Last month I wrote about a New Zealand study which found that marijuana use can harm your gums or even make your teeth fall out.
Recent studies have also found smoking pot exacerbates schizophrenia, and can bring on lung disease 20 years earlier than cigarette smokers.
The Baptist Press today also examines that New Zealand report and points out that marijuana smoke can contain twice the concentration of cancer-causing polyaromatic hydrocarbons.
Apparently, pot isn't the harmless drug many make it out to be.
Another Baptist Press article contains the testimony of a man for whom marijuana was a gateway drug leading to things much worse:
"I began listening to rock and roll music and smoking pot and drinking some," he recounted to Baptist Press. "That went on, and around 1986 or so when I got in high school, I really started drinking every day, smoking weed every day, taking pills three or four times a week. And also when I was in ninth grade I started using cocaine."
A couple of years after he graduated from high school, Drennon began intravenous drug use, and two years after that he started using heroin.
Not everyone who uses pot goes on to other things. I have a friend right now who has used marijuana for over 20 years and has never moved on to harder drugs. He is, however, struggling to break free from this addiction, having realized it's negative impact on his marriage and his relationship with God.
But in my experience, many if not most people who start using marijuana do graduate to drugs which take an even deadlier toll than the maladies outlined earlier in this post. And several of them have so lost their grip on reality that it's difficult to carry on a well-grounded conversation with them, much less a meaningful friendship.
Ironically, some advocate marijuana for medicinal use. When there are other painkillers available, some even using THC in another form, it seems odd that someone would advocate the use of marijuana for medical reasons, especially when there are such dangers involved with its use.
I suspect that most of this advocacy is just a cover to excuse and muddle efforts to stop general drug use. There have been a number of stories of abuse in California where they've tried legalizing pot; not just recreational "abuse" but abuse of the law, ostensibly for medical reasons, but for providing cover for regular drug abuse.
When some people can use a product that is otherwise illegal, or substances like hemp which look very much like marijuana are legalized, it makes it very difficult for the law enforcement community to keep a handle on things. And I think that's the whole idea behind the "medical marijuana" effort.
You hear of very few doctors supporting legalization of marijuana, but quite a few stereotypical potheads stumping for it. To me, that speaks volumes.
40 comments:
If marijuana is so much more dangerous than tobacco, then where are all the deaths caused by marijuana? Where are these statistics? Where's all the proof that marijuana causes cancer or even death?
People need to look into these studies in order to realize how small and weak they really are.
Um, that's what this post and the referenced studies are about, Anonymous. Have you been spoking pot?
The percentage of those affected will naturally be smaller than tobacco use, because a smaller cross segment of the population uses pot.
Besides, you can still light up a cigarette in public (in some places, still) without being arrested, but pot smoking is by its illegal nature not as convenient to do, so it isn't done as often. But as the New Zealand study points out, lung disease typically comes on 20 years earlier from pot use.
By Bruce Mirken
Source: AlterNet
USA -- Recent weeks have seen a rash of new studies of marijuana hitting the mass media, generating scary headlines like "Smoking Pot Rots Your Gums," "Cannabis Bigger Cancer Risk Than Cigarettes," and "Pot Withdrawal Similar to Quitting Cigarettes. Most of this coverage can be boiled down to a fairly simple equation:
Flawed science + uncritical reporting = misinformation.
Mercifully, the U.S. mass media were so distracted by Super Tuesday, Heath Ledger's autopsy and the latest Britney Spears trauma that reports of these studies didn't get as much play as they might have. That's good, because the research had significant gaps, and the reporting ranged from slapdash to flat wretched.
Lung Cancer: A Joint = 20 Cigarettes
The lung cancer study was the scariest. Since cigarettes are a known lung cancer risk, it seems plausible that marijuana might carry similar risks. In fact, most of the scientific evidence tends in the opposite direction -- though one would never know it from reading either the study or the Reuters wire story that got the heaviest circulation.
Conducted in New Zealand, this was what is called a "case-control" study, in which researchers looked at a group of patients who had lung cancer and compared them to a group without cancer -- the controls -- matched for age and other demographics. All were asked about various factors that might increase their lung cancer risk, including smoking cigarettes or marijuana. After running the data on 79 cancer cases and 324 controls through myriad equations and mathematical analyses, the researchers proclaimed that one joint packed a cancer risk roughly equal to 20 cigarettes -- an assertion that became Reuters' lead.
What was downplayed in the study, published in the European Respiratory Journal, and missing entirely from most media reports was context -- context that strongly suggests that its alarming conclusion is wrong.
For one thing, the new conflicts with other, much larger studies. In a study published in 1997, Kaiser-Permanente researchers followed 65,000 patients for 10 years and saw no sign of marijuana use increasing the risk of lung cancer or other smoking-related cancers. And a UCLA study similar in design to this one, published in 2006, found a trend toward lower lung cancer rates among marijuana smokers. Instead of 79 cancer cases, the UCLA team looked at 1,212. The result was so striking that they speculated that it "may reflect a protective effect of marijuana."
That's right: Marijuana might protect from cancer. Piles of published studies going back to the mid-1970s document the cancer-fighting properties of marijuana's active components, THC and other chemicals called cannabinoids. Anticancer activity has been shown in many types of malignant cells, including lung cancer cells. So even though marijuana smoke contains tars and other potentially carcinogenic compounds, it is entirely plausible that cannabinoids counter any harmful effects.
But even without such context, a closer look at the New Zealand data raises questions that should have been asked by reporters. For example, most marijuana smokers in the study actually didn't show an increased risk of cancer. The only group that did was those whose marijuana use equaled at least 10.5 "joint-years" (one joint-year equals smoking a joint every day for one year). That group constituted a whopping 14 people. All those complicated mathematical models leading to the "20 times the risk" assertion, and contradicting reams of published research, rest on exactly 14 people.
Bob
Ironically, you offer up other painkillers as an alternative to medical cannabis without concern for the highly addictive, costly, and proclivity to horrible side effects caused by them. THC in another form is ineffective and prohibitively expensive at approx $1500 a month.
The risk ratio of a God given plant as medicine seems small compared to the pharmaceutical alternatives.
As for supportive doctors a little research would have turned up quite a few, Dr. Ron Paul most notably.
Yes, Virapattra, the libertarian Ron Paul who isn't too keen on drug laws in general.
I stand my my original remarks: there are other alternatives that don't make it harder to keep dangerous drugs under control by law enforcement.
What you refer to was not a study or research but propaganda. All reputable scientific and medical research has proven the opposite. Realistically speaking do you actually think that the "Baptist Press" would be a non biased reputable newspaper? Spare me your "Reefer Madness" nonsense.
Cannabis is NOT a dangerous drug! The reason you think that is because you've been brainwashed from over 70 years of anti-marijuana propaganda ad campaigns financed by the Federal Government of the U.S.A., I'm sure you are under age 70 so all your life you have heard only the negative aspects of marijuana use and that was for a reason. What reason you ask? To manipulate public opinion through the disemination of misinformation. So there, bleh, I'm now sticking my tongue out at you, that's the mature reaction this BS article deserves. They were not interested in truth they were assigned to look for and point out only negative aspects of marijuana use. Who are they? The Chief Administrative Law Judge's for the DEA of the USA. That's right, just google 'francis young' to learn about just one of them, Francis quit when told to ignore positive effects and focus on only negative effects. There have been several who keep reporting that the laws against marijuana are out of line and that the use of marijuana is neither a threat or danger to the health and well being of the country. So put that in your Vaporizor (to remove all carcenigens,DUH!?!?) and smoke it all.
Ok I used Ron Paul tongue-in-cheek. but honestly.
Source: Reuters (Wire)
Author: Will Dunham
Published: February 15, 2008
Copyright: 2008 Reuters News Service
"Washington, DC -- A leading U.S. doctors group has endorsed using marijuana for medical purposes, urging the government to roll back a prohibition on using it to treat patients and supporting studies into its medical applications.
The American College of Physicians, the second-largest doctors group in the United States, issued a policy statement on medical marijuana this week after it was approved by its governing body, the group said on Friday.
The group cited evidence that marijuana is valuable in treating severe weight loss associated with AIDS, and nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy in cancer patients."
How dose medical cannabis hinder law enforcement any more than prescription drug abuse? I would argue decrim of cannabis in general would free up drug enforcement dollars and manpower for dangerous drugs.
when will REFFER MADNESS end?? Enough of this already! Marijuana is relatively safe,..much safer than alcohol and cigg's,..Big Pharma cant figure out how to keep it to themselves,Thats why they fight to keep it illegal,.."Use OUR drugs,..Not your own!!!"
Mr. Ellis
do you realize that there are more people in the US there are more ADDICTED to your legal Oxycontin, Hydro Codone (codeine), Morphine, Demerol, etc etc the list goes on and on .... than there are cocaine, heroin and Meth Amphetamines addicts
more people died last year from accidental over doses IN THE HOSPITAL under a doctors care than liver cancer from their alcohol consumption
cannabis has been used by man for over 5000 years and was only made illegal in 1937 as a result of raceisim and nothing else, look it up
since the start of recorded time there has been ZERO deaths attributed to THC
and since you brought up God, Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
God made cannabis, so now all of a sudden it's bad?
Anonymous, because some people are addicted to other things, we should add one more substance to the list? Do we need even more addiction than we already have?
God didn't make marijuana to smoke and get high. Have you read the parts of the Bible which condemns intoxication and says we are to be sober minded? You can't be sober minded when you're high--no matter what intoxicant is used.
Do u know that the largest abused DRUG amongst teens is PRESCRIPTION PILLS?
I have seen pills and alcohol ruin lives whilst I have seen marijuana help lives.....
Show me how many people in the WORLD die a year from ONLY marijuana use.
I bet you cant.
As a gateway drug thats pure propaganda!
Alcohol is way more of a gateway drug than marijuana, how do you not see this?
Have you ever smoked marijuana?
Tried alcohol?
Taken Prescription pain pills?
Smoked cigarettes?
You say the bible condemns intoxication...How does the Church justify wine? Some people actually will get intoxicated from a single glass of wine.
Sticky_Bud, if some people get intoxicated by one glass of wine, then they need to leave it alone if they're going to obey the Bible, don't they?
Your logic of pointing to other abused substances to justify the use of marijuana is like saying that since we have a few flies in the house, we should open the door and allow some more to come in, or because we have some criminals, we should allow more, or because I have one broken leg I should break my other one. What does it matter, right?
Marijuana (Cannabis) has been used as a medicine by millions of people for thousands of years, without one single death from overdose. Reference: In the Matter of MARIJUANA MEDICAL RESCHEDULING PETITION September 6, 1988. Docket No. 86-22. Francis L. Young, Administrative Law Judge.
Our "new, far superior" traditional pharmaceuticals kill over 100,000 people per year, even when they are properly prescribed and properly taken. Reference: JAMA - Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients - A Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Jason Lazarou, MSc; Bruce H. Pomeranz, MD, PhD; Paul N. Corey, PhD; JAMA.1998; 279:1200-1205.
Patients with serious diseases -- and their physicians -- need all the medical options at their disposal, especially options that cannot kill from toxicity, like cannabis.
Contrary to Bill's claim, there is a HUGE amount of support from physicians all over the U.S. and all over the world.
Here is a small list of mostly U.S. health organizations demanding immediate access to medical marijuana for legitimate patients:
American College of Physicians, the American Psychiatric Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, the National Institute of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, The American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of HIV Medicine, The American Bar Association, The American Public Health Association, The American Society of Addiction Medicine, AIDS Action Council, British Medical Association, The American Nurses Association, The New Jersey Nurses, Association, American Medical Students Association, California Legislative Counsel for Older Americans, California Nurses Association, California Pharmacists Association, National Association of People with AIDS, New York State Nurses Association, Virginia Nurses Association, Alaska Nurses Association, American Preventative Medical Association, Being Alive, Connecticut Nurses Association, Federation of American Scientists, Hawaii Nurses Association, Illinois Nurses Association, Florida Nurses Association, Medical Society of the State of New York, Colorado Nurses Association, Consumer Reports Magazine, Kaiser Permanente, Lymphoma Foundation of America, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Foundation, National Nurses Society on Addiction, Health Canada, the HIV Medicine Association, the National Association of People With AIDS, the National Association for Public Health Policy,...
Please help end the lies about medical cannabis.
Marijuana (cannabis) has been safely and effectively used as a medicine for thousands of years by millions of people, WITHOUT A SINGLE DEATH FROM OVERDOSE. Source: In the Matter of Marijuana Medical Rescheduling Petition - September 6, 1988. Docket No. 86-22. Francis L. Young, Administrative Law Judge
Marijuana's non-lethal safety profile is truly remarkable, especially considering our "newer, far superior" traditional pharmaceutical are one of the leading causes of death in the U.S. A JAMA report estimated there are over 100,000 deaths per year from properly prescribed and properly taken medications. Source: JAMA - Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients - A Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Jason Lazarou, MSc; Bruce H. Pomeranz, MD, PhD; Paul N. Corey, PhD; JAMA.1998; 279:1200-1205.
Patients with severe diseases -- and their physicians – need all the medical options at their disposal, especially options that cannot kill from toxicity, like cannabis.
Contrary to Bill's claim that very few doctors support the legalization of medical marijuana, there is a HUGE amount of medical support, including many of the most prestigious medical societies in the U.S. and the world. Here’s a small list of mostly U.S. organizations demanding immediate access to medical marijuana for legitimate patients:
American College of Physicians, the American Psychiatric Association, the New England Journal of Medicine, the National Institute of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, The American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of HIV Medicine, The American Bar Association, The American Public Health Association, The American Society of Addiction Medicine, AIDS Action Council, British Medical Association, The American Nurses Association, The New Jersey Nurses, Association, American Medical Students Association, California Legislative Counsel for Older Americans, California Nurses Association, California Pharmacists Association, National Association of People with AIDS, New York State Nurses Association, Virginia Nurses Association, Alaska Nurses Association, American Preventative Medical Association, Being Alive, Connecticut Nurses Association, Federation of American Scientists, Hawaii Nurses Association, Illinois Nurses Association, Florida Nurses Association, Medical Society of the State of New York, Colorado Nurses Association, Consumer Reports Magazine, Kaiser Permanente, Lymphoma Foundation of America, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Foundation, National Nurses Society on Addiction, Health Canada, the HIV Medicine Association, the National Association of People With AIDS, the National Association for Public Health Policy...
Please help restore logic and compassion to the discussion of medical marijuana.
ANNUAL AMERICAN DEATHS CAUSED BY DRUGS
1. TOBACCO .......... 400,000
2. FDA-APPROVED MEDICATIONS.........106,000*
(properly taken and properly prescribed)
3. ALCOHOL .......... 100,000
4. ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS ..15,000
5. CAFFEINE ........... 2,000
6. ASPIRIN ........... 500
7. MARIJUANA .......... 0
----------
Source: United States government
National Institute on Drug Abuse, Bureau of Mortality Statistics, except*
*JAMA - Incidence of Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospitalized Patients - A Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Jason Lazarou, MSc; Bruce H. Pomeranz, MD, PhD; Paul N. Corey, PhD; JAMA.1998; 279:1200-1205.
If so many doctors think it's a great idea, why do we only see potheads pushing it ?
Here is the American College of Physicians conclusion on medical marijuana. The ACP publishes the Annals of Internal Medicine, the most cited medical specialty journal in the world.
"Evidence not only supports the use of medical marijuana in certain conditions but also suggests numerous indications for cannabinoids...The science on
medical marijuana should not be obscured or hindered by the debate surrounding the legalization of marijuana for general use."
And another medical "heavy" weighing in on medical marijuana:
National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine (IOM)
"Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs, primarily THC, for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation."
"For certain patients, such as the terminally ill or those with debilitating symptoms, the long-term risks [associated with smoking] are not of great concern. … [Therefore,] clinical trials of marijuana for medical purposes should be conducted. … There are patients with debilitating symptoms for whom smoked marijuana might provide relief. … Except for the harms associated with smoking, the adverse effects of marijuana use are within the range of effects tolerated for other medications."
Reference: "Marijuana as Medicine: Assessing the Science Base," National Academy Press: Washington, DC. 1999
American Academy of Family Physicians
"The American Academy of Family Physicians [supports] the use of marijuana ... under medical supervision and control for specific medical indications."
Reference: 1996-1997 AAFP Reference Manual - Selected Policies on Health Issues
Excerpts from "In the Matter of MARIJUANA MEDICAL RESCHEDULING PETITION" September 6, 1988. Docket No. 86-22. Francis L. Young, Administrative Law Judge, US Drug Enforcement Administration:
"In practical terms, cannabis cannot induce a lethal response as a result of drug-related toxicity. Simply stated, researchers have been unable to give animals enough cannabis to induce death."
"Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis cannabis can be safely used with a supervised routine of medical care."
"Based upon the facts established in this record and set out above, one must reasonably conclude that there is accepted safety for use of marijuana under medical supervision. To conclude otherwise, on this record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious….”
“The cannabis plant considered as a whole has a currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, there is no lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision and it may lawfully be transferred from Schedule I to Schedule II. The judge recommends that the Administrator transfer cannabis.”
New England Journal of Medicine
"Federal authorities should rescind their prohibition of the medical use of marijuana for seriously ill patients and allow physicians to decide which patients to treat. The government should change marijuana's status from that of a Schedule I drug ... to that of a Schedule II drug ... and regulate it accordingly."
Reference: Editorial by NEJM editor Dr. Jerome Kassirer, January 30, 1997
American Public Health Association
"[The APHA] encourages research of the therapeutic properties of various cannabinoids and combinations of cannabinoids, and ... urges the Administration and Congress to move expeditiously to make cannabis available as a legal medicine."
Reference: Resolution #9513: "Access to Therapeutic Marijuana/Cannabis:" adopted November 1995
Federation of American Scientists
"Based on much evidence, from patients and doctors alike, on the superior effectiveness and safety of whole cannabis compared to other medications, … the President should instruct the NIH and the Food and Drug Administration to make efforts to enroll seriously ill patients whose physicians believe that whole cannabis would be helpful to their conditions in clinical trials, both to allow data-gathering and to provide an alternative to the black market while the scientific questions about the possible utility of cannabis are resolved."
Reference: FAS Petition on Medical Marijuana, November 1994
British Medical Association
"Present evidence indicates that [cannabinoids] are remarkably safe drugs, with a side-effects profile superior to many drugs used for the same indications. ... [The BMA] will urge the government to consider changing the Misuse of Drugs Act to allow the prescription of cannabinoids to patients with certain conditions causing distress that are not adequately controlled by existing treatments."
Reference: BMA report: "Therapeutic Uses of Cannabis:" November 1997
British House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology
"Cannabis can be effective in some patients to relieve the symptoms of MS, and against certain forms of pain. This evidence is enough to justify a change in the law. … The Government should allow doctors to prescribe cannabis for medical use: this is the conclusion of a report by the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee, published today."
Reference: Press release ("Lords Say: Legalise Cannabis for Medical Use") of the House of Lords: November 11, 1998.
British House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology (Second Report):
"Patients with severe conditions such as multiple sclerosis are being denied the right to make informed choices about their medication. There is always some risk in taking any medication, … but these concerns should not prevent them from having access to what promises to be the only effective medication available to them."
Reference: Select Committee on Science and Technology, Second Report: "Therapeutic Uses of Cannabis:" March 14, 2001.
AIDS Treatment News
"The scientific case for medical [marijuana] use keeps growing stronger. Far more dangerous psychoactive drugs, like morphine, are successfully allowed in medical use. Somehow marijuana has become a symbolic or political hard line to be maintained by anti-drug believers regardless of human cost. The costs will mount until the public can organize itself to insist that those who urgently need this medicine can obtain and use it legally."
Reference: AIDS Treatment News, #287, January 23, 1998
Lymphoma Foundation of America
"Be it resolved that this organization urges Congress and the President to enact legislation to reschedule marijuana to allow doctors to prescribe smokable marijuana to patients in need; and, Be it further resolved that this organization urges the US Public Health Service to allow limited access to medicinal marijuana by promptly reopening the Investigational New Drug compassionate access program to new applicants."
Reference: Resolution approved by Lymphoma Foundation President Belita Cowan: January 20, 1997.
It's strange that you would believe anything said by a church reporting on a scientific issue. It would be like listening to the Catholic church regarding the string theory. I found it best to never listen to what the church (any church) says, because they are generally close minded and I am a person of reason. The study in New Zealand had its flaws, and so did the story regarding it. This story is nothing but speculation. I don't care who you know, or what you think. Just stick to the facts.
I commend you, CancerSurvivor, for having your ducks in a row on this subject. It seems there is a lot more medical support out there that I realized.
However, I'm remain unconvinced on this subject for several reasons, and I'll divide them into two sections.
The first is that I maintain that (a) the nature of marijuana--that it is easy to produce and fairly easy to hide it's use--makes law enforcement efforts to fight abuse very difficult, and (b) there are still other legal pain medications available that don't undermine efforts to control illegal drugs.
But more specifically on support for medical marijuana, if there is so much medical support for it's use, why is it that in advocacy efforts, we never seen to see (I never have, anyway) doctors at the forefront, calling for hearings, leading petition drives, writing articles in the public forum, and so on.
Why is it we see so little of that alleged support from the medical community, and so much of it coming from potheads and hemp growers?
The disproportion leaves me very wary.
Anonymous, as for what the church has to say on the issue, the church is the institutional representative of God on earth. It's not infallible, since it's made up of flawed human beings who can sometimes misinterpret things and who can let their own personal agendas get in front of God's truth.
But assuming the church is relaying God's truth correctly, then what God says about the issue has every bearing and relevancy. It doesn't matter if it's a moral issue or a "scientific" issue; God created everything in the universe, so he essentially created or paved the way for science, therefore he understands how things work far better than we ever will.
And the Bible is very clear that becoming intoxicated is bad. When we do--whether it's pot or meth or alcohol--our thinking becomes distorted (I've been drunk enough in my hell-raising days to know that). We do things we shouldn't and we think things we shouldn't and we cultivate attitudes we shouldn't. That are spiritually and physically unhealthy for us, for our loved ones, and the world around us.
You don't have to agree with it, but what God says has every relevancy on everything in life, since he created it all, including us.
Medical marijuana is almost exclusively advocated by recreational pot users and the internet is full of their web sites. They know and they admit that passage of laws legalizing medical marijuana use is tantamont to full legalization of the drug, which is , of course, their goal. Compassion for patients is not the issue, except as a fallacy to confuse the uninformed toward their goal of yet another dangerous and addictive drug readily and legally available to those who need such chemicals to cope with life.
The Sacramental Police Department blog has an informative piece on this issue:
http://blog.sacpd.org/?p=376
"You hear of very few doctors supporting legalization of marijuana,"
This is inaccurate. The American College of Physicians, the largest medical-specialty organization and second-largest physician group in the United States with over 125,000 members, supports medical marijuana.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23190863/
Bill,
Your attempt to be open about this subject is honorable.
Considering FDA-approved medications are indeed a leading cause of death in the U.S., it is time to recognize we are in a very real pharmaceutical crisis!
With its incredibly low toxicity and amazing safety profile, cannabis -- and its cannabinoid compounds -- is just ONE of the solutions.
Remember, there are many administration or delivery methods for cannabis -- besides smoking -- like tinctures, butters, baked goods, candy, teas, smoothies, balms, ice cream, suppositories, and even PILLS (not the synthetic stuff but the real deal).
Furthermore, I strongly believe that our sick and dying cannot wait around for our elected officials to get out of their pharmaceutical lobby bed and examine the historical and medical realities of cannabis.
As far as your two remaining objections:
a) I think the American College of Physicians (ACP) explained it best in their conclusion on medical marijuana:
"The science on medical marijuana should not be obscured or hindered by the debate surrounding the legalization of marijuana for general use." (end of quote)
Law enforcement should not target legitimate patients or their physicians, because it is simply inhumane and and an incredible misuse of our tax dollars, resources and time.
b) For many patients, the traditional medication options simply do not work or have unbearable side effects, including death.
According to the National Academy of Sciences Institute of Health:
"There will likely always be a subpopulation of patients who do not respond well to other medications." (end quote)
These patients also deserve access to effective medicine.
Not to mention, according to a Harvard study, 77 percent of over 1,000 oncologists with an opinion preferred raw cannabis to synthetic marinol. Indeed, close to half of the physicians (48%) had previously recommended their patients try raw marijuana, despite possibility of patient and doctor arrest.
What is most amazing about this study of oncologists is that it came out years before the first state medical marijuana laws and years before more widespread physician education.
Despite the growing consensus for medical marijuana in the medical community, much of the media refuses to present the clearly established medical benefits of cannabis. For example, did the Dakota Voice cover ANY of the pro-medical marijuana developments from ANY of the aforementioned pro-medical marijuana groups? (Many of these organizations released international P.S.A.s. Did you miss them?)
Many physicians with practices are justifiably scared to individually discuss their support for medical marijuana in a public forum, because the DEA continues to target physicians who have the courage to publicly stand up for access to medical marijuana. But the number of physicians speaking out, despite federal intimidation, is rapidly growing.
As our country becomes more knowledgeable about the medical realities of cannabis, hopefully physicians' fear of prosecution and revoked licenses will lessen.
Finally, science and theology do not need to be at such odds. Many Christians and Christian organizations feel that withholding a healing, God-given plant from the sick is barbaric and not too Christian.
Bill, thanks for being open about this. Like many other medical cannabis patients, I never touched cannabis prior to getting sick, and I shared many of your reservations.
alas cancer survivor. You can have all of the best well reasoned arguments, present them in concise intelligent, and thoughtful answers, (just like you did in fact) and the end result will be someone calling you a pothead or saying. "regardless of all the evidence and support, it still doesnt matter because i think its bad."
thats what it boils down to for many people. they believe its bad. The idea that medicinal marijuana will make enforcement more difficult does not mean a thing. methodone is used legally.. does not seem to hamper the ability to deal with illegal use. and if it really does.. why do we allow it?
And though I dont want to confuse the legalisation/medical use debate. I must say that were pot to be controlled and sold like alcohol (pot being safer this only seems logical) We could eliminate the illegal aspects of it and help alleviate the judicial system of all the frivolous possesoion charges that run through it. So much strain that could be removed. so much tax money to rake in. and you get to control what used to be a horrible plague on society.
Just because a group issues a statement in support of something doesn't mean that all members agree with that statement, only that those in charge of making and issuing the statement do. Knowing the liberal slant of many groups these days, I wouldn't be surprised if the majority of ACP members disagreed with the statement.
People on both sides of the political aisle are waking up to the historical and medical realities of marijuana. Access to medical marijuana is not a political issue. Providing medication to the sick and dying is a medical and moral issue:
"Taking marijuana when young is a stupid thing to do, but the young generation is not (yet) suffering from cancer and AIDS and other diseases from the ravages of which they might find relief, if they can dance through the congestion of laws and opinions that beset us...Nothing is more infuriating to a person who has been relieved of crippling nausea than to be told that he has not been relieved."
-- William Buckley from "The Court on High - Medical Marijuana and the Supremes" The National Review - June 07, 2005
"The anti-marijuana campaign is a cancerous tissue of lies, undermining law enforcement, aggravating the drug problem, depriving the sick of needed help, and suckering well-intentioned conservatives and countless frightened parents... Narcotics police are an enormous, corrupt international bureaucracy ... and now fund a coterie of researchers who provide them with 'scientific support' ... fanatics who distort the legitimate research of others"
-- William F. Buckley, Commentary in The National Review, April 29, 1983, p. 495
If you are interested in learning more about marijuana (cannabis) as a medicine, here are some incredible and credible links to copy/cut & paste into your Google search engine:
1) "Marijuana's History as a Medicine," Lester Grinspoon, M.D. - Dr. Grinspoon is Associate Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and the author of several cannabis-related books, including "Marijuana Reconsidered" and "Marijuana: The Forbidden Medicine." Dr. Grinspoon founded the Harvard Mental Health Letter, and served as its editor for fifteen years. The following expert testimony was prepared for the DEA:
http://www.maps.org/mmj/grinspoon_history_cannabis_medicine.pdf
2) American College of Physicians (ACP) Position Paper on Medical Marijuana. The ACP publishes the Annals of Internal Medicine, the most widely cited medical specialty journal in the world:
http://www.acponline.org/acp_news/medmarinews.htm
3) "Exposing Marijuana Myths: A Review of the Scientific Evidence" – A summary from John P. Morgan, M.D. and Lynn Zimmer. William F Buckley surprised the whole establishment -- conservatives and liberals -- when he praised Zimmer and Morgan’s larger book on medical marijuana as "a miracle of intelligent concision."
http://www.bisdro.uni-bremen.de/boellinger/cannabis/08-zi-mo.pdf
4) "Emerging Clinical Applications for Cannabis and Cannabinoids: A Review of the Recent Scientific Literature, 2000 - 2006" - Paul Armentano, Senior Policy Analyst, NORML (this document takes a while to download):
http://www.norml.org/pdf_files/NORML_Clinical_Applications_for_Cannabis_and_Cannabinoids.pdf
5) Americans for Safe Access - the “nation’s largest organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research.” This is great source for medical and legal information, as well as current news regarding medical marijuana.
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/
The study is clearly BS junk science used to justify lining the pockets of those selected to supress the use of pot. It flies in the face of 99% of the established science. More dangerous than cigarettes? That's a laugh.
Post a Comment