A landmark scientific analysis from Canada has upended decades of drug policy logic, confirming that alcohol and tobacco cause significantly greater harm to individuals and society than cannabis. Published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology, the peer-reviewed study utilized a multi-criteria decision analysis to rank 16 psychoactive substances. The results are stark: Alcohol emerged as the most damaging substance overall, scoring nearly five times higher than cannabis on the harm scale.
Key Takeaways
- The Harm Ranking: Alcohol scored 79/100 for overall harm, followed by tobacco at 45, while cannabis scored just 15.
- Social Damage: Alcohol's high score reflects its massive contribution to injury, economic cost, and harm to others (e.g., violence, accidents).
- Policy Disconnect: The data highlights a "failure to adopt proven policies" for alcohol, despite it being more dangerous than restricted substances.
- Global Consistency: These findings align with previous Lancet studies from the UK, confirming a universal trend in drug harm data.
Core Finding: The "Harm Paradox" in Drug Policy
The study's primary discovery is the massive discrepancy between legal status and actual harm. By evaluating substances across 16 distinct categories—ranging from mortality risk to environmental damage—researchers established a "Harm Score" for each drug. Alcohol's dominance at the top (79) is driven not just by its toxicity, but by its widespread use and the collateral damage it causes to non-users (accidents, violence). In contrast, cannabis (15) ranked far lower because it is significantly less associated with fatal accidents, violence, and long-term disease burden at the population level.
This creates a paradox: the most harmful substance is the most socially integrated and least regulated, while a far less harmful substance faces advertising bans, banking restrictions, and criminal penalties.
Data Visualization: Comparative Harm Scores
The following table illustrates the weighted harm scores assigned by the expert panel, clearly showing the gap between legal and illegal/restricted substances.
| Substance | Overall Harm Score (0-100) | Primary Drivers of Harm |
|---|---|---|
| Alcohol | 79 | Injury, Economic Cost, Violence, Dependence |
| Tobacco | 45 | Mortality Risk, Physical Health Damage |
| Cannabis | 15 | Low mortality, lower social cost |
Methodology Brief: Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis
The study employed a rigorous framework previously used in the UK and EU. A panel of 20 experts from six Canadian provinces evaluated 16 substances across two main dimensions: Harm to Users (mortality, health damage, dependence) and Harm to Others (injury, crime, economic cost). This holistic approach ensures that the ranking reflects the total societal impact, not just the biological effect on a single user.
Practical Application: Rethinking Regulation
The implications for policymakers are profound. The study argues that current drug policies are not based on evidence but on "tradition, stigma, and political convenience." If regulations were proportional to actual harm, alcohol would face far stricter controls, while cannabis restrictions would be loosened. A 2024 U.S. study echoed this, finding that Americans are far more likely to report secondhand harms from alcohol than from cannabis. The authors conclude that governments must acknowledge these relative harms to create honest, safety-focused public health policies.
Is alcohol worse than weed?
Scientifically, yes. According to the Journal of Psychopharmacology, alcohol causes nearly 5x more overall harm than cannabis when factoring in health damage, addiction, and societal costs like violence and accidents.
