MARIJUANA RECONSIDERED

Imagine that scientists at a major drug company announced the discovery of
a new drug, clinically proven to be effective in the treatment of symptoms
of glaucoma, multiple sclerosis, AIDS and migraines, all with moderate
short term side-effects and no long term ones. The drug has no potential
for overdose and no risk of physical dependence. Now imagine that the
United States government deemed this substance to be medically worthless,
classified it with the most dangerous and addictive narcotics and, along
with state and local governments, proceeded to spend over $30 billion a
year attempting to eradicate it.

Sound bizarre?

It is, but it also happens to be U.S. policy on marijuana. Since the
administration of President Richard Nixon, America has put billions upon
billions of dollars into the War on Drugs, with the lion's share of funds
allotted to fighting marijuana. There are over 20 federal agencies involved
in combating cannabis and the combined cost to taxpayers is tremendous.

Yet there are few valid arguments as to why we should be involved in this
fight; the justifications offered in support of marijuana prohibition
crumble under scrutiny.

Rhetoric has eclipsed logic, and the debate over the decriminalization of
marijuana has devolved into a farce of political grandstanding and
exploitation.

The Harvard Coalition for Drug Policy Reform is dedicated to reversing this
trend by bringing logic and science to the forefront of federal drug policy.

We believe that current discourse on the issue ignores the critical
question of what is more harmful to society: marijuana or the battle to
eradicate it. We also believe that an appeal to the facts answers this
question conclusively.

In the words of the very commission convened by President Nixon to justify
the prohibition of marijuana, "The drug's relative potential for harm.and
its actual impact on society does not justify a social policy designed to
seek out and firmly punish those who use it." This conclusion can be
supported along several lines.

To begin with, marijuana has less potential for dependence and is less
likely to induce withdrawal symptoms than alcohol, nicotine and even
caffeine. It is considerably less harmful to the lungs than smoking
cigarettes, not only because cigarette smokers tend to consume their
product in much larger quantities, but also because cigarettes affect
smaller airways in the lungs and thus do proportionately more damage. While
there has not been a single death reported from cannabis, cigarettes kill
430,000 people annually.

With regard to its impact on the brain, the most pervasive myth about
cannabis is that it permanently impairs memory and other cognitive
functions. However, a 1999 study from Johns Hopkins University of 1,318
marijuana users over a 15-year period revealed no significant difference in
cognitive decline between heavy users, light users and non-users. While
marijuana users as a group scored more poorly than non-users on a battery
of cognitive tests at the outset of another study, after 27 days of non-use
the test scores of the two groups were indistinguishable. Granted, the
ability to learn and recall new information is impaired while high, but the
effects are neither long term nor irreversible. The myth that marijuana
kills brain cells is as patently false as the claim that it induces violent
or aggressive behavior.

The dangers of marijuana have been greatly exaggerated. These limited
dangers must now be weighed against the social costs of its prohibition.
The most damaging effect of marijuana prohibition is the denial of
medicinal marijuana to those who need it. Marijuana dramatically reduces
the severe nausea associated with cancer chemotherapy, relieves the
unrelenting optic pressure that characterizes glaucoma and successfully
induces appetite among AIDS patients who desperately need to eat. It has
also proved effective in combating the symptoms of epilepsy, multiple
sclerosis and many other medical conditions. Unbelievably, the U.S.
government has ignored these findings and classified marijuana as a
Schedule I Drug, effectively stating that it has no potential for medicinal
use. This classification is especially unwarranted as marijuana's toxicity
is minimal, particularly when compared with other commonly prescribed
pharmaceuticals.

The economic and social costs of prohibition are also staggering. The
government spends over $30 billion battling cannabis each year, yet despite
this tremendous expenditure marijuana is as available as ever, with 89
percent of high school seniors reporting last year that it was fairly easy
or very easy to obtain.

It is not surprising then that 734,000 people were arrested on
marijuana-related charges in 2000, 88 percent for simple possession. Such
enforcement produces more harm than it prevents.

It criminalizes large numbers of otherwise law- abiding people who have in
no way impinged upon the liberties of others. Furthermore, it
disproportionately affects America's youth and minority communities, and
the harm done to their futures far outweighs the harm of marijuana itself.

The government should base its policy on science and common sense.
Marijuana must be decriminalized and made readily available for medicinal
purposes.