Some of the issues are controversial and information changes frequently, reasons that SAYNO decided a blog attached to our traditional website, would be a good way to address these issues. This inaugural post, reprints a rebuttal to the Montgomery Advertiser in response to two letters published promoting legalization of marijuana for medical purposes (recent references at the Montgomery Advertiser). It received an immediate and heated response. That original post follows:

I would like to take issue with a few of Mr. Reinertson’s assumptions.

First it is erroneous to assume that because THC levels are stronger, the abuser will simply be satisfied to smoke less pot, accordingly. Tell that to the alcoholic who drinks fortified wine, cheap booze, rubbing alcohol, mouth wash, etc.  Take a moment to peruse articles in High Times and it quickly becomes evident that the fundamental goal of growers is to produce still-stronger  “super pot” through cross breeding and hybridization of select strains, reinforced hydroponics, the use of sophisticated grow equipment, fertilizers, etc. — all with the clearly stated goal of heightening the high experience, and being able to remain high for longer periods via increased THC percentage content.  This argument is patently false and obviously self-serving to justify relaxing with a “good harmless bowl. ”

If users are satisfied with a mild high from medium strength pot, then why the continued emphasis on producing still more powerful weed?   Again, check out the continuing run of articles in High Times promoting increased THC content and heaping praise by the publisher and readers/ consumers on those producing the strongest varietals– complete highly detailed descriptions of the smoking experience and pictures of mature plants oozing THC crystals.

And its not just magazines– take a look at the myriad number of pro-pot websites featuring stoned users, offering technical, legal and other  assistance (including books, videos, Q&A columns and more)  to help produce and promote production of  the strongest varietals, etc.

Secondly, regarding addiction, Mr. Reinertson would be well advised to simply review the treatment stats. The number one drug of choice for treatment in Montgomery (and many other locales) is and has been marijuana for the last seven years.  Can’t get hooked?  Abusers would like to believe so, but reality says otherwise.  Behavior patterns are modified significantly, with significant passivity, inability to concentrate and remain focused, memory loss,  and overall indifference to just about everything, as well as a continued overwhelming desire to continue to use pot (but not do much anything else.)

I saw this as a counselor with clients I worked with over 16 years ago, when “great “pot (Mauie Wowie, Acapulco Gold) was typically pushing 10% to 12% THC content.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to estimate the impact of pot now running 14% to 20% in THC strength to result in even stronger addiction.     But if this isn’t sufficient, simply take the time to review SPECT (Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography)  of the brains of pot smokers to see clearly the adverse impact of pot use resulting in reduced and abnormal neural function (Dr. Daniel Amen’s web site, California.)

Where is the justice?  The democracy?  It is alive if not terribly well.  Imagine that someone promoting pot use as does Mr. Reinertson in many countries today would most certainly result in arrest, a quick sham trial and a noose or a blindfold.    True enough– our criminal justice system is swamped with drug cases of many types and sorts, and is in sore need of reforms– drug courts, alternative sentencing, improved screening and  treatment, etc.  Unfortunately, the current economic situation does not bode favorably for such reforms in the immediate future for most.  But that in no way justifies legalization/ decriminalization– a classically illogical  “baby with the bathwater” approach.