ANTI-MARIJUANA ARGUMENTS MADE IN MEDICAL ISOLATION

Dear Editor:

One shouldn't look to the medical community for progressive new reforms.
Keep in mind that for nearly 50 years the tobacco industry and their
powerful lobby of health professionals were able to confuse, mislead, and
for want of a better word, lie to the public about the dangers of smoking.

The standard claim of early radio and television commercials when "99 out
of 100 doctors recommends brand X" sound like a joke today. Deception and
bad science were simply part of staying in business and providing the
public with a perfectly legal product.

The deception surrounding cannabis involves playing up the real dangers.
Never mind that marijuana is nearly as widespread as tobacco, is standard
treatment for a number of ailments including glaucoma, has been used
medicinally and recreationally by different cultures for over 1,000 years
and has, contrary to the rhetoric being voiced over mis-prescribing, been
studied to death. While the responsibility of dispensing cannabis is a
legitimate concern, one that further undermines the judgement of the
federal government, the "counter-indicated" argument is a cop-out.

Singling out marijuana as a serious threat to one's chemical equilibrium,
and then failing to include the arsenal of mind-altering, easily accessible
pharmaceutical options (Prozac, demerol, morphine, lithium crystals, for
example), many of which have powerful, well-documented negative
side-effects, is intellectually, if not scientifically, dishonest. Alcohol,
by almost any measurement is a far more dangerous drug either by itself or
in combination with other drugs.

Predictably, during the tiresome marijuana redux, there's no
"counter-indicated" concern being expressed over alcohol or any number of
routinely prescribed pharmaceuticals far more likely to be
counter-indicated in any given drug treatment.

Hugh Nevin
North Vancouver