Oldal 44 [44]
42 = USING INTERPRETATIVE PHENOMENOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
tellanos et al., 2011; Meshack et al., 2013). Other motivations to use include
the wish to experience pleasant feelings, recreational effects, and relaxation
(Barratt et al., 2013; Bonar et al., 2014). The lack of safety information may
lead to the incorrect assumption that SCs are safe (Fattore & Fratta, 2011;
Vandrey, Dunn, Fry, & Girling, 2012). Compared to cannabis use, the con¬
sumption of SCs may be associated with more adverse and unpredictable
physical and psychological effects (Bonar et al., 2014; Castaneto et al., 2014;
Fantegrossi, Moran, Radominska-Pandya, & Prather, 2014; Fattore, 2016),
although people who use SCs reported subjective experiences that are similar
to the use of cannabis, and they also described unique effects that are very
different from other kind of drugs (Vandrey et al., 2012). In addition, in the
study of A. R. Winstock and Barratt (2013) the effects of SCs last for a shorter
time and they are more intense compared to cannabis, and many undesired
effects have also been described by participants.
In a study by Vandrey et al. (2012), 87% of people who use SCs reported
having positive effects (e.g., they felt a pleasant high, stimulated, and ener¬
getic), but 40% reported negative or unwanted effects (e.g., dry mouth, heart
racing, and paranoia). A subset of respondents felt unable to cut down or stop
SC use (38%), experienced tolerance (36%), used for longer periods than
originally intended (22%), and had interference with other activities (18%).
Barratt et al. (2013) found that 68% of the people who used SC reported at
least one side effect, such as decreased motor coordination, fast and irregular
heart-beat, dissociation, dizziness, and psychosis.
Winstock, Lynskey, Borschmann, and Waldron (2015) conducted a re¬
search study among people who used SC who sought emergency medical
treatment following their SC use. They found the relative risk of severe side
effects associated with use of SCs to be 30 times higher compared to that of
cannabis (SC is a full agonist and THC is a partial agonist of the CB1 receptor
(Huffman & Padgett, 2005; Loeffler, Hurst, Penn, & K, 2012)). Respondents
reported more adverse symptoms after the consumption of SCs versus can¬
nabis, including panic, paranoia, anxiety, and aggression, and they used emer¬
gency services more often as well.
There is a growing body of literature on clinical case reports about severe
consequences of SC use. The consumption of the drug leads to emergency
room visits, though clinical treatment often remained short and symptomatic
(Castaneto et al., 2014; Fattore, 2016). Castaneto et al. (2014) conducted a
literature review on acute SC intoxication and found that patients reported
that intoxication occurred within 2-5 h and lasted for about 24 h. Treatment
to relieve symptoms included benzodiazepines and intravenous saline solu¬
tion. In a systematic review, Tait, Caldicott, Mountain, Hill, and Lenton (2016)
summarized the adverse events arising from SC use. They found that major
complications included cardiovascular events, acute kidney injury, generalized