Top 10 Pot Studies Government Wished it Had Never Funded

[rothbardian]

<!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.freetheplant.com/2006/08/31/top-10-pot-studies-government-wished-it-had-never-funded/">www.freetheplant.com/2006...er-funded/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br>10) MARIJUANA USE HAS NO EFFECT ON MORTALITY: A massive study of California HMO members funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) found marijuana use caused no significant increase in mortality. Tobacco use was associated with increased risk of death. Sidney, S et al. Marijuana Use and Mortality. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 87 No. 4, April 1997. p. 585-590. Sept. 2002.<br><br>9) HEAVY MARIJUANA USE AS A YOUNG ADULT WON’T RUIN YOUR LIFE: Veterans Affairs scientists looked at whether heavy marijuana use as a young adult caused long-term problems later, studying identical twins in which one twin had been a heavy marijuana user for a year or longer but had stopped at least one month before the study, while the second twin had used marijuana no more than five times ever. Marijuana use had no significant impact on physical or mental health care utilization, health-related quality of life, or current socio-demographic characteristics. Eisen SE et al. Does Marijuana Use Have Residual Adverse Effects on Self-Reported Health Measures, Socio-Demographics or Quality of Life? A Monozygotic Co-Twin Control Study in Men. Addiction. Vol. 97 No. 9. p.1083-1086. Sept. 1997<br><br><!--EZCODE EMOTICON START 8) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/glasses.gif ALT="8)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> THE "GATEWAY EFFECT" MAY BE A MIRAGE: Marijuana is often called a "gateway drug" by supporters of prohibition, who point to statistical "associations" indicating that persons who use marijuana are more likely to eventually try hard drugs than those who never use marijuana — implying that marijuana use somehow causes hard drug use. But a model developed by RAND Corp. researcher Andrew Morral demonstrates that these associations can be explained "without requiring a gateway effect." More likely, this federally funded study suggests, some people simply have an underlying propensity to try drugs, and start with what’s most readily available. Morral AR, McCaffrey D and Paddock S. Reassessing the Marijuana Gateway Effect. Addiction. December 2002. p. 1493-1504.<br><br>7) PROHIBITION DOESN’T WORK (PART I): The White House had the National Research Council examine the data being gathered about drug use and the effects of U.S. drug policies. NRC concluded, "the nation possesses little information about the effectiveness of current drug policy, especially of drug law enforcement." And what data exist show "little apparent relationship between severity of sanctions prescribed for drug use and prevalence or frequency of use." In other words, there is no proof that prohibition — the cornerstone of U.S. drug policy for a century — reduces drug use. National Research Council. Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us. National Academy Press, 2001. p. 193.<br><br>6) PROHIBITION DOESN’T WORK (PART II: DOES PROHIBITION CAUSE THE "GATEWAY EFFECT"?): U.S. and Dutch researchers, supported in part by NIDA, compared marijuana users in San Francisco, where non-medical use remains illegal, to Amsterdam, where adults may possess and purchase small amounts of marijuana from regulated businesses. Looking at such parameters as frequency and quantity of use and age at onset of use, they found no differences except one: Lifetime use of hard drugs was significantly lower in Amsterdam, with its "tolerant" marijuana policies. For example, lifetime crack cocaine use was 4.5 times higher in San Francisco than Amsterdam. Reinarman, C, Cohen, PDA, and Kaal, HL. The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and San Francisco. American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 94, No. 5. May 2004. p. 836-842.<br><br>5) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART I): Federal researchers implanted several types of cancer, including leukemia and lung cancers, in mice, then treated them with cannabinoids (unique, active components found in marijuana). THC and other cannabinoids shrank tumors and increased the mice’s lifespans. Munson, AE et al. Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602.<br><br>4) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER, (PART II): In a 1994 study the government tried to suppress, federal researchers gave mice and rats massive doses of THC, looking for cancers or other signs of toxicity. The rodents given THC lived longer and had fewer cancers, "in a dose-dependent manner" (i.e. the more THC they got, the fewer tumors). NTP Technical Report On The Toxicology And Carcinogenesis Studies Of 1-Trans- Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, CAS No. 1972-08-3, In F344/N Rats And B6C3F(1) Mice, Gavage Studies. See also, "Medical Marijuana: Unpublished Federal Study Found THC-Treated Rats Lived Longer, Had Less Cancer," AIDS Treatment News no. 263, Jan. 17, 1997.<br><br>3) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART III): Researchers at the Kaiser-Permanente HMO, funded by NIDA, followed 65,000 patients for nearly a decade, comparing cancer rates among non-smokers, tobacco smokers, and marijuana smokers. Tobacco smokers had massively higher rates of lung cancer and other cancers. Marijuana smokers who didn’t also use tobacco had no increase in risk of tobacco-related cancers or of cancer risk overall. In fact their rates of lung and most other cancers were slightly lower than non-smokers, though the difference did not reach statistical significance. Sidney, S. et al. Marijuana Use and Cancer Incidence (California, United States). Cancer Causes and Control. Vol. 8. Sept. 1997, p. 722-728.<br><br>2) OOPS, MARIJUANA MAY PREVENT CANCER (PART IV): Donald Tashkin, a UCLA researcher whose work is funded by NIDA, did a case-control study comparing 1,200 patients with lung, head and neck cancers to a matched group with no cancer. Even the heaviest marijuana smokers had no increased risk of cancer, and had somewhat lower cancer risk than non-smokers (tobacco smokers had a 20-fold increased lung cancer risk). Tashkin D. Marijuana Use and Lung Cancer: Results of a Case-Control Study. American Thoracic Society International Conference. May 23, 2006.<br><br>1) MARIJUANA DOES HAVE MEDICAL VALUE: In response to passage of California’s medical marijuana law, the White House had the Institute of Medicine (IOM) review the data on marijuana’s medical benefits and risks. The IOM concluded, "Nausea, appetite loss, pain and anxiety are all afflictions of wasting, and all can be mitigated by marijuana." While noting potential risks of smoking, the report added, "we acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana, such as pain or AIDS wasting." The government’s refusal to acknowledge this finding caused co-author John A. Benson to tell the New York Times that the government "loves to ignore our report … they would rather it never happened." Joy, JE, Watson, SJ, and Benson, JA. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy Press. 1999. p. 159. See also, Harris, G. FDA Dismisses Medical Benefit From Marijuana. New York Times. Apr. 21, 2006<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[darkbeforedawn]

Love it!!! <p></p><i></i>

[Joe Hillshoist]

Cheers Roth that links going into my research faves... Its a v useful resource. <p></p><i></i>

[streeb]

Finally, some good news! <p></p><i></i>

[Joe Hillshoist]

<!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1422.html" target="top"><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Teachers also said that two particular sets of children were not using ganja, and Dreher suspected that teachers made this evaluation because the children's families had money and elevated community status. In fact, the children from these families were heavy ganja users. In many cases, children from non-ganja using families were less successful in school than ganja children.<br><br>Facts confounded expectations in other ways. Women who were actively engaged in producing, buying, selling and administering marijuana often had the best-run households and the smartest children. One mother, a Rastafarian named Pansy, had her oldest child selling marijuana when Pansy was not at home. Yet, Pansy's children were ranked by teachers and principals as among the most intelligent, diligent and well-behaved of all students; they were ranked at the top of their classes.<br><br>Jamaican ganja women do not believe that marijuana can make a dunce into a genius, or vice-versa. When Dreher suggested to women with poorly-performing children that marijuana might be one of the reasons, the women denied it by saying that ganja can only enhance what is already there. "If a child be a dunce," one woman said, "[the use of ganja] can only make him a smarter dunce."<br><br>Teachers, on the other hand, refused to believe that ganja had any positive effects at all. When confronted by correlations between ganja use and good school performance, for example, teachers would say only that if children were not using ganja they would be doing even better.<br>Children learn to respect the herb<br><br>Medicinal ganja use apparently does not lead to increased "recreational" use or poor childhood adjustment. Indeed, Dreher's research indicates that children learn early on to respect the power of the plant. They learn that it is to be used in a prescribed set and setting, for the purposes of health, strength, spirituality and community participation. Children in rural Jamaican villages are not running around out of control, rolling up spliffs whenever they want to. Even adolescent children know not to grab ganja and roll their own; they wait to be invited to smoke by their parents.<br><br>If Dreher's reports are accurate, Jamaican ganja children are far more capable than children in most North American households. When I spoke with Dreher, she noted that the lives of poor Jamaican children are harder than the lives of most North American children.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--></a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br>edited for this addition:<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>"I don't want to belittle the problems or concerns of North American parents who worry about drug use among children," Dreher continued, "but it's very possible that marijuana is being blamed for problems it has nothing to do with- such as poor nutrition, societal decay, lackluster schools, and incompetent parenting. We need to be very careful not to ignore the social setting and ideology that surrounds substance use in different societies when we attempt to evaluate how a drug affects people or society. My Jamaican studies indicate that, in the case of marijuana, we might want to re-examine our assumptions and myths, especially when they contradict reality."<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Its a review of the work of one Dr Melanie Dreher.<br><br>Well worth a read if you haven't yet. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=joehillshoist>Joe Hillshoist</A> at: 9/3/06 12:21 am<br></i>

[mentalgongfu2]

8) THE "GATEWAY EFFECT" MAY BE A MIRAGE:

I had a great philosophy professor who tore apart the "gateway drug" argument by making the analogous claim that Ketchup is a gateway drug. The logic being, people who take what are considered hard drugs usually try marijuauna first, then move on to things like cocaine or heroin. People who smoke marijuana have almost always ingested Ketchup before trying marijuana, therefore, by the same line of thought, Ketchup is a gateway drug that leads to marijuana use.

[annie aronburg]

People who smoke marijuana have almost always ingested Ketchup before trying marijuana, therefore, by the same line of thought, Ketchup is a gateway drug that leads to marijuana use.

I like to point out that sugar is the first drug.

Tobacco's usually the second.


Annie

[Joe Hillshoist]

spot on annie

[annie aronburg]

As a thirty year denizen of the demi-monde I have observed that the cocaine and heroin enthusiasts typically want little or nothing to do with the lambsbread of the lion of judah.

They all love candy bars and cigarettes though.

annie