Key+Parts+from+Sources

 [] discusses different cohorts ** "Sending the Wrong Message": Did Medical // Marijuana // Legalization in // California // Change Attitudes About and Use of // Marijuana //? ** []  This research suggests that medical **marijuana** policy has had little impact on youth and young adult **marijuana**-related attitudes and use in selected communities across the country. The ultimate outcome measure in this study was **marijuana** use, and it remained stable from 1995 to 1999. Medical **marijuana** continues to be part of public dialogue and debate nationally and internationally. As of August 2003, nine states (with more than 20% of the U.S. population) allow medical **marijuana** use, and Canada recently legalized medical use. Nearly three out of four Americans (73%) favor legalization for medical purposes, less than one third (31%) support general legalization of **marijuana** and the country is nearly evenly split on whether **marijuana** possession should be treated as a criminal offense (Gallup Poll, 2000). Regardless of public opinion, however, **marijuana** is a controlled substance and recreational use, although decriminalized in some states, is still illegal. Irrational Basis: The Legal Status of Medical Marijuana [] [] California specific example

AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALCOHOL //PROHIBITION//
[] The use of government //** prohibitions **// to address economic and social problems related to substance abuse is widespread, but this policy is surprisingly difficult to justify on economic grounds. Standard economic models suggest that //** prohibitions **// can have substantial undesirable consequences and that they may fail to accomplish their primary objective: reduced consumption of the prohibited commodity. Economic reasoning also suggests that moderate sin taxes on the commodity in question, possibly combined with various types of regulation, are likely to reduce consumption more effectively than //** prohibition **// while avoiding many of the negative consequences of //** prohibitions **//. Evidence from the U.S. experience with the //** prohibition **// of alcohol, //** 1920 **//-33, is consistent with the predictions of the economic analysis of //** prohibition **//: neither alcohol consumption nor alcohol prices changed substantially, while violent crime increased. [|http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=16&hid=107&sid=d75c0b30-0148-427e-9e15-dcc5d39cf49f%40sessionmgr110&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aph&AN=48017706#db=aph&AN=48017706] The present investigation examined marijuana use, abuse, and dependence in relation to anxious and fearful responding to panic-relevant bodily sensations elicited by a biological challenge procedure among a sample of young adult marijuana users (n = 64; 46.9% women; Mage = 20.97, SD = 6.01). Results indicated that those who were dependent on marijuana had greater self-reported panic attack symptoms post-challenge than those who abused marijuana. No differences were found between those who did not meet criteria for either abuse or dependence (users), and those who abused or were dependent on marijuana. No group differences were found for heart rate reactivity. Results are discussed in relation to better understanding the role of marijuana use and its disorders in terms of panic responsivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] [] A small component of the marijuana market might remain illicit—moonshine marijuana rather than moonshine whiskey—but if regulation and taxation are moderate, most producers and consumers will choose the legal sector, as they did with alcohol.
 * Marijuana Use, Abuse, and Dependence: Evaluation of Panic Responsivity to Biological Challenge **