Pubdate: Thu, 15 Oct 2015
Source: National Post (Canada)
Copyright: 2015 Canwest Publishing Inc.
Contact: http://drugsense.org/url/wEtbT4yU
Website: http://www.nationalpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/286
Author: Ed Gogek
Page: 10

MISLEADING THE PUBLIC ON THE BENEFITS OF LEGALIZATION

According to news reports, Canadian scientists often feel pressured to
support bad science and harmful government decisions, especially
regarding climate change. Has something similar happened with marijuana?

One year ago, the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH)
released its Cannabis Policy Framework recommending that Canada
legalize marijuana. CAMH said the report was based on scientific
evidence, but it actually relies on statements that are either
deceptive or provably false - which is shocking coming from a
reputable research centre.

First, the provably false: the CAMH report says that "cannabis use
alone does not increase the likelihood that a person will progress to
using other illegal substances." That's not true. A study published in
the British Journal of Psychiatry in April 2010, found that teenagers
who use marijuana regularly are seven times as likely to use other
illicit drugs later in life.

The CAMH report also says that, "Removing criminal and civil penalties
for possession of cannabis would eliminate the more than $1 billion
Canada spends annually to enforce cannabis possession laws." However,
California has a population slighter larger than Canada's, and a Rand
Corporation report estimates that state only spends around $300
million per year, and that's for all marijuana-related crime,
including trafficking, which causes most of the enforcement expenses.
CAMH's $1-billion estimate is for possession alone.

So on Oct, 22, 2014, I asked on the CAMH blog how they came up with $1
billion, just to enforce marijuana possession laws. CAMH responded:

"This figure was derived from a report called The Costs of Substance
Abuse in Canada 2002. This study found that the costs of law
enforcement for illegal drugs in Canada was $2.335 billion in 2002.
Law enforcement costs specific to cannabis were estimated by assigning
half of total enforcement costs - $1.167 billion - to cannabis."

That's true: the 2002 report did find that "the costs of law
enforcement for illegal drugs =C2=85 was $2.335 billion." However, that w
as
not just the cost of enforcing possession laws. That was the cost of
enforcing laws against possession, sales and cultivation, plus the
cost of enforcing laws for violent and property offences committed by
drug users who were under the influence, or stealing to get money for
drugs. So marijuana possession laws cost Canada a tiny, tiny fraction
of that $1.167 billion - not the entire amount, as the Cannabis Policy
Framework claimed.

It's hard to imagine this was a mistake. The lead author of the 2002
report was Dr. Jurgen Rehm, who's also a director at CAMH. He had to
know that his own paper didn' t say Canada spends $2.335 billion per
year on possession laws alone!

Next, the deceptive: the CAMH report says that, "The prohibition of
cannabis and criminalization of its users does not deter people from
consuming it. The evidence on this point is clear: tougher penalties
do not lead to lower rates of cannabis use."

Notice what they did. The first sentence says prohibition doesn't
deter use, but the evidence offered in the second sentence isn't about
prohibition. It's about the severity of penalties. Even if tough
penalties are no more persuasive than mild ones, CAMH is not
recommending milder penalties. CAMH is recommending eliminating
prohibition, which means no penalties at all.

Here's an analog y. Reducing the fine for speeding from $200 to $100
probably wouldn't change many driving habits, but eliminating speed
limits altogether certainly would. In effect, CAMH is claiming that
since lowering traffic fines doesn't increase dangerous driving, that
proves we can safely eliminate speed limits altogether.

Besides, their claim that "the prohibition of cannabis =C2=85 does not
deter people from consuming it" is wrong. A recent University of
Michigan survey interviewed teens who had never tried marijuana, and
10 per cent said if it were legal, they'd try it. Clearly, prohibition
deters them.

CAMH used bad information to convince the country to legalize
marijuana. Why would scientists at a reputable institution mislead the
public this way?

Dr. Gogek is an addiction psychiatrist and author of Marijuana Debunked: 

A handbook for parents, pundits and politicians who want to know the
case against legalization.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Matt