By Jacob Sullum

A new study reported in Annals of Epidemiology finds that, contrary to drug czar Gil Kerlikowske’s warnings, passage of medical marijuana laws is not associated with increases in adolescent pot smoking. Analyzing data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, researchers at McGill University found that teenagers in states that enact such laws are more apt to smoke pot, but that is because of pre-existing differences. It seems “states with higher use are more likely to enact laws.” The researchers found little evidence that allowing patients to use marijuana as a medicine makes teenagers more likely to use it recreationally. “If anything,” they write, “our estimates suggest that reported adolescent marijuana use may actually decrease after passing MMLs [medical marijuana laws].” They say such an effect “could be plausibly explained by social desirability bias or greater concern about enforcement of recreational marijuana use among adolescents after the passage of laws.” Evidently Kerlikowske is wrong to worry that linking a drug to cancer and AIDS patients makes it seem cooler to the kids.

These results are consistent with the conclusions of reports from the Marijuana Policy Project and the Institute for the Study of Labor, both of which found no increase in adolescent use attributable to medical marijuana laws. The latter study did, however, find an increase in adult consumption, which was associated with a decline in traffic fatalities.

There seems to be little sense in which risks people find praiseworthy, and which we condemn, writes Dan Gardner

Last week, a physicians’ group called on governments to make helmets mandatory for both children and adults on ski slopes. Lots of people support that. They feel that skiers should not be permitted to decide for themselves whether to wear a helmet because skiing without one is too dangerous. Two days later, Sarah Burke, a champion “superpipe” skier, died as a result of injuries sustained in competition. Burke was almost universally praised as a courageous and talented athlete who died doing what she loved.

Does that make sense?

Maybe it does. I don’t know. The question isn’t rhetorical.

Risk is everywhere, always, which means we are constantly drawing lines, whether we are aware of it or not. We draw lines between risks that we are willing to personally engage and those we will leave to others. We draw lines between risk-taking that is praiseworthy and that which is foolish, between risks that should be promoted and encouraged and those that should not. We draw lines between what people should be free to decide for themselves and what should be regulated, restricted, or even banned.

But we seldom compare the lines we draw and ask if, in juxtaposition, they make sense.

My wife Jodie Emery and I both receive thousands of letters and inquiries with impassioned pleas that read: “I want to do something to make a difference. I want to legalize marijuana. What can I do? Can you advise or help me start? Where do I begin?” This is a question, without rival, that we hear most often.

It comes mostly from Americans and Canadians, but I have received the same question from India, Australia, Europe, the Philippines, Japan, and all over the world. It is a universal desire shared by many people in the cannabis culture the planet over.

If all these millions of people, largely high school and college students, could be harnessed into productive purpose, it would be a huge political force indeed! But most people who consume cannabis and believe in its worth still do nothing to advance our cause in any meaningful way.