Propaganda of the Marijuana Lobby: A Con Job

 

We’re all being conned. As legalization of marijuana is being pushed forward in the US, we are discovering how little we really know about the drug, and the information we do have is not widely publicized:

Despite being a substance that targets the brain, if and how long-term cannabis use alters brain structure and function remain unknown. There are some known adverse effects. It acutely impairs mental functions and may exacerbate depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and use of other substances. Whether it is more harmful than substances such as alcohol or nicotine is still undetermined. On the plus side, there is conclusive evidence that cannabis provides relief from symptoms related to chemotherapy and multiple sclerosis. Other potential benefits remain unknown.

Ten states have already allowed the recreational use of cannabis. According to an op-ed piece by Alex Berenson, the pro-marijuana groups have changed the discussion by talking about medical marijuana and the relief it can provide, rather than focusing on its recreational use.

Studies that are not widely publicized explain that the effects on children and teenagers can be long-term:

When marijuana users begin using as teenagers, the drug may reduce attention, memory, and learning functions and affect how the brain builds connections between the areas necessary for these functions. Marijuana’s effects on these abilities may last a long time or even be permanent.

Developing brains, like those in babies, children, and teenagers are especially susceptible to the hurtful effects of marijuana. Although scientists are still learning about these effects of marijuana on the developing brain, studies show that marijuana use by mothers during pregnancy may be linked to problems with attention, memory, problem-solving skills, and behavior problems in their children.

Following the states that have legalized marijuana to date, casual use doesn’t seem to have increased substantially. But for people who are heavy users, the increase in use is alarming:

…the number of Americans who use cannabis heavily is soaring. In 2006, about 3 million Americans reported using the drug at least 300 times a year, the standard for daily use. By 2017, that number had increased to 8 million—approaching the 12 million Americans who drank every day. Put another way, only one in 15 drinkers consumed alcohol daily; about one in five marijuana users used cannabis that often.

The potency of the drug has also increased. Rather than the 2% THC (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) of the 1970s, marijuana is routinely 20-25%.

Even more alarming than this data is the lack of information on the link between mental illness, violence, and the use of marijuana:

In 2017, 7.5% of young adults met the criteria for serious mental illness, double the rate in 2008.

None of these studies prove that rising cannabis use has caused population-wide increases in psychosis or other mental illness, although they do offer suggestive evidence of a link. What is clear is that, in individual cases, marijuana can cause psychosis, and psychosis is a high risk factor for violence. What’s more, much of that violence occurs when psychotic people are using drugs. As long as people with schizophrenia are avoiding recreational drugs, they are only moderately more likely to become violent than healthy people. But when they use drugs, their risk of violence skyrockets. The drug they are most likely to use is cannabis.

According to the National Academies of Sciences, US scientists can only receive access to “research-graded” cannabis, so they don’t conduct studies on the marijuana that is actually being used recreationally by the public.

Needless to say, the marijuana lobby is not interested in funding or encouraging research on their product. Due to the lack of research, we have no credible assessment of the damage that is being done to our children. The relationships between mental illness, psychosis, and violence are still unclear. And no one really knows the effect on crime statistics.

If you think the opioid crisis was a tragedy, just wait and see the results of widespread marijuana legalization.

Are you as concerned as I am?

Published in Culture
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 195 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    • #31
  2. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Joshua Bissey (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    I just don’t like stuff legalized that’s not researched.

    I’m surprised to see conservatives taking this line of argument. Don’t we usually ask for reasons why government should be involved, rather than wanting a justification for repealing laws?

    FWIW, I have never used pot, and don’t intend to start. I don’t see a place for government in deciding what drugs people use.

    I’ve never used it, either. Would you apply that to any drugs?

    • #32
  3. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Kozak (View Comment):
    I think if you ask ER docs to pick between alcohol and marijuana in terms of negative health effects, alcohol is worse hands down. Doesn’t mean there are no negative effects.

    I can see why, @kozak. If the use of marijuana increases, though, do you think that would make a difference in the kinds of cases you’d see?

    • #33
  4. Buckpasser Member
    Buckpasser
    @Buckpasser

    Speaking selfishly as an employer I’m not looking forward to legalization.  Drug testing has reduced my probable work force significantly already.  I fear that total legalization will lead to proponents arguing that Marijuana is different and testing positive for it does not mean I can refuse to hire them.  Similar to somebody telling me I have to bake a cake.  If you use Marijuana, by definition, you want to be high.  I don’t want that person driving my forklifts.

    • #34
  5. KentForrester Coolidge
    KentForrester
    @KentForrester

    Oregon’s legalization of the recreational use of marijuana has been a godsend for me.  I’ve lived with insomnia for decades.  The only thing that has helped is a tincture (dissolving a drug in alcohol) of marijuana.  The tincture I use is a solution made up THC plus other non-THC parts of the marijuana plant.

    I’ve been placing this liquid solution under my tongue with an eye dropper for a couple of months now, and it works!  I’ve been sleeping eight hours a day, and I don’t get up in the night. (I’ve been getting up in the middle of the night for years.)

    As far as I can tell, that tincture of marijuana only has a couple of rather benign side effects.  I’m left with a dry mouth for a few hours (alleviated by drinking water), and I’m a bit groggy sometimes when I get up in the middle of the night to urinate. In the morning I’m clear-headed and bushy-tailed.

    Before marijuana was legalized, I tried to get my VA doctor to give me a prescription for medical marijuana.  He wouldn’t do it because he’s part of the government and the U.S. government still considers marijuana an illegal drug.

    Thank God for legalization and fie on you guys who don’t want me to have my marijuana. I want to sleep!

    • #35
  6. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    Thank God for legalization and fie on you guys who don’t want me to have my marijuana. I want to sleep!

    I want you to sleep, too, !@kentforrester I thought medical marijuana could be approved in any state whether it’s legal or not, since it’s like a prescription. No?

    • #36
  7. KentForrester Coolidge
    KentForrester
    @KentForrester

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    KentForrester (View Comment):
    Thank God for legalization and fie on you guys who don’t want me to have my marijuana. I want to sleep!

    I want you to sleep, too, !@kentforrester I thought medical marijuana could be approved in any state whether it’s legal or not, since it’s like a prescription. No?

    Susan, the VA won’t prescribe marijuana because even medical marijuana is illegal according to the Feds.  That’s my understanding. 

    At any rate, that’s what my primary physician told me. 

    • #37
  8. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    KentForrester (View Comment):

    Oregon’s legalization of the recreational use of marijuana has been a godsend for me. I’ve lived with insomnia for decades. The only thing that has helped is a tincture (dissolving a drug in alcohol) of marijuana. The tincture I use is a solution made up THC plus other non-THC parts of the marijuana plant.

    I’ve been placing this liquid solution under my tongue with an eye dropper for a couple of months now, and it works! I’ve been sleeping eight hours a day, and I don’t get up in the night. (I’ve been getting up in the middle of the night for years.)

    As far as I can tell, that tincture of marijuana only has a couple of rather benign side effects. I’m left with a dry mouth for a few hours (alleviated by drinking water), and I’m a bit groggy sometimes when I get up in the middle of the night to urinate. In the morning I’m clear-headed and bushy-tailed.

    Before marijuana was legalized, I tried to get my VA doctor to give me a prescription for medical marijuana. He wouldn’t do it because he’s part of the government and the U.S. government still considers majuana an illegal drug.

    Thank God for legalization and fie on you guys who don’t want me to have my marijuana. I want to sleep!

     

     

    All that is is an argument for the medicinal use of marijuana. Just like the medicinal use of opioids.  It would be controlled.  I’ve never heard of people being against that. 

    • #38
  9. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    So you’d rather they drive drunk?

    • #39
  10. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Kozak (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Douglas Pratt (View Comment):
    There is one important difference between alcohol and marijuana: alcohol can cause or aggravate aggressive behavior, and dope doesn’t. That’s about the only argument I can find on the legalization side.

    I don’t think that’s a correct assumption, although psychosis isn’t necessarily aggressive. But it can be coupled with marijuana. From my OP:

    What is clear is that, in individual cases, marijuana can cause psychosis, and psychosis is a high risk factor for violence. What’s more, much of that violence occurs when psychotic people are using drugs.

    Thanks for chiming in, @douglaspratt!

    From my perspective as an ER doc we just don’t see violence from pot users. We rarely see them in the ER at all except when someone has a dysphoric paranoid reaction, usually a novice, or in combination with other substances.

    I think if you ask ER docs to pick between alcohol and marijuana in terms of negative health effects, alcohol is worse hands down. Doesn’t mean there are no negative effects.

     

    Sure. And tobacco too.

     

    • #40
  11. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    So you’d rather they drive drunk?

    I’ve never found the argument that because alcohol is legal and bad then you might as well legalize pot to be satisfying. Two dumb things don’t make a right. Because alcohol has been in the culture for thousands of years, it is impossible to prohibit. So why add another dangerous substance to the list?  If pot is bad for society judge it on its own merits. 

    • #41
  12. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Manny (View Comment):

    KentForrester (View Comment):

    Oregon’s legalization of the recreational use of marijuana has been a godsend for me. I’ve lived with insomnia for decades. The only thing that has helped is a tincture (dissolving a drug in alcohol) of marijuana. The tincture I use is a solution made up THC plus other non-THC parts of the marijuana plant.

    I’ve been placing this liquid solution under my tongue with an eye dropper for a couple of months now, and it works! I’ve been sleeping eight hours a day, and I don’t get up in the night. (I’ve been getting up in the middle of the night for years.)

    As far as I can tell, that tincture of marijuana only has a couple of rather benign side effects. I’m left with a dry mouth for a few hours (alleviated by drinking water), and I’m a bit groggy sometimes when I get up in the middle of the night to urinate. In the morning I’m clear-headed and bushy-tailed.

    Before marijuana was legalized, I tried to get my VA doctor to give me a prescription for medical marijuana. He wouldn’t do it because he’s part of the government and the U.S. government still considers majuana an illegal drug.

    Thank God for legalization and fie on you guys who don’t want me to have my marijuana. I want to sleep!

     

     

    All that is is an argument for the medicinal use of marijuana. Just like the medicinal use of opioids. It would be controlled. I’ve never heard of people being against that.

    The fact is things are more complex than just legal vs. not legal. We are a far way from libertarian utopia on all drugs. That was back on the 1800s.

    • #42
  13. Joshua Bissey Inactive
    Joshua Bissey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):

    The word “legalize” is a red flag that does not mean what many (most?) people think it means. 

    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    Look at lotteries. By 1860, lotteries were prohibited in all but two US states. Now, they’re run by the states. That’s what it means when something is “legalized”.

    I do not know whether you’re correct about “legalize,” but it was true of same-sex unions. “Legalizing gay marriage” didn’t deregulate anything. Instead, it opened up same-sex relationships to a kind of regulation they’ve never known before. Of course, it was necessary for some reason, right? I mean, I’m sure they’ll find a reason. Someday.

    • #43
  14. Doug Watt Moderator
    Doug Watt
    @DougWatt

    Like alcohol and any other intoxicant including marijuana, has the potential to be abused. It’s dependent upon the user. Arizona allows medical marijuana, and medical marijuana dispensaries, but does not allow recreational use. The legalization petition for recreational use did get enough signatures to place it on the 2018 ballot.

    You cannot prevent anyone from obtaining pot, and I’m willing to bet that you won’t have too much difficulty finding a doctor that will get you a medical marijuana card.

    The what about-ism argument comparing alcohol to marijuana is rather hollow. No one smokes pot because it tastes good, it’s smoked to become intoxicated. Pinot Noir compliments a roast leg of lamb. I have yet to place a small plate of blunts on the table with leg of lamb, but I’ve uncorked a bottle of Pinot and placed that on the table.

    • #44
  15. Misthiocracy secretly Member
    Misthiocracy secretly
    @Misthiocracy

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    The idea behind legalization (as opposed to deregulation) is that regulation will do a better job of minimizing marijuana consumption at a reasonable cost to taxpayers than prohibition has managed to do.  IMHO, whether or not this idea holds water depends almost entirely on the jurisdiction.

    Up here in the Great White North, for example, where the criminal code is federal legislation (as opposed to the USA where each state has its own criminal code) I can be sympathetic to the argument.

    When enforcing criminal laws the police have to deal with pesky things like probable cause, unreasonable search and seizure, etc.  By wiping marijuana possession from the criminal code, they transfer jurisdiction over its regulation to the provinces, and provincial regulators don’t have to follow the Charter of Rights nearly as much as police do.*

    Like, imagine if marijuana enforcement was taken out of the hands of police and handed instead to the EPA, an agency that can inspect your property (pretty much) whenever the heck they feel like it.  That would be a brave new world.

    (* Not to mention that in nearly every province the only legal seller of marijuana is the provincial government.  Cha-ching!)

    • #45
  16. Joshua Bissey Inactive
    Joshua Bissey
    @TheSockMonkey

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    It puzzles me that the driving issue keeps coming up. The prohibitions against drunk driving are well-known, so how can there be any question that we’ll apply the same legal framework to driving under the influence of marijuana? Don’t we already? People are driving around stoned in all 50 states, legal or not, right? Surely there are already criminal penalties for such. No?

    • #46
  17. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Manny (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    So you’d rather they drive drunk?

    I’ve never found the argument that because alcohol is legal and bad then you might as well legalize pot to be satisfying. Two dumb things don’t make a right. Because alcohol has been in the culture for thousands of years, it is impossible to prohibit. So why add another dangerous substance to the list? If pot is bad for society judge it on its own merits.

    Because people don’t usually stack them. 

    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol. If someone gets stoned and stays on they’re couch, they’re not driving drunk, they’re not starting fist fights. 

    Contrary to decades of government propaganda, which people parrot uncritically, pot users usually aren’t violent. Especially compared to alcohol users. 

    So you’re advocating prohibiting a less harmful alternative to a product we know has deleterious health and societal effects. 

    • #47
  18. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Kozak (View Comment):
    I think if you ask ER docs to pick between alcohol and marijuana in terms of negative health effects, alcohol is worse hands down. Doesn’t mean there are no negative effects.

    I can see why, @kozak. If the use of marijuana increases, though, do you think that would make a difference in the kinds of cases you’d see?

    Possibly. But I’ve been at this since the late 70’s in areas with loads of pot users.  I think we would have seen it by now.

    • #48
  19. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol. If someone gets stoned and stays on they’re couch, they’re not driving drunk, they’re not starting fist fights. 

    But their still stoned.

    • #49
  20. Richard Easton Coolidge
    Richard Easton
    @RichardEaston

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Richard Easton (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Doug Watt (View Comment):

    Yo dudes, and dudettes, start investing in Lava Lamp, Pringles, and black light shares.

    You could start an specific fund and call it DSC. Dated Stoner Cliches.

    There is no expiration date on stupid stoners.

    But some of the tired cliches have expired. No stoner I know has a lava lamp anymore.

    How many stoners do you know.

    Well, I am on the NYLP state committee, so…

    Perhaps I should revise my question.  Do you know any nonstoners.  j/k

    • #50
  21. Fred Cole Inactive
    Fred Cole
    @FredCole

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol. If someone gets stoned and stays on they’re couch, they’re not driving drunk, they’re not starting fist fights.

    But their still stoned.

     But can probably use homonyms correctly. 

    • #51
  22. Chris B Member
    Chris B
    @ChrisB

    I think, @susanquinn, that one of the big issues that needs to be addressed is that we have very much over-regulated marijuana.

    It is currently Federally classified as a Schedule I drug. The definition for Schedule I drugs is: Drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse

    We have known for at least my entire lifetime (if not centuries before) that there are legitimate medical uses for marijuana.

    Declaring it a Schedule I drug (the most strictly regulated classification) has only resulted in preventing legitimate research on practical uses and the real impacts of the use of this commonly utilized drug.

    My understanding is that, in certain cases, treatment with CBD oil can have nearly miraculous effects on individuals with Parkinson’s disease and epilepsy, ending uncontrollable tremors, spasms, and seizures in seconds or minutes. That is a huge quality of life improvement for some people who can otherwise find no relief. I also understand that it has value to some individuals as a pain reliever with far fewer and less severe side effects than the alternatives such as opioids.

    I have a friend who has suffered from debilitating IBS, whom I’ve recommended several times should discuss with his doctor about exploring marijuana as a treatment. He has so far refused to do so due to Federal law (fearing it could make him unemployable) and general stigma.

    I would be in favor of reducing marijuana to a Schedule III drug, so that legitimate research can study it and medical experts are free to prescribe it where it is appropriate.

    Here is the DEA’s explanation of drug Schedules for those interested

    • #52
  23. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Misthiocracy secretly (View Comment):
    Etymologically, to “legalize” is to create laws, not to repeal laws. It’s a synonym for “regulate”, and not a synonym for “deregulate”. If there is no existing law to control something, and you want to create a law to control that thing, you are “legalizing” that thing.

    That’s true, Mis. I guess I’m concerned with public safety more than anything. If people want to fry their brains, that’s their choice, but if they’re stoned and driving, I’m concerned.

    So you’d rather they drive drunk?

    I’ve never found the argument that because alcohol is legal and bad then you might as well legalize pot to be satisfying. Two dumb things don’t make a right. Because alcohol has been in the culture for thousands of years, it is impossible to prohibit. So why add another dangerous substance to the list? If pot is bad for society judge it on its own merits.

    Because people don’t usually stack them.

    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol. If someone gets stoned and stays on they’re couch, they’re not driving drunk, they’re not starting fist fights.

    Contrary to decades of government propaganda, which people parrot uncritically, pot users usually aren’t violent. Especially compared to alcohol users.

    So you’re advocating prohibiting a less harmful alternative to a product we know has deleterious health and societal effects.

    Yeah I see no reason why pot should be legal.  Stoned people, whether they are on a couch or not, are not good for society, it’s not good for their families, and it’s not good for them.  You seem to disregard the unintended consequences.  

    • #53
  24. Manny Coolidge
    Manny
    @Manny

    Joshua Bissey (View Comment):

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):
    I just don’t like stuff legalized that’s not researched.

    I’m surprised to see conservatives taking this line of argument. Don’t we usually ask for reasons why government should be involved, rather than wanting a justification for repealing laws?

    FWIW, I have never used pot, and don’t intend to start. I don’t see a place for government in deciding what drugs people use.

    That’s because you have a misunderstanding of conservatism.  Because conservatism and Libertarianism are in a political alliance, many have conflated the two and blurred critical distinctions.  Conservatism is not just about liberty, it’s about ordered liberty.  From the father of conservatism, Edmund Burke:

    “The only liberty that is valuable is a liberty connected with order; that not only exists along with order and virtue, but which cannot exist at all without them. It inheres in good and steady government, as in its substance and vital principle.”
    – Edmund Burke

    Free use of drugs is not ordered, and it’s certainly not virtue.  Conservatism rests on two key principles: ordered liberty and the wisdom accumulated through tradition.  A society where people are allowed to function stoned is not dutiful application of wisdom.  Libertarianism is as radical from conservatism as it gets.  In some ways it’s more radical than Liberalism.  At least Liberalism has a moral core.  I may dispute the values in that moral core, but I can’t argue they don’t have any.  Libertarianism is essentially moral relativism.

    • #54
  25. JosePluma Coolidge
    JosePluma
    @JosePluma

    I really don’t have a horse in this race; I am severely allergic to marijuana so I can’t use it.  I am libertarian, so I really don’t care what other people do to themselves.  It is less dangerous than alcohol, smoked tobacco or narcotics.

    On the other hand, it is not completely benign.

    Despite the “marijuana never killed anyone” meme, marijuana use is correlated with increased morbidity and mortality.  I have arrested people for vehicular homicide while under the influence of marijuana.  Its use is also associated with increased accidents (falls, burns, lacerations) in general.

    There appears to be an association between marijuana use and psychosis.

    Marijuana legalization has not eliminated criminal activity.  Since legal marijuana is heavily taxed, there is a thriving black market in “bootleg” untaxed weed, as well as the transportation from states where it is legal to states where it is not.

    Finally, marijuana is not a wonder drug.  Most of the therapeutic effects of medical marijuana are overstated, nonexistent, or can be more effectively obtained with other medications.

     

    • #55
  26. JosePluma Coolidge
    JosePluma
    @JosePluma

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Because people don’t usually stack them.

    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol.

    Not in my experience as a cop and as a nurse.

    A large percentage of the DWI’s (alcohol) I arrested were also in possession of marijuana.  Many of the people brought to the ER under the influence of alcohol also have cannabis on board.

    In fact, as @kentforrester points out, one of the most popular ways of consuming marijuana is as a tincture in alcohol, thus avoiding the rather unpleasant smell.

    • #56
  27. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil Fawlty
    @BasilFawlty

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):
    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol. If someone gets stoned and stays on they’re couch, they’re not driving drunk, they’re not starting fist fights.

    But their still stoned.

    But can probably use homonyms correctly.

    As in “stays on they’re couch”?

    • #57
  28. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    JosePluma (View Comment):

    I really don’t have a horse in this race; I am severely allergic to marijuana so I can’t use it. I am libertarian, so I really don’t care what other people do to themselves. It is less dangerous than alcohol, smoked tobacco or narcotics.

    On the other hand, it is not completely benign.

    Despite the “marijuana never killed anyone” meme, marijuana use is correlated with increased morbidity and mortality. I have arrested people for vehicular homicide while under the influence of marijuana. Its use is also associated with increased accidents (falls, burns, lacerations) in general.

    There appears to be an association between marijuana use and psychosis.

    Marijuana legalization has not eliminated criminal activity. Since legal marijuana is heavily taxed, there is a thriving black market in “bootleg” untaxed weed, as well as the transportation from states where it is legal to states where it is not.

    Finally, marijuana is not a wonder drug. Most of the therapeutic effects of medical marijuana are overstated, nonexistent, or can be more effectively obtained with other medications.

     

    I cannot imagine that smoking weed, and holding it in the lungs, can be good for your lungs. I imagine as pot smoking goes up, we will see lung cancer rise again. :(

    • #58
  29. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    JosePluma (View Comment):

    Fred Cole (View Comment):

    Because people don’t usually stack them.

    Pot is a replacement product for alcohol.

    Not in my experience as a cop and as a nurse.

    A large percentage of the DWI’s (alcohol) I arrested were also in possession of marijuana. Many of the people brought to the ER under the influence of alcohol also have cannabis on board.

    In fact, as @kentforrester points out, one of the most popular ways of consuming marijuana is as a tincture in alcohol, thus avoiding the rather unpleasant smell.

    This is true in my experience as well. 

     

    • #59
  30. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Chris B (View Comment):

    I think, @susanquinn, that one of the big issues that needs to be addressed is that we have very much over-regulated marijuana.

    It is currently Federally classified as a Schedule I drug. The definition for Schedule I drugs is: Drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse

    We have known for at least my entire lifetime (if not centuries before) that there are legitimate medical uses for marijuana.

    Declaring it a Schedule I drug (the most strictly regulated classification) has only resulted in preventing legitimate research on practical uses and the real impacts of the use of this commonly utilized drug.

    My understanding is that, in certain cases, treatment with CBD oil can have nearly miraculous effects on individuals with Parkinson’s disease and epilepsy, ending uncontrollable tremors, spasms, and seizures in seconds or minutes. That is a huge quality of life improvement for some people who can otherwise find no relief. I also understand that it has value to some individuals as a pain reliever with far fewer and less severe side effects than the alternatives such as opioids.

    I have a friend who has suffered from debilitating IBS, whom I’ve recommended several times should discuss with his doctor about exploring marijuana as a treatment. He has so far refused to do so due to Federal law (fearing it could make him unemployable) and general stigma.

    I would be in favor of reducing marijuana to a Schedule III drug, so that legitimate research can study it and medical experts are free to prescribe it where it is appropriate.

    Here is the DEA’s explanation of drug Schedules for those interested

    I think that might be a good alternative. 

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.