The discussion of Utah’s Proposition 2 regarding medical marijuana has revealed a plethora of diverse opinions, which is to be expected. Of late, however, there has been a proliferation of false or misleading statements against the proposition, including Mark Greenwood’s op-ed of Sept. 9.

Two (of the many) examples include the falsehood that there are no traditional safeguards and that it makes recreational marijuana easily accessible. Nothing in the initiative to supports either of those statements.

First, a doctor’s approval is required, which is clearly stated in the initiative.

Second, it enacts additional prohibitions to those already in place. None of the existing prohibitions would be affected, and additional prohibitions would add safeguards against the use of marijuana for other than medicinal purposes.

What is clear is that hundreds of individuals and families, who have no other experience with marijuana, will categorically state that they have been helped by medical marijuana, and a cursory level of research will show that the 30 states where it is legal have experienced measurable declines in opioid abuse and deaths.

To preclude the use of this drug based on the unfounded premise that it will lead to abuse is to deprive the rest of us of the availability of a valuable drug in the treatment of diseases that aren’t responsive to other treatments.

Bill Forbes, Bountiful