Marijuana Dangers refuted, with references

[Guest guest]

This isn't a marihuana article, really; it's a piece of agenda

written by an anonymous Narconon author who uses baseless

negative opinions on marihuana, liberally sprinkled with a few

seemingly valid points on other drugs and alcohol, but labeled

'Marihuana Dangers'.

 

The writer's agenda shows whenever she lumps recreational 'drugs'

together; of course they all have different effects alone or in

combination. Again, these are shenanigans that have nothing to do

with the topic of marihuana dangers. If I was more lenient I

might point out that the writer maybe, just possibly, is indeed

that confused, but would Narconon print a health article without

basis except if it suits their agenda?

 

As a background, Narconon was founded by Scientology devotees.

It's widely known and safe to say that the organisation is

manipulative and that it teaches devotees how to use various

brainwashing techniques. Although Scientology has been exposed

long ago, it's unfortunate that we can't similarly expose the

anonymous writer, as none is credited. I think 'nuff said about

the messenger; let's get back to the message.

 

Here's the link again, just for a hoot:

> http://www.marijuana-detox.com/m-dangers.htm

 

> Because of the drug's effects on perceptions and reaction time, users

> could be involved in auto crashes. Drug users also may become involved

> in risky sexual behavior. There is a strong link between drug use and

> unsafe sex and the spread of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.

 

See what I mean by 'drug' generalisation and a lack of data on

the topic?

 

> Marijuana affects many skills required for safe driving: alertness,

> the ability to concentrate, coordination, and reaction time. These

> effects can last up to 24 hours after smoking marijuana. Marijuana use

> can make it difficult to judge distances and react to signals and

> sounds on the road.

 

This contention that marihuana use results in unsafe drivers is

unsupported. In fact, the reverse has been found to be true in

several large studies from as many countries. I recently did an

newspaper article on this very subject; it follows this critique.

 

In summary, pot smokers are better drivers and have fewer crashes

than straight people, and this IS supported by data.

 

Not also that benzodiazepine use in drivers is a much bigger

problem on the road.

 

So, as it's a rather long confused article that's not really

worth seriously bothering with, I won't comment on the

redundancies or the opinions on drug cocktails that somehow

equate to marihuana use in the writer's mind, save to observe

that she has a right to her opinion, baseless or not and I

support her right to associate with others of her ilk.

 

> Marijuana use has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and

> other parts of the respiratory tract because it contains irritants and

> carcinogens.

 

One might reasonably hazard a guess, as the author has, that

cancer should increase with marihuana use, but the data shows

something quite different:

 

A study presented at a meeting of the American Thoracic Society

on May 24 2006 found that smoking marijuana, even heavily, does

not increase the risk of cancer. The study was headed by Dr.

Donald Tashkin of the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA.

 

The findings of the study now have researchers considering the

possibility that marijuana may have a protective effect against

cancer, perhaps deterring tumor growth.

 

Read More: http://www.drugpolicy.org/news/052506cancer.cfm

 

" This study refutes yet another drug war fallacy: that marijuana

smoke causes cancer. One by one, the myths and outright lies

about marijuana are falling by the wayside due to sound science

devoid of politics. We can now clearly see that the most negative

consequences of marijuana revolve around the fact that it is

illegal. "

 

-- Ethan Nadelmann, executive director, Drug Policy Alliance

 

 

I think I'm about done. Here follows the safer driving article;

go ahead and follow the research, and by all means forward this

post:

 

--

 

Straights have a higher accident rate than stoners

(The Citizen, June 10, 2006)

 

Body Electric, Duncan Crow

 

A caller, clearly annoyed at seeing our youth toking up on

their way home from school, asked if I could please detail for

her pot-smoking husband how Marijuana impairs drivers, impairs

reason, impairs co-ordination etc., so I started digging up

details for a story on reefer madness.

 

A recent CBC report (http://tinyurl.com/9ej2v) tells us that

according to the RCMP a recent roadcheck in Langley showed

evidence of an alarming trend in that seven drivers received

suspensions because they were impaired by drugs - almost as many

as were impaired by alcohol. Norm Gaumont, the RCMP's officer in

charge of traffic services for B.C. says he's not surprised;

" We know this is becoming more and more of an issue. And that's

the reason we're training more of our members to be drug-

recognition (DRE) experts " , he says. Australia, England, Norway,

Sweden, Germany, 43 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, and

three provinces, Quebec, British Columbia and Manitoba, currently

use DRE testing; there are currently about 50 drug recognition

experts working around the province. Today, stoned drivers pretty

well have to blurt out the truth to get themselves busted; as

Gaumont points out there are no legal tests and Canadian drivers

can not be compelled to comply with DRE testing.

 

The concept is that we need laws to protect us from stoned

drivers who won't volunteer the information that they're stoned.

To make them comply we'll probably have to show they're a menace,

but that might be difficult in terms of marijuana; according to a

British study (http://tinyurl.com/8mo4h) launched in 1992 under

pressure from anti-drug and driving groups, the only

statistically significant effect associated with marijuana use

was slower driving. As it turns out, pot is rarely involved in

driving accidents, except when combined with alcohol. Believe it

or not, the study concluded that " the THC-only drivers had an

(accident) responsibility rate below that of the drug free

drivers. ...While the difference was not statistically

significant, there was no indication that cannabis by itself was

a cause of fatal crashes. " Another study done in 1993 gave Dutch

drivers the active ingredient THC and tested them on real Dutch

roads. It concluded that " THC's adverse effects on driving

performance appear relatively small. " And a massive 1998 study by

the University of Adelaide and Transport South Australia analyzed

blood samples from 2,500 accidents, and found that drivers with

cannabis in their system were actually slightly less likely to

cause accidents than those without.

 

OK, but three million people in Canada smoke pot; one would

think we've gotta be able can get some dirt on them. No such

luck; a University of Toronto study released in March 1999 found

that moderate pot users typically refrained from passing cars and

drove at a more consistent speed than non-users.

 

" Marijuana does not impair driving, " said Dr. Mitchell

Earleywine, an expert on addiction and personality at the

University of Southern California and author of the just

published Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific

Evidence. " Robbe (1998) got people high and had them drive around

in the Netherlands. They had a little trouble staying smack in

the center of their lanes, but showed no other problems. They

tended to slow down, increase the distance between their car and

the car in front of them, and refrain from trying to pass other

vehicles. In short, they drove safely despite marijuana

intoxication. Also, three studies have shown that people who

tested positive for THC were no more likely to be at fault in

accidents than people with no drugs detected. " Marijuana

researcher Dr. Ethan Russo of Montana Neurobehavioral Specialists

in Missoula echoed Earleywine's conclusions. " Cannabis in

isolation rarely causes serious impairment in motor skills or

driving safety. The only reasonable measure to assess 'drugged

driving' is a field sobriety test, much as is commonly done for

alcohol ingestion. " That makes sense for any drug; the Safety

Council says that (http://tinyurl.com/cwh4a)10 milligrams of

Valium can be worse than a blood alcohol content of .10, and a

Montreal study of more than 224,000 drivers aged from 67 to 84

found that those on long-acting valium relatives had 45 per cent

more injury-related collisions compared to pot's zero.

 

So stoners don't seem to be public safety issue; how about

personal safety? MarijanaNews.com http://tinyurl.com/do7cj points

out that during a recent pot case in Ontario the presiding judge

said that after analyzing the scientific evidence on the effects

of marijuana presented at the trial, he had concluded that

" consumption of marijuana is relatively harmless compared to the

so-called hard drugs and including tobacco and alcohol. " Mr.

Justice J.F. McCart of the Ontario Court´s General Division said

that " there exists no hard evidence demonstrating any

irreversible organic or mental damage from the consumption of

marijuana. "

 

Though it's a no-brainer to expect chronic use to result in

some breathing issues, the defence has already made a pretty good

case. Sorry, caller.

 

Duncan Crow

http://members.shaw.ca/duncancrow/