"Truth must be repeated again and again, because error is constantly being preached around it."
Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe

The Truth About Marijuana and Industrial Marijuana Hemp

By letter dated March 20, 2001, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) denied a petition to initiate rulemaking proceedings to reschedule marijuana. The letter sent to the petitioner (denying the petition), along with the supporting documentation that was attached to the letter, constitute an extraordinary collection of information pertaining to the harms and dangers of marijuana and also lower-potency industrial marijuana hemp.

The cited research substantiates long-time concerns expressed by law enforcement and other preventionists in challenging drug proponents and pro-drug materials that promote the smoking of marijuana, marijuana for “medical” uses, and the growing of industrial marijuana hemp. All information in this Paper is from the Federal Register: April 18, 2001, Volume 66, Number 75, Pages 20037-20076, that contained the published information relating to the petition’s denial.

November, 2001

Strategic Intelligence Section

Division of Narcotics Enforcement

Wisconsin Department of Justice

CONTENTS

THC Levels in the Late 1960s – Early 1970s…………. 2

Nature of Marijuana…………………………………...3

Constituents/Cannabinoids…………..…………………3

THC Needed for Psychoactivity…………...........……………3

Harms From Marijuana…………….…………..……….4

Marijuana as “Medicine” ………………………….….11

Industrial Marijuana Hemp….……….…………….…..12

Drug Law Enforcement……..…..……………………...14

a010418c.html, under “Drug Enforcement Administration.”

In 1968, “Weil, Norman, & Nelsen report(ed) that marijuana assayed at 0.9% THC (a quantity slightly less than the 1% THC limit set forth by the petitioners) was rated by the chronic users in the study to be ``good, average'' marijuana, neither exceptionally strong nor exceptionally weak compared to the usual supplies….In 1971 Jones reported on the wide variability in THC concentrations found in street samples:

Specimens gathered in the midwestern United States contained only 0.1--0.5% THC. Thirty specimens selected from seized samples in the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Laboratory in San Francisco all contained less than 1% THC. Samples from the State of California Bureau of Narcotic enforcement analyzed in our laboratory contained as little as 0.1% THC and a maximum of 0.9% * * * In a survey done in Ontario, Canada, Marshman and Gibbons found that of 36 samples alleged to be marijuana with high cannabinoid content, 34% contained no marijuana at all, and much of the rest was cut with other plant substances. A generous assumption is that marijuana generally available in the United States averages about 1.0% THC.”

“It must be acknowledged that the THC content of domestically grown and imported marijuana has increased since these reports. However, the description by Weil, Zinberg & Nelson (1968), Agurell & Leander (1971), Jones (1971) and Barnett et al. (1982) highlight the historical importance of low THC concentrations contained in marijuana which provided the basis for the marijuana culture that developed in the 1970s. The incident described by Jones was not an isolated case of the inadvertent misrepresentation of the THC content of marijuana extracts. Caldwell et al., (1969) found that the NIMH-supplied marijuana that they reported to have contained 1.3% THC was analyzed by two independent laboratories and found to contain as little as 0.2 to 0.5% THC. Similarly, according to Paton & Pertwee (1973) the THC content of material used by Clark & Nakashima (1968), Weil et al., (1968), Weil & Zinberg (1969), and Crancer et al., (1969) must be expected to be one- third to one-sixth less than stated. This means that the positive results of all of these studies were the result of a surprisingly low THC-containing (1.0%) marijuana. The early scientific data on the subjective effects of marijuana were generated with these samples by experienced smokers smoking material in this potency range. These experienced marijuana smokers were reporting that these marijuana samples were of ``average quality'' (Mechoulam, 1973).”

Nature of Marijuana

"....marijuana is not a single uniform plant like many of those encountered in nature, but a rather deceptive weed with several hundred variants. The intoxicating substances prepared from Cannabis vary considerably in potency according to the varying mixtures of different parts of the plant, and according to the techniques of fabrication....this basic botanical fact has been overlooked by physicians and educators, who have written about marijuana as a simple, single substance, which uniformly yields a low concentration of a single intoxicant."

******************************

Constituents/Cannabinoids in Marijuana

To date, a total of 483 natural constituents have been identified in marijuana of which approximately 66 belong to the general group known as cannabinoids (Ross and ElSohly, 1995). The cannabinoids appear to be unique to marijuana, and most of those occurring naturally have already been identified. Within the cannabinoids, delta\9\- tetrahydrocannabinol (delta\9\-THC) is considered the major psychoactive constituent of marijuana.”

Amount of THC Needed for Psychoactivity

“Domino, Rennick, & Pearl (1976) administered THC injected into tobacco cigarettes to male volunteers. Similar to findings described by Isbell et al., (1967) they report that 50 g of THC into the cigarettes produced a ``social high'', while 250 g/kg was ``hallucinogenic''. Taking 80 kg as the mean weight of their subjects the authors concluded that a 4.0 mg total THC dose produced a ``social high''; a hallucinogenic dose was 20 mg total THC by inhalation. A standard 1g cigarette of 1% THC fibre-type hemp provides 10 mg of THC. Even allowing for a 50% loss of THC from sidestream smoke and pyrolysis, smoking this cigarette provides more than enough THC to produce a ‘social high.’”

“In 1968 Weil, Norman, & Nelsen described a set of studies examining the physiological and psychological aspects of smoked marijuana. The first batch of Mexican grown marijuana used in the study was found to contain only 0.3% THC by weight. The potency of this product was considered to be ``low'' by the experimenters on the basis of the doses needed to produce symptoms of intoxication in the chronic users. This low potency marijuana was able to produce a ``high'', but only with two 1 gram cigarettes. A second batch was used in later studies. Weil, Norman, & Nelsen report that marijuana assayed at 0.9% THC (a quantity slightly less than the 1% THC limit set forth by the petitioners) was rated by the chronic users in the study to be ``good, average'' marijuana, neither exceptionally strong nor exceptionally weak compared to the usual supplies. Users consistently reported symptoms of intoxication after smoking about 0.5 grams of the 0.9% THC containing marijuana (half a joint). With the high dose of marijuana (2.0 grams of 0.9% THC containing marijuana) all chronic users became ``high'' by their own accounts and in the judgment of experimenters who had observed many persons under the influence of marijuana.”

“Agurell & Leander (1971) examined the physiological and psychological effects of low THC-containing cannabis in experienced users. They reported that 14-29% of the cannabinoid content of the cigarette was transferred to the mainstream smoke. Based on qualitative and quantitative analyses, Agurell & Leander demonstrated that as little as 3-5 mg of THC was needed to be absorbed by the lung in order to produce a ``normal biological high''. Further, they found that as little as 1 mg of absorbed THC was discriminable by all of their chronic user subjects.”

“In 1982, Barnett, Chiang, Perez-Reyes, & Owens had six subjects smoke a 1% THC-containing (industrial hemp, as defined by the petitioner) marijuana cigarette. Significant heart rate and subjective measures of ``high'' were measured for 2 hours after each cigarette.”

HARMS FROM MARIJUANA

“The mental and behavioral effects of marijuana can vary widely among individuals, but common responses, described by Wills (1998) and others (Adams and Martin 1996; Hollister 1986a, 1988a; Institute of Medicine 1982) are listed below:

(1) Dizziness, nausea, tachycardia, facial flushing, dry mouth and tremor can occur initially

(4) Enhanced sensory perception, giving rise to increased appreciation of music, art and touch

(5) Heightened imagination leading to a subjective sense of increased creativity

(8) Impaired judgement, reduced co-ordination and ataxia, which can impede driving ability or lead to an increase in risk-taking behavior

(9) Emotional lability, incongruity of affect, dysphoria, disorganized thinking, inability to converse logically, agitation, paranoia, confusion, restlessness, anxiety, drowsiness and panic attacks may occur, especially in inexperienced users or in those who have taken a large dose

“The impact of in utero marijuana exposure on a series of cognitive tasks had been studied in children at different stages of development. Differences in several cognitive domains distinguished the 4-year-old children of heavy marijuana users. In particular, memory and verbal measures were negatively associated with maternal marijuana use (Fried and Watkinson, 1987). Maternal marijuana use was predictive of poorer performance on abstract/visual reasoning tasks, although it was not associated with an overall lowered IQ in 3-year old children (Griffith et al., 1994). At 6 years of age, prenatal marijuana history was associated with an increase in omission errors on a vigilance task, possibly reflecting a deficit in sustained attention, was noted (Fried et al., 1992). Recently, it had been speculated that prenatal exposure may affect certain behaviors and cognitive abilities that fall under the construct termed executive function, that is, not associated with measures of global intelligence. It was postulated that when tests evaluate novel problem-solving abilities as contrasted to knowledge, there is an association between executive function and intelligence. In a recent study (Fried et al., 1998), the effect of prenatal exposure in 9-12 year old children was analyzed, and similarly to what was shown in other age groups, in utero marijuana exposure was negatively associated with executive function tasks that require impulse control, visual analysis and hypothesis testing and it was not associated with global intelligence.”

Marijuana use is frequently mentioned in hospital emergency room drug overdose visits. The rate for marijuana is about half that for cocaine, about the same as for heroin/morphine, but is twice the rates for common household painkillers aspirin/acetaminophen and for benzodiazepine depressants such as Xanax and Valium.

While marijuana typically had been used with another drug, particularly alcohol and cocaine, in 1999 marijuana use as a single drug did account for 22% of the marijuana emergency room incidents. By way of comparison, single use of cocaine and heroin accounted for 29% and 47% of the cocaine and heroin episodes, respectively.

In 1999, DAWN (Drug Abuse Warning Network) data reported by medical examiners show that out of 664 marijuana-related deaths, there were 187 deaths where marijuana was the only drug reported.

“Data show that humans prefer higher doses of marijuana to lower doses, demonstrating that marijuana has dose-dependent reinforcing effects. Marijuana has relatively low levels of toxicity and physical dependence as compared to other illicit drugs. However....physical dependence and toxicity are not the only factors to consider in determining a substance's abuse potential. The large number of individuals using marijuana on a regular basis and the vast amount of marijuana that is available for illicit use are indicative of widespread use. In addition, there is evidence that marijuana use can result in psychological dependence in a certain proportion of the population.”

"The study* also showed that subjects could smoke more of the low THC cigarette to produce effects that were similar to the high THC dose cigarette."

* Azorlosa J, Heishman S, Stitzer M (1992). Marijuana smoking: effect of varying delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol content and number of puffs. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 261:114-122.

"....chronic heavy users of marijuana experience a number of withdrawal symptoms during abstinence and clearly demonstrate a 'marijuana dependence syndrome' in humans....dependence on THC may in fact be an important consequence of repeated, daily exposure to cannabinoids and....daily marijuana use may be maintained, at least in part, by the alleviation of abstinence symptoms.”

“This (study) has been the first clear demonstration that THC promotes tumor growth and supports the epidemiological evidence of an increased risk of cancer among marijuana smokers.”

“….the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration reported that adolescents, age 12 to 17, who use marijuana weekly are nine times more likely than non-users to experiment with illegal drugs or alcohol; six times more likely to run away from home; five times more likely to steal; nearly four times more likely to engage in violence; and three times more likely to have thoughts about committing suicide. It was also reported that adolescents also associated social withdrawal, physical complaints, anxiety, and depression, attention problems, and thoughts of suicide with past-year marijuana use (SAMHSA, 1999).”

“In the sense that marijuana use typically precedes rather than follows initiation of other illicit drug use, it is indeed a ``gateway'' drug (Institute of Medicine Report 1999, p. ES.7).”

“These data strongly suggest that marijuana does plan (sic) (play) an important role on the pathway to more serious drugs use.”

“These findings further suggest that marijuana's role as a gateway to more serious substance sue (sic) (use) has become more pronounced over time.”

“Ferguson & Horwood (2000) have examined the relationship between cannabis use in adolescence and the onset of other illicit drug use. Data were gathered over the course of a 21 year longitudinal study of a birth cohort of 1,265 children. By the age of 21, just over a quarter of this cohort reported using various forms of illicit drugs on at least one occasion. In agreement with the predictions of a ``stage- theory'' of the ``gateway hypothesis'' there was strong evidence of a temporal sequence in which the use of cannabis preceded the onset of the use of other illicit drugs. Of those reporting the use of illicit drugs, all but three (99%) had used cannabis prior to the use of other illicit drugs. However, the converse was not true and the majority (63%) of those using cannabis did not progress to the use of other forms of illicit drugs. (Editorial Comment: Still, a substantial 37% did go on to other drugs--a very large %.) In addition, to these findings there was a strong dose-response relationship between the extent of cannabis use and the onset of illicit drug use. The analysis suggested that those using cannabis in any given year on at least 50 occasions had hazards of using other illicit drugs that were over 140 times higher than those who did not use in the year. Furthermore, hazards of the onset of other illicit drug use increased steadily with increasing cannabis use. The very strong gradient in risk reflected the facts that: (1) Among non- users of cannabis the use of other forms of illicit drugs was almost non-existent and (2) among regular users of cannabis the use of other illicit drugs was common. To address the issue of ``confounding factors'', the associations between cannabis use and the onset of illicit drug use were adjusted for a series of prospectively measured confounding factors that included measures of social disadvantage, family functioning, parental adjustment, individual characteristics, attitudes to drug use and early adolescent behavior. After adjustments for these factors, there was still evidence of strong dose-response relationships between the extent of cannabis use in a given year and the onset of illicit drug use--the hazards of the onset of illicit drug use was 100 times those of non-users.

Critics of the ``gateway theory'' point to the presence of other confounding factors and processes that encourage both cannabis use and other forms of illicit drug use. Despite these factors, the Ferguson & Horwood (2000) study provide a compelling set of results that support the hypothesis that cannabis use may encourage other forms of illicit drug use, including the following:

1. Temporal sequence: There was clear evidence that the use of cannabis almost invariably preceded the onset of other forms of illicit drug use.

2. Dose-Response: There was clear evidence of a very strong and consistent dose-response relationship in which increasing cannabis use was associated with increasing risks of the onset of illicit drug use.

3. Resilience to control for confounding: Even following control for a range of prospectively measured social, family and individual factors, strong and consistent associations remained between cannabis use and the onset of other forms of illicit drug use. And,

4. Specificity of associations: The association could not be explained as reflecting a more general process of transition to adolescent deviant behavior since even after control for contemporaneously assessed measures of juvenile offending, alcohol use, cigarette smoking, unemployment and related measures, strong and consistent relationships between cannabis use and the onset of other forms of illicit drugs remained.

A suggested view of the ``gateway hypothesis'' states that the use of cannabis may be associated with increasing risks of other forms of illicit drug use, with this relationship being mediated by affiliations with deviant peers and other non-observed processes that may encourage those who use cannabis (and particularly heavy users) to experiment with, and use, other illicit drugs.

While marijuana is clearly not the only gateway to the use of other illicit drugs it is one of the three most typical drugs in the adolescent's armamentarium. The increased avenues to imported and ``home-grown'' marijuana which contain behaviorally-active doses of THC and CBD pose a serious threat to the health and well-being of this dimension of society.”

In one particular study, a substantial 37% of adolescents who used marijuana went on to use other illicit drugs.

Those who used marijuana at least 50 times in a year had a risk of ultimately using other illicit drugs that was over 140 times higher than those not using marijuana in that year. Other illicit drug use increased steadily with increasing marijuana use.

In a study of persons though the first twenty-one years of their lives, “(1) Among non- users of cannabis the use of other forms of illicit drugs was almost non-existent and (2) among regular users of cannabis the use of other illicit drugs was common.”

There are strong and consistent relationships between cannabis use and the onset of other forms of illicit drug use. Even "controlling" for things such as social disadvantage, family functioning, attitudes about drug use, etc., the odds of going on to other illicit drugs were 100 times greater for marijuana users in a given year than for non-users. There is a "....compelling set of results that support the hypothesis that cannabis use may encourage other forms of illicit drug use....."

“One of the greatest concerns to society regarding \9\-THC is the behavioral toxicity produced by the drug. \9\-THC intoxication is associated with impairments in memory, motor coordination, cognition, judgement, motivation, sensation, perception and mood (cf., Jaffe, 1993). The consequences produced by \9\- THC-induced behavioral impairments can greatly impact the individual and society in general. These impairments result in occupational, household, or airplane, train, truck, bus or automobile accidents, given that individuals may be attending school, working, or operating a motor vehicle under the influence of the drug. In the most general sense, impaired driving can be seen as a failure to exercise the expected degree of prudence or control necessary to ensure road safety. The operations of a motor vehicle are clearly a skilled performance that requires controlled and flexible use of a person's intellectual and perceptual resources. Cannabis interferes with resource allocations in both cognitive and attentional tasks. “

“Early-onset cannabis use (onset before the age of 16) showed significant impairments in attention in adulthood. These persistent attentional deficits may interact with the activities of daily living, such as operating an automobile.”

“….an individual (who uses marijuana) is approximately 2.3 times more likely to drop out of (high) school than an individual who has not initiated marijuana use.”

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) "concluded that even in low to moderate doses, marijuana impairs driving performance."

“In its official report titled ``Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base'', the Institute of Medicine highlighted a number of risks to the public health as a result of cannabis consumption:

(1) Cognitive impairments associated with acutely administered marijuana limit the activities that people would be able to do safely or productively. For example, no one under the influence of marijuana or THC should drive a vehicle or operate potentially dangerous equipment (Page 107).

(2) The most compelling concerns regarding marijuana smoking in HIV/AIDS patients are the possible effects of marijuana on immunity. Reports of opportunistic fungal and bacterial pneumonia in AIDS patients who used marijuana suggest that marijuana smoking either suppresses the immune system or exposes patients to an added burden of pathogens. In summary, patients with pre-existing immune deficits due to AIDS should be expected to be vulnerable to serious harm caused by smoking marijuana. The relative contribution of marijuana smoke versus THC or other cannabinoids is not known. (Page 116-117)

(3) DNA alterations are known to be early events in the development of cancer, and have been observed in the lymphocytes of pregnant marijuana smokers and in those of their newborns. This is an important study because the investigators were careful to exclude tobacco smokers; a problem in previous studies that cited mutagenic effects of marijuana smoke. (Page 118-119)

(4) * * * factors influence the safety of marijuana or cannabinoid drugs for medical use: the delivery system, the use of plant material, and the side effects of cannabinoid drugs. (1) Smoking marijuana is clearly harmful, especially in people with chronic conditions, and is not an ideal drug delivery system. (2) Plants are of uncertain composition, which renders their effects equally uncertain, so they constitute an undesirable medication. (Page 127)”

"....Budney, Novy, & Hughes (1999) have recently examined the withdrawal symptomology in chronic marijuana users seeking treatment for their dependence. The majority of the subjects (85%) reported that they had experienced symptoms of at least moderate severity and 47% experienced greater than four symptoms rated as severe. The most reported mood symptoms associated with the withdrawal state were irritability, nervousness, depression, and anger. Some of the behavioral characteristics of the marijuana withdrawal syndrome were craving, restlessness, sleep disruptions, strange dreams, changes in appetite, and violent outbursts. These data clearly support the validity and clinical significance of a marijuana withdrawal syndrome in man."

“….in March 1999, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) issued a detailed report that supports the absolute need for evidence-based research into the effects of marijuana and cannabinoid components of marijuana, for patients with specific disease conditions. The IOM report also emphasized that smoked marijuana is a crude drug delivery system that exposes patients to a significant number of harmful substances and that ``if there is any future for marijuana as a medicine, it lies in its isolated components, the cannabinoids and their synthetic derivatives.'' As such, the IOM recommended that clinical trials should be conducted with the goal of developing safe delivery systems (Institute of Medicine, 1999).”

“It has not been established that marijuana is effective in treating any medical condition. (NIH Workshop on the Medical Utility of Marijuana, 1997) At this time, there is no body of knowledge to which a physician can turn to learn which medical condition in which patient will be ameliorated at which dosage schedule of smoked marijuana nor can he/she determine in which patient the benefits will exceed the risks associated with such treatment. The petitioner (who wished marijuana to be reclassified downward), therefore, is advocating that individuals become their own physicians, a notion that even primitive man found unsatisfactory.”

INDUSTRIAL MARIJUANA HEMP

"....even low doses of marijuana, containing 1%, 0.3% and even 0.1% THC, typically referred to as ``non- active'', are capable of producing subjective reports and physiological markers of being `high'."

"It should be noted that cannabidiol [CBD] can be easily converted to delta-9- and delta-8-tetrahydrocannabinol [psychoactive THC]. Even industrial hemp plant material (leaves), containing high concentrations of CBD, can be treated in clandestine laboratories to convert the CBD to delta-9- tetrahydrocannabinol....converting a supposedly innocuous weed into a potent smoke product." [Inserted in quote.]

(Page 2059) THC Concentration Varies Considerably Between Plants and Between Parts of the Same Plant

"There is considerable THC content variation within and between plants....Quantitative results of tetrahydrocannabinol concentration (THC) are highly dependent upon the specific plant part sampled....THC concentration are (sic) dramatically higher on dried flowering or vegetative tops of the plants relative to middle or lower portions."

"....commercial grade industrial hemp seeds, germplasms derived from <0.3% THC chemovars, demonstrated a significant variation in the average THC content which ranged from 0.06 to 1.77% in the female dry leaf matter....the industrial hemp plant does not preclude high THC content."

"....THC concentrations vary within portions of the Cannabis plant.... In some studies, the concentration of THC can increase as much as 100% from leafy to flowering portions of the same plant. THC concentrations are known to be elevated on the upper portions of the plant....there was considerable variations (sic) between the flowering tops (bracts, flowers, immature fruits at the ends of shoots) and leafy portions of some specimens....The lower, more developed leaves have a low cannabinoid content and the top leaves have a high cannabinoid content, especially when they are associated with the bracts of the plant. Cannabinoids are localized in the upper third of the ``stalk'' and in the flowers. Therefore, the THC content of specific portions of a plant, which on a whole plant basis did not exceed 1%, could significantly exceed this threshold. Very few marijuana users actually ``smoke'' the leaves. It is the colas or the flowering portions of the plants which are utilized and these are exactly the portions of the plant which would be expected to have the highest concentration of THC."

"In 1968 Weil, Norman, & Nelsen described a set of studies examining the physiological and psychological aspects of smoked marijuana. The first batch of Mexican grown marijuana used in the study was found to contain only 0.3% THC by weight. The potency of this product was considered to be ``low'' by the experimenters on the basis of the doses needed to produce symptoms of intoxication in the chronic users. This low potency marijuana was able to produce a ``high'', but only with two 1 gram cigarettes."

A study released in 1971 "….conducted a randomized block, double-blind study designed to establish a dose-response analysis of the THC content in marijuana using a variety of behavioral and subjective effects measures. Marijuana cigarettes were manufactured to deliver doses of....THC...equivalent to smoking cigarettes containing 0, 0.08%, 0.16%, 0.3%, and 0.7% THC containing hemp. The lower concentrations of THC were used because these doses are found in the weaker 'hemp' or fiber type marijuana commonly grown in the United States."

"All doses of THC, including the two lowest doses...." (0.08%, 0.16%), "....increased the subjective ratings on both the ARCI and Cornell Medical Indexes, produced heart-rate increases, increased motoric decrements in pursuit meter, and produced decrements in mental performance using the delayed auditory feedback test."

"Most importantly, 80% of subjects correctly identified the lowest dose...." (0.08% THC) "....as active marijuana. The authors suggested that even lower doses might have measurable effects." Another study "....suggested that one of the best predictors of a drug's abuse liability is the identification of the substance as 'drug-like' by experienced drug users."

"The identification of the lowest dose of marijuana in....studies....clearly suggests that industrial 'fiber-type' marijuana has abuse potential."

DRUG LAW ENFORCEMENT

(Page 20055) Difficulties in Establishing Impairment Based on Blood Concentration

"....changes in THC plasma concentrations in humans may not be the best predictive marker for the subjective and physiological effects of marijuana in humans.... plasma THC concentration is a poor predictor of simultaneous occurring physiological (heart rate) and psychological (``high'') pharmacological effects....There is no linear relationship between blood [THC] levels and pharmacological effects with respect to time, a situation that hampers the prediction of cannabis-induced impairment based on THC blood levels….”

Implication: Marijuana proponents say that marijuana use by itself should not be prosecuted, but intoxicated driving under the influence of marijuana should continue to be an offense. The above points to the difficulties of establishing a prima facie marijuana-intoxicated driving evidence threshold, as has been done for alcohol-intoxicated motor vehicle operation.

A study published in 2001 "….reviewed the National Household Survey (on) Drug Abuse from 1990 through 1996 and compared those statistics with State law enforcement policies and prices that affect marijuana use in the general public. These authors found evidence that both higher fines for marijuana possession and increased probability of arrest decreased the probability that a young adult will use marijuana. These new data refute the petitioner's suggestion that legal control of marijuana does not have a dampening effect on its use.”

Questions, needs for additional information, or requests for References in this Paper may be addressed to William R. Walluks, Chief, Strategic Intelligence Section, Division of Narcotics Enforcement, Wisconsin Department of Justice, POB 7857, Madison, WI 53707-7857 or 608/267-1318

This page was last updated on October 26, 2001
Copyright © 2001 Drug Watch International. All rights reserved. Disclaimer
Please address all comments and questions to: Drug Watch International, P.O. Box 45218, Omaha, NE 68145-0218, USA