DRUG INFO

The column Soft Drugs and Hard Crime (May 24) by Donna Laframboise and her
reference to the Canadian Medical Association's editorial has prompted me
to respond. As one who has been conducting research investigating the
possible consequences of marihuana and pregnancy for more than 20 years, I
wish to add my voice to the ones who feel the laws concerning marijuana
need a major revisit. However, the issue is much more complex than implied
in the CMA editorial in which decriminalization is described as a
"relatively simple legislative act." There are gaping holes in our
knowledge, which belies the black and white picture that was presented in
the CMA editorial as well as recent columns in the Post. Certainly "there
have been no reported cases of fatal marijuana overdoses," but I am also
unaware of fatal tobacco overdoses. To imply that marijuana is innocuous
because 1.5 million Canadians smoke the drug for recreational purposes
presents a picture that suggests a state of knowledge that is not reality.
Although approximately 50 studies have looked at whether there are
long-term effects of regular marijuana use that persist after the "high"
has passed, the data are equivocal with about half reporting persisting
effects and half reporting none. What about the use of the drug during
pregnancy and its possible effect upon the offspring? Is there a threshold
effect so that "small amounts for personal use" (as most people who
advocate decriminalization suggest) if used daily may be problematic? What
about smoking up and driving? Unlike alcohol, marijuana remains in the body
for many days and, to complicate matters further, the rate of
metabolization varies depending upon the extent of chronic use. How much
time should elapse between the last joint and getting behind the wheel of a
car or a plane? The present laws with respect to marijuana need
modification. However, to imply that the issue is a simple one is
misleading. I applaud the House of Commons move to establish a committee to
study illegal drugs and I do hope that, with respect to marijuana,
consideration to amendments to the legal status recognizes both the cogent
argument of the inappropriateness of the present penalties and the
complexity of the issue at hand. Peter Fried, Professor, Department of
Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa.