Correspondence
Epidemiological Data are Lacking
The authors describe the symptoms of somatic, mental, and psychosocial impacts in a detailed and evidence-based manner (1). However, I miss epidemiological data on the distribution of quantitative use.
According to our epidemiological understanding, consumers with excessive cannabis use are in the minority, the majority of users are occasional consumers. The article leaves an aftertaste, especially when taking into account the current sociopolitical discussion, as it provides opponents of liberalization with a point of attack in additional (pseudo-) arguments in support of their known theories.
A differentiation between medical effects in users whose consumption is high and those whose consumption is low would have benefited the article; for this reason, I think that the authors did a disservice to the fair sociopolitical discussion of the entire topic.
The fact that by retaining the 40 year old German narcotics law (Betäubungsmittelgesetz, BtmG), cannabis users continue to be criminalized and may therefore lose their social or economic/financial status in society, although their consumption does not result in appreciable deviations regarding good social conduct, is the real scandal in society.
Independently of the indication, the case should be made for a sober, medical discourse on the risks of non-medicinal cannabis use; in my view, the inclusion of epidemiological data in this is mandatory.
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2016.0009a
Ulrich Braune
Schwerin
braune.ulrich@web.de
Conflict of interest statement
The author declares that no conflict of interest exists.
| 1. | Hoch E, Bonnet U, Thomasius R, Ganzer F, Havemann-Reinecke U, Preuss UW: Risks associated with the non-medicinal use of cannabis. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2015; 112: 271–8. VOLLTEXT |
