ANTH106 Week 3 Lecture Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Download ANTH106 Week 3 Lecture Notes PDF

Description

ANTH106 Week 3 Lecture Cannabis Botanical names: Cannabis sativa and Cannabis Indica Active ingredient: Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) Main forms:     

Marijuana: dried flowering tops and leaves of harvested plant (5 – 15% THC) Sinsemilla marijuana: female plants, not fertilised (25 – 25% THC) Hashish (hash): dried cannabis resin and compressed flowers (20 – 80% THC) Hashish oil: high potency substance extracted from hashish (30 – 80% THC) Hemp: use (mainly fibre from plant stalk) for industrial purposes (0.5 – 1.5% THC)

Cannabis: A Brief History -

-

-

Originated in Central Asia Mentioned in ancient medical and religious Chinese and Indian texts In the West cannabis used (as hemp fibre) initially for practical purposes: e.g. ship sails and ropes and cloth W.B. O’Shaughnessy is credited with introduction of medical use of cannabis. Between 1842-1900 over 100 reports published on therapeutic qualities of cannabis. o Sent in 1833 to work as a surgeon in India  discovered cannabis and did experiments on people Late 19th century saw a serious decline in the hemp industry due to cheap cotton production. Recreational use in the West: o French Hashish Club (Baudelaire & Gautier, 1843) o Hashish bars in Europe and USA (second half 19th century) Australian states issuing licenses to grow hemp for industrial use: o NSW o QLD o Vic

Lost reputation with medical profession for two main reasons: -

Difficulty in determining precise dose Insoluble in water, made it difficult to make a liquid tincture  slow, delayed effect on the body

Symbolic Dimensions of Cannabis Legislation -

-

-

Himmelstein (‘From Killer Weed to Drop-Out Drug’ LR 34): ‘Moral entrepreneurs’: moral crusaders who play a key role in drug legislation by influencing public images of a drug (e.g. Harry Anslinger – portrayed ‘killer weed’ as a drug causing destruction). o We can explain the transition in terms of three concepts:  Moral entrepreneurs  Social locus of use  Symbolic politics ‘Social locus’: the social position (e.g. class, ethnic, generational) position of the drug users  the lower the social position of the users, the more likely a drug will be considered deviant or immoral o Beginning around 1910, Cannabis was associated with the ‘criminality and inherent violence’ of Mexican immigrant  linked to violence in the lower class ‘Symbolic politics’: drugs and drug prohibition as ‘symbolic counters in wider social conflicts’. o Drugs as political scapegoats for the stereotypes that are projected onto the dominant group by the subordinate group

Cannabis in Jamaica: -

-

Introduced by indentured Indian labourers in 1830s and quickly spread to black population (former slaves). Ganja: a scapegoat for elite and middle-class anxieties about deviant behaviour (crime, violence, laziness) of poor working class (including Rastafarians). 1870s – approx. 70% of Jamaican population used Ganja Middle class and elite consumed Ganja as tea, which was seen as acceptable, while the smoking of Ganja by the working class was deplored 1937 Anslinger (FBN) pressured British colonial authorities in Jamaica to introduce mandatory minimum sentences for cannabis possession.

Rastafarianism: -

-

Founded by Marcus Garvey: political activist for black rights in Jamaica, England and USA. Encouraged Jamaicans of African descent to see Jesus as black and form their own church Belief in black messiah: Emperor Haile Selassie (Ras Tafari Makonnen). Followers were bound by strict rules of conduct (no alcohol, gambling, cutting of hair). o Cannabis (kaya) was believed to be prescribed sacred herb that enhances communion with God and others  religious act Symbolic politics: colonial authorities considered: Rastafarianism dissident movement and a threat to social stability. The suppression of cannabis was synonymous with keeping down Rastafarians 1930s – 1958 – regarded as working class Jamaican movement with potential for native uprising  it was a dissonant movement (anticolonialist)

o

Harsh marijuana laws helped keep down the Rastafarians without seeming ‘racist’

Cannabis and inter-generational conflict (Himmelstein): -

-

By early 1970s in USA the public image of cannabis/marijuana had changed from a drug of violence to a ‘drop-out’ drug linked to ‘amotivational syndrome’. ‘Social locus’ of use changed to middle-class youth hence the image of the drug’s affect changed ‘Symbolic politics’: cannabis a symbol of conflict between generations. ‘The social characteristics of the Counterculture, as perceived by the dominant society, were projected on to marijuana and then claimed to be the psychological effects inherent in the drug’

Cannabis Legislation Film: The Sinister Reason Weed is Illegal -

Scapegoating still alive and well within Us – Black American 4x more likely to be arrested for marijuana offences

DEA Website: -

Says distribution of drugs are primarily done by black, Asian and Hispanic street gangs

Gussan Hodge: White Australia Prohibition: In the 20th century moves were made to prohibit cannabis as a dangerous narcotic: -

Geneva Convention Dangerous Drugs Act, 1925 Individual country legislation: Great Britain, 1928; Australia 1928; USA, 1937. Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961. Since 1987 all states in Australia have the option of law enforcement to decriminalise small possession amount with fines or diversions instead of a criminal conviction

Cannabis Legislation: Australia

Cannabis Legislation: Netherlands -

Netherlands: ‘de facto legalisation’ since 1976. Non-enforcement policy for sale in coffee shops. (Dutch police more likely to enforce anti-smoking bans than cannabis bans.)

Criminalisation rests of two main reasons: -

Cannabis as a ‘gateway drug’ Negative health effects of use

Major Health Effects of Cannabis Use January 2017: massive meta-study of over 10,000 published research articles on cannabis (published by National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine). Major findings:

-

Therapeutic effects (antiemetic, relieves chronic pain, MS spasticity) Respiratory disease (causes chronic cough, phlegm) Cancer (doesn’t increase risk for most cancers inc lung, neck and head except testicular) Immunity and cardiometabolic risk (limited evidence for both) Psychosocial effects (recent use impairs learning, memory; teen use  many negative impacts: education, employment, income) Prenatal exposure (lower birth weight) Mental health (raises schizophrenia, psychosis risk; exacerbates bipolar disorder, suicidal thoughts, social anxiety disorder) “problem use” (younger you start, more problems) Injury and death (risk for motor vehicle accidents) – habitual users have 10x the risk of car crash

The Gateway Theory Popular theory that cannabis use in adolescence leads to the use of more dangerous ‘hard’ drugs (e.g. heroin). David Fergusson and John Horwood: classic articulation of the Gateway Theory in 2000. ‘Does cannabis use encourage other forms of illicit drug use’ Addiction 2000, 95(4): 505-520. -

By the age of 21, nearly 70% of people in study had used cannabis 26% had used other illicit drugs In all but 3 cases, people had used cannabis before the other illicit drugs Majority of cannabis users (63% did not go on to use other illicit drugs If you use cannabis 50+ times a year, you are 140 times more likely to use other illicit drugs  60 times greater risk for other drug use when statistics are adjusted for other factors

Processes independent of socio-economic background: -

-

Cannabis provides a blueprint for experimentation with other illicit drugs, reducing inhibitions for further illicit drug use. Existence of factors and processes that encourage both cannabis and other illicit drug use (‘common factor’ explanation)  drug dealers, once they give you access to cannabis, you have access to other drugs you otherwise wouldn’t have Common or correlated genetic factors that may increase the risk of various forms of illicit drug use (‘neurochemical’ explanation)  certain people are more predisposed to try drugs/risk taking

Gateway theory often used as argument against decriminalisation or legalisation of cannabis. BUT critiques of Gateway Theory point out: -

Almost all hard drug users first used cannabis. However, temporal precedence cannot be equated with causality. Research demonstrates that only a small proportion who use cannabis go on to use heroin, as cannabis use tends to decline in early adulthood. However, there is ‘a reasonably strong association between regular and early cannabis use and other illicit drug use’ (Hall & Lynskey 2005, LR 35)

Legalisation of Cannabis?

-

-

-

‘The removal of criminal penalties for personal possession does not increase use of marijuana or more dangerous drugs’(R.J. MacCoun & P.R. Reuter Drug War Heresies: Learning from Other Vices, Times and Places, UK, Cambridge University Press, 2001). However, MacCoun & Reuters predict that legalisation would increase prevalence and possibly intensity of use and encourage aggressive commercial promotion. As of June 2015, cannabis legalised for recreational use in 4 U.S. states and Washington D.C. Predications  consequences of legalisation of cannabis

Change to crime rate: either increase/decrease Drugs off the black market More people using cannabis More teens using cannabis

Boost to the economy, including drug tourism

Increase in state revenue

Decrease in crime – drop in rates of violent crime Not entirely – tax avoidance Yes Generally dropping even as more states are legalising recreational use Kids in 2013 less likely to have used than in 2003 – rate fell by 10% Yes – 295 million in sales and 51 million in tax Dangers associated with cash-only  banks won’t take deposits  money must be stored elsewhere leading to crime Yes, but not as projected

Philippe Bourgois on U.S. political economy of cannabis -

-

Lived in Spanish Harlem mid 80s in the height of the crack epidemic “The mystery of why marijuana is so severely repressed by law enforcement should be especially humbling for public health researchers in the United States and for the field of science studies more broadly.” “objective scientific evidence” does NOT shape drug policy, media coverage, and popular opinions. Repeated medical, epidemiological, and scientific evidence that cannabis consumption less risky than alcohol use. Yet in the 2000s, U.S. spent over $4 billion a year arresting people on marijuana charges

-

-

-

-

“Despite (or perhaps because of) law enforcement's efforts, hip-hop culture defiantly celebrates marijuana and this probably represents a public health boon.” Why does Bourgois say that hip-hip culture’s celebration of cannabis is a public health boon? Because there’s a good possibility that increasing marijuana use has decreased use of more dangerous drugs, particularly crack cocaine and heroin. “The greatest harm caused by marijuana comes from the collateral damage of its illegality.” Criminalization leads to an increase in profitability of marijuana (remember the Bertram et al. and the “profit paradox”). Criminalisation also leads to an increase in the violence surrounding trafficking. Prison terms for sellers punish the poorest members of society, who then have a hard time getting jobs after prison....