Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Study: Marijuana Does Not Lead to Hard Drugs
Reuters ^ | Dec. 2, 2002 | unknown

Posted on 12/02/2002 2:42:58 PM PST by Sparta

— WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Countering a basic principle of American anti-drug policies, an independent U.S. study concluded on Monday that marijuana use does not lead teenagers to experiment with hard drugs like heroin or cocaine.

The study by the private, nonprofit RAND Drug Policy Research Center rebutted the theory that marijuana acts as a so-called gateway drug to more harmful narcotics, a key argument against legalizing pot in the United States.

The researchers did not advocate easing restrictions in marijuana, but questioned the focus on this substance in drug control efforts.

Using data from the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse between 1982 and 1994, the study concluded teenagers who took hard drugs were predisposed to do so whether they tried marijuana first or not.

"Kids get their first opportunity to use marijuana years before they get their first exposure to hard drugs," said Andrew Morral, lead author of the RAND study.

"Marijuana is not a gateway drug. It's just the first thing kids often come across."

Morral said 50 percent of U.S. teenagers had access to marijuana by the age of 16, while the majority had no exposure to cocaine, heroin or hallucinogens until they were 20.

The study, published in the British journal Addiction, does not advocate legalizing or decriminalizing marijuana, which has been linked to side-effects including short-term memory loss.

But given limited resources, Morral said the U.S. government should reconsider the prominence of marijuana in its much-publicized "war on drugs."

"To a certain extent we are diverting resources away from hard drug problems," he said. "Spending money on marijuana control may not be having downstream consequences on the use of hard drugs."

Researchers say predisposition to drug use has been linked to genetic factors and one's environment, including family dynamics and the availability of drugs in the neighborhood.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: brownshirts; dudewheresmybong; dumembers; ganja; gatewaydrug; jackboots; jbtsonparade; lpvoters; maryjane; stoners; wackyweed; weedisnotnormal; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 241-254 next last
To: wideawake
My belief that the sun will rise tomorrow is predicated largely on my own anecdotal experience and astrophysical data that I've never observed and am merely taking on faith from others.

What you are referring to is not anecdotal. Anecdotal refers to anecdotes, that is, stories repeated by others. That the sun rises, water boils at 212 degrees, the wind blows, is the metaphysically absolute, and as such, is self evident.

All one needs do to verify it is use sensory perception.

You are confusing the metaphysically self evident with word of mouth stories.

A is A.

141 posted on 12/03/2002 4:00:47 PM PST by galt-jw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
Reality check - how many people do you know who have made this statement: "I'll do smack and blow, but I'll never touch that demon weed!"

LMFAO!!!!
142 posted on 12/03/2002 4:11:57 PM PST by Bush2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass
"Yeah, poor Keith Richards, who is rockin' and rollin' on a hugely profitable concert tour. What is he now? 60?

In biological terms, Richards is about 150 years old.

143 posted on 12/03/2002 4:16:21 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: All
Trust me, the gateway drug thing is a myth. Whether someone graduates to harder drugs or not is all in the character of the person. Marijuana as a gateway drug is a cop-out.

I've smoked pot for about seven years. I have never tried any other illegal drug: no coke, no heroin, no speed, no pills, no mushrooms, no acid, no LSD, no NOTHING. As a matter of fact, I find the very idea of using drugs like these to be repulsive. It has never crossed my mind to ever try any of them.

What people that have never tried pot don't understand is that it doesn't make you all wacked out. Actually, it isn't like being intoxicated, either. Being intoxicated affects your speech, motor coordination, thought process--I could go on. Being high doesn't. You don't stagger and fall down when you are high. You don't slur your speech when you are high. You don't have trouble with your judgement when you are high.

While I wouldn't recommed operating machienery when high, I would also point out that you shouldn't do that after taking cough medicine, either.

And for those who may ask--no, I don't use the legal drug alcohol. It makes me very, very sick:)
144 posted on 12/03/2002 5:31:48 PM PST by Morrigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: jayef
Never suggested that weed was the only problem. Doctors prescribe medications to help their patients recognize reality and deal with it.
I was quite clear that in my view we all struggle to recognize reality. Any substance that clouds or inhibits our clear perception is something that we should all stay away from.
145 posted on 12/04/2002 4:20:58 AM PST by thegreatbeast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Actually, I am well aware of the actual position of Vicodin etc. in the pantheon of addictive drugs. My use of the term "hard drugs" was in the context that the term is most often used on FR, i.e. as a substitute for "the illegal drugs cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines". Believe me, it is fully my position that legal prescription drugs are every bit as destructive as those drugs commonly considered "hard", and should be seen and treated as such.
146 posted on 12/04/2002 4:51:17 AM PST by truenospinzone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: Sparta
So what? There was another "study" (that was presented on another thread here on Free Republic) that concluded that sexual abuse doesn't hurt children. Should we legalize the sexual abuse of children as well? Basically, a study is like a poll in that the study can be manipulated to produce a certain result. This study is meaningless.
147 posted on 12/04/2002 4:56:12 AM PST by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Basically, a study is like a poll in that the study can be manipulated to produce a certain result. This study is meaningless.

If the data has been manipulated, or the methodology is not sound, then yes, it is meaningless. OTOH, if the methodology is good, and the data is read objectively, the study is perfectly valid. Can you provide any reason to believe the study has been manipulated, other than that the results didn't turn out like you wanted?

The Shafer Report came to the same conclusion, and that research was commission by Nixon, and the members hand picked by him.

148 posted on 12/04/2002 6:46:35 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
That works both ways. Obviously you like the results of this "study," so you're carrying it into battle like a standard to rally your fellow dopers.

It doesn't matter who Nixon hand picked to do his study. Obviously they had their own agenda! Methodology be damned.

149 posted on 12/04/2002 6:53:12 AM PST by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; All
I apologize if someone has already made this point, but aren't we missing something in the "gateway" theory here.

Let's start with a question: What is the biggest difference between alcohol and tobacco in comparison to marijuana?

Answer: The former are legal, the latter is illegal.

In order to acquire tobacco or alcohol, it is merely necessary to be of legal age (or know someone who is), purchase these items in a completely legal manner and then consume them.

To acquire marijuana, it is first necessary to find someone who is involved in committing an illegal act. Thus, the market is comprised of criminals. Criminals tend to be individuals who are more reckless, daring (stupid) than average. Therefore these dealers, who are almost always users, are likely to be statistically more prone to know others who sell harder drugs, if they don't sell themselves. Thus, beginning a relationship with a dealer is the "gateway" to harder drugs. It is not the drug itself, it is the illegal act.

Conclusion: if you want to reduce the number of people for whom marijuana is a "gateway" drug, make it available so that it is not necessary for them to come into contact with the criminal element that leads to harder drugs.
150 posted on 12/04/2002 7:06:11 AM PST by Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit
Excellent point. But why stop there?

If I'm a petty thief and rob 7-11's, get caught and go to jail, I'll be forced to reside with other criminals. In prison, I'll learn that the real money can be found in banks, and I'll become a bank robber when I get out.

Now, if it were legal to rob 7-11's, I wouldn't be arrested and exposed to these criminals. Voila!

151 posted on 12/04/2002 7:29:23 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
That works both ways. Obviously you like the results of this "study," so you're carrying it into battle like a standard to rally your fellow dopers.

Maybe, maybe not. I asked what evidence you had to support the assertion that it has been manipulated, and you haven't provided any. My "agenda" is to have a rational public policy based on an objective analysis of the available data. What's yours?

It doesn't matter who Nixon hand picked to do his study. Obviously they had their own agenda! Methodology be damned.

On that basis, there is no reason to do any research at all. Why waste money on research if you've already decided what the results should be, and will not accept any evidence to the contrary? It works for the environmentalists.

152 posted on 12/04/2002 7:31:09 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Now, if it were legal to rob 7-11's, I wouldn't be arrested and exposed to these criminals. Voila!

A pointless example, being that the act of robbing a convenience store is in and of itself a crime with a direct victim. For this scenario to be in any way relevant to our discussion here, you'd have to prove that the act of an adult purchasing marijuana from another adult and consuming it in private is, in and of itself, a crime with an obvious, direct victim. The government hasn't had any luck trying to "prove" that for the past fifty years or so, so I'd imagine you won't fare much better.

153 posted on 12/04/2002 7:44:52 AM PST by truenospinzone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
It doesn't matter who Nixon hand picked to do his study. Obviously they had their own agenda!

"Obviously" by what standard? Because the results didn't match up with your predetermined conclusion? Are you honestly stating that each of the dozens of independent studies that have determined no causal relationship between marijuana use and hard drug use "had their own agenda", and that only those that come to your personal conclusion are valid? Who has the agenda again?

154 posted on 12/04/2002 7:48:04 AM PST by truenospinzone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
It appears that the finding is that of a common antecedent: the predisposition for drug use.

As for the policy implications, suppose that the authirs are correct, the gateway effect is not a cause. They established, then, that MJ use is a great detector of the subsequent use of harder drugs. So, why not continue preventing it so that a person caught does NOT graduate to harder drugs?

Because policy-wise, you answered your own question. If this study's legitimate, people who use hard drugs are predisposed to do so. Marijuana plays no role in it. By busting pot smokers, you're not going to cut down the number of people who "graduate" on to harder drugs because none do. You're only going to bust people who smoke pot.

Therefore, when making policy, you must consider pot alone: does pot pose such a societal threat that people who grow it and smoke it should be thrown in prison? Is government intervention really warranted here---especially if our goal, as conservatives, is less governmental intrusion in the daily lives of American citizens?


155 posted on 12/04/2002 7:59:53 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: truenospinzone
I believe that reply should have been addressed to destructor.
156 posted on 12/04/2002 8:01:27 AM PST by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
So, why not continue preventing it so that a person caught does NOT graduate to harder drugs?

Thus far there has been very little success in actually preventing the use of MJ. Only in sanctioning the small percentage who are actually caught.

157 posted on 12/04/2002 8:01:29 AM PST by AUgrad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Kerberos
I did my own study on myself and found that Marijuana DID lead to harder drug use. That's just one person though.
158 posted on 12/04/2002 8:03:49 AM PST by Republic of Texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: AUgrad
Only in sanctioning the small percentage who are actually caught.

Most of them, as far as I know, go through revolving doors.

We fight war on drugs just like we fought in Vietnam. The opponents conclude, erroneously, that thes wars should not have been started.

159 posted on 12/04/2002 8:05:38 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
Because policy-wise, you answered your own question. Not really.

If this study's legitimate, people who use hard drugs are predisposed to do so. Marijuana plays no role in it.

No, not true: if you bust MJ smokers, you are going to get those who will graduate to harder drugs as well and possibly prevent that from happenning.

You are also going to bust people who would not have progressed to harder drugs. But nobody said that that is the sole reason for butsting them either.

160 posted on 12/04/2002 8:09:27 AM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 241-254 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson