Legalization of Marijuana - Report Example

An Analysis of Marijuana Legalization One of the aspects of current drug policy that continues to provide tension and a level of debate is why certain drugs, such as nicotine, are allowed to be produced and consumed within the purview of government regulation whereas other drugs, such as marijuana, are completely and entirely outlawed by the federal government. One might posit that the reason for such a differential has to do with the overall level of harm differential that exists between these two drugs; however, when one considers the fact that both drugs are ultimately damaging to one’s health – if inhaled – the level of differential between them, from a quality of health standpoint, is negligible. Within such an understanding, the following analysis will seek to compare and contrast the objective and subjective effects of both nicotine and marijuana. Moreover, an analysis of the different government policies and regulations that constrain their usage will be analyzed alongside a discussion of the health risks that utilizing these substances necessarily portend. It is the hope of this author that such an analysis will land the reader to have a more actionable and definitive understanding of current drug policy had whether or not it represents an effective and ethical response to issues of public health are evidenced within current society. Although it is not the place of this brief analysis to advocate a safe entirely new approach to drug policy within the United States, it is the hope of this research that a greater level of inference with regards to the appropriate response framework that government represents will be able to be inferred. A great deal of debate has centered on the use of marijuana as a means of treating a variety of medical conditions; most notably with regards to terminally ill patients that are working to deal with a host of pain management problems. However, the overall legitimacy of marijuana as both a drug and a treatment plan is an issue that is slightly more nuanced than either side of the debate would likely let on. The fact of the matter is that marijuana, when used to treat illness, has like any medical drug a series of pros and cons; i.e. benefits and side effects. As the book entitled Attitudes Towards the Legalization of the Use of Marijuana aptly notes, “Even though much of the debate over marijuana legalization has been centered upon the possible benefits that medical marijuana could provide the user, a plurality of pharmacists and other medical professionals agree that existing treatments can invariably present a better level of pain remediation and/or glaucoma treatment as compared to smoking or otherwise ingesting marijuana” (Zhu 29). Although marijuana is not unique in that its implementation has both a series of side effects and benefits, this analysis will attempt to categorize this, discuss their nature, and draw inference as to the overall balance sheet with regards to whether medical marijuana is worthy of continuing to be used as a drug due to the preponderance of its inherent benefits or should be discontinued as a drug/treatment as a function of the risk it poses to the individual. Yet, the battle over marijuana legalization is not something that many states are willing to leave up to the federal government. As one author noted, “The issue of marijuana legalization is one that has encouraged many of the more progressive/liberal states to make the first move in decriminalizing, and in many cases tacitly encouraging, the legalization of marijuana” (Tutro 243) With respect to some of the most important side effects that have been medically demonstrable, one has to note that the smoking of any substance provides a greatly increased risk of developing a host of cancers. These include but are in no way limited to the following: lip cancer, tongue cancer, cheek cancer, esophageal cancer, and lung cancer but to name a few. Similarly, it has been proven that smoking marijuana also demonstrably weakens the body’s immune system. This is of vital importance to many individuals who will be taking it to assist in providing them with a means to survive a given illness or extreme situation that requires such a method. In this way, the individual is likely to prolong the amount of time that they are suffering from an illness due to the fact that the prolonged use of marijuana has a negative effect on the total white blood cell count and the body’s inherent ability to fight off infection. Another relevant piece of research pointed to the following: “In addition to the increased risk of a litany of cancers, the user of marijuana is also at a highly increased risk of respiratory illness; due to the fact that inhaling the smoke from even 1 joint per day can noticeably affect the bronchial linings in the air way which serve to protect the individual from a host of airborne viruses” (Friese & Grube 37). Additionally, as many people are well aware, the amount of tar in a single cigarette is itself one of the most harmful factors of smoking as it is this specific action that causes a plaque like buildup to form within the lungs of the user over time. Said one author, “Even though pot is understood be society as a “safe” drug; the fact of the matter is that smoking any substance has negative, oftentimes detrimental long term health effects, upon the individual in question” (Wells 79). A little known fact is that a single joint contains 4 times the level of tar as a single cigarette. In this way, the individual can see that even smoking a single joint per day is the equivalent of smoking 4 cigarettes with respect to the overall level of tar and the negative health effects that this portends for the user. As well as current research has been able to demonstrably prove that cigarettes are harmful for a number of reasons to the average smoker, it is reasonable to assume that almost each and every one of these reasons can be transferred to medical marijuana and compounded. Another long-term side effect that marijuana is known to portend has to do with the fact that it has been known to trigger psychological reactions among many of the test groups that have been analyzed. In other words, panic attacks, bipolar incidents, anger/rage/aggression, and other psychological responses have been proven to be noticeably and measurably higher in patients who have been dosed with marijuana on a regular basis as compared to the control groups which of course have not. Similarly, studies have also shown that memory loss is oftentimes a key side effect of the continued and/or prolonged use of marijuana. Notwithstanding these risks, one author has noted that: “The drive to legalize marijuana is unique. It has taken in various elements of otherwise end of the spectrum politics; encouraging people to see the legalization of a potentially dangerous substance as a cause célèbre for ‘freedom’”(Schwartz 576). Naturally, the previous cases have all dealt with the main drawbacks of medical marijuana. Similarly, the following section of analysis will concern some of the potential benefits associated with it. Naturally, one of the first of these has to do with the overall level of pain management that medical marijuana can effect as compared to other (oftentimes more powerful narcotics). A study by a European group indicated that: “Drugs that currently exist and have been tested through rigorous trials prove that even though marijuana can have a powerful medicinal effect, if one regards the issue of overall patient health and long-term pain management, marijuana is not the desired drug of choice to engage with these needs” (Tkalic and Devic 610). What is of extreme importance to note here is whether or not the medical marijuana itself is being used as a maintenance drug or used to ameliorate the effects of extreme pain due to debilitating and/or terminal illness. The reason that this is of such great importance is concentric upon the fact that many of the negative side effects that marijuana has for its users are oftentimes not immediately exhibited. Furthermore, if the medical marijuana is being used to lessen the pain of a terminally ill patient, it only stands to reason that the medical professionals responsible for proscribing and monitoring the pain management of given individual will likely not be highly concerned with the fact that a litany of negative long-term side effects for the drug exist as they do not normally expect the patient to live long enough to experience these. A positive attribute of medical marijuana is the fact that it can be made into medicine to the extent that many of the aforementioned health risks associated with its use would be minimized. Without necessitating the smoking of the marijuana, the overall pros and cons would fall into entirely different subcategories. However, it should be clearly noted that the smoking of the drug is one of the most efficient ways to extract the vital TCP from the plant matter and transmit that into the human blood stream. Delving into the history of marijuana use and cultivation within the United States, it has definitively been noted that one of the main reasons for why marijuana is not currently legal is due to the fact that it posed a fundamental threat to large tobacco companies and was thus sidelined via legislation over 100 years ago. Naturally, it cannot be said that any and all reasons for marijuana being outlawed has to do with special interests and or big money. As Benjamin Radford noted in his 2013 book, “The case for marijuana legalization is ultimately one that can be defined by lobbies and big business. At such a point in time as lobbies and big business reach out to profit from this drug, the legalization of it will all but be assured” (Radford 113). Additionally, it must be noted that marijuana, as compared to tobacco, is a psychoactive drug. What is meant by this is the fact that whereas one can smoke a cigarette or derive nicotine via a litany of different delivery methods, the psychological mindset of the individual remains unaltered. Although they may feel a sense of well-being, their ability to make decisions and react to situations is unaltered. However, the case of marijuana is quite different; as the individual is ultimately impacted psychologically by the drug itself. It is oftentimes assumed that smoking marijuana is somehow safer than smoking cigarettes. This incorrect assumption is oftentimes the derived from the belief that the lack of man-made carcinogens that are found in marijuana make the smoking of marijuana more “helpful” and the smoking of tobacco. However, scholarship has indicated that the differential of health impacts from smoking cigarettes as compared to smoking marijuana is in fact quite the same. One such critic noted that: “Studies abound that point to the fact that marijuana causes cancers in almost an identical way as does cigarette smoking” (Anderson and Rees 231). The ultimate reason for this is not contingent upon whether or not mass-produced cigarettes have a higher concentration of carcinogens than do the homemade application of marijuana smoking,; instead, it has to do with the fact that the marijuana delivery mechanisms and the means by which marijuana is smoked is necessarily quite different from the means by which cigarettes are smoked. For instance, medical studies have indicated that an individual who smokes marijuana tends to inhale 2 to 3 times as much smoke as the typical cigarette smoker. By the same token, the means by which marijuana is smoked is usually either via a bong or via some type of home-made rolled cigarette. As such, these do not have any way of blocking the harmful to our and other carcinogens that are extent within any inhaled smoke. Moreover, the ultimate reason behind marijuana smokers attempting to inhale more of the smoke at each and every opportunity has to do with the fact that there is a direct psychoactive connection between the amount of smoke inhaled in the overall feeling of well-being and satisfaction that is derived. From a policy analysis with regards to whether or not current policy is effective and rational, it would have to be the conclusion of this analysis that the existing policy concerning the use and regulation of marijuana and tobacco products are completely and entirely unjustifiable. The rationale for this is contingent upon the fact that if the government seeks to outlaw marijuana as a result of the fact that it inhibits an individual to perform a given task in an effective manner, then by the very same token alcohol and similar products must also be outlawed. Conversely, from a social health standpoint, it is definitively recognized, from the information that is been provided, that cigarette smoking and marijuana smoking are ultimately just as harmful to the health of the individual. As such, government regulation does not have an effective means of clearly delineating why cigarettes and tobacco products are allowed whereas marijuana products are strictly prohibited. From the information that is been provided, it can be understood that marijuana and big tobacco companies have had something of a difficult past. However, if the ultimate intention of the current societal structure is to allow the individual with choice with regards to whether or not they choose to treasure and improve their health or whether or not they choose to devalue and destroy it, the only obvious approach is to allow marijuana and tobacco usage simultaneously. However, if the governmental structure comprises health and safety of society above all other aspects, neither tobacco products nor marijuana products should be allowed; due to the fact they both have the potential and likelihood of slowly eroding the health of those societal stakeholders to engage with the drug at all. However, as has been noted within the past 30 to 40 years, the war on drugs has been an abysmal failure and is accounted for the loss of billions of taxpayer dollars and the imprisonment of countless young and nonviolent offenders; mainly from an African-American ethnic background. As a direct result of this complete failure to control substances and demand that society behaves in a certain way, it is the approach of this author that any and all governmental regulations demanding that an individual not integrate with a particular substance are ultimately useless and extraordinarily expensive (Ramo, 2013). An alternative view of this particular topic may promote the idea that if all societal and governmental regulations against illicit substances were removed then necessarily a larger number of health problems would be exhibited within the population. Although this may indeed be true, the individual who ascribes to such a standpoint is not necessarily consider the fact that billions upon billions of dollars would be saved by the federal government with respect to the strain that is placed on the legal system, dispense these, expanded state federal and local police forces, drug interdiction teams, the drug enforcement agency, and a litany of others. As Ike Brannon noted, “The debate over marijuana would likely shift entirely if individuals were merely aware of how much money could be returned to government coffers in the event that it was legalized” (Brannon 16). Moreover, this money can very well be applied to public health and seek to ameliorate the problems that are already exhibited within society. Although there is not a singular approach that will solve all the societal ills that can be caused by the use of illicit substances, or even of legal substances such as alcohol or tobacco, it is painfully evident, from the analysis that is been conducted, the current policy does not have a justifiable moral, ethical, or illegal grounding. Drugs, by their very nature, are damaging to the individual as a degree of addiction is able to be retained and the individual user becomes numb to the physiological health ramifications that continued use portends. However, a level of legality or illegality for such an action has little bearing with regards to the behavior that individual is likely to portray. Works Cited Anderson, D. Mark, and Daniel I. Rees. "The Legalization Of Recreational Marijuana: How Likely Is The Worst-Case Scenario?."Journal Of Policy Analysis & Management 33.1 (2014): 221-232. Business Source Complete. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Brannon, Ike. "Legalizing Marijuana: Money Over Minds." Regulation 36.3 (2013): 16. Business Source Complete. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Tkalic, Renata and Ivan Devic. "Motivation For Substance Use: Why Do People Use Alcohol, Tobacco And Marijuana?." Drug Usage Report 22.4 (2013): 601-625. SocINDEX with Full Text. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Friese, B, and JW Grube. "Legalization Of Medical Marijuana And Marijuana Use Among Youths." Drugs-Education Prevention And Policy 20.1 (2013): 33-39. Social Sciences Citation Index. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Radford, Benjamin. A Case For Marijuana Legalization. n.p.: ABC-CLIO, LLC, 2013. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Schwartz, David S. "High Federalism: Marijuana Legalization And The Limits Of Federal Power To Regulate States." Cardozo Law Review 35.2 (2013): 567-641. Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Tutro, Joseph. "States Are Making Their Own Decisions Regarding Whether Marijuana Should Be Illegal: How Should The Federal Government React?." Tennessee Journal Of Law & Policy 9.2 (2013): 233-247. Academic Search Complete. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Wells, Brenda. "Marijuana Legalization: Implications For Property/Casualty Insurance." Journal Of Insurance Issues 37.1 (2014): 77-92. Business Source Complete. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Zhu, Thang. Attitudes Towards The Legalization Of The Use Of Marijuana. n.p.: Gale, 2006. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 7 Apr. 2014. Read More