Dr. Matthew Hill

speaker
614 appearances 1 recordings 1 series first heard Jul 2024 last heard Jul 2024

Dr. Matthew Hill’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.

Trend

recordings per month · last 12 months
No recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.

Appearances

newest first · ▶ plays the moment
relatively well established most people would agree that uh acutely intoxication with cannabis doesn't pair memory processes in some capacity what explicit form of memory i don't think i could speak to comfortably just because i'm not a memory researcher and i know there's very specific things of like episodic and declarative and whatnot so um i can't say that but i'd say it's kind of generally and i mean again you can replicate this in animals where if you train them on a task while they're under the influence they don't seem to have consolidated that information as well um
But again, I don't really think there's super compelling evidence that there's kind of long-term permanent effects on cognitive function in individuals who use cannabis. At least I've never seen anything that's replicable or reliable or stable in any way. So, yeah.
Yeah. I mean, I don't actually even think it matters if it's high THC in the cannabis. I think like some people can get very intoxicated off of very, very low doses of cannabis.
I mean, you look at edibles, for example. I mean, this may be an interesting segue into root of administration stuff because I think it's an important point that a lot of people don't recognize is the difference between Between someone inhaling cannabis versus someone orally consuming cannabis is like a different game.
Which is very fast.
I don't know if it's different than nicotine. I'm not sure. Again, I don't know if I would say that, but yeah, it's very fast.
Two to five minutes, I would say. It's pretty fast. I mean, so this is one of the things with cannabis is – And again, this will kind of go into this idea of the change in potency of the plant as well. Yeah. it's pretty quick and people titrate cannabis pretty well. Like at least people who've used it a couple of times and understand this.
Depending again on how you, so again, this can vary. So like, you know, cannabis from the 70s was like, I don't know, 5% THC, let's say. It was pretty low. And nowadays cannabis is, a lot of the commercial stuff is between 20 and 30. Although whether those are super accurate numbers, not entirely clear, but so it's gone up a fair amount.
Yeah. Basically, you're talking about a beer or a wine to a spirit.
So I would say this is what's super interesting. And this was something that came out of the way that cannabis research is done, certainly in the States. And Canada has been quite behind on this, even with legalization, we haven't caught up.
But they have been doing lab-based studies of cannabis, you know, Meg Haney, Harriet DeWitt, this cluster of researchers around the country, Ziva Cooper at UCLA here, have all done this where, you know, you have people come into the lab, you give them cannabis, you measure subjective outcomes or neuroimaging outcomes or whatnot. So to do this,
you can't use commercial cannabis and pre even like the state by state legalizations hasn't changed this. So if you are doing cannabis research in humans and you're funded by like NIDA, which is National Institute of Drug Abuse, you get all your cannabis sourced I mean, this may be changing. I think there are some shifts that are happening.
But historically, in all the literature that we would talk about that's kind of pre the last couple of years, all that cannabis came from one source, which was, I believe, a farm in Mississippi that was essentially funded by NIDA to produce cannabis. Lucky farm. Yeah.
Well, the cannabis that came out of it, though – and this is one of the reasons a lot of the clinical stuff people have kind of been like, oh, I don't know how representative this is because it reflects cannabis that I would say is more from like the 70s or 80s. So it would be like 5% to 9% kind of THC cannabis. Now –
when you put someone in a lab setting and you get them to smoke to level of intoxication, people would take, you know, whatever, eight tokes, let's say, something like that. And that's where they would stop. And so, you know, a lot of the labs that use this have always been like, our people who are regular cannabis users are getting high off of it.
It's not as potent as the stuff that's on the street, but they're clearly getting intoxicated from it and it's giving us reliable data. So when they started looking at the blood levels of THC that you achieve, it was around 100 nanograms per ml of THC, give or take. That seemed to be where it was. Now, because of the way that you can legally study cannabis in the States,
You couldn't just go down to a dispensary and buy the products that everyone on the street are using, which is kind of like it's been a weird thing for a lot of people because they're like, why wouldn't you study what we're using? But because of the legal aspects of this, you couldn't bring those products into the lab. They'd never been standardized.
No one knew exactly what was in them, pesticides, all this other stuff that could influence it. So from a safety perspective, it was always like, no, you use the cannabis that's sourced from NIDA.
So there's a group in Colorado, Kent Hutchinson and Angela Bryan and Cinnamon Bidwell have kind of, I would say, became very creative actually to figure out how to study cannabis that's being used, I call it, in the wild, like in kind of an ecological setting, let's say. And so they created what was called the Canavan.
And the Canavan was a way to study people using products on the street, but not have them come into a laboratory setting where it was complicated. And so what they would do is they would drive the Canavan to someone's house, but they'd be parked on the street.
Showing 161–180 of 614 · page 9 of 31 ← Previous Next →