Is marijuana fear a myth?

The broadsides are everywhere. The president warns against those who are "soft" on drugs. Steve Forbes writes of "an insidious effort ... to legalize drugs. Medical marijuana is the stealth legalizer's Trojan horse." It is refreshing that State Sen. John Vasconcellos in California is determined to authorize a simple examination of the factual questions about the use of marijuana. He had impressive sponsors for his bill to establish a Medical Marijuana Research Center at the University of California.

Along comes a small book that is a miracle of intelligent concision. It is called "Marijuana Myths/Marijuana Facts." Its authors are Lynn Zimmer, a professor of sociology at Queens College, and Dr. John P. Morgan, a physician and professor at the CCNY Medical School. The publisher is the Lindesmith Center in New York, a research center outspokenly committed to the legalization of marijuana. But hear this about a remarkable book:

It comprises 20 questions about marijuana, which the authors term "myths." Each of the chapters, on the initial page, states the "myth," cites sources for it, and gives the authors' conclusion in 100 words. That page is followed by an essay extending their reasons for their judgment.

Let's recite the first page:

Myth. "Marijuana's harms have been proved scientifically. In the 1960s and 1970s, many people believed that marijuana was harmless. Today we know that marijuana is much more dangerous than previously believed."

The authors then give five sources for the judgment above. To wit:

"Every single scientific study that has been done in the last several years shows alarming increases in the toxicity and the danger of using marijuana." (The source for this and subsequent citations is given in the appendix.)

"Parents ... who used marijuana a generation ago ... need to realize ... that research has shown the drug to be far more dangerous ... than was known in the 1960s and 1970s."

"New research tools, including sophisticated brain scanners and methods for studying the brain's system of chemical messengers ... provide new insights on the often subtle effects of marijuana."

"There are over 10,000 documented studies available that confirm the harmful physical and psychological effects of smoking marijuana."

And, finally, "Whatever you may have heard or thought about marijuana in the '60s, '70s and '80s, forget it."

Then, under "Fact," comes the authors' evaluation of the above:

"In 1972, after reviewing the scientific evidence, the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse concluded that while marijuana was not entirely safe, its dangers had been grossly overstated. Since then, researchers have conducted thousands of studies of humans, animals and cell cultures. None reveal any findings dramatically different from those described by the national commission in 1972. In 1995, based on 30 years of scientific research, editors of the British medical journal Lancet concluded that 'the smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health."' A 10-page essay on the point follows.

Among the "myths" examined are: marijuana and addiction; marijuana, hard drugs and the gateway theory; marijuana law and punishment; Dutch marijuana policy; marijuana: motivation and performance; marijuana: psychology and insanity; marijuana and the immune system; marijuana's persistence in the body; marijuana and highway safety; the potency of marijuana; preventing marijuana use.

Now it's one thing to say (I say it) that people shouldn't consume psychoactive drugs. It is entirely something else to condone marijuana laws the application of which resulted, in 1995, in the arrest of 588,963 Americans. Why are we so afraid to inform ourselves on the question?

The Zimmer-Morgan book is available for $17 (I refuse to write $16.95) from Lindesmith, 888 Seventh Ave., New York, N.Y. 10106. Surely legislators who write marijuana laws and judges who sentence marijuana users should inform themselves on these questions? It is terrifying and humiliating to remind ourselves that 10,000 people every week are arrested for marijuana handling because legislators do not pause over evidence as readily obtainable as is now the case in a book that is exemplary, research graphically presented, concisely rendered, on a large public question.

It may be very dumb to use marijuana. But it is surely very wrong for those who inveigh on the question to fail to consult this little book.

Copyright © The Sacramento Bee