Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:


After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.

Cannadian Senate puts cannabis myths to bed

Don Barnard

Press Release

Sunday 02 Jun 2002

---

The following information is already in the public domain and reproduced here for media and public
information.

Thought you might like to have a crack at a comparative evolution between the little reported
"Canadian Senate Report on Cannabis" published early May 2002 and the "HASC report on cannabis"
published on 23 May 2002.


The Full report can be read at

http://www.parl.gc.ca/37/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/ille-e/library-e/discussion-e.pdf


Kind regards
Don Barnard
Press Officer
http://www.lca-uk.org

Editors notes:

From the Canadian report:

Everyone has opinions on cannabis. Yet opinions are often biased, based on
myths and lack of information. Indeed, some of our own opinions were just
that when we began our study.Cannabis may well be one of the most studied of
all plants. Yet even scientific evidence is contradictory.

Studies indicate that the vast majority of cannabis smokers never progress
to other drugs.

While it is true that most users of hard drugs have also used cannabis
before these other drugs..., other factors, mainly psychosocial, would
better explain progression to other drugs.

Between 8 and 10 per cent of cannabis users may develop some psychological
dependency, a much smaller proportion than for many other drugs, illegal and
legal, and comparable to prescribed medications.

For most dependent users, stopping use for a few days is usually sufficient
to eliminate any symptom of addiction.

Cannabis, like any other drug, has potential negative health effects. But
(it) also has positive effects. These include relaxation, euphoria and
sociability. Cannabis also has therapeutic applications.

Many of us perceive that a significant proportion of ordinary criminality is
related to drugs. Nevertheless, the relationship between drugs and crime is
more complex. This relationship does not apply in the case of cannabis.

It is impossible to estimate the total costs of cannabis criminalization.
The most recent Auditor General's Report mentions that the annual cost of
fighting illegal drugs for federal agencies alone is over $500 million.

Drivers under the influence of cannabis are more cautious and less
aggressive and drive more slowly than drivers under the influence of
alcohol.

Some witnesses before the committee and individuals writing to us are
concerned that a more "liberal" drug policy would mean increased use,
especially by youth.

Studies show that in the Netherlands, despite a more liberal approach than
other countries', the proportion of youth using cannabis is not higher. In
fact, it is in the middle of the pack.

Does cannabis use affect academic performance or social abilities? Studies
indicate that problem young cannabis users are also problem alcohol users,
manifesting other "risk-taking" behaviour. These are therefore symptoms of
other underlying problems rather than causes.

Public policies have little impact on use levels and patterns.

Prohibition and criminalization entail a criminal record for simple cannabis
possession, fuel a black market that brings young people into contact with
criminal elements and force them to hide to avoid police scrutiny.

Public policies also entail other negative effects. Prohibition makes public
health approaches, balanced information, prevention and quality control of
substances difficult, if not impossible.

National policies on drugs find much of their legitimacy in the
international conventions and treaties.

Yet these international agreements evolved in the absence of any significant
drug problem in the developed countries that pushed them.

End


 

 

 

After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.




This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.
Feel free to link to this page!