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".
I'd also throw in those that don't take 2 minutes with a search engine to de-bunk. At any rate, two words: Water Pipe (notice, I said "water pipe", not bong, so don't kick me out of the store ;^) )
I think marijuana should be legal, but we should go after cocaine and crystal strongly.
It is interesting that the US government didn't want the WHO to educate people about the health problems related to marijuana because they thought this information could be used to undermine their efforts to keep it illegal. So, the end result is that some heavy pothead who ignores the law and smokes pot would benefit from the WHO report and yet he was denied it all so that the government can continue trying to keep it illegal.
We outlaw drugs to protect the citizens allegedly from the drugs and then when the citizens are caught with drugs we impose penalties on them that are worse than the drugs.
Remember these facts: In 1993 the US government cut spending on the DEA by 50%, they laid off half of the 500 undercover agents they had trying to stop drugs from coming into the US. Then, when DEA to spend half its resources trying to stop drug smuggling within the US rather than to spend all of its resources trying to stop drugs from coming into the US. We all know that agency will use its resources much more effectively doing the traditional undercover thing to stop drugs before they get here. Their effectiveness has been purposely sabotaged.
The CIA itself admitted that it had been involved in bringing drugs into the US going back to even before 1980. If you think that only wild conspiracy theorists say these things, then you'll have to explain the CIA's own statements (2 of them) when they admitted to this. This fits in nicely with the fact that ex-LAPD people insist that they remember in the mid-80's when CIA people came to LA and taught street criminals how to make crack. It also fits in nicely with the fact that several ex-CIA people have even testified under oath that it was their job to bring cocaine into the US.
Callous, but accurate. All of this whooping and hollaring about the ineffectiveness of the WOD, as far as marijuana is concerned, is really a waste of time. As soon as the number of people who have actually used it rises, the social attitude about it will change, and either all drugs (meaning cigs and alcohol) will become illegal, or marijuana will be added to the fold of "ok" drugs to use.
emotional, disjointed, context switching, ad hominem, ridiculous, circular, infantile, mystical arguments.
the reason they dont want cannabis legal is the alcohol lobby. and on another level, alteration of consciousness in a transitory expansive manner is a threat to the state.
maintainence of control of an entity by the state can exist only by the manipulation and control of consciousness.
remember?: ideas change the world. see: history.
No. MJ should also be legal.
Problem was, they held the rally the day after the vote to decide if it was legal or not. Humor, to be funny, must have an element of truth. And this humor did.
Those signs always make me laugh.
Also, recently my wife and I along with another couple were in Asheville NC to visit The Biltmore and the town. My wife and I love head shops. They have great nic-nacs for decorating and the such. Well, we went into what appeared from the outside to be a quality head shop. Got inside and they had NO 'supplies'. We werent shopping for any so it didnt matter. We walked out saying "That head shop has no head."
We later found another shop that had 'lots of head'.
I collect skulls and find head shops to be an excellent source.
Boy, Surfin was not happy with us.
Thanks for trying, but these stoners will consistently ignore the truth no matter how many times it is presented to them.
To state that cannabis contains nicotine would predicate the existance of a successful tobacco/hemp hybrid. It'd be like trying to breed a pot bellied pig to an elephant.
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.