The Background:
In the United States, the production, sale, possession, and use of marijuana is
illegal.
But certain states have legalized
marijuana for medicinal or even recreational purposes.
Yes, but no, technically they did not, and
cannot do that. The legal breakdown of the United States says that in the event
of a contradiction between state and federal law, federal law takes priority. Thus,
all technicalities aside, marijuana is
illegal throughout all of the United States, period.
The Controversy: But
why? Marijuana is safe and has been shown to have medicinal uses.
The Typical Options:
A. Keep
it illegal (I mean just think of the children)
B. Legalize
it for medicinal uses only (because that will stop people from abusing it)
C. Legalize
it for any use but with restrictions (so you admit it’s not harmless)
D. Legalize
it without restriction (What could possibly go wrong)
My Thoughts:
E. Option
C but not B with additional provision F that makes it illegal to smoke
This
is why I hate dichotomies. Okay, let’s break it down.
First, on the spectrum of libertarian
to authoritarian, I would fall more on the libertarian side, but I find myself
walking a thin line between, “you can’t tell me what to do” and “please tell that
person that they simply cannot do that,” particularly when the thing that they
are doing could kill me. Example, gun control (much more on this topic later).
The argument for lax gun control is that it infringes on personal freedoms,
such as the right to own and use a gun. The argument for stricter gun control
is that it presents a very real threat to human lives, as guns can be used
(very easily) to kill other humans, and we as a society are pretty much in
agreement at this point, that killing is bad. We must then decide which is more
important, the right to own the gun, or the protection of humans from that gun
owner. In light of this, my views tend to come out on the “do whatever you want
as long as it doesn’t endanger me in any way” side.
How does any of this relate to
marijuana? It is actually a very similar issue, at least in my mind. Let us default
to the “does this endanger me?” question. Despite the propaganda of days past, marijuana
does not typically promote violent behavior in the way that some other illicit
substances have been known to do. However, there is a wealth of evidence that
second hand smoke can kill you. You can probably see where I am going with
this, but I will spell it out for you none the less (is there really any other
way to communicate through writing?).
I have long felt that smoking should be
illegalized, and I do not just mean tobacco cigarettes. The entire act should
be banned. There is a very real danger that comes with exhaling smoke into your
surroundings, and despite what some marijuana advocates might tell you, smoking
marijuana is just as bad as tobacco, or even green tea leaves for that matter.
It is not the substance but the chemical products of the combustion process
that are harmful when inhaled, so there is really no getting around it.
The reason that some view marijuana in
such a better light than tobacco likely stems from the anti-tobacco initiatives
that most everyone of the past generation was subjected to in school. Opponents
of tobacco have done a wonderful job of educating people about the dangers of
tobacco smoking, but have created a kind of stigma, that big tobacco companies
have taken the innocent tobacco cigarette and made it harmful on our lungs through
injecting deadly toxins into the product. The reality is that manufactured
cigarettes are probably better for your lungs than a hand rolled cigarette, due
to the inclusion of filters. So, in summary, let them have their marijuana and
eat it too, just don’t smoke it.
What about the children though? Okay, another
hard truth but hear me out, marijuana is a drug. Some will argue against this,
but anyone who is not completely ignorant will recognize that the definition of
a drug is pretty far reaching, and includes such substances as caffeine, nicotine,
ethanol, and, yes, even components of the marijuana plant. So, should there be
restrictions on who can and cannot purchase marijuana in this crazy
hypothetical world where it is legal for purchase? Yes, yes, a million times
yes. Just like how children should not be drinking alcoholic beverages or
smoking tobacco cigarettes, the use of marijuana would very likely affect their
development.
Marijuana
has very real effects, both short and long term, and children are simply not
mature enough to make an informed decision about the risks versus benefits of
using such a product.
This brings us to why I oppose medicinal
marijuana. Marijuana has shown some promise as a medicinal product, however, we
are simply too naïve at present to utilize it in my opinion. When a new drug product is seeking approval
from the FDA it must undergo rigorous trials to be proven both safe and effective.
Marijuana, however, is still illegal, as previously stated, and is therefore
not FDA approved for any use, or even under consideration for approval at
current.
Let’s break it down further. The simplest
idea is giving patients the ability to purchase crude marijuana, that is the
plant itself. This is just plain barbaric. Imagine a scenario, if you would,
wherein a patient complains to their physician of a headache, and are
subsequently instructed to go purchase a small amount of willow bark and chew
upon it until their pain subsides. Imagine now that this patient is you and
brainstorm for a minute all of the accusations you would make against said
quack physician. With your head throbbing from the 10 minutes of straight
screaming at this doctor, take a few minutes to calm down and chew on some
willow bark. What’s this? It actually works. Who knew. Well, the ancient Greeks
for one. You see, natural chemicals found within willow bark have analgesic
properties, but these chemicals have since been isolate, refined, and purified.
Now we produce a synthetic, pure, optimized product known as aspirin.
This is how modern medicine works. We take
crude remedies and we optimize them. News reports of pharmaceutical companies
looking to traditional eastern medicines for new remedies has created this idea
that maybe botanical products can be superior to our “synthetic drugs.” But
make no mistake, those companies are not looking for a botanical product. They
are looking for lead chemical compounds, from which they can derive new
synthetic drugs.
Okay, so let’s take marijuana and make a
new drug containing its active constituents. Yes, I am on board. Cannabidiol,
in particular has shown great promise in being used medicinally, and with much
fewer side effects than the psychoactive component THC (sorry stoners). But let
us not forget to test it. Again, research to date is limited. It is still
illegal after all, and studies on illicit substances can prove quite
challenging to get approved. However, if a purified product based on active
components from marijuana is produced, subjected to clinical trials, approved
by the FDA, and put on the market, then I am all for physicians prescribing it
and pharmacies providing it. But until, that time comes, maybe leave the
marijuana to the recreational users, and let the afflicted use clinically proven
products for their ailments.
-AMS
No comments:
Post a Comment