Civilisation and Drugs

Sir: In his article ‘Harmful Drug Dependence’ (Listener, December 5) Dr H.B. Turbott quoted with approval my comment in a student magazine that amphetamine pills were highly dangerous, but expressed bewilderment at my contention that marihuana and tobacco are of approximately equal danger to the user. My contention was neither arbitrary nor irrational. It is well known that the use of cigarettes can produce lung cancer. It is also well known that some people endure a degeneration of brain tissue and consequent psychosis on account of a particular sensitivity to alcohol. In the case of marihuana the effects are less drastic. The only negative results I have ever seen on account page 117 of a daily use of marihuana were a certain degree of sluggishness in certain people. True, I have heard that some experiments in America indicate that marihuana may have deleterious effects on the brain and may in certain cases precipitate a latent mental disorder. But the difference between the statistics of lung cancer and these medical uncertainties is the difference between death and a possible sickness

It is all a matter of degree. I have never held that heroin or cocaine (or the more dangerous amphetamine drugs) should be available on legal prescription. I have argued only that civilisation and drugs go together, and that a culture which can tolerate alcohol and tobacco, setting aside their dangers for the sake of common liberty, can easily tolerate the relatively mild drug marihuana. This is not to encourage anybody to drink beer or smoke tobacco or pot. It is simply to try to straighten the law where it has become Draconian and unrealistic.

1970 (601)