Over at Join Together, a commentary by Dr. Stuart Gitlow, a member of the American Medical Association's Council on Science & Public Health and Acting President of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, has this to say about marijuana legalization:
With Election Day just around the corner, voters in multiple locations will
again be confronted with cannabis-related questions . . .
In each case, there is a less-than-subtle approach to licensing and
regulation, with excise taxes, fees and other revenue generating components
representing a critical argument used in favor of passage . . . The legislatures in each state appear to have ignored the many associated
costs which will quickly swallow the revenue described. This includes increased
utilization of the drug at younger ages with associated addictive and physical
illness, diminished productivity caused by cognitive abnormalities, and
increased drugged driving and associated morbidity/mortality.
In July, the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM) considered the
question of marijuana legalization, concluding:
1) That physicians lead efforts to oppose legislative or ballot initiatives
that would result in the legalization of marijuana production, distribution,
marketing, possession and use by the general public, and that all physicians
incorporate screening and intervention for risky substance use, including
marijuana use, as well as diagnosis, treatment and disease management for
addiction into their routine medical practice;
2) That public education campaigns be undertaken to inform the public that
addiction associated with cannabinoids is a significant public health threat,
and that marijuana is not a safe product to use, especially, but not only, by
smoking;
3) That parents be informed that the marijuana their children are exposed
to today is of much higher potency than the marijuana that was widely available
in the 1960s through the 1980s, and that the potential for the development of
addiction and for the development and progression of psychotic conditions are
enhanced when high-potency marijuana products are used by adolescents because of
the unique vulnerability of the adolescent brain;
4) That when cases of marijuana-related substance use disorders are
identified and the diagnosis confirmed by professional assessment, carefully
monitored treatment to establish abstinence be offered to afflicted persons and
such treatment and insurance coverage for it be readily available;
5) That drugged driving associated with marijuana use be subject to
additional epidemiological research and research on the treatment needs of
drivers. Increased efforts are needed to prevent its occurrence which should
include substantial legal consequences at the level of the consequences for
drunk driving;
6) That, given the significant role the criminal justice system plays in
discouraging marijuana use, states promote programs that enhance linkages
between the criminal justice system and the addiction treatment system, using
models such as Drug Courts and HOPE Probation.
ASAM asserts that the anticipated public health costs of marijuana
legalization are significant and are not sufficiently appreciated by the general
public or by public policymakers. Physicians and other health professionals must
become more aware of the anticipated undesirable outcomes of marijuana
legalization and encourage public education on these facts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment