The Year's Best Drug Scares

Killer weed redux, pimple-faced potheads, vapin' in the boys room, Halloween high horror, and a crazy kratom crackdown


Marijuana was on the ballot in six states this year, and prohibitionists hauled out some familiar, even quaint, arguments against legalization. Three of those warnings made my list of the year's most memorable drug scares, which is rounded out by the panic over adolescent vaping and the DEA's decision to treat kratom as a public menace.

Reason TV

5. Killer Weed Redux

Harry Anslinger, who directed the Federal Bureau of Narcotics from 1932 to 1962, famously described marijuana as a "killer weed" that inspired irrational acts of savage violence. Anslinger's portrayal of marijuana as "the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind" helped persuade legislators unfamiliar with the plant to ban it. Now that pot prohibition is collapsing, diehard defenders of that morally and scientifically bankrupt policy are trying to revive the marijuana murder meme.

This year Roger Morgan, a leader of the campaign against marijuana legalization in California, told Reason TV that in "almost all of the mass murders that we've had in recent years," the perpetrator "has been a heavy marijuana user, because it changes the brain." The website for Morgan's organization, Stop Pot 2016, includes a list of crimes allegedly caused by marijuana—titled, apparently without irony, "Modern Reefer Madness." It mentions four mass murderers who were marijuana users, and my review of news stories from the last six years identified three more. Known cannabis consumers committed about a quarter of mass shootings in the U.S. since 2011—nobody's idea of "almost all."

Morgan's claim, then, is not remotely true, even if you ignore the distinction between correlation and causation. Nor does it seem that his Anslingeresque propaganda made much of an impression on California voters, who approved legalization by a margin of 14 points.

4. Pimple-Faced Potheads

When the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) indicated that marijuana use by teenagers in Colorado rose after that state legalized marijuana for recreational use in 2012, drug warriors trumpeted the results, even though the change was not statistically significant. "When comparing the two-year average before and after legalization," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), said at a hearing last April, "current marijuana use among 12-to-17-year-olds increased by 20 percent…while the national average decreased by 4 percent. In my book, that's a very big statistic, and [it] tells you a lot."

Feinstein probably won't be citing the latest numbers from that survey, which indicate that adolescent cannabis consumption became less common in Colorado during the very period when state-licensed stores began serving recreational customers. The increase in past-month adolescent marijuana use emphasized by pot prohibitionists was not statistically significant, and neither was the subsequent decline in past-month use. But NSDUH does describe last year's decline in past-year use as statistically significant, albeit "at the 0.10 level," which is twice as generous as the usual standard. Another survey with a much bigger sample of Colorado teenagers likewise found that marijuana use did not rise significantly last year.


The picture looks similar in Washington, the other state where voters approved legalization in 2012. According to NSDUH, marijuana use by teenagers rose slightly after possession was legalized for adults, then fell after marijuana stores began operating.

What about the idea that loosening state marijuana laws encourages teenagers to smoke pot by making it seem cooler, more acceptable, or less dangerous? Prohibitionists have been saying that for two decades, since California became the first state to legalize marijuana for medical use. But survey data show no such pattern, as confirmed by the latest numbers from the Monitoring the Future Study.

"I don't have an explanation," said Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which sponsors the MTF survey. "This is somewhat surprising. We had predicted, based on the changes in legalization [and] culture in the U.S. as well as decreasing perceptions among teenagers that marijuana was harmful, that [use] would go up. But it hasn't gone up."

Office of the Surgeon General

3. Vapin' in the Boys Room

This month Surgeon General Vivek Murthy issued a report that declared adolescent e-cigarette use "a major public health concern," noting with alarm that it rose "an astounding 900 percent" from 2011 to 2015. A week later, the latest results from the Monitoring the Future Study (MTF) showed that vaping by teenagers, which has been falling since the survey began asking about it in 2014, fell again this year.

Both MTF and the National Youth Tobacco Survey, the source of the "astounding" number emphasized by Murthy, show that adolescent smoking continues to fall, despite warnings from alarmists like Murthy that e-cigarettes could be a gateway to the real thing. Making that fear even less plausible, MTF finds that nonsmoking teenagers who vape typically do not vape nicotine and in any case rarely vape frequently enough to develop a nicotine habit.

These results have not dampened enthusiasm for restrictions that will hurt adult smokers in the name of saving children. "To protect our nation's young people from being harmed by these products," Murthy recommended policies, such as higher taxes, vaping bans, limits on advertising, and possibly flavor restrictions, that will undermine public health by making e-cigarettes less appealing to people who currently get their nicotine from conventional cigarettes, a much more dangerous source.

Bureau County Sheriff's Office

2. Halloween High Horror

For years pot prohibitionists have been warning parents that strangers with cannabis candy are determined to get their kids high by slipping marijuana edibles into their trick-or-treat bags. On Halloween this year, Bureau County, Illinois, Sheriff James Reed announced that he had come across evidence of this heretofore apocryphal threat: "suspicious looking candy marked as Crunch Choco Bar" that "has small pictures of cannabis leaves on it" and tested "positive for containing cannabis."

As a Google image search would have quickly revealed, Reed had mistaken Japanese maple leaves for cannabis leaves, which along with an inaccurate field test led him to misidentify ordinary candy as a THC-tainted treat. Read admitted his embarrassing error a couple of days later, but in the meantime local news outlets and anti-pot activists had latched onto his original alarmist claim.

"The cruel and unfortunate incident highlights the very real dangers legal marijuana has on children," said the Drug Free America Foundation. "These children were intentionally targeted by adults that were not their parents with the malicious intent of poisoning them." The organization's executive director, Calvina Fay, added:

This shows that the potential for children accidently ingesting marijuana is a real danger. It also shows that this is not just a problem for children who have parents that use marijuana and leave it unsecured and accessible around the house and it is not something we can simply blame on bad parenting. This makes it clear that children, even with the best parenting, can be exposed to marijuana. These children were unsuspecting and taken advantage of by a mean spirited person or persons with no regard for their safety or well-being.

The Halloween argument was deployed against marijuana initiatives in Nevada and Florida, without much success. More than 54 percent of Nevada voters favored legalization for recreational use, while Florida voters approved medical marijuana by a margin of more than 2 to 1.

Kraken Kratom

1. Crazy Kratom Crackdown

After the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) announced an "emergency" ban on kratom at the end of August, a spokesman for the agency said "our goal is to make sure this is available."

In case that was not confusing enough, the spokesman, Melvin Patterson, also told The Washington Post that kratom, a pain-relieving leaf from Southeast Asia, does not belong in Schedule I, the most restrictive category under the Controlled Substances Act, even though that is where the DEA had just put it. He added that kratom, which the DEA says has "no currently accepted medical use," is "at a point where it needs to be recognized as medicine."

The DEA apparently was surprised by the backlash against its ban notice, which included angry calls to Capitol Hill, a demonstration near the White House, and letters from members of Congress. In October the agency withdrew the notice, saying it would delay a decision on kratom to allow time for public comments and input from the Food and Drug Administration. Patterson said criticism of the ban "was eye-opening for me personally," adding that "I want the kratom community to know that the DEA does hear them."

That attitude was quite a contrast to the deaf arrogance the DEA displayed when it announced it was temporarily placing the drug in Schedule I, a classification that lasts at least two years and could become permanent. Saying a ban was "necessary to avoid an imminent hazard to the public safety," the DEA summarily dismissed kratom's benefits while exaggerating its dangers.

Kratom, which acts as a stimulant or a sedative, depending on the dose, has been used for centuries in Southeast Asia to ease pain, boost work performance, and wean people from opiate addiction. But the DEA views all kratom use as "abuse."

Since the DEA assumed there was no legitimate reason to use kratom, it did not need to muster much evidence that the drug is intolerably dangerous. It claimed there have been "numerous deaths associated with kratom," by which it meant 30. In the whole world. Ever.

"Deaths associated with kratom" are not necessarily caused by kratom. "Kratom is considered minimally toxic," noted a 2015 literature review. "Although death has been attributed to kratom use, there is no solid evidence that kratom was the sole contributor to an individual's death."

As further proof of kratom's dangers, the DEA noted that "U.S. poison centers received 660 calls related to kratom exposure" from 2010 through 2015, an average of 110 a year. By comparison, exposures involving analgesics accounted for nearly 300,000 calls in 2014, while antidepressants and antihistamines each accounted for more than 100,000.

NEXT: A Free Market Friend at the FTC

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. All of these scares could easily be averted if Congress would simply stop chasing the dragon of drug prohibition and get on board with feelings prohibition. Garage chemists and basement botanists will always be one step ahead of legislation, but if you make a law that bans altered states or an unnatural happiness?

    1. feelings prohibition

      *Damn* it, Fist! Stop giving them ideas!

    2. Seriously, this is where “we” are heading.

      Watch what happens when VR gets “too fantastic”.

  2. “I don’t have an explanation,” said Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, which sponsors the MTF survey. “This is somewhat surprising. We had predicted, based on the changes in legalization [and] culture in the U.S. as well as decreasing perceptions among teenagers that marijuana was harmful, that [use] would go up. But it hasn’t gone up.”

    I might have mentioned this before Nora; People who want to smoke pot are smoking pot. The state has created a black market so pervasive that 14 yo kids can get pot easier than they can get beer. Legalizing it isnt going to increase pot users. In fact, a regulated market should make pot harder for underage kids to get it. You aren’t going to hear me this time just like you didn’t hear me that last 10K times I said it.

  3. OK, so those are the drug scares. What are our current drug realities here at H&R?*

    * Agile Cyborg is disqualified for obvious reasons.

    1. Not enough

    2. It is 6:30 am I am on my second vodka. I don’t have anything to do today or anywhere to go so…

      That is my drug of choice.

      1. “The water of life.”

        Have a nice day, Suthen!

      2. Why not? All the cfb bowl games on today are worth watching. Have a drink and enjoy. Unfortunately I have to be a productive member of society today, so I will not be joining you, Suthen.

        1. I can’t get into watching football just regular-like now that I’ve several years of coaching experience. Try it a while and see if mere watching doesn’t become boring.

          1. mere watching

            Well, there’s your problem.

            1. I guess maybe if I got into handicapping, especially with specialty bets, that might overcome the indifference. But it might not; I might just want the results then.

        2. I played years of rugby, and it didn’t spoil me for watching football or rugby. Coaching is different.

    3. I’m addicted to water. I always feel like I’m going to die if I don’t get enough!

    4. Last week I bought a 1/4 ounce of Sour Diesel and found ten seeds in it. The buds were overly dry as well.

      The horror, the horror…

  4. Why does every Surgeon General need to be a massive cunt? Groovus Maximus for Surgeon General!

    1. So you’re saying Dr. G meets the prerequisite of being a cunt and is therefore qualified for the position? 😉

      1. You. You! You have exploited my own less-than-airtight thought-ejaculation and have turned it against me!!

  5. The government owns your body and it’ll tell you what to put into it.

    If it doesn’t like what you’re putting into it , you’ll be arrested for your own good.

    A Man in California Is Fighting a Caffeine DUI, and the State Won’t Back Down

    Progs marching onward to total state control of a once free individual

    1. Da’ fuk!?

      So turkey induced tryptophan DUIs are just around the corner?

      1. Nah – it’s the new way to fight the Obesity epidemic!

        “I’m sorry sir but that appears to be the remains of a doughnut in your cupholder. Surely you’re aware that driving under the influence of carbohydrates is a menace to society! I’m going to need you to get your tubby ass out of the vehicle”

  6. “Addiction” can be used as an excuse to deplore and/or ban any successful consumer product or service.

    1. Anything that can possibly feel good is a target for addiction threats. Therefore, by logical reasoning, we must always feel bad *ALL* of the time. It’s the only way to ensure that no one gets hurt by those dastardly feel-goods.

  7. Thugs will be thugs.

  8. I will repeat my complaint = i still have not tried any of these things, so can not yet confirm their awfulness.

    Seriously, what does it take to find a Kratom dealer? It used to be you could kick a hippie and find whatever was currently being banned, but now they just tell me they’re vegans and don’t do that stuff anymore.

    1. Look on Amazon. They’re a kratom dealer.

      1. Sadly they seem to be focused mostly on pills. Call me old-fashioned, but i like my drugs packaged like this

    2. join r/kratom on reddit. it is a community of kratom users, advocates and activists. you will learn everything there is to know about kratom and will find daily lists of kratom vendors.

  9. The Kratom actions are perfectly understandable from the DEA’s perspective. There is a non-zero chance that weed may not be available as an excuse to steal people’s stuff and put them in cages anymore, so a replacement must be found. It is a natural progression from the end of alcohol prohibition leading to the war on weed, and now a war on Kratom. Budgets, both direct and from civil asset forfeiture, are at risk! Something must be done!

    1. That works only if they expect kratom to become very popular.

      1. They’re already publicizing it. I’d never heard of Kratom until the DEA got involved. And they’re certainly manufacturing evidence against it based on things like the poison control numbers.
        Build it up to knock it down.

      2. the DEAs actions against kratom have had exactly that effect. it was estimated that 3 to 5 million Americans were quietly and safely using kratom – rather than dangerous pharmaceuticals and illegal drugs – before the attempted scheduling. I would guess that number is much greater today.

  10. The bit about teen pot use in Colorado struck me..

    They said the increase in past month pot use was 20%.

    But it was not statistically significant.

    20%…… Twenty.

    Not statistically significant.

    How big is your sample size that an effect that large has no statistical significance?

    Did they talk to 100 kids? Why are you reporting survey results that have no statistical significance for effects of this magnitude? (except that you would’t talk about the percent difference from year to year on small sample sizes, so that Feinstein statistic is intentionally cooking the numbers to make her case)

    And their threshold for statistically significant for many of their numbers is .10%, instead of the more traditional .05%. Jeez. At least they should have reported the numbers with a standard deviation attached. That would probably show that Feinstein’s 20% was within the margin of error of the survey – i.e. statistically the same as 0%.

    Loath as I am to say such a thing, it sounds like they need to up the spend on this survey a little bit to get some more reliable results. P-values of over .1 on tons of your results makes it seem like a bit of a waste of time.

    1. Why are you reporting survey results that have no statistical significance

      (tries to stop laughing)

      sorry, i’m just imagining the glazed over stare you’d get from your average journalist when the words “statistical significance” passed your lips.

      1. This.

        And the fun *really* begins when you drag in margin of error.

        1. No, the fun’s when you drag in beta & figure type 2 errors on results reported insignificant.

          1. All these statistical refinements only need be applied to election polls. It is known.

    2. [QUOTE]How big is your sample size that an effect that large has no statistical significance?[/QUOTE]


  11. I’ve noticed that the word, “almost,” has become a magical fudge term for prohibitionists that allows them to make the most outrageous, unsupported assertions without regard to supporting evidence or proof and still sound authoritative.

  12. [Marijuana] changes the brain.

    Cannabinoid receptors are found throughout the body. They’re activated by endocannabinoids that are naturally produced within our bodies.

    Our bodies produce a number of different kinds of endocannabinoids. Cannabinoid#Endocannabinoids

    Saying that marijuana changes the brain is simply to say that it activates certain receptors. Adrenaline changes the brain, too. Dopamine and serotonin change the brain every time we feel emotions. The brains of murderers are also affected by adrenaline, dopamine, and serotonin. Why single out cannabinoids?

    The suggestion that marijuana makes people violent isn’t supported by the facts. The suggestion that things are awful because the have an effect on the brains of murderers is absurd. The brains of murderers are affected by everything that affects the brains of non-murderers.

  13. “U.S. poison centers received 660 calls related to kratom exposure” from 2010 through 2015, an average of 110 a year. By comparison, exposures involving analgesics accounted for nearly 300,000 calls in 2014, while antidepressants and antihistamines each accounted for more than 100,000.


    You do realize that the way that their brains work, the appropriate response for them would be to also ban antidipressants, analgesics and antihistamines.

    Now excuse me while I make a trip to the pharmacist to get carded before I can buy sudafed.

    1. I respectfully disagree. The DEA seems to have no problem with any number of deaths and overdoses caused by commercially available pharmaceuticals which are sold by the multinational corporations who line their pockets with lobby money.

  14. as decreasing perceptions among teenagers that marijuana was harmful

    When I was a teenager 20yrs ago, now keep in mind I never conducted an official survey, the “harm” associated with MJ was already understood by my peers to come from enforcement of the prohibition against it. So, sure, a decrease in enforcement SHOULD result in diminishing that perception.

  15. So the Drogenbek?mpfung Arbeiterpartei is today the same as it was in 1932. THAT’s conservatism!

  16. Facebook gives you a great opportunity to earn 98652$ at your home.If you are some intelligent you makemany more Dollars.I am also earning many more, my relatives wondered to see how i settle my Life in few days thank GOD to you for this…You can also make cash i never tell alie you should check this I am sure you shocked to see this amazing offer…I’m Loving it!!!!

  17. Treasonous

    US govt pushes for legalization and then disarms the people..

  18. along with state govts.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.