cannabisnews.com: Marijuana Madness





Marijuana Madness
Posted by CN Staff on January 28, 2003 at 08:10:38 PT
Editorial Opinion
Source: Union Tribune 
San Diego City Council members face a choice on whom they want to listen to about medical marijuana. Will they listen to the city's Medical Marijuana/Cannabis task force or will they listen to UCSD's Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research?The Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research is a consortium of respected medical researchers from UC campuses in San Francisco, San Diego and Davis. These researchers will be conducting more than a dozen scientific research projects on the possible use of marijuana for pain, HIV, AIDS symptoms and other health problems. 
They also will study specific medical protocols for marijuana's possible use, balanced against the safety and health issues of the drug.The UC researchers are following strict scientific guidelines that include clinical trials, rigorous peer review of research, and publication of their results in respected medical journals. Center officials estimate they will have enough evidence and data to begin publishing their results in two to three years.No medical experts In sharp contrast, the city's Medical Marijuana/Cannabis task force is a consortium of marijuana activists, marijuana growers and providers, legal activists, a political consultant, a cancer patient, an AIDS patient and several others whose connection to the issue is unclear. There are no medical or pharmacological experts on the panel. There was an osteopath who is controversial in AIDS research circles, but he quit. Three others among the original members also no longer serve. They include Steve McWilliams, who has been arrested several times for growing marijuana.The task force has put out a survey of San Diego physicians on the use of medical marijuana, extensive guidelines for possessing and growing marijuana and a list of recommended dosage amounts of marijuana for specific ailments. Unlike the UCSD Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, most of the data for the task force's publications are entirely anecdotal, according to the chairwoman of the task force, Juliana Humphrey.For example, the proposed guidelines say patients should be allowed to possess three pounds of marijuana and that "caregivers," people who provide medical marijuana, could grow up to 90 marijuana plants. The task force's list of patient dosages for specific conditions includes such things as five grams a day for major depression and 7 to 12 grams a day for muscle spasm and back disease. There's no medical basis for such prescriptions.While there are some references to research in these recommendations, their citation is purposely skewed. As for the rest of the information given by the task force, it is completely unscientific. There is no accounting for research methods, survey samples are not random or representative in any scientific way, and the source of the anecdotal data is not revealed.The task force itself has no expertise on medical marijuana and was formed almost entirely by council member Toni Atkins, following pressure from some of her constituents. There is nothing in Proposition 215, the 1996 medical marijuana initiative, or in its implementing legislation, that either mandates or suggests municipal regulations for medical marijuana. The imprimatur claimed by medical marijuana activists comes from a suggestion by Attorney General Bill Lockyer that guidelines can be developed by local governments. It's not mandatory, and only about a dozen or so communities throughout the state have done so.Handcuffing the police The task force's proposals would makes San Diego's guidelines among the state's most permissive, even bordering on legalization. "Patients" would be allowed to smoke marijuana anywhere tobacco is smoked, which means anywhere outdoors.Also, the task force guidelines include a 72-hour waiting period for police to seize plants. That means that even if police officers have probable cause to believe someone is illegally trafficking in marijuana, they can't seize his plants for 72 hours if he claims to be a medical marijuana patient or caregiver. The cops must walk away.In that 72 hours, the plants can be cut down and sold or otherwise disposed of, and police would have no recourse. The task force recommendations are riddled with such conditions, which can be easily used to facilitate recreational use and even trafficking of marijuana.The task force is being opposed by nearly the entire drug and alcohol treatment and prevention community in San Diego. Although many here may not know it, San Diego's treatment and prevention community is one of the most respected in the country, and is held up as a model of effectiveness nationwide. Its opposition to these guidelines should carry more weight among City Council members than the pro-marijuana advocacy of task force activists.Presiding Juvenile Court Judge James Milliken, who has instituted significant reforms to send youngsters who use drugs to treatment and prevention programs instead of to jail, has spoken out strongly against the task force recommendations. He's particularly concerned about allowing caregivers to grow up to 90 plants or allowing patients to possess three pounds, saying that would make the drug even more available to kids.Uncredible task force The credibility of the task force is in doubt. Instead of heeding its recommendations, the City Council should listen to the UCSD Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research. Its research will be ready in two to three years, and the council can revisit the issue then.The scientific findings about medical marijuana may entirely conflict with the activist agenda promoted by task force members. There's no justification for City Council members to jump at public policy based on the suspect foundation provided by the task force, not when real scientific inquiry is well under way at UCSD.Despite the claims of some marijuana activists, the legality of medical marijuana is not a pressing issue. San Diego police say there are only a half-dozen arrests each year when the medical marijuana defense is raised, and in most of those instances charges are not filed.Next week, when the task force's recommendations are due to be considered, Mayor Murphy and other City Council members should table this issue until the real experts from the UCSD Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research can weigh in. As with any medicine, we should depend on scientific research to determine whether marijuana can be used safely and what the proper protocols and uses should be. That scientific information will be available shortly, produced right here in San Diego.Note: Respected researchers vs. ragtag task force.Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)Published: January 27, 2003Copyright: 2003 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.Contact: letters uniontrib.comWebsite: http://www.uniontrib.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:CMCRhttp://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/Medicinal Cannabis Research Linkshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/research.htmMedical-Pot Panel Meeting Ousted From Officehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15248.shtmlGuidelines Might OK Less Than 3 Pounds http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15240.shtmlMarijuana Activist Seeks Dismissal of Charges http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15239.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #5 posted by FoM on January 29, 2003 at 17:16:19 PT
Dozens Protest Medical Marijuana Guidelines
January 29, 2003A few dozen people gathered in front of a City Heights library Wednesday to protest the medical marijuana guidelines the San Diego City Council will consider next week. The protesters marched in a circle in front of the Weingart City Heights Library, carrying signs reading, "No Pot Gardens," "Tell Teens the Truth" and "Keep Pot Away From Our Kids." The anti-marijuana rally, organized by the San Diego Prevention Coalition, was aimed at letting the City Council know participants don't agree with the guidelines the city's task force recommended, said John Redman of the SDPC. Redman told reporters increased availability and decreased risk perception both lead to more substance abuse. Advocates of medical marijuana say the drug can help patients with conditions such as cancer and AIDS, including relief of the nausea and loss of appetite that can accompany other treatments. On Tuesday, the City Council is scheduled to vote on recommendations by the city's Medical Cannabis Task Force. One controversial provision would allow patients to possess up to three pounds of marijuana, which the task force concluded would be a year's worth for a typical dosage. The guidelines are aimed at implementing Proposition 215, which California voters approved in 1996 to allow medicinal use of cannabis. Implementation has been problematic because the state law didn't set out guidelines, according to officials. Any guidelines approved by the City Council won't change the fact that federal law makes no exemption for medicinal use of the illicit drug. http://www.kfmb.com/topstory13454.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by p4me on January 28, 2003 at 10:03:11 PT
Right on Sam Adams
Health care is 14% of GDP. The biggest increases that drive the state deficits that might be $60 billion this year is Medicare/Medicaid. Now if pills are half the price in Canada that they are here and the pill industry is $150 billion then Congress with any guts could push $75 billion dollars in excess profits out of the pill industry. Of course the pill people would rather buy politicians than wave that money goodbye. There was a PBS show last night talking about the building of the transcontinental railroad and how the parties bought Congress with stock and everything else back in the 1860s. The Congresscritters are just continuing a long tradition.There was a deal that Boeing wanted when the industry collapsed as air travel plummeted after 9/11. I think they had to take back some leased planes because they talked about removing seats and storing them for ten years and then putting them back in. Anyway Congress was going to authorize the leasing of 100 Boeing 767s after they were converted to tankers for jet fuel. The article that descibes the concept of the deal is at CounterPunch- http://www.counterpunch.org/boeing1.htmlBut what is strange is their was an article that talked of the completion of this deal with the passage of the Homeland Security Act that went offline shortly after it appeared shortly after Congress approved the big consolidation. I wish I could find it because it was sickening to think they would pay much more than they could buy the tankers for new even if they needed them. Now I specifically remember the article and its sudden disappearance when I searched for it just a few days later. It said they could buy the planes for $1 after Boeing had crapped on the taxpayers. It is as strange as the article about Sweden bringing inn Americans so they might feel free to speak about US policy. Live,Sweden, FBI agent, 28 years, White House and some other words I rembered at the time for a search found nothing. That was the article where the retired FBI agent that served in the White House said words very close to, "Not only do I not believe what Bush says, he doesn't believe what he says."Anyway where is an article that tells how the Boeing deal finally shaped up. I feel confident it went threw and that it did not pass Congress until the Homeland Security Act passed after the last election. Please feel free to add to my limited recollection.I mention these things because the cannabis portal is not the only portal to see that big corporations at least rent the control of Congress if they do not own certain people in it. Look for the piece on PBS about the transcontinental railroad and see what happenned when Union Pacific spun off its corporation with protected liability when corporations began their march for control of the country.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by p4me on January 28, 2003 at 09:26:29 PT
A. complete bias,B,complete nonsense,C,both
Its research will be ready in two to three years, and the council can revisit the issue then.I may come back and write these people a simple to understand email later. For now I will just state that Mword should be legal anyway under the concept of freedom. Then their is the issue of the Compassion Act of 1996 that is blocked by the position of the DEA/feds with their SOL.The article is complete nonsense and to put it out as a reasonable analysis shows complete bias. The anser is C.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on January 28, 2003 at 09:16:38 PT
Flat Earth Society
Let's not forget that the whole reason the "Task Force" came into being is that the medical establishment ignored the suffering and dying of patients for the last 80 years!  They had 80 years to come up with a way to help us, and they failed. The politicians are turning to the people that want to help NOW.I hope that cannabis is the catalyst that reforms the Western medical establishment. Look at what we've become! The sick are forced by government rules to only use expensive drugs foisted on them by huge corporations. You are no longer allowed to use herbs and natural health care methods that are virtually free. A sick and depraved Orwellian tyranny.The Libertarians are right. Health care is choking under the weight of government regulations and control. If you want to see a physical therapist for massage therapy, or ultrasound, you are forced to first see an expensive doctor within a huge hospital system. Then, you can only see a PT at said system, which costs $175 for a half hour. For something that really doesn't require any more skill or training than a manicure.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Ethan Russo MD on January 28, 2003 at 09:11:34 PT:
Two to Three Years?
In 2-3 years, many clinical cannabis patients in the USA will be dead. In 2-3 years, clinical cannabis will be available in the UK, Ireland, Germany, France, Spain, Andorra, Italy, Greece, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Belgium, Holland, Germany, Norway, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, and Brazil. Mark my words. Is this a policy issue in which we want to be last?
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment