>From: WallyB41@aol.com    <--- REPLY TO
>
>Dear CLCIA,
>
>Thank you very much for your recent MAP post about the MS victory in UK.
>Here in Hawaii, we were recently able to pass a medical marijuana bill in our
>State Senate by a one vote margin.  It passed by a wider margin in the House
>and Gov. Ben Cayetano supports it.  We should see a liberal medical marijuana
>law in Hawaii by summer.
>
>In the meantime, I would appreciate your comments on the following
>announcement that went by without comment from most American organizations
>such as NORML, MPP, DRCNet, MAP etc. etc.
>
>
>In this new Millennium, I am hoping to share with you my enthusiasm over the
>two most important research articles completed on the subject of the
>long-term effects of cannabis use since the historic studies in Jamaica,
>Costa Rica, and Greece came out in the mid 70's.  These classic studies were
>panned by officials because of the relatively low number of smokers included
>(who were reported to have healthy, productive lives).  There were only 30
>marijuana smokers and 30 controls in the famous Jamaican study (n = 60) - but
>it generated an inspiring book GANJA IN JAMAICA.
>
>Now we finally have two studies that address two of the most important
>slanderous charges hurled at a medicinal herb - that of causing brain damage
>and being very carcinogenic.  This time the Cognition Preservation Data
>included over 1,318 people over 11.5 years and the Cancer Prevention Data is
>based on medical records from 65,171 people including 14,128 Current
>Marijuana Smokers and 12,771 Former Marijuana Smokers from 1979 to a
>mortality follow-up in 1991.
>
>To read these historic articles, point your web browser to the CANNABIS
>RESEARCH LIBRARY at http://www.druglibrary.org/crl/
>Then click on the "Aging" button on the left to download a PDF version of the
>cognitive decline article or to download the "Marijuana Use and Mortality"
>article from the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH.
>
>These very important articles can also be downloaded from the
>Medical Marijuana News Page at:
>http://homepages.go.com/~marthag1/medmjnews.htm
>or if you use Netscape use the following web address:
>http://homepages.go.com/~marthag1/mmjdex.htm
>
>Here are the two most important Tables from the above articles.  They were
>shortened to their basic facts to prevent them from being scrambled by
>e-mail.
>
>
>"Marijuana Use and Mortality" AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH article from
>April 1997:
>
>CANCER PREVENTION DATA
>TABLE 2  Relative Risk of Death for Ever Users and Current Users of
>Marijuana, by Sex and Cause of Death: Kaiser Pemanente Medical Care Program
>Members (n = 65,171), Oakland and San Francisco, June 1979 through December
>1985 - section of table regarding cancer (Neoplasms) as the cause of death:
>
>
>
>MEN
>Ever Users                      Relative Risk of Cancer Death
>Full Model                                          0.78
>
>Nonsmokers/ Occasional Drinkers      0.46
>
>Current Users
>Full Model                                          0.97
>
>Nonsmokers/ Occasional Drinkers      0.75
>
>WOMEN
>Ever Users
>Full Model                                          0.82
>
>Nonsmokers/ Occasional Drinkers      0.70
>
>Current Users
>Full Model                                           0.86
>
>Nonsmokers/ Occasional Drinkers       0.56
>
>Here, numbers less than one for Relative Risk of Cancer Death represent a
>lower rate of fatal cancer among marijuana smokers in the large Kaiser Study
>from California.  For example, women who are current marijuana smokers but
>did not smoke tobacco, were found to have only 56% of the risk of cancer
>death as compared to other women who were nonsmokers of both tobacco and
>marijuana.
>
>
>"Cannabis Use And Cognitive Decline In Persons Under 65 Years Of Age"
>AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY, Vol. 149, No.9 pages 794-800, 1999
>
>COGNITION PRESERVATION DATA
>TABLE 3. Mean change in Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score between
>wave 2 (1982) end wave 3 (1993-1996) in men and women, by level of cannabis
>use, Baltimore Epidemiologic Catchment Area study follow-up
>
>Gender and level                                          Mean score
>of cannabis use                         Number     change in MMSE
>
>     MEN
>Nonusers                                        251           -1.00
>
>Light users                                    104            -1.03
>
>Light users & use of drugs               48            -1.06
>Heavy users                                     82            -0.84
>
>Heavy users & use of drugs                3            -0.33
>
>    WOMEN
>Nonusers                                        555            -1.46
>
>Light users                                     131            -1.04
>
>Light users & use of drugs                83            -1.07
>Heavy users                                      55            -1.15
>
>Heavy users & use of drugs                 8            -0.60
>
>Here the negative numbers represent a loss of mental functioning.  It occurs
>in all age groups as a natural function of aging and exposure to toxic
>substances - such as excessive alcohol or tobacco.  However, we see less
>cognitive decline among marijuana smokers than nonusers of this controversial
>herb.  The authors only acknowledge that cannabis had no effect on natural
>mental decline, as they found the above measured values to be too close to
>call the difference statistically significant.  On the other hand, they
>listed alcohol and tobacco as two of the prime causes of cognitive decline.
>
>These Tables contain data so powerful - that they can really help turn around
>the drug war - and move us quickly on the way towards drug peace.  Every day
>now, we loose thousands of battles in the war on drugs as new arrests and
>convictions for cannabis continue at an unprecedented rate.  I read yesterday
>that Whitney Houston is in trouble in Hawaii for having a small bag of
>marijuana in her purse at the Kailua-Kona Airport.  Only the truth can set us
>free!
>
>I called Stephen Sidney, MD, at the Division of Research, Kaiser Permanente
>Medical Care Program, 3505 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94611 on Jan. 4, and he
>confirmed that they found lower levels of cancer among the marijuana smokers
>when compared to their control group.
>
>Dr. Sidney is the first author listed in the AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC
>HEALTH article.  After acknowledging that they found lower rates of cancer
>among both "Ever Users" and "Current Users" of marijuana - he said they did
>not mention it in the text because of the relatively wide 95% Confidence
>Intervals.  He also confirmed that any Relative Risk less than 1.0 means a
>lowered risk of death compared to the Reference or control group.  (Relative
>Risk values of greater than one would be expected from the false claims that
>marijuana is carcinogenic.)
>
>Dr. Sydney also clarified my question regarding the lower values among the
>Nonsmokers (of tobacco)/Occasional Drinkers) group of marijuana smokers.
>These lower values of Relative Risk were calculated by comparing them to
>Nonusers/Experimenters who also did not smoke tobacco and did not consume
>excessive alcohol.  This makes these lowered values much more important than
>if they were compared to the full group of Nonusers/Experimenters.)
>
>Because tobacco is so carcinogenic, any studies attempting to measure the
>association between marijuana use and cancer must ignore those who smoke both
>tobacco and marijuana.  It is unfortunate that the press has distorted the
>recent pilot study findings of the Zhang/Tashkin group to state "Smoking
>marijuana can cause cancer, study finds" as reported on CNN Dec. 17, 1999.
>
>The real story, as uncovered by Chuck Thomas of MPP, is that they again found
>evidence of the Cancer Prevention Activity of Cannabinoids, as only 2 in the
>group of 173 head and neck cancer patients had only smoked marijuana - as
>compared to 5 of the 176 in their control group.  This data is limited
>because of the relatively low number of people in these groups.  Here n = 173
>+ 176 = 349.  The Kaiser study is thus over 185 times larger with an n =
>65,171.
>
>These facts are included in the data tables.  It also states that of these
>173 cancer patients, only 28 did not smoke tobacco.  22 of the 24 marijuana
>smokers with head and neck cancer also smoked tobacco, therefore 145/173
>cancer patients smoked tobacco and 123 of them smoked only tobacco - as
>compared to only 2 that only smoked marijuana.  With the score of 123 to 2 -
>which is more likely to cause cancer?
>
>Another related important article is Anticancer Activity of Cannabinoids
>concerning reduced growth of implanted lung cancer tumors in mice published
>the JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, Sept. 75.  Here mice with
>implanted lung cancer tumors lived significantly longer than control animals,
>as tumor growth was inhibited by THC and other cannabinoids tested.
>
>The two Tables included above bring good news from two outstanding research
>articles that have the last word in the actual effects of marijuana smoking
>because they collected data from 514 marijuana smokers in the cognition study
>and 26,899 marijuana smokers in the largest, most comprehensive study
>completed on the ultimate long-term effect - mortality - to date.
>
>As with all such studies, there is a degree of uncertainty in their findings
>- which is expressed as the 95% confidence intervals included in these
>reports.  Although opponents of drug policy reform will argue that they are
>too large to have much meaning, the observed decreases in Relative Risk
>associated with cancer deaths are all similar in value, with an increase in
>protection as they exclude tobacco smokers.   This shows consistency in these
>findings for the 26,899 marijuana smokers included in the Kaiser study.
>
>Another important point is that they stand unchallenged - as no reports have
>been published which show any increase in the cancer rate among any group of
>people who have only smoked this medicinal herb.  In fact, they have yet to
>find even one case of lung cancer in anyone who has just smoked cannabis -
>even though thousands of new cases of lung cancer are reported among
>nonsmokers of tobacco every year in the U.S.
>
>I hope you find the above information complementary to your recent expose of
>hypocrisy.  I also hope you want to know more about a subject I have
>researched rather thoroughly - "The Benzopyrene Hoax" - which is used to
>support their false claims of carcinogenicity of marijuana.  Please reply and
>I will send you more relevant facts about one of the largest successful
>propaganda campaigns in recent history - the convincing of the people of the
>world that cannabis is carcinogenic.
>
>Best Wishes,
>
>Wally Bachman
>Best Chemistry Student 1969,  SUNY New Paltz
>B.S. Cum Laude,  Chemistry & Sociology 1970, SUNY New Paltz
>Master of Arts, Teaching Sociology 1973, University of Hawaii
>Science Advisor to C.A.R.E.
>Citizens Advocating Responsible Education
>
>