It's quite a contentious report, but bear in mind the Lancet is very well respected, equivalent to JAMA over on your side. I.e. has been put together by medical profs and peer-reviewed (more importantly!) by similar.

Having completed part of med school some time ago (boy.... we're talking some time ago now) and with a wife who's a GP, our view is sympathetic towards some of the suggestions in this study. It is an impossible argument, but it's not as simple as assuming illicit drugs are more dangerous just by dint of fact that they're illegal. E.g. death due to alcohol and alcohol-related incidents is more common than any other drug, illicit or otherwise.

There is also the social stigma of drug abuse (ruins lives, tears families apart, physical damage, psychological damage, etc.) and you'd be right to point to those factors as why some drugs remain illiegal. But guess what? I believe alcohol has exactly the same social effects on many: ask any alcoholic!

One final question for you, Howard. You say "I remain convinced that drugs are illegal for a GOOD reason." So how do you explain drugs that were illegal, but are no longer illegal. Have they somehow changed in chemical structure in the intervening period? Have humans become impervious to their effects in that time? Are the social outcomes different now?

I am of course referring to alcohol -- prohibition of yesteryear, and its availability and status today.