 | Research: Peter Dunne talks nonsense & wonders why Nandor doesn't bother replying |
 In a desperate attempt to get publicity, United Future leader Peter Dunne has recently been calling on Nandor to answer some "questions" he has about cannabis. Tired of this lack of gumption to research these things for himself, we have compiled the answers for him here.
DUNNE: "I want Nandor to address issues like the Swedish study that shows that cannabis use in those under 18 increases the rate of schizophrenia by 600 percent, and trebles the risk of general mental illness".
Contrary to UF claims, the fact remains that NZ rates of schizophrenia in the general population have not increased, despite a massive increase in cannabis use, including 20% increase in the 1990s and now almost 80 per cent of 21-year-olds. This is recognised by the Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists - who support cannabis law reform - and other leading researchers.
The Swedish study's findings have not been replicated in another population based sample, and the study was hampered by the fact that the psychosis cases were restricted to patients requiring a hospital admission, as well as a lack of information on drug use over the follow-up period.
One critique summarised the Swedish conscript cohort study with:
"For many years the only evidence that cannabis use might predispose to later psychosis came from a cohort study of Swedish conscripts who were followed up using record-linkage techniques based on in-patient admissions for psychiatric care (Andréasson et al, 1988). A dose-response relationship was observed between cannabis use at conscription (age 18 years) and schizophrenia diagnosis 15 years later. Self-reported ‘heavy cannabis users’ (i.e. who had used cannabis more than 50 times) were six times more likely than non-users to have been diagnosed with schizophrenia 15 years later. However, more than half of these heavy users had a psychiatric diagnosis other than psychosis at conscription, and when this confound was controlled for the relative risk decreased to 2.3 (but nonetheless remained statistically significant). Very few heavy cannabis users (3%) went on to develop schizophrenia, suggesting that cannabis use may increase the risk for schizophrenia only among individuals already vulnerable to developing psychosis. The authors concluded that ‘Cannabis should be viewed as an additional clue to the still elusive aetiology (cause) of schizophrenia’.
DUNNE: "I want Nandor to tell New Zealanders why he thinks it is a good idea to legalise this drug when Professor Robin Murray of London’s Institute of Psychiatry reports that some 90% of his patients showing a first episode of psychosis smoke cannabis?
The bill put in the ballot by the Green Party does not propose legalising cannabis, but reducing the criminal status of what has become a normal activity. 90% of people who use cannabis do so moderately and responsibly, and DO NOT get psychosis or develop other problems.
We couldn't find any such quote from Professor Murray saying 90% of his patients have smoked cannabis. We could only find...
"For most people, smoking moderate amounts of cannabis causes no problems, says Professor Robin Murray, a leading researcher in the field" in a Times Online article reproduced on the Drug Prevention Network of America website.
To put things into perspective, this same institute (London’s Institute of Psychiatry) have also found that the constant distractions of email and texting are more harmful to performance than cannabis. Those distracted by incoming email, phone calls and text messages saw a 10-point fall in their IQ, more than twice that found in studies of the impact of smoking cannabis, according to the researchers.
DUNNE: And while he’s at it, he can comment on these studies: A University of Maastricht study confirming anecdotal evidence that cannabis use can treble the risk of mental illness, and confirming that cannabis causes serious psychotic disorders in people with no history of mental illness
This research was conducted by a team led by Jim van Os of the University of Maastricht in the Netherlands, and contrary to what Mr Dunne alleges, it did not find that "cannabis use can treble the risk of mental illness". The researchers followed 2437 people aged between 14 and 24. After four years, 21% of cannabis users had experienced psychotic symptoms compared with 15% of non-users. The conclusion reached by this study was that the risk appears greatest for those with a predisposition to psychosis, as evidenced by mild signs of psychosis at the outset of the study.
In addition, Mr Dunne fails to note that the definition of psychosis used in this study was very broad and does not meet the recognised DSM-III-R rating system.
DUNNE: A Karonlinska Institute (Sweden) 15-year longitudinal study of some 50,000 military conscripts that showed that the higher the consumption of cannabis in adolescence, the greater the risk of schizophrenia.
This is the same Swedish study mentioned above (Andreasson, S. et al (1987) "Cannabis and schizophrenia: A longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts". Lancet, 2, 1483-1486). Is Mr Dunne deliberately misleading the public, or genuinely mistaken, to list the same study twice as if it was two separate studies?
An important point for United Future to note is that those conscripts were 18 years old at the time of the study. The Greens Infringement bill actually includes methods aimed at protecting under 18 year olds - so this study actually reinforces their argument. By inadvertently agreeing with the Greens, Mr Dunne has again demonstrated how little he understands the issue.
DUNNE: A 15-year study of 1920 Americans which showed the cannabis use increased the rate of major depression by 400%
Again, United Future is distorting facts for political gain. It would be very unwise to extrapolate this out to moderate average users. The researchers were trying to find out if depression led to cannabis abuse or vice versa, but only in relation to existing cannabis abusers. There is a world of difference between use and abuse.
The study (Bovasso, GB. Cannabis abuse as a risk factor for depressive symptoms. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 158:2033-2037, 2001) sought to estimate the degree to which cannabis abuse is a risk factor for depressive symptoms, rather than an effort to self-medicate. Over a 14- to 16-year period, the study found that people who were not depressed and abused marijuana at the beginning of the study were four times more likely than non-users to suffer from depression at follow-up.
In apparent contradiction to this, a recent US study into Cannabis and Depression published in the journal Addictive Behaviours, showed that adults who use cannabis report suffering from less-severe incidents and/or symptoms of depression than non-users.
Researchers at the University of Southern California analysed survey results from 4,400 adults who had completed The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale (a numerical, self-report scale designed to assess symptoms of depression in the general population). Authors compared "depression scores" among those who consumed cannabis daily, once a week or less, or never in their lives. "Despite comparable ranges of scores on all depression subscales, those who used once per week or less had less depressed mood, more positive affect, and fewer somatic (physical) complaints than non-users," the authors wrote: "Daily users [also] reported less depressed mood and more positive affect than non-users. ... These data suggest that adults apparently do not increase their risk for depression by using marijuana," researchers concluded.
DUNNE: Or perhaps, if he wants something closer to home, he could talk to Dr Anne Walsh, the Hawke’s Bay Clinical Director of Mental Health, who revealed last year that most of the patients in the Hawke’s Bay mental health unit suffering severe psychiatric illness were cannabis users.
It is hardly commonsense for United Future to cite this again, given that the Hawkes Bay District Health Board has confirmed that this is an inaccurate reflection of Dr Walsh’s comments, and that this has already been pointed out to Mr Dunne. Her report actually indicated that the majority of people who use cannabis do so without problems but that for a small number of users there are very real issues. She made no comment on the pros or cons of law reform.
DUNNE: "Or would he prefer to comment on this year’s Canterbury University study that shows that daily cannabis use almost doubles the risk of psychotic illness?"
Assuming he is referring to the Christchurch School of Medicine's longitudinal study, perhaps Mr Dunne should discuss issue with the researcher, Professor Fergusson, who has stated that he supports the Green Party Partial Decriminalisation bill, calling it "thoughtful and reasonable".
Prof Fergusson has also called the current law, which Peter Dunne supports, racist, inefficient and ineffective. In the study 'Arrests and Convictions for Cannabis Related Offences in a New Zealand Birth Cohort' (2002), Fergusson found:
* Maori are more likely to be arrested and convicted for cannabis offences than non-Maori;
* The law is inefficient with only five per cent of cannabis users ever being arrested;
* Arrest and conviction does not change cannabis use and is no deterrent to further use.
Prof Fergusson has also said the current cannabis laws were not working, and "might be exacerbating wider drug use". Because cannabis was illegal, to buy it, people had to get involved in the illegal drug culture where they were offered other drugs.
The Christchurch study is a general-population birth cohort from New Zealand that has examined the development of its participants for more than 20 years. The association between cannabis dependence disorder and the presence of psychotic symptoms at ages 18 and 21 years was examined, controlling for several potential confounding factors, including previous psychotic symptoms (Fergusson et al, 2003). The authors concluded that ‘the findings are clearly consistent with the view that heavy cannabis use may make a causal contribution to the development of psychotic symptoms since they show that, independently of pre-existing psychotic symptoms and a wide range of social and contextual factors, young people who develop cannabis dependence show an elevated rate of psychotic symptoms.’
Prof Fergusson has also confirmed there was little evidence to suggest the occasional use of cannabis was harmful, and there is "a clear need for policies releting to cannabis to avoid criminalising the majority of occasional recreational users who do not appear to pose a risk to themselves or anyone around them."
DUNNE: "Let me make it very clear. The cannabis of today is far stronger than that of the 60s, 70s and 80s. It is a serious psychoactive drug and it is being actively promoted by the Greens.
ESR research shows this is a myth and, as the Health Select Committee cannabis report stated, "the use of high-THC cannabis may have the effect of decreasing harm by reducing the amount of smoke inhaled by the user."
An extract from the HSC's Inquiry into the Mental Health Effects of Cannabis, 1998: (p36) Potency of cannabis.
"We wished to clarify whether the level of the psychoactive chemical delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) had been artificially increased over time by growers, as had been as asserted in some submissions. Drug Policy Forum Trust (DPFT), the Police and the Ministry stated that the potency of cannabis had not increased significantly over time.[Poulsen, H., Personal communication, 1998. Cited in the submission of the Ministry of Health.]
"The Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) provided information showing that the THC levels in New Zealand grown cannabis are not high by international standards. The average level of THC is three to four percent in the buds, while New Zealand hash oil has been found to contain THC levels of 20 percent on average. Oil produced overseas can contain up to 50 percent THC. Indeed, it appears that an increase in the production of hash oil in New Zealand, using relatively crude techniques, has actually served to reduce THC levels in most New Zealand hash oil."
DUNNE: "And I make one last point on the Greens and drugs: They were the only party that opposed the drug P being made a Class A drug. I think that about says it all"
Given Mr Dunne supported lowering the drinking age, opposed alcohol and tobacco advertising bans and opposed the Smokefree Environs Act, it seems a little strange that he accuses another MP of supporting drug use.
DUNNE: "They are the pro-drug party and, as such, they are dangerous to the health and well-being of young New Zealanders; they are destructive of families,"
Can United Future demonstrate how prohibition helps families? How are families helped by sending one or more parents to jail, expelling kids from school, or giving people criminal convictions?
United Future policy isn’t logically consistent or evidence based. For example, if new information comes to light indicating that earlier evidence was incorrect and a drug is LESS damaging to society than was previously supposed, they maintain that it should not be allowed to have its classification lowered to reflect the evidence.
Its election time and United Future can't get good media off their own initiatives, so they attack the Greens whenever they want some attention. We hope that by answering Mr Dunne's misleading and twisted questions, that he will finally use his famous "commonsense" and support ending cannabis prohibition... but we doubt it he will pay any attention to any evidence that doesn't fit his predetermined view of cannabis.
While we're on the topic, isn't it about time Mr Dunne handed himself in to the police? He is, after all, a self-confessed former pot smoker ("I did try it when I was a university student in the 1970s." -Peter Dunne, The Press, June 23 2000), and he has repeatedly called on Nandor Tanczos to hand himself in. Is this yet another example of Peter Dunne saying one thing and doing another? Another example of him having one set of standards for himself and another for other people? Does he know the meaning of the word "hypocrisy"?
|
|
|
|
| |
| Login |
|
You can register for some special extra features. | |
| Article Rating |
Average Score: 5
Votes: 7
| |
|
