« Historical Background | Main | The Retchin-Magbie Fallacy: practicing Medicine without an education. »
Your guide to making money in the multi-billion dollar marijuana industry
| Own your ow legal marijuana business | Your guide to making money in the multi-billion dollar marijuana industry |
| Web Log of Dr. Tom O'Connell |
« Historical Background | Main | The Retchin-Magbie Fallacy: practicing Medicine without an education. »
Recently, I called attention to Claude Shannon, whose mid-Twentieth Century work on communication theory had both anticipated and greatly facilitated what we now know as 'information technology' (IT). Another entry promised to connect several 'dots' between the serendipitous study of pot users which originally inspired this blog and how several of its implications clearly point to major weaknesses in current drug policy.
Perhaps my study's most important revelation was that virtually all those applying for a cannabis recommendation in California were already experienced chronic users who had first tried it during adolescence. Two additional revelations were that most (95%) had been born after 1945, and nearly all had first tried (initiated) pot in close temporal conjunction with similar trials of alcohol and tobacco. The same characteristics had been noted by the first behavioral scientists ever to study the then-new phenomenon of youthful pot use in the mid-Seventies. Those observations eventually led to a 'Gateway' "theory" which-- despite its subsequent inability to earn validation-- is a major rhetorical argument used by federal policy makers who remain insistent that harsh punishment for possession of arbitrarily designated 'drugs of abuse' is an essential element of drug policy.
Important differences between mid-Seventies observations cited by Kandel and my more recent ones is that, as the American cannabis market has grown dramatically in size over time , and pot has become even more available to adolescents , the average age of its youthful initiates-- at least, those who eventually apply for medical recommendations-- has declined. The most recent analysis by cohort shows that alcohol, tobacco and cannabis were all tried at the same average age (14.9 years) by those applicants born between 1976 and 1985.
It is to be stressed that although data entry is incomplete, demographic data from over half of the approximately 3000 individuals seen during the past four years has been entered. It's thus quite unlikely that average ages at initiation will change significantly.
Another implication, strongly supported by both the demographic data and the aggressive initiation patterns for several other illegal drugs exhibited by this population over the same time interval is that their drug initiations are far more likely to represent inchoate youthful attempts at palliating symptoms of emotional origin than reflecting irresponsible youthful hedonism.
Human emotions were not recognized as phenomena worthy of serious consideration
by scholars until the
Renaissance; despite considerable subsequent attention from philosophers,
they weren't thought of as producing
symptoms requiring pharmaceutical intervention for another 350 years;
yet it's quite likely that the humans who left Africa in the series
of migrations completed some 13000 years ago-- and who were the antecedents
of all modern humans-- possessed brains which were structurally and physiologically
indistinguishable from our own. Thus, any behavioral differences
between them and ourselves almost certainly results from phenomena
we are just now beginning to study seriously under the rubric of cultural
evolution.
Given the current planetary ecology and the doctrinal divisions
which continue to plague our rapidly expanding species, the importance
of a global drug policy based on honestly gathered evidence which has then
been accurately interpreted can't be overstated. That current policy
is clearly derived from religious beliefs which are being dishonestly portrayed
as Public Health is as obvious as the reticence of the 'scientific community'
to object out of fear or feigned disinterest.
The apparent willingness of so many scientists to tacitly accept
such overt perversion of their profession's most essential attribute out
of fear is an ominous omen.
Tom O'Connell, MD
Posted by tjeffo at November 26, 2005 06:13 AM