THE WHITE HOUSE RETURNS TO STOKING FEARS ABOUT POTENT POT

In What Is Becoming a Nearly Annual Ritual, the ONDCP Has Released
Yet Another Report Filled With Dire Warnings About Rising Marijuana Potency.

In what is becoming a nearly annual ritual, on June 12 the White
House Office of National Drug Control Policy released yet another
report filled with dire warnings about rising marijuana potency. And
the U.S. media -- led by the Associated Press, by far the nation's
most powerful wire service -- once again mistakenly treated the story
as if it was actual news.

AP's story, picked up by newspapers and TV and radio stations all
over the country, began, "Marijuana potency increased last year to
the highest level in more than 30 years, posing greater health risks
to people who may view the drug as harmless, according to a report
released Thursday by the White House."

One had to read six paragraphs into the story to get the first hint
of a dissenting view, voiced by Dr. Mitch Earleywine, author of the
book, Understanding Marijuana. Earleywine, a substance abuse
researcher and psychology professor at the Albany campus of the State
University of New York, noted that marijuana smokers simply smoke
less when the product is more potent, just as drinkers imbibe smaller
quantities of bourbon or vodka than they do of beer. Since the only
serious proven harm from marijuana use consists of coughing and other
respiratory symptoms caused by inhalation of smoke, higher potency
marijuana is arguably healthier, since smoke intake is reduced.

But the AP story -- and most other coverage -- was dominated by dark
suggestions of the dire consequences of this new "potent pot." ONDCP
chief John Walters warned of the "serious implications" of increased
potency, saying, "Today's report makes it more important than ever
that we get past outdated, anachronistic views of marijuana."

And Nora Volkow, head of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, added,
"Particularly worrisome is the possibility that the more potent THC
might be more effective at triggering the changes in the brain that
can lead to addiction."

The operative word in Volkow's statement is "might." The claim that
higher-potency marijuana means greater risk of addiction is entirely
speculative, supported by precisely zero data. That, too, was pointed
out by Earleywine, but in a comment buried at the very end of the story.

And not acknowledged anywhere, either by AP or most other news
outlets, is the very large body of evidence suggesting that the whole
"it's not your father's marijuana" scare story is phony. To
understand why, a bit of context -- almost never provided by U.S.
mass media -- is necessary.

First, the average potency level of 9.6 percent THC that has ONDCP so
alarmed (and which overstates the potency of most domestic marijuana,
which is around 5 percent) is actually low by world standards. As
reported in the new edition of The Science of Marijuana, by Oxford
University pharmacologist Dr. Leslie Iversen, the average THC content
of seized marijuana products in Britain from 1998 to 2005 ranged from
10.5 percent to 14.2 percent. In the Netherlands, where marijuana is
available by prescription through conventional pharmacies, the
minimum permissible THC content set in government standards for
medical cannabis (except for one special variety developed
specifically to be high in cannabinoids other than THC) is 13 percent.

In other words, the minimum acceptable THC content for medical
marijuana in the Netherlands is over one-third higher than the level
that has Walters and Volkow in such a tizzy.

And more sober analysts around the world continue to be far less
certain than U.S. drug warriors that potency is of great consequence.
In a report issued earlier this spring, the British government's
Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (of which Iversen is a
member) expressed some ambivalence about the issue. While
acknowledging a concern about young people using high-THC marijuana,
the ACMD noted that most users may simply smoke less. It also noted
that while potency has clearly increased in the United Kingdom over
time, "there has been no concomitant reported increase in enquiries
to the National Poisons Information Service nor an increase in
hospital admissions due to cannabis intoxication."

A new analysis by a group of Australian researchers, published online
May 20 by the journal Addiction, is even more skeptical, citing
"claims about escalating cannabis potency made as far back as 1975."
The Australians argue that "more research is needed to determine
whether increased potency and contamination translates to harm for
users." For good measure, they add that the evidence "is fragmented
and fraught with methodological problems," explaining that the
variations in marijuana samples (potency data comes from batches of
marijuana seized by law enforcement) are so wide and the sources so
varied that it is simply impossible to know if reported potency
accurately represents what is available to marijuana consumers.

That said, there are some legitimate concerns about marijuana
potency. A first-time user who happens upon some very high-octane
marijuana could well have a more intense experience than they are
prepared for. So could someone accustomed to lower-grade material who
unexpectedly happens upon some high-quality sinsemilla.

There is an easy way to avert such unpleasant surprises, a method
that's long been in use for alcoholic beverages: The bottle of white
wine presently sitting in my refrigerator bears a label indicating an
alcohol content of 13.7 percent, while the bottle of single-malt
scotch I keep on hand for special occasions, contains 43 percent
alcohol -- again clearly marked. Needless to say, I'll drink the
scotch more slowly and judiciously than the wine.

Similar information could easily be given to marijuana consumers. But
that, of course, would require replacing prohibition with a
regulatory system similar to that now used for alcohol and tobacco.
Oddly, neither Walters nor Volkow seem to have brought up that possibility.