My first post!!! Sorry for such a long post but some one needs to do this. I've collected a ton of sources about the evils of marijuana, but i have limited my self to published credible sources that are subject to peer review. The government has a nasty habit of citing its self, restating its own poor conclusions that were reached with no research at all. I want to break this cycle.
Marc <st1
lace><st1:City>Kaufman</st1:City>, <st1:State>Washington</st1:State></st1
lace> Post
<st1:date year="2006" day="26" month="5">Friday, May 26, 2006</st1:date>
The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.
The new findings "were against our expectations," said Dr. Donald Tashkin, a UCLA pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.
"We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."
Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought.
Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.
Tashkin's study, funded by the National Institutes of Health's National Institute on Drug Abuse, involved 1,200 people in <st1:City><st1
lace>Los Angeles</st1
lace></st1:City> who had lung, neck or head cancer and an additional 1,040 people without cancer matched by age, sex and neighborhood.
They were all asked about their lifetime use of marijuana, tobacco and alcohol. The heaviest marijuana smokers had lit up more than 22,000 times, while moderately heavy usage was defined as smoking 11,000 to 22,000 marijuana cigarettes. Tashkin found that even the very heavy marijuana smokers showed no increased incidence of the three cancers studied.
"This is the largest case-control study ever done, and everyone had to fill out a very extensive questionnaire about marijuana use," he said. "Bias can creep into any research, but we controlled for as many confounding factors as we could, and so I believe these results have real meaning."
Tashkin's group at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA had hypothesized that marijuana would raise the risk of cancer on the basis of earlier small human studies, lab studies of animals and the fact that marijuana users inhale more deeply and generally hold smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers -- exposing them to the dangerous chemicals for a longer time. In addition, Tashkin said, previous studies found that marijuana tar has 50 percent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to cancer than tobacco cigarette tar.
While no association between marijuana smoking and cancer was found, the study findings, presented to the American Thoracic Society International Conference this week, did find a 20-fold increase in lung cancer among people who smoked two or more packs of cigarettes a day.
The study was limited to people younger than 60 because those older than that were generally not exposed to marijuana use in their youth, when it is most frequently tried. <o
></o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
></pre>
12. A Johns Hopkins study published in May 1999, examined marijuana's </pre>
effects on cognition on 1,318 participants over a 15 year period. </pre>
Researchers reported "no significant differences in cognitive </pre>
decline between heavy users, light users, and nonusers of cannabis." </pre>
They also found "no male-female differences in cognitive decline </pre>
in relation to cannabis use." "These results ... seem to provide </pre>
strong evidence of the absence of a long-term residual effect </pre>
of cannabis use on cognition," they concluded. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Constantine G. Lyketsos, Elizabeth Garrett, Kung-Yee </pre>
Liang, and James C. Anthony. (1999). "Cannabis Use and Cognitive </pre>
Decline in Persons under 65 Years of Age," American Journal of </pre>
Epidemiology, Vol. 149, No. 9. </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
15. In March 1999, the <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>Institute</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName>Medicine</st1:PlaceName></st1
lace> issued a report on </pre>
various aspects of marijuana, including the so-called, Gateway </pre>
Theory (the theory that using marijuana leads people to use harder </pre>
drugs like cocaine and heroin). The IOM stated, "There is no </pre>
conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally </pre>
linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Janet E. Joy, <st1:City><st1
lace>Stanley</st1
lace></st1:City> J. Watson, Jr., and John A Benson, </pre>
Jr., Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. Division </pre>
of Neuroscience and Behavioral Research, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>Institute</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName>Medicine</st1:PlaceName></st1
lace> </pre>
(Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1999). </pre> <o
> </o
>
The DEA's Administrative Law Judge, Francis Young concluded: </pre>
"In strict medical terms marijuana is far safer than many foods </pre>
we commonly consume. For example, eating 10 raw potatoes can </pre>
result in a toxic response. By comparison, it is physically impossible </pre>
to eat enough marijuana to induce death. Marijuana in its natural </pre>
form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known </pre>
to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be </pre>
safely used within the supervised routine of medical care." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Agency, "In </pre>
the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition," [Docket #86-22], </pre>
(<st1:date year="1988" day="6" month="9">September 6, 1988</st1:date>), p. 57. </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
Commissioned by President Nixon in 1972, the National Commission </pre>
on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded that "Marihuana's relative </pre>
potential for harm to the vast majority of individual users and </pre>
its actual impact on society does not justify a social policy </pre>
designed to seek out and firmly punish those who use it. This </pre>
judgment is based on prevalent use patterns, on behavior exhibited </pre>
by the vast majority of users and on our interpretations of existing </pre>
medical and scientific data. This position also is consistent </pre>
with the estimate by law enforcement personnel that the elimination </pre>
of use is unattainable." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of </pre>
Misunderstanding, <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Ch.</st1
lace></st1:country-region> V, (<st1
lace><st1:City>Washington</st1:City> <st1:State>DC</st1:State></st1
lace>: National Commission on </pre>
Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1972). </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
When examining the relationship between marijuana use and </pre>
violent crime, the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug </pre>
Abuse concluded, "Rather than inducing violent or aggressive </pre>
behavior through its purported effects of lowering inhibitions, </pre>
weakening impulse control and heightening aggressive tendencies, </pre>
marihuana was usually found to inhibit the expression of aggressive </pre>
impulses by pacifying the user, interfering with muscular coordination, </pre>
reducing psychomotor activities and generally producing states </pre>
of drowsiness lethargy, timidity and passivity." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of </pre>
Misunderstanding, Ch. III, (<st1
lace><st1:City>Washington</st1:City> <st1:State>DC</st1:State></st1
lace>: National Commission on </pre>
Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1972). </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
When examining the medical affects of marijuana use, the </pre>
National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse concluded, "A </pre>
careful search of the literature and testimony of the nation's </pre>
health officials has not revealed a single human fatality in </pre>
the <st1:country-region><st1
lace>United States</st1
lace></st1:country-region> proven to have resulted solely from ingestion </pre>
of marihuana. Experiments with the drug in monkeys demonstrated </pre>
that the dose required for overdose death was enormous and for </pre>
all practical purposes unachievable by humans smoking marihuana. </pre>
This is in marked contrast to other substances in common use, </pre>
most notably alcohol and barbiturate sleeping pills. The WHO </pre>
reached the same conclusion in 1995. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Shafer, Raymond P., et al, Marihuana: A Signal of </pre>
Misunderstanding, Ch. III, (<st1
lace><st1:City>Washington</st1:City> <st1:State>DC</st1:State></st1
lace>: National Commission on </pre>
Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1972); Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., </pre>
WHO Project on Health Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative </pre>
Appraisal of the Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, </pre>
Cannabis, Nicotine and Opiate Use, <st1:date year="1995" day="28" month="8">August 28, 1995</st1:date>, (<st1:City><st1
lace>Geneva</st1
lace></st1:City>, </pre>
<st1:country-region><st1
lace>Switzerland</st1
lace></st1:country-region>: World Health Organization, March 1998).</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
23. The authors of a 1998 World Health Organization report </pre>
comparing marijuana, alcohol, nicotine and opiates quote the </pre>
<st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>Institute</st1:PlaceType> of <st1:PlaceName>Medicine</st1:PlaceName></st1
lace>'s 1982 report stating that there is no </pre>
evidence that smoking marijuana "exerts a permanently deleterious </pre>
effect on the normal cardiovascular system." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health </pre>
Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the </pre>
Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine </pre>
and Opiate Use, <st1:date year="1995" day="28" month="8">August 28, 1995</st1:date> (<st1
lace><st1:City>Geneva</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>Switzerland</st1:country-region></st1
lace>: World Health </pre>
Organization, March 1998). </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Some claim that cannabis use leads to "adult amotivation." </pre>
The World Health Organization report addresses the issue and </pre>
states, "it is doubtful that cannabis use produces a well defined </pre>
amotivational syndrome." The report also notes that the value </pre>
of studies which support the "adult amotivation" theory are "limited </pre>
by their small sample sizes" and lack of representative social/cultural </pre>
groups. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Hall, W., Room, R. & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health </pre>
Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the </pre>
Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine </pre>
and Opiate Use, <st1:date year="1995" day="28" month="8">August 28, 1995</st1:date> (<st1
lace><st1:City>Geneva</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>Switzerland</st1:country-region></st1
lace>: World Health </pre>
Organization, March 1998)</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Australian researchers found that regions giving on-the-spot </pre>
fines to marijuana users rather than harsher criminal penalties </pre>
did not cause marijuana use to increase. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Ali, Robert, et al., The Social Impacts of the Cannabis </pre>
Expiation Notice Scheme in <st1:State><st1
lace>South Australia</st1
lace></st1:State>: Summary Report (<st1:City><st1
lace>Canberra</st1
lace></st1:City>, </pre>
<st1:country-region><st1
lace>Australia</st1
lace></st1:country-region>: Department of Health and Aged Care, 1999), p. 44. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
"Both Australian studies suggest cannabis may actually reduce </pre>
the responsibility rate and lower crash risk. Put another way, </pre>
cannabis consumption either increases driving ability or, more </pre>
likely, drivers who use cannabis make adjustments in driving style </pre>
to compensate for any loss of skill (Drummer, 1995). This is </pre>
consistent with simulator and road studies that show drivers who </pre>
consumed cannabis slowed down and drove more cautiously (see Ward </pre>
& Dye, 1999; Smiley, 1999. This compensation could help reduce the </pre>
probability of being at fault in a motor vehicle accident since </pre>
drivers have more time to respond and avoid a collision. However, </pre>
it must be noted that any behavioral compensation may not be </pre>
sufficient to cope with the reduced safety margin resulting from </pre>
the impairment of driver functioning and capacity."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: </pre>
Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation </pre>
Policy," Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 980.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
A literature review of the effects of cannabis on driving found, </pre>
"Another paradigm used to assess crash risk is to use cross-sectional </pre>
surveys of reported nonfatal accidents that can be related to the </pre>
presence of risk factors, such as alcohol and cannabis consumption. </pre>
Such a methodology was employed in a provocative dissertation by </pre>
Laixuthai (1994). This study used data from two large surveys that </pre>
were nationally representative of high school students in the United</pre>
States during 1982 and 1989. Results showed that cannabis use was </pre>
negatively correlated with nonfatal accidents, but these results can </pre>
be attributed to changes in the amount of alcohol consumed. More </pre>
specifically, the decriminalization of cannabis and the subsequent </pre>
reduction in penalty cost, as well as a reduced purchase price</pre>
of cannabis, made cannabis more appealing and affordable for young </pre>
consumers. This resulted in more cannabis use, which substituted </pre>
for alcohol consumption, leading to less frequent and less heavy </pre>
drinking. The reduction in the amount of alcohol consumed resulted </pre>
in fewer nonfatal accidents."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Laberge, Jason C., Nicholas J. Ward, "Research Note: </pre>
Cannabis and Driving -- Research Needs and Issues for Transportation </pre>
Policy," Journal of Drug Issues, Dec. 2004, pp. 980-1.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
Since 1969, government-appointed commissions in the United </pre>
<st1
lace><st1:City>States</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>Canada</st1:country-region></st1
lace>, <st1:country-region><st1
lace>England</st1
lace></st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Australia</st1
lace></st1:country-region>, and the <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Netherlands</st1
lace></st1:country-region> have </pre>
concluded, after reviewing the scientific evidence, that </pre>
marijuana's dangers had previously been greatly exaggerated, and </pre>
urged lawmakers to drastically reduce or eliminate penalties for </pre>
marijuana possession. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Advisory Committee on Drug Dependence, Cannabis (<st1:City><st1
lace>London</st1
lace></st1:City>, </pre>
<st1:country-region><st1
lace>England</st1
lace></st1:country-region>: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1969); Canadian Government </pre>
Commission of Inquiry, The Non-Medical Use of Drugs (<st1:City><st1
lace>Ottawa</st1
lace></st1:City>, </pre>
<st1:country-region><st1
lace>Canada</st1
lace></st1:country-region>: Information <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Canada</st1
lace></st1:country-region>, 1970); The National Commission on </pre>
Marihuana and Drug Abuse, Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding, </pre>
(Nixon-Shafer Report) (Washington, DC: USGPO, 1972); Werkgroep </pre>
Verdovende Middelen, Background and Risks of Drug Use (<st1:City><st1
lace>The Hague</st1
lace></st1:City>, </pre>
The <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Netherlands</st1
lace></st1:country-region>: Staatsuigeverij, 1972); Senate Standing Committee </pre>
on Social Welfare, Drug Problems in <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Australia</st1
lace></st1:country-region>-An Intoxicated </pre>
Society (<st1
lace><st1:City>Canberra</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>Australia</st1:country-region></st1
lace>: Australian Government Publishing </pre>
Service, 1977); Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, "The </pre>
classification of cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971" </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
The <st1:country-region><st1
lace>United Kingdom</st1
lace></st1:country-region> officially downgraded the classification </pre>
of cannabis from Class B to Class C effective Jan. 29, 2004. </pre>
The London Guardian reported that "Under the switch, cannabis </pre>
will be ranked alongside bodybuilding steroids and some </pre>
anti-depressants. Possession of cannabis will no longer be an </pre>
arrestable offence in most cases, although police will retain </pre>
the power to arrest users in certain aggravated situations - such </pre>
as when the drug is smoked outside schools. The home secretary, </pre>
David Blunkett, has said the change in the law is necessary to </pre>
enable police to spend more time tackling class A drugs such </pre>
as heroin and crack cocaine which cause the most harm and </pre>
trigger far more crime."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Tempest, Matthew, "MPs Vote To Downgrade Cannabis," The </pre>
Guardian (<st1
lace><st1:City>London</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>England</st1:country-region></st1
lace>), <st1:date year="2003" day="29" month="10">Oct. 29, 2003</st1:date>.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
"Our conclusion is that the present law on cannabis produces more </pre>
harm than it prevents. It is very expensive of the time and resources </pre>
of the criminal justice system and especially of the police. It </pre>
inevitably bears more heavily on young people in the streets of inner </pre>
cities, who are also more likely to be from minority ethnic communities, </pre>
and as such is inimical to police-community relations. It criminalizes </pre>
large numbers of otherwise law-abiding, mainly young, people to the </pre>
detriment of their futures. It has become a proxy for the control </pre>
of public order; and it inhibits accurate education about the </pre>
relative risks of different drugs including the risks of </pre>
cannabis itself."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Police Foundation of the <st1:country-region><st1
lace>United Kingdom</st1
lace></st1:country-region>, "Drugs and the </pre>
Law: Report of the Independent Inquiry into the Misuse of Drugs </pre>
Act of 1971", <st1:date year="2000" day="4" month="4">April 4, 2000</st1:date>. The Police Foundation, based in </pre>
<st1
lace><st1:City>London</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>England</st1:country-region></st1
lace>, is a nonprofit organization presided over by </pre>
Charles, Crown Prince of Wales, which promotes research, debate </pre>
and publication to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of </pre>
policing in the <st1:country-region><st1
lace>UK</st1
lace></st1:country-region>. </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
"Although marijuana grown in the <st1:country-region><st1
lace>United States</st1
lace></st1:country-region> was once </pre>
considered inferior because of a low concentration of THC, </pre>
advancements in plant selection and cultivation have resulted in </pre>
higher THC-containing domestic marijuana. In 1974, the average </pre>
THC content of illicit marijuana was less than one percent. Today </pre>
most commercial grade marijuana from Mexico/Columbia and domestic </pre>
outdoor cultivated marijuana has an average THC content of about </pre>
4 to 6 percent. Between 1998 and 2002, NIDA-sponsored Marijuana </pre>
Potency Monitoring System (MPMP) analyzed 4,603 domestic samples. </pre>
Of those samples, 379 tested over 15 percent THC, 69 samples </pre>
tested between 20 and 25 percent THC and four samples tested </pre>
over 25 percent THC."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: US Drug Enforcement Administration, "Drugs of Abuse" </pre>
(<st1
lace><st1:City>Washington</st1:City>, <st1:State>DC</st1:State></st1
lace>: US Dept. of Justice, 2005), from the web at</pre>
http://www.dea.gov/pubs/abuse/7-pot.htm</pre>
last accessed <st1:date year="2005" day="27" month="1">Jan. 27, 2005</st1:date>.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
"A review of the literature suggests that the majority of</pre>
cannabis users, who use the drug occasionally rather than</pre>
on a daily basis, will not suffer any lasting physical or</pre>
mental harm. Conversely, as with other ‘recreational’ drugs, </pre>
there will be some who suffer adverse consequences from their </pre>
use of cannabis. Some individuals who have psychotic thought </pre>
tendencies might risk precipitating psychotic illness. Those who </pre>
consume large doses of the drug on a regular basis are likely to </pre>
have lower educational achievement and lower income, and may suffer </pre>
physical damage to the airways. They also run a significant risk of </pre>
becoming dependent upon continuing use of the drug. There is </pre>
little evidence, however, that these adverse effects persist after </pre>
drug use stops or that any direct cause and effect relationships </pre>
are involved."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Iversen, Leslie L., PhD, FRS, "Long-Term Effects of </pre>
Exposure to Cannabis," Current Opinion in Pharmacology, </pre>
Feb. 2005, Vol. 5, No. 1, p. 71.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
According to research published in the journal Addiction, </pre>
"First, the use of cannabis and rates of psychotic symptoms </pre>
were related to each other, independently of observed/non-observed </pre>
fixed covariates and observed time dynamic factors (Table 2). </pre>
Secondly, the results of structural equation modelling suggest </pre>
that the direction of causation is that the use of cannabis </pre>
leads to increases in levels of psychotic symptoms rather than </pre>
psychotic symptoms increasing the use of cannabis. Indeed, there </pre>
is a suggestion from the model results that increases in psychotic </pre>
symptoms may inhibit the use of cannabis." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Fergusson, David M., John Horwood & Elizabeth M. Ridder, </pre>
"Tests of Causal Linkages Between Cannabis Use and Psychotic </pre>
Symptoms," Addiction, Vol. 100, No. 3, March 2005, p. 363.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
(Higher score indicates greater effect)</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Substance Withdrawal Reinforcemt Tolerance Dependnce Intoxictn</pre>
----------- ---------- ----------- --------- --------- ---------</pre>
Nicotine 6 4 5 3 2</pre>
Heroin 5 5 6 5 5</pre>
Cocaine 4 3 3 6 4</pre>
Alcohol 3 6 4 4 6</pre>
Caffeine 2 2 2 1 1</pre>
Marijuana 1 1 1 2 3</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
Federal statistics show that a large percentage of criminal </pre>
offenders were under the influence of alcohol alone when they </pre>
committed their crimes (36.3%, or a total of 1,919,251 offenders). </pre>
Federal research also shows for more than 40% of convicted murderers </pre>
being held in either jail or State prison, alcohol use was a </pre>
factor in the crime. </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: <st1:City><st1
lace>Greenfield</st1
lace></st1:City>, <st1:City><st1
lace>Lawrence</st1
lace></st1:City> A., Alcohol and Crime: An Analysis </pre>
of National Data on the Prevalence of Alcohol Involvement in </pre>
Crime (Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, April 1998), </pre>
pp. 20-21. To put these numbers in perspective, see also other </pre>
Factbook sections on Alcohol, Civil Rights, Prisons, Race and </pre>
Prisons </pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
"What is most noteworthy, however, is how little change has </pre>
occurred in the proportion of 12th graders who say that marijuana </pre>
is 'fairly' or 'very' easy to get. By this measure, marijuana has </pre>
been almost universally available to American 12th graders (from </pre>
83% to 90%) over at least the past 31 years."</pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., Bachman, J. G., & </pre>
Schulenberg, J. E., Monitoring the Future national survey </pre>
results on drug use, 1975-2005: Volume I, Secondary school students </pre>
(NIH Publication No. 06-5883) (<st1
lace><st1:City>Bethesda</st1:City>, <st1:State>MD</st1:State></st1
lace>: National Institute on </pre>
Drug Abuse), August 2006, p. 402.</pre> <o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
></pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
14. The World Health Organization noted that, while some studies </pre>
indicate that adolescents who use marijuana might be more likely </pre>
to drop out of high school and experience job instability in </pre>
young adulthood, "the apparent strength of these cross-sectional </pre>
studies . . . has been exaggerated because those adolescents who </pre>
are most likely to use cannabis have lower academic aspirations </pre>
and poorer high school performance prior to using cannabis, than </pre>
their peers who do not." </pre>
<o
> </o
></pre>
Source: Hall, W., Room, R., & Bondy, S., WHO Project on Health </pre>
Implications of Cannabis Use: A Comparative Appraisal of the </pre>
Health and Psychological Consequences of Alcohol, Cannabis, Nicotine </pre>
and Opiate Use, <st1:date year="1995" day="28" month="8">August 28, 1995</st1:date> (<st1
lace><st1:City>Geneva</st1:City>, <st1:country-region>Switzerland</st1:country-region></st1
lace>: World Health </pre>
Organization, 1998). </pre> <o
> </o
>
There is no evidence that marijuana impairs male reproductive functioning.
The Jamaican and Costa Rican field studies detected no differences in hormone levels between marijuana users and non-users.
In epidemiological surveys of marijuana users, no problems with fertility have emerged as important.
In 1974, researchers reported diminished testosterone, reduced sexual function and abnormal sperm cells in males identified as chronic marijuana users.
<sup>34</sup> In a laboratory study, the same researchers reported an acute decrease in testosterone, but no chronic effect after nine weeks of smoking; they did not evaluate sperm volume or quality.
<sup>35</sup> In other laboratory studies, researchers have been generally unable to replicate these findings,
<sup>36</sup> although by administering very high THC doses - up to 20 cigarettes per day for 30 days - one study found a slight decrease in sperm concentrations.
<sup>37</sup> In all studies, test results remained within normal ranges and probably would not have affected actual fertility.
Severe adverse consequences have also been produced in male laboratory animals, although only with extremely high daily THC doses.
<sup>38</sup>
More importantly, in both the human and animal laboratory studies, all observed changes were reversed once THC administration was halted.
<o
> </o
>
Source:
Lynn Zimmer, Associate Professor of Sociology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
Queens</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
College</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
John P. Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>
City</st1:PlaceType><st1:PlaceType>
University</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
of <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
New York</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceName>
Medical</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
School</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
October 1995
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
The principal study fueling the original claim of immune impairment involved preparations created with white blood cells that had been removed from marijuana smokers and controls. After exposing the cells to known immune activators, researchers reported a lower rate of "transformation" in those taken from marijuana smokers.
<sup>26</sup>
However, numerous groups of scientists, using similar techniques, have failed to confirm this original study.
<sup>27</sup>
In fact, a 1988 study demonstrated an increase in responsiveness when white blood cells from marijuana smokers were exposed to immunological activators.
<sup>28</sup>
Studies involving laboratory animals have shown immune impairment following administration of THC, but only with the use of extremely high doses. For example, one study demonstrated an increase in herpes infection in rodents given doses of 100 mg/kg/day - a dose approximately 1000 times the dose necessary to produce a psychoactive effect in humans.
<sup>29</sup>
There have been no clinical or epidemiological studies showing an increase in bacterial, viral, or parasitic infection among human marijuana users. In three large field studies conducted in the 1970s, in <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Jamaica</st1
lace></st1:country-region>, <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Costa Rica</st1
lace></st1:country-region> and <st1:country-region><st1
lace>Greece</st1
lace></st1:country-region>, researchers found no differences in disease susceptibility between marijuana users and matched controls.
<sup>30</sup>
Marijuana use does not increase the risk of HIV infection; nor does it increase the onset or intensity of symptoms among AIDS patients.
<sup>31</sup> In fact, the FDA decision to approve the use of Marinol (synthetic THC) for use in HIV-wasting syndrome relied upon the absence of any immunopathology due to THC.
<sup>32</sup>
Source:
Lynn Zimmer, Associate Professor of Sociology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
Queens</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
College</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
John P. Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>
City</st1:PlaceType><st1:PlaceType>
University</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
of <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
New York</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceName>
Medical</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
School</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
October 1995
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
The concept of an amotivational syndrome first appeared in the late 1960s,
<sup>68</sup> as marijuana use was increasing among American youth. In the years since, despite the absence of an agreed-upon definition of the concept, numerous researchers have attempted to verify its occurrence.
Large-scale studies of high school students have generally found no difference in grade-point averages between marijuana users and non-users.
<sup>69</sup> One study found lower grades among students reported to be daily users of marijuana, but the authors failed to identify a causal relationship and concluded that both phenomena were part of a complex of inter-related social and emotional problems.
<sup>70</sup>
In one longitudinal study of college students, after controlling for other factors, marijuana users were found to have higher grades than non-users
<sup>7l</sup> and to be equally as likely to successfully complete their educations.
<sup>72</sup> Another study found that marijuana users in college scored higher than non-users on standardized "achievement values" scales.
<sup>73</sup>
<o
> </o
>
Source:
Lynn Zimmer, Associate Professor of Sociology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
Queens</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
College</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
John P. Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>
City</st1:PlaceType><st1:PlaceType>
University</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
of <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
New York</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceName>
Medical</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
School</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
October 1995
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
When human subjects were administered daily oral doses of 180-210 mg of THC - the equivalent of 15-20 joints per day - abrupt cessation produced adverse symptoms, including disturbed sleep, restlessness, nausea, decreased appetite, and sweating. The authors interpreted these symptoms as evidence of physical dependence. However, they noted the syndrome's relatively mild nature and remained skeptical of its occurrence when marijuana is consumed in usual doses and situations.
<sup>61</sup> Indeed, when humans are allowed to control consumption, even high doses are not followed by adverse withdrawal symptoms.
<sup>62</sup>
Signs of withdrawal have been created in laboratory animals following the administration of very high doses.
<sup>63</sup> Recently, at a NIDA-sponsored conference, a researcher described unpublished observations involving rats pretreated with THC and then dosed with a cannabinoid receptor-blocker.
<sup>64</sup> Not surprisingly, this provoked sudden withdrawal, by stripping receptors of the drug. This finding has no relevance to human users who, upon ceasing use, experience a very gradual removal of THC from receptors.
The most avid publicizers of marijuana's addictive nature are treatment providers who, in recent years, have increasingly admitted insured marijuana users to their programs.
<sup>65</sup> The increasing use of drug-detection technologies in the workplace, schools and elsewhere has also produced a group of marijuana users who identify themselves as "addicts" in order to receive treatment instead of punishment.
Source:
Lynn Zimmer, Associate Professor of Sociology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
Queens</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
College</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
John P. Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>
City</st1:PlaceType><st1:PlaceType>
University</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
of <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
New York</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceName>
Medical</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
School</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
October 1995
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
The original basis of this claim was a report that, upon postmortem examinations, structural changes in several brain regions were found in two rhesus monkeys exposed to THC.
<sup>51</sup> Because these changes primarily involved the hippocampus, a cortical brain region known to play an important role in learning and memory, this finding suggested possible negative consequences for human marijuana users.
Additional studies, employing rodents, reported similar brain changes.
However, to achieve these results, massive doses of THC - up to 200 times the psychoactive dose in humans - had to be given . In fact, studies employing 100 times the human dose have failed to reveal any damage.
<sup>52</sup>
In the most recently published study, rhesus monkeys were exposed through face-mask inhalation to the smoke equivalent of four to five joints per day for one year. When sacrificed seven months later, there was no observed alteration of hippocampal architecture, cell size, cell number, or synaptic configuration. The authors conclude:
"while behavioral and neuroendocrinal effects are observed during marijuana smoke exposure in the monkey, residual neuropathological and neurochemical effects of marijuana exposure were not observed seven months after the year-long marijuana smoke regimen."
<sup>53</sup>
Source:
Lynn Zimmer, Associate Professor of Sociology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
Queens</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
College</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
John P. Morgan, Professor of Pharmacology, <st1
lace><st1:PlaceType>
City</st1:PlaceType><st1:PlaceType>
University</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
of <st1
lace><st1:PlaceName>
New York</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceName>
Medical</st1:PlaceName><st1:PlaceType>
School</st1:PlaceType></st1
lace>
October 1995
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
As noted by Bruce Mirken and Mitch Earleywine in their article
"Psychosis, Hype and Baloney" (AlterNet, March 7, 2005):
"[T]he article gives no indication that respondents were asked to distinguish between feelings experienced while high and feelings experienced at other times. Thus, we are left with no indication at all as to whether these supposed psychotic symptoms are long-term effects or simply the normal, passing effects of marijuana intoxication. While it's possible the researchers had these data and didn't see a need to report them, the failure to do so is downright bizarre. It's like reporting that people who go to bars are more erratic drivers than people who don't, without bothering to look at whether they'd been drinking at the time their driving skills were assessed.
"Even if these were long-term effects, the researchers seem not to have considered that what might be an indication of psychosis in other circumstances could be an entirely normal reaction for people who use marijuana. Consider: Someone using a substance that is both illegal and socially frowned-upon almost by definition has 'ideas or beliefs that others do not share.' This is not a sign of mental illness. It's a sign of a rational person realistically assessing his or her situation.
"The same goes for 'feeling other people cannot be trusted.' Just ask Robin Prosser, the <st1:State><st1
lace>Montana</st1
lace></st1:State> medical marijuana patient arrested last summer on possession charges by the cops who came to save her life after she'd attempted suicide because she was in unbearable pain after running out of medicine.
"Fergusson reports very little raw data, so we don't know which symptoms came up most often, or whether the differences in average levels of symptoms between users and non-users came from a few people having a lot of symptoms or a lot of people having a couple symptoms. The heavy-user group, with the highest levels of supposed psychosis, reported an average of less than two symptoms each. So it is entirely possible that the entire case for marijuana 'causing' psychosis is based on marijuana smokers having the completely reasonable feelings that they have beliefs different from mainstream society [or] should be a tad suspicious of others."
<o
> </o
>
<o
> </o
>
Just because a teenager uses cannabis occasionally does not mean they are destined to turn into a heroin addict. The vast majority of such young people never develop a problem with drugs at all. From the medical point of view it is probably more worrying to find that one's child is smoking tobacco than to learn of occasional cannabis use.
Some coffee, tobacco and alcohol consumers could be termed addicts, the only difference being the legal nature of their drug-of-choice. Whether legal or illegal, most adults use a variety of drugs in a controlled way and only a minority get into difficulties.
There is virtually nothing a parent can do to prevent a child being exposed to drugs. What we can do is to make sure that our children are equipped with the knowledge to prevent death and disease should they decide to try drugs. Honest and frank education is the basis for sensible decision making, whether in the field of drug use or other areas such as sex, diet or exercise.
Dr Andrew Byrne, addict in the family