Re: Mr. Eastmond's letter - RG May 8, 2000.

For all those "enlightened enough to prefer marijuana over the hard drug that is legal'' (alcohol) you need to know the following about marijuana use: Over 10,000 scientific studies of marijuana have been published and the drug has not been shown to be safe or effective as medicine and that there are better, safer drugs available for all medical conditions considered.

Oncologists reject marijuana as an effective medication. Crude marijuana contains over 400 different chemicals. THC, the main active ingredient in crude marijuana, is available as the prescription drug Marinol.

Smoking marijuana compromises the immune system and puts AIDS patients at significant risk for infections and respiratory problems.

The risk of genetic damage to newborns is high if expecting mothers consume marijuana during pregnancy.

The higher THC content available in today's marijuana makes psychotic and other reactions (anxiety, agitation, delusions, amnesia, confusion and hallucinations) more likely.

One marijuana cigarette is ten times more likely to cause damage to lungs then one tobacco cigarette.

Young people exposed to others who use drugs are at higher risk for early use.

Researchers continue to regard marijuana as a gateway drug. 40% to 50% of adolescents in treatment centres cite marijuana as the drug that caused them to enter treatment.

American Academy of Pediatrics declared "there is little doubt that marijuana intoxication contributes substantially to accidental deaths and injuries among adolescents...'' A US National Highway Traffic Safety study determined "Under marijuana's influence, drivers have reduced capacity to avoid collisions if confronted with the sudden need for evasive action.'' Should you need further information about marijuana use and its harmful psychological and physiological impact please come to our Prevention Resource Centre. Prevention Works! DOMINIQUE SMITH Executive Director Centre for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention An unfair proposal April 25, 2000 Dear Sir, I am writing this letter pertaining to our government raising the legal age to ride a bike. I personally am already 16 and on the road so I have nothing to worry about, but I have several friends and relatives that are almost 16. I do realize that by raising the legal riding age you would decrease the number of traffic accidents considerably. However, I must protest against your decision to change the legal age of riding from 16 to 18. The reason for this is because I feel that my friends and relatives are very responsible. It is not fair to penalize responsible 16-year-olds just because there are a few irresponsible ones. Thank you for taking the time to read my article.

HASCO Get your priorities right April 19, 2000 Dear Sir, I am writing in concern towards the bike issue here in Bermuda. We all know that motorcross bikes are loud and often get complained about.

I feel if a person has one of these bikes they should be able to ride it at their leisure. Kids who enjoy scrambling are not the ones to blame for underage drinking and smoking. It's difficult to drink and ride while controlling these types of bikes.

I think that they should have a law that states the motorcross bikes should be able to be ridden between 11 a.m. -- 5 p.m. Most people are at work or school at these times.

In conclusion to this issue I feel that people should stop complaining about something so small when there are other major issues to be "attacked''.

JODY CARREIRO Unfair on teachers May 9, 2000 Dear Sir, The Minister of Education has announced that plans are afoot to license teachers. I agree that they should be licensed; but now is not the time to literally harass teachers when they are having the time of their lives with unruly children.

In my view, the Minister is putting the emphasis on the wrong syllable. He is diverting attention from the real problem in the schools: the children. If he wants to appear to be doing something, he should be doing something about the children.

KEEN OBSERVER City of Hamilton Don't forget the past May 9, 2000 Dear Sir, Re: Letter dated May 2, 2000 "Spend Money Better'' from Pisces.

I find it remarkably presumptuous of you to suggest in your letter that the citizens of Mombasa, Kenya would "give their eye teeth to have had their ancestors transported to the West under any circumstances...'' Perhaps you should take a course in American History 101 or read Willie Lynch's "How to Make a Slave'' and thoroughly acquaint yourself with the appalling experiences and conditions that were part and parcel of the slave trade and the "Middle Passage,'' our ancestors treacherous journey across the Atlantic to this Westernized civilization.

As well, if you take a look at African history, you will see that it was not until Africa became inhabited with thousands of persons, whose only purpose was to plunder and steal and deplete entirely the natural resources of that beautiful country, that the African countrymen did not always "live, dressed in rags and living in cardboard boxes'' as you so portray.

I doubt sincerely that you would be able to find one African who would willingly give up his present condition, no matter how pitiful it may seem to you, to have his mother, father, brothers, sisters, children and numerous other relatives sold into slavery.

VICTORIA WILLIAMS St. George's Finally seeing the light May 10, 2000 Dear Sir, Thanks to Phil Cracknell I have finally seen the light. In his world Robert Mugabe is the devil incarnate while dear old Cecil Rhodes is the next best thing to sliced bread. Make that white if you please! Although I never once mentioned Mugabe and instead focused on the infamous Cecil Rhodes, Mr.

Cracknell devotes a whole letter on Mugabe and lends scarcely a paragraph to he whose name became a byword for misery throughout Southern Africa, the aforesaid Mr. Rhodes.

This unfortunately is a fine example of the selective morality practised by the English of which I have alluded to.

While I am far from being an apologist for Mr. Mugabe, if it is true as Cracknell asserted in his letter of the May 10 that land was compulsorily purchased for as he put it "a pittance'', then I would be terribly disappointed, for by all accounts Mr. Mugabe has paid more than that which is deserved.

ROLFE PATTON COMMISSIONG City of Hamilton