More Weed, More Problems – Twin Studies Show This Is a False Claim?

More weed, more problems? As in, if you smoke all day, every day, your life is probably a hot mess with no hope of redemption? According to a recent CU Boulder study, the answer to “more weed, more problems” is no.

According to researchers, legalizing recreational cannabis at the state level is not leading to an increase in substance use disorders. Or even increased use of illegal drugs among adults. In fact, it can even reduce problems related to alcohol abuse.

A study of over 4,000 twins from Colorado and Minnesota found no association between cannabis legalization and an increase in cognitive, psychological, social, relationship, or financial problems.

“We really haven’t found support for many of the harms that people fear from legalization,” said lead author Stephanie Zellers. “From a public health perspective, these results are reassuring.”

The study, published in Psychological Medicine, was conducted by researchers from the University of Minnesota, CU Boulder and the CU Anschutz Medical Campus. The study used data from two of the nation’s largest and longest-running twin studies: one at the IBG and the other at the Minnesota Center for Twin Family Research.

What are twin studies?

Can twin studies prove more weed doesn’t mean more problems? Now what are twin studies?

Twin studies are research designs that compare monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal) twins. The idea is that identical twins share all of their genes, while fraternal twins only share about half of their genes.

Therefore, any differences between the two types of twins can help researchers identify which traits or conditions are likely influenced by genetics and which are likely influenced by the environment. Researchers can use twin studies to study a wide range of topics, including genetics, development, and health.

IBG stands for Institute of Behavioral Genetics, a research center at the University of Colorado Boulder. The Minnesota Center for Twin Family Research at the University of Minnesota.

Both centers conduct twin studies and have been collecting data for years. And both centers are among the best-known and longest-running twin studies in the country. They provide researchers with a wealth of data on genetic and environmental factors related to human behavior and development.

The problem with studying

Of course, twin studies are not without criticism.

1. Assuming the same environments: Twin studies sometimes assume that identical and fraternal twins will grow up in similar environments, but that doesn’t always have to be the case. For example, identical twins may be treated more similarly than dizygotic twins, which could affect the results.
2. Limited generalizability: Researchers often conduct twinning studies on small, specific samples, such as twins from a specific country or region. This limits the generalizability of the results to other populations.
3. Lack of heritability: Twin studies estimate the amount of variation in a trait or condition due to genetics. But they don’t account for all of the genetic variations that can affect the trait or condition.
4. Complexity of human behavior: Many complex human behaviors and conditions, such as mental disorders or intelligence, are likely to result from multiple genes and environmental factors. Twin studies may not fully capture these interactions.
5. selection bias: Twins who volunteer for studies can be different from twins who don’t volunteer, which can skew the results.

Twin Studies Disprove More Weed, More Problems?

Researchers in this “more weed, more problems” study compared the 40% of twins living in states where recreational cannabis is legal to those living in states where it remains illegal for the overall impact to understand legalization.

Researchers have been tracking the participants, who range in age today from 24 to 49, since they were teenagers. They collected information about their use of alcohol, tobacco, cannabis and several other illicit drugs and assessed their general well-being.

By specifically comparing twins within 240 couples where one twin lives in a legal cannabis state and the other lives in a non-legal state, the researchers aimed to identify any changes caused by cannabis legalization.

The researchers previously found that identical twins living in states where recreational cannabis is legal tend to use it about 20% more often than their twins living in states where it remains illegal.

So does that mean more weed, more problems?

To answer this question, the team compared survey results examining 23 indicators of “psychosocial distress.” These include the use of alcohol and illegal drugs such as cocaine and heroin, mental stress, financial difficulties, cognitive problems, unemployment and relationship problems both at home and at work.

“We included everything we had data on with the goal of getting a comprehensive view of the effects on the whole person,” Zellers said. “Big picture, there isn’t much.”

No, more weed doesn’t mean more problems

So is “more weed, more problems” debunked?

Researchers found no link between legal cannabis and an increased risk of “cannabis use disorder” or addiction.

For years, critics have referred to cannabis as a “gateway drug” to harder substances like cocaine and heroin. The researchers found no changes after legalization.

“For the low-level cannabis use that made up the majority of users, legalization does not appear to increase the risk of substance use disorders in adults,” said co-author Dr. Christian Hopper.

This study not only challenges the “more weed, more problems” narrative, but also demonstrates the benefits of legal cannabis. People in lawful states are less likely to develop alcohol addiction problems, including drunk driving.

“Our study suggests that we shouldn’t be overly concerned about everyday adult use in a legalized environment. But no drug is risk-free,” said John Hewitt, professor of psychology and neuroscience at CU Boulder.

While the study found no adverse effects on the daily lives of cannabis-using adults, the study also found no evidence that legal cannabis benefited people’s cognitive, psychological, social, relational, or financial status.

Overall, the study seems to suggest the same thing as before. Substances are neutral. It is the person who can decide to use or abuse them. But the drugs themselves have no innate power of control.