Dear Editor: Re: Russell Barth's letter 5 Apr 05 Mr. Barth needs to read my letter a few more times before criticizing it. In my original letter printed 29 March, I did not once advocate or "root" for prohibition. I did however on several occasions, advocate for education, guidance, and stiffer penalties for lawbreakers! Perhaps Mr. Barth you should stop smoking and start reading! An example of shortsighted thinking is right in front of Mr. Barth. A study that determines that THC shrinks the tumors in rats, without noting other possible side effects, is not a full and complete study. We have seen this in numerous drug studies in Canada and the US that have resulted in mass recalls of drugs such as thalidomide, vioxx, and more recently the drug phenylpropanolamine. These drugs were all approved for use without the long-term effects being known. The same can be said for marijuana. [continues 816 words]
Dear Editor: Re: Second Thought, Camrose Booster, Mar. 15/05 After reading Dr. Osbourne's article I was compelled to write. I cannot believe that we allow this type of thinking in our educational establishments. No wonder we have such difficulty controlling crime, when people such as Dr. Osbourne write articles practically encouraging people to flaunt the law! What's worse is the alarming errors that he, a professor of sociology, has included in his article! While not all marijuana users are responsible for the tragic deaths of the RCMP Officers in Mayerthorpe, it brings me to ask, would this have happened if there were no viable market for marijuana in the first place? [continues 568 words]
