The Devil's Lettuce, Study Restrictions, and Scientific Alarm

-

The issue of marijuana has intrigued me in the past years. For as long as I had even heard of the existence of the drug, I’ve heard arguments mostly on the pro side of the issue. It’s rare that someone will come out on the undeniably pro-weed internet to excoriate the supposed ill effects of marijuana. After all, we’ve come a long way since scare-mongering movies like “Reefer Madness” attempted to showcase these so-called dangerous effects in an unintentionally laughable fashion. And the article “Legalize the Lettuce!” by Matthew Serpas is no exception to the modern-day ideas about weed. 

In the article, Sherpas extols the virtues of a well-regulated and legal marketplace for weed. He argues that the popularity of the drug combined with the taxes that the government could levy on its sales would be beneficial to those governments. An aspect of this taxation argument that took me by surprise, however, was the idea that a certain portion of the tax revenue should go towards a program helping those addicted to more perilous narcotics like cocaine or heroin. This is quite a clever idea that I haven’t heard before and, if it were successfully implemented, would be of great benefit to hurting portions of society. 

Further, the author expounds on the idea that marijuana could be used to assist injured athletes. This is another idea which I have not heard, and for that matter have not researched, but it would not surprise me that a relaxing stimulant such as marijuana could be used to soften the pain of athletic injury. 

Still, I do think that there are some potential downsides to the legalization of weed that the author does not mention. Recent studies of marijuana, which were unable to be performed for decades due to the unrelenting bias against weed by the government and society, have shone a light on oft unmentioned issues. 

The largest of which, and the most concerning, is the connection that weed might have toward the development of mental health issues. For instance, some studies have shown that those who have a predisposition of long-term psychosis could have it made worse with marijuana. In addition, multiple alarming studies have constantly found an unusual link between the development of psychosis and those that use weed frequently. 

Of course, these studies are still in the preliminary stages due to the aforementioned study restrictions. Even still, they seem to tell us we should tread somewhat carefully on this issue, or at the very least, take seriously how we might prevent these problems while still retaining the benefits of weed legalization.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Should Globalism Be a Dirty Word?

-
Image
Alex Jones, a far-right conspiratorial political pundit, is a frequent detractor of globalism. This belief is often repeated across the Republican party, and even with some Democrats. There is a dirty word going around the Republican party and even some parts of the Democratic party: globalism. Republicans in Congress frequently disavow so-called “globalist policies” implemented by Democratic politicians, and those of the far right paint their enemies with the often-anti-Semitic pejorative of “globalist”. But globalism should not be looked at with such disdain. In fact, the U.S. government would do good to implement true globalist policies for the benefit of the U.S. and the world.  First, we should define what we mean by “globalism”. The term refers to a perspective of national policymaking that considers its effect on a global scale. For instance, when a country is having economic issues that could be partly allayed by tariffs on global imports, a country would consider suc
Read more

The Government is Fine, You Aren't

-
Image
Ask any citizen of the United States, either on the left or right of the political spectrum, to lay out their list of government grievances, and you’ll soon realize that the list is almost unending. Indeed, it is practically a national pastime to blame the U.S. government for our multitude of problems. Healthcare, immigration, climate change, etc. are all issues current and past governments have floundered to address. Yet, while it may be common to use this line of thinking, it masks a deeper and more vexing issue underneath: that if the American public really wanted to solve these problems, they could. Indeed, the frequent adjustment of our founding document gives a clue of the potential for radical change in the United States. Furthermore, the public has never had more power when it comes to directly changing their situation through election of officials. When it comes to discussions of governance, the public often looks to the Constitution for guidance. It is the refere
Read more

Does Age Matter in Politics?

-
Image
The members of the recent 116th Congress are the most diverse yet in race, gender, and age. With the recent influx of fresh faces to Congress after the 2018 midterm elections, it was refreshing to see a diverse crowd. Yet, one aspect of this diversity could pose a strategic problem: age. Frank Bruni, a columnist for The New York Times, argues in a recent piece entitled In Defense of the Gerontocracy that age is a factor to be considered in the current US Congress and, more specifically, that older congresspersons are a vital component. Indeed, it is a common theme of critique to denounce one's position of power based simply on that person’s age, and Bruni submits that it happens all too often towards older congressmen. Whether power is rejected on the belief that the person is either too young or too old to hold it skillfully, these beliefs about age can cloud or hamper our political thinking. Bruni points out that older members of Congress have been in politics long enough t
Read more