Search

Adolescence is a period of dramatic neural reorganization creating a period of vulnerability and the possibility for the development of psychopathology. The maturation of various neural circuits during adolescence depends, to a large degree, on one's experiences both physical and psychosocial. This occurs through a process of plasticity which is the structural and functional adaptation of the nervous system in response to environmental demands, physiological changes and experiences. During adolescence, this adaptation proceeds upon a backdrop of structural and functional alterations imparted by genetic and epigenetic factors and experiences both prior to birth and during the postnatal period. Plasticity entails an altering of connections between neurons through long-term potentiation (LTP) (which alters synaptic efficiency), synaptogenesis, axonal sprouting, dendritic remodeling, neurogenesis and recruitment (Skaper et al., 2017). Although most empirical evidence for plasticity derives from studies of the sensory systems, recent studies have suggested that during adolescence, social, emotional, and cognitive experiences alter the structure and function of the networks subserving these domains of behavior. Each of these neural networks exhibits heightened vulnerability to experience-dependent plasticity during the sensitive periods which occur in different circuits and different brain regions at specific periods of development. This report will summarize some examples of adaptation which occur during adolescence and some evidence that the adolescent brain responds differently to stimuli compared to adults and children. This symposium, "Experience during adolescence shapes brain development: from synapses and networks to normal and pathological behavior" occurred during the Developmental Neurotoxicology Society/Teratology Society Annual Meeting in Clearwater Florida, June 2018. The sections will describe the maturation of the brain during adolescence as studied using imaging technologies, illustrate how plasticity shapes the structure of the brain using examples of pathological conditions such as Tourette's' syndrome and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and a review of the key molecular systems involved in this plasticity and how some commonly abused substances alter brain development. The role of stimulants used in the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the plasticity of the reward circuit is then described. Lastly, clinical data promoting an understanding of peer-influences on risky behavior in adolescents provides evidence for the complexity of the roles that peers play in decision making, a phenomenon different from that in the adult. Imaging studies have revealed that activation of the social network by the presence of peers at times of decision making is unique in the adolescent. Since normal brain development relies on experiences which alter the functional and structural connections between cells within circuits and networks to ultimately alter behavior, readers can be made aware of the myriad of ways normal developmental processes can be hijacked. The vulnerability of developing adolescent brain places the adolescent at risk for the development of a life time of abnormal behaviors and mental disorders., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The number of people entering specialist drug treatment for cannabis problems has increased considerably in recent years. The reasons for this are unclear, but rising cannabis potency could be a contributing factor., Methods: Cannabis potency data were obtained from an ongoing monitoring programme in the Netherlands. We analysed concentrations of δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) from the most popular variety of domestic herbal cannabis sold in each retail outlet (2000-2015). Mixed effects linear regression models examined time-dependent associations between THC and first-time cannabis admissions to specialist drug treatment. Candidate time lags were 0-10 years, based on normative European drug treatment data., Results: THC increased from a mean (95% CI) of 8.62 (7.97-9.27) to 20.38 (19.09-21.67) from 2000 to 2004 and then decreased to 15.31 (14.24-16.38) in 2015. First-time cannabis admissions (per 100 000 inhabitants) rose from 7.08 to 26.36 from 2000 to 2010, and then decreased to 19.82 in 2015. THC was positively associated with treatment entry at lags of 0-9 years, with the strongest association at 5 years, b = 0.370 (0.317-0.424), p < 0.0001. After adjusting for age, sex and non-cannabis drug treatment admissions, these positive associations were attenuated but remained statistically significant at lags of 5-7 years and were again strongest at 5 years, b = 0.082 (0.052-0.111), p < 0.0001., Conclusions: In this 16-year observational study, we found positive time-dependent associations between changes in cannabis potency and first-time cannabis admissions to drug treatment. These associations are biologically plausible, but their strength after adjustment suggests that other factors are also important.

The Netherlands has seen an increase in Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentrations from approximately 8% in the 1990s up to 20% in 2004. Increased cannabis potency may lead to higher THC-exposure and cannabis related harm. The Dutch government officially condones the sale of cannabis from so called 'coffee shops', and the Opium Act distinguishes cannabis as a Schedule II drug with 'acceptable risk' from other drugs with 'unacceptable risk' (Schedule I). Even in 1976, however, cannabis potency was taken into account by distinguishing hemp oil as a Schedule I drug. In 2011, an advisory committee recommended tightening up legislation, leading to a 2013 bill proposing the reclassification of high potency cannabis products with a THC content of 15% or more as a Schedule I drug. The purpose of this measure was twofold: to reduce public health risks and to reduce illegal cultivation and export of cannabis by increasing punishment. This paper focuses on the public health aspects and describes the (explicit and implicit) assumptions underlying this '15% THC measure', as well as to what extent these are supported by scientific research. Based on scientific literature and other sources of information, we conclude that the 15% measure can provide in theory a slight health benefit for specific groups of cannabis users (i.e., frequent users preferring strong cannabis, purchasing from coffee shops, using 'steady quantities' and not changing their smoking behaviour), but certainly not for all cannabis users. These gains should be weighed against the investment in enforcement and the risk of unintended (adverse) effects. Given the many assumptions and uncertainty about the nature and extent of the expected buying and smoking behaviour changes, the measure is a political choice and based on thin evidence., (Copyright © 2016 Springer. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)