The Legalization of Cannabis for Therapeutic Purpo
ses
(Name)
(Institutional affiliation)
The legalization of marijuana is a topic that has sparked debate since its ban in the United States in the early 1930s. Lawmakers, scholars and ordinary citizens are ever active in the deliberation on its legalization and are divided on which outcome should prevail. However, the use of cannabis for therapeutic purposes (CTP) has significantly increased, with public perception towards its legalization warming up considerably. Today, marijuana consumption for medical purposes is legal in 30 states, though heavily controlled in most. In Colorado, California, Oregon, Alaska, Nevada, Washington D.C., Massachusetts and Maine it is legal to use cannabis for recreational use. However, research on its potential medical applications is limited and heavily controlled by the federal government, with opponents of its countrywide legalization the most vocal against such an initiative. This paper discusses the perceptions of disadvantages of cannabis use to individuals and society in general and maintains the stance that it is not a public threat.
To understand the recent intrigue of whether Cannabis for Therapeutic Purposes (CTP) should be legalized or not, it is essential to delve into why its popularity dropped since the 1960s. Regardless of the ban on marijuana in 1930, CTP continued to play a significant part of the medical community up until 1961 when a UN convention concluded that due to its high potential for abuse, it was no longer accepted for medical use(Sznitman&Zolotov, 2015). More advanced medicines were discovered and developed, leading to decreases in CTP use.
Nevertheless, the turn of the millennium has seen an increase in the use of CTP, with proponents and opponents in disagreement. Proponents for cannabis legalization cite the critical advantages as a boost in revenue, decrease in crime, its health benefits, better substance control and strong price control. They maintain that every citizen has the right to make their own choice regarding drug use, and specifically cannabis due to its natural component. Opponents of itslegalization, on the other hand, are of the opinion that marijuana has addictive properties, is a gateway drug, has severe health effects and increase the societal problems that are prevalent in our communities. Surprisingly, the opponents of marijuana legalization are often the lobbyists for legislature preventing medical studies and research on marijuana.
It has been suggested that CTP legalization will result in the increase in illegal cannabis use among groups such as the youth, high-risk groups and non-risk groups. Regarding the youth, studies have been inconclusive on whether CTP legalization increases in teens to use illegal cannabis. Studies have found that CTP legalization does increase the availability and prevalence of marijuana, but data on teen use is varied. A survey carried out in Colorado, a cannabis legalized state, found that drug-related suspensions in public schools bumped slightly after marijuana was legalized in 2009but stayed level after(Dills,GoffardandMiron, 2016). Regarding expulsion, the study found that the rate also rose somewhat but dropped thereafter. CTP legalization has not led to an increase in the use of illegal cannabis by the youth.
High-risk groups are people who are more likely to use cannabis like arrestees and ER patients while non-risk groups include a majority of the population. Studies carried out regarding high-risk groups, and CTP legalization found no correlation between the two in the sense that an increase in cannabis use among these groups was not associated with the passing of CTP laws. Majority of the studies involving illegal cannabis use and CTP laws have examined the association using the non-risk population. Eight of these studies found no relationship between CTP laws and illegal cannabis use, with one study suggesting that the changes in perceived risk of cannabis use were unrelated to CTP legalization. Empirical evidence suggeststhat CTP legalization resulted in a reduction in the use of illegal cannabis in 48 of the 58 states (Cerdaet al., 2012). Therefore cannabis legalization diminishes the black market for cannabis
One hypothesis suggested that cannabis prices would reduce significantly decrease due to CTP legalization, leading to increases in its use. Due to economic theory, this would seem accurate due as cannabis would become relatively cheap and appeal to a broader base of people. However, research by Dills,GoffardandMironfound that prices remained relatively unchanged before and after CTP was legalized in Colorado, with 200-230 dollars being the range per ounce(2016). In Oregon, the cost per ounce was relatively cheaper but soon caught up with the price point in Colorado after legalization which is standard in commodity market trends. Other studies on the link between price and CTP legalization have been inconsistent and therefore inconclusive. Overall, the use of illegal cannabis among the general population and CTP legalization is unrelated.
Opponents of cannabis legalization have proposed that this has and will continue to affect public health and have dire outcomes on productivity. Also, they have presented cannabis as a gateway drug and thus legalization will lead to an increase in the use of other more harmful drugs. However, this is highly inaccurate or inconclusive. In the case of Colorado, the legalization of cannabis did not have a significant effect on the use of either alcohol or cocaine. Therewasupward trend of cannabis use in the state since 2009, whereas alcohol and cocaine have been on a downward trend since(Cerdaet al., 2012). It has been suggested that this is due to a substitution effect, with users switching one drug for another. Still, there is no conclusive evidence to claim that CTP legalization has led to the decrease in the use of other drugs, just as there is inconclusive evidence to suggest that CTP legalization has led to an increase in illegal cannabis use, as earlier discussed.
Mental health is also an issue that is often brought up due to CTP legalization. Medical research on conditions such as depression, bipolar disorder, and other mood disorders havesuggested that cannabis can be used as an effective treatment for these conditions. Suicide, which is caused by depression in 90 percent of the cases, has been noted to be significantly less prevalent among cannabis male users between 20-38 years (Dills,GoffardandMiron, 2016). However, other studies offer contrary results, suggesting that excessive cannabis use increased the risk of anxiety, unhealthy drug abuse, schizophrenia, and depression.
Another point raised by those against cannabis legalization is that its legalization would lead to more potency in its THC levels and that this may, in turn, have detrimental effects on people’s health. A study conducted to measure the THC levels before and after CTP legalization found there was little or no differences in the levels(Anderson ; Reese, 2016). However, it also found out that the THC levels in cannabis sold in dispensaries was higher that of which was cultivated by home growers. However, this was attributed to better skills and resources used by growers for commercial purposes. Therefore, the legalization of cannabis does not in any way lead to a more potent composition of the drug.
There are some perceived social or community effects that the critics of cannabis legalization suggest. For a long time, cannabis use has been associated with crime, social deviance, and other adverse social problems. Opponents of cannabis indicated that its legalization would lead to an increase in the black market activity, and lead to spillover effects to areas where the drug was banned(Dills,GoffardandMiron, 2016).However, the legalization of marijuana is likely to cause a shift from the underground market to legal venues, and a decrease in crime. This will result in less pressure on the police regarding cannabis, and they can focus their energies and efforts in the crackdown of other prohibited drugs.
The claim that cannabis dispensaries lead to an increase in criminal activity intheir locationsis untrue. The dispensaries are more often than not found in areas where instances of crime are high. They are forced to operate on a cash-based system since although legal; the government does not allow them to bank their revenues(Anderson ; Reese, 2016). Such a cash system attracts criminal activity, and therefore legalization is not responsible for these crimes. Instead, it is the legislation. However, studies have shown that dispensaries with security measures like CCTV cameras and an identification requirement are less likely to be robbed.
With regards to road safety and cannabis legalization, studies offer contrasting results. One hypothesis proposed is that traffic accidents increase due to cannabis legalization where road users use the drug and drive under the influence. The opposing hypothesis suggests that legalization leads to better road safety since cannabis is a substitute for alcohol which is far more dangerous when it comes to road safety. Moreover, proponents suggest that CTP users who use it for pain can drive better and hence less likely to cause accidents.
Finally, cannabis legalization is not a precursor to impoverished communities, as some would suggest. Instead, cannabis dispensaries tend to be located in low-income areas. On the flipside, cannabis legalization creates job opportunities in these areas as growers, retail workers, and distributors. States like Colorado have benefited economically from being one of the pioneer states in cannabis legalization(Dills,GoffardandMiron, 2016). The industry has boosted its economy, with marijuana tourism’ in full effect. However, as more states legalize cannabis, the economic gains will be more spread out.
Conclusion
Majority of the outcomes proposed by those against cannabis legalization have been debunked or been inconclusive. Cannabis legalization does not increase illegal cannabis use among the youth, risk-groups or the general public. Majority of these health issues associated with cannabis use are untrue, save for a few that are still being studied. In fact, cannabis offers curative properties to people suffering from depression, anxiety, and nausea. The legalization of cannabis does not lead to higher potency levels as suggested. Additionally, its legalization does not increase the crime rate of a community, nor does it impoverish it. Much more research is needed to understand the medical benefits as well as the socio-economic outcomes of cannabis. Nevertheless, cannabis legalization is inevitable and should be embraced as a unique opportunity to understand a substance with a lot to offer.
References
Anderson, D. M., & Rees, D. I. (2014).The Legalization of Recreational Marijuana: How Likely Is the WorstCase Scenario?.Journal of Policy Analysis and Management,33(1), 221-232.
Cerda, M., Wall, M., Keyes, K. M.,Galea, S., &Hasin, D. (2012). Medical marijuana laws in 50 states: investigating the relationship between state legalization of medical marijuana and marijuana use, abuse and dependence.Drug and alcohol dependence,120(1), 22-27.
Dills, A.,Goffard, S., &Miron, J. (2016).Dose of Reality: The Effect of State Marijuana Legalizations.
Sznitman, S. R., &Zolotov, Y. (2015).Cannabis for therapeutic purposes and public health and safety: a systematic and critical review.International Journal of Drug Policy,26(1), 20-29.
