CNN's #Gupta drove it home, but #Englund's piece nails the right way to shed light on these issues from a conservative, risk-averse stance. With incidence this low, and causality uncertain, bearing the burden of proof should be the task of those who want the status quo in terms of regulation. The prohibition apparatus should prove that the current setting offers a better outcome than legalisation in terms of cost-effectiveness, controlling rising health-care costs, reducing prison expenses, increasing tax revenues that could strengthen quality controls -which would in turn reduce health-risks together with age controls. All these while dismantling organised crime revenue streams, and thereby increasing citizen safety and enabling investment climate incentives. I've heard people say stupidity consists in expecting a different outcome from doing the same over and over again. What then, is Madness all about?