under the influence of the drug experience certain physiological effects. Of course! People use marijuana because of the way it makes them feel, which presumably is different than the way they normally feel. But those physiological effects can oſten be very negative. According to the Foundation for a Drug
H
Free World, “Te immediate effects of taking marijuana include rapid heartbeat, disorientation, lack of physical coordination, oſten followed by depression or sleepiness. Some users suffer panic atacks or anxiety. But the problem does not end there. According to scientific studies, the active ingredient in cannabis, THC, remains in the body for weeks or longer.”1 If THC stays in the body for weeks or
longer, then it is easy to see how the so- called effects of marijuana use can last for many hours or even days. As such, it stands to reason that a user can remain under the influence of marijuana for an extended period of time aſter the drug is initially consumed. Knowing this, should lead employers to question whether they can simply look the other way and blindly hire people who are occasional marijuana users let alone regular users. Tey should question whether it’s wise to eliminate marijuana from their drug test panel completely. Yet, some employers are questioning their right to test for marijuana. In a 2015 survey of drug testing providers
conducted by the Current Consulting Group, 67.1% indicated that they believe employers are “confused and worried” about how to deal with marijuana in the workplace. Further, 12.3% said that some employers believe it is illegal to test for marijuana and 19.1% said some employers believe it is illegal to terminate the employment of someone who tests positive for pot. Neither is true, of course. It is legal in all 50 states to drug test for marijuana. Also, it is within the rights of employers to bring adverse
www.datia.org
owever, one thing perhaps we can all agree on is that legalizing marijuana doesn’t change the fact that people
employment action against someone who tests positive under most conditions, although restrictions may apply in some states that have legalized marijuana. Perhaps the most distressing statistic from
the survey was the fact that only 69.8% of drug testing providers said they “actively encourage [their] clients to continue to test for marijuana.” Tis begs the question why 30% do not encourage clients to test for marijuana? Are there drug testing providers who do not understand the dangers associated with having employees at work under the influence of drugs? Or who are not sure if it’s legal to test for marijuana or terminate a person who tests positive? Hopefully not, but it’s possible that some people, employers as well as drug testing providers, are only seeing one side of the argument regarding legalizing marijuana. Aſter all, there is a ton of information out there on why marijuana should be legalized compared to the amount of information countering the pro-legalization view.
Treating Marijuana Like Alcohol One of the most common arguments in favor of legalizing marijuana is that pot is no different than alcohol. Alcohol is legal therefore marijuana should also be legal. Check out these headlines from a recent Google search: • “Is marijuana as safe as—or safer than— alcohol?” (Source: CNN)
• “Why not regulate marijuana like alcohol?” (Source: Common Sense for Drug Policy)
• “No High Risk: Marijuana May Be Less Harmful Than Alcohol” (Source: NBC News)
• “10 Reasons Marijuana Is Beter for You Tan Alcohol” (Source: Hightimes)
Perhaps the most distressing statistic from the survey was the fact that only 69.8% of drug testing providers said they “actively encourage [their] clients to continue to test for marijuana.”
And that’s just the tip of the proverbial
iceberg; there are many more. But as you review the articles and reports that compare marijuana to alcohol you’ll realize that the pro-legalization people base their claims that marijuana is safer than alcohol on three key points: Marijuana is less addictive, less dangerous and less harmful to the user’s health than alcohol. However, to quote this article, there is a counter argument for each point that is backed by independent, empirical data, real-world experience, and just plain old logic. For example, we know:
datia focus 23
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80