cannabisnews.com: Voters Weigh in on Issues of Marijuana Use





Voters Weigh in on Issues of Marijuana Use
Posted by CN Staff on November 15, 2004 at 08:46:26 PT
By Tanya Albert, AMNews Staff
Source: American Medical News 
On Nov. 2, Montana became the 10th state to approve the use of medical marijuana. Meanwhile, voters in Alaska and Oregon rejected marijuana initiatives on their ballots. Nearly 63% of Montana voters approved a measure to legalize medical marijuana, according to results from the Montana secretary of state. Similar to other states with medical marijuana laws, Montana will allow patients who are under medical supervision to produce, possess and use the substance to alleviate the symptoms of debilitating diseases such as cancer, glaucoma and HIV/AIDS.
A patient or the patient's caregiver will have to register with the state to legally grow and possess limited amounts of marijuana. To register, a patient will need a written certification from a physician stating that the patient has a debilitating medical condition and would benefit from using the drug.Montana Medical Assn. members have not yet discussed what this will mean for physicians in the office setting, said G. Brian Zins, the group's executive vice president and CEO.The MMA opposes the measure. "Its passing does not change our position," Zins said.63% of Montana voters approved a measure to legalize medical marijuana. In Alaska and Oregon, physicians also opposed the marijuana-related measures.Alaska residents considered a ballot question that would have decriminalized marijuana for adults. Nearly 57% of Alaska voters rejected the measure. Medical marijuana has been legal in Alaska since 1998.In Oregon, where medical marijuana is already legal, citizens were asked to expand the law. The Oregon Medical Assn. fought the initiative because it believed the expansion was an attempt to try to legalize marijuana under the guise of medical use.Voters defeated the measure, with nearly 58% casting ballots against it, according to the Oregon Secretary of State's Office, Elections Division.Note: Medical use passes in Montana, but ballot initiatives fail in two other states.Source: American Medical News (US)Author: Tanya Albert, AMNews StaffPublished: November 22 - 29, 2004Copyright: 2004 American Medical AssociationWebsite: http://www.amednews.com/Contact: http://www.ama-assn.org/apps/amednews/edlet.plRelated Articles:Marijuana Reform Scores Big Gains http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19794.shtmlDrugs and The Nationhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19772.shtmlA Good Day for Intolerancehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19769.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #18 posted by runruff on November 16, 2004 at 19:07:51 PT:
mamawillie
Thank you for responding to my post with another side to my understanding. It is good to know that there are doctors out there like your husband. Namaste
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by FoM on November 16, 2004 at 12:39:53 PT
afterburner
That's a good article. When we went to our first Neil Young concert it seemed wrong to allow people to get really drunk but a person couldn't smoke a cigarette. You had to smoke on a grass section only. It was an open air pavillion and it really annoyed me but I saw them telling people to put that cigarette out or you're out. I even lit one up but got so scared I put it out right away! LOL! So much for my rebel nature. The next concert that we saw of Neil Young was inside and I wouldn't consider lighting a cigarette but we did smell marijuana from time to time. One guy yelled out pass it this way. I laughed it was funny. Smokers shouldn't be discriminated against but a smoker must be respectful of others rights that don't smoke. Cannabis should be dealt with similarly I believe when it's finally re-legalized.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by afterburner on November 16, 2004 at 12:20:32 PT
Strange Bedfellows
Cannabis smokers should enlist the support of tobacco smokers (even though I don't personally like tobacco). The anti-smoking campaigns could be interpreted as a back door attempt to keep cannabis illegal (reverse legalization or prohibition). As long as any smoker uses discretion, the amount of tar and other noxious ingredients is dwarfed by the industrial and automotive and electrical generation emissions.MyChoice.ca is a new smokers' rights website, sponsored by the tobacco industry. CTV.ca | Cigarette makers launch smokers' rights group
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1096406954479_91816154?s_name=&no_ads= {According to MyChoice.ca president Nancy Daigneault, the idea is actually to provide smokers with "the resources and tools to ensure they are no longer ignored by decision makers."}
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by mamawillie on November 16, 2004 at 08:42:50 PT
Rufruf-- untrue
Rufruf, my husband is a physician. Everything you said about med schools and doctors is totally untrue. Medical schools are not funded by pharmaceuticals. My husband, as well as the very vast majority of doctors we know are *for* medical marijuana and many for the total legalization/taxation of marijuana.Many doctors have a love/hate relationship with pharmacuticals. As you know, many drugs have life-altering benefits. Yet many of the doctor's patients are unable to afford the drugs because of costs and drug formularies from insurance companies.So if you are going to generalize and say: medical profession.. then at least qualify that to mean pharmaecutical companies and anyone who receives direct financial benefits from drug companies.The laws are so tight now, drug reps can't give out "gifts" of over like 50.00 to doctors. All they basically do now is give a 2 hour talk at the best restaurant in town. Doctors are *not* bought by drug companies.Next time, try to have some back-up for statements like drug companies finance medical schools.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by FoM on November 16, 2004 at 08:28:46 PT
About Tobacco Bans
When they banned smoking in restaurants years ago it made plenty of people really angry. I remember people lighting up in defiance. Somewhere in time we will need to address the issues of respect for others as we push hard to legalize Cannabis. I've said it before that we share this earth with many people. If Cannabis was legal I would expect some restrictions. Public morality is a concern but private morality should be a non issue and exactly that private in my opinion.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by breeze on November 16, 2004 at 03:54:14 PT
Comment #10 - KaptNemo-
Scotland has also recently placed the nation under a ban of smoking in ALL public places, including places where smoking is often common. A few members of society are terming the action the beggining of a "nanny state." Follow this link if you want to know more of how some people view smoking in public as a "crime".http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041116/ap_on_he_me/britain_smoking_ban
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by FoM on November 15, 2004 at 14:59:05 PT
Thanks Everyone
I am using Firefox now. I just got my new LCD Monitor and I'm trying to get use to it too. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Dave in Florida on November 15, 2004 at 14:48:37 PT
 Is it really good? 
I would recommend Firefox as well, I have been using Mozilla for quite a while. It is written by the same people that wrote the original Netscape. It's very good to use.Dave
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by kaptinemo on November 15, 2004 at 13:10:29 PT:
Unrelated: Bhutan bans tobacco
Bhutan to stub out tobacco sales 
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4012639.stmNobody ever seems to get it; prohibition only makes things worse...no matter what is being prohibited...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by dongenero on November 15, 2004 at 12:52:50 PT
firefox
Thank you DankHank. Firefox seems very nice. I've always used Netscape on my PC and I use Safari on my Mac.
Firefox reminds me more of Safari with the built-in Google search.
Do you use the Mozilla mail client as well?I do all I can to avoid IE and Outlook.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by AOLBites on November 15, 2004 at 12:46:39 PT
Firefox rocks
i have not had any problems at all with firefox and i've been useing it and Mozilla for a long time now... once you use tab browsing you won't want to go back...built in image blocking [ads or whatever servers you don't want to see images from] built in pop up blocking ... extensible thru various modules .. radial context is my fav you basicly replace the right click menu with mouse gestures its super fast and easy .. 
http://www.radialthinking.de/radialcontext/functionality.htmltry firefox you Will like it =P
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Dankhank on November 15, 2004 at 12:24:05 PT
Firefox
yes, give it a try haven't had any problems yet, I used it for a few days to check it out.break free from IE
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on November 15, 2004 at 11:20:01 PT
Dankhank
I have been reading about that Browser but I was afraid it might be buggy. Is it really good? If so I'll give it a try.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Dankhank on November 15, 2004 at 11:04:55 PT
Resist
Resistance to the folly of drug war is good.Continue to resist in all manner.Resist large corporations that abuse the citizen for anything.Break free from all monopolies that want only your money.Break the umbilical cord from IE ...Try Mozilla "Firefox," it's free ...http://www.mozilla.org/A new browser from Mozilla, the creators of Netscape who were destroyed by the mighty B Gates.CNews looks great in Firefox.Try it ... you'll like it.Won't work for EVERY site ... yet ... so you may have to revert to IE occaisionally, but it's good.
Resist
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on November 15, 2004 at 10:25:37 PT
runruff 
I see all the drugs they advertise on TV and I just don't understand why there are so many pills. People didn't take pills for everything years ago. I feel sorry for those who buy into a pill for every ill. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by runruff on November 15, 2004 at 10:04:01 PT:
medical marijuana and lost profits.
There are several in my family in the medical/health care buisness including me and my wife. My uncle is a dental surgeon in Glendale, Calif. He is also a homeopathic practitioner for about the last 35 years. He donates as much of his time as he charges for it. Uncle is is a fine , caring and generous man. He says Doctors oppose medical cannabis because the medical profession today is all about profits. Big bucks most of which are being made in presciption drugs.Some facts.The FDA was created by such corporations as Du Pont for the sole purpose of protecting their new drug trade.The FDA does not own a drug testing facility i.e. a labratory. They farm out all drug research to the same people who manufacture them.The FDA is a sham.Read Behind the Nylon Curtin I read this Du Pount biograpghy about 12 years ago and can't remember the author. There is another eye opening biography on the Du Pount dynasty, I can't remember the name of the second book or the author either. Sorry. I've read a lot of Books but these can be found if you want to look for them.My aunt, a retired sugical nurse says that the med schools today are mostly funded by pharmaceutical companys and as a result the colleges are turning out what amounts to drug therapist instead of medical practitioners.Cannabis was in about 50% of all pharmacopoeia in America prior to 1937. Even in baby and child medications. There has never been a reported negative reaction or side effect to these meds. It's obvious to me the medical buisness is only protecting it's on profits by opposing medical cannabis because cannabis can be grown anywhere by almost anyone.Cannabis is mans campanion plant on this planet.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Craiig on November 15, 2004 at 09:30:51 PT
he must have balls
don't think George Bush and co would like it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by FoM on November 15, 2004 at 09:26:02 PT
News Article from Narco News
Brazil's Lula to Sign Drug Decriminalization Decree on Nov. 24By Al Giordano 
Posted on Mon Nov 15th, 2004 According to a report in today's Folha de São Paulo (subscription only), the government of Brazilian President Lula da Silva has reached a "consensus" to step forward into a bold new era of drug policy: decriminalizing the drug user, and opening 250 safe drug use centers across the country during the year 2005.
Lula is expected to sign an executive decree on November 24, taking drug enforcement responsibilities away from police agencies, and placing the problems of drug use under the jurisdiction of the Health Ministry, which will be charged with supporting the safe drug-use centers and make Harm Reduction - a policy to reduce the harms associated with drug use - the law of the land.Here is an excerpt from today's report from Brazil's largest daily newspaper:Policy proposal considers drug consumption as a public health problem, and no longer one for the police
The government wants to create centers for drug useBy Luciana Constantino and Iuri Dantas
Folha de São Paulo, Brasília BureauAfter a series of internal disagreements about drug policy, the federal government is preparing a realignment of national policy to define drug consumption as a public health problem, and not one for the police as it is today.There will be a presidential order creating rules for treating drug dependents, with emphasis on Harm Reduction...(More of the translation appears after the jump.) The new focus will include a change in the name of the policy. It will be changed from "National Anti-Drug Policy" to "National Policy on Drugs."
"Changing the name is a symbol, and there will be a change in orientation. The country is maturing in order to put forward a more pragmatic policy," said Pedro Gabriel Delgado, the government's mental health coordinator.The president's public safety secretary, General Jorge Armando Felix, has also endorsed the proposal. "Drug dependents are a public health problem. They should be treated as people like those with any other illness, particularly in the area of psychiatry, they need support and treatment."Through this new lens, Lula will sign a presidential decree to regulate harm reduction programs, making possible a wider network of treatment for drug users and the creation of local centers for safe drug use. Before opening their doors, these centers will need authorization from the Health Ministry and will count with permanent support.Preferably, the centers will be monitored by universities and dedicated to high risk users, such as those who use crack or inject cocaine.The decree will create the role of Harm Reduction agent, a health professional who will be responsible for the direct contact with the users. And he, for example, will provide sterilized syringes… Today, non-governmental organizations, with support from the health department, are already involved in Harm Reduction programs, but within the limits of legal prohibitions, thus there has been no regulation of this kind of work…The goal for 2005 is the creation of 250 such local drug use centers around the country.
After much controversy and six public hearings in different states, the government will finalize the new policy on November 24th… The emphasis will be on demand and Harm Reduction.According to the national drug czar, General Paulo Robero Uchoa, the government decided to put its efforts into combat against narco-trafficking, leaving the drug user to medical attention. "A drug is an inert thing. I don't combat penicillin… Now I combat trafficking. Drugs have to be understood to be able to educate and prepare society and the youth to not use drugs carelessly."Translated from: Folha de São Paulo, 15 de novembro de 2004.http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2004/11/15/94326/676
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment