Pubdate: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 Source: Victoria Times-Colonist (CN BC) Copyright: 2004 Times Colonist Contact: http://www.canada.com/victoria/timescolonist/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/481 Author: James Geiwitz Referenced: editorial http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n1580/a05.html MAYBE COFFEE'S THE PROBLEM Re: "Drugged driving tests aren't foolproof," Nov. 5. Kudos for the editorial on tests for drugged driving. Existing tests do not measure impairment, only traces of the drug in one's bloodstream; in the case of marijuana, the drug may have been ingested a month ago. Unfortunately, the editorial also calls Marc Emery's claim "absurd," that driving when stoned is safer than when straight. If we examine the research, Emery's claim is supported, with qualifications. First, marijuana does not lead to motor impairment, as alcohol does; in fact, in fine-motor tasks, stoned subjects generally perform better than straight. Second, marijuana reduces anger (road rage) and impatience (whereas alcohol increases both), two primary obstacles to road safety. Direct research on marijuana and driving concludes that experienced users of marijuana drive better stoned than straight, but novice users drive more poorly stoned. The claim by the RCMP that "scientific studies have shown that marijuana is the No. 2 drug behind alcohol in fatal accidents" is the truly absurd statement in this controversy. No such scientific studies exist. The discovery of THC in drivers involved in accidents is meaningless, hardly better than anecdotal evidence. Suppose I said that a high percentage of drivers involved in accidents have coffee in their blood, would the TC agitate for a ban on coffee while driving? It would have to have something to which to compare this finding, such as data on whether these drivers perform better with no coffee. James Geiwitz, Victoria. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake