cannabisnews.com: Medical Pot or Not? High Court To Decide 





Medical Pot or Not? High Court To Decide 
Posted by CN Staff on December 04, 2004 at 08:38:24 PT
By Katharhynn Heidelberg, Journal Staff Writer 
Source: Cortez Journal
Area medical and legal authorities agree that the federal government should limit interference with state's rights, but differ when it comes to medicinal marijuana - an issue so complex that it is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. Colorado voters passed Amendment 20 in 2000, which allows limited marijuana use for specifically defined "debilitating medical conditions," such as cancer, HIV or glaucoma.
Patients must obtain recommendations from licensed physicians and apply to the state for a Medical Marijuana Registry card allowing them to possess no more than 2 ounces of marijuana or no more than six marijuana plants. According to registry statistics kept by the state health department, there are an estimated 502 medical marijuana registry cardholders in Colorado, five of whom live in Montezuma County. To date, 10 other states have medicinal marijuana laws, but all could be affected by the government's challenge to California's law, pending before the Supreme Court. The government is challenging a 2003 ruling of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which according to CNN, held that prosecuting medical marijuana users is unconstitutional when the drug is not sold or transported across state lines. Arguments began in late November, with a ruling expected by June 2005. "I think physicians mostly think this is something the federal government should stay out of," Cortez general practitioner Leonard Cain, M.D. said Wednesday. "I think it's interesting that a so-called conservative administration would be trying to impose a federal law over state's rights." States' rights were also the issue for state Rep. Mark Larson, R-Cortez and state Sen. Jim Isgar, D-Hesperus, both of whom said the higher court should not overturn state laws governing medicinal marijuana. "While the citizens of each state passed the medical marijuana issue, the federal government is still saying it has jurisdiction over those people. I think it's appropriate the Supreme Court address that," Larson said. Isgar concurred. "I think that if the state has laws that regulate that, the federal government shouldn't try to overturn them," he said. "But it (medical marijuana) shouldn't be used to get around the law. There has to be a real medical need." Larson agreed there must be a compelling medical reason, but added: "I'm of the opinion that we should mitigate pain and suffering every way we can and not exclude remedies." Cain said marijuana does alleviate chronic pain, though he hadn't seen much research explaining how. "There's something in our bodies (endocanabonoid receptors) that responds to these substances and presumably, it modifies neurotransmission and reduces pain, but I don't think it's well-worked out how that happens," he said. "...but marijuana definitely has an anti-nausea effect." Cain said he limits his registry recommendations to those with very serious conditions. "It has a medical downside," he said. And what is that downside? "It's habit forming," Cain said. "It also is not good for your lungs. It is smoke. It produces tars and it doesn't get filtered. It's not benign in terms of causing lung problems." Unlike other prescriptions, he said, there is no way to monitor a patient's marijuana use. Montezuma County Sheriff Joey Chavez said the drug is not benign, period. "I believe marijuana should be unlawful for whatever purpose," he said Friday. Chavez said he supported states' rights. "But I just wish the state would outlaw (marijuana) in its entirety." He said he also feared those with registry cards were sharing the drug with unauthorized users. Cortez Police Chief Roy Lane said the state law is not beneficial because of the controversy it has engendered. "Until the federal government and states get on the same page, it's tough on us," Lane said Friday. "All of a sudden, we're allowing a federal law to be broken and regulated by the state." Cain said there was little medical evidence that marijuana use affected anyone other than the user. "You'd be hard pressed to find any evidence, medical or legal, that anyone's died or been killed because of another person's using marijuana." Chavez said however that the drug affects each user differently. "They could do things they wouldn't do otherwise and it definitely impairs their driving," he said. Cain said the negative affects of marijuana pale in comparison to the drawbacks of legal drugs. "We legalize the two deadliest drugs we use (alcohol and tobacco) and have all the rest of them felonies to use," he said. "That's a huge hypocrisy. We kill tens of thousands of people a year on the highways because of legal alcohol. And the largest killer of people in this country is tobacco." Source: Cortez Journal (CO)Author: Katharhynn Heidelberg, Journal Staff Writer Published: December 4, 2004Copyright: 2004 Cortez JournalContact: editor cortezsentinel.comWebsite: http://www.cortezjournal.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Angel Raich v. Ashcroft Newshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/raich.htmSanity's AWOL in War on Drugshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19972.shtmlMarijuana Use Isn't Commercehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19971.shtmlHealth Issue Goes To Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread19966.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Post Comment