Pregnant vaping?

[EverythingsHazy]

I’m pretty sure nobody on this forum understands the ECS enough to know when it would benefits from supplementation, and how much is appropriate. More isn’t always better.

It’s highly irresponsible to advise a pregnant person to do anything that will affect her bodily functions in unknown ways.

People here so badly want to convince themselves that Cannabis can do no harm, that they’ll argue in favor of doing things like driving while high or vaping while pregnant.

 

[C No Ego]

I was getting a bit agitated reading this thread but olivianewtonjohn totally took the words out of my mouth.

While endocannabinoids might be important to health we should not take the more/bigger = better approach, especially when dealing with such topics as pregnancy. To say that taking in a whole bunch of external cannabinoids = healthy endocannabinoid system without meta-analysis of tons of studies is ludicrous.

Lots of vitamins and things like salt are essential for health, but too much of many of them can have extremely detrimental effects on health.

Also some really shocking references here guys, to know things you really have to get your information from the primary literature, CNN, thedailymail etc just write whatever people are going to look at and cannot really be trusted. Even peer reviewed science has inherent bias and studies individually mean very little, its through the combination of many studies that we start to build a picture.

Knowledge is hard to acquire and people are often swayed by random posts from unknown people on the internet, while the information does not really exist at present please refrain from making big statements like 'Consuming cannabis while pregnant is healthy for everyone'.

again- the realness here as my example of a pregnant mother with cancer consuming massive quantities of cannabis oil ( RSO- RSHO- etc.... ) to cure her cancer WHILE PREGNANT... whats the harms ther? please come up with something as the realness of wanting to live and how biology uses cannabinoids overrides anything you can say IMO... again - a pregnant mother with cancer adding vital signalling molecules ( phytocannabinoids) into her biology to make it work better and to metabolize canacer away... a healthy mother with no cancer is better for the baby than he mother dying before th ebaby ios born or defects from cancer etc.... and I brinh this up because thousands upon thousands of people have healed with high dose oil and a few were pregnant mothers with cancer... LOOK IT UP

I’m pretty sure nobody on this forum understands the ECS enough to know when it would benefits from supplementation, and how much is appropriate. More isn’t always better.

It’s highly irresponsible to advise a pregnant person to do anything that will affect her bodily functions in unknown ways.

People here so badly want to convince themselves that Cannabis can do no harm, that they’ll argue in favor of doing things like driving while high or vaping while pregnant.

Read above ^

CANNABIS is a bio- lipid = humans are carbon based life forms--- get the connection

 

[MinnBobber]

@C No Ego , this post makes me very sad. Does it do that to you too?

This post really shows the widespread ignorance/lack of knowledge regarding cannabis, what it is and what it is not. It
shows what decades of lies and propaganda do, even to some regular cannabis users

Some people act like cannabis is a new phenomenon, rather than it having a 6000 plus year history of being the
most effective, most widely used, and safest medicine the world has ever known. After billions of "doses", no
one has ever died from a cannabis overdose. Even "water" cannot make that claim....

It's a very exciting time as "we know" why it works, as it is a supplement to our own ECS endocannabinoids.
I should say "we" = those who take the time and effort to learn about the ECS as it is the key to it all.
If you choose to learn about the ECS, you soon realize that almost everyone has an ECS deficiency as that's a
simple dietary/chemical equation. It takes Omega 3s to make endocannabinoids and most certainly don't get
enough Omega 3s. Add in the aging process, toxic environment, etc and the ECS deficit only gets bigger.

Yet some have a relentless mantra, "what about the negatives for cannabis"? Yes, please inform the rest of us about all these negatives as massive studies were conducted, clearly with 99% of them intent to find/highlight the negatives and the
results: almost no negatives or looking at the big picture, negatives so small in comparison to the benefits/ positives
that they are less than insignificant.

Is there any substance which has a "benefit: harm ratio" even close to cannabis? I'd like to hear people's thoughts.

 

[C No Ego]

in olden days the cannabis oil was called pitch - tar , and would be used to rub on the area, poultices etc.... pregnant women= everyone.. back then it was just a plant that you made something out of like all the other plants used... common sense

 

[EverythingsHazy]

The fact that some people here still argue that cannabis is safer than water just shows that they don’t know enough about the human body to give others health/medical advice.

Every time I see a post with that comparison, I lose a bit of faith in the Cannabis community.

CANNABIS is a bio- lipid = humans are carbon based life forms--- get the connection

Again, that doesn’t mean that we know the right amount to have in our bodies. Just repeating scientific terms doesn’t help anyone. Being carbon based life forms does not mean that ingesting any amount of Cannabis will both beneficial and risk free.

 

[chris 71]

@C No Ego


shows what decades of lies and propaganda do, even to some regular cannabis users

i have suggested this same thing before , its amazing to me how our minds can be manipulated by those in charge our education on things in life .

this is especially true if we are exposed to this type of training ( brain washing ) at a young age . its extremely , extremely difficult to break free from this kind of indoctrination . we were told it was bad growing up and man its hard to shake . especially for some ....

and they say cannabis is bad for the developing brain ... i say there are much worse things for the developing brain .... say like the teachers of the wrong ideals of the times

remember also science is always finding out things which were once thought to be the answer turn out to have a different answer altogether .

and also a fitting quote ....

In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual

Galileo Galilei

 

[BaroneBarra]

and also a fitting quote ....

In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual

Galileo Galilei

I mean, not really. One could actually argue that the quote means the opposite of what you're suggesting.

Galileo's time was very different from today.
Not only the geocentric model was the common opinion, you couldn't have a different one. Galileo was "tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", and forced to recant. He spent the rest of his life under house arrest".

What we have now are peer-reviewed studies, prepared following the scientific method Galileo put into writing. To say he would be on board with the recent outbreaks of laymen convinced they are the repository of absolute truths (anyone say vaccines?) would just be wrong. They are as ill-informed and arrogant as the 17th's century Roman church was, so his way of thinking couldn't be more distant from theirs.

It's interesting seeing how some of you pointed out that we should use common sense.
Common sense, when talking about pregnancy and brain development in children, would advise me to err on the side of caution.
I might be convinced - as a non-doctor - that cannabis is not only safe, but beneficial in a lot of situations (and I am). It's just the game isn't worth the candle, imho.

 

[chris 71]

It's interesting seeing how some of you pointed out that we should use common sense.
.

to me this is the point of the quote , it has been my experience that common sense is lacking and and perhaps even forgotten about . especially by the training of our doctors and such . they rely on there training to be steadfastly correct .

and old the Galileo quote may be , but history shows that old does not always mean out dated .

to think we are at the ultimate height of knowledge now , just because its 2018 . is im sure , going to look the same as looking back at the 1600 in 400 years , if we are stiil here . this is still the stone age of what we may come to know as we speed faster into the secrets of the universe lol

look , i dont know if cannabis is good or bad or for pregnancy . and i also probably wouldn't tell my wife or sis or whoever to smoke joints all day long while pregnant . im just pointing out to certain posters that things change in what we know at any given time . even with our top scientific minds and figurings
what we know or think we know now can and often does change

this again i believe for me anyway , is what the quote is saying , think for your self that is were all the most enlighten learning has come from , no ?

 

[C No Ego]

The fact that some people here still argue that cannabis is safer than water just shows that they don’t know enough about the human body to give others health/medical advice.

Every time I see a post with that comparison, I lose a bit of faith in the Cannabis community.


Again, that doesn’t mean that we know the right amount to have in our bodies. Just repeating scientific terms doesn’t help anyone. Being carbon based life forms does not mean that ingesting any amount of Cannabis will both beneficial and risk free.

the fact it is a bio-active metabolite 100% says - it metabolizes.... what more info or proof etc.... cellular metabolism , molecular receptor signalling, = metabolism... I've presented the cannabis molecular info and how the molecules act and metabolize... anything more is speculation and fear IMO... sure it's best to be safe but its also best to look at the science and proven biological molecular recognition, biological metabolic adjustments...

the biggest issue- my post about cannabis concentrated oil healing cancer is no joke at all... it's up to you to know this or not... the same mechanistic action potentials that cannabis created cannabinoids have in our biology to help metabolize cancer away is the same mechanistic action that provides cellular metabolism @ any level... levels of cannabinoids will determine effects etc as you mention... a lesser quantity than used for treating cancer would do the exact same thing just at a lesser level... it is why I highly recommend cannabis as a minor boost adjustment to better metabolism- cellular metabolism

no one else in this thread has said anything about omegas and lipids and cells' metabolism and natural endocannabinoid production etc save for @MinnBobber .... I'm assuming about less than 5% of people know this info and rely on news channel 11 to fill in the rest

 

[Dirtrider]

IMO - Don't use booze, cannabis, cigs, or any other drug when pregnant.

 

[Tranquility]

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/895073

FLORENCE, Italy — Both mothers and fathers who use cannabis during pregnancy are more likely to have children who experience psychotic symptoms, new research suggests.

An analysis of more than 3500 families showed that maternal cannabis use was linked to a 38% increased risk for psychotic symptoms in offspring at 10 years of age; cannabis use among fathers was associated with a 44% increased risk.

Led by Koen Bolhuis, MD, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, the investigators also found there was a similar association with offspring psychotic symptoms and maternal cannabis use both before and after pregnancy.

They conclude that these findings demonstrate "that maternal and paternal cannabis use were each associated with offspring psychotic symptoms at age 10 years, well before the risk period of adolescent cannabis use initiation."


The findings were presented here at the Schizophrenia International Research Society (SIRS) 2018 Biennial Meeting........​

 

[Dirtrider]

Don't do any drugs, legal or illegal, when pregnant. If given by a Dr. be very careful and many birth defects arise from prescription drugs as well. I am speaking from first hand experience. If you can't take 9 months off, don't have kids. Do what you want, but leave the child out of it. They can make their own decisions later about the chemicals they put in their body - good or bad. I don't care if you have had 100 kids, don't put drugs in your kids, it is not up to you. Would you let your infant take bong hits? Same thing.

 

[Summer]

An analysis of more than 3500 families showed that maternal cannabis use was linked to a 38% increased risk for psychotic symptoms in offspring at 10 years of age; cannabis use among fathers was associated with a 44% increased risk.​

The paternal figure makes no sense to me. The mother using cannabis throughout a 9 month pregnancy, I get that, but apart from fertilization & the mother inhaling smoke exhaled from the father when partaking, how is 44% even possible?

@Dirtrider, I completely concur. Better to be safe than sorry. And if you can't abstain for 9 months for the best possible outcome for a child, "your child," then, in my opinion, you are too selfish to be a good parent.

 

[Tranquility]

The paternal figures make no sense to me. The mother using cannabis throughout a 9 month pregnancy, I get that, but apart from fertilization & the mother inhaling smoke exhaled from the father when partaking, how is 44% even possible?

@Dirtrider, I completely concur. Better to be safe than sorry. And if you can't abstain for 9 months for the best possible outcome for a child, "your" child, then, in my opinion, you are too selfish to be a good parent.

If you go to the article, it is clear the authors don't necessarily believe the source of the problem has to do with interuterine exposure. It might be other factors.

Noting that the impact of maternal and paternal cannabis use was comparable, the investigators say this suggests that "common etiologies, rather than solely causal intrauterine mechanisms, underlie the association between parental cannabis use and offspring psychotic symptoms, shedding potential new light on the debated causal path from cannabis use to psychosis."​

 

[little maggie]

Just wondering how many women have responded to this thread. Personally, until there is more fetal research on the effect of cannabis on the developing brain I think it's safest to avoid cannabis. And while there are worse things than cannabis that impact the fetus those are best avoided as well.
I'm sure that research is already going on and, as attitudes change, the focus will be on the positives and negatives and not just the negatives.

Still, most of the research and decisions will be made by men as are most of the comments on this thread. And that's concerning.

 

[Summer]

Still, most of the research and decisions will be made by men as are most of the comments on this thread. And that's concerning.

I don't find it concerning at all. Valid trials are valid trials & results are results regardless of the gender of the researchers. Men have as much stake in having healthy children as women do.

@OldNewbie, as far as interuterine is concerned, if women ingest weed directly or indirectly it would seem logical that fetuses would be more affected %-wise than men, unless sperm is the deciding factor. However, if a child is affected only by indirect inhalation then that is the only way that the male % can be higher. Just from reading this board, many men have female partners that don't partake.

 

[MinnBobber]

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/895073

FLORENCE, Italy — Both mothers and fathers who use cannabis during pregnancy are more likely to have children who experience psychotic symptoms, new research suggests.

An analysis of more than 3500 families showed that maternal cannabis use was linked to a 38% increased risk for psychotic symptoms in offspring at 10 years of age; cannabis use among fathers was associated with a 44% increased risk....

...............................................................................................................

Making any conclusions is very premature as this study is not anywhere near showing a casual relationship.

And the raw numbers seem very suspect to me:
3500 families yet:
"The team found that 183 mothers used cannabis; 98 did so before pregnancy, and 85 did so during pregnancy. In addition, 386 women continued tobacco smoking during pregnancy. Cannabis use was reported by 297 fathers."

??? Only 183 moms out of 3500 families used cannabis?? Tobacco was used by 386 moms during pregnancy--- which has a much worse effects on a fetus, etc.
................................................................

"Commenting on the findings for Medscape Medical News, Richard Saitz, MD, MPH, chair and professor, Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health, Massachusetts, said that he hesitates "to draw any firm conclusions," because few details of the study have been provided and the study has not been fully peer reviewed.

"For example, we do not know how many children experienced psychotic symptoms, nor do we know what potential confounders were adjusted for, and the differences between the adjusted and unadjusted models seem minimal, which could either suggest there is little confounding to worry about, or that the right confounders were not included," he said."
..........................................................................................................

The Jamaican study of cannabis and pregnancy showed no developmental differences between cannabis and non-cannabis kids at 1 day, 30 days, 4 years, 5 years and those were moms doing big ol' Jamaican ganja blunts--nasty combustion.

The posted study is very premature with many important details absent.

Think endocannabinoid system folks--even more important that the ECS has ample cannabinoids during pregnancy.

EDIT-- Jamaican Study addition: I said no difference in cannabis vs non kids BUT to be forthwright, the kids with cannabis moms came out better on some elements:

"Dr. Dreher and her team compared babies of Jamaican women who smoked marijuana during pregnancy and those who did not. The researchers tested infants on a variety of functions one, three, and 30 days after birth. Their findings were surprising: cannabis-exposed babies scored significantly higher in their reflex tests as well as tests of basic functions like blood pressure and heart rate. The infants of cannabis-using moms were also less irritable and more alert.

Dreher’s team then followed up with the children at ages four and five. The follow-up study used the McCarthy Scales of Children’s Abilities to test IQ and behavioral performances. It also took home environment, and school attendance into account. The team found no difference between children in the two groups."

Peace, out

 

[EverythingsHazy]

Recommending Cannabis use during pregnancy on the basis of assuming that an unnatural level of cannabinoids in a mother's system is automatically better for the developing child, is foolish.

If something doesn't have a vast amount of scientific backing, and a strong consensus among medical professionals, it is safer to avoid it, than to test it out on your own.

We don't even know the full range of effects Cannabis has on fully developed (>25yrs old) adults, let alone developing fetuses.

The paternal figure makes no sense to me. The mother using cannabis throughout a 9 month pregnancy, I get that, but apart from fertilization & the mother inhaling smoke exhaled from the father when partaking, how is 44% even possible?

@Dirtrider, I completely concur. Better to be safe than sorry. And if you can't abstain for 9 months for the best possible outcome for a child, "your child," then, in my opinion, you are too selfish to be a good parent.

That figure does seem odd, at first, but perhaps it isn't representative solely of the medical effects that paternal Cannabis use has on children. It may very well be affected by the effects that having a Cannabis using parent has on children. They studied children up to 10 years of age, which means their gestational period was not the only time they were affected by the Cannabis using parent.

Perhaps, men who use Cannabis are more likely to carry certain psychosis inducing genes than their female mating partners, which would lead to those genes being passed on more frequently to their offspring.

Another possibility, is that Cannabis use might be associated with certain behavioral patterns that differ between male and female users. The behavioral patters exhibited by the male users might have an higher risk of inducing psychosis in their offspring, versus their female counterparts.

Always remember, Correlation =/= Causation!

 

[little maggie]

I don't find it concerning at all. Valid trials are valid trials & results are results regardless of the gender of the researchers. Men have as much stake in having healthy children as women do.

@OldNewbie, as far as interuterine is concerned, if women ingest weed directly or indirectly it would seem logical that fetuses would be more affected %-wise than men, unless sperm is the deciding factor. However, if a child is affected only by indirect inhalation then that is the only way that the male % can be higher. Just from reading this board, many men have female partners that don't partake.

It has been ages since I was last in school so things might have changed but back then there was considerable research on the effect of the researchers bias on results even with double blind studies etc.

 

[Dirtrider]

I can't believe people are dumb enough to propose smoking weed when pregnant. But I guess if people are dumb enough to do it, then they will argue in favor of it. Spend some time around a drug exposed kid and you will change your mind. But, I guess things are great in Jamaica - lol. I will even say don't do drugs (legal or illegal), men and women, if you are trying to have kids and during the pregnancy. It is not about you and what you want, protect the child.

 

[Tranquility]

I can't believe people are dumb enough to propose smoking weed when pregnant. But I guess if people are dumb enough to do it, then they will argue in favor of it. Spend some time around a drug exposed kid and you will change your mind. But, I guess things are great in Jamaica - lol. I will even say don't do drugs (legal or illegal), men and women, if you are trying to have kids and during the pregnancy. It is not about you and what you want, protect the child.

Look at something like B-12 and Folate in pregnancy. Too little? Increased potential of a devastating neural tube deficiency. Too much? Increased potential of autism.

Those are vitamins.

any of a group of organic compounds that are essential for normal growth and nutrition and are required in small quantities in the diet because they cannot be synthesized by the body.​

Of course, it is FAR more complex than a simple too little or too much. At the very least, there are some epigenetic factors involved in addition to the timing and method of ingestion.

The educated balance has doctors still generally recommending supplementation. But the recommendation is no longer perfunctory but based on careful review of the mother's history and status. Cannabis contains multiple drugs. Any of them may help or harm and any of them that help or harm may have a different effect depending on the levels used.

 

[Tranquility]

Use in pregnancy is correlated with psychosis of the child.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2729440

Abstract:
Mirroring increases in the general population, the prevalence of past-month marijuana use among pregnant mothers in the United States increased by 75% between 2002 (2.85%) and 2016 (4.98%).1 Although cannabis use has been linked to psychosis, little is known about prenatal exposure.2,3 Unprecedented increases in marijuana use during pregnancy, alongside evidence that cannabis use is correlated with psychosis and that endocannabinoids play an important role in neurodevelopment, highlight the importance of evaluating potential long-term consequences of prenatal exposure.4

 

[howie105]

Use in pregnancy is correlated with psychosis of the child.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/2729440

Abstract:
Mirroring increases in the general population, the prevalence of past-month marijuana use among pregnant mothers in the United States increased by 75% between 2002 (2.85%) and 2016 (4.98%).1 Although cannabis use has been linked to psychosis, little is known about prenatal exposure.2,3 Unprecedented increases in marijuana use during pregnancy, alongside evidence that cannabis use is correlated with psychosis and that endocannabinoids play an important role in neurodevelopment, highlight the importance of evaluating potential long-term consequences of prenatal exposure.4

The Fed forbid research for years so women were denied information at a possibly critical point in their and their children's lives. There isn't much you can say for ignorance on anybodies part on such matters.

 

[Tranquility]

The Fed forbid research for years so women were denied information at a possibly critical point in their and their children's lives. There isn't much you can say for ignorance on anybodies part on such matters.

I don't think this so much of a fed problem in this instance. Most times there is a problem with the feds on research, the research requires cannabis. Since the feds have the only federally-legal cannabis farm, and medical ethics requires one to follow the law, only with the agreement of the feds to supply the weed is there a way to deny research. They simply don't make an exception to the distribution laws and the study is squelched.

Here, the researchers did not supply the cannabis. The study took a previously created dataset and the researchers just made some hypotheses and tested them against the data. The only thing that could have possibly hindered them is if they demanded the feds pay for the querys. I see the link I supplied only goes to the abstract without registration. More explanation of how the study was done can be found here.

https://psychcentral.com/news/2019/...bis-may-bump-up-risk-of-psychosis/144125.html

...For the study, the researchers looked at data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, an ongoing longitudinal study of child health and brain development with data collection sites throughout the nation.

They pulled data from the initial ABCD baseline data release which included survey responses from 3,774 mothers about cannabis use during 3,926 pregnancies. Risk of psychosis in the 4,361 children born from these pregnancies between 2005 and 2008 was measured using a questionnaire administered to the children between ages 8.9 and 11 years.

Among the 4,361 children in the study, 201 (4.61 percent) were reported to have been exposed to cannabis before birth. Of these, 138 were exposed only before mothers knew they were pregnant; two were exposed only after the mother knew she was pregnant.

The researchers note that the study has many limitations, including the small sample of prenatal cannabis-exposed offspring; potential maternal underreporting of use during pregnancy; imprecise data on timing, amount, frequency and potency of cannabis exposure; absence of data on whether childhood psychosis proneness is associated with conversion to psychosis; and lack of data on some potential confounders, such as maternal stress and genetic risk of psychosis among parents.

“Our research is correlational and as such cannot draw causal conclusions,” said Allison Moreau, study co-author and a graduate student in psychology at Washington University....
​

 

[hinglemccringleberry]

I'm really surprised there hasn't been any differentiating of THC and CBD in this discussion. Pregnant women can vape all they want and incur the benefits of this wonderful plant... They just need to make sure they're consuming CBD products only for those 9 months. Avoid THC during pregnancy; it's common sense.