Gone to Pot?

It’s fun, every once in a while to write about something you know nothing about. Heck,  Hannity and O’Reilley do it every so often but they just don’t tell us, rather we need to figure it out for ourselves or wait for Politifact to tell us they’re full of malarkey. In spite of the danger of falling into that category, I’m going to  enter the fray.

 I see more and more punditry devoted to the subject of legalization of marijuana, a subject (pot, not legalization) of which I literally know nothing, experientially. Never smoked weed, never really wanted to. What I did smoke, two packs a day for most of 20 years, was cigarettes, so I know about smoking…a lot!

When discussing pot, the first analogy inevitably drawn is to alcohol. Usually the conversation goes along these lines, “Well, alcohol is a drug too, so what’s the difference?”  (why do people start sentences with “well” so often? It’s kind of like “uh” or “y’know”, just a place holder while the brain engages). And, in some respects pot is like alcohol, I guess. Although I disagree with the President that alcohol is more dangerous, I believe it’s because he’s speaking macroscopically and I am not.  Statistics bear his point out, in that alcohol related deaths in the US far outstrip Pot related deaths, if one discounts overindulging in Cheetos.  

An individual who abuses any substance which diminishes the senses to a dangerous level is a hazard to himself and, if in public, say behind the wheel of a car, the general public.  Alcohol and Pot both hold the potential to slow reflexes and impair judgment. So does being overtired or on any of a long litany of prescription or even over the counter medications. What then is all the hoo hah about?  

To begin with, pot suffers from a bad reputation because of its early association with “hordes of drug crazed  Negroes, jazz musicians and wild motorcycle gangs.” While the Rockefellers were blowing down 30 year old Scotch by the quart and figuring out how to pay less and produce more, they were clucking their tongues at those less fortunate who indulged in the escape offered by cheap wine and  reefer. Movies like “Reefer Madness” portrayed ludicrous scenarios of raging out of control frat parties  to a largely ignorant (at the time) viewing public. Small wonder that pot remained illegal even after alcohol was re-legalized by the 21^st Amendment – the people who made the laws drank the best booze. Hell, throughout the period of prohibition many in the moneyed classes drank imported liquor while bemoaning the efforts of organized crime to fill the demands from the masses!

Analysis without the emotion attached by users (or haters) has some other aspects which I feel merit discussion. The first broad statement which is applicable is that alcohol in the appropriate moderation actually has therapeutic effects which, while having been suspected by doctors for years, are validated by actual data. In simple terms, alcohol taken in reasonable amounts meets the FDA standard of “safe and effective, taken as directed.”  It has positive therapeutic effects in the areas of reduced risk of heart disease, improved insulin mobilization and deferred onset of dementia. Add the effects of wine, especially red wine and there is a clear quantity threshold below which alcohol consumption is a positive health factor for adults.     

On the other hand, alcohol is also a high order killer if abused. The list of health risks is voluminous and the impaired judgment accompanying overuse causes more traffic deaths in the United States than any other single factor. In summary; alcohol taken, as Socrates advised, “in moderation”, is not only not harmful, it is beneficial. Like chocolate, a little is good, too much is dangerous.

Marijuana’s effects are much more difficult to quantify because any efforts to do meaningful long term effects studies  have been complicated by several obstacles not presented to alcohol researchers. In the first place, until very recently, admitting pot use was admitting a criminal act. Secondarily, any study group of Marijuana habitués would also be dominated by cigarette smokers and the deleterious effects of  cigarettes are not open to discussion or debate. Cigarettes have no “safe and effective” threshold. Even the second hand results of their use is harmful to others. This also causes several considerations not present in alcohol studies.

 First, and this is a personal area of expertise, there are few casual cigarette  smokers. Even at today’s outrageous prices, there are many two pack a day users as I was. Any attempt to study long term pot use effects on respiratory components is complicated by the difficulty of separating pot effects from tobacco smoke effects. While we know that there are at least three serious carcinogens in pot smoke, it’s hard to differentiate whether Bob Marley died from Ganja or Tobacco, since cancer is cancer. We can safely state that there is probably no “safe and effective” threshold for Pot any more than for tobacco, although much time and money has been spent trying to prove that (and its inverse), obviously not by the same groups!

The second complicating factor is that while there are a large number of Americans who are alcoholic and addicted to drink, more drink in moderation and not every day. Cigarette smokers are another story. I’ve always thought that the snarkiest crowd one could ever find would be a no-smoking, caffeine free, AA meeting. Putting it more plainly, the majority of those who smoke are addicted to it, and the billions spent on quitting programs substantiates that. Most persons who use alcohol aren’t addicts. Too many are, but not a majority. If the majority of pot users are cigarette smokers then there is at least the statistical implication that they are also afflicted with addictive personalities, as evidenced by their cigarette use in the face of overwhelming evidence that it will kill most of them. Does this imply a strong likelihood of pot addiction (or “habituation”)? Yeah I know, it’s the nicotine that addicts some to cigarettes, but that isn’t the whole story.    

Granting that these medical questions remain unanswered, what is the implication of legalizing pot? I’ll provide some strictly opinion possibilities below.

1.        Those who already smoke cigarettes and pot will be less likely to quit either, and their health will continue to suffer. We all will pay the price for that in increased Medicare costs as we treat the lung cancer of those 65 yr old smokers who have piggybacked pot onto tobacco.

2.        Some smokers, probably a microscopic percentage, will take to the road, since pot is legal, probably to go to Taco Bell, and be driving while impaired, adding to the carnage already caused by alcohol abuse. By the same token, legality implies easier access and competition will drive price down and usage up.

3.      Some cancer patients (also probably a small percentage of all users) will use medical marijuana, as intended,  to reduce nausea of chemo and increase appetite. It will not prolong life, but may improve quality.

4. . Frito-Lay and Betty Crocker will merge into  a giant brownie and snack food consortium.

5. None of the above or all of the above

What is sure, however is that alcohol will remain America’s drug of choice, and far too many will use it and die, while more will probably benefit from its therapeutic benefits. Of the big three, alcohol, tobacco and marijuana, only the first has properties beneficial to all of us.