POT STUDY FLAWED

I'M NOT surprised to read that Green MP Nandor Tanczos won't be
backing off his campaign to legalise cannabis despite American
scientists warning it may increase the risk of heart attacks in
middle-aged people (The Post, June 13).

The results of Dr Mittleman's study are hardly newsworthy. The flaws
are readily apparent to anyone with a basic understanding of research
methods.

The sample size is statistically insignificant, no causal
relationship has been established, and the study itself has never
been replicated. Out of 3882 patients who had heart attacks, 124 were
current cannabis smokers and nine had smoked within an hour of their
heart attack.

Based on this minuscule self-selected sample, Dr Mittleman concludes
that the risk of a heart attack is 4.8 times higher after smoking
cannabis.

Assuming Dr Mittleman's conclusions are accurate, the fact that heart
attack risk for an otherwise healthy 50-year-old man is about 10 in
one million highlights the sensationalism of the widespread publicity
the study is receiving.

Such junk science is routinely funded by the United States Government
and well-publicised. Millions has been spent trying to find harm in a
relatively harmless plant. Regardless of whether or not the study in
question is subjected to peer review, the results will no doubt be
repeated by drug warriors for decades.

ROBERT SHARPE
The Lindesmith Center-Drug Policy Foundation
Washington, DC