SHOULD the law put cannabis on a par with drugs such as amphetamines and barbiturates? The UK government thought not, and last year it downgraded cannabis to 鈥渃lass C鈥�, where it now sits with steroids and growth hormone. It was a courageous decision, meant to free the police to spend more time catching traffickers of hard drugs.
Then last week the home secretary, Charles Clarke, asked the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs 鈥� which supported last year鈥檚 reclassification 鈥� to take another look. Why? He says two studies have uncovered new evidence linking smoking cannabis with psychosis.
The results of the studies he cites are highly contentious (see 鈥淭oo much, too young鈥�). In the first, the conclusion rests on only three people. The second uses such a broad definition of psychosis that it would probably apply to millions of people who have never touched cannabis or suffered serious mental illness.
Advertisement
These studies do not add any significant insights into the impact of cannabis on mental health. They do not, for example, show unequivocally that the drug ever causes schizophrenia in an otherwise healthy person. What they do highlight is the possibility that cannabis may increase the risk of psychosis in a small group of young people.
Should the law on cannabis be toughened up to protect this minority? Cannabis was reclassified to foster better policing, and that still holds. If we are going to make drugs policy on health grounds alone, surely we should start with tobacco and alcohol, both of which exact a huge toll of misery and disease.
