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.'
I don't see any explaination for that sentiment that doesn't involve malicious intent.
I think it is you that has the malicious intent by misquoting me ... and not even apologizing when caught.
What is malicious about observing others on an open forum?
Your careful wording says you already know.
You think whatever you want.
An obvious dodge to escape from my question:
Would you also agree with the following?
[mugs99] Anyone who supports the criminalisation of marijuana cocaine is a socialist.
My statement was a reply to a question of yours. I'll answer your next one after you answer mine.
Do you support the prohibition of peanut butter? If not, why not?
I would like you to quote me, verbatim, showing the proper posting address, where I have supported the legalization of cocaine. You are the one-hit wonder!
I am a tax-paying citizen of these United States, a veteran, and a contributing member of the Republican Party, in WV, and the national Bush-Cheney Campaign. I probably gave them more last year, than you paid in taxes. I'll damn well bet you I paid much more than you did in taxes.
Frankly dude, I am tired of being called a liar, and I am tired of your insipient whines.
I say all that, to justify myself, within the community. I am an occasional pot-smoker. So what. It is none of your business. I changed my "about" page because I have a friend in local LE, and he informed me that someone ONLINE had sent info about my alleged illegal activities. I would suspect you or someone like you was responsible. Needless to say, I have lots of friends, who know me, and will acknowledge my worth, to my communities. I have several.
Go back under your bridge...
Why? Have you ever said that? I have no idea.
Frankly dude, I am tired of being called a liar, and I am tired of your insipient whines.
Then don't lie about me like you did in #353 to which I responded showing you how you had lied about me.
I changed my "about" page because I have a friend in local LE, and he informed me that someone ONLINE had sent info about my alleged illegal activities. I would suspect you or someone like you was responsible.
I think you are paranoid. Either that or you are trying another attempt at slander. I have no idea who you are or where you live.
[358]Another lie. And you can find NO post where I stated such. Of course, that is the name of your game, lies, deceit and propaganda.
I would like you to quote me, verbatim, showing the proper posting address, where I have supported the legalization of cocaine.
Not exactly an acknowledgement of you lie.
I posted proof of your deceit. At least be a man and admit it.
I know that y'all know that y'all have spent the day with your flames trying to get me to fire back. All I have done is to honestly expose your lies. Sleep well.
You'll claim to "know" whatever you think will provoke a response and waste someone else's time. Nothing more, nothing less. It isn't worth the electrons it took to paint the pixels.
I post facts. Documented. You post slander and lies. Documented. Only YOU can waste your time.
I think I'll get wasted, since it is my time to waste!!!!
You're going to have to totter your little old troll ass down the road and post to someone else you'd like to see fired or banned.
You've got this troll pegged rightly, but I do enjoy seeing him and his deceit ridiculed. If you apply the 'devil's advocate' theory, he is trying to make the drugwarrior seem as stupid and fascist as possible, thereby trying to stereotype the drugwarrior as such, and desiring this jackbooted stereotype be generally accepted. Why? He's most likely a pusher himself. He doesn't want pot or coke or horse or anything like that legal because he enjoys his income.
I think you're right. His "documents" are always too easily shown to be bogus. He, like all drug pushers, supports the War on Drugs to protect his profits.
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.