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.
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
8) 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
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 acknowledged 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)
Source:
worldtruth.tv
Follow us on facebook and be updated!
http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog
Follow us on facebook and be updated!
http://www.facebook.com/shortcuttingblog
No comments:
Post a Comment