Marijuana Myths and the Medical, Social, and Economic Benefits of Cannabis Legalization

The use of marijuana, even for long terms, is no more harmful, and, in fact, less harmful than other, legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco. However, this plant, the most widely used in the world, remains illegal almost everywhere in the world. For years now, there have been a multitude of movements calling for the decriminalization or, even more desirably, the legalization of marijuana and other "soft-drugs". The most outspoken proponents of legalization are members of law enforcement and medical professionals, as they truly know just how ineffective and unnecessary the current prohibitionist stances are. Politicians, on the other hand, often refuse to take a stand on the issue, in fear of alienating some of their constituents. And in the rare instances when a politician DOES attempt to address the inherent problems with prohibitionist attitudes towards marijuana, they face astounding condemnation from their contemporaries, which is a result of their fear of losing the support of their constituents. Many of these fears are based on misunderstandings regarding marijuana, based on campaigns of disinformation from generations past. This paper seeks to confront some of these misconceptions, and explain some of the social, medical, and economic benefits that would come from the legalization of marijuana.

In order to accurately assess the necessity of legalizing marijuana, it is imperative to clear up some of the most popular myths surrounding cannabis.

First off, whenever the topic of marijuana's health effects is brought up, it must be noted that there have been countless scientific and medical reports and studies, every one of which has concluded that marijuana poses no great risk to society and should not be criminalized. Some of these studies include: The National Academy of Sciences' "Analysis of Marijuana Policy"(1982); the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse (the Shafer Report) (1973); the Canadian Government's Commission of Inquiry (Le Dain Report) (1970); the British Advisory Committee on Drug Dependency (Wooton Report) (1968); the La Guardia Report (1944); the Panama Canal Zone Military Investigations (1916-29); and Britain's monumental Indian Hemp Drugs Commission (1893-4).

A common myth supported by those who wish to keep marijuana illegal is that there is "new evidence" showing marijuana is more harmful than was thought in the sixties. In fact, the most recent studies have tended to confirm marijuana's safety, refuting claims that it causes birth defects, brain damage, reduced testosterone, or increased drug abuse problems, all of which will be dealt with in more in depth later on. The current consensus is well stated in the 20th annual report of the California Research Advisory Panel (1990), which recommended that personal use and cultivation of marijuana be legalized: "An objective consideration of marijuana shows that it is responsible for less damage to society and the individual than are alcohol and cigarettes."

This is not to say that marijuana is a healthy drug. There are some serious effects that should be noted. Research shows that the two major risks of excessive marijuana use are:
* respiratory disease due to smoking and
* accidental injuries due to impairment.

Recently, a Kaiser Permanente Center survey found that people who smoke marijuana-only on a daily basis have a 19% higher rate of respiratory complaints than non-smokers. Though this shouldn't surprise anyone, since it has been known that, aside from its psychoactive ingredients, marijuana smoke contains virtually the same toxic gases and carcinogenic tars as tobacco. Human studies have found that pot smokers suffer similar kinds of respiratory damage as tobacco smokers, putting them at greater risk of bronchitis, sore throat, respiratory inflammation and infections. Although more research must be conducted to definitively settle the matter, it is widely suspected that marijuana smoking causes cancer. Studies have found apparently pre-cancerous cell changes in pot smokers. Some cancer researches have found a higher-than-expected incidence of throat, neck and tongue cancer in younger, marijuana-only smokers. A few of these cases have been fatal. Even though it has yet to be conclusively proven, the evidence is highly suggestive that marijuana smoking may cause lung cancer. According to Dr. Donald Tashkin of UCLA, a leading expert on marijuana smoking: "Although more information is certainly needed, sufficient data have already been accumulated concerning the health effects of marijuana to warrant counseling by physicians against the smoking of marijuana as an important hazard to health." Fortunately, the hazards of marijuana smoking can be reduced by various strategies:
* use of higher-potency cannabis, which can be smoked in smaller quantities,
* use of water pipes and other smoke reduction technologies, and
* ingesting pot orally instead of smoking it.

Some critics overstate the dangers of marijuana smoking by dubiously citing a study by Dr. Tashkin which found that daily pot smokers experienced a "mild but significant increase in airflow resistance in the large airways greater than that seen in persons smoking 16 cigarettes per day". However, they neglect to mention that the same study examined other, more important aspects of lung health, where "marijuana smokers did much better than tobacco smokers". Dr. Tashkin himself disavows the notion that one joint equals 16 cigarettes. A more widely accepted estimate is that marijuana smokers consume 4 times the carcinogenic tar as cigarette smokers per weight smoked. This does not mean, though, that one joint equals four cigarettes, since joints usually weigh less than cigarettes. In fact, the average joint is estimated to contain 0.4 grams of pot, a bit less than one-half the weight of a cigarette, making one joint equal to two cigarettes. Note, however, that this is just an average, since joint sizes range from cigar-sized spliffs smoked by Rastas, to very fine sinsemilla joints weighing as little as 0.2 grams. It should also be noted that there is no exact equivalence between tobacco and marijuana smoking. This is because they affect different parts of the respiratory tract differently. Tobacco tends to penetrate to the smaller, secondary passageways of the lungs, while marijuana tends to concentrate on the larger, central passageways. One consequence of this is that marijuana, unlike tobacco, does not appear to cause emphysema.

Whatever the dangers of marijuana smoking are, they are intensified by current laws in several ways.
First, paraphernalia laws have impeded the development and marketing of water pipes along with other, more advanced technology that could significantly reduce the harmfulness of marijuana smoke. Second, prohibition encourages the sale of pot that has been contaminated or adulterated by insecticides, or mixed with other, more dangerous ranging from PCP, crack, to heroin. Third, prohibition, by its nature, raises the price of marijuana. This makes it uneconomical to eat marijuana, which is the best way to avoid smoke exposure altogether, because eating cannabis generally requires 2-3 times as much marijuana as smoking it does. Currently, organizations such as NORML are researching the use of water pipes and other advanced smoke reduction technology.

Another common misconception regarding marijuana is that it is a major road hazard. On the contrary, an ever-growing library of research indicates that marijuana is actually less of a road hazard than alcohol. Multiple surveys from various organizations have found that more than 50% of all drivers responsible for fatal accidents have alcohol in their blood, whereas only 7 - 20% had THC, which is indicative of having smoked within the past 2-4 hours. The same studies also show that 70% - 90% of those with THC in their blood also have alcohol in their blood. This means that, for example, if there are 100,000 fatal accidents in a year, over 50,000 of those drivers had alcohol in their blood, and only 7,000 - 2,000 had THC. And of those 7 - 20K drivers, 5,000 - 18,000 had THC and alcohol, which means that THC, by itself, would only be accountable for 2,000 fatal accidents, or 2%. Therefore, it appears that marijuana, by itself, not a major road hazard. Some research even suggests that low doses of marijuana may sometimes improve driving performance, though not always. Two major studies conducted by the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration have confirmed marijuana's relative safety compared with alcohol. The first study, which is the most comprehensive drug accident study yet, surveyed blood samples from 1,882 drivers killed in car, truck and motorcycle accidents in 7 states between 1990 - 1991. Alcohol was found in 51.5% of samples, compared to just 17.8% for all other drugs combined. Marijuana, which was the 2nd most common drug, appeared in a mere 6.7% of the samples. Again, 2/3rds of the marijuana-using drivers also had alcohol in their blood. This report concluded that alcohol was by far the "dominant" drug-related cause of accidents. It went on further and analyzed the responsibility of drivers for the accidents they were involved in. It found that those drivers with alcohol in their blood were especially culpable in fatal accidents, and even more responsible when they combined it with other drugs. However, the marijuana-only users appeared to be less culpable, even less than non drug using drivers, though the information was to insufficient to statistically prove this. The report finished, stating that "There was no indication that marijuana by itself was a cause of fatal accidents."
The second study, entitled "Marijuana and Actual Driving Performance," found that the negative effects of marijuana on driving are "relatively small" and less than those of drunken driving. The study, which took place in the Netherlands, looked at the performance of drivers in actual highway and city driving situations at various doses of marijuana. The study found that marijuana produces a moderate, dose-related decline in road tracking ability, however it is "not profoundly impairing" and "in no way unusual compared to many medicinal drugs." It also found that marijuana's effects at the high doses preferred by smokers never exceed those of alcohol at blood concentrations of .08%, which is the minimum level for legal intoxication in the most strict states like California. The study found that alcohol encourages risky driving, while marijuana appears to produce greater caution. This is because marijuana users are more aware of their state and able to compensate for it, which other studies have concluded as well. This isn't to say that these results apply to non-driving related situations, where forgetfulness or inattention can be more important than speed. The NHTSA study also warned that marijuana could also be quite dangerous in emergency situations that put high demands on driving skills.

Another myth clung to by anti-drug activists is that marijuana prohibition improves public safety. Unfortunately for them, there is no evidence that the prohibition of marijuana reduces the net social risk of accidents. And actually, recent studies suggest that pot may actually be advantageous because it acts as a substitute for alcohol and other, more dangerous drugs. For example, researcher Karyn Model found that states with marijuana decriminalization in place had lower overall drug abuse rates than states without decriminalization. Another study, by Frank Chaloupka, found that states that decriminalized marijuana had lower accident rates, too. In Alaska, accident rates held constant or declined following the legalization of personal use of marijuana. In Holland, government and health officials believe that legalization has contributed to an overall decline in opiate abuse. Recent U.S. government statistics show that the highest rates of cocaine abuse in the West were in Nevada and Arizona, which are the states with the toughest marijuana laws.

Another fallacious argument opponents make is that a single joint can have effects than linger for days, weeks, or even months. While it is true that THC and other cannabinoids are fat-soluble and can linger in the body for prolonged periods, they don't generally affect behavior beyond a few hours, with possible exceptions in chronic users. Most studies have found that the adverse effects of acute marijuana use wear off in 2-6 hours, which is faster than alcohol. The one exception was a pair of flight simulator studies conducted by Leirer, Yesavage, and Morrow, which reported effects on performance up to 24 hours later. But, these differences were described by Leirer as "very subtle" and "very marginal," and were less than those due to pilot age. Another flight simulator study by the same group couldn't find any signs of effects later than 4 hours. Similar "hangover" effects are noted for alcohol. Heavy users may experience more prolonged effects due to a build-up of cannabinoids in the tissues, however, there is no evidence that these are detrimental to safety.

One of the most widely cited myths is that pot is 10 times more potent now than in the sixties. This idea is nothing more than a DEA myth based on biased government data, as shown in a recent report by Dr. John Morgan. The government studies used samples of pot from the early '70s, which were from stale, low-potency Mexican "kilobricks" of ditchweed that had been left in police lockers, and whose potency had declined to sub-smokable levels of less than 0.5%. These horrible samples were then compared to later samples of decent-quality marijuana, making it appear that potency had skyrocketed. Careful examination of the government data shows that marijuana potency increased only modestly by a factor of 2 or so during the '70's, and has remained generally constant ever since.

In fact, there is nothing new about high-potency pot. In the '60's, premium varieties of marijuana like Acapulco Gold and Panama Red were readily available, as was hash and hash oil, which were just as strong as modern day sinsemilla, but were conveniently ignored in the government's potency statistics. While the average potency did increase with the advent of sinsemilla in the '70's, the range of potencies available has remained mostly unchanged since the last century, pharmacies sold high-potency tonics over the counter. In Holland, high-powered hash and sinsemilla are sold in coffee shops with no evident problems.

And contrary to popular myth, a higher potency is not more dangerous, because users tend to self-titrate their dose depending on potency. Therefore, high potency sinsemilla is healthier for the lungs as it reduces the amount of smoke needed to inhale to get high.

Critics also claim that pot kills brain cells, even though government experts concede that it doesn't. This myth is the result of animal studies that found structural changes, though not actual cell death, in brain cells of animals exposed to extremely high doses of cannabis. Many critics still cite the infamous monkey studies of Dr. Robert Heath, which supposedly found brain damage in 3 monkeys that had been heavily dosed with cannabis. Not only was this work never replicated, but it has since been discredited by a pair of better controlled, and much larger studies, one by Dr. William Slikker of the National Center for Toxicological Research and the other by Charles Rebert and Gordon Pryor of SRI International. Neither study was able to find any evidence of changes in the brains of monkeys exposed to daily doses of marijuana over the course of a year. Human studies of heavy users in Jamaica and Costa Rica also found no evidence of oddities in brain physiology. The only evidence that suggests any type of brain changes is that persistent deficits in short-term memory have been noted in heavy marijuana smokers after 6 to 12 weeks of sobriety. In comparison, other, legal drugs, including alcohol, are known to cause brain damage.
Critics also maintain that marijuana use causes sterility and lowers testosterone. But once again, government experts admit that pot has no permanent effect on the human reproductive systems. There is some evidence, though, that heavy marijuana use may have some suppressive effect on testicular function, but all effects are reversible. Regarding the assertion that pot use lowers sex hormones, a recent study by Dr. Robert Block has refuted earlier research suggesting that pot lowers testosterone or other sex hormones in men or women. Conversely, heavy alcohol use is known to lower testosterone levels and cause impotence. Some lab studies indicate that extremely heavy marijuana use may lower sperm count, but it is purely theoretical, and surveys of chronic smokers show no signs of infertility or other sexual abnormalities,

Unfortunately, less is known about the effect of cannabis on females. Although some animal studies imply that pot might temporarily lower fertility or increase the risk of fetal loss, this evidence is of little relevance to humans. One human study suggested that pot may mildly disrupt ovulation, and it is possible that adolescents are especially vulnerable to hormonal disruptions from pot, but not a single case of impaired fertility has ever been reported in humans of either sex.
Many opponents also argue that marijuana use causes birth defects. But experts, though they don't recommend any drug use during pregnancy, have found no evident link between prenatal use of marijuana and birth defects in humans, unlike alcohol, cocaine or tobacco. A popular variation of this myth insists that cannabis may cause fetal alcohol syndrome, but a study by Dr. Susan Astley at the University of Washington refuted this. The only evidence suggesting cannabis has any negative effect on birth is that some research has found that prenatal cannabis use is associated with slightly reduced average birth weight and length, but these studies have often been critiqued on their methodology. More recently, a better-conducted study found that cannabis use increased birth weight during the third trimester and resulted in no adverse behavioral consequences, but found a slight reduction in birth length with pot use in the first two months of pregnancy. Another study of Jamaican women who used cannabis during their pregnancy found that their babies registered higher on developmental scores at the age of 30 days, with no significant effects, positive or negative, on birth weight or length.

Though cannabis use is not recommended during pregnancy, it has proven effective in treating morning sickness and easing the pain of childbirth.

Marijuana also causes high blood pressure. At least, that's what the critics would have you believe. But according to the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, marijuana's effects on blood pressure are complicated and varied, and depend upon the dose, administration, and posture. Often, cannabis will produce a temporary, "moderate" increase in blood pressure immediately after being consumed; but oddly enough, heavy chronic doses may slightly depress blood pressure instead. Posture is very important in understanding marijuana's effect on blood pressure. A common reaction is for pot to cause decreased blood pressure when the user is standing, and increased blood pressure when lying down, which is what sometimes causes people to faint if they stand up too quickly. There is no evidence, though, that cannabis use, even heavy, causes persisting hypertension or heart disease, and some users claim it helps control hypertension by reducing stress.

THC does increase pulse rates for about an hour, but this isn't normally harmful, since exercise does the same. Users with pre-existing heart disease may experience problems, though. And again, chronic use has different effects, as chronic users may develop a tolerance to this and other cardiovascular reactions.

Some critics also indicate that marijuana damages the immune system citing that some studies indicate that THC and other cannabinoids present in cannabis may exercise immuno-suppressive effects by inhibiting the activity of lymphocytes and macrophages. But like all the other effects THC may have on human physiology, these proposed immuno-suppressive effects are mild and reversible. Furthermore, it's questionable whether these effects are of any importance to human health, as they are based on theoretical laboratory and animal studies, with no human evidence. According to Dr. Leo Hollister: "The evidence [on immune suppression] has been contradictory and is more supportive of some degree of immunosuppression only when one considers in vitro studies. These have been seriously flawed by the very high concentrations of drug used to produce immunosuppression. The closer that experimental studies have been to actual clinical situations, the less compelling has been the evidence." One of the first critics to propose that THC suppressed the immune system was the notorious cannabophobe Dr. Gabriel Nahas, but a flood of research ordered by the Reagan administration couldn't find anything alarming. As with all reports of marijuana exerting influence on body physiology, there is some truth in this myth. The recent discovery of a cannabinoid receptor inside rat spleens, the location of immune cells, raises the possibility that cannabinoids do exert some sort of influence on the immune system. First, that is only hypothetical, and second, it has been suggested that if true, these effects may be beneficial for patients with autoimmune diseases like MS. Still, not one case of marijuana induced immune deficiency has ever been clinically or epidemiologically detected in humans. One possible exception is in the lungs, where chronic smokers have been shown to suffer some damage to the alveolar macrophages and other defense mechanisms, but it is still unclear as to how much of this damage is from THC, and how much is a result of all of the other toxins that occur in smoke, which can be filtered out by water pipes and other devices, which, as we have learned, can't be developed because of unjust paraphernalia laws. Some say that since pot may have immuno-suppressive effects, it is dangerous to AIDS patients, but many report that it helps avert the deadly "wasting syndrome" by stimulating appetite and reducing nausea. Furthermore, cannabinoids do not actually damage the T-cells, and one study found that marijuana exposure increased T-cell counts in subjects with low T-cell counts, though the subjects were not AIDS patients.

Along with the immune system myth, many believe that marijuana causes chromosome and cell damage, even though the NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES concluded, "Studies suggesting that marijuana probably does not break chromosomes are fairly conclusive." Cannabanoids by themselves are neither mutagenic nor carcinogenic, but the tars created by marijuana combustion are. The critics proof of chromosomal damage comes from some laboratory studies that have suggested that high dosages of THC may interfere with cell replication and produce odd numbers of chromosomes, but there is no evidence of this damage in any realistic situations.

Lastly, the most common myth is that marijuana is a gateway drug, despite the fact that there is no scientific evidence for the theory. If the theory were true, then the cannabis-using cultures of Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America would show a high propensity for other drugs, yet they do not. The theory took hold in the '60's, as marijuana became the leading recreational drug. 20 years later, it was refuted, when cocaine abuse exploded in the '80's at the same time marijuana use declined. As discussed earlier, there is evidence that cannabis may substitute for alcohol and other more dangerous drugs. A recent survey by Dr. Patricia Morgan of the University of California at Berkeley found that a significant number of pot smokers and dealers switched to harder drugs only when pot was not available. For example, many pot users and dealers started using methamphetamine when Hawaii began a marijuana eradication program which created a shortage of pot. Dr. Morgan also noted a similar occurrence in California, where cocaine use soared as a result of the CAMP helicopter eradication campaign. The one way in which marijuana does lead to other drugs is through its illegality, as persons who deal in marijuana are likely to deal in other illicit drugs as well.

Now that the myths surrounding marijuana have been debunked, it is possible to explore the benefits of its legalization. These benefits can be broken down to economical, social, and medical.

Economically, marijuana legalization is quite favorable. First, because cannabis is a weed, it is the easiest cash crop to grow. Not only does it not need much attention, but it can be grown almost anywhere, even in areas where the large-scale cultivation of other crops is impossible, for instance, the mountainous regions of the Appalachians, or the dry deserts of the American Southwest. It is also incredibly cheap to grow, as it requires no extra fertilizers, or timed irrigation, or other expenses necessary to turn a profit on other leading cash crops.

Second, since marijuana is such an easy crop, the free-market price of legal marijuana would be between $.05 - $.10, which severely limits the problems of crop theft. A sin tax of roughly $.50 - $1 then placed on the marijuana, and using conservative estimates of use, it is logical to see this sin tax alone bringing in between $2.2 and $6.4 billion USD a year. Additional sales taxes would bring in another $0.2 - $1.3 billion USD a year, bringing the annual revenue of marijuana cigarettes to $2.4 - $7.7 billion USD a year.

But the money doesn't stop there. The hemp industry and its offshoots would be able to generate the most revenue. Hemp's use as a fuel, rope, dietary supplement, paper source, and fabric could bring in between $6 - $10 billion USD a year. Not to mention, spin-off industries including pipe, lung, bong, and paper makers would generate even more revenue. These new industries would also open up the door for over 60,000 retailers and 100,000 jobs.

In terms of savings, legalization of marijuana would cut narcotics enforcement costs by $6 - $9 billion USD a year. Not only does this free up more budgeted money for better use like education and healthcare, but it means fewer taxes for citizens. And if citizens pay fewer taxes, they are more likely to spend more money. And the more money people spend, the better the economy fares as a whole.

Cannabis legalization also has social benefits. The most obvious benefit is the reduction of alcohol and hard drug abuse. If marijuana were more readily available, the abuse of more harmful drugs like cocaine, heroin, and PCP would decline rapidly. Without the need to confront dealers, users bypass the exposure to more harmful drugs. It would also lead to a decrease in black-market drug activity, which means less crime on the streets as a result of drug related standoffs and "turf wars". It also eliminates the possibility of weed being laced with dangerous chemicals, which would reduce hospital costs and lead to safer neighborhoods.

But the most outstanding benefits of cannabis legalization are its medical applications. Of all the negative consequences of prohibition, the most tragic is the denial of medicinal marijuana to tens of thousands of seriously ill patients who could benefit from its use. Modern research indicates marijuana is a valuable aid and treatment for nausea, pain relief, spasticity, glaucoma, movement disorders, asthma, migraines, morning sickness, childbirth, appetite loss, and more. Some cannabanoids are even effective in protecting neurons.

One of the best-established medical uses of marijuana is as an anti-nauseant for cancer chemotherapy in six different state sponsored trials. For the majority of patients, smoked marijuana was more effective than both conventional anti-nauseants and synthetic THC. One such reason is that orally ingested THC stays in the stomach for hours before being absorbed, meaning patients are left to suffer, whereas smoked marijuana begins to reduce nausea immediately.

Many patients report using marijuana as a pain reliever. Historically, cannabis was used as an analgesic from ancient times through the nineteenth century. With the introduction of opiates like morphine and heroin in the nineteenth century, however, marijuana use as an analgesic declined. Cannabis use remained the drug of choice for migraine relief into the 20th century, though. Unfortunately, modern research is scant, though animal studies have tended to show analgesic effects. In a study conducted by R. J. Noyes, patients reported that marijuana relieved migraines, menstrual cramps, and post surgical pain. He also found, in subsequent trials, that oral THC relieved chronic pain in 10 cancer patients. A second follow-up involving 36 cancer patients, it was found that THC was just as effective as codeine. 2 other studies found marijuana effective in reducing experimentally induced pain.

Treating spasticity was the first major application of cannabis in Western medicine, as evidenced by 19th-century authorities such as Dr. William O'Shaughnessy, the Ohio State Medical Committee, and Dr. John Russell Reynolds (who prescribed it to Queen Victoria for menstrual cramps). Although its traditional use is well known, little modern research has been done. The results of these studies do tend to support the traditional view of cannabis as an anti-spastic agent. 5 human studies have found that marijuana was reported to be useful in treating epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, and Tourette's syndrome, in addition to the pain relieving properties mentioned earlier. Another study showed that 5 of 8 spinal injury patients found benefits from marijuana use. 30 MS patients also reported relief from THC in 3 different studies. 2 studies found that cannabidiol (CBD), a cannabinoid from marijuana that is NOT found in Marinol, was beneficial for grand mal epilepsy and dystonia. Studies have also found that 40% of severely epileptic children benefited from marijuana use. A survey of 308 epileptics found that marijuana use appeared to delay the inception of "complex partial seizures". A Virginia hospital survey of 43 spinal injury patients found that 88% of the patients who smoked marijuana reported that it reduced their spasms. In a purported recent negative study on marijuana and multiple sclerosis, Dr. Harry Greenberg and colleagues from the University of Michigan reported that marijuana "impaired posture and balance in patients with spastic multiple sclerosis". Which isn't surprising, as marijuana impairs balance in normal users as well, and MS patients use marijuana for pain relief, not balance control. Animal studies have also shown that CBD has anti-convulsant properties, and there is evidence that it can reduce the risk of panic reactions associated with just THC - as is given in Marinol which may be why many patients prefer natural cannabis.

As mentioned earlier, marijuana reduces intraocular pressure, which is the purpose of anti-glaucoma therapy. This was shown in multiple experiments by UCLA professor Robert S. Hepler, resulting from research targeted at finding out whether marijuana dilated pupils. He found a "statistically significant" drop in intraocular pressure in 429 subjects treated with marijuana. 29 of those patients continued to show benefits during 94 days of treatment with no signs of increased tolerance. These effects have been explored in a half-dozen other studies. Ophthalmologists have been reluctant to prescribe marijuana treatment, however, because of its psychoactive side effects. Unfortunately, efforts to create cannabinoid eye drops with no psychoactive effects have been unsuccessful. Under its cannabis research program of 1979-89, the California Research Advisory Panel instituted a glaucoma research program as a result of Dr. Hepler's studies. Unfortunately, the participants were given Marinol instead of smokeable marijuana, and they all eventually abandoned their treatment.

Regarding marijuana's use in relieving asthma attacks; three human studies have shown that smoking marijuana produces bronchodilation, which relieves asthma attacks. Two other studies have confirmed the same effects with THC, leading to the belief that smokeless forms of ingesting THC may be helpful in treating asthma.

A cannabinoid derivative, dexanabinol (HU-211), is a non-psychotropic derivative of a synthetic THC analogue. The drug has three methods of protecting neurons. First, it blocks glutamate-induced neurotoxicity. Second, it collects and removes peroxy and hydroxy free-radicals. Lastly, it inhibits the action of the "inflammatory cytokine alpha-tumor necrosis factor". According to Raphael Mechoulam, professor of pharmacology at Hadassah Medical School in Jerusalem, "The triple action stops the spread of the primary neuronal damage from the core of injury to the surrounding brain tissue, even after a single intravenous injection, up to 6 hours after the initial insult".

In the matter of AIDS, marijuana's full potential for healing has yet to be studied, because there have been no clinical studies on it's usefulness in treating HIV/AIDS. One reason for this is that the government, or at least the DEA, has been blocking researches like Dr. Donald Abrams at the University of California at San Francisco's studies by denying them access to marijuana for research. However, Marinol has been FDA-approved to treat AIDS wasting syndrome by acting as an appetite stimulant. There is also a lot of information regarding smoked marijuana and appetite stimulation. Some of this information includes 4 studies that showed marijuana use enhanced food intake and weight gain, known to most as "munchies". Medical marijuana is widely used by AIDS patients. A recent survey of the San Francisco Cannabis Buyers' Club's 11,000 customers found that 80% have HIV/AIDS. Another survey, this one from Australia, found that ¼ of HIV-positive gays used medicinal marijuana to combat the pain of neuropathy, shingles and other common AIDS-related problems, and AIDS wasting syndrome. Many AIDS patients prefer smoked marijuana to oral THC supplements like Marinol because it is quick acting, easy to titrate, and has an absence of side-effects.

In conclusion, the prohibition of marijuana is socially, medically, and economically unsound. Unfortunately, politicians refuse to take stands on this issue, which further compounds the struggle to legalize one of the most useful plants in the world. This is a result of misinformation and anti-legalization propaganda, most of which I have attempted to address and disprove in the preceding pages. As I hope you have seen, marijuana and marijuana use is not only not bad for users, but can be good for society, the sick and dying, and the economy. To this extent, I support the legalization of cannabis, and encourage you to do so, as well.