Pubdate: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (PA) Copyright: 2010 PG Publishing Co., Inc. Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/pm4R4dI4 Website: http://www.post-gazette.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/341 Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v10/n542/a01.html Author: Michael T. Flaherty POPULAR OPINION IS NOT SCIENCE On July 11, the Post-Gazette reported on Pennsylvania's efforts to legalize medical marijuana ("The Push for Pot: State Bill Would Legalize Marijuana as Therapeutic Option"). For both alleged medical reasons and admitted financial ones -- and rationalizing that the popular vote is there -- legislators ask, why not? Everybody knows it, but maybe it's a good time to say it again: Popular opinion is not science. In fact, the two have little in common. There is scientific evidence that marijuana is addictive. Recent developments in neuroimaging techniques show distinct similarities between the way the brain changes in response to cannabinoids and the way it changes to exposure to other addictive drugs: The brain develops a tolerance, can experience cravings and can suffer withdrawal -- all marks of addiction. Some marijuana users express a desire to cut back or quit, but have difficulty doing so -- a hallmark in assessing dependence. Like all drugs, not everyone who uses marijuana becomes dependent on it. But some do. Regarding medical marijuana, it has been argued as an option in treating certain conditions, such as nerve pain or chemotherapy-related nausea. Using addictive substances to treat medical issues, while not new, does require thorough patient education and consent and careful -- very careful -- medical monitoring, which is not the case in California where medical marijuana has been legalized. We also need to do more research on the effects of medical marijuana use on people's lives in general, e.g., relationships, work, productivity and long-term health and quality of life. We simply don't understand this very well yet. Other nonaddictive proven remedies also exist. Too often, our understanding of addiction is informed by emotion, prejudice, stigma or financial need, rather than scientific rigor. Privileging public opinion over science on the issue of legalization is inappropriate, particularly when the public can be so easily motivated by a desire to reduce tax liability or for a fleeting but potentially life-altering good time. Michael T. Flaherty, Ph.D. Executive Director Institute for Research, Education and Training in the Addictions Downtown - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake