It's been discounted by other sources, too, on other threads, posted to you. We understand why you don't believe it. 
Posted on 07/25/2004 1:12:55 AM PDT by MadIvan
New super-strength marijuana readily available on US streets is prompting the White House to change direction in its war against drugs.
Research from the government-sponsored Marijuana Potency Project claims today's cannabis is more than twice as strong as in the mid-Eighties, leading to greater health risks for those smoking it at increasingly younger ages.
Now President George Bush, who had already promised a more aggressive campaign against substance abuse, has ordered that resources be allocated to fighting so-called 'soft' drugs instead of concentrating on harder forms, such as heroin and cocaine.
'We are working hard on education, but unfortunately a lot of today's parents are under the impression marijuana is harmless and that their kids trying it is some kind of rite of passage,' said Jennifer de Vallance, of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
'They might have had experience in their own teenage years with no problems, but this is not the same marijuana as in the Sixties, Seventies and Eighties. Today's forms are much stronger and potentially more harmful, especially to young people whose brains are not fully developed and are therefore more susceptible to adverse reactions.'
The Marijuana Potency Project, at the University of Mississippi, analysed more than 30,000 samples seized over the past 18 years by the authorities. It found that the average level of the active ingredient in marijuana, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), jumped from 3.5 per cent in 1985 to more than 7 per cent in 2003.
Of more concern to the analysts is that the upward trend appears to be continuing. The average potency of 20 marijuana samples seized and tested so far this year exceeds 9 per cent, with a peak of 27 per cent in one batch from a state in the North West.
'Today's marijuana is a much more serious problem than the vast majority of Americans understands,' said John Walters, the government's director of drug control policy who has promised a clampdown on producers.
Those who support the legalisation of cannabis are not convinced. 'Whenever government officials speak about drugs issues, a more detailed examination of the facts is a good idea,' said David Borden, executive director of the Washington-based Drug Reform Coordination Network.
'These projects are always government-funded and, without criticising the researchers, officials take what they want from it and send out their press releases. There has always been a wide range of potencies. It doesn't mean people are getting more intoxicated, because the higher the potency, the less they smoke.'
Figures suggest overall drug use in America's high schools has fallen by 11 per cent in two years but the National Centre on Addiction and Substance Abuse reports the number of children and teenagers receiving treatment for marijuana abuse jumped 142 per cent over the last decade, and that emergency hospital admissions of 12 to 17-year-olds in which marijuana was implicated rose 48 per cent in four years.
Borden acknowledges children must be steered away from drugs, but says: 'Their anti-drugs efforts have had a paradoxical effect in promoting the underground cultivation of marijuana. The number of users makes it an appealing target and there is no limit to the number of arrests that can be made, and the government uses those numbers to scare the public into thinking there is some big problem.
'All the government has been able to do is encourage people to experiment with stronger drugs than they would have before.'
Seems to me that the teacher needs it more than Tommy.
It is my contention that libertarianism and the Libertarian Party are exclusive of each other. I agree with Reagan completely. People like VagBoy don't.
When he retires, those little dopers will be funding his Social Security. I would say that he should be interested.
youre right. what a waste of time and resources...besides, anyone who was around in the 60's and 70's knows that the smoke then was WAY better...no comparison, really.
Bogus research = bogus science.
The Capt.
No, that is your wish.
Small "l" libertarianism has more in common with the Libertarian Party Platform than against it -- the Libertarian Party Platform is more specific when it comes to the social issues, that's all.
For example, what is the position of libertarianism on prostitution, gambling, suicide and pornography? And how is that any different than the Libertarian position?
I bet you can't give me five differences. Immigration, one. Abortion, nope. (Maybe 1/2). And there's ....
The same as most FReepers. With an exception of suicide, I think all of those should be legal. In the words of George Carlin, selling is legal, f@#king is legal, so why is it illegal when you combine the two.
As far as gambling, you're talking to an avid Texas Hold 'Em player, so we're never going to agree on that.
As far as porn, it's not really my thing unless it is a chick only film, but it is quite radical to advocate banning it IMO.
I bet you can't give me five differences.
The main difference is that most small-l folks do not share the isolationist foreign policy views of the LP. That one's a biggie.
It's been discounted by other sources, too, on other threads, posted to you. We understand why you don't believe it.
"Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals."
I read it, and I agree with Reagan wholeheartedly about some in "the current group who call themselves Libertarians." I have no use for anarchists.
It didn't say "medical" in the Insight article. Get your hands on a copy. That's what I'm going by.
And he STILL said it should be up to the states, despite his flip-flopping by signing that bill you state.
It SHOULD be up to the states, but some people think states' rights should be up to Central Command.
The WOD has a way of driving up the potency of everything on the street. Why is pot any exception to the rule?
That is, if you assume that every LP member *must* agree with the entire party platform.
Tell me... do you have any differences with YOUR party's platform? Be honest.
That is, if you assume that every LP member *must* agree with the entire party platform. For instance, I'm anti-abortion, probably to the 99.995% against. And, so far, they haven't kicked me out for it. In fact, there's that group, Libertarians for Life... I like it. Then again, they're probably financed by Soros... I know I am.
But seriously:
Tell me... do you have any differences with YOUR party's platform? Be honest.
But ALL libertarians are anarchists! People on here say so! Therefore it must be true!
So freakin' what if today's marijuana is stronger?
Tell us today's COCAINE is stronger. If it were, THEN we would have a subject worthy of fretting and hand-wringing.
Dude, come on over to the GOP and help us decrease the size and scope of gov't. (We need all the help we can get). Even libertarian Ron Paul figured it out and switched parties. Working withing the LP is working on a road to nowhere.
Herding cats.
I'd re-join the GOP, *IF* they were ever truly serious about reducing said scope and size of government, but when our president can't even cut the budget increase for subsidized "art", my prediction is that government will just grow at a slower rate than with Dems at the helm.
That's a paraphrase of Mike Reagan's belief that, with Republicans, we wind up living in a socialist state LATER than we would with Dems.
Wish I could be more optimistic.
Your world is special because in your world funding masked thugs to harrass and imprison flower possessors in an unconstitutional war waged against our own citizenry is more important than supporting gifted creators of beauty amongst the citizenry.
May peace be with you.
You're talking about differences between Party members. I agree, there are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.