What is marijuana?

Marijuana is one of many names for the herbal form of cannabis, so called for containing a class of chemicals called cannabinoids. The human body naturally produces cannibinoid compounds which are involved in pain, memory, neurodegeneration, and inflammation. The major active compound in marijuana is Δ9-tetrahydrocannibinol (THC). The intoxicating effects of THC on an individual who has smoked or ingested the compound are similar to alcohol. It is also known that THC, most likely acting via the cannabinoid receptor in the brain, stimulates appetite, alleviates nausea, and in some instances reduces the symptoms of depression.

Social history

Cannabis has a long history of use in the common era, both legal and illegal, and society has shown a love/hate relationship towards this herb. Older religions are infamous in some circles for their use of hallucinogenics or psychoactive (mind altering) chemicals to achieve a higher consciousness. An internet search turns up many individuals who still consider it a beneficial part of their spiritual awareness. The more traditional and accepted uses in this context include use by the Scythians as early as the 5th century BC, evidenced by archaeological finds of hemp seeds, and the Sadhus in India. Some scholars believe that cannabis may have been an ingredient in the holy anointing oil used in the ancient Judaic culture and some more speculative individuals believe that the Bible may reference Jesus smoking marijuana. Though the spiritual and ancient uses of marijuana are more subjective and open for debate, the truth remains that this herb has been smoked by people for a long time without developing a negative mythology, prior to 20th century America, as has been the case with alcohol, cigarettes, and opiates.

Marijuana has been criminalized in the United States since the mid 1900s. It was originally banned as a way to focus anti-Mexican sentiments since the perception was that most smokers were immigrants coming to the United States from Mexico. Marijuana was made a schedule 1 drug, putting it in the same category as LSD and heroin, in 1970 as a way to focus anti-hippie sentiments. This was a long cry from the original legislation in 1937, the Marihuana Tax Act, placing a tax on the sale of the herb, similar to what is done today with tobacco. The later legislative era was plagued with outrageous statements of behavior alterations caused by smoking a marijuana cigarette. Pete Guither’s Marijuana.DrugWarRant.com has some interesting quotes and histories worth considering. Though this author could not fact-check everything, the congressional actions were real and the cultural sentiments are well known to anyone who grew up during or since the Reagan administration. The argument has been put forth that marijuana is a “gateway” drug. However, a National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded study at the University of Pittsburgh recently found that social factors determine whether marijuana use will lead to the use of harder drugs more than the pharmacology. It has been speculated that the laws making marijuana illegal opens the door for people to come into contact with the gatekeepers of harder, more socially debilitating drugs. In my, and others, opinion - psychologically, once crossing the line into illegal, using other drugs does not seem as taboo.

Health affects

As of now there are approximately 60 known cannabinoids which might have medicinal applications. There is a synthetic version of THC used to relieve nausea and stimulate appetite, Marinol, but its effects do not equal that of the herb, the whole being greater than any one of its parts. There are benefits of smoking marijuana beyond pain remedies going back centuries and alleviating nausea in chemotherapy patients, but also for treating nerve injury and multiple sclerosis, the wasting seen in AIDS patients, and THC has been shown to slow the progression of Alzheimer’s.

There has been some contradictory research looking at the effects of smoking marijuana cigarettes. In December 1999, researchers at UCLA reported that marijuana smoking may increase the risk of head and neck cancers. They found that molecular alterations in the respiratory tract, which may be responsible for the development of the cancers, were potentially related to smoking tobacco and marijuana. In January of this year a study published in JAMA (Journal of the American Medical Association) found that smoking-related head and neck skin cancers are actually associated with several specific inherent genetic alterations. The earlier study at UCLA had also found that there is an interplay between marijuana smoking and genetic defects, specifically inhibitions in DNA repair. Many studies over the years have found that the tar from pure cannabis contains higher levels of carcinogen activator, but a 2001 UCLA research study found that THC activates the metabolizing enzyme related to the development of smoking related cancers (Cyp1A1) via a different receptor than tobacco, thus resulting in inhibited activity and having different, potentially less carcinogenic, effects. So actually, marijuana smoking most likely does not cause the defects necessary for the development of cancer, it is the tobacco smoke that is responsible, and if anything, there are higher levels of positive acting chemicals in marijuana smoke. The lead 1999 UCLA researcher stated, rather erroneously, that there are more carcinogens, or cancer causing agents, in marijuana smoke than in tobacco smoke.

Research woes

There are many instances of contradictions and alternate conclusions in research studies over the years, but not just towards marijuana. In general, it takes several independent studies to fully conclude the effects of a chemical. At the current time, marijuana is difficult for researchers in the United States to obtain legally. The tide of thinking has started to change as researchers try to flesh out the positive medicinal uses for cannabis, but current laws make it difficult to develop forms of the herb that are not intoxicating and will be more socially acceptable. Researchers must obtain marijuana from the US research crop, through the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which is less potent than what is available via other means and a poor research specimen. The maintenance of a single crop does not address the different strains of plant, which may have different efficacies and offer non-intoxicating variations of herb. The UK has authorized pharmaceutical crops for this purpose and classified cannabis as a class “C” drug, a lower classification than its prior class “B” status equating marijuana to cocaine and amphetamines, in 2004. The UK’s Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) found that law enforcement costs were disproportionate to the low public health burden associated with use. Also, much of the research over the years is difficult to interpret because of small study sizes and potential societal bias, particularly in the 1980’s when the “War on Drugs” was instituted by the Reagan administration. This is similar to the research done on tobacco-related illnesses, though with bias in the positive direction due to the tobacco industry, which only recently has come to light.

Legal substances versus marijuana

Much of the toxicity of tobacco cigarettes is due to the 599 additives on the list of ingredients released by the tobacco companies in 1994, that when burned create over 4000 compounds. Health agencies in the EU report that very few of these additives were used in their cigarettes prior to 1970. Tobacco cigarettes also contain the addictive compound nicotine, which is not present in cannabis. Despite the similarities and potential relevant differences between tobacco and pure cannabis smoke, tobacco is legal and marijuana remains illegal. Also, as published by Scientific American in 2006, marijuana cigarettes are 100 times less toxic to the human body than alcohol. Yet, marijuana is illegal and alcohol is legal. Canada’s CBC News reported in January of this year that, between 1993 and 2003, 5% of U.S. drivers tested positive for cannabis and that drivers who heavily smoke marijuana are at 29% higher risk of causing a fatal crash. In that same article, however, it was pointed out that this does not take into account intoxication, which is what matters when looking at impaired driving. A 1990 study from the National Institute on Drug Abuse in Baltimore found that marijuana adversely affects complex human performance for less than 24 hours after smoking, similar to alcohol inebriation, though THC can be detected for up to 2 months depending on the individual’s usage. A 2004 report states that alcohol is detected more often in accident-involved drivers than cannabis. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reports that 39% of traffic related deaths are attributed to alcohol use and that 18% of driver deaths have other drugs used in combination with alcohol, most of which were repeat offenders. It would seem that the legal drugs are causing more adverse health effects than marijuana.

The seeds of change

The legislative machinery has been slowly turning to change the place marijuana has in the current society. In 1997, Proposition 215 legalized marijuana in California for medicinal purposes. The Clinton administration made predictions of increased youth drug use, but according to the LA Daily News was proven wrong by a decrease in drug use between 1995 and 2003. Also, regulation for policing has been successful; marijuana drug arrests have not been affected even though the opposition to Proposition 215 claimed that legalization for medicinal purposes would open the door for its illegal use. Colorado, Nevada, and South Dakota had statewide initiatives on the 2006 ballots to decriminalize marijuana, especially in the medical context, which received 40-50% of positive votes. The initiatives were supported by the same percentage of citizens that voted for the current president. Eureka Springs, Arkansas passed a local law allowing for a summons rather than an arrest for marijuana possession. Similar citywide laws have been passed in Missoula, Montana and 110 communities in Massachusetts since 2002. Since California legalized medicinal marijuana 10 years ago, a few communities in that state have decriminalized possession. Other states with local medical marijuana laws include Alaska, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. A 2004 poll of AARP members (age 50 and over) found that 72% felt marijuana should be legalized for medicinal purposes and 74% believe that it is addictive. A Gallup poll taken in the summer of 2006 of potential voters in Florida found that medicinal legalization was supported by 65% of the respondents and only opposed by 32%, which is reported to mirror national trends of thought. A downside to state initiatives though is the ability of the federal government to supercede the states’ authority and prevent individuals from purchasing medicinal marijuana. This is exemplified by the Supreme Court ruling against a terminally ill woman in California in Ashcroft v. Raich in 2004. It seems the most states can do is decriminalize possession at this point.

In my opinion

As society alters its view of cannabis as a drug, the laws should reflect those alterations. As more positive uses for marijuana are discovered, they should be researched and defined for the benefit of the population. As of now, the laws stand in the way of truly understanding how beneficial cannabinoids, particularly those naturally occurring in marijuana, are to the human species. There is a potential to stop pain, cure diseases, and solve other problems I have not even touched upon here. Yet, the issues surrounding marijuana legalization are clouded in ignorance, propaganda, and legislative status quo. Medical researchers should be allowed greater access to more strains of cannabis herb to study THC in its natural context. The strict laws holding back citizens from exercising their free will of choosing what is best for their own health should be equal. There is no reasonable explanation for the legality of tobacco and alcohol while marijuana remains illegal. The education of the populace should include information about toxicity, adverse health effects, health benefits, and information based on research, not cultural or legal sentiment.