“A prudent step toward marijuana legalization,” read the headline on your April 15 editorial.

“Prudent?” I think not!

Responsible and accountable and deliberative and rational? I guarantee not. There is a colossal mismatch existing between your careful journalists who cover the daily scourge of drug abuse and your editors and Editorial Board’s conclusions. There is an even more gargantuan mismatch between your editorials on marijuana, its legalization, and the newly emerging neuro-scientific facts — not opinions based on smoke.

First, The Day was not present, nor was the session reported, at Psychiatry Grand Rounds at Yale /Lawrence + Memorial given by Mohini Ranganathan MBBS on April 11. You would have learned much. This was a stellar update on our current understanding and best evidence of the cannabinoid pathways in the human brain and the known (i.e. proven) effects of exogenous THC (marijuana’s active ingredient - TetraHydroCannabinol) on brain functions.

(To be clear, there are beneficial, therapeutic effects of cannabinoids - medicalization and continued funded research into prescriptive, appropriate , clinical uses are not at issue in this essay.)

Second, the purported loss of revenue to Massachusetts and the balancing of our deplorable Connecticut deficit ring hollow. Even given best-case projections from our own Bureau of Consumer Protection and Appropriations Committee, in fiscal year 2019, $61 million would be realized from marijuana tax revenues against a shortfall of $192 million. Thus, in the short term, we might cover 37 percent of the deficit shortfall.

But the long-term known consequences (the experiment has already been done in Washington and Colorado) to worker productivity, classroom performance in preadolescence and adolescence, intoxication, traffic accidents with rising health care costs and morbidity from disabling injuries, homelessness, and increasing risky behaviors have already significantly out cost the earlier dollar benefits foisted on an uninformed and unsuspecting public.

Shame on us if we fail to heed the warnings.

THC is a psychoactive drug , one with the potential for abuse. It is addicting — 10 percent of regular users get addicted with all of the ramifications of tolerance, dependence, binging, cues, withdrawal, and prefrontal cortical hijackings with associated drug-seeking behaviors. Also, our friends, the garage and kitchen synthetic chemists, already are adept at augmenting, lacing, altering the base drug for greater addictive potential. Yes, there are black-market sources and indefatigable dealers with robust supply chains. Will recreationalization stop them once vulnerable brains are sabotaged and hooked? (Rhetorical question.)

“In other words,” the editorial states, “the question is not whether state citizens will use marijuana to get high. They are and will continue to do so.”

How can you write such drivel in good editorial conscience? As a society, as a wise culture, as lifelong learners faced with new and path-breaking intelligence, why is this accepted as inevitable? A craft beer to relax, a glass of red wine to enhance a fine dining experience or for your dose of resveratrol, or a joint for calming serenity as directed by a licensed, trained, knowledgeable care provider is not the issue raised. (Decriminalization is rational. Prisons are overflowing enough.)

Then the editorial takes the unwieldy leap to the bill’s language that legalization planning “must include provisions for substance abuse treatment, prevention, and awareness programs.” Would not these additional costs to our already overwhelmed providers and underfunded institutions be better re-purposed toward just prevention and rational legislation and regulation?

Your final plunge off the ledge into the abyss is to urge Congress to make this the law of the land. Fundamental vanguard researchers like Dr. Nora Volkow, NIH director of Substance Abuse Division, and other brilliant scientists like Rita Goldstein will hopefully never let such uninformed comment reach the light of law.

Once this marijuana genie is released, it will be much harder to contain or to re-cork. Multigenerational consequences, fully known and predictable, will be your legacy. The campaign slogan was not “Make America befuddled and faltering further.” But that is the outcome your editorial presages.

Rethink your “slippery slope,” then get the facts and retract!

Dr. Frank Maletz is a retired orthopedic surgeon and a member of New London’s Opioid Action Team.