Re: More reefer madness

Issue: BCMJ, vol. 43, No. 9, November 2001, Page 495 Letters

I feel compelled to take issue with the points that Dr Ray Baker raises in his opinion piece “More reefer madness” [BCMJ 2001;43(6):362].

Dr Baker speaks of a “cannabinoid antagonist” that “when administered to rats, precipitates immediate withdrawal syndrome.” As an emergency physician who deals with all manner of substance abuse on a regular basis, I cannot recall ever seeing “marijuana withdrawal” and strongly doubt the existence of the same as a clinically relevant entity. Far more scientific evidence exists for caffeine addiction and withdrawal. If addictive potential alone is an argument against decriminalization, as Dr Baker implies, perhaps we should start shutting down Starbucks outlets.

Other arguments that Dr Baker raises, such as interference “with cellular immunity” and “introduction of fungal spores” sound rather vague and weak.

Dr Baker is concerned about the risk that marijuana poses to adolescents. This is a laudable concern, but it is intellectually and morally lazy for society to think it is protecting its youth through ineffective drug laws. Dr Baker believes that prohibition works, despite pointing out a 15% increase in marijuana use in BC secondary students in the last decade. Clearly prohibition is not working. If we truly want to protect our young people, we need to create a society that is more family centered, where parents spend more time with their children—even when they become teenagers. It is simpler to demonize drugs than to face the reality that we are a selfish and self-serving generation that has set our children adrift, allowing them to be raised by TV, computer games, and their peers. Prohibition solves nothing. We, as individuals, need to create loving and secure homes for our children and in the process transform our society for the better.

—Jeffrey Eppler, MD 

Jeffrey Eppler, MD. Re: More reefer madness. BCMJ, Vol. 43, No. 9, November, 2001, Page(s) 495 - Letters.

Above is the information needed to cite this article in your paper or presentation. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) recommends the following citation style, which is the now nearly universally accepted citation style for scientific papers:
Halpern SD, Ubel PA, Caplan AL, Marion DW, Palmer AM, Schiding JK, et al. Solid-organ transplantation in HIV-infected patients. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:284-7.

About the ICMJE and citation styles

The ICMJE is small group of editors of general medical journals who first met informally in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 1978 to establish guidelines for the format of manuscripts submitted to their journals. The group became known as the Vancouver Group. Its requirements for manuscripts, including formats for bibliographic references developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), were first published in 1979. The Vancouver Group expanded and evolved into the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), which meets annually. The ICMJE created the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals to help authors and editors create and distribute accurate, clear, easily accessible reports of biomedical studies.

An alternate version of ICMJE style is to additionally list the month an issue number, but since most journals use continuous pagination, the shorter form provides sufficient information to locate the reference. The NLM now lists all authors.

BCMJ standard citation style is a slight modification of the ICMJE/NLM style, as follows:

  • Only the first three authors are listed, followed by "et al."
  • There is no period after the journal name.
  • Page numbers are not abbreviated.

For more information on the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals, visit

BCMJ Guidelines for Authors

Leave a Reply