Abstracts
Résumé
L’impact du cannabis sur la santé est faible, comparativement aux drogues légales. Il n’y a pas de dose létale pour cette plante. Malgré la croyance populaire, elle ne réduit pas la motivation, elle n’incite pas à consommer des drogues dites dures et elle n’affecte pas la structure du cerveau. Son association aux maladies mentales suggère que les personnes qui souffrent de désordres psychotiques devraient éviter le cannabis de même que tous les psychotropes. L’usage chronique quotidien crée des problèmes potentiels sur la performance rapide des tâches complexes. Lors d’un usage chronique quotidien, il y a déviation des fonctions cérébrales – mais pas plus que celle observée chez les alcooliques. L’inhalation quotidienne de la fumée peut abîmer les poumons, mais les nouvelles techniques de vaporisation pourraient ne pas les abîmer. L’usage occasionnel par des adultes en santé ne crée pas de maladies. Un petit pourcentage d’usagers réguliers rapporte une dépendance au cannabis mais ce désordre ne semble pas aussi aversif que la dépendance à d’autres drogues. Le cannabis semble avoir moins d’effets négatifs sur la santé que les drogues légales comme l’alcool, la caféine ou le tabac et il tue moins de personnes. Les impacts négatifs des pénalités imposées à la possession de cannabis semblent dépasser les impacts négatifs de la drogue elle-même, suggérant que la politique anti-drogue des Etats-Unis pourrait être améliorée en décriminalisant la possession de cannabis et en permettant à chaque adulte de cultiver quatre plants pour son usage personnel. Cette nouvelle approche permettrait d’économiser des milliards de dollars sur l’application de la loi, sur le temps d’administration de la justice de même qu’un nombre incalculable d’irritants.
Abstract
Compared to drugs that are currently legal, cannabis's impact on health is low. The plant has no lethal dose. Despite myths to the contrary, it does not sap motivation, lead to the use of harder drugs, or alter brain structure. Associations with mental illness suggest that people with psychotic disorders should avoid cannabis, as they should avoid all psychoactive drugs. Chronic daily use creates potential problems for the quick performance of complex tasks. Brain function is deviant in chronic daily users, but no worse than that found in alcoholics. Smoking daily can harm the lungs, but the new technique of vaporization might not. Occasional use by healthy adults does not create illness of any sort. A small percentage of regular users report cannabis dependence, but the disorder does not appear as aversive as dependence on other drugs. Cannabis seems to have fewer negative health effects than legal drugs like alcohol, caffeine, or tobacco, and kills far fewer people. The negative impact of penalties for cannabis possession appear to outweigh these negative impacts of the drug itself, suggesting that U.S. drug policy could improve by decriminalizing possession of cannabis and permitting each adult to grow 4 plants for personal possession. This new approach could save billions of dollars in law enforcement and judicial time and countless hours of hassle. It also has the potential to increase respect for the law and law enforcement.
Appendices
Références
- Aldrich, M. R., & Mikuriya, T. (1988). Savings in California marijuana law enforcement costs attributable to the Moscone Act of 1976 [A summary]. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 20, 75-81.
- Ali, R., Christie, P., Lenton, S., Hawks, D., Sutton, A., Hall, W., et al. (1999). The social impacts of the Cannabis Expiation Notice scheme in South Australia.
- Australian Government Publishing Service. (1995). National drug strategy household survey report. Canberra, ACT:Author.
- Blaze-Temple, D., & Lo, S. K. (1992). Stages of drug use: a community survey of Perth teenagers. British Journal of Addiction, 87, 212-225.
- Block, R. I., O'Leary, D. S., Erhardt, J. C., Augustinack, J. C., Ghoneim, M. M., Arndt, S., et al. (2000). Effects of frequent marijuana use on brain tissue volume and composition. NeuRoreport, 11, 491-496.
- Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA). (1996). National survey of American attitudes on substance abuse: II. Teens and their parents. New York: CASA at Columbia University.
- Chemic Laboratories. (2003). Evaluation of the Volcano vaporizer. Retrieved from http://www.ukcia.org/research/EvaluationOfVaporizer.pdf
- de Zwart, W. M., Stam, H., & Kuiplers, S. B. (1997). Key Data - smoking, drinking, drug use and gambling among pupils aged 10 years or older. Netherlands: Netherlands Institute of Health and Addiction.
- Dennis, R. J. (1990). The American people are starting to question the drug war. In A. S. Trebach & K. B. Zeese (Eds.), The great issues in drug policy (pp. 141-186). Washington: Drug Policy Foundation.
- Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport. (1995). Drug policy in the Netherlands - continuity and change. Netherlands:Author.
- Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1997). Crime in the United States, 1996. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
- Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2002). Uniform Crime Report: Crime in the United States, 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
- Gergen, M. K., Gergen, K. J., & Morse, S. J. (1972). Correlates of marijuana use among college students. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 2, 1-16.
- Goode, E. (1971). Drug use and grades in college. Nature, 239, 225-227.
- Grant, B. F., & Pickering, R. (1998). The relationship between cannabis use and DSM-IV cannabis abuse and dependence: Results from the national longitudinal alcohol epidemiological survey. Journal of Substance abuse, 10, 255-264.
- Hall, W., Solowij, N., & Lennon, J. (1994). The health and psychological consequences of cannabis use. Canberra: Australian Government Publication Services.
- Hesselbrock, V., Begleiter, H., Porjesz, B., O'Connor, S., & Bauer, L. (2001). P300 event related potential amplitude as an endophenotype of alcoholism - evidence from the collaborative study on the genetics of alcoholism. Journal of Biomedical Science, 8, 77-82.
- Institute of Medicine. (1999). Marijuana and medicine: Assessing the science base. Washington, DC: National Academy.
- Johnston, L., Bachman, J., & O'Malley, P. (1981). Marijuana decriminalization: the impact on you, 1975-1980. Monitoring the Future Occasional Paper, 13, 27-29.
- Johnston, L., Bachman, J., & O'Malley, P. (1996). National survey results on drug use from the monitoring the future study, 1975-1995. Washington, DC: USGPO.
- Kaestner, R. (1994b). New estimates of the effect of marijuana and cocaine on wages: accounting for unobserved person specific affects. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47, 454-470.
- Kaestner, R. (1994a). The effect of illicit drug use on the labor supply of young adults. Journal of Human Resources, 29, 123-136.
- Kandel, D. B., & Davies, M. (1996). High school students who use crack and other drugs. Archives of General Psychiatry, 53, 71-80.
- Kleiman, M. A. (1992). Against excess: drug policy for results. New York: Basic Books.
- MacCoun, R. J., & Reuter, P. (2001). Drug war heresies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Mackesy-Amiti, M. E., Fendrich, M., & Goldstein, P. J. (1997). Sequence of drug use among serious drug users: typical vs. atypical progression. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 45, 185-196.
- Maloff, D. (1981). A review of the effects of decriminalization of marijuana. Contemporary Drug Problems, 10, 306-340.
- Mandel, J. (1988). Is marijuana law enforcement racist? Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 20, 83-91.
- McGee, R., Williams, S. A., Poulton, R., & Moffitt, T. (2000). A longitudinal study of cannabis use and mental health from adolescence to early adulthood. Addiction, 95, 491-503.
- McGeorge, J., & Aitken, C. K. (1997). Effects of cannabis decriminalization in the Australian Capital Territory on university students' patterns of use. Journal of Drug Issues, 27, 785-793.
- Miron, J. A.. Violence and the U.S. prohibition of drugs and alcohol (JEL No K42nd ed., NBER working paper No 6950).
- Model, K. E. (1993). The effects of marijuana decriminalization on hospital emergency room drug episodes: 1975-1978. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 88, 737-747.
- Morral, A. R., McCaffrey, D. F., & Paddock, S. M. (2002). Reassessing the marijuana gateway effect. Addiction, 97, 1493-1504.
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). (1991). NIDA capsules: Summary of findings from the 1990 Household survey on drug abuse. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
- National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML). (1996). Principles of responsible cannabis use. Retrieved from http://www.natlnorml.org/about/responsible.shtml
- Nielson, A. C., Co. (1998). TV Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.tvta.org/stats.html
- Office of the National Drug Control Policy. (1997a). National drug control strategy. Washington, DC:Author.
- Office of the National Drug Control Policy. (1997b). State and local spending on drug control activities, Report from the National Survey on local and state governments. Washington, DC:Author.
- Ostrowski, J. (1998). Drug prohibition muddles along: How a failure of persuasion has left us with a failed policy. In J. M. Fish (Ed.), How to legalize drugs (pp. 352-368). Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
- Packer, H. L. (1968). The limits of criminal sanction. Palo Alto: Stanford University.
- Patrick, G., Straumanis, J. J., Struve, F. A., Fitz-Gerald, M. J., Leavitt, M. J., & Manno, J. E. (2000). Reduced P50 auditory gating response in psychiatrically normal chronic marijuana users: A pilot study.
- Pihl, R. O., & Sigal, H. (1978). Motivation levels and the marihuana high. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 87, 280-285.
- Reinarman, C. (2003). Cannabis use patterns and practices in Amsterdam and San Francisco. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Law Conference, San Francisco.
- Roffman, R. A., & Stephens, R. S. (1993). Cannabis dependence. In D. L. Dunner (Ed.), Current Psychiatric Therapy (pp. 105-109). Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.
- Roffman, R. A., Klepsch, R., Wertz, J. S., Simpson, E. E., & Stephens, R. S. (1993). Predictors of attrition from an outpatient marijuana-dependence counseling program. Addictive Behaviors, 18, 553-566.
- Shedler, J., & Block, J. (1990). Adolescent drug use and psychological health: A longitudinal inquiry. American Psychologist, 45, 612-630.
- Smith, N. T. (2002). A review of the published literature into cannabis withdrawal symptoms in human users. Addiction, 97, 621-632.
- Solowij, N. (1998). Cannabis and cognitive functioning. New York: Cambridge University.
- Stein, J. (2002, November 4). The new politics of pot. Time Magazine, 56-61.
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). (2000). Summary of findings from the 1999 National household survey on drug abuse. Rockville, MD:Author.
- Sullum, J. (2003). Saying yes. New York: Putman/Tarcher.
- Szasz, T. (1993). Our right to drugs. New York: Praeger.
- Tashkin, D. P. (2001). Airway effects of marijuana, cocaine and other inhaled illicit agents. Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine, 7, 43-61.
- Thornicraft, G. (1990). Cannabis and psychosis: Is there epidemiological evidence for an association? British Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 25-33.
- Weller, R. A., & Halikas, J. A. (1980). Objective criteria for the diagnosis of marijuana abuse. Journal of Nervous and mental Disease, 176, 719-725.
- Wilson, W., Mathew, R., Turkington, T., Hawk, T., Coleman, R. E., & Provenzale, J. (2000). Brain morphological changes and early marijuana use: A magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography study. Journal of Addictive Diseases, 19, 1-22.
- Zimmer, L., & Morgan, J. P. (1997). Marijuana myths marijuana facts. New York: The Lindesmith Center.