Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1070939
25 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 13 JANUARY 2019 OPINION talk to people who actually smoke it… not to people who publicly boast about never having touched the drug once in their lives.) No, the real problem is that government's approach forces us to turn our attention to the 'harm' it hopes to actually 'reduce'. Now: I am not naïve enough to seriously believe that a mind-altering chemical like THC is in no ways harm- ful to the person who indulges in it. I also happen to agree with the proposed 21-year age restriction: there are, after all, known and document health risks associated with smoking marijuana in adolescence. I won't argue with any of that. But if we are going to talk about 'harm reduction', the first thing we need to do is establish how 'harmful' this drug really is. Immediately we are beset with a conundrum: for while government is busy re-criminalising cannabis for recreational purposes… it has gone gung-ho in the opposite direction when it comes to legalising 'medical marijuana'. Sorry, but this is getting a little confusing. Is cannabis 'harmful', or isn't it? Let me guess: it is 'harmful' when smoked by ordinary, every- day people at home or in the street… yet somehow, the exact same drug suddenly becomes 'totally harmless' (if not a downright miracle cure for every ailment under the sun) the moment some Big Pharma company somewhere looks set to invest millions in Malta, create a tonne job op- portunities, and basically pass on a small chunk of its mega- million profits to the Internal Revenue Department. And please: no comparisons with morphine, demerol, or any other cousin of heroin to be found in hospitals the world over. There is a reason why opioids like morphine are illegal for recreational pur- poses, despite having wide- ranging medical uses. They are dosage-based drugs, and have this depressingly con- sistent habit of occasionally killing their users. Even so, however: I am unaware that heroin-users in Malta were ever asked to register themselves with the State, or subject themselves to 'consumption measuring' methods. And incidentally, Malta boasts the highest inci- dence of problem heroin use in Europe. (Thought I'd just remind you all of how won- derfully successful our past drug policies actually were, seeing as how we are now go- ing to re-implement them). But to return to the de- bate about the 'harmfulness' or otherwise of cannabis… there is more in life to make comparisons with than just other drugs or alcohol. It is a question that has been trou- bling me for some time now: not just with regard to the present government's overall approach to drugs, but also to the way the entire subject tends to be treated in the local and international media alike. Why do we only ever talk about 'harm reduction' when it comes to drugs, and nothing else? Why do we never talk about 'reducing the harm' we do in so many other spheres… continually, on a day-to-day basis, all the time? Compare, for instance, the physical or psychological harm that may or may not be caused by smoking marijuana, to all the stress, trauma and physical hardship endured by 49 people – including women and children – stranded at sea for 18 days, at the coldest time of the year… because the same government that wants to 'educate' us about the dangers of THC, decided to hold them all hostage while it negotiated a resettlement deal with other EU member states. Would smoking a joint have 'harmed' those people more, I wonder? And while I'm at it: it's not just people who are sometimes directly harmed by a government's policies and actions. There are also considerations such as the environment. For the harm that one does to oneself by smoking marijuana – a drug not known to cause any major extended social problems – is in the main limited to that one individual alone. If there is short-term memory loss, for instance… or an increased risk of bipolar disorder, or schizo- phrenia, or any other physical or psychological side-effect you care to name… it will be only ever affect the user of that drug; not the country as a whole. Can government say the same for the untold harm its own policies have caused, and continue to cause, to our natural environment? If mari- juana consumption causes such 'harm' that government feels the need to 'measure' it… what can we say about the continual loss of natural habitat to overdevelopment? That's measurable too, you know. Or how about an aqua- culture industry that has ru- ined our seas, and is contrib- uting to a global depletion of marine life even as we speak? After all, what ultimately causes more 'harm'… the oc- casional marijuana smoker, or the wholesale depredation of the environment in the name of unbridled, insatiable greed? There are, of course, other areas we could go into: does cannabis cause more harm than corruption? Nepotism? Misogyny? Racism? Domestic violence…? But we'd be at it all day. Bottom line is: if gov- ernment expects to be taken seriously when talking about 'harm reduction'… it should start by reducing some of the much more grievous harm it causes itself, every day. Until it finally starts put- ting its marijuana where its mouth is… quite frankly, it has absolutely no business to be 'educating' anyone about anything at all. Why do we only ever talk about 'harm reduction' when it comes to drugs? Why do we never talk about 'reducing the harm' from corruption? Nepotism? Misog yny? Racism? Domestic violence…? Why do we only ever talk about 'harm reduction' when it comes to drugs, and nothing else? Why do we never talk about 'reducing the harm' we do in so many other spheres… continually, on a day-to-day basis, all the time?