cannabisnews.com: Evidence Necessary Before Prescribing Marijuana Evidence Necessary Before Prescribing Marijuana Posted by FoM on January 06, 2000 at 07:47:15 PT By Richard Roberts, MD, Special to JSOnline Source: JSOnline The medical marijuana debate was rejuvenated last month when Vice President Al Gore suggested that the government give doctors greater flexibility to prescribe the drug to relieve pain and suffering. Despite the new attention to the issue, an old problem remains: good, quality evidence that marijuana is superior to existing treatments does not exist. Nobody is more aware of patient suffering than those of us who dedicate our lives to alleviating it. If marijuana were really the wonder drug that some groups purport it to be, physicians would be in favor of prescribing it. But the fact is that the majority of patients respond very well to current, proven treatments.In my own experience, over the past 16 years of practicing medicine, I have never been tempted to recommend that a patient smoke marijuana. This is because established treatments have proven to work well for them. But do understand, however, that not every patient is so fortunate.What would we have to lose by trying marijuana in those difficult to treat cases? What we lose, more specifically, what the patient may lose, is the chance to treat the problem with one of the medications that have survived rigorous, well-controlled studies. To do otherwise, is to risk making the problem worse by pursuing an unknown course that may cause severe side effects and even death.I can’t help but think the interest in medical marijuana is derived partly from myths about health care in America, that somehow magic cures, potions and "natural" remedies are available, but being denied to the public.As successful and sometimes amazing as modern medicine has become, Physicians can not work miracles. The human body remains in many ways a mystery. We are learning more, and need to learn much more, to help those patients who do not respond fully to traditional medicine. But subjecting patients to drugs that have not or can not pass scientific muster would be a violation of the physician’s oath to do no harm.Science ultimately reveals secrets to conquering disease, even though the process may take longer than we would sometimes like.Dr. Roberts, of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin, practices family medicine in Belleville, Wisconsin. He is president-elect of the American Academy of Family Physicians.Published: January 5, 2000© Copyright 2000, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Related Article:What Does Gore Really Think About Medical Pot?-12/29/99 http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4133.shtmlGore Briefly Supports Access to Med. Marijuana - 12/17/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4037.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #5 posted by bill bryan on March 28, 2001 at 17:26:01 PT: federal judge allows medical mj in southern Calif. I am trying to find the site called something like 215 Now which recently has a list of several dozen mostly California people who have faced federal government medical marijuana prosecution. I am specifically looking for a southern California couple whom a federal judge as a result of trial allowed them to possess 7-plus lbs. each of medical marijuana. I need the name and e-mail address of the site: it is something akin to (Prop.215) Now, etc.. Thanks, Bill in California [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by FoM on January 06, 2000 at 21:59:54 PT More Information From Richard lake Note: Dr. Roberts, of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin, practices family medicine in Belleville, Wisconsin. He is president-elect of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Also: Richard Cowen's comments on this item are at: http://www.marijuananews.com/is_evidence_necessary_before_pre.htm Evidence Necessary Before Prescribing Marijuana [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Gary Storck on January 06, 2000 at 13:19:59 PT: Dr. Roberts out of step with his own organization! I visited the American Academy of Family Physicians and found that Dr. Roberts is out of step with the official position of the AAFP on medical marijuana, and that the CA chapter endorsed Prop 215 in 1996.Wish I'd seen this before I sent my LTE. Good info for anyone else wanting to respond directly to Dr. Roberts or to send an LTE.See below:Gary -------- "Dr. Roberts, of the State Medical Society of Wisconsin, practices family medicine in Belleville, Wisconsin. He is president-elect of the American Academy of Family Physicians."---Richard G Roberts MD Belleville Family Clinic 21 S Vine St, Belleville, WI 53508 (608) 424-3384FAX: (608)424-6353http://www.aafp.org/ American Academy of Family Physicians 11400 Tomahawk Creek Parkway Leawood, KS 66211-2672 telephone: (913) 906-6000 e-mail: fp aafp.orgAlthough the AAFP appreciates your comments, the large volume of e-mail sometimes makes it impossible to reply to all messages. ---- From the AAFP website: URL: http://www.aafp.org/policy/84.html "MARIJUANA The American Academy of Family Physicians opposes the use of marijuana except under medical supervision and control for specific medical indications. (1989) (1995)" --- Also from: http://www.aafp.org/dnl/961017/marijuan.html Directors' Newsletter -- October 17, 1996"California AFP supports medicinal marijuana legislationThe California AFP supports a state proposition to allow people with AIDS, cancer, and other illnesses to cultivate and smoke marijuana to ease their discomfort."Since 1994, we have had a clinical policy to expedite access to cannabis for use under the direction of a physician," said Susan Hogeland, executive director of the California AFP. "This proposition seems to fit that concept."Ms. Hogeland adds they have only endorsed the controversial proposition. The chapter has neither contributed money nor sent a member to speak on the proposition's behalf.As reported in the Oct. 14 issue of Newsweek, the California ballot initiative doesn't limit the amount of marijuana an individual can grow or smoke and requires only oral permission from a doctor to obtain the narcotic. Supporters of the initiative say marijuana provides precious relief from the nausea and pain of chemotherapy and potent AIDS drugs.California residents will vote on the initiative in November." Drug Policy Forum of Wisconsin [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on January 06, 2000 at 13:10:35 PT Bang on target, Gary! As someone who has witnessed the efficacy of 'conventional treatments', I'll take cannabis over the anti-emitics usually prescribed for cancer patients.Perhaps the good doctor would like to give himself a huge IV loaded with Taxol and Kytril, and lets see him change his tune! My elderly friend sat in a chair, immobilized with pain from the chemo FOR DAYS!!!! She wound up leaving a trail of vomit behind her because the chemo made her so sick, despite the 'conventionl treatment' to prevent vomitting. That 'conventional treatment' that was supposed to be so good cost her $50 a pill! AND WE ALL PAID FOR THIS BECAUSE SHE WAS ON MEDICARE! Never fool yourself; Cancer is a big business, and the pharmaceutical companies don't care how many people suffer horrible agonies, just so long as their profit margins are maintained! And that is precisely what this is all about - profits.Not health. Not alleviating the pain of those who are suffering, some terminally. Just profits. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Gary Storck on January 06, 2000 at 12:40:49 PT: The Not So Good Doctor is Badly Misinformed Here is a letter to the editor I just submitted to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:I am writing in reference to the article, "Evidence Necessary Before Prescribing Marijuana", January 6, 2000, by Richard Roberts, MD.Apparently Dr. Roberts is unaware that The National Academy of Science's Institute of Medicine released a report in March of 1999 concluding that marijuana has significant therapeutic potential. It recommended immediate single patient access for some patients to this medicine.Dr. Roberts evidently does not care about patients who do not respond to "current proven treatments", and should be aware there are many of us. I would certainly be hesitant to seek treatment from a physician unwilling to exercise every treatment option available. Some doctors may be unwilling to recommend marijuana because of its illegal status or that they know little about its medical use because such information has been purged from most of today's medical references, not because it doesn't work. The fact is in its long history, there has not been one death recorded due to marijuana toxicity. By contrast, deaths from the side effects of conventional medications are said to cause over 100,000 deaths per year. In 1988, after an exhaustive review, the DEA's own Administrative Law Judge Francis Young concluded, "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care." There are plenty of physicians with the intelligence to recognize that marijuana is medicine, and the courage to recommend it despite cruel and immoral government policies that suppress its medical use. Dr. Roberts does his patients and readers a grave disservice by closing his mind to the therapeutic benefits of marijuana. When one examines the facts, it's medical utility is well documented. Perhaps he thinks arresting and jailing patients is good medicine, too. Gary StorckMadison, WI Drug Policy Forum of Wisconsin [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: