I can't stand the bad-rap marijuana has received over the years. Grouped in a category with cocaine, heroin, exctasy and other hard narcotics, marijuana has yet to claim a single life due to an overdose, has yet to be proven physically addictive, and yet to be conclusivly proven that it is a "gateway" drug. Anyone who tells you otherwise is mixing truth with fiction. The truth is, marijuana IS a drug.

There is no question about it. The active ingredient in marijuana, THC, is a mind altering chemical that creates a feeling of lucidity and relaxation upon consumption. By its very nature it

is less harmful than tobacco and alcohol, both of which are legalized narcotics. One of the most prevelant reasons marijuana remains illegal is it's effect on memory and reasoning. Fed up with claims that "stoners end up smoking all day and failing their courses", I decided to conduct a very basic experiment as part of my individual report for an Introduction to Statistics course checking the validity of this claim.

Though it was conducted two years ago, I strongly believe that the results of this experiment are still valid. IntroductionThe legal foundation of the status of marijuana in Canada has been severely weakened.

With the recent Senate report regarding the benefits of decriminalization and even legalization as well as the Supreme Court ruling that the current laws are unconstitutional, the topic of "pot" and its usage is at the forefront of the minds of todays youth. National surveys and reports have indicated that nearly 80% of Canadians favor decriminalization of the substance while a statistically significant proportion (65%) favor legalization.

Those who have argued against the legalization and more-so decriminalization of marijuana have argued it would create a generation of pot-heads, or "stupid" pot addicted youth. The main goal of this report is to research whether marijuana has any effect on the intelligence of youth. This will be done so by surveying 40 random people at the University of Toronto during the week of March 1, 2003 to March 8, 2003 and comparing the G.

P. A? of those who state they have used marijuana against those who state they have never tried the substance. This population of 40 youth will hopefully accurately represent the general population of students at the University of Toronto and in turn the average Canadian youth who falls in that age bracket.

To ensure that the sample is as random as possible, the survey will be conducted as follows. Four groups of two individuals (friends of mine) carrying 10 surveys will stand near the main entrance of one of the following buildings: The Hart House, University College, Medical Building and Convocation Hall. These four buildings represent the largest at the University of Toronto. The survey is then to be distributed one at a time to every 3rd individual who walks through the main doors.

It is expected that 100% of individuals who are given the survey will complete it on the spot and return it, if they refuse, then the surveyors proceed to wait for another 3 individuals to pass by before giving out a survey. Many may state that this is not a completely random survey as we are only getting individuals who have classes in these four buildings.

This is true, but the survey was distributed this way for the following reason. Our target population is the average Canadian youth and we define youth as anyone between the ages of 19 and 23, or anyone pursuing their undergraduate degree. Almost all students at the University of Toronto who are presently working toward their undergraduate degree have to pass through one of these four buildings at some point during the average week.

Granted this does not include those who are sick, or dropped out of school, but those people are not? verage Canadian youth?and therefore do not fit the profile of this survey. The Survey1. Have you smoked marijuana since beginning your post-secondary education? Yes __ No __2. What is your present age?3.

What year of your undergraduate degree are you currently enrolled as? Freshman__ Sophomore__ Junior__ Senior__ Super-Senior__4. What program are you currently registered in?5. What province in Canada do you call home? (if you are from another country state the country name)6. How old were you when you first smoke marijuana?7. How many blunts do you smoke monthly?8. Approximately how much do you spend monthly on marijuana use?9.

Have you tried or do you use any other drug beside marijuana? Yes____ (state drug name ____) No____10. What is your current G. P. A?Survey Construction and MethodologyThe survey was distributed to 8 individuals paired up to make four groups. These groups were then posted at the entrances of the following buildings; The Hart House, University College, Medical Building and Convocation Hall.

The survey was distributed by the group to every third individual who entered the building. Because the individuals taking the survey either took it on the spot or refused due to time constraints or other reasons, the surveys that were not taken were then distributed to the next individual who happened to be the third person entering after the refusal. By maintaining that the survey be taken on the spot only by every third individual, we not only obtain our random sample of the undergraduate population, we also maintain a 100% return rate.

The survey was given out during the week of March 3,2003 to March 7, 2003 at the previously stated locations during the following times, 10:00 am, 12 noon, 2 p. m. , 4 p. m. and 6 p. m. . The logic behind this was to not only obtain information from students who had classes during the regular 9? 5 interval but also obtain information from the population of students who had classes during the evenings.

Ideally I would have liked to distribute surveys on the hour, every hour, but it was not possible to do so using this methodology as those individuals who volunteered their time to help distribute the surveys at those locations refused to do so every hour stating? have a life, and no amount of beer is worth wasting an entire week?Regression, Correlation and AnalysisAfter calculating the regression line, we find there is a linear correlation that emerges allowing us to predict the G.

P. A of an average student at the University of Toronto from the amount of marijuana smoked monthly. For the purposes of this survey, the amount of marijuana consumed is measured by the amount of blunts/ joints smoked within a month, with the monthly period consisting of approximately 30 days.

The equation that is derived from the regression analysis allowing us to make this prediction is as follows,? -hat = 0. 0257x + 2. 88? where y-hat represents the predicted G. P. A of an average university student, and the x-value signifies the number of? lunts?smoked corresponding to amount of marijuana consumed monthly.

Even though we can see that there is a positive correlation, which may cause us to believe that the data implies the more marijuana smoked, the higher the G. P. A of an individual we have to also take into consideration the r- value or the strength of the linear relationship before we can draw any strong conclusions.

The r-value in this case is calculated to be 0. 332047, which although is not incredibly strong, it is strong enough to allow us to state that these two variables are correlated. In order to have full faith in our conclusion, we must make sure that an analysis of the residual plot gives us no reason to believe otherwise. The residual plot based on the data provided indicates no clear outliers or influential points, while also establishing no clear and credible pattern amongst the residual points graphed.

This in turn indicates that the regression line has captured the overall relationship between marijuana consumption and G. P. A. General Analysis of DataThe undergraduate degree to many has become synonymous for a time of self discovery and exploration, with the attitude of students towards alcohol, sex and marijuana taking on very liberal stance.

This generalization seems to fit perfectly when trying to interpret the data found while conducting this survey at the St. George campus at the University of Toronto. Of the 40 individuals who had completed the survey, 67% had stated that they either presently use, or have at- least tried marijuana during their post-secondary education careers.

Of the data on the 40 students, at-least one individual from each of the corresponding undergraduate years was represented. This allowed us to discover that of the students enrolled, sophomores consume the most amount of marijuana, 82 blunts, constituting 38% of all the marijuana smoked amongst the surveyed. Freshman rank last, constituting approximately 11% or 24 blunts of the total marijuana smoked amongst the surveyed.

With the last report conducted by the Canadian Senate, it was suggested upon it? conclusion that marijuana should not only be decriminalized but also legalized, with the legal age for possession being 16. Staunch supporters of the American? ar on Drugs?policy felt that making possession of marijuana legal for 16 year olds would create a generation of? ope heads? Anti-legalization groups cited the addictive nature of marijuana, claiming that if made available to younger audiences, it would cause increased use of the substance in their later years, which in turn indicates addiction.

In order to test this hypothesis put forth by the anti-legalization movement, the survey provided to the students at the University of Toronto also asked at what age they first tried marijuana.

By comparing the age that the students first tried the substance to the average of the present monthly marijuana consumption for that group, we can get a general idea of whether the previous hypothesis holds true. In theory we would expect to see a bar graph with the highest average consumption amongst those individuals who tried the substance at an early age as opposed to those who tried it later on.

Based on our findings we see there is no real pattern that emerges. Though the highest average of marijuana consumption, 9. 8 joints/month, is amongst those individuals that tried it when while they were 19 years old, their was a very similar average, 9 joints/month, amongst those individuals who had tried the substance while they were 15 years old. This creates a distribution with two distinct peaks.

This may be due to many reasons, one of which can easily be explained. Because the question asked for the age those surveyed first started smoking the substance rather then the amount of time they were smoking it for, the data refutes the hypothesis? s stated?by the anti-legalization movement, but may not refute what they meant. If the statement was less ambiguous, I may have been able to change the question around so that data could be collected on the length of time individuals smoked for rather then the age they first tried it.

To get more accurate information from the same data, we could attempt to find out at what age youth at the University of Toronto are most likely to try marijuana. This can be accomplished by creating a histogram of the age that people first tried marijuana.

http://www. lonelycanuck. com

Author:
Sunny Sambhara