cannabisnews.com: State Voters Face Choice On Med. Use Of Marijuana





State Voters Face Choice On Med. Use Of Marijuana
Posted by FoM on October 08, 1999 at 13:52:57 PT
By Francis X. Quinn, Associated Press
Source: Boston Globe
AUGUSTA, Maine Weighing in on a nationwide debate, Maine voters will decide next month whether to legalize the use of marijuana for some medicinal purposes in the state. 
Advocates of the proposal, which will be listed as Question 2 on the Nov. 2 ballot, say by authorizing marijuana for specific medical conditions the proposed law would protect patients who are advised by a doctor they might benefit from the drug. The list of qualifying ailments includes persistent nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite from AIDS or cancer treatments, glaucoma, and seizures or muscle spasms from chronic diseases, such as epilepsy or multiple sclerosis. The ballot initiative has been advanced by proponents organized as Mainers for Medical Rights. ''We shouldn't be driving very sick people into illegal situations,'' says retired veterinarian Mike Lindey, 67, of Freeport, who as part of the campaign for passage of the initiative has taken to the Internet to describe his own use of marijuana during chemotherapy several years ago. Critics of the initiative challenge the medicinal value of privately obtained marijuana with no standardized source or preparation, as well as at least some of the claims by proponents that it would be beneficial in the cases outlined in the proposal. The Maine Medical Association opposes the ballot initiative. ''It was an easy decision ... when considered on its scientific merits,'' said Dr. Katherine Stoddard Pope, a Portland anesthesiologist who led a committee that proposed the group's opposition statement. The ballot question asks, ''Do you want to allow patients with specific illnesses to grow and use small amounts of marijuana for treatment, as long as such use is approved by a doctor?'' The proposed law defines a usable amount as up to 1.25 ounces of harvested marijuana and up to six marijuana plants, no more than three of which may be mature, flowering plants. Since 1996, five states California, Oregon, Washington, Alaska and Arizona have passed medical marijuana initiatives. Voters in the District of Columbia also registered approval. The U.S. Justice Department, however, has argued that no claim of necessity can justify use of a drug that is classified by Congress to be a dangerous substance with no approved medical purpose. As a Schedule I substance, marijuana is illegal to cultivate, possess or use under federal law. Two soundings of public sentiment in September reported similar majorities favoring the initiative. In a survey of 402 Mainers by Critical Insights of Portland, 68 percent of those responding said they would vote to allow patients with specific illnesses to grow and use small amounts of marijuana, provided its use is approved by a doctor. Thirty percent said they would vote against the measure. A separate survey of 400 Maine voters by Strategic Marketing Services, also of Portland, found about 70 percent of those interviewed were in favor of the proposal, while nearly 28 percent opposed or were leaning against the proposal. The margin of error was xx percent for the first survey and xx percent for the second survey. In March, a panel of medical experts concluded in a report to the federal government that marijuana has medical benefits for people suffering from cancer and AIDS and should undergo scientific trials to see how it works best. An affiliate of the National Academy of Sciences, the Institute of Medicine, said chemicals in marijuana ease anxiety, stimulate the appetite, ease pain and reduce nausea and vomiting. It also said there is no evidence that use of marijuana leads to other drug use. But the panel warned that smoking marijuana can cause respiratory disease and called for the development of standardized forms of the drugs. It also came out against claims that marijuana is beneficial in treating glaucoma. ''Although glaucoma is one of the most frequently cited medical indications for marijuana, the data do not support this indication,'' the report said. Earlier this month, Gov. Angus King said enactment of the medical marijuana initiative would put Maine on a ''slippery slope.'' He noted the conflict between the proposal and federal law and suggested that for some proponents, the initiative would be ''a first step toward the ultimate legalization of marijuana.'' Literature distributed by Mainers for Medical Rights maintains that no one wishing to use marijuana recreationally would gain legal access to it under the proposal.Mainers For Medical Rightshttp://www.mainers.org/ Reefer Referendum - 10/08/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3203.shtmlEditorial: Legalize Pot in Maine - 9/22/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread2983.shtml 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #1 posted by FoM on October 08, 1999 at 18:49:45 PT:
Editorial: Dr. Worm
Thu, 07 Oct 1999 Casco Bay Weekly(ME) http://www.cascobayweekly.com By Al Diamon There are doctors in Maine who believe legalizing marijuana for medical purposes is good medicine. But try to find one with the courage to say that publicly. Asking pro-pot physicians to openly endorse the referendum question on the Nov. 2 ballot seems to cause cases of the shakes reminiscent of the camera work in "The Blair Witch Project." It's enough to give the average doctor motion sickness. (Fortunately, marijuana helps control nausea.) It's also enough to make people suffering from the side effects of chemotherapy for cancer and wasting syndrome from AIDS even sicker than they already are. Doctors -- the one group that should be advocating most strongly for the needs of those patients -- are almost entirely silent. "I'm reluctant to talk, mostly because I've got so many other things on my plate," said one prominent Portland physician, who asked that his name not be used. "I don't want to get drawn into the limelight too much." Talk about operating.The ballot question asks voters to allow doctors to advise patients that smoking marijuana could help alleviate the symptoms from certain diseases, such as cancer, AIDS and glaucoma. Because the state cannot supersede federal law, the initiative won't make pot available by prescription, but it would permit people with those illnesses to possess small amounts of the drug. Similar laws have been approved by voters in six states and the District of Columbia. Polls show the measure enjoys overwhelming support in Maine. So why are members of the medical community who support the idea so reluctant to speak out? It's certainly not because they lack strong opinions on the subject. "I disagree with the premise that marijuana leads to other drugs," a mid-coast physician told the Bangor Daily News. "It's an effective medicine for certain uses."Unfortunately, the good doctor preceded his comments by asking the reporter not to use his name."It's a little backwater of us not to talk," admitted another doctor known for his outspoken activism on other issues. "You're not going to quote me on that, are you?"As a result of this outbreak of yellowbelly fever, the public may be getting the erroneous impression that all the state's physicians oppose the use of medical marijuana. Some news outlets reported the Maine Medical Association had unanimously endorsed a resolution opposing physician-assisted pot. But those in attendance at the association's meeting on Sept. 17 in Bar Harbor said a small, but significant, number of doctors either opposed the anti-marijuana statement or abstained from voting.The same news reports also neglected to mention that the doctors' group had significantly watered down the resolution before approving it. Gone was all that crap about marijuana being a "gateway drug," an old war-on-drugs slogan that has no basis in scientific research. Also missing was the absurd claim that there was no evidence pot had medicinal value. If that were so, why would the federal government permit doctors to prescribe Marinol, an artificial version of the active ingredient in marijuana?It was obvious somebody with some sympathy for sick people and some common sense about what the latest research showed had been at work behind the scenes. But behind the scenes isn't good enough in a political campaign on a volatile issue. Somebody has to be willing to stand up and speak the truth in public. About the closest anyone has come to doing that is Dr. Owen Pickus, a Portland oncologist and a leader in treating people with AIDS. Pickus doesn't hesitate to support the medical use of marijuana and to label his fellow physicians as cowards for failing to join him in doing so. "Doctors in general are conservative in their beliefs," he said. "They're afraid of peer pressure. They tend to be sheep. Followers, rather than leaders. "They're trained to be peer-reviewed. That's a system that suggests that if you're outside of what your peers think is right, you must be wrong -- even if your peers are wrong."They see no upside to standing up and taking a position." Unfortunately, Pickus won't be appearing in any TV spots for the medical marijuana referendum. He opposes the measure because it creates a conflict between Maine and national law. "You can't satisfy either the patient or the government," he said. "It does harm to the doctor-patient relationship."Instead, Pickus favors changing federal regulations to allow doctors to prescribe pot. Of course, that'll happen about the same time George W. Bush 'fesses up to snortin' coke.In the meantime, Maine doctors should check to see if there's a drug available that will give them some artificial courage. 
Editorial: Dr. Worm
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: