Thursday, February 23, 2017 2:53:19 PMacheter
Their novel approach to the synthesis of
these analogs untilizes the condensation of the Schiff base 225 with glutaric
anhydride to give predominantly the trans-piperidone 226a
users which has the very highest likelihood of later heroin use. The progression hypothesis
(11 of 24)4/15/2004 1:07:52 AM
The Marijuana Smokers - Chapter 8
holds up best in the very group where the commission gathered data.
Lower-class adolescent slum dwellers are far more likely to come to the attention of
formal legal agencies of social control than the middle-class suburban teenager.
latter, informal, nonrecord, nonarrest implementation is more likely than for the former, if
Again, it is a certainty that this progression to heroin is most likely among the
slum dwellers, which the authors themselves state, and least likely at the top of the class
structure, which is distinctly underrepresented in official records. The process of officially
recording an individual's illegal behavior is highly contingent on social class,
neighborhood, race, and education, among other contingencies. Official notice, in fact, is
immersed in the very process the authors are trying to explain. The problem is not with
differentials of law enforcement involvement, as the authors imply (i.e., with the New
York Youth Council files as opposed to incarcerated drug users), but with involvement
with the law at all as opposed to no involvement. In my study only seven respondents
were arrested on marijuana charges, and none was incarcerated.
To reason from this
handful of cases concerning the characteristics of the 200 users in my sample would have
led to erroneous conclusions.
The Narcotics Addiction Control Commission survey at least implied that its validity
was stronger in some groups and weaker in others. Another study7 often cited by law
enforcement officers to support their pot-to-heroin claim was conducted among the
admissions to the Lexington and Fort Worth addiction centers' inmates in 1965. Of the
addicts studied, 70 percent had used marijuana prior to their addiction, that is, had
progressed to the narcotics from cannabis. This is quoted as definitive proof that the
stepping-stone hypothesis is valid. Giordano, for instance, quotes the Lexington study to
support his antipot propaganda.
Haslip, too, uses the Ball Lexington research report as
support for the progression thesis.
Further, both pieces claim that the addict survey
documents the pharmacological "effects" explanation for the transition to heroin.
What does the Ball article really say? Actually, its argument and presentation of fact is
much more subtle than the law officers admit.
The findings do not support the
pharmacological explanation: they refute it. And they do not even document the
progression theory; they qualify it. The main point of the Ball-Chambers-Ball article was
not that 70 percent of all addicts once used pot. It is that where there is an illicit drugusing
subculture, marijuana and heroin will be found as mutual components, making the
link more likely; where there is no illicit drug subculture, the progression is unlikely,
CANNABIS UK CABANSIS DE UK CANNABIS CANNABIS UK GRAINES CANNABIS CABANSIS