.jpg)
The American “War on Drugs” unjustly incarcerates more than 700,000 people annually for marijuana-related crimes (Rosenthal 86). This plant, with a 10,000-year history of many uses and purposes, if decriminalized, could reshape American industry, farming and health-care. Most important, cannabis can contribute to a strong national security. But first, to understand this unique plant’s many qualities, the cannabis story must be presented, including a proper telling of its legal woes. A truthful accounting of its medicinal benefits and intoxicating effects will be offered, including responses to the most common lies advanced in business-sponsored government propaganda. Finally, I will conclude with a proposal for how a well-regulated decriminalization of cannabis will transform our society to better conquer the unprecedented challenges of the twenty-first century.
The history of cannabis is as old as civilization. Hemp may have been one of the first plants cultivated by humans. Archaeologists in Taiwan discovered fibers dating to 8000 BCE, and hemp was used for linen as early as 3500 BCE, a thousand years before cotton. Russians manufactured strong and durable rope from hemp beginning around 600 BCE. The ropes enabled successful ocean exploration and powerful navies, and in 1533, King Henry VIII fined farmers who did not grow hemp. His daughter Elizabeth increased the fine. (Earlywine 4-5) The Chinese invented hemp paper around 100 BCE, and “[w]hen Gutenberg’s presses started rolling, it was hemp paper that received the ink and spread the word of the Bible to an awakening Europe.” (Robinson vii)
In America, the Jamestown colonists raised hemp beginning in 1616. “Thomas Jefferson considered hemp so vital that he risked his life to smuggle hemp seeds out of France.” (Rosenthal 43) Seven early American presidents smoked cannabis, including James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Zachary Taylor and Franklin Pierce. Jefferson and George Washington, both wealthy hemp farmers, exchanged smoking gifts. Early drafts of the Declaration of Independence were written on hemp paper before copied to animal parchment. The first U.S. patent was issued to Jefferson for inventing a hemp threshing machine. (Robinson 129-135).
The first use of cannabis for health dates to 2737 BCE, when the Chinese noted its potential treatment for pain, seizure, muscle spasm, poor appetite, nausea, insomnia, asthma and depression. The sacred Hindu text Atharvaveda praises marijuana as a holy plant for calming anxiety and relieving tension. Marijuana use to ease the pains of childbirth and postpartum depression is documented in early Jerusalem. A physician to Nero, emperor of Rome from 54 CE to 69 CE, recommended hemp seed for earaches, later confirmed by scientists as an effective cure. Wealthy Romans ate a hemp seed dessert, and it is now known that hemp seeds provide all the amino and fatty acids necessary for proper nutrition. (Earleywine 8-11) The hemp seed is the most complete vegetable protein. (Robinson 55-56). Cannabis was more widely marketed as a medicinal remedy after an 1842 publication by Irish physician William O’Shaughnessy. In 1850, cannabis was added to The U.S. Pharmacopoeia, and in 1860, the Ohio State Medical Society summarized the then-known medical uses of marijuana. (Earleywine 13-14)
In the 1930s, Henry Ford developed an all-organic automobile, constructed of hemp and other annual crops powered by the carbohydrates of hemp fuel. Ford’s vision, with plastic from hemp polymers; biomass fuels; and everyday products made of hemp, like fish nets, bowstrings, canvas, strong rope, overalls, tablecloths, towels, linens and paper, provoked the newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst. With business ally Lammont Du Pont, who supplied chemicals to the Hearst timber holdings and owned General Motors on a loan from Andrew Mellon, the Secretary of Treasury and owner of Gulf Oil (now Chevron), Hearst manipulated public opinion with frightening tales of cannabis-induced rape, murder, frenzied orgies and other lies. Harry Anslinger, commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in the Treasury Department, reported the newspaper stories to Congress, who quickly passed the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937, bringing cannabis and its non-psychoactive sister plant hemp under the regulatory power of the federal government. Despite protests from the American Medical Association, he also organized an international conference for the purpose of a worldwide ban on cannabis trafficking. (Robinson 138-159)
Aiding the prohibition lobby was the recently liberated alcohol industry; the federal law enforcement, who would be assured of work through the Depression; and the pharmaceutical companies, whose early support of cannabis prohibition advanced their high-profit synthetic prescriptions. (Rosenthal 85-86; Robinson 150) Research on the plant was limited through the 1940s and 1950s, but Czech scientists discovered its antibiotic properties. Congress increased penalties as investigators learned of its great use in treating glaucoma. (Earleywine 15) Independent committees recommended decriminalizing marijuana to Presidents John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B Johnson, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, who all rejected the advice. (Robinson 168-169) The government instead sponsored “pathology theory” marijuana research, forcing investigators to start with preconceived notions that trump sound science. (Rosenthal 36) Supporting the ongoing “War on Drugs” is the criminal justice system that costs taxpayers $160 billion/year: the police, state’s attorneys, judges and court employees, probation and parole departments, and drug-rehabilitation clinics. Marijuana prohibition is also good business for prison construction; the manufacturers of police vehicles, weapons, protective gear; and the vendors who supply food, clothing and other supplies to the prison system. Overall, 46% of drug arrests are marijuana-related, and 88% of those arrests are for simple possession. (Rosenthal 86-88) Funding the spread of discredited science are notable corporate-sponsors like Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, Bayer, General Motors, Pfizer and ExxonMobil. (Rosenthal 83-84)
“In 1996, California voters overwhelmingly passed a people’s initiative called The Compassionate Use Act, Proposition 215 [California H&S Code 11362.5], which amended state law to allow legal access to marijuana when recommended or approved by a physician...Senate Bill 420 drastically expanded the Compassionate Use Act in 2005.” (Margolin 18-19) Critics of the legislation advocate a synthetic THC dronabinol, marketed as Marinol, as a safer alternative, but “many argue for marijuana’s superiority on medical and economic grounds. Patients prefer smoked marijuana to this medication. Anyone who is vomiting and nauseated may find swallowing a pill quite difficult. Because patients must digest the orally administered dronabinol, the effects do not appear as rapidly. Many claim that the dosage is much easier to modify with smoked marijuana, too. After a few puffs and a brief waiting period, patients can decide to increase their dose as they see fit. Dronabinol pills do not lend themselves to this sort of quick and easy alteration of dosage. The pills are also markedly more expensive. Patients could spend from $600 to over $1,000 per month on dronabinol...” whereas a medicinal marijuana plant can be grown free with a small patch of soil, sunlight, proper ventilation and water (Earleywine 16). Cannabis is now recognized as a legitimate and effective treatment of glaucoma, chronic pain, headache and migraines, cancer pain, nausea and vomiting, seizures, insomnia, anxiety, depression, asthma, menstrual cramps, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, arthritis, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis and many other ailments. Recent data suggests oral consumption of THC, through baked goods, for example, minimizes disturbed behavior in Alzheimer’s patients, and further, THC, the psychoactive chemical compound in cannabis, appears to block clumps of protein that inhibit memory and cognition, perhaps stalling the decline of Alzheimer’s patients better than the currently available drugs. (Earleywine 184) As written in the Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach 38:4: “The Lord hath created medicines out of the earth; and he that is wise will not abhor them.”
Yet critics are quick to point out a number of exaggerated dangers and make demands of marijuana studies not applied to many commonly accepted prescription medications. The first argument against decriminalizing marijuana is known as the gateway theory, or marijuana as a stepping-stone to dangerous drugs. “Descriptions in popular culture create the impression that marijuana intoxication produces an insatiable urge for more and different drugs, something similar to the way eating salt makes people thirsty. Data do not support these ideas.” (Earleywine 50) Support for gateway theory comes from correlational studies usually indicating marijuana as a contributor to a cluster of behavior problems. Data expressed as a correlation coefficient shows an actual correlation between marijuana and crack cocaine as a paltry .02, smaller between marijuana and heroin, thus offering little support for a link between the drugs. (Earleywine 50-57) No empirical data shows marijuana as a stepping-stone to dangerous drug abuse, and the little correlation that exists is likely because “the most common one occurs first simply because it is more common.” (Earleywine 57)
Critics also warn of alteration of brain function, usually followed by a physical description of how THC, like other chemical compounds, affects the hippocampus then a description of the subjective effects of intoxication, like an altered sense of time and space; altered perception of emotions and humor; short-term memory impairment; and difficulty focusing. Actual alteration of brain function is not supported by research. “Chronic marijuana consumption does not appear to create gross neuropsychological impairments.” (Earleywine 77) “Quite a bit of research reveals no gross cognitive impairments related to chronic consumption of marijuana.” (Earleywine 82) “Studies suggest that long-term use of cannabis does not lead to overt signs of gross intellectual impairment.” (Earleywine 86) “Careful research on humans shows no structural changes associated with chronic cannabis exposure in adulthood.” (Earleywine 148) However, there is reason to set age restrictions when decriminalizing marijuana. “In contrast to all of these studies that found no structural changes in adults, adolescent users of marijuana may alter the development of their brains. In a new study using MRI, researchers reported smaller brains, a lower percentage of gray matter, and a higher percentage of white matter in adults who started smoking marijuana before age 17...The participants who started smoking earlier also had smaller bodies, which is consistent with arrested development. The men who started smoking before age 17 weighed an average of 20 pounds less and were an average of 3 inches shorter.” (Earleywine 149-150)
Another argument of critics is the potential threat to one’s life. Nevertheless, there is no documentation of a fatal overdose, whereas the fatalities for tobacco stand at 430,700 per year, alcohol at 110,000 per year, prescription drug reactions at 32,000 a year, and aspirin at 7,600 per year. (Rosenthal 40) Another scare tactic used by critics is to suggest a link between smoking marijuana and lung cancer. “Currently, no data reveal definitive increases in rates of lung cancer among people who smoke marijuana but not tobacco. A retrospective study of over 64,000 patients showed no increases in risk for many types of cancer once alcohol and cigarette use were controlled.” (Earleywine 156) Because inhaling smoke is not ideal for the lungs and “chronic users of cannabis do show adverse respiratory symptoms, including cough, phlegm, wheezing, and bronchitis,” marijuana users may opt for a safer method of ingestion, like a use of a vaporizer to inhale medicated steam, or through oral ingestion, like brownies or cookies. (Earleywine 154) Furthermore, unlike consuming alcohol while pregnant, “A study of more than 12,000 newborns found no link between cannabis use and gestation, birth weight, or malfunctions.” (Earleywine 160) Further more, “children of heavy users appeared less irritable, as well as more alert and stable...American children exposed to marijuana prenatally showed no deficits on gross motor skills at age 3...and no differences in total growth at age 6.” (Earlywine 161)
The final arguments of critics are social-related problems, like amotivational syndrome, impaired school or work performance, poor driving skills and aggressive behavior. The lazy, lethargic pot smoker is a stereotype based on modern Western values about productivity. What is more likely true is intoxicated humans are less likely to perform tasks they dislike and may not share the same ideal lifestyle or goals as traditional America. “Over half a dozen studies reveal that marijuana smokers and nonsmokers have comparable grades in college...Surprisingly, at least two other studies found higher grades in the marijuana smokers than in nonsmokers.” (Earleywine 204) “People who perform repetitive, simple tasks may turn to cannabis to relieve the boredom...Perhaps marijuana makes monotonous physical labor more bearable. In contrast, jobs that require complex or rapid decisions likely suffer during intoxication.” (Earleywine 205) “[M]otorists intoxicated with cannabis compensate for the drug’s cognitive effects. They drive more slowly, leave more space between cars, and take fewer risks. Thus, current data suggest that cannabis likely does not increase reckless driving or [collisions].” (Earleywine 210). Finally, links between aggression and marijuana tend to indicate hostility as a personality characteristic, not as a effect of cannabis consumption, and “studies reveal small but significant links between cannabis and aggression with very select populations under extremely circumscribed conditions.” (Earleywine 215)
It is obvious the prohibition of marijuana and its non-psychoactive sister plant hemp should be abandoned. Because of the research suggesting stunted growth in adolescents, I propose we educate children with the truthful information on the short-term and long-term effects of use. Children should also be given techniques for decision-making that minimize harmful consequences. Then, at age 21, like with alcohol, people are free to grow or purchase, with appropriate taxes, marijuana for medical or recreational use. Its bountiful use as a medical therapy no doubt will transform the structure of our malfunctioning health-care system and perhaps reduce fatalities from prescription drug reactions. The nutritional aspects of the plant could potentially reduce our meat-intake, reducing the amount of land dedicated to the environmentally unsound practice of cattle ranching.
Recently, the governor of California vetoed a bill legalizing the growing of hemp for industrial purposes, and this is flat-out wrong. Our national security would be strengthened, and our agriculture improved, if we abandoned oil and instead retrofitted our current technology with a hemp-based alternative:
Say you are the United States government. You are presiding over a runaway technological freight train heading for the brink of environmental collapse. More and more of your scientists are sounding the alarm: heavy reliance on fossil fuels is causing soaring pollution levels...Your forests are disappearing at an alarming rate to serve the housing and paper industries, leaving behind vast tracks of eroding soil. Farmlands that have not eroded are so overused and contaminated with pesticides and insecticides from cotton and other crops that farmers must add as much as forty times the fertilizer they did a century ago to get the same yield. And the runoff from this soil is contributing to the degradation of your water supply...What you need is a new industry, one that can fill the needs now met by fossil fuels and virgin timber; one that can be worked sustainably without polluting soil, air, or water; one that is self-sufficient and local, neither exploiting nor dependent on foreign countries. This industry would need to employ those citizens previously employed by the petrochemical, timber, and cotton industries. (Robinson 18-19)
Hemp “yields four times more fiber per acre than trees” and “absorbs heavy-metal contaminants from soil, gradually purifying the earth.” (Robinson 21) Using merely 10% of farmland to grow hemp for biofuel could power all our energy needs with a great reduction in the production of greenhouse gases, to say nothing of the repair to the overworked soil. Overall, cannabis and hemp offer a great many solutions to the problems our nation faces, and the suppression of this wonderous plant for economic gain by a small few must end.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Earleywine, Mitch. Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence. New York: Oxford, 2005.
Green, Greg. The Cannabis Grow Bible. San Francisco: Green Candy Press, 2003.
“Marijuana.” The National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign website. 1 Dec 2006. 1 Dec 2006. http://www.theantidrug.com/drug_info/drug-info-marijuana.asp
“Medical Marijuana in California.” Institute of Governmental Studies: UC Berkeley website. June 2003. 1 Dec 2006. http://www.igs.berkeley.edu/library/htMedicalMarijuana2003.html
Margolin, Bruce. The Margoline Guide. West Hollywood: Law Offices of Bruce M. Margolin, PLC, 2006.
“National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.” California Chapter website. 14 Nov 2006. 1 Dec 2006. http://www.canorml.org/
Robinson, Rowan. The Great Book of Hemp. Rochester: Park Street Press, 1996.
Rosenthal, Ed & Steve Kubby with S. Newhart. Why Marijuana Should Be Legal. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press, 2003.