!

 

Doctor Janice

 

Thanks doc. I'll keep you in mind when I'm taking my next toke.

 

(Actually - i took a break over the summer and haven't puffed since June).

[Reaver 10]

...skunk bud, indica.....Skunk, bud, indica...Sativa, my reefer, la arriba

 

name that song...

[carcanaques 10]

I love pot. Makes me horny and sexy and that's why I wouldn't dream of getting high to trade. The best smoke I ever found was in Amsterdam. A small cafe with opiated moroccan hashish. Sticky and rolled in small pellets like peas. I bought a bag of it and stayed in my hotel for a week with a beautiful woman and room service.

[OAC 10]

I love pot. Makes me horny and sexy and that's why I wouldn't dream of getting high to trade. The best smoke I ever found was in Amsterdam. A small cafe with opiated moroccan hashish. Sticky and rolled in small pellets like peas. I bought a bag of it and stayed in my hotel for a week with a beautiful woman and room service.

 

Don't get any more juicier than this, otherwise you will be banned.

And you have not made any relevant post about trading since you became a member either.

[MC 10]

Even if mentally it won't harm your performance it will eat into your profits.

That $hit is so expensive to me it's a waste of money. But if your doing well money wise and want to treat yourself and you like weed I say why not.

[Reaver 10]

ha ha good point. Man it's been such a long time.

[The Bear 10]

I love pot. Makes me horny and sexy and that's why I wouldn't dream of getting high to trade. The best smoke I ever found was in Amsterdam. A small cafe with opiated moroccan hashish. Sticky and rolled in small pellets like peas. I bought a bag of it and stayed in my hotel for a week with a beautiful woman and room service.

 

Are you a female? If so please give me your TEL. I'm free tonight and I live in Toronto.

[Reaver 10]

Are you a female? If so please give me your TEL. I'm free tonight and I live in Toronto.

 

 

 

LOLOLOLOL

 

TL has a new matchmaking service. LOL

[aiki14 10]

I realize I am a newbie around here, But I'd like to encourage the smoking of weed by other traders. I'll be on the other side of those trades potentially, and if my opposite is of diminished capacity so much the better.

The market is a zero sum game for all intents and purposes, the big companies employ the guys who graduated first in their class at MIT, you bring your "A" game or you might as well just send your money to the folks who will.

[Reaver 10]

As one who hasn't partaken in many years....I would venture to say that for many daytraders it may not be the best of ideas to get stoned before trading ...others though, may benefit from not being so antsy.

 

Many snipers use valium and other anti-anxiolytics to calm their nerves and allow them to focus....in other words waiting for a long time can really mess with you..not to mention the anxiety associated with your job....

 

Perhaps some daytraders would benefit from the same concepts. Perhaps not.

 

Swing traders...well, I don't think it really makes a huge difference as long as you're sober when you're doing your research.

[OAC 10]

Are you a female? If so please give me your TEL. I'm free tonight and I live in Toronto.

 

How do you know she is Bi? Or not a drug addict with Aids or even worst, being sent to us from EliteTrader ?

[Reaver 10]

How do you know she is Bi? Or not a drug addict with Aids or even worst, being sent to us from EliteTrader ?

 

 

heh heh like we say down South...you're likely to get Gator Bit.

 

LOL

[The Bear 10]

I realize I am a newbie around here, But I'd like to encourage the smoking of weed by other traders. I'll be on the other side of those trades potentially, and if my opposite is of diminished capacity so much the better.

The market is a zero sum game for all intents and purposes, the big companies employ the guys who graduated first in their class at MIT, you bring your "A" game or you might as well just send your money to the folks who will.

 

True that.

 

It's also those top grad numbskulls from MIT who provide me with their lost money. Unfortunately in this high stakes game of short-term trading, no university degree will gain you the holy grail.

 

The game is old, but the players are always new.

[aiki14 10]

True that.

 

It's also those top grad numbskulls from MIT who provide me with their lost money. Unfortunately in this high stakes game of short-term trading, no university degree will gain you the holy grail.

 

The game is old, but the players are always new.

 

Much more likely that the lost money comes from more casual, and smaller traders. If you're getting any money off the "MIT numbskulls" it's because they're arbitraging a small percentage off both sides of a trade you happen to be on the winning side of. It's unlikely they notice you, or any individual trader for that matter.

The game is indeed old, and the reason the players are always new is most get swept out of the game by the real big money players.

I am interested in the reaction to any mention that the real big players are highly educated, math whiz types. There is no doubt that they are the big players, which implies it is a successful strategy to employ them or their methodologies, prepare oneself to compete against them, or sidecar along with them. So why is it that my mention of these things elicits such vitriol?

I am also wondering about your definition of "high Stakes", which I see as million dollar equity trades or 100 million dollar currency trades.

[OAC 10]

Fund managers in the U.S. are compensated not on how much money they have made for their clients, but based on their fund's performance as compared to the SP 500 benchmark . Another word, if the S&P index fell 15%this year and the fund only fell 10%, the fund manger can expect a large bonus, sometimes as large as 7 digits.

More example of big reward for corporate incompetence is the firing of Merril Lynch's CEO this week. The firm had its biggest quarterly loss in 95 years. And the severance package for Mr. O'Neil? a whopping $160 million.

Hey, may be it is a good idea to keep these MIT dudes around, because someday I may need them to help pay my children's college education.

[aiki14 10]

Fund managers in the U.S. are compensated not on how much money they have made for their clients, but based on their fund's performance as compared to the SP 500 benchmark . Another word, if the S&P index fell 15%this year and the fund only fell 10%, the fund manger can expect a large bonus, sometimes as large as 7 digits.

More example of big reward for corporate incompetence is the firing of Merril Lynch's CEO this week. The firm had its biggest quarterly loss in 95 years. And the severance package for Mr. O'Neil? a whopping $160 million.

Hey, may be it is a good idea to keep these MIT dudes around, because someday I may need them to help pay my children's college education.

 

Actually each fund uses a benchmark that has some correlation to their asset class, not necessarily the S&P. Performance against a benchmark is the only way to measure the effectiveness of management (Alpha). If the fund outperforms the benchmark index by your 5%, or in other words 5% alpha, management has earned their bonuses, even in your -10% versus -15% scenario. We use asset allocation diversification strategies to protect against down markets, calling the scenario above incompetence is not understanding the concept.

Mr. O'neill does not have a severance, he was not a contract employee. The $160-200 million is restricted stock and options bonuses he earned over 21 years as a Merrill employee in the same way every other employee of the firm does. He is not receiving a bonus for 2007 nor does his salary continue on after his date of termination. Additionally I believe he is a Harvard Alum. I am not defending Mr. Oneill, I wouldn't have put a guy who didn't come from the retail side of the house into the CEO position of the largest retail broker in the world, and I also see him as a "kiss up, kick down" kind of manager (same for Fakahany for that matter).

As an aside I played golf with my Merrill guy on monday, he is with the Private Banking and Investment Group (PBIG) and he says the brokers really like McCann as successor or Greg Fleming from the IB side.

And one thing thing I do agree with is keeping the MIT "dudes" around, as it would indicate you potentially have the assets to warrant an account at GS, and they won't even take your call without a million in AUM.

[OAC 10]

Actually each fund uses a benchmark that has some correlation to their asset class, not necessarily the S&P. Performance against a benchmark is the only way to measure the effectiveness of management (Alpha). If the fund outperforms the benchmark index by your 5%, or in other words 5% alpha, management has earned their bonuses, even in your -10% versus -15% scenario. We use asset allocation diversification strategies to protect against down markets, calling the scenario above incompetence is not understanding the concept.

Mr. O'neill does not have a severance, he was not a contract employee. The $160-200 million is restricted stock and options bonuses he earned over 21 years as a Merrill employee in the same way every other employee of the firm does. He is not receiving a bonus for 2007 nor does his salary continue on after his date of termination. Additionally I believe he is a Harvard Alum. I am not defending Mr. Oneill, I wouldn't have put a guy who didn't come from the retail side of the house into the CEO position of the largest retail broker in the world, and I also see him as a "kiss up, kick down" kind of manager (same for Fakahany for that matter).

As an aside I played golf with my Merrill guy on monday, he is with the Private Banking and Investment Group (PBIG) and he says the brokers really like McCann as successor or Greg Fleming from the IB side.

And one thing thing I do agree with is keeping the MIT "dudes" around, as it would indicate you potentially have the assets to warrant an account at GS, and they won't even take your call without a million in AUM.

 

Thank you for trying to educate me. I have a MBA and used to work for a Wall Street firm