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

Skip to comments.

High anxieties : What the WHO doesn't want you to know about cannabis
New Scientist ^

Posted on 07/02/2002 8:56:30 AM PDT by WindMinstrel

Health officials in Geneva have suppressed the publication of a politically sensitive analysis that confirms what ageing hippies have known for decades: cannabis is safer than alcohol or tobacco.

According to a document leaked to New Scientist, the analysis concludes not only that the amount of dope smoked worldwide does less harm to public health than drink and cigarettes, but that the same is likely to hold true even if people consumed dope on the same scale as these legal substances.

The comparison was due to appear in a report on the harmful effects of cannabis published last December by the WHO. But it was ditched at the last minute following a long and intense dispute between WHO officials, the cannabis experts who drafted the report and a group of external advisers.

s As the WHO's first report on cannabis for 15 years, the document had been eagerly awaited by doctors and specialists in drug abuse. The official explanation for excluding the comparison of dope with legal substances is that "the reliability and public health significance of such comparisons are doubtful". However, insiders say the comparison was scientifically sound and that the WHO caved in to political pressure. It is understood that advisers from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse and the UN International Drug Control Programme warned the WHO that it would play into the hands of groups campaigning to legalise marijuana.

One member of the expert panel which drafted the report, says: "In the eyes of some, any such comparison is tantamount to an argument for marijuana legalisation." Another member, Billy Martin of the Medical College of Virginia in Richmond, says that some WHO officials "went nuts" when they saw the draft report.

The leaked version of the excluded section states that the reason for making the comparisons was "not to promote one drug over another but rather to minimise the double standards that have operated in appraising the health effects of cannabis". Nevertheless, in most of the comparisons it makes between cannabis and alcohol, the illegal drug comes out better--or at least on a par--with the legal one.

The report concludes, for example, that "in developed societies cannabis appears to play little role in injuries caused by violence, as does alcohol". It also says that while the evidence for fetal alcohol syndrome is "good", the evidence that cannabis can harm fetal development is "far from conclusive".

Cannabis also fared better in five out of seven comparisons of long-term damage to health. For example, the report says that while heavy consumption of either drug can lead to dependence, only alcohol produces a "well defined withdrawal syndrome". And while heavy drinking leads to cirrhosis, severe brain injury and a much increased risk of accidents and suicide, the report concludes that there is only "suggestive evidence that chronic cannabis use may produce subtle defects in cognitive functioning".

Two comparisons were more equivocal. The report says that both heavy drinking and marijuana smoking can produce symptoms of psychosis in susceptible people. And, it says, there is evidence that chronic cannabis smoking "may be a contributory cause of cancers of the aerodigestive tract".


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: cannabis; health; pot; un; who; wod; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 321-334 next last
To: Dakmar
Hey, you're the one who brought up turtles. If you want to rent turtles, call Lisa Schel and get back to me. I can really visualize and appreciate your idea of rounding up a few people to stand around looking downtrodden but what does that have to do with your saltwater, turtles and sea rocks recipe?
181 posted on 07/02/2002 6:35:47 PM PDT by Lady Jag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte; Wolfie
You would be correct! Please add me to your ping list too. :)
182 posted on 07/02/2002 6:47:07 PM PDT by Hap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody; nopardons
Wrong on both counts, dear.
Please don't call me dear. You sound too much like nopardons when you do that.
Somehow I get the feeling it's simply condescension on your part.
183 posted on 07/02/2002 7:20:25 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Don't be upset.; being accused of sounding like me is a good thing; dear. : - )
184 posted on 07/02/2002 8:50:14 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: nopardons; MEGoody
No, it isn't.
185 posted on 07/02/2002 11:13:31 PM PDT by philman_36
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: Xenalyte
'Who exactly supports legalizing drugs, and the whole counter-culture, anti-American crap line anyway? Conservatives? Wrong."

"Man, am I glad you're here. I've been calling myself a conservative for so long, and I'm embarrassed as all hell to find out I was wrong." "

So tell me: if I'm for Ron Paul, school vouchers, the NRA, legalization, capitalism, and Ann Coulter, and against abortion, Amnesty International, Susan Sarandon, government interference, and Hillary, am I a leftist?"

"I sure hope not. I hate to think I've been voting the wrong ticket for the last 15 years."

Good for you! At least you have some measure of good sense. Your support of legalizing drugs makes you one of the Libertarians that really ought to know better.

186 posted on 07/03/2002 4:34:29 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Atomic Vomit
Mr. Vomit-

Forgive me for being sceptical, but I would really like to see that study. I find it hard to believe that any substance that impairs you mentally would have no effect on your driving, or your reaction time.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion. Personally, I don't want to share the road with drunk, or stoned drivers.

Destructor

187 posted on 07/03/2002 4:44:21 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
"Sobriety seems to have nothing to do with it since you claim sobriety AND incomprehension."

Speaking of incomprehension I think that last one went over your head, so I'll explain. It does you no good to be literate and cultured, if you're stoned. You might think you're brilliant, but your thought process is impaired. You come off looking foolish at best.

Unless you happen to be doing cocaine.

188 posted on 07/03/2002 4:54:57 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
"So, you're for legalization of cannabis, so long as there are regulations against driving stoned, like there are against driving drunk?"

No I'm not for legalizing cannabis, but I know that people are going to use it anyway. I can't sit around and worry about all of the fools that want to destroy themselves with drugs. Just stay out of your car. Don't make some innocent person pay for your stupid decision.

189 posted on 07/03/2002 5:01:48 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
The NHTSA did some research that found drivers having low to moderate levels of THC in their systems were impaired, but far less than those with low to moderate levels of alcohol. THC and alcohol in combination seems to be much worse than either one alone. Link to the research is here.
190 posted on 07/03/2002 5:08:34 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Atomic Vomit
"No one has yet mentioned this.....reefer is a true aphrodesiac. Not in the fuzzy alcohol sense where inhibitions are lowered, along with good judgement, but in the increased intensity of pleasure sense."

"Are you still so sure you hate it?"

I guess that could be construed as a benefit, if you have to be mentally impaired to express love.

I think you're ingnoring the fact that the lack of inhibitions can also lead to a lack of caution. Drugs can cause people to engage in risky behavior that leaves them open to catching sexually transmitted diseases such as: AIDS, Herpes, Hepatitis, etc.

191 posted on 07/03/2002 5:11:27 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
I don't want to share the road with drunk drivers either. But I'm not advocating the prohibition of alcohol.
192 posted on 07/03/2002 5:11:50 AM PDT by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Drugs can cause people to engage in risky behavior that leaves them open to catching sexually transmitted diseases such as: AIDS, Herpes, Hepatitis, etc.

As can alcohol. Far more than so than MJ.

193 posted on 07/03/2002 5:12:47 AM PDT by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Thank you. I'll read it with an open mind. I appreciate the link!
194 posted on 07/03/2002 5:12:59 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
"Drugs can cause people to engage in risky behavior that leaves them open to catching sexually transmitted diseases such as: AIDS, Herpes, Hepatitis, etc."

"As can alcohol. Far more than so than MJ."

Not so Phantom. Alcohol and Marijuana both impair your thought process, and your ability to reason.

195 posted on 07/03/2002 5:19:15 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Yes, they both impair your thought process. That is not in question. But when it comes to reducing sexual inhibitions, alcohol is far more 'effective' when it comes to that.
196 posted on 07/03/2002 5:23:14 AM PDT by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
I read the study. Very interesting stuff! I think that blows this argument that Marijuana has no effect on driving, or reaction time. However, I agree with your premise that alcohol does impair you more than pot. The study that you sited proves it.
197 posted on 07/03/2002 5:23:53 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
So, I guess that means alcohol is actually a better aphrodisiac than pot! Interesting. I hope Atomic Vomit is paying attention.
198 posted on 07/03/2002 5:27:21 AM PDT by Destructor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
Big difference between an aphrodisiac and something that reduces your mental capcity to the point that you willingly engage in risky behaviour that you wouldnt engage in if you hadnt been drinking.

Last I checked, the favored tool of college guys to get girls in the sack was alcohol. Not pot. While used in conjunction may work even better, but when only one is ingested, alcohol would be the way to go.

199 posted on 07/03/2002 5:41:37 AM PDT by Phantom Lord
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: Destructor
I read the study. Very interesting stuff! I think that blows this argument that Marijuana has no effect on driving, or reaction time. However, I agree with your premise that alcohol does impair you more than pot. The study that you sited proves it.

While we're on different sides as far as decrim/legalization are concerned, I don't see making absolute assertions in either direction as constructive. As far as driving impairment goes, they're just now looking at the impairment levels caused by under-DUI levels of alcohol in combination with many OTC drugs and finding that the impairment level may be as bad as that from DWI levels of alcohol. IMHO, someone trying to talk on a cell phone in a car full of screaming kids can be just as dangerous as a drunk.

200 posted on 07/03/2002 5:55:19 AM PDT by tacticalogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220 ... 321-334 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