[roel_v]

You're basically saying that only non-users can make a cost/benefit analysis of drug use. One could equally well claim that a portion of non-users have an anti-drug bias for self-justification reasons. Where does one draw the line? The only solution is to not rely on 'opinions' and naked theory, but on data. Which is hard, but even when accounting for error margins, there is to the best of my knowledge no reason to accept that people who have at one point in their lives illegally used controlled substances have a statistically significant bias that distorts everything that comes from them.