嫩草影院

Another news station has done a test on marijuana smokers on a driving course and has come to two conclusions that聽we already know:

1. Having marijuana聽in your system is no indicator of any driving impairment, and
2. Smoking marijuana聽then immediately driving is going to reduce some people鈥檚 ability to drive.

Shortly after Washington legalized marijuana, local news station . It was then we met a young woman named Addy Norton, whose driving was only 鈥渂orderline鈥�, according to an observing drug recognition expert (DRE) police officer, once she had reached 56 nanograms of active THC per milliliter of her blood (ng/mL). Washington had included an unscientific 5 ng/mL聽per se DUID punishment in its law and the KIRO test provided clear evidence of the worthlessness of the limit for determining actual impairment.

Now, a FOX station in Boston, WFXT, has . Before we continue, let鈥檚 be clear that the WFXT testing is referring to nanograms of active THC聽in their urine, not in their blood. At least, I think they are. Toward the end of the piece, one of the doctors refers to聽metabolites, which is an even-more unscientific method of punishing cannabis-using drivers.聽This makes comparisons to the KIRO test imperfect.

However, many states use detection of active THC or inactive metabolites in urine as the basis for their zero tolerance marijuana DUID laws. These urine tests, according to WFXT, register a positive result at 50ng/mL. So, we can consider them useful for debunking the idea of zero-tolerance marijuana DUIDs specifically and the idea of stoned mayhem on the freeways in general.

Here are the results of the test 鈥� each 鈥渞un鈥� followed smoking 3/4 gram of Critical Cheese that tested at 22.74 percent THC:

1. Quentin 鈥� 36-year-old male, moderate user.
   Baseline = 94ng/mL, 鈥渘o signs of impairment鈥�
   First Run = 鈥渨ithout any significant issues鈥�
   Second Run = 鈥渙nly minor issues鈥�
   Third Run = 鈥渕ore signs of impairment,聽hitting a cone鈥�
2. Carol 鈥� 56-year-old female, daily medical user
   Baseline = 94ng/mL, 鈥渙nly minimal trouble鈥�
   First Run = 鈥渟he did back into the rear barrier in the parking test鈥�, 鈥淪he seemed a little bit more confused鈥�
   Second Run = 鈥渃rashed through several cones鈥�
   Third Run = 鈥渕ore signs of impairment,聽slowed down significantly鈥�
3. Corinne 鈥� 24-year-old female, daily recreational user
   Baseline = 100ng/mL, 鈥渘o obvious signs of impairment鈥�
   First Run = 鈥渇ailed to stop after the high speed emergency lane change鈥�
   Second Run = 鈥� hit a series of smaller cones on the side of the emergency stop and lane change鈥�
   Third Run = 鈥渕ore signs of impairment,聽sped up through some parts of the driving course鈥�
4. Don 鈥� 65-year-old male, moderate medical user
   Baseline = 104ng/mL, 鈥渆xcelled in the first runs鈥�
   First Run = 鈥渒nocked down one cone in the slalom鈥�
   Second Run = 鈥渙nly minor issues鈥�
   Third Run =聽鈥漨ore signs of impairment,聽slowed down significantly鈥�

Dr. Jordan Tishler observed the test and noted that 鈥渢he sky isn鈥檛 falling and not everybody crashed and burned.鈥� Everyone involved with the testing observed that the effects of marijuana on each volunteer was different, with some speeding up and others slowing down. Even at the highest levels of marijuana use, the volunteers were able to successfully complete many portions of the course.

When the story threw back to the anchors at the FOX station, one seemed unable to believe that we wouldn鈥檛 be able to set a fixed limit, like alcohol, to determine whether or not a driver is impaired. But this isn鈥檛 surprising to anybody who understands how marijuana works in the body. That includes the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which that 鈥淚t is inadvisable to try and predict effects based on blood THC concentrations alone, and currently impossible to predict specific effects based on THC-COOH concentrations.鈥�

The only surprise to me in this test is how the older drivers slowed down in the third run and the younger drivers sped up. Other than that, we found that prohibitionists need to back off the idea that having weed in your system means you鈥檙e more dangerous on the road and that tokers need to back off the idea that smoking pot then immediately driving means you鈥檙e not more dangerous on the road.