BY DR. JEFFREY LIEBERMAN

In a dramatic example of government yielding to public opinion the Senate has introduced legislation to legalize cannabis on the federal level. Though passage before the November election is unlikely, this long overdue legislative action seeks to update a statute stemming [pun intended] from marijuana’s demonized image as depicted in the 1936 documentary film “Reefer Madness” and better reflect public opinion and liberal social trends. Currently, under the Federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA) of 1970, cannabis is considered to have “no accepted medical use” and a high potential for abuse and physical or psychological dependence. This Federal statute contrasts with the claims of therapeutic benefits of cannabis’ biochemical constituents such as cannabidiol and THC (tetra-hydro-cannabinol) when the sole FDA indication for their use is a rare childhood (Lennox-Gasteau) seizure disorder.

While the scientific information to officially endorse cannabis products as having therapeutic benefits is lacking, a recent Pew Research Center Survey found that 88 percent of Americans felt that marijuana should be legal for medical or recreational use. This wave of popular opinion has led to marijuana’s approval in 38 states for medical use, in 24 states for recreational use and decriminalization in an additional seven states.

Americans now have access to a recreational intoxicant that is arguably no more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco without fear of the disproportionately severe punishments previously meted out to those apprehended for possession and use. But at the same time, there are numerous inconsistencies and cross-purposes integral to the legalization and commercialization of cannabis products. The most obvious of these is the fact that Federal law considers the use, sale, and possession of cannabis illegal.

The consequence of the latter was not just that the exaggerated therapeutic claims were not born out by scientific research, but that it served as a “Trojan Horse” to galvanize public opinion and advance cannabis advocates ultimate goal of unfettered access. This came to fruition when the state legislatures of Colorado and Washington voted to legalize the commercial production and sale of cannabis products in 2012. This triggered a stunning demonstration of states’ rights in which a majority of states followed suit by liberalizing their cannabis laws despite Federal prohibitions.

In a glaring recent example of governmental missteps, on March 17, Gov. Kathy Hochul declared New York State’s commercialized cannabis licensing and distribution system “a disaster” and announced “a top-to-bottom review of the NYS Cannabis Control Board and its system for regulating legalized cannabis products.” The main purpose of the review was to process applications faster and enable more cannabis vendors to open. Just weeks before  Hochul’s executive order which was intended to give New Yorkers greater access to cannabis, the American Heart Association had issued a warning on the higher risks of cardiovascular events associated with heavy cannabis use. This was based on a National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded study of nearly 435,000 American adults reported last November which found that “Daily use of cannabis –– was associated with a 25% increased likelihood of heart attack and a 42% increased likelihood of stroke when compared to non-use of the drug.”

Such health hazards are not some abstract possibility or unconfirmed scientific speculation, but a growing current reality. As a practicing psychiatrist I have witnessed these effects first-hand as a burgeoning number of cannabis-induced medical and mental disturbances—particularly in young people—show up in our hospital emergency rooms and are referred to me for consultation.  And while the rising numbers of adverse effects occurring in the wake of legislative reform are disturbing, they are not surprising. Rather, they were anticipated.

This was revealed in an NBC News report on states enacting legislation to legalize cannabis in April 2022: “We were not aware when we were voting [in 2012] that we were voting on anything but the plant,” said Dr. Beatriz Carlini, a research scientist at the University of Washington’s Addictions, Drug & Alcohol Institute. She has led the effort in Washington state to research high-potency pot and is now exploring policy options to limit access. Her team concluded in 2020 that “high-potency cannabis can have lifelong mental health consequences.”

So while possible therapeutic value has been the lever, tax revenue for states and profits for new industries—resulting from broad access—has clearly become the goal with unsuspecting users as the potential victims. This is the template now driving rapid legalization of a host of previously prohibited recreational drugs including MDMA (ecstasy) and psychedelics.