RECREATIONAL POT — OR NOT

A ‘Yes’ on Question 4 puts health at risk

Ballot Question 4 — the legalization of recreational marijuana — is one of the most important issues facing Massachusetts this election year for one reason: Its outcome will signal how much voters value public health in the commonwealth.

The proponents of Question 4 say passing the referendum would be “smart public policy.” It is hard to understand how permitting ready access to a substance that presents a risk of addiction, impairs cognition, endangers pregnancies and damages the developing brains of adolescents is smart public policy.

Let’s consider the real issue underlying Question 4: public health.

Marijuana is not harmless, and the risk of addiction is real. The mind-altering element in the drug, THC, is today four times stronger that it was in the 1980s, and according to the National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA), about 9 percent of those who use marijuana will become addicted. The rate jumps to 17 percent for those using it in their teens, and increases to 25 percent to 50 percent among daily users.

Marijuana use impairs cognition, reducing alertness, concentration, coordination and reaction time, all critical qualities needed for driving motor vehicles or operating machinery safely. The impact on highway and occupational safety could be substantial.

Marijuana use during pregnancy increases a baby’s risk of problems with brain development and may lead to premature birth, low birth weight or stillbirth. THC and other chemicals can even be passed to newborns through breastfeeding. Use before pregnancy can affect fertility.

Despite an age restriction, expanding access to marijuana for adults will do the same for our youth; age limits don’t work with tobacco and alcohol, and they won’t work with marijuana. Expanding access will also persuade young people that marijuana is not dangerous, and that’s a bad message for children and adolescents.

A 2014 article in the New England Journal of Medicine concluded that marijuana use is associated with significant adverse health effects and that legalization of marijuana will lead to more people with ill health. That’s not what we need in a state trying to control soaring health care costs.

Health reasons alone should be enough to give voters pause, but the referendum itself adds to the argument. It allows the sale of edibles, such as cookies, candies, snack foods, and drinks, which appeal to children. And no mention exists in any of the 24 pages of the question about public health oversight or revenue from the sale of the drug to be allocated for health education, prevention or treatment.

The proponents’ arguments about the “failed prohibition” of marijuana and the supposed benefits of a “taxed and regulated system” should fall short of public support when compared to public health priorities.

America’s Health Rankings, an annual cooperative effort by the American Public Health Association and the United Health Foundation that serves as the nation’s report card on health, has consistently rated Massachusetts among the healthiest states in the nation, and the commonwealth is now ranked first in the health of women and children. Massachusetts citizens should want to remain at the top of this list.

The real question before voters, then, is this: Are we willing to sacrifice public health and safety in favor of the commercialization of a substance known to be harmful, especially in the face of an opioid epidemic that is already destroying too many lives?