In a press release published today (May 6th), New South Wales Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione said Dr Wodak, as a respected and responsible physician, had an obligation to bring any knowledge he had of this activity to the relevant authorities.

He continued, “I am deeply concerned Dr Wodak’s comments have unfairly smeared all police who work hard to uphold the law. That is not right". “As Commissioner of Police I am determined to tackle head-on any suggestion of police corruption that might exist in this area."

A few hours after the NSW Police press release hit the Internet, Chairman for "Drug Free Australia", Mr Craig Thompson, made it clear in no uncertain terms , what HE thought of Dr Wodaks plans to reduce cannabis use when he said, "At a time when the most reputable evidence points to the increased harms of cannabis, it seems highly irresponsible from a person in Dr Wodak's position to make such a statement."

How about a presidential candidate Mr Thompson? Would you accept his or her opinion if they said exactly the same as Dr Wodak?

Gravell
Mike Gravell, US presidential candidate, was speaking to students at a "high school" when he said that "tripping on marijuana is a lot safer than doing it on alcohol".

Mike Gravel - US Presidential candidate



In Mr Thompsons opinion, Dr Wodak has his facts well and truly wrong.

"For example", continued Thompson, "he (Wodak) claims that the idea has worked in Amsterdam, but this is not the case. In fact, the distribution outlets (coffee shops) are closing down at a rapid rate," said Mr Thompson, a fact backed up by Drug Free Australia's executive officer Jo Baxter, who said "Dr Wodak's message has dangerous health consequences."

Risks of cannabis use include memory loss, psychosis, impaired driving, hallucinations, asthma and even lung cancer, she said.

"If the good doctor could provide his evidence-base to show that open distribution of cannabis would actually decrease use, reduce psychosis and related violence, he may have a credible voice," Ms Baxter said.

"However, right now he has only dug himself further into disrepute."

Drug Free Australia
In case you don't know about Drug Free Australia, this is an organisation who, to use their own words, "launched a Campaign recently, to Refocus Australia's Illicit Drug Policy to one of 'Harm Prevention'.

But a policy of harm prevention is simply not possible using prohibition and incarceration as your guiding star, as 9 decades of history pay witness.

Brunstrom
Chief Constable Richard Brunstrom was publicly berated recently here in the UK, for saying that in his opinion, drugs should be decriminalised and regulated at ministerial level, in a bid to "quality control" the substances people are going to use no matter what the status is in the eyes of the law.

But lets be sensible for just a moment shall we? One of the United Kingdoms highest ranking, and statistically most successful Police Officers wasn't simply inviting a deregulated drugs free-for-all. On the contrary.

Mr Brunstrom was pointing out that for a government to be able to better "control" the distribution of illicit drugs, it needs to control the supply, and not, as is currently the case, leave the supply of illegal drugs in the hands of organised criminals. We already know this is a recipe for disaster.

Leveque
Dr Phillip Leveque, who is a toxicologist, pharmacologist and practising physician from Oregon US, summed it up well when he said of the marijuana rhetoric which does the rounds when a story like this breaks, "Simply repeating something which isn't true, ad nauseum, doesn't then make it true, (he was paying reference to the cannabis psychosis claims from some quarters), and Dr Leveque isn't alone when it comes to giving a controversial opinion to the cannabis debate, as the 124,000 American College of Physicians proved in February, when they released a statement informing the world "Mainstream Medicine Endorses Medical Marijuana."

Surely they wouldn't do that if it was as dangerous as "experts" would have us believe?

124,000 members of the American College of Physicians
Of course not, and if the second largest group of doctors in the US believe it to be safe enough to prescribe to medical patients, why can't we look toward a new, forward thinking way of regulating cannabis?

Presently if we "think forward" its all bad news as we already have an idea of how many people will use cannabis in the coming 12 months.

Dr Wodaks comments, coming as they do from someone who deals with drug concerns on a day-to-day basis, are simply an example of how the distribution of marijuana could be controlled by government, using a network of postal offices which already exists, all of which is helping to keep costs down.

For every global organisation who believes stamping drugs out using force is the only way to achieve results, there exists a hundred doctors who will vouch for the efficacy of cannabis as medicine, negating the need for the criminalisation of cannabis and its users once and for all.

A medicine which brings with it no long term side-effects, and no dependence.

Elders
Former US Surgeon General (Clinton era) Dr jocelyn Elders hit the nail squarely on the head when she said, "the efficacy of medical marijuana has already been established, and it's time for studies designed to determine the best dose and route of delivery."

This was in reply to the American College of Physicians, (ACP) a group who speak the same language as Dr Alex Wodak - the language of medical science, who spoke out in support of medical marijuana recently.

The ACP position paper which was published in February 08, demolishes several myths, starting with the notion still proclaimed by some politicians that marijuana is unsafe for medical use. The College notes that the most serious objection to medical marijuana -- potential harm to the lungs from smoking -- has largely been solved by a technology called vaporization, already proven in scientific studies.

The ACP position paper also explains that there is no reason to believe that protecting medical marijuana patients leads to increased drug abuse. "Marijuana has not been proven to be the cause or even the most significant predictor of serious drug abuse," the doctors write. "Opiates are highly addictive, yet medically effective ... There is no evidence to suggest that medical use of opiates has increased perception that their illicit use is safe or acceptable."

Theirs, was an historic document. Large medical associations are by their nature slow, cautious creatures that move only when the evidence is overwhelming.

The evidence is indeed overwhelming that, as ACP put it, there is "a clear discord" between what research tells us and what our laws say about medical marijuana. Their words, not ours, but if Drug Free Australia is unaware of the ACP's findings I'll be happy to mail them a copy of the paper.

Dr Alex Wodak deserves to be congratulated for bringing this topic into the public eye. Clearly, a man who works daily with drug users is well qualified to comment on how he see's the problem of illicit drugs being handled long term.

Drug Free Australia however, an organisation whose ideas and concepts seem at first glance to be as whimsical and unachievable as their name, clearly believes that oppression, persecution and incarceration are the answers to drug 'harm prevention' but today, in 2008, science disproves all of those theories, as noted above.

Dr Wodak believes that cannabis will soon overtake tobacco in the user figures, and all of the evidence backs up his theories.

The regulated nature of tobacco, allied to a long-standing high visibility anti-smoking campaign has served its purpose well in reducing numbers of people taking up smoking in the first place, and as Dr Wodak alluded in his original article, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest the same wouldn't apply with cannabis.

As things stand currently, with no government prepared to move in the right direction for fear of upsetting "highly financially supportive" lobbies from the alcohol, petroleum and pharmaceutical industries, it looks like nothing is going to change anytime soon.

But jumping as an "anti-drugs collective", on the first person who gives a quote which goes against government policy, isn't going to solve anything either.

Good luck in your quest Dr Wodak. Although you probably won't believe it right now, there are quite literally millions around the world who support your position on cannabis.

Unfortunately until the habit of "publicly discrediting" anyone with a slightly left or right of field opinion is put to bed, the majority of those will not speakout, and organisations like Drug Free Australia know this only too well, which gives them "carte blance" to say whatever they want, whenever they want to.

But they need to check their facts first! 

http://cannazine.co.uk