The world map of cannabis
Study demonstrates the extraordinary scale of the drug's global popularity
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
enlarge
It is 40 years since cannabis unleashed the "flower power" revolution of the 1960s, encouraging a generation in Europe and the US to "make love not war". Young people at the time hoped their legacy would be world peace. Instead, it has turned out to be a world of fuzzy dope-heads.
In the intervening decades, the drug whose intoxicating effects have been known for 4,000 years has been increasingly adopted by adolescents and young adults across the globe.
Today, an estimated one in 25 adults of working age – 166 million people around the world – has used cannabis to get high, either in ignorance or defiance of its damaging effects on health. Now, the extraordinary popularity of the drug is posing a significant public health challenge, doctors say.
Writing in The Lancet, Wayne Hall of the University of Queensland and Louisa Degenhardt of the University of New South Wales, Australia, say cannabis slows reaction times and increases the risk of accidents, causes bronchitis, interferes with learning, memory and education and, most seriously, may double the risk of schizophrenia. Yet these effects have failed to dent its popularity.
"Since cannabis use was first reported over 40 years ago by US college students, its recreational or non-medical use has spread globally, first to high- income countries, and recently to low-income and middle-income countries," they say.
Citing figures from the UN Office on Drugs and Crime for 2006, they say cannabis use is highest in the US, Australia and New Zealand (where more than 8 per cent of the population indulge), followed by Europe. But because Asia and Africa have bigger populations, they also have the highest proportion of the world's cannabis users, accounting for almost a third (31 per cent) and a quarter (25 per cent) respectively.
Use of cannabis among young people rose strongly during the 1960s and 1970s, peaking in the US in 1979. There was then a long decline until it increased again in the 1990s, before levelling off once more since 2000. In Britain, Australia and New Zealand, cannabis use has been falling for several years, but it is thought to be rising in Latin America and several countries in Africa.
The typical user smokes their first joint in their mid-teens, with use peaking in the mid-20s. The habit then declines steeply as young people move into jobs and discover they have to get up in the morning. Marriage and babies accelerate the decline. About one in 10 of those who ever smoke a joint become regular daily users, with 20 to 30 per cent using the drug weekly. Regular users are also more likely to use other illicit drugs, including heroin and cocaine, lending support to the theory that "soft" drugs act as a "gateway" to hard drugs. But the authors admit this supposed link "remains a subject of considerable debate".
However, they add that the ill effects of cannabis are modest when compared with the damage done by alcohol, tobacco and other illicit drugs. In Australia, it accounted for just 0.2 per cent of the total burden of disease.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
I challenge anyone to produce evidence that the incidence of schizophrenia in the West has 1) increased since 1970 and 2) that the increase is caused by the use of cannabis.
And considering the utter and sheer stupidity of modern politics, I would definitely become schizophrenic if I had to grow up in these times. I would like to suggest that schizophrenia is first of all caused by a political system that is based on lies, distortion of reality, egoism, greed and most of all, a consistent lack of morality.
If our enlightened leaders had put just as much effort in fighting the desastrous effects of alcohol abuse, just think how many lifes could have been saved.
But they rather harass people who use a relitively harmless substance that makes the user see more clearly the extent of insanity and criminality of our leaders.
Do I need to remind you of the climate debate, Sellafield, the destruction of tropical forests in order to grow low-grade crops for the western world, the structural over-fishing of the oceans, the plundering of poor countries for precious resources for our ever hungry industry etc. etc.?
Just thinking of these things makes me very, very schizophrenic...
Firstly - there is no claim that canabis CAUSES scyizophrenia - however there is evidence that along with pre-existing genectic profile it can be a contributing environmental factor.
Secondly it is a myth that schizophrenia is egalitarian with a flat epidemiological profile. See the references below - the first shows a 100% raise in the incidence rate in the suburb of Camberwell in london between 1965 and 1997.
The study conclues "Conclusions - The incidence of schizophrenia has doubled in south-east London over the past three decades."
And the second that is more general about the myth of the epidemiology.
http://schizophreniabulletin.oxfordjour
Now i am not saying that it shoudl be banned - i don't belive that works for any drugs - however we need to get away from the myths and platitudes thar are pedaled by both sides fo the discussion.
Still, the finding that schizophrenia is variable within subgroups doesn't address the fact that cannabis is smoked by a cross-section of the population, and no overall increase in schizophrenia has been observed. Indeed, if there had been a schizophrenia "epidemic" commensurate with the explosion of cannabis use it would have been considered a public health crisis of the first order, somewhat like smallpox. But no such thing happened. I suppose now that it is established that schizophrenia is affected by environmental factors, one can say that cannabis can be such a factor, as can possibly pollen, and cold, sleety weather, not to mention your town.
Jeremy Laurance has an ax to grind, evidenced by ad hominems such as "fuzzy dope-heads." His animus towards cannabis is obvious and he manages to pack in innuendos about "gateway" theories and "other illicit drugs, including heroin and cocaine." It is normal for anti-cannabis propagandists to start an article with put-down words like "fuzzy dope-heads" and in the course of the article try to associate cannabis with heroin. And this calls itself a "Health Editor."
A real Health Editor would have addressed the important fact that cannabis has no lethal dose. To some this may be academic, but not to pain sufferers. Prescription pain-killers, usually opiates, must be taken on schedule, else their efficacy wanes and toxic buildup occurs. Cannabis has a pain-killing effect, and while it is not as strong as the opiates it is a useful adjunct to pain management since it can be taken as often as the patient needs - precisely because it has no lethal dose and is non-toxic. Chronic pain involves a lot of clock watching, waiting for the time to take the next pill. That clock-watching is considerably reduced by cannabis. Medicinal cannabis is a godsend to many sufferers, and it is mean-spirited and ignorant to refer to them as "fuzzy dope-heads." It's miserable to watch purported health reporting turn into this type of propagandistic, slanted trash. Laurance's supervisor should take note.
If you take heroin, you'll be soon borrowing,
kick the habit,
If you take cocaine, it will blow your brain,
kick the habit,
If you smoke the dope, You will soon lose the hope,
Kick the habit.
Off on a tangent, For the latest in ultra cool concept cars check out http://www.carthrottle.com
Cannabis gives you the impression that you are becoming more intelligent,whereas in fact you are becoming LESS intelligent. This is very dangerous for society but is pretty good for governments, who prefer stupid and docile citizens who have less chance of working out what game is really going on. For example in Saudi Arabia soft drugs are in widespread use - much like the use of Soma in the book Brave New World.
Mr Alex Weir, Baghdad
Sir Paul McCartney, Sir Mick Jagger and artists and musicians for thousands of years have got some benefits from cannabis whilst somehow avoiding becoming axe murderers or baby eaters. But hey, let's peddle some more rubbish and stoke up the ignorance eh? I lost my faith in the Independent's objectivity some time ago on this issue.
And no, you won't get more intelligent by using cannabis. But cannabis will enable you remove certain psychological barriers and can help you to think more clearly.
The risk for irreversable fysical damage is far less then with alcohol.
Abuse of any drug, however, will result in people becoming stupid.
But don't blame the drug, blame the user!
http://www.alternet.org/healthwelln
wriggling around in our environment and how and what the synergistic effects of all these toxins effects us as humans and our environment.
The reality we just don't know, so we lambast those we don't agree with.
Yes I don't deny that burnouts don't exist, but the point is that alcohol and tobacco have legal status as drugs used to 'dope' the population, wherein however cannabis use is countercultural with its spiritual, creative and medicinal properties for the mind body and soul.
I consider television worse than marijuana. Marijuana brings people together, makes you smile, has anti-depressive properties, can fight alzheimers. Contrary to what most people believe, a study of the synthetic cannabinoids (HU-210) which is 200x more potent then THC, has found that despite temporarily disrupting the brain in the short term, the rate of adult neurogenesis increased by 40% above CONTROL rats.
Once upon a time we used to be spiritual beings and we were better for it with knowledge of plant and herb lore for many ailments before the invention of medicine. Then came the plague of religion, government and politics creating a dominator culture which tarred users of entheogens as siding with the devil and loony and ever since innocent people have been prosecuted, tortured and killed for their beliefs while another drug (alcohol and tobacco) flourished because they were far more addictive and those in power knew that as long the peasants had coffee, alcohol and tobacco they could keep them under control (christianisation of the world).
I personally do not think cannabis is a bad thing, it's only made bad by it's illegality. I can cite the prohibition era where the demand for booze pushed it into the hands of gangsters and criminals, I can also cite the portugal study which showed that hard drug use, drug-binging and drug-related violence decreased significantly after it was decriminalised. Also, a study in 2008 found that incidence of cannabis use among adolescents and young adults in Holland was significantly lower than the UK and the US (24% in the UK for 15 year olds for cannabis used in the last month vs 15% in Holland, a tolerant country).
I'm not saying cannabis is for everyone, but there are plenty of high-functioning users who have long term girlfriends, a steady income and are highly educated and do not use drugs to abuse them but to enhance their personal lives, spiritually and recreationally with little side effects. There still exists a media and moral panic which doesn't acknowledge the potential good cannabis has, it is virtually impossible to get funding to research drug chemicals, the bodies of NIMDA, WHO and DEA have too much power and ONLY studies which look at drug toxicity are approved for study, this is a monopoly which corporates (big pharma) lobbyists and politicians (thieves) control to keep you ignorant and unquestioning.
I think it really has got to the time when the word journalist needs a new definition in the dictionary. Something like "White-collar flunky employed by big business to peddle whatever message will best sell their product." something like that should do. The stuff you have written in this article is mainly unsubstantiated rubbish not borne out by real world experience. Tosh.
You can buy hemp products if you look around, including textiles, nutritional supplements, soaps and ropes. You just can't grow hemp in the UK without a license. So all the hemp used in these products purchased is grown somewhere else: China, Canada, India, Chile and many other countries. Meanwhile farmers suffer under increasing debt and decreasing revenues from stalled crop prices. What's wrong with this picture? What's wrong, it turns out, is that the powers that be, make no differentiation between industrial hemp and marijuana. To them it's all the same crop (never mind that smoking industrial hemp will only make you vomit, not high) and anyone caught planting Industrial hemp will be arrested and prosecuted using the same laws that were really only intended to halt hard-core street drug pushers.
As anyone who isn't smoking crack has already figured out (and even a few who are), our drug policy is a scandalous failure. Not only has the so-called "War on Drugs" utterly failed to stop the flow of recreational drugs, it has criminalized struggling farmers who seek to grow industrial hemp as a profitable, renewable crop that's in high demand across multiple industries.
The War on Drugs has accomplished one thing, though: It has filled the nation's prisons with small-time "offenders" who got caught with an ounce or two of weed in their pockets. Our drug policy, it seems, is a boon for the prison industry, but a curse upon our rights and the nation's farmers. Industrial Hemp was referred to, “as the billion dollar crop” before the pharmaceutical and cotton industry took control of our governments around the world. Outlawing industrial Hemp to maximise their profits.
Legalise the weed.
And encourage farmers to grow it as a cash crop, and tax it on sale to the retailers.
This will give our poor farmers additional income, and generate needed tax revenues.
Remeber cannabis has two marketable products - the flower for people to consume, and the hemp that can be used for rope making or cloth
Allow Dutch style coffee shops to open to sell the weed. This will create new businesses, which will create needed jobs, all of which will generate new revenue streams.
Release from prison all those convicted of cannabis offenses, thus reducing the prison population and saving government revenue
And finally allow the importation of cannabis from the tradional 3rd world growers - afghanistan, lebanon, mexico etc. This polcy would see a dramatic rise in gdp for the exporting countires and provide many impoverished farmers with a legitimate profitable income.
Yes their will be some health consequences, but the tax generated on the proceeds of cannabis will far outway the additional health costs.
Yes people who are prone to schizophrenia do have problems with cannabis, but this is a very small proportion of the people who use cannabis, but is the only thing that the cannabis propogandists have to use, so they overplay it to the max.
If cannabis is a gateway drug, the drug it leads people onto - far more than any other - is tobacco.
Yes some people who use cannabis go onto smack and crack - but most do not. But virtually all cannabis smokers do end up addicted to nicotine at some point in their lives.
We are living in very interesting times, that need some very radical solutions
So why not let cannabis solve the worlds economic problems ????????????
Why doesn't the author write another story about alcohol abuse and compare the two marijuana vs. alcohol
Marijuana does not kill tens of thousands of people a year, while driving while drunk, health risk due to drinking, the number of people divorced and suicide rate are all well documented problems associated with alcohol.
The war over drugs has never been about our health. It has been about money. I guarantee you if the government could figure out a way to control and tax marijuana everyone would be lighting up tomorrow.
This is I D I O T I C
Imagine Gordon Brown huddled in a corner with his top advisors:
"Damnit men, there must be SOME way we can make some money off this marijuana cigarette fad."
"Can't be done, sir. There's just no profit in the sale of narcotics. Nor sex, for that matter."
"(sighing) Well fuckit. 10 more years of drug war."
"The government" does know a way to control and tax marijuana. Umm... Control it and tax it. Far from being the problem in the way of legalization, it is the easy part and the most convincing argument.
As far as the link to schizophrenia goes.. I understand that research has shown that there are two distinct groups of active chemicals of interest. The canaboid class and the THC class. THC increases the probability of psychotic breaks while canaboids do the opposite. Different varieties of weed are grown with different proportions. Smoke the old style mellows and stay healthy.
As far as the arguments put forward by you and voodoo that nobody would buy if they could grow... What, and get my fingernails dirty? Controlling and taxing the sale of pot is not the same as legalizing unlicensed individual growers. There are many possible shades of decriminalization. But even if total legalization were to come about, the majority of people would still go for store bought, pick-your-favorite-brand, hassle-free pot. The majority would do this for the same reason that the majority don't grow their own veg: the ability to use money to buy things gives the illusion of being able to save your time for things that are more interesting to you, like the internet or getting more money. Most people don't like gardening. The die-hards and rastas can unplug themselves from the grid if they like, maybe some of the tax revenue generated from the taxation of legally sold pot could even go into harassing them, but controlling the sale of pot and moving it into the mainstream would not result in a significant increase in the sale of garden tools.
It is not like the tobacco which can only be grown only in certain areas and in certain ways. And it's not like alcohol, how many people have a vineyard large enough to make wine. How many people have the room and capacity and will to make their own alcohol. Distilling alcohol is a dangerous process highly combustible. And these are exactly why tobacco and alcohol is easily controlled and taxed.
FYI, it's not as simple as throwing some seeds into some dirt if you want anything close to commercial quality herb. There is a serious opportunity cost that requires a devotion of one's time and energies to MJ horticulture to get a product anywhere close to what you could find down the street at the coffee shop for a fraction of the price of what you would spend in time and money in raising comparable quality.
I have been a regular reader of the Independent for over 20 years now in fact I read my first Independent round about the time that I first tried cannabis.
However this article has just given me a good reason to stop buying one of them.
Bong anyone?
p.s.
Where's the map you prat?
In all my life it has been virtually impossible to find sensible journalism on this topic in the mainstream media. I sit here shaking my head in disbelief that once more cannabis has been highlighted as a 'gateway ' drug. THIS IS ABSOLUTE NONSENCE. I know hundred of recreational users of cannabis and NOT ONE has used this as the lame excuse that it set them on the road to hard drugs.
We must try and have a meaningful debate on drugs which involves decriminalisation at the same time accepting people will always make decisions on how they want to spend their time. Governments should have little if not nothing to do with this.
As to taxing cannabis I agree it is difficult. Why not tax the seeds?
Look at the Dutch. They have had semi-legal cannabis for decades, but seem to be forced to impose stricter regulations due to cannabis tourists. Coffeeshops in some towns near the border with Belgium are no longer allowed to sell cannabis. The government wants to introduce some form of cannabis pass only available to Dutch citizens.
Studies reveal that the Dutch use less than countries with severe repression regarding cannabis.
The problems arise when there are different opinions between countries as to how liberal you want to be on cannabis.
Imho both the Belgian, French and German authorities are rather retarded. Especially the French use quite a lot more cannabis than the Dutch, and will probably receive most of the stuff from Morocco. So why complain about a minor group of youths going to Holland to enjoy cannabis in FREEDOM?
Because that's the bottomline. They can get hold of the stuff in France without much trouble, but have to use it at home in secrecy. While in Holland they can visit a coffe shop, get stoned and go out on the streets, to a park, to a concert etc. without feer for prosecution. Maybe already next year one should say "once could"...
Unless the EU as an entity decides to liberalize cannabis, allows local production under strict regulations and forbids all sale of seed, you will never be able to regulate and tax it in such a way that you minimalize crime, promote rational consumption and uphold strict age restrictions.
Since the EU has made a worrying shift to neo-conservatism, backwarded christianity and sheer and utte stupidity, I don't see this happening. Actually while a number of countries at the other side of the Atlantic have started to legalize cannabis for own consumption, the EU insists on going the other direction. The price they pay for this policy? More crime, more smuggling, more access of narcotics to ever younger people, more social disruption.
Already now you can say that the Dutch through their hypocritical and retarded policy of "gedogen" (to tolerate) have invoked more crime in their society then they would ever have had if they had been consistent and had legal, regulated production of cannabis. They gave the marked to criminals and they said thank you very much. So, now it is BIG business and whole armies of police are searching for an ever increasing number of illegal growers. It is not only the real big guy producing for smuggling, it is also the home grower having 10-20 plants on the attic. Also that is very profitable. You can easily have 4 crops a year and you will earn a nice sum without paying tax.
Let's be realistic. Cannabis will not suddenly disappear. Whatever our enlightened leaders might come up with. They would do better to legalize the stuff asap and make sure that as few youngster as possible can get hold of it. For me that would be the main issue. How to avoid that people under 18-20 years have easy access? And that goes just as much for alcohol and tobacco!!!
The cotton lobby were a major factor in criminalising the herb in USA; USA eventually persuaded the UN to follow suit.
Which lobby is behind the latest campaign?
(Just kidding!)
And so is alcohol. Necessarily so, because we have seen the results of prohibition. We see the same result for cannabis and other narcotics.
Legalizing would only make it easier to impose strict regulations regarding production, quality and sale, and at the same time maintaining the strictest possible age restrictions.
And at the same time society can get rid of a lot of crime.
Any antidepressant falls in the same category of substances as cannabis. It is a psycho-active substance.
So, what you're saying is nonsense.
There is no fundamental difference between natural and synthetic drugs. Any synthetic drug can theoretically be produced by a plant, animal, fungus, bacteria etc. And vice versa.
Amen!
So far from what I can tell the reasons for keeping it illegal are;
* Might be bad for your mental health
* Might make you less smart
Now let's take a look at the reasons for legalising it;
* Taxation on sale of plants/seeds/flower for smoking (let's face it, growing it is a pain in the ass - most would probably just buy it)
* Health benefits - for medicinal reasons, IE, multiple sclerosis, alzheimers, cancer, pain etc
* Social aspect - would bring people together from all communities (would be good for N. Ireland!)
* Local business would boom - not only from cannabis outlets but a lot of industries would benefit from industrial hemp at least
I challenge any reader to find more negative aspects to legalisation than positive. The pros way outweigh the cons.
And let's face it - America's done it, Spain's done it, Portugal's done it, a lot more European countries are trying to do it - South America has done it - everyone is legalising or at least decriminalising cannabis - it'll come here some day, let's just stop wasting time and legalise it now, shall we?
Anyway, I'm dying for a bong, excuse me.
P. Wilson - Belfast, N Ireland.
De-criminalisation of the 1000's of people who have done nothing more criminal than smoke a bit of weed
1st Joint = Aged 12
Average Joints per day = 9-10 between ages of 12-18
5-7 between ages of 18 26
3-4 between ages of 26 and now
Current Job = IT Network Infrastructure Engineer
Employment History - Out of work for One month since entering the job market at 16 (Had to work during my A-Levels)
Highest Salary Earned - £65,000pa. Currently earning less as I volountarily left Commercial for Public Sector
Education = 12 GCSEs A-C (Smoking Cannabis at time of exams)
4 A-Levels A-B (Smoking Cannabis at time of study and exams)
1:1 Degree achieved in International Studies LAST YEAR with OU (Smoking Cannabis on a daily basis throughout the 5 years I worked on this and, oh yes, holding down a full-time, complex and complicated job)
In my spare time I like nothing more than a Doobie with a bit of Thomas Paine or Plato.... try it... you'll find ourself shouting at the book as if it's a politician on the telly :-)
Mental history - Perfectly stable, although can get a bit ratty when reading articles of such incredibly poor quality and research.... the average 9 year old on the streets of London understands more about Cannabis than the author of this 'Journalist'.
And to finish, I'll sum my life history of 22 years experience of Cannabis by quoting the late great preacher, Bill Hicks:
"Never murdered anybody, never robbed anybody, never raped anybody, never beat anybody, never fvcking lost a single job, a car, a house, a wife or kids ... laughed my ass off ... and went about my day."
It is hard to believe that this is the same paper that ran a huge legalise cannabis campaign 12-ish years ago - under a rather more rational editor.
You are running this piece concurrently with an article related to medical marijuana and yet strangely no mention of the many, many medical uses of cannabis here at all - only bogus science. Funny that.
I really expect better than this from the Independent and I am at a loss to understand how a normally intelligent paper can be such an hysterical ninny when it comes to pot. Was the editor painfully dumped by a pot smoking ex-girlfriend? Why don't your normal journalistic standards apply when it comes to the subject of cannabis? You are really damaging your brand here.
The low side of enjoying a puff of wacky baccy is I once was arrested and spent 9 weeks in custody before being given an 18 month (suspended) prison sentence. The prosecutor had demanded 2 years hard labour for possessing an ounce of weed.
Which would you rather have, a room full of dreamy smokers or happy happy MDMA'ers of a load of yobs pissed and puking on a Saturday night in the city centre?