Related Articles
To the Editor:
Re “Unexpected Problem in the Rise of Marijuana” (front page, Oct. 5):
As we navigate the evolving landscape of marijuana legalization, it is crucial to emphasize the need for effective treatment options alongside these reforms. While legal access to cannabis may alleviate burdens on the criminal justice system, it also raises concerns about increased use and potential addiction.
Research suggests that approximately 9 to 17 percent of cannabis users may develop an addiction, particularly among those who start young or use it frequently. This reality highlights the necessity for robust public health initiatives focused on education and treatment.
Effective treatment strategies, including cognitive-behavioral and motivational enhancement therapies, are essential for addressing cannabis use disorder. Alarmingly, only about 10 percent of daily users seek help, often because of stigma or a false belief that treatment is unnecessary.
We must prioritize funding for prevention and treatment programs to create a balanced approach to cannabis use that mitigates the negative consequences of legalization while promoting responsible use.
Peter ProvetNew YorkThe writer is the president of Odyssey House.
To the Editor:
This article makes it clear: There’s an urgent need for Congress to regulate cannabis federally.
My organization represents the regulated cannabis industry, which operates in 38 states. We test our products to ensure consumer safety and strictly prohibit sales to people under 21. However, we compete with the larger illicit market where untested, unreliable products are available. There is also a massive market for unregulated THC from hemp.
The article fails to distinguish between these radically different products and implies that cannabis legalization enables youth access, when the opposite is true.
Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration recently conducted an extensive scientific review of cannabis, finding the drug less harmful than alcohol and worthy of a lower classification given its low abuse potential and medical uses. The agency’s 250-page report wasn’t mentioned in the article, which cites an unpublished analysis of survey data.
Tens of millions of American adults use cannabis safely and responsibly. As with anything people consume, a small percentage of people experience adverse effects. Reclassifying cannabis will facilitate research to better understand these effects and the benefits. But the bigger questions must be resolved by Congress.
David A. CulverWashingtonThe writer is the senior vice president of public affairs at U.S. Cannabis Council.
To the Editor:
I’m curious to know, is there any correlation between cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome and the type of weed or way it’s consumed? I myself am a daily smoker, and am aware that my own personal experience is anecdotal and may not relate to everyone. However, I am very cautious not to smoke vapes or extracts often, and most days only smoke real flower that doesn’t contain a very high concentration of THC.
Since the market is now flooded with new ways to consume weed — extracts, edibles, a range of disposable vapes, etc. — could differing methods (especially ones where the THC concentration is quite high) be more likely to induce C.H.S. and other disorders?
Weed is not new, but all of these new products with high levels of THC are. I wish we had more information about these new cases of C.H.S. being linked, or not, to these new products. I get a lot of great benefits from my smoking and would hate to lose them if these worries around C.H.S. and psychosis inhibit future sales and legality.
Kelsey RoseBrooklyn
To the Editor:
As someone who knows an individual with severe paranoid schizophrenia that was triggered by smoking a lot of weed in 1996, I have always been well aware of the risks even as pot activists try to deny the legitimacy of her experience. I myself have even had a psychotic episode from weed.
From the start, pot enthusiasts insisted that the weed “must have been laced” after this person developed schizophrenia and I had my episode. But leading psychiatrists in the field, including this person’s first psychiatrist at U.C.L.A., knew way back in the ’80s and ’90s that pot could cause psychotic disorders.
Many cannabis advocates do not want to admit the harms caused by the drug, but denying it is criminal. The lack of public health awareness means these people have no idea of the risks. We absolutely need a public health campaign. Those invested in the cannabis business shouldn’t shy away from this reality.
Instead, they could tone down the THC content in weed and temper it with higher concentrations of CBD. The U.S. or state governments could also regulate the amount of THC a product can contain, which, interestingly, is done in the pot-friendly Netherlands.
Tracy ChabalaLos Angeles
To the Editor:
The article correctly exposes the chaos of the cannabis “gray market,” a direct result of inconsistent state laws and a federal government too timid to step in and provide needed guidance.
This disarray — marked by a lack of oversight and quality control — stems from decades of government dishonesty about drugs, leading to the criminalization of Black and brown communities and devastating immigration consequences. Our leaders have lost credibility, leaving the legal cannabis market to function like the Wild West.
Unfortunately, the article itself sensationalizes anecdotes. While it acknowledges there is no proven causal link between cannabis use and these extreme outcomes, it still frames them as impending public health crises, fueling fear rather than fostering informed dialogue.
What America needs now is truth, transparency and science-based policies. Federal descheduling of cannabis is critical to enabling the research necessary for a safe, well-regulated market as well and addressing historic harms. Fear and misinformation only exacerbate confusion.
Jasmine TylerWashingtonThe writer is the executive director of the Justice Policy Institute.
<
