The publication itself, which seems to be legit, and well done.

Haven't had a chance to read all of it, but it isn't badly executed by a quick scan.

Edit: I've had a chance to read it in full.

About half of it is over my head. Just don't have the biochemical background to be able to interpret much of the metabolites they were measuring.

That being said, that stuff isn't actually important for casual interest.

Here's the key points I found:

First, the study was mice only. While mice are excellent for this kind of work, you can't guarantee things will be a 1:1 result in Holland p.

Second, the study was for low dose levels, and only delta-9 thc, with no other cannabinoids being used at all.

Third, the study was relatively short, with 42 days being the longer end.

Fourth, and this is the cool part, changes in the relevant metabolites and brain samples had benefit at the 14 day mark. So, if this does translate to human effects, short term, low dose use of delta-9 may be a valuable option. That's years away before this could be confirmed as valid for humans, but the effects were significant.

All of that means that just smoking weed, you aren't going to duplicate the conditions of the study. If you're taking in enough to get high, you're at a higher dose than the study, and that may cause an opposite effect long term.

This is a very focused experiment, with well defined limits and goals. The information gained can not be used as an indicator that smoking herb as an adult human will give any benefit, much less what is in the title of the article.

Think of this study as step one in maybe ten steps you get to the point where it would be useful for indicating benefits in humans, assuming everything went right along the way.

I like hearing this so it must be true

Idk, I'm high right now and my memory is shit.

Same energy as "wine is good for you!" As it turns out, no. Wine is absolutely poisonous to you.

Lmao benzinga the pinnacle of science news

There is a real study it's referencing at least but these fucks are probably just trying to pump weed stocks

It's amazing to me that they misspelled "reaserch" in the first bullet item.

I've been stoned consistently since covid started. The only "sober" time is when I sleep. I don't think younger, but most things don't bother me. Want to improve your brain? Find consistent ways to reduce stress and perform them daily(like an hour walk outside). That will make you feel and think like a younger you.

No wonder Cheech&Chong, Willie Nelson, Snoop, and Lily Tomlin seem pretty young at heart/mind for their age

I voted for this because I want it to be true. Yay, science!

Well, I don't know if we'll be able to reverse brain aging anytime soon, but we at least know some ways of slowing it down, like by language learning or some other mental tasks.

I personally recommend at least giving a try for learning a new foreign language, it's fascinating journey and even it might be hard at first it's very satisfying in the end. And some people might say that it's not worth it because of AI, but come on, you can still do it for fun, and bigger cultural understanding.

When I was 17 I really turned back the clock. Almost every day we were reversing brain aging and boosting mental capacity.

I wonder if micro dosing can give the same effects? I am a control freak and don't like to be high but worry about cognitive decline. Especially since I got long covid and fucked up my olfactory system. Brain damage sucks.

There's also this study from 2017, if you want more info on this.

That's why I'm so smrt

I'm not convinced. Unless the idiot stoners in my area are so fucking stupid that even when you work some science magic to make them smarter, they are still about as intelligent as a sack of dirt.

Generally any headline that is that is phrased as a question can be answered with "no".