Letters to the Editor 12/19/2012

To the Editor:

Rob Meeter's guest editorial, "Marijuana use is more harmful than teens think," made numerous excellent points. It also espoused a couple of fallacies and overlooked the crux of the matter.

For context in my following remarks, I don't use marijuana.

Despite Mr. Meeter's inference, there is not one documented case of marijuana smoke causing cancer. If marijuana smoke were carcinogenic, it would not be prescribed medically to treat cancer. Besides their well-known palliative effects, the cannabinoids in marijuana have actually been shown to inhibit the spread of cancer cells (Journal of the National Cancer Institute Advance Access, 2007). That said, smoking ANYTHING is harmful to your health in other ways.

Citing a survey, Mr. Meeter stated that, "after alcohol, marijuana has the highest rate of dependence or abuse among all drugs." Not true. That distinction goes to America's two other favorite drugs (conveniently undesignated as such): tobacco and coffee. Unlike when giving up marijuana, stopping the use of tobacco or coffee produces physical withdrawal symptoms in the user, impelling them to resume consumption. Giving these culturally sanctioned drugs a run for their money is America's widespread prescription-drug (narcotics) abuse problem.

Which brings me to the crux of the matter. It's not enough for parents to talk to their teens about eschewing drugs. They must lead by example, practicing what they preach. Your words will fall on deaf ears if your kid observes your inviolable addiction to coffee - with a lump or two of refined sugar - playing out every morning. (Its toxicity aside, refined sugar is far more addicting than marijuana.)

You can't effectively teach kids to follow a healthy lifestyle without abiding one yourself. They know a hypocrite when they see one. Something for our obese, drugged-out society to consider when preaching to the next generation.

Michael Cooper

•••

To the Editor:

I do not oppose Rob Meeter's argument in his recent guest column that widespread use of marijuana, legally or illegally, is not a good thing. However, he does a disservice to his own argument by the use of defective

logic.

Specifically, he quotes a government survey, which indicates over half of all illicit drug users begin with marijuana. This is called "affirming the consequent": This is what happens when you affirm the second part by deducing the first. It should be the

opposite.

In reality fully 100 percent of ALL illicit drug users actually began with another substance. It is called MILK.

Jay MacAfee

•••

To the Editor:

Today (December 12, 2012) it was reported on the radio that illegal aliens in the state of Oregon are a $1,000,000,000 (that's one billion dollars) drain on the state's tax revenue and the taxpayers.

That is $1,000,000,000 that could be used to help our state's education system or improve our health care or a whole host of other items the State of Oregon is struggling to fund.

I remember the phrase from an elected leader, "a million here and a million there and pretty soon it's real money." $1,000,000,000 is real money!

Since most of the illegal aliens are from Mexico, this amounts to a one billion dollar subsidy to Mexico's unemployed.

Illegal aliens in this country and the state of Oregon are in violation of the law and are currently un-convicted criminals.

Now, I hear that the governor of Oregon is proposing to give free college tuition to the children of these law-breakers, while the college tuition of our legal residents continues to climb. Why is the state rewarding these criminals?

How can we, the taxpayers of Oregon, afford to pay for this free college tuition on top of the $1,000,000,000 they (the criminals) are already receiving?

Why do our elected leaders and bureaucrats continue to encourage and assist in this illegal behavior?

Dave Marlow