Is alcohol worse than marijuana?
This seemed to be the question asked by a one page spread of articles in the National Post last week. Surprisingly, with the National Post's reputation for conservatism, the answer appeared to be "yes."
Given the number of people who die each year either directly or indirectly from the consumption of alcohol, it is certainly an appropriate stance. If alcohol was introduced today, it is unlikely it would be approved by Health Canada considering its negative health effects.
As one article points out, no one has ever died from a marijuana overdose. To get an overdose dosage a person would need to smoke several tonnes of marijuana in a fifteen minute period. Both physically and socially impossible. That said, it is possible to overdose on the active ingredients if they are extracted and purified.
Alcohol poisoning, on the other hand, is quite common - typically responsible for about 200 deaths each year in Canada. And long term consumption can lead to liver damage, cancer, and other diseases.
Clearly, from this simple perspective, alcohol is more dangerous than cannabis and yet it is perfectly legal although its consumption is supposed to be restricted to adults.
A similar question could be asked about tobacco. Is it more harmful than marijuana?
Annually, three million deaths a year worldwide are directly linked to smoking cigarettes. Many more deaths are tied to secondary effects such as secondhand smoke and compromised health. It is actually fairly hard to get a handle on just what a pervasive effect cigarettes have had on human health. However, there is no question tobacco is the most important cause of avoidable deaths and disease in the world.
But if we look at the history of tobacco, it was originally used as medicine by the pre-Columbian America people and in Europe and the rest of the world once it became established. As early as 1500, Portuguese explorers reported its use in treating ulcerated abscesses, fistulas, sores, inveterate polyps and many other ailments. It was called a "holy herb" because of its efficacy in treating hopeless cases.
In Europe, herbalists were soon prescribing tobacco to treat general bodily ills, catarrh, colds, fevers, digestive problems, and as a purgative. Ironically, it was even prescribed for the treatment of skin cancer.
Tobacco was seen as medicine for over two centuries. Its use - either as a herb or through smoking - was encouraged by physicians around the world as the plant spread.
Both alcohol and tobacco are perfectly legal substances in Canada. From this perspective, legalization of marijuana would seem to make sense. It is - at present - a far less troublesome drug than either of alcohol or tobacco.
But if we knew then what we know now, would we have allowed the widespread use of both alcohol and tobacco? And while we have "medicinal marijuana" presently available, what are the long term implications of widespread recreational use?
I would suggest the answer lies in how it is used. Smoking marijuana carries with the same cancer risks as smoking a cigarette. The tars and oils are not filtered out from the smoke of a joint so the actual risk is significantly higher. A single joint is equivalent to ten cigarettes if we are simply talking about the total consumption of potential carcinogens.
Yes, there are benefits of a dubious nature to smoking marijuana. It increases appetite and helps to overcome nausea but these benefits come at the cost of exposure to potent carcinogenic compounds. A safer method of administration needs to be found for the medical use of marijuana.
With the Cannabis Act, the government is setting up a framework for controlling the production and the sale and distribution of the substance for purely recreational use. The majority of the products will likely facilitate the smoking of the plant. The long term implications of doing so are not well known.
But we do have legal drugs to consider for comparison. The real question shouldn't be "is alcohol worse than marijuana?" or "are cigarettes more harmful than joints?" but how are we going to change the consumption patterns to minimize the lifetime risks of users?
I am in favour of the legalization of marijuana. I understand the necessity. In the grand scheme of things it is certainly hypocritical to say "no" to some drugs and "yes" to others. Besides our present laws really do nothing to stop either the production or the sale of marijuana.
The government needs to be considering the long-term implications of introducing the substance into our lives. Cancers, emphysema, and other lung related diseases will be more prevalent once the drug is available. There will be an increased burden on our health care system as a consequence of these lifestyle diseases.
Perhaps, this time, we can maybe think ahead and get it right. After all, we know the consequences of consumption.
