Drug WarRant

Tom Angell is unstoppable in his dogged determination to ask pointed questions of the powerful. Over at Marijuana.com, he discusses the Facebook chat conducted by NIDA’s Nora Volkow, where he got her to admit that there are barriers to research on marijuana.

This is why most people supporting the prohibition regime don’t like to get into public discussions. It’s very hard to maintain the lies under determined knowledgeable questioning.

Go to Tom’s article for more.

Richard Branson: Abolishing the death penalty

One area of particular concern to death penalty opponents like me is the so-called war on drugs. At least 32 countries still prescribe the death penalty for various drug offences. […]

One of these countries is Iran, which has in recent years seen a dramatic increase in drug-related death sentences and may execute more drug offenders than any other country in the world – over 300 people in 2014 alone. Most recently, Indonesia executed six drug offenders and plans to execute more – including the Australian leaders of the group known as the “Bali Nine” – in the coming weeks.

Both countries claim that executions are an important and effective deterrent. Nothing could be further from the truth. Drug use is a daily reality in Iran and Indonesia, with a dramatic increase in the illicit drug market observable especially in Indonesia. Tough law enforcement and draconian sentences, including executions, have failed entirely to change this status quo. Overall, there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that the death penalty has a deterrent effect on those using and trafficking drugs.

Like Branson, I am opposed to the death penalty in general, for a variety of practical and moral reasons. And to use it as a tool of prohibition seems somehow even more heinous, given the destruction caused by prohibition.

It’s an additional reason to push for legal regulation of drugs, and in the meantime, at the very least, we need to stop incentivizing it — which is what happens when we provide financial assistance to these countries for their drug war.

Back in 2009, Ashley Halsey III, a factually lazy reporter at the Washington Post, was completely taken by the drug czar’s report about the voluntarily testing of drivers and made statements in his article like “11 percent of motorists are high” when the study had specifically stated that it only tested for presence in the blood, not whether they were high. (see How the drug czar uses lazy reporters).

When I brought this undeniable fact to Halsey’s attention, complete with direct quotes from the NHTSA study, he responded to me with this simple nonsensical insult: “Your arrogance and ignorance are impressive.”

Well, he’s at it again.

Fewer people driving drunk,but drug use on the road is rising

There are fewer drunk drivers on the road, but their place has been taken by people high on marijuana and prescription drugs, according to two reports from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

No. Once again, the NHTSA tested for the “presence” of drugs and specifically noted that marijuana is a problem in this regard because it can stay in the blood for so long, and that it doesn’t indicate whether the driver is “high” or “impaired.”

NHTSA conducted a second study to determine whether smoking marijuana increased the risk of crashes. They found that it did but, adding a caveat, said that pot smoking is most common among a group already at high risk for crashes: young men.

No. The second study did not find that smoking marijuana increased the risk of crashes. They found that, when adjusted for other demographics, marijuana did not result in any statistically significant increase in crash risk.

Lazy and ignorant (willful or not) journalism.

Jacob Sullum also found this article to be an example of bad journalism.

Interestingly, elsewhere in this same paper, that second study is discussed in a way which really reveals how big a story it really is.

Stoned drivers are a lot safer than drunk ones, new federal data show

This is the key point. The demonstration that alcohol and driving mix in a way that is radically different than other drugs.

You shouldn’t drive impaired by anything. But as a society, we shouldn’t get distracted by scare stories about roads full of dangerously stoned drivers.

New Jersey prohibitionists clearly don’t have a clue about advertising.

Story at Weedist.

Here’s a great way of looking at how facts get distorted by government and the media.

Remember, on Friday afternoon (putting it out with the trash), NHTSA released their report showing no evidence that marijuana use is statistically significant in increasing crashes.

The report showed that overall those who smoked marijuana were more likely to get in crashes, but only because of the overlap with certain higher-crash-likely demographics (like young males). When you accounted for those factors, it turned out that there was no significant difference in crashes between marijuana users and those who didn’t use.

That’s a powerfully strong outcome of a comprehensive study.

However, the NHTSA not only released that info on a Friday afternoon, but also in conjunction with a separate study that showed that there was a reduction of those getting behind the wheel with alcohol in their system, but an increase in those getting behind the wheel with marijuana or other drugs (other than alcohol) in their system. This is a completely unrelated study that has nothing to do with crashes.

By combining the two studies in one release, and using a lot of weasel-worded statements downplaying the clear results of the crash study, they hoped for this stunningly ridiculous kind of headline:

USA Today Study finds new driving threat from dopers, druggies

The war against drunk driving appears to be making progress, but more motorists are instead using marijuana or prescription drugs then getting behind the wheel, a government study shows.

Another study, also released Friday, showed that marijuana users are more likely to be involved in crashes. But it also points out that marijuana is smoked mostly by young men, the group with the highest propensity for accidents anyway. […]

“The rising prevalence of marijuana and other drugs is a challenge to everyone who is dedicated to saving lives and reducing crashes,” says NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind.

Fortunately, there were a number of media sources who saw through this and realized that the buried story was the real story here.

No evidence marijuana leads to higher crash risk

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said a 20-month survey of drivers in 2013 and 2014 found that while drinking dramatically raises the chance of a crash, there was no evidence that marijuana use is statistically significant in boosting wreck rates.

This is something we’ve known, but I have a feeling it’s not going to be too popular in some circles.

Here’s the study.

In fact, the NHTSA didn’t seem to be too happy about reporting their own study’s results. Check out the tortured language in their release (released on a Friday afternoon naturally):

A second survey, the largest of its kind ever conducted, assessed whether marijuana use by drivers is associated with greater risk of crashes. The survey found that marijuana users are more likely to be involved in accidents, but that the increased risk may be due in part because marijuana users are more likely to be in groups at higher risk of crashes. In particular, marijuana users are more likely to be young men – a group already at high risk.

This was the most precisely controlled study of its kind yet conducted, but it measured the risk associated with marijuana at the levels found among drivers in a large community. Other studies using driving simulators and test tracks have found that marijuana at sufficient dosage levels will affect driver risk.

“Drivers should never get behind the wheel impaired, and we know that marijuana impairs judgment, reaction times and awareness,” said Jeff Michael, NHTSA’s associate administrator for research and program development. “These findings highlight the importance of research to better understand how marijuana use affects drivers so states and communities can craft the best safety policies.”

That’s right! The Fatal Vision® Marijuana Simulation Experience – Program Kit ($875), and the Fatal Vision® Marijuana Impairment Experience – Event Kit ($1,590) from Innocorp, Ltd. can show you what they want you to think it’s like to be stoned.

Or, for a whole lot less, I suppose, you could just, you know, try pot.

OK, this is certainly interesting…

Remember that in-depth article at Huffpost about how we as a country are failing addicts that I discussed recently? Again, it’s nowhere near where we need to be headed (read “Chasing the Scream” for what we should be doing), but it was at least a wake-up call for some of the worst practices we have been conducting in this country.

Apparently, it struck a nerve.

Federal Government Set To Crack Down On Drug Courts That Fail Addicts

The federal government is cracking down on drug courts that refuse to let opioid addicts access medical treatments such as Suboxone, said Michael Botticelli, acting director of the White House’s Office of National Drug Control Policy, on Thursday.

Drug courts that receive federal dollars will no longer be allowed to ban the kinds of medication-assisted treatments that doctors and scientists view as the most effective care for opioid addicts, Botticelli announced in a conference call with reporters.

Again, this isn’t the actual solution, but it’s an awareness that is huge to be coming from the federal government.

In another moment of federal shifting…

U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy Says Marijuana ‘Can Be Helpful’ For Some Medical Conditions

“We have some preliminary data that for certain medical conditions and symptoms, that marijuana can be helpful,” Murthy said during a Wednesday interview on “CBS This Morning” in response to a question about his stance on marijuana legalization.

While Murthy didn’t take the opportunity to endorse legalization of marijuana for medical or recreational purposes, he did add that he believes U.S. marijuana policy should be driven by science and what it reveals about the efficacy of using the plant for medical purposes.

“I think we’re going to get a lot more data about that,” Murthy said. “I’m very interested to see where that takes us.”

That’s a good step, and once again has raised a lot of questions in the press about how it can continued to classified in Schedule 1.

Naturally, after some likely behind-the-scenes pressure, the statement appeared to be walked back slightly yesterday evening in a statement attributed to Murthy…

Marijuana policy — and all public health policies — should be driven by science. I believe that marijuana should be subjected to the same, rigorous clinical trials and scientific scrutiny that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) applies to all new medications. The Federal Government has and continues to fund research on possible health benefits of marijuana and its components. While clinical trials for certain components of marijuana appear promising for some medical conditions, neither the FDA nor the Institute of Medicine have found smoked marijuana to meet the standards for safe and effective medicine for any condition to date.

Yet today, HHS’s twitter feed was actually promoting his original statements: Feds appear to stand by surgeon general’s comments that “marijuana can be helpful”

And federal drug policy tap dances its way along the edge of testing the idea of moving out of the dark ages. Next thing you know, they’ll admit that the earth isn’t flat.

Here’s a great little exercise in seeing how government agencies can dance and weave to avoid telling the truth, and to make implications that aren’t true.

It’s the ONDCP’s Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Marijuana

It’s really worth understanding how they operate, so you can know how to shine light on their actions.

What are some of your favorite fallacies, sleights-of-hand, and misdirections here?

Check out the 9 am panel tomorrow (February 3) at CADCA’s National Leadership Forum.

I’m sure the ghost of Harry Anslinger will be there smiling.