The Endocannabinoid System and Evolution

The Endocannabinoid System and Evolution

The endocannabinoid system has played a fundamental role in evolutionary processes on Earth. As such, the endocannabinoid system regulates all human physiological processes and the CB1 receptor is the most abundant receptor in the brains of humans. The awareness of consciousness as a result of evolution on Earth sparked an amazing form of life. Humans are the result of evolution on Earth and thus religion was created by humans.

Religion was created by man for purposes of control and dominance. The consequences of creating religion have been negatively paramount. We cannot undue these mistakes of the past, but we can become the wiser and create a better future for not only ourselves, but our planet. We need and want everyone to wake up.

• The endocannabinoid system in humans is a homeostatic regulatory system involved in all physiological processes—from conception to death. The ECS consists of the precursors that synthesize the endogenous cannabinoids Anandamide and 2-AG (these are eicosanoids, and function as ligands to the cannabinoid receptors), enzymes that break them down, and the G-protein coupled receptors CB1 and CB2. Within the postsynaptic neuron, endocannabinoids are produced on demand, and mediate the retrograde signaling process at the synapse of glutamate and GABA neurons. The retrograde process occurs as endocannabinoids are transported back across the synapse to the CB1 receptor on the presynaptic neuron. The expression of the CB1 receptor is encoded in the gene CNR1, and chromosome 6q14–q15. The genes that encode the CB1 and CB2 receptors are exclusive to phylum Chordata. There is direct correlation of CB1 receptor density in the specialized areas of the brain and the orders of higher complexity with species. A greater CB1 receptor density is required to regulate increased biological complexity and consciousness.


• Below are texts from one scientific publication. There is a vast amount of information published on this, so I see no point in having to provide more than one source as one can look and see for oneself.

CB1/CB2-type receptors originated in a common ancestor of extant chordates, and in the sea squirt Ciona intestinalis a CB1/CB2-type receptor is targeted to axons, indicative of an ancient role for cannabinoid receptors as axonal regulators of neuronal signalling.

Although CB1/CB2-type receptors are unique to chordates, enzymes involved in biosynthesis/inactivation of endocannabinoids occur throughout the animal kingdom.

CB1 and CB2 share more sequence similarity with each other (approx. 44%) than with any other mammalian GPCRs, indicating that they originated by duplication of a common ancestral gene (i.e. they are paralogs).

Genes encoding CB1/CB2-type receptors have been found in the invertebrate groups that are most closely related to the vertebrates (urochordates, e.g. CiCBR in Ciona intestinalis; cephalochordates, e.g. BfCBR in Branchiostoma floridae) but not in the non-chordate invertebrate phyla [73,75–78]. Thus, it appears that CB1/CB2-type receptors are unique to the phylum Chordata and, as such, they have a rather restricted phylogenetic distribution in the animal kingdom.

The antiquity of DAGLs is evident in the strategy that led to the discovery of the mammalian enzymes DAGLα and DAGLβ—the sequence of a DAGL originally identified in the bacterium Penicillium was used to identify related proteins in BLAST searches of the human genome sequence [17]. This indicates that DAGLs are an ancient enzyme family that originated in prokaryotes. Submission of human DAGLα and human DAGLβ as query sequences in BLAST searches of the GenBank protein database reveals orthologues of both isoforms in deuterostomian invertebrates and protostomian invertebrates. Thus, the gene duplication that gave rise to DAGLα or DAGLβ dates back at least as far as the common ancestor of extant bilaterian animals.

Analysis of the phylogenetic distribution of FAAH and FAAH2 indicates that the gene duplication that gave rise to these related proteins probably predates the origins of the first animals with nervous systems. However, in addition to the loss of FAAH2 in rodents (see above), there are other examples of lineage-specific loss of FAAH or FAAH2. For example, only a FAAH2 orthologue is found in Drosophilaand other insects.

Analysis of the phylogenetic distribution of CRIP1a and CRIP1b in mammals reveals that, while CRIP1a is found throughout the mammals, CRIP1b may be unique to catarrhine primates. For example, orthologues of human CRIP1b can be found in the chimpanzee Pan troglodytes, the gibbon Nomascus leucogenys and the rhesus monkey Macaca mulatta. Thus, it appears that exon 3b of the human CRIP1 gene, which is unique to CRIP1b, may have originated relatively recently in mammalian evolution.

Indeed, orthologues of CRIP1a can be found in basal invertebrates such as the cnidarian N. vectenses, indicating that CRIP1a is very ancient protein with origins dating back to the first animals with nervous systems.

Accordingly, orthologues of human CRIP1a are found throughout the vertebrates and in deuterostomian invertebrates (e.g. in the cephalochordate B. floridaeand in the hemichordate Saccoglossus kowalevskii) and protostomian invertebrates (e.g. in the insect Bombus impatiens and in the nematode C. elegans). This contrasts with the much more restricted phylogenetic distribution of CB1/CB2-type cannabinoid receptors, which, as highlighted above, are only found in vertebrates and invertebrate chordates. What this suggests is that CRIP1a is evolutionarily much more ancient than the CB1 receptor protein that it is thought to interact with.

the expression of CB1 in so many different brain regions suggests that endocannabinoid signalling has been a fundamental and widely employed mechanism of synaptic plasticity throughout more than 400 million years of vertebrate brain evolution. Moreover, there is evidence that at least some of the physiological/behavioural roles of endocannabinoid signalling that have been discovered in mammals are also applicable to non-mammalian vertebrates, suggesting evolutionarily ancient origins.

the discovery of genes encoding co-orthologues of CB1 and CB2 in the urochordate C. intestinalis (CiCBR) [76] and in the cephalochordate B. floridae (BfCBR) [75] revealed that the evolutionary origin of CB1/CB2-type cannabinoid receptors could be traced back beyond the vertebrates to the common ancestor of extant chordates.

While CB1/CB2-type receptors do not occur in the majority of invertebrates, as highlighted earlier, the biochemical pathways for biosynthesis/inactivation of 2-AG and anandamide occur throughout the animal kingdom. Therefore, it is of interest to review evidence of non-CB1/CB2-mediated endocannabinoid signalling in the nervous systems of invertebrates.

The evolution and comparative neurobiology of endocannabinoid signalling

So the long and the short of it is weed is good.
In moderation and appropriate situations.
I had this figured out by the time I was 15.

a reply to: skunkape23


Could be, but this post isn't about weed, unfortunately

The ECS evolved millions of years ago yet we've only know about it for a of couple decades.
The properties of the system seems to be quite impressive for the little we understand about it.
I've no doubt it has been part of not only human evolution but many other species in terms of survival and health.
I'm sure it is not the last we will hear about this.

a reply to: skunkape23

Apparently the body produces a certain amount of cannabinoids itself. Just not enough for it to be fun. Ah well...

I've always wondered about the fact we had receptors, and also the capacity to produce internally, for "canabinoids". Allow me the word, please.

That means we grew side by side with the plant, for a veeeery long time, no?

Thanks for your link, I'll bookmark it and read it soon.

a reply to: M4ngo

I have always found it funny that people wonder why cannabis stays in the system for so long. Our bodies have an innate intelligence, given that we have a ECS in the first place shows how important of a nutrient the cannabinoids are.

It also make sense that it has been a integral part of our evolution.

The entire Cannabis ban, proves that the lunatics are running the insane asylum, I mean we may as well ban serotonin!

Great thread!

S&F

a reply to: M4ngo

Was religion created for control or dominance?

I would accept that argument about armed forces but not religion.

It would appear that you are not controlled and dominated by religion. Neither am I. I can't think of anyone I know who is controlled and dominated by religion.

Perhaps the Pope is?

Also, except that the CB1 receptors are fairly ancient, what is the evolutionary advantage of them? Surely it has taken until relatively modern times for us to extract sufficient THC to have much effect.

So, what are the natural selection advantages?

Appreciate the comments, happy to know others are interested.

Yes, it is the closed-minded ones that are ruining (and unfortunately running) the world. I have hope all that will eventually change. And it is not just Cannabis that these people have banned. but other naturally growing things are banned too. Anyone that even entertains the idea of trying to outlaw and/or prevent the use of something naturally growing from the Earth is mentally ill. I Certainly don't see how anyone can be ok with their hard earned money going to the same group of people that find outlawing anything naturally growing to be make decisions that directly impacts life. Those people do not understand what life is, and thus should have absolutely zero authority over any form of life. That is my opinion anyway.

Something interesting to note is the major constituent in the essential oil of Cannabis, beta-caryophyllene. This a government approved GRAS, and is abundant in black pepper. Interestingly, beta-caryophyllene is a cannabinoid. It is the only phytocannabinoid that also exists in plants other than Cannabis.

Beta-caryophyllene selectively targets the CB2 receptor and acts as a full agonist.

Some of the other plants and corresponding essential oils that contain beta-caryophyllene includes:

Origanum vulgare—oregano

Carum nigrum—black caraway

Syzygium aromaticum—clove

Humulus lupulus—hops

Lavandula angustifolia—lavender

Rosmarinus officinalis—rosemary

a reply to: chr0naut

Both. Look at money from the United States, "In God We Trust".

Majority of world leaders are religious, or at least claim to be.

The media argues with atheists.

Millions world-wide go to church and believe in fairy tales.

Religion is human made.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: M4ngo

Was religion created for control or dominance?

I would accept that argument about armed forces but not religion.

It would appear that you are not controlled and dominated by religion. Neither am I. I can't think of anyone I know who is controlled and dominated by religion.

Perhaps the Pope is?

It does appear that you are not controlled by a religion because it looks like peaceful persuasion and is less likely to attract attention. Victims of coercive persuasion show no signs of abuse, changes are so gradual they are often unaware of it.
All religion is coercive persuasion that greatly modifies a person's concept of self, their perceptions of reality and interpersonal relationships. When a religion is successful at inducing these changes, coercive thought reform, among other things, creates the situation for undue influence over a person's independent decision making. And in doing so, turn that person into a agent for the organizations benefit.

originally posted by: M4ngo
a reply to: chr0naut

Both. Look at money from the United States, "In God We Trust".

Majority of world leaders are religious, or at least claim to be.

The media argues with atheists.

Millions world-wide go to church and believe in fairy tales.

Religion is human made.

We were dealing with your assertion that religion controls and dominates.

Expression of religious belief itself doesn't control and dominate. Are you controlled by that phrase being printed on money? If the phrase was not there, would you be less controlled by financial pressures?

Does argument between atheists and theists over the media lead to any more or less control?

Surely, that there are millions of people expressing one faith or another, does not assert control over those who choose differently (except in a democracy, where the majority should have the greatest sway over general political direction).

Surely it was the religious who defined that "all men are created equal" and defined equality under the law and in regards to human rights.

Nor are religious beliefs fairy tales. Many people are wanting to know their spiritual purpose and meaning and find it in religion. Science and atheism offers nothing. Having a goal higher than just survival or existence is not invalid nor is it a belief in untruth or a fairy tale. Religion is deeper and more personal than that to most people.

Religions may be human made, they definitely seem to fit our psyche.

Alternately, from a religious stand point, perhaps it is the humans that were made for a purpose which religion explains?

originally posted by: flyingfish

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: M4ngo

Was religion created for control or dominance?

I would accept that argument about armed forces but not religion.

It would appear that you are not controlled and dominated by religion. Neither am I. I can't think of anyone I know who is controlled and dominated by religion.

Perhaps the Pope is?

It does appear that you are not controlled by a religion because it looks like peaceful persuasion and is less likely to attract attention. Victims of coercive persuasion show no signs of abuse, changes are so gradual they are often unaware of it.
All religion is coercive persuasion that greatly modifies a person's concept of self, their perceptions of reality and interpersonal relationships. When a religion is successful at inducing these changes, coercive thought reform, among other things, creates the situation for undue influence over a person's independent decision making. And in doing so, turn that person into a agent for the organizations benefit.

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

a reply to: chr0naut

We were dealing with your assertion that religion controls and dominates.

It's not a assertion, it's a fact.

Expression of religious belief itself doesn't control and dominate. Are you controlled by that phrase being printed on money? If the phrase was not there, would you be less controlled by financial pressures?

It's a violation of the first amendment respecting an establishment of religion. Do you think "in God we trust" is Buddha or Allah?

Does argument between atheists and theists over the media lead to any more or less control?

Yes..

Surely, that there are millions of people expressing one faith or another, does not assert control over those who choose differently (except in a democracy, where the majority should have the greatest sway over general political direction).

Yes they do. If you do not abide by particular dogma, are gay, are atheist or different you can be judged, excommunicated, ostracized, demonized and even killed. And no.. Democracy was created to protect the minority from the majority.

Surely it was the religious who defined that "all men are created equal" and defined equality under the law and in regards to human rights.

No. "all men are created equal" is a secular value.

Nor are religious beliefs fairy tales. Many people are wanting to know their spiritual purpose and meaning and find it in religion. Science and atheism offers nothing. Having a goal higher than just survival or existence is not invalid nor is it a belief in untruth or a fairy tale. Religion is deeper and more personal than that to most people.

There is no evidence that religion is nothing more that man made fairy tales. We give purpose to our lives. Understanding that life is an emergent property and knowing we exist in the moment, here and now, center stage, and this your one shot at life, transcends any spiritual/emotional concepts made up by man.

Religions may be human made, they definitely seem to fit our psyche.

Religion has outlived it's usefulness and is no longer needed in healthy populations. This has been shown to be true in secular in societies throughout the world.

Alternately, from a religious stand point, perhaps it is the humans that were made for a purpose which religion explains?

Humans are not made, we are evolved and religion is useless at explaining our reality. Show me one example where religion has overturned a scientific discovery.

a reply to: chr0naut

Regardless of whether my assertion is the true reason for why humankind created religion, the fact is humans are the result of millions of years of evolutionary processes on Earth. The first life form was bacteria. This thread is not about the reasons for why humans invented religion. It is to put to rest the claims religious texts falsely claim the origins of humans. We are the result of millions of years of evolution and the endocannabinoid system has played, and continues to play, a very important part of it.

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

a reply to: chr0naut

Was religion created for control or dominance?

Absolutely it was, not only for dominance but allows for a person to blame "god" if things go wrong, it is far easier to shift blame onto an imaginary entity instead of taking responsibility for ones own actions.

originally posted by: flyingfish
a reply to: chr0naut

It's not a assertion, it's a fact.

Then convince me and render the scientific data on it.

It's a violation of the first amendment respecting an establishment of religion. Do you think "in God we trust" is Buddha or Allah?

I believe that the phrase was specifically left ambiguous but it couldn't be the Buddha, he was not God. However many Buddhists accommodate Hindu beliefs (to some extent).

Does argument between atheists and theists over the media lead to any more or less control?

Yes..

Then explain how argument between atheists and theists over the media leads to any more or less control?

Surely, that there are millions of people expressing one faith or another, does not assert control over those who choose differently (except in a democracy, where the majority should have the greatest sway over general political direction).

Yes they do. If you do not abide by particular dogma, are gay, are atheist or different you can be judged, excommunicated, ostracized, demonized and even killed. And no.. Democracy was created to protect the minority from the majority.

Yes, there are some who utilise religion as a rallying cry for hatred. Such as those who proclaim to be warriors of Islam when the majority of their innocent victims are Muslim, or the hate filled Westbro Baptist Church which claims to be Christian. These are not examples of true faiths.

But just consider the millions killed in the 20th century by those who espoused 'scientific eugenics'. Even in the US, immigration was denied on the basis of eugenics.

Also, democracy was created to protect the majority (average citizens) from the minority (corrupt, despotic rulers), not the other way around. A small minority in a democratic system has little power or say. This is why most democracies have limitations in supreme law (such as the constitution), protecting individual rights, so that the majority cannot oppress a minority.

Surely it was the religious who defined that "all men are created equal" and defined equality under the law and in regards to human rights.

No. "all men are created equal" is a secular value.

Surely the concept of creation requires a creator, I will stick with the definition of all men being "created equal" as being religious in origin.

Nor are religious beliefs fairy tales. Many people are wanting to know their spiritual purpose and meaning and find it in religion. Science and atheism offers nothing. Having a goal higher than just survival or existence is not invalid nor is it a belief in untruth or a fairy tale. Religion is deeper and more personal than that to most people.

There is no evidence that religion is nothing more that man made fairy tales. We give purpose to our lives. Understanding that life is an emergent property and knowing we exist in the moment, here and now, centre stage, and this your one shot at life, transcends any spiritual/emotional concepts made up by man.

There is significant evidence that random actions could not have produced the variety and complexity that we see around us, in the time-frame of the universe. Therefore, there must be an alternate that originated the cosmos. One theory, that has not been discounted, is that there is an intelligent creator deity who is atemporal.

It is fairly obvious that mankind, if it doesn't wipe itself out, will achieve many wonderful things. Looking far into the future, issues like disease and current limitations will be addressed and, most probably resolved. This is not a fairy tale.

The person or persons who invent a way for us to travel and spread beyond the confines of the Earth will be legendary - the saviours of mankind (for to stay on Earth is to face eventual extinction). That is what having a 'destiny' is about.

All religions hold that we can be better than we now are. But you can't expect to give advanced tech to primitives and that their lives will simply become better, they'd just use it to nuke their opponents from orbit.

The religious conceive of a better world, unlike like today, a world of morality, peace and ease where death and disease are defeated. This is where we are most likely to evolve to, but only if we can loose our primitiveness.

Beside that, life as just another doomed organism, on a tiny speck, in the outer arm of one galaxy among billions, seems a little futile.

Religions may be human made, they definitely seem to fit our psyche.

Religion has outlived it's usefulness and is no longer needed in healthy populations. This has been shown to be true in secular in societies throughout the world.

Religion is still in the majority in most societies in the world. Societies such as such as Communist China and the USSR had oppressed religious groups by force and imprisonment for a long time but now the religions are seen as examples of national culture and there is a resurgence. Perhaps those societies have discovered that "the opiate of the masses" was no such thing and that people become hopeless if they have no vision.

Let's also remember the numbers of deaths that those atheist regimes caused. Lets take Stalinist Russia; Three million imprisoned in Gulags (for political reasons), 20 million deaths (A. Solzhenitsyin estimated 60 million deaths). Or Maoist China; 40 million deaths. Hardly "successful secular societies".

Of course, if you are talking about 'secular' societies as ones that separate church and state, then most of them still have significant numbers of citizens of various faiths, so this sort of secularization does not indicate that religion is invalid.

Humans are not made, we are evolved and religion is useless at explaining our reality. Show me one example where religion has overturned a scientific discovery.

You have no evidence upon which to base the assertion that humans were not made. I believe that they are both made and evolved and that evolution is one of the processes through which they were made.

There are lots of instances where scientifically held theories conflicted with Biblical text and were also later disproved.

For instance, Spontaneous Generation was held to be a scientifically observed fact but is unbiblical (which holds that only God created all 'kinds' of living things) and was finally proven to be untrue by Louis Pasteur.

Many scientists initially disliked the Big Bang theory because it implied a single point in time for "creation", like the Bible infers. We now have far more information and are fairly sure that the Big Bang theory is correct.

The Bible, thousands of years before knowledge of the orbit of the Earth and planets, said: "He hangs the Earth upon nothing" Job 26:7.

In Heberws 13:3 it says that "things which are seen were not made from things which are visible". This was well before atomic theory or microscopes.

Job 38:16 mentions that there are springs (of water) under the ocean. Similarly, the Bible reveals that there are mountains under the ocean. Jonah 2:6.

Anyway, it's all off topic to how the Endocannanabinoid system relates to evolution.

originally posted by: flyingfish

You'd have to be fairly weak minded to be 'religiously coerced' in a world of such philosophical variety. If someone stops searching, it may be because they have found something.

We are easily coerced, this is why we must be skeptical of unevidenced claims and learn critical thinking skills to protect ourselves and our children from religious indoctrination.

You have some evidence that complexity arises from randomness?

a reply to: chr0naut

I agree that religion was created for basically two reasons. By some humans it was created so that superstition and fear could be used to manipulate the masses.

By others, religion is used to assist in having a spiritual side to life.

My opinion is that the bad effects of religion outweigh the good effects.

a reply to: M4ngo

Why do fish have endocannabinoid receptors?