TikTok is working on a job search feature. This is what we know about the popular app’s new expansion.
TikTok has steadily taken control of our lives. It’s an inescapable app, one that’s cemented itself throughout the pandemic and that is now planning to get involved with job searches.
According to Axios, TikTok is developing and testing a tool designed for brands who are interested in recruiting entry level employees. The plan is for TikTok to connect people to jobs while also creating channels for brands to get to know them in a different light. According to the report, big brands have been contacted, including sports leagues.
While you might be thinking about how weird it’d be to apply to jobs via dance challenges, the report explains that the job search app wouldn’t be held within the TikTok app. Instead, the job board could be accessed through the app, which would then take you to a separate web page.
The TikTok job section would revolve around videos. Users would likely be able to post a TikTok video resume in lieu of a traditional one, allowing them to stand out in ways that are unique and personalized. It seems like an idea that targets Gen Z and Millennials, hoping to grow up with a demographic that’s now or will soon be entering the job market.
TikTok hasn’t made any comments on this new feature, but it isn’t the first social media app to get involved with job searches. Facebook has its own job service and LinkedIn is meant to look very much like Facebook, having social media aspects to it. Goldi is another website that allows for video resumes, giving users the chance to be more creative when applying for a job.
There’s no way states were going to just sit back and let people sell delta-8 without restrictions.
Delta-8 THC had a good run. People made money, customers were happy, and it all seemed legal to boot. Like all good things in life, states and the DEA are doing everything in their power to ensure that delta-8’s run comes to an end. Here is why states and the DEA want Delta-8 weed banned.
For those of you who may not have been paying attention, delta-8 is one of many, many cannabinoids in cannabis (marijuana and hemp) plants. Unlike CBD, it gets you high. It’s not usually present in high volume in cannabis, so it’s usually derived by converting hemp CBD through chemical processes, and can’t be legally derived from marijuana under federal law.
Photo by Christina Winter via Unsplash
In theory (or, more accurately, according to the literal text of the federal 2018 Farm Bill, if you care about little details like “what the actual law is”) hemp-derived delta-8 THC should be considered legal under present federal law. But the DEA apparently didn’t get that memo.
Late last year, the DEA issued an interim final rule (IFR) that says that all synthetic cannabinoids are Schedule I narcotics and illegal. Never mind that delta-8 is most commonly derived from a hemp plant and that the 2018 Farm Bill legalized hemp and its derivatives because, well, the DEA apparently thinks it’s as dangerous as heroin. We wrote quite a bit on why the DEA was just wrong around the time the IFR was published, and generally stand by that opinion. See the below:
Surprisingly, the DEA didn’t see eye to eye with the entire industry. It even put delta-8 on its “Orange Book” of controlled substances. I won’t get into too much more detail on the status of federal delta-8 law, as my colleague Nathalie Bougenies recently did just that a few months back.
That said, I will note that there are a number of lawsuits challenging the IFR. One of those cases was recently dismissed based on essentially technical legal issues, and there is another challenge in a federal appellate course that will play out soon.
The problem here is that even if the IFR is completely overturned, it really won’t matter given that states are apparently in a secret contest to ban delta-8 as fast as they can. On May 18, Hemp Industry Daily published an article noting that Michigan was in the process of banning delta-8 and noted at the end that this was the TWELFTH state to do this–including uber hemp friendly states like Colorado and Kentucky. I can already sense the California Department of Public Health itching to post another website FAQ banning delta-8.
As lawyers are valiantly duking it out with the DEA in the D.C. Circuit, one has to ask: will it really do anything? If states ban delta-8, it doesn’t really matter if the IFR is scrapped. To the extent that states’ positions are based on the IFR, the state can always just find another justification to ban delta-8. And the DEA can always just find another way to sink it’s teeth into delta-8.
Photo by Uriel Sinai/Stringer/Getty Images
How did we get here? Why all the fuss? The answer is probably the fact that delta-8 is intoxicating. While it’s not intoxicating to the same extent as delta-9 THC, it still gets you high. As I’ve believed for a while, there’s no way states were going to just sit back and let people sell delta-8 without restrictions. Delta-8 is often sold online or in retail settings where there is no state or federal mandate to verify age, for example. This was not something that states would tolerate for long.
While I personally expected to see states start to impose regulatory restrictions instead of full on bans, here we are. It seems like every day, another state or two has banned delta-8. Just last year, we thought smokable hemp would be banned almost across the board, and those bans moved at a glacial pace compared to the light-speed effort states are taking to get rid of delta-8.
At this point, things are not looking good for the industry, and will likely get a lot worse before they get better (if they do). It’s certainly possible that once the air clears or the DEA loses, states will try to fill the vacuum by strictly regulating delta-8. But for now, we’ll just have to watch out to see which state jumps on the ban-wagon next.
Griffen Thorne is an attorney at Harris Bricken, a law firm with lawyers in Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Barcelona, and Beijing. This story was originally published on the Canna Law Blog and has been reposted with permission.
Researchers at the University of Washington found that while budtenders were good about educating their customers over the benefits of weed, they didn’t warn them about all the evils that could arise.
Step inside any marijuana dispensary across the United States, and you’ll be greeted by a crew of dedicated budtenders whose job is to sell you weed. The transaction might be similar to other retail experiences you’ve had over the years. They’ll see if they can help you find anything specific. If you’re not sure what you want, the budtender might even ask you some questions and then make some recommendations based on your response.
That’s one thing the cannabis industry has attempted over the years: To make the experience of buying legal weed kind of like walking into a pharmacy with a runny nose and asking which cold medication is suitable for that symptom. But, for the most part, marijuana isn’t on track to become medicine. It’s more on par with the likes of alcohol, an inebriant sold to adults 21 and over in both good times and bad. Americans no longer need a medical reason to smoke marijuana these days. They can do it just because it’s fun.
Photo by Heath Korvola/Getty Images
Perhaps this was the industry’s first mistake — making cannabis all about medicine. But that’s what advocates do, according to a recent report from Bloomberg. “First, they claim medical benefit. Then they push for broader reform.” The news source isn’t wrong.
Cannabis advocates have spent decades trying to convince the population that marijuana can treat and/or cure various conditions. But there is still little evidence proving that cannabis has widespread therapeutic value. The plant certainly isn’t in line to take the reins as the be-all, end-all drug for today’s civil society. Still, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be legal for adult Americans to play with.
Marijuana is an intoxicating drug that 91% of the American population now believe should be legal. However, there are still plenty of naysayers out there who think increased access will only sabotage public health. They are concerned that there will be an influx of disease and mental health issues as legalization spreads nationwide. Therefore, groups skittish about legal pot feel it is the responsibility of dispensaries in legal states to ensure that people understand what they are getting into.
But should budtenders really be preaching to cannabis customers about the perils of pot? A new study published in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs suggests that they should.
Researchers at the University of Washington found that while budtenders were good about educating their customers over the benefits of weed, they didn’t warn them about all the evils that could arise. The report shows that most budtenders stopped short of explaining the potential hazards of marijuana products to customers, mostly because they didn’t feel it was their place to do so. “Budtenders did not believe their job involved discussing use during pregnancy or while driving or safe storage. They prioritized customers’ autonomy over education on these topics, and they did not necessarily consider these behaviors to be harmful,” the report states.
“Legalization is a lot of things,” Tweeted Kevin Sabet, president of Smart Approaches to Marijuana (SAM). “One thing it’s not is oriented to public health.”
But is this really a fair assessment of what’s happening out there with legal weed? Probably not. After all, adults who buy alcohol and cigarettes are not given the third degree by clerks at convenience stores and liquor outlets about how those products can cause cancer, liver damage, and car crashes. If they did, those people would likely be fired.
Photo by nattrass/Getty Images
Everyone who uses these products understands that they aren’t necessarily good for them, but it’s their freedom as tax-paying adults to smoke and drink however they see fit. Marijuana is not any different. The only thing that creates an illusionary distinction is that the cannabis industry has spent so much time touting weed’s medicinal benefits that dispensaries are often seen more like pharmacies than liquor stores.
And while some pot shops are designed to give off that “medical” vibe, they are still just selling marijuana. Not even pharmacies like CVS and Walgreens, both of which sell alcohol and cigarettes, make it a point to advise customers over the detriments of those products. Adults are responsible for their own education. Budtenders should no more be explaining the hazards of getting high than they should be providing medical advice.
Prohibition is doing nothing but using up public resources such as the police, who end up wasting time arresting cannabis offenders.
There are many reasons why we should end prohibition. Perhaps next to better access for those who need it, ending marijuana prohibition is going to benefit the economy greatly. But now marijuana prohibition cost the US $53 billion annually, it is a whole different game.
A shocking report published on AmericanMarijuana.org revealed that as a country, we’re losing $53 billion each year from prohibiting cannabis. The main reasons why it’s sending money down the drain is because the government instead chooses to spend money on cannabis enforcement as well as wasted tax revenues.
This substantial amount could go on to do many significant things for the population: treat the flu, fund treatment for COVID-19 patients, provide medical insurance for over 42 million Americans, buy a pack of alcohol sanitizers to every American, and so much more.
Photo by FatCamera/Getty Images
Why else do we need to end marijuana prohibition ASAP?
First and foremost, it isn’t working.
What else can be said about prohibition but that it’s failed BIG time? So many Americans are already using cannabis that it’s considered mainstream. Prohibition is doing nothing but using up public resources such as the police, who end up wasting time arresting cannabis offenders. And speaking of offenders, the law sends millions of Americans to jail, affecting countless lives. Even then, being convicted will seriously affect one’s ability to get a job, obtain housing, food assistance, student loans, driver’s license, and so much more.All for what? A drug that has been proven to save lives.
Prohibition does the opposite: it ruins lives and even promotes violence. Just look at how alcohol prohibition caused violence especially because of the underground market that ends up thriving. Consumers as well as dealers are prone to assault when they cannot resolve disputes the right way.
What Is The Government Doing?
President Biden’s changing stance on cannabis legalization is well-known by now. In the past he was adamantly anti-drugs, but during his 2020 Democratic Party Platform he says they would “decriminalize marijuana use and reschedule it through executive action on the federal level. It would support legalization of medical marijuana, and believed states should be able to make their own decisions about recreational use.”
As the Democrats have control over the White House and Congress, it’s expected that Congress will soon take the issue of cannabis legalization seriously. “Ending the federal marijuana prohibition is necessary to right the wrongs of this failed War on Drugs and end decades of harm inflicted on communities of color across the country,” says Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, in a statement last February 2021.
However, last month, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki refused to disclose if Biden is going to sign or veto a bill that would legalize marijuana should it arrive on his desk. “The president supports leaving decisions regarding legalization for recreational use up to the states, rescheduling cannabis as a Schedule II drug so researchers can study its positive and negative impacts and, at the federal level, he supports decriminalizing marijuana use and automatically expunging any prior criminal records,” Psaki said. “He also supports legalizing medicinal marijuana so that’s his point of view on the issue.”
Photo by Andrew Harnik-Pool/Getty Images
“The War on Drugs has too often been a war on people, particularly people of color,” said Schumer during a speech that day. “It makes no sense – it’s time for change. I believe the time has come to end the federal prohibition on marijuana in this country, and I’m working with Senators Booker and Wyden to do just that.”
Federal Drug Agency Agrees
The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)’s director, Nora Volkow, agrees. She recently wrote an essay for the journal Health Affairs, making her case to stop incarcerating individuals for low-level drug crimes and instead consider this all as a major health crisis. Though she doesn’t blatantly say she supports decriminalization, in the essay she says that the current system is only causing disproportionate arrests targeted to people of color.
More than the message, it’s important to note the source: NIDA has long been notorious for their stance of supporting prohibition. However, their director seems firm that abusing drugs isn’t a crime.
“Drug use continues to be penalized, despite the fact that punishment does not ameliorate substance use disorders or related problems,” Volkow says. “Imprisonment, whether for drug or other offenses, actually leads to much higher risk of drug overdose upon release.”
“We have known for decades that addiction is a medical condition – a treatable brain disorder – not a character flaw or a form of social deviance,” she says. “Yet, despite, the overwhelming evidence supporting that position, drug addiction continues to be criminalized. The US must take a public health approach to drug addiction now, in the interest of both population well-being and health equity.”
Photo by strelov/Getty Images
Volkow’s statements point toward harm reduction though Volkow doesn’t say outright that lawmakers should decriminalize cannabis. She does say that more research “is urgently needed to establish the effectiveness and impact of public health-based alternatives to criminalization, ranging from drug courts and other diversion programs to policies decriminalizing drug possession.”
From there, NIDA will be “redoubling its focus on vulnerabilities and progression of substance use and addiction in minority populations,” Volkow says. “We are exploring research partnerships with state and local agencies and private health systems to develop ways to eliminate systemic barriers to addiction care.”
Conclusion
If the government listens, and Congress takes action with the support of the President, decriminalizing cannabis shouldn’t be such a far-fetched pipe dream. With $53 billion out there at stake, taking decriminalization and ending prohibition should be taken more seriously than it is right now.
Every day, more and more companies are scheduling their return to the office. Here’s why some people fear going back.
It’s a stressful time. That long awaited moment that people were visualizing over a year ago, when a vaccine was easily accessible and life would be turning back to normal, has arrived with the baggage of a year of trauma. A return to the office is a big concern for a group of people who’ve adapted to remote work and wish for things to stay the same.
A recent study found that two thirds of American workers are feeling anxious about returning to their in person work settings. Reasons for this are varied, with people willing to take a pay cut in order to avoid going back to the office or even willing to resign from their jobs. While many are nervous and afraid over health concerns, a large percentage of people experienced a year of working from home convenience and are not willing to go back.
Here are 5 reasons people fear going back to the office:
Office work doesn’t allow for free time
Photo by Volha Flaxeco via Unsplash
“I’m not excited to go back to the office,” said Tracie Smith, an analyst who spoke to the New York Times. “My fear is that, given the opportunity, they’ll take all of it away and we’ll be back to 8 to 5 in the office again,” she said. “But the pandemic has shown that there are alternatives that work well.”
According to Smith, it took a pandemic for her to feel rested and like she could use her time wisely when in a break from work, allowing her to do laundry or to shop for groceries without feeling like she was wasting her precious free time. “I feel like a whole person. I am living an actual life every single day, instead of trying to cram it into a day-and-a-half on the weekend.”
The commute process is filled with anxiety
Photo by Ross Sneddon via Unsplash
Entering buildings doesn’t feel like it used to. Aside from wearing face masks, following social distancing guidelines and the over stickers indicating how to behave correctly and politely, hurdles like riding the subway or standing in a crowded elevator can add anxiety to an already stressful time. It’s a time consuming process that not everyone looks forward to.
People who are disabled or have an underlying condition are rightfully scared
Photo by Christian Erfurt via Unsplash
The pandemic has been tough for everyone but it’s been especially rough for people who have a disability or underlying condition. Working from home gave this people much more comfort and opportunity, something that not a lot of people need or even think about. It also provided them with safety, not having to account for co-workers social lives and whether they cover their nose or not with their face masks.
Rebecca, a specialist in problem management who is disabled, spoke with The Huffington Post on why she’d rather stay working from home. “I wasn’t losing two hours a day to commute, plus two to three hours a day spent crashed out recovering from the work day,” she said. “I had energy, I developed a baking habit.”
Remote work has worked fine for a year. Why mess with it?
Photo by Thought Catalog via Unsplash
Whether people are introverts or simply enjoy being able to do their laundry while on their lunch break, remote work has been a success for a large percentage of them.
“Spending all that time, effort and money and now having to go back to the pre-pandemic routine seems like it was all for naught,” said Jonas, a a Ph.D. student who spoke with HuffPo. “All the freedoms we enjoy in our home offices ― wearing whatever pants you like, structuring the day so it fits you better than the default 9-5, taking a quick half-hour nap if a work problem stresses you out ― that’s all about to go away.”
Phase III testing is critically important for the legalization of prescription MDMA. In this phase, scientists evaluate how it compares to existing medications that treat PTSD such as Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil.
By Andrew Smith
Efforts by the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS) to legalize prescription MDMA (Ecstasy) appear to have passed a gigantic hurdle earlier this month: MDMA is on track to meet the testing requirements to be a legalized prescription drug, specifically intended to treat the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
After analyzing the preliminary results of the latest Phase III study of the effects of MDMA, scientists believe that MDMA represents a potential breakthrough in PTSD treatment. This is huge news because FDA has only approved a few antidepressants to treat PTSD, and about half of patients get no relief from those drugs.
Photo by portokalis/Getty Images
According to analysis by an FDA-coordinated independent data monitoring company (DMC) — which reviewed MAPS’ Phase III data after 60% of the subject completed the study — there is at least a 90% chance that the Phase III testing will yield statistically significant results once all participants have been treated. The results of the study were published last week in Nature Medicine, a prestigious trade journal.
So, how did the study work? Scientists used a randomized, placebo-controlled study with 90 participants suffering from severe PTSD. They found that MDMA significantly reduced PTSD symptoms and functional impairment. Specifically, 67% of patients improved enough to no longer satisfy the diagnostic criteria for PTSD, and a third experienced complete remission. Furthermore, MDMA did not induce adverse events of abuse potential, suicidal idealization or attempts, or QT prolongation. Ultimately, the results of the study indicate that MDMA-assisted therapy is highly efficacious in those with severe PTSD, and that MDMA treatment is safe.
Phase III testing is critically important for the legalization of prescription MDMA. In this phase, scientists evaluate how MDMA compares to existing medications that treat PTSD such as Prozac, Zoloft, and Paxil. Phase III is also a considerable step up from Phase I and Phase II; Phase I trials examine the safety of the drug but not the efficacy of the drug in humans, and Phase II trials study whether the drug actually treats PTSD in conjunction with talk therapy.
The study results are a huge victory for Rick Doblin in particular, who has spent more than 30 years advocating for psychedelic drug use to treat emotional trauma (sometimes, Doblin refers jokingly to MAPS as “the world’s oldest start-up”). Founded by Doblin in 1986, MAPS is a nonprofit based in San Jose, California that is committed to attracting funding and seeing MDMA through the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approvals process. Since then, MAPS has guided MDMA through various regulatory obstacles and investors have contributed lots of money to study the efficacy of MDMA in treating PTSD. Just last August, MAPS announced that it had raised $30 million to complete this first Phase III MDMA study.
Photo by Pornpak Khunatorn/Getty Images
MAPS is preparing for a sprint to the finish line, aiming for FDA approval in 2022 and drug commercialization in 2023. The biggest challenge between now and then for MAPS likely will be raising a few hundred million more to complete a second Phase III study, move into drug production, and train therapists around the world to administer treatment.
We have been following MAPS and predicting the success of this treatment regime for a while now, and we were excited to see these results and follow the progression of MDMA towards legalization. It could also pave the way for approvals of other psychedelic drugs in the FDA channel, as we’ve been covering on this blog for the past three years.
As more companies engage in scientific research to unravel the value of cannabinoids found in the cannabis plant, Big Pharma is already exploring the possibilities with synthetic cannabinoids.
When you read “Big Pharma” and “cannabinoids” in one sentence, one thing is sure: cannabis is on the move again to solve serious medical issues. Big Pharma will only focus and work with a compound they view as valuable and deploy all mechanisms in their arsenal to ensure maximum utilization of such a component. Here is why Big Pharma loves synthetic cannabinoids.
Synthetic cannabinoids refer to molecules that bind to the same cannabinoids (THC and CBD) present in cannabis plants. They are likened to designer drugs sprayed on plant matter or smoked and may be ingested as a concentrated liquid in the UK and US. So why does Big Pharma prefer synthetic cannabinoids? First, let’s unravel the differences between “natural” and “synthetic’ cannabinoids.
Photo by anankkml/Getty Images
The differences between natural and synthetic cannabinoids
Natural cannabinoids are derived and separated from natural sources such as the C. Sativa plant and other varieties of biological species. While the synthetic cannabinoids are created from scratch in a laboratory with the chemical synthesis process using chemical precursors.
Some people view synthetic cannabinoids as being of “low quality” compared to their natural counterparts. But Professor Edvinas Orentas, who works closely with Sanobiotec, maintains that the concept of “low quality” is not a property of either natural or synthetic cannabinoids.
He further explained that there are no differences between a synthetically produced cannabinoid and a natural one at the molecular level. Yes, there is a stigma around “synthetic” (he isn’t only affecting cannabinoids). Still, he believes that the best way to eradicate such stigma is to persistently educate the public about the values of synthetic cannabinoids, which Big Pharma is taking seriously.
The world currently thrives on technological innovations to support natural sources, and when natural cannabinoid is not obtainable, it can lead to scarcity of products. Hence the reason synthetic is gaining a lot of momentum.
The company Sanobiotec
To understand Big Pharma’s preference for synthetic cannabinoids, we need to refer to an established company leading the charge on this discovery. Sanobiotec focuses on developing a more comprehensive range of cannabinoid applications in the pharmaceutical and wellness sector.
They are interested in mainstream and rare cannabinoids, with a significant part of their work revolving around the combination of synthesis, natural extractions, and biosynthesis to produce high-quality products.
Photo by Matvevna via Pixabay
The company operates in the EU with excellent manufacturing practices, all in an analytics lab. They have discovered the valuable components of synthetic cannabinoids and the potentials it embodies and it will go all the way with this discovery
Sanobitec needs a cannabinoid they can access all year round, and synthetic cannabinoid offers this assurance, making it a highly rated preference. You can understand Big Pharma’s commitment to synthetic cannabinoids when you fully grasp its advantages.
Advantages/benefits of synthetic cannabinoids
Synthetic cannabinoids can be manufactured on a large scale, beginning with cheap and straightforward chemicals, which means labor and land-intensive plating stages are eradicated. Additionally, the quality and yield of the synthetic cannabinoid are more reproducible and aren’t subject to seasonal changes.
With natural cannabinoids, companies may have to wait until the plant is in bloom during its season before gaining access to the cannabinoid. However, since synthetic cannabinoid is created in the lab, they have access to it at any time.
More so, some natural cannabis plants are exposed to pesticides and toxic chemicals, which also negatively impacts the cannabinoid derived from such a plant. With synthetic cannabinoid, there is no worry or concern regarding pesticides or harmful chemicals because it is made inside the company’s safe facility.
Why Big Pharma prefers utilizing synthetic over natural cannabinoids
A small cannabis plant grower can choose to rely on the natural cannabinoid from plants because growers only require a small quantity. So they plant what they need, and even if the plant is not in season, they can wait for a while before planting again; this is on a small scale.
On the other hand, Big Pharma produces products on a large scale to reach millions of people and cannot afford to use an unreproducible cannabinoid. They will lose billions of dollars that should be made from sales if they don’t have access to the cannabinoid (which is the main ingredient in most of their cannabis-related products).
So synthetic cannabinoids are highly reproducible, making them an ideal and perfect choice for Big Pharma. The risk of biological contamination with synthetic cannabinoids is also at an all-time low when complete synthetic compounds are used.
Photo by AnuchaCheechang/Getty Images
Despite these advantages, it is pertinent to note that the exact strict quality control requirements are deployed with synthetic and natural cannabinoids. The companies analyze their compounds for the same molecules; therefore, the testing standards will be the same.
But the risk of contamination from pesticides is more likely to happen with natural cannabinoids. Contamination is of grave concern to Big Pharma who wants to ensure that all products are safe for consumers before releasing them into the market.
The process of getting rid of such impurities that cause contamination in cannabinoids is also too tasking compared to a zero-risk synthetic cannabinoid. As it is with every business, business owners will always go for the option that saves cost and still offers the promise of quality.
Big pharma is also concerned with sustainability and what works for them in the long run. Synthetic cannabinoids offer the stability they require to remain relevant in the market through the consistent production of highly sought-after products.
Bottom line
As more companies engage in scientific research to unravel the value of cannabinoids found in the cannabis plant, Big Pharma is already exploring the possibilities with synthetic cannabinoids. While the natural cannabinoid remains a viable option, the synthetic cannabinoid is highly reproducible and desirable to Big Pharma.
Experts believe that the cannabis market is becoming saturated with some cannabinoids, especially CBD, and now it’s time to explore all of it through synthetic measures. As Big Pharma takes the lead, they are paving the way for other industries utilizing cannabinoids, such as skin care companies.
Researchers theorize that this connection could be due to the fact that workers don’t have the space to eat healthy and work out.
According to a new report, long work hours aren’t only emotionally exhausting. These hours have been linked with a higher risk of heart disease and strokes.
The study was published in the journal Environmental International, and it was the first global peer reviewed analysis of its kind. It defined long work hours as working over 55 hours a week, and found that people who followed these schedules had 35% higher risk of a stroke and 17% risk of heart disease when compared to people who worked for 35 to 40 hours a week.
The study focused specifically on 2016 and found that long work hours were connected to 745,194 deaths from strokes and heart disease.
“With working long hours now known to be responsible for about one-third of the total estimated work-related burden of disease, it is established as the risk factor with the largest occupational disease burden,” explains the World Health Organization (WHO).
The WHO warns that long work hours are on the rise all over the world, especially now that a lot of people are working from home and are finding it difficult to excuse logging off at any particular time.
Photo by Vlada Karpovich via Pexels
“The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly changed the way many people work,“ said WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
“Teleworking has become the norm in many industries, often blurring the boundaries between home and work. In addition, many businesses have been forced to scale back or shut down operations to save money, and people who are still on the payroll end up working longer hours. No job is worth the risk of stroke or heart disease. Governments, employers and workers need to work together to agree on limits to protect the health of workers.”
Long and grueling work hours have long been linked to poor health, ranging from colds and flus to plenty of emotional imbalances. While this study is the first of its kind in scope, it isn’t the first to suggest that there’s a link that exists between heart disease and work stress. Researchers theorize that this connection could be due to the fact that workers only have time to work and don’t have the space to eat healthy and work out. Other factors to consider include stress, age, and gender.
The COVID-19 vaccine has been approved for children ages 12 and up. Here’s what you should know.
The Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine has been approved for adolescents making vaccination a reality for many parents who are considering taking their kids to their nearest pharmacy or hospital for their shot.
Vaccinating kids for COVID-19 can be scary for some parents, especially due to the politics and drama that surround this important moment. A survey indicates only 30% of parents were willing to take their kids to get vaccinated as soon as a shot was available. A lot of parents think of these vaccines as something different than the average flu shot.
Is the COVID-19 vaccine safe for children? Will vaccination records be necessary for rejoining school? Here’s what you should know about COVID-19 vaccines and adolescents.
Giving your child the vaccine is important
Photo by Tim Mossholder via Unsplash
Data from Pfizer’s adolescent vaccine trials shows that the shot is 100% effective at keeping them safe from the virus. That’s more effective than it is for adults. The protection of children not only drastically reduces child hospitalization and deaths from COVID-19, but also prevent the development of new and more dangerous vaccine variants.
Data from teens shows that the vaccine works fine in them, considered safe for the vast majority. About 6% of teens experienced an adverse event, including depression, constipation and abdominal pain, which weren’t found to be related to the vaccine itself. Scary side effects like blood clots or serious allergic reactions were not reported in the vaccine trials.
Will COVID-19 vaccines be required for in person school?
While there’s been a lot of discussion about vaccine passports and events that are only available to those who’ve been vaccinated, there’s no way of knowing if schools will be enforcing this or even if they’ll be legally allowed to do so.
Some colleges and universities have been asking students to get their vaccines if they wish to attend class in person. Still, this question may change on a state by state basis and will likely be ruled by each school’s vaccination policies and guidelines.
Researchers believe the only natural way to prevent getting hammered with cannabis-related health issues is to sidestep it.
Ever since marijuana started going legal in the United States, the news has been filled with countless reports of people getting their butts handed to them because of it. At first, much of the trouble was blamed on edible pot products — or rather, the average citizen’s ignorance over how much THC is too much to take at one time.
But then, the terror grew into the potential harms of vaporizers, how smoking was as bad as cigarettes and a slew of other hazards that one might encounter if they dance with the doobie. However, scientists now believe they understand how cannabis can be used safely, and they want to share their thoughts with the public.
Researchers from Canada recently published a list of guidelines in the American Journal of Public Health, providing cannabis users with 10 ways to increase their chances for survival in the modern stoned age. According to Dr. Benedikt Fischer, senior scientist at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, the team has uncovered “factual, science-based information” to help the average cannabis user avoid both short and long-term health problems associated with cannabis.
Photo by LordHenriVoton/Getty Images
Unfortunately, the latest guidelines aren’t going to be well-received by many. Especially not by those who believe that cannabis is a medicinal plant and not something to be feared. In fact, most cannabis users aren’t going to appreciate the number-one line of defense against the perils of pot — and that’s abstinence.
Researchers believe the only natural way to prevent getting hammered with cannabis-related health issues is to sidestep it. “The most effective way to avoid cannabis use-related health risks is abstinence,” researchers declared. With that said, scientists realize that their weed wisdom isn’t going to stop most adults from smoking marijuana. However, they want to caution the younger generations against getting high too soon.
“Avoid using cannabis at an early age, specifically before the age of 16 years old,” the guidelines state.
The subsequent warnings focus on potency and quality. Researchers urge cannabis users to opt for lower levels of THC or select “balanced THC-to-cannabidiol (CBD)-ratio cannabis products.” The report also asks for users to avoid dangerous synthetic cannabinoids known as “Spice” and “K2.”
Smoking is also a considerable threat. Researchers want cannabis users to avoid this method of consumption at all costs and switch to safer alternatives. “Avoid smoking cannabis and opt for non-smoking use methods, such as edibles,” the report reads, adding that users should also “avoid deep or other “risky” inhalation practices.” All in all, the message is that smoking anything is bad news.Smoking is also a considerable threat. Researchers want cannabis users to avoid this method of consumption at all costs and switch to safer alternatives. “Avoid smoking cannabis and opt for non-smoking use methods, such as edibles,” the report reads, adding that users should also “avoid deep or other “risky” inhalation practices.” All in all, the message is that smoking anything is bad news.
Photo by Javi Julio Photography/Getty Images
The guidelines go on to discourage daily use. Avid marijuana consumers often partake in their drug of choice on a daily basis (usually starting with the morning wake and bake) to ward off the tragedies of the day. Some even claim that life would not be possible without a little THC rattling around in their brains. But researchers find this habit can be a detriment to a person’s overall health. “Avoid high-frequency use, that includes both “daily and near-daily,” the report states.
Researchers also advise against driving stoned and any use if there is a family history of mental illness.
Right now, the United States is progressing on the cannabis issue more with each passing week. There is even a chance that we could see the plant considered for full-blown legalization in Congress later this year. Advocates often complain that legal weed would be no greater threat to civil society than alcohol and tobacco. Both legal substances continue to bury hundreds of thousands of people every year, yet the products are a driving force behind the American economy. Some believe that marijuana is totally safe, yet more research emerges all the time showing how some users still experience health issues and struggles. Not everyone can handle their weed.
Canadian researchers think their strategy on cannabis consumption may prevent significant casualties as legalization progresses. “These guidelines are an important tool supporting a public health approach to cannabis use,” says Ian Culbert, Executive Director of the Canadian Public Health Association.
“People who use cannabis and cannabis-derived products, front-line practitioners, and public health professionals can all benefit from having access to evidence-informed guidelines that can help reduce the potential negative health effects associated with cannabis use. Through their widespread adoption, the guidelines will provide people who use cannabis with the information they need to manage their use and protect their health and well-being.”
