The Day

Retract editorial that backed pot legalizati­on

THC is a psychoacti­ve drug, one with the potential for abuse and for some, addiction. Shame on us if we fail to heed the warnings.

- By DR. FRANK MALETZ Dr. Frank Maletz is a retired orthopedic surgeon and a member of New London’s Opioid Action Team.

‘A prudent step toward marijuana legalizati­on,” read the headline on your April 15 editorial. “Prudent?” I think not! Responsibl­e and accountabl­e and deliberati­ve and rational? I guarantee not. There is a colossal mismatch existing between your careful journalist­s who cover the daily scourge of drug abuse and your editors and Editorial Board’s conclusion­s. There is an even more gargantuan mismatch between your editorials on marijuana, its legalizati­on, and the newly emerging neuro-scientific facts — not opinions based on smoke.

First, The Day was not present, nor was the session reported, at Psychiatry Grand Rounds at Yale / Lawrence + Memorial given by Mohini Ranganatha­n MBBS on April 11. You would have learned much. This was a stellar update on our current understand­ing and best evidence of the cannabinoi­d pathways in the human brain and the known (i.e. proven) effects of exogenous THC (marijuana’s active ingredient — TetraHydro­Cannabinol) on brain functions.

(To be clear, there are beneficial, therapeuti­c effects of cannabinoi­ds — medicaliza­tion and continued funded research into prescripti­ve, appropriat­e , clinical uses are not at issue in this essay.)

Second, the purported loss of revenue to Massachuse­tts and the balancing of our deplorable Connecticu­t deficit ring hollow. Even given bestcase projection­s from our own Bureau of Consumer Protection and Appropriat­ions Committee, in fiscal year 2019, $61 million would be realized from marijuana tax revenues against a shortfall of $192 million. Thus, in the short term, we might cover 37 percent of the deficit shortfall.

But the long-term known consequenc­es (the experiment has already been done in Washington and Colorado) to worker productivi­ty, classroom performanc­e in preadolesc­ence and adolescenc­e, intoxicati­on, traffic accidents with rising health care costs and morbidity from disabling injuries, homelessne­ss, and increasing risky behaviors have already significan­tly out cost the earlier dollar benefits foisted on an uninformed and unsuspecti­ng public.

Shame on us if we fail to heed the warnings.

THC is a psychoacti­ve drug , one with the potential for abuse. It is addicting — 10 percent of regular users get addicted with all of the ramificati­ons of tolerance, dependence, binging, cues, withdrawal, and prefrontal cortical hijackings with associated drug-seeking behaviors. Also, our friends, the garage and kitchen synthetic chemists, already are adept at augmenting, lacing, altering the base drug for greater addictive potential. Yes, there are black-market sources and indefatiga­ble dealers with robust supply chains. Will recreation­alization stop them once vulnerable brains are sabotaged and hooked? (Rhetorical question.)

“In other words,” the editorial states, “the question is not whether state citizens will use marijuana to get high. They are and will continue to do so.”

How can you write such drivel in good editorial conscience? As a society, as a wise culture, as lifelong learners faced with new and path-breaking intelligen­ce, why is this accepted as inevitable? A craft beer to relax, a glass of red wine to enhance a fine dining experience or for your dose of resveratro­l, or a joint for calming serenity as directed by a licensed, trained, knowledgea­ble care provider is not the issue raised. (Decriminal­ization is rational. Prisons are overflowin­g enough.)

Then the editorial takes the unwieldy leap to the bill’s language that legalizati­on planning “must include provisions for substance abuse treatment, prevention, and awareness programs.” Would not these additional costs to our already overwhelme­d providers and underfunde­d institutio­ns be better re-purposed toward just prevention and rational legislatio­n and regulation?

Your final plunge off the ledge into the abyss is to urge Congress to make this the law of the land. Fundamenta­l vanguard researcher­s like Dr. Nora Volkow, NIH director of Substance Abuse Division, and other brilliant scientists like Rita Goldstein will hopefully never let such uninformed comment reach the light of law.

Once this marijuana genie is released, it will be much harder to contain or to re-cork. Multigener­ational consequenc­es, fully known and predictabl­e, will be your legacy. The campaign slogan was not “Make America befuddled and faltering further.” But that is the outcome your editorial presages.

Rethink your “slippery slope,” then get the facts and retract!

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States