From: Christopher B Reeve <[cr 39] at [andrew.cmu.edu]> Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA "In 1962 the White House Conference on Narcotic and Drug Abuse stated: 'It is the opinion of the Panel that the hazards of marihuana per se have been exaggerated and that long criminal sentences imposed on an occasional user or possessor of the drug are in poor social perspective. Although marijuana has long held the reputation of inciting individuals to commit sexual offenses and other antisocial acts, the evidence is inadequate to substantiate this.'" ("Proceedings: White House Conference on Narcotic and Drug Abuse, September 27 - 28, 1962," State Department Auditorium, Washington, D.C. (Washington, G.P.O., 1963), 286, extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 310) "the term 'drug abuse' apparently does not necessarily require that the drug have demonstrable ill effects. In the Moslem, Eastern Mediterranean region during the seventeenth century, coffee drinking was strictly forbidden, and those who owned or even visited coffee houses faced the death penalty. The severity of this punishment had nothing to do with the rhetoric about the deleterious effects of coffee, but rather with the cofee house becoming a meeting place for political malcotents assumed to be plotting against established religious and political authorities." (T. Eli Mahi, "A Preliminary Study on Khat Together with the Institutional History of Coffee as a Beverage in Relation to Khat," World Health Organization Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean, March 1962, extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 338) "When from 1956-1960 the cultivation of Cannabis sativa was prohibited in Tunisia and Algeria, vineyards replaced hemp fields, and alcohol consumption took the place of cannabis with no consequent improvement in public health. B. W. Sigg believes this demonstrates that where large segments of the population are in the habit of using nonaddictive euphoriants, repressive control is futile." (R. H. Blum and associates, "Drugs, Behavior, and Crime," Society and Drugs: Social and Cultural Observations (San Francisco, 1969), I, p. 74, citing: B. W. Sigg, Le Cannabisme chronique: Fruit du sous developpement et du capitalisme (Marrakesch, 1960; Algiers, 1963). All of this is extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 344 - 345) "In Japan, after World War II, amphetamines became freely and legally available. Their use began to skyrocket to the point where it was estimated that five million Japanese were habitual users. In response to this medicosocio emergency, a highly punitive law was enacted in 1953 against both users and sellers. But whereas the amphetamine problem was considered solved by 1955, the number of narcotic addicts had begun to rise steadilyl. The increase in the use of narcotics became so alarming that in 1963 a new law, intended to be as severe as the 1953 amphetamine legislation, was passed. It solved the heroin problem, but the number of barbituate users now began to rise, and in fact is still rising. In addition there is now a sharp increase inthe practice of solvent inhalation" (L. E. Hollister, "Criminal Laws and the Control of Drugs of Abuse: An Historical View of the Law (Or, It's the Lawyer's Fault)," Journal of Clinical Pharmacology and Journal of New Drugs (1969), pp. 345-348, extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 346) "The possibility that the economic impact of drug abuse of all kinds may be overestimated is supported by the White House Committee on Narcotic and Drug Abuse, which has noted that if the economic aspects alone are considered, there are many other problems deserving a higher priority." (Proceedings of the White House Conference on Narcotic and Drug Abuse (Washington, G.P.O., 1962), extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 347) "Roughly three-quarters of those arrested for marihuana violations have had only minor or no difficulty with the law previously. Of those arrested for possession of marihuana in California, about one-third are incarcerated for some period of time. It is an unfortunate fact that most of the jails and prisons in this country are chronically overcrowded and understaffed. To send a personn whose behavior presents no essential threat to the fabric of society to such a place is absurd. Worse, it throws someone whose only 'crime' may be that he has smoked marihuana into the closest contact with a number of much more serious (from the point of view of the threat of direct social harm) offenders, and increases the likelihood that he will engage in other, perhaps non-drug-related criminal activities, after he is released: the criminogenic nature of the penalties provided by the antimarihuana laws also includes the effects on users of imprisonment. But even those who are not imprisoned have their futures seriously scarred inasmuch sa their arrest records follow them through life and jeopardize their chances of getting jobs, gaining entrance to schools, or being accepted as members in many organizations." (N. L. Chayet, "Legal Aspects of Drug Abuse," In Drugs and Youth, ed. Wittenborn et al., p 241, extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 354 - 355) "About 300,000 mostly young people are arrested on marijuana charges each year, and the political climate has now deteriorated so severely that it has become difficult to discuss marihuana openlly and freely. It could almost be said that there is a climate of psychopharmacological McCarthyism. One indication of this climate is the rise in mandatory drug testing, which is analogous to the loyalty oaths of the McCarthy era. Hardly anyone believed that forced loyalty oaths would enhance national security, but people who refused to take such oaths risked loss of their jobs and reputations. Today we are witnessing the imposition of a chemical loyalty oath. Mandatory, often random testing of urine samples for the presence of illicit drugs is increasingly demanded as a condition of employment. People who test positive may be fired or, if they wish to keep their jobs, may be involuntarily assigned to drug counseling or 'employee assistance' programs. All this is of little use in preventing or treating drug abuse. In the case of cannabis, urine testing can easily be defeated by chemical alteration of the urine or substitution of someone else's urine. Even if the urine sample has not been altered, the available tests are far from perfect. The cheaper ones are seriously inaccurate, and even the more expensive and accurate ones are fallible because of laboratory error and passive exposure to marihuana smoke. But even an infallible test would be of little use in preventing or treating drug abuse. Marihuana metabolites (breakdown products) remain in the urine for days after a single exposure and for weeks after a long-term user stops. Their presence bears no established relationship to drug effects on the brain. It tells little about when the drug was used, how much was used, or what effects it had or has. Like loyalty oaths imposed on government employees, urine testing for marihuana is useless for its ostensible purpose. It is little more than shotgun harassment designed to impose outward conformity." (Lester Grinspoon and James B. Bakalar, preface to Marihuana, The Forbidden Medicine) "Ronald Reagan, for example, claimed a breakthrough in the War on Drugs in 1982, citing an increase of drug arrests and seizures. By early 1983, however, the General Accounting Office (GAO) has issued a report revealing that the figures used by Reagan were the result of double counting, that is, that the DEA and Customs, for example, were claiming some of the same seizures [Freemantle, Brian. (1986). The Fix. New York: Tom Doherty Associates. page 52.]." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 34) "the public perception about the dangers of certain drugs has been manipulated. The dangers of illegal drugs are perceived to be much more serious than the dangers of legal drugs, partly because they are constantly discussed and presented in graphic (if overblown) form. The use of marijuana, cocaine, heroin, and crack, therefore, has come to be perceived as 'real' drug abuse. Evidence of this can be seen in references to 'drug and alcohol abuse'; the phrase implies that alcohol is not a drug. While the dangers of legal drugs (like alcohol and tobacco) are not ignored completely, they are hardly presented in the panic terms of the targeted drugs in the drug war. The public is not subjected to extensive media campaigns dramatizing the dangers of over-the-counter or prescription drugs. Nor are the destructive effects of alcohol and tobacco presented as eroding the very fabric and internal security of the nation." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 58) "Even though 3,000 teenagers start smoking every day, cigarette companies are allowed to spend an estimated $3.3 billion every year to advertise cigarettes. An estimated 1 billion packs of cigarettes are sold to minors every year, but according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), despite these violations only three states reported citations against thirty-two vendors in 1989 for sales to minors. Researchers at the CDC found only minimal enforcement of laws restricting sales of cigarettes to children in other states [Duston, Diane. (6/1/90). Smoking Will Kill Five Million Youths, Surgeon General Says. Montgomery Advertisor: 4A.]. Alcoholic beverage companies are allowed to spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year on advertising that encourages alcohol use. When former surgeon general C. Everett Koop was still in office, he called for a ban on alcohol advertising. William Bennett, however, has refused to add alcohol to his mandate as Drug Czar, and predictably enough, advertising trade groups have opposed attempts in Congress to introduce any restrictions on alcohol advertising. These trade groups have even gone to the extent of denying a connection between advertising and consumption. Dan Jaffe, executive vice president of the Association for National Advertisers, was quoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying: 'Research has yet to document a strong relationship between alcohol advertising and alcohol consumption. Let's not go off down a blind alley' [Lipman, Joanne. (2/23/90). Lumping Alcohol into Drug War Isn't Idea Industry's Warming To. Wall Street Journal: B5.]. That they are going off down a blind alley should be news to the companies who spend so much money advertising alcohol. The Partnership for a Drug Free America, a coalition of advertisers, ad agencies, and media groups that produces some of the most gruesome of the anti-illegal drug advertising, produces no alcohol abuse advertising and reportedly has no plans to do so. This is not surprising, since the coalition's major corporate sponsors include the Miller Beer parent company, Philip Morris [Lipman, Joanne. (2/23/90). Lumping Alcohol into Drug War Isn't Idea Industry's Warming To. Wall Street Journal: B5.]." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 59) "The mainstream media, dominated by corporate interests and riddled with the fear of being negative, has virtually abdicated its critical and investigative role. While sensationalizing the drug problem by presenting innumerable variations of 'Midnight on Crack Street,' the media does very little questioning of the strategies being employed by the state in the War on Drugs, and it offers almost no useful analysis of the drug issue. The Democratic party has ceased to be a party of opposition. The intellectual poverty of the party is demonstrated clearly in its failure to mobilize any response to the new proposals of the Drug Warriors except more funds for treatment adn more money for the War on Drugs in general." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 126) "This is not a culture that encourages intellectual activity or communicates the joy of a conflict in ideas. Robert W. Pittman, the creator of MTV, has noted that in developing the cable network he and others were merely capitalizing on a profound difference between how younger people receive and process information and how the pre-TV generation did. He has argued that the 'TV babies' do many things at once - watch TV, do their homework, talk on the telephone [Pittman, Robert W. (1/24/90). We're Talking the Wrong Language to 'TV Babies.' New York Times: A15.]. Although he has argued that this is characteristic of the TV babies, it is increasingly characteristic of the population as a whole. The pace of life has increased to such an extent that people want information quickly and in the least complicated form possible. This may be why Ronald Reagan was considered 'the great communicator.' Increasingly, people want images; people communicate not through discourse but through images. There is a kind of impatience with discourse, with anything that cannot be absorbed immediately with the least amount of work possible. MTV and politicians are well aware of this. It has become apparent that one image of Willie Horton is worth fifty well-reasoned arguments. This also explains the media frustration with Jimmy Carter, who insulted this country by holding the notion that the world was a complicated place, by failing to reduce every issue to black and white, the good guys and the bad." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 179) "In 1986, Regan went on television with props and photographs (including a map of Latin America with a spreading red stain) and charged that the Nicaraguan government was tied to the international cocaine trade. 'I know,' he said, 'that every American parent concerned about the drug problem will be outraged to learn that top Nicaraguan government officials are deeply involved in drug trafficking.' A day after the speech the DEA admitted that there was no evidence to back up the charge [Black, George. (1988). The Good Neighbor: How the United States Wrote the History of Central America and the Caribbean. New York: Pantheon Books. page 165.]." (Christina Jacqueline Johns, Power, Idealogy, and the War on Drugs: Nothing Succeeds Like Failure, 152) Driving Performance / Drug Testing "One experimental project concerns the effects of marihuana as compared to alcohol on driving performance as tested by a driving simulator, which has been studied and found to be a valid tester of driving ability. The experimental team found, using a fairly rigorous and systematic procedure of control and double-blind technique, that 'subjects experiencing a 'social marihuana high' accumulated significantly more speedometer errors than when under control conditions, whereas there were no significant differences in accelerator, brake, signal, steering, and total errors. The same subjects intoxicated from alcohol accumulated significantly more accelerator, brake, signal, speedometer, and total errors than under normal conditions, wehreas there was no significant difference in steering errors.' The driving test was 23 minutes long, and included a total of 405 checks, broken down as follows: accelerator - 164; brake - 106; turn signals - 59; steering - 53; speedomoter - 23. Because the simulator was so constructed that the driver could not control the rate of the filmed stimuli, the speedometer checks 'are not an indication of speeding errors, but of the amount of the time spent monitoring the speedometer.' But, as the researchers note, 'comments by marihuana users ... report alteration of time and space perceptions, leading to a different sense of speed which generally results in driving more slowly.' Although the selection of subjects was from a group of regular marihuana users (who also were 'familiar with the effects of alcohol - there were no teetotalers or chronic alcoholics'), and accordingly the results of hte study might seem vulnerable on the grounds that hte 'nature of selectioin probably resulted in subjects who preferred marihuana to alcohol and, therefore, had a set to perform better with marihuana,' the study effectively eliminated the possibility of any such subject bias. 'The main safeguard against bias was that subjects were not told how well they did on any of their driving tests, nor were they acquainted with the specific methods used to determine errors. Thus, it would have been very difficult intentionally and effectively to manipulate error scores.' Perhaps the most striking finding of the study was that 'simulated driving scores for subjects experiencing a normal social marhuana 'high' and the same subjects under control conditions are not significantly different. However, there are significantly more errors (P < .01) for [alcohol] intoxicated than for control subjects (difference of 15.4 percent) ... teh mean error scores of the three treatments [were] ... control, = 84.46 errors; marihuana, 84.49 errors; and alcohol, 97.44 errors.' Another interesting observation was that 'Impairment in simulated driving performance does not seem to be a function of increased marihuana dosage or inexperience with the drug.' Thsi was suggested by 'retesting four subjects after they had smoked approximately three times the amount of marijuana used in teh main experiment. None of the subjects showed a signficant change in performance. Four additional subjects who had never smoked marihuana before were pretested to obtain control scores, then given marihuana to smoke until they were subjectively 'high' with an associated increase in pulse rate ... All subjects showed either no change or negligible improvement in their scores." (A Crancer et al., "Comparison of the Effects of Marihuana and Alcohol on Simulated Driving Performance," Science, 164 (1969), extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 159 - 161) "'The most provocative comment was the frequent report of the ability to 'turn-off' the 'high' at time of stimulus presentation, thus enabling S to perform as in a normal or nondrugged state.' In this study many of the subjects reported the "turn-off" phenomenon to be a normal concomitant of the marihuana experience. This apparent ability to turn off the marihuana "high" during periods requiring short attention spans raises the issue whether such tests (which constitute the majority of those used in studies reported to date) are valid indicants of the marihuana experience or ismply measures of an interesting concomitant of the drug's effect, namely, the ability to respond normally at will? Whether this phenomenon is possible only for tasks of short-term duration or would be manifest in sustained performance tests is partially answered in the Weil et al. study (1968) where marihuana users improved from baseline levels on digit symbol substitution and pursuit rotor tests, both being more sustained performance tasks than any used in the present study. Furthermore, no performance decrements were observed for a 5-minute continuous performance test following marihuana smoking for either naive or experienced Ss. Moreover, Crancer et al. (1969) have reported no impaired performance for marihuana-intoxicated Ss in a simulated driving condition. All tests, however, were basically measures of eye-hand coordination, whereas the present study measures pure sensory response data." (D. F. Caldwell et al., "Auditory and Visual Threshold Effects of Marihuana in Man," Perceptive and Motor Skills, 29 (1969), 758-759. He cites Weil et al., "Clinical and Psychological Effects," and Crancer et al, "Effets of Marihuana and Alcohol." All of this is extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 161 - 162) "The only reliable study to date of the relative degrees to which alcohol intoxication and marihuana intoxication affect an individual's ability to operate a motor vehicle demonstrated that cannabis was significanntly less dangerous than alcohol in this respect. The study was carefully designed and well controlled and, of course, the results were of great interest. The manuscript was rejected by the Journal of the American Medical Association and subsequently accepted for publication in Science, one of the country's most prestigious scientific journals, and one with an extremely critical editorial board." (A. Crancer et al., "Comparison of the Effects of Marihuana and Alcohol on Simulated Driving Performance, " Science, 164 (1969), 851-854, extracted from Lester Grinspoon, Marihuana Reconsidered, 329 - 330) -- "Freud was convinced that 'the voice of the intellect will be heard.' But no one understood better than he that if reason is to triumph, it has to sound above the clamor of conflicting emotion and the roar of primitive desires." (Zinberg and Robertson, _Drugs & The Public_, 242)