On 08/09/2012 21:33, wrote:
In article ,
Janet Tweedy wrote:
In article , Sacha
writes

What is now known about the effects of long-term smoking of cannabis is
far too worrying to be lightheared about it. Imo.

And it's all the idiots who use it for recreational purposes that then
make it difficult to obtain for treating conditions such as MS.

Now that modern analytical chemistry can detect it in blood there is no
compelling reason to ban it. Intoxication can be tested and compared to
both alcohol and tobacco the total harm it does is relatively modest. It
may even benefit people with certain conditions like MS and also as an
effective anti-emetic for use in chemotherapy.

Actually, no, sorry. The prejudice against and demonisation of
cannabis started something like a century ago, and I have absolutely
no idea why. It used to be part of the British Pharmacopeia, but
has been significantly more restricted than morphine, heroin and
cocaine for a century. It's very odd.

Amongst other players William Randolph Hearst was hacked off that the
Mexicans nabbed some of his prime timber land in the Spanish-American
war and used his media empire to spread insane scare stories about
Mexicans and "Marihuana" carefully avoiding telling them it was the same
stuff as the Indian Hemp in various patent medicines of the day.

http://www.pasadenaweekly.com/cms/st...nspiracy/9329/


Soon to be unemployed alcohol prohibitionists later leapt at the chance
to empire build with a newly demonised target to attack and so the US
"war-on-drugs" was born. They have been losing it ever since.

You can blame "The League of Nations" for the global ban...

http://www.idmu.co.uk/historical.htm
(although I am not convinced this site is impartial)

It seems that overly powerful newspaper magnates are very dangerous and
can influence public opinion using fake stories and selective editing in
ways that result in perverse outcomes detrimental to society.

Some things don't change - scare stories sell lots more newspapers.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown