|
Cannabis Campaigners' Guide News Database result:
|
|
US CO: Column: What Have Our Feds Been Smokin'?
ccguide Tuesday 28 Aug 2001 Pubdate: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 Source: Denver Post (CO) Copyright: 2001 The Denver Post Corp Contact: Website: http://www.denverpost.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/122 Author: Billie Stanton WHAT HAVE OUR FEDS BEEN SMOKIN'? Tuesday, August 28, 2001 - The long-running battle against medical marijuana makes me want to smoke two joints and go lie down. Alas, I don't smoke the stuff. But plenty of people who do, purely for recreation, aren't about to stop just because it's against the law. Sadly, those most often deterred by the law - or forced to break it - are people who truly need marijuana to alleviate horrendous suffering. New drug czar Asa Hutchinson showed extraordinary ignorance last month when he said medical marijuana is harmful and rife with "many potential dangers." He also insisted the scientific community doesn't support the drug's medical use. Au contraire, Asa. Use of medical marijuana is supported not only by the scientific and medical communities, but also by a former administrative law judge of the Drug Enforcement Administration who spent two years studying such use. The U.S. Department of Justice had referred the matter to Judge Francis L. Young, who released his findings in September 1988: Medical marijuana has "accepted medical use" for treatment of chemotherapy- induced nausea, spasticity caused by multiple sclerosis and other conditions, and hyperparathyroidism. Young also found that a person would have to smoke 20,000 to 40,000 marijuana cigarettes to induce death. By contrast, just 40 aspirin can kill a person, and aspirin does kill hundreds every year. Yet the DEA administrator rejected Young's findings, saying the oncological community doesn't consider marijuana acceptable for chemotherapy patients. Au contraire again, DEA. In a survey of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in 1990, more than 44 percent of respondents said they had recommended marijuana to at least one chemotherapy patient, and 48 percent said they would prescribe marijuana if it were legal. Even the conservative American Medical Association conceded in December 1997 that well-controlled studies suggest marijuana's possible efficacy with AIDS wasting syndrome, emesis induced by chemotherapy, MS, spinal cord injury, dystonia and neuropathic pain. The Institute of Medicine - asked by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy to review the latest scientific evidence - reported in 1999 that remarkable consensus supports the potential of medical marijuana. Although the government has approved use of Marinol for cancer and AIDS patients, that capsule contains only THC and takes effect slowly with variable results. By contrast, smoking delivers a combination of drugs with rapid effect, the IOM found. However, because smoking causes lung cancer and other problems, the IOM recommends development of a rapid-onset delivery system such as an inhaler. Great Britain's House of Lords concluded in 1998 that doctors should immediately be allowed to prescribe cannabis for certain patients. And Canada enacted a law on July 30, allowing possession and production of pot to ease patients' suffering. Plenty of AIDS and cancer patients have found relief by eating marijuana-laden cookies, says U.S. District Judge John L. Kane Jr., who volunteered at two hospices in 1996 and 1997. One cancer patient who had dropped from 160 pounds to less than 100 started regaining weight and strength after munching the cookies. Although he ultimately died of cancer, at least he did so with dignity, Kane recalls. Other hospice residents found Marinol ineffective, though marijuana did help. Yet despite a vast array of scientific, medical and anecdotal evidence - despite even the IOM's assurance that medical marijuana wouldn't increase non-patient pot use - the U.S. government continues to equate medical marijuana with a back-door push to legalize drugs. Colorado officials exhibit the same paranoia. The June threat by Attorney General Ken Salazar and Gov. Bill Owens - that physicians who recommend medical marijuana risk federal prosecution - was underscored by a letter asking interim U.S. Attorney Richard Spriggs to "enforce federal law." (Spriggs retorted that if they don't like the state medical marijuana law approved by voters last year, they shouldn't look to federal authorities to solve their problem.) This threat didn't only infringe on doctors' First Amendment rights. It also was an inexcusable intrusion into medical care. Even the AMA has said discussion of such alternatives by physicians and patients shouldn't be subject to criminal sanctions. But this is what the U.S. government is doing on a grand scale - unjustifiably blocking effective medical care while ignoring even the scientific findings it commissioned. For a multitude of cancer, AIDS and other patients, the real criminal is the federal government - not the sufferer who needs to smoke two joints and go lie down. - --- MAP posted-by: Beth
After you have finished reading this article you can click here to go back.
|
This page was created by the Cannabis Campaigners' Guide.
Feel free to link to this page!