NEITHER SIDE IN POT DEBATE HAS PROVEN CASE

Dana Larsen and Neil and Phillip Seeman are talking at crossed purposes.
Larsen believes marijuana laws cause more damage than benefits to society,
which is a basis for decriminalization rather than legalization. He also
believes that smoking marijuana has been shown to be effective and safe for
treating many medical conditions.

The Seemans do not address the societal harm that arises as a result of the
criminalization of marijuana and point out that marijuana is of unproved
safety but this alone does not prove that possession should be a criminal
offence. There is no shortage of evidence suggesting that cigarettes are
associated with many diseases but they are legal. Nor is it convincing that
there is no role for marijuana in medical practice. In pallative care,
where long term adverse effects are less important, their argument is
difficult to support.

Larsen has argued that marijuana should be decriminalized but he failed to
show that it should be legalized, while the Seemens have argued that
smoking marijuana has not been proven to be safe but have failed to show
that possession should be a criminal offence.

Stephen Workman, M.D.
Mississauga, ON.