cannabisnews.com: The Case Against Marijuana as Medicine The Case Against Marijuana as Medicine Posted by FoM on March 27, 2000 at 23:56:24 PT By Richard Morin & Claudia Deane Source: Washington Post Voters should just say no to ballot initiatives that legalize smoking marijuana for medical reasons: They're bad medicine as well as bad legislation, argues James McDonough in the upcoming issue of Policy Review, published by the Heritage Foundation. McDonough, director of the Florida Office of Drug Control Policy, notes that a number of the active ingredients in marijuana have demonstrated real potential for relieving such symptoms as pain, nausea and lack of appetite. And he recommends "ambitious research . . . to understand fully how these substances affect the human body."So what's the problem? Simply this: From a strictly medical standpoint, smoking pot is a lousy way to deliver the benefits of marijuana--sort of like puffing on an opium pipe instead of taking morphine-based prescription drugs, he claims."Botanical products are susceptible to problems with consistency, contaminations, uncertain potencies, and instabilities. After all, we are talking about a leaf, and a burning one at that," he writes.Smoking marijuana also poses risks of its own--and McDonough's not talking about the occasional exploding seed. A UCLA researcher reported that the carcinogens found in pot smoke are "far stronger than those in tobacco."Still, pro-pot initiatives are all the rage. In 1998 alone, five states passed measures that legalize smoking marijuana for medical reasons, and more are expected to win places on the ballot this year. Six others permit doctors to prescribe pot to patients--though he claims few doctors do.By Richard Morin and Claudia DeaneTuesday, March 28, 2000; Page A21 © Copyright 2000 The Washington Post CompanyRelated Articles:Marijuana Isn't Medicinehttp://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread5122.shtmlCasualties of the Marijuana War - Salon Magazinehttp://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread5199.shtmlhttp://www.cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtmlhttp://www.google.com/search?q=cannabisnews+medical+marijuanaAre You Writing At Least One Letter Per Week? - DrugSensehttp://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread5203.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #19 posted by Doc-Hawk on March 29, 2000 at 15:49:52 PT: Thanks FoM Thanks FoM,We missed ya. The poll you posted was great! I sent a copy along with a pointed message to Barry by way of: ondcp ncjrs.org . His old private email bounces. I got a reply saying that it would be sent to him, and giving me the following address to write him:Barry R. McCaffrey, DirectorOffice of National Drug Control PolicyExecutive Office of the PresidentWashington, DC 20503************************Sent this to Barry and Janet:If this is not a war, then it is past time for you to stop takingprisoners! The American public knows that marijuana can serve as aneffective medicine for many symptoms, yet you throw Americans in jaildaily for their (and sometimes their doctor's) choice of medicine.Stop the lies Barry!!!! Your unmitigated propaganda has resulted incontinued pain and suffering for far too long.I sure hope you never have to undergo chemo, but if you do, you wouldthen understand the truth! You would have helped create your ownHELL...and you damn sure would have earned it!!!Stop the war! [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by FoM on March 28, 2000 at 23:03:49 PT Time Magazine Marijuana as Medicine Poll Marijuana as MedicineMarch 17, 2000Time Magazinehttp://www.time.com/time/Do you think the federal government should legalize the medicinal use of marijuana? http://www.time.com/time/daily/poll/0,2637,marijuana,00.html Time Magazine Marijuana as Medicine Poll [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by FoM on March 28, 2000 at 21:01:53 PT DRCNet Needs Your help Hi Everyone, Since this is such a busy thread I thought I would post this here for you to read.DRCNet Needs Your Help Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 From: DRCNet drcnet drcnet.org Subject: DRCNet Needs Your Help 3/28/00Dear friend of DRCNet:I'm writing today because DRCNet needs your help. Just asthe impact of our work soars to greater levels, a seriousfinancial crisis -- the kind we thought we were past -- isforcing us to lay off staff, unless enough of yousubscribing to our list can help. Would you visitwww.drcnet.org/drcreg.html and make a contributionto DRCNet today, to help keep our work going strong?http://pub3.ezboard.com/fdrugpolicytalkdrugpolicyreform.showMessage?topicID=158.topic&index=2 Drug Policy Talk [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by Freedom on March 28, 2000 at 18:23:48 PT RE: Harmless? Awe, a prohibitionist comes in with this. How quaint.Silly, the 2 ngm/ml. law is a joke. You could achieve that by being in a room with other marijuana consumers. A similar law was tossed in Georgia last year because it is irrational to say one group using Marinol is clear to drive, while another must face felony charges.Marinol, which gets users more intoxicated than whole cannabis, is listed by the FDA as safe to use while driving once you become accustomed to the drug.This study shows that users are less likely to have an accident than other groups:http://www.marijuananews.com/1994_dutch_study_on_.htmBesides, that is your favorite red herring, where did anyone say marijuana use is harmless? Oh, the Lancet did say moderate use is... but, we did not. I would like to see research on what is more harmful, arrest and jail, or casual use of marijuana. Hmmm? [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by Mikey on March 28, 2000 at 18:16:27 PT More BS Do these guys know about a vaporizer or are they trying to prove yet another useless point? [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Pat on March 28, 2000 at 18:00:00 PT PUB LTE..an apology, Mr Clarke?+CannabisNews Tips (Hi Guys, there's a ~large note after PUB LTE.)From: WebBooks Date: Tue Mar 28 2000, 2:43 PM GMT-08:00 To: editor mapinc.org, mape legalize.org Subject: PUB LTE We think you owe us an apology, Mr Clarke From: WebBooks http://www.paston.co.uk/users/webbooks/webhome.html Source: Evening News, Norwich, UK Pub Date: 28 March 2000 PUB LTE We think you owe us an apology, Mr Clarke Contact: Tel 01603 01603 628311 Fax 01603 219060 EveningNewsLetters ecn.co.uk Comment: Include postal address and telephone number We think you owe us an apology, Mr Clarke On the programme "On the Record BBC 1" on Sunday, Home office minister Charles Clarke (pictured) stated that by running as a "Legalise Cannabis" candidate in Norwich at the last general election, Howard Marks tried to "to disrupt the election". As Howard's election agent, I would like to ask him for a public apology, we did no such thing. The issue of the legalisation of cannabis is something this government has set its mind against, no matter how many experts, police authorities and even members of the public demand change. To present those of us who are willing to stand up against this myopic policy and are trying to make ourselves heard as "disruptive" is an indication of the desperation they must be feeling. The one thing to come out of our campaign in 1997 was the admission from Mr Clarke that he has used cannabis himself, so he knows the law is no deterrent, yet he still peddles the myth. Not only that, but, therefore, by his own standards, Charles is a criminal, should he really be in office? Derek Williams Pembroke Road Norwich ----------------------------------------- My little bit of the world-wide web thing www.paston.co.uk/users/derek Tel (mobile) 07941 238908 __________________________________________________________________________________________Hi Freedom and Everyone,we've created quite a nice, good-sized thread, here. I hope no one minds that I dropped off this EM from Alun Buffry in the U.K. here. ... Yes, it's therapeutic to be able to comment and vent right after Prohibitionist agitation-propaganda 'news' stories. ... There are a number of very nice aspects of http://www.cannabisnews.com , here. -The most important one is, of course, FoM's strong dedication to finding and posting news. [And... lets not forget Ron Bennett's fine effort in creating this website, too....] -Another one that I really like is that this site is easily "Searchable" with http://www.google.com and http://www.alltheweb.com search engines (and maybe one or more other engines.) -Another excellent feature of this site is that ALL of the news stories and all of peoples' responding comments are archived... and *with their original URLs, too.* (You can even add to a thread after it's been archived.) -If, (say), you're looking for Medical-related news stories you can go the Medical section of this site and see all the Medical-related news stories and responding posts all at once (so they're easy to search through, either manually or with the help of the "Edit/Find (on This Page)" function of your browser.) ....-Re: Clinton saying: "There haven't been any scientific studied done on marijuana." If you check the National Library of Medicine's PubMed database for: - THC pharmacology - you'll get back a listing of almost 3,000 different study abstracts. "No studies" indeed! Bullcookies.-Re: the comment: "Nobody inhales their medicine." Quite a few pharmaceutical drugs are using this means of ingestion. More are coming out all the time. (Of course) there are a number of very good reasons for using this method.-**Anyway, (I think) that (essentially) any and all of folks pro-'WoDs' ideas, thoughts, convictions and laws, etc., are really only a smoke screen to hide the basic fact that these folks are wrongly and immorally butting into other peoples' lives.... ....Btw, I wonder if all of the news posts (threads) at this website are automatically registered with other search engines besides the google and the alltheweb engines?Also, I wonder if you can do a 'general type' of search while using google and alltheweb but w/o specifically including the term cannabisnews and STILL find ALL the news posts threads here at this board? -Btw, I think that if you use google and/or alltheweb search engine(s) to search through this site that you can ALSO search through the "Comments" that other folks leave here, too. That's cool! (If I'm right about this we can find this - PUB LTE We think you owe us an apology, Mr Clarke - message by specifically searching for it like this: (after these threads get 'picked up' by the google and alltheweb engines) search for: cannabisnews AND (any part of:) "PUB LTE We think you owe us an apology, Mr Clark" .Well, sorry to be so long-winded. I hope that perhaps this post is of some interest and of some help to some folks. (There may have been one or a few other things I was thinking of mentioning, but this is more than long enough already....)Thanks, Freedom, FoM and All the other good folks who stop bye here.Pat [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by kaptinemo on March 28, 2000 at 17:15:49 PT: Affiliations, please And just who are Mr. Morin and Ms. Deane? What is their speciality? Are they doctors or medical professionals of any type? Evidently not; I don't see any alphabet soup trailing after their names. Are they caregivers with any experience in the effectiveness of cannabis on those suffering nausea from chemo, or wasting from AIDS related diseases? Doesn't look like it. So, just who are they?Can it be that they are just another set of catspaws out to make a name for themselves (as well as a few bucks while standing beside the federal DrugWar trough)? Isn't it amazing that lay people, without a single shred of medical background or certification, can determine health policy for millions of other people, sight unseen? And isn't also amazing that they can in effect *practice medicine without a license*, and do so with impunity, simply because they are allied to a political *minority* who happens for the moment to enjoy suzerainity? Such people often become emboldened by feeling allied to such a group; they often make terrible mistakes by thinking that they will be protected by the same organizations. So they often become as strident as they are ignorant. Until it comes time to put up or shut up. For all the antis reading this: It's been my observation that antis have never been ones for standing in an open arena and answering a fair challenge to debate their beliefs. Like marauders, they drop in here and deposit their ignorant blather, in much the same way cattle deposit dung. They mistake declaration of opinion as statement of fact. And they generally do not possess the courage necessary to come back to explain themselves.Which is why we're winning. People who've been backed into a wall, people who have had loved ones suffer and die horribly when their suffering could have been relieved, people who see rampant injustice cloaked in 'legitimacy', are not likely to be sunshine soldiers. Every one here, to a greater or lesser extent, is in it for the long haul, antis. Get used to losing. Because, in the final analysis, there are more of us than there are of you. And we are a hell of a lot more motivated than you are. Your concerns are for what you think of as propriety - ours are concerened with survival. Believe it or not, even of yours.Bceause, dear antis: the American Cancer Society says over and over again that one out of three Americans will get cancer in their lifetimes. In the 1970's they used to say one out of four. From 25% to 33%. Someday you may have to face the horrific results of a test, hear the words "Cancer of the (fill in the blank) and face the equally horrific and miserable fate you have shown such callousness towards those so unlucky. The physician may recommend chemo; they almost always do (at $3,500 a pop, and Medicare paying for it, you see how lucrative it is for the White Coat Brigade). And when you realize, as the nausea worsens and you cannot eat, that you could have avoided this terrible suffering. Simply by not by not being so righteously, stupidly ignorant. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by DontArrestMe on March 28, 2000 at 13:51:53 PT Oh Please Why talk about the crudeness of smoked marijuana when we can discuss the prescription Paregoric that has been prescribed for about a century. No fancy morphine pills here. It contains anhydrous morphine exracted from opium and then placed in a 45% alcohol solution for consumption. And what is it for? Diarrhea! That is much more sophisticated than smoking marijuana. The point is that both medicines benefit from a rapid absorption medium although I would not reccomend thc oil in alcohol for people who can't stop vomiting.And on the matter of carcinogens. Yes it does contain more than tobacco. However, the Surgeon General in 1990 stated that at least 90% of lung cancer in smokers is caused by the radioactive nutrient containing soils in which tobacco is required to be grown. Maybe that explains why no one has died of cannabis smoking alone and thus nullifies the rationale that it should not be legal because it causes cancer. [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by observer on March 28, 2000 at 13:09:40 PT The Children > Tell that to the parents of the kids who died or who are in hospital. a) I'm always amazed when Prohibitionists propagandistically imply that marijuana caused this or that because someone had traces of it in their blood... ``John Watkins, a Las Vegas defense attorney who has consulted with Williams and who has specialized in DUI cases for more than 20 years, said earlier this week he believes the new law is unconstitutional. Just because someone may have traces of a prohibited substance in their system does not mean they are impaired, Watkins said.''http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n411/a06.htmlOf couse, if I were sucking down a nice salary from the drug Prohibition government gravy-train, I'm sure I'd be screaming loud and long about "the children", too. Good for business, don't you know?b) When drunk drivers hit and kill innocents on the highway, we don't hear people blaming anyone but the drunk driver. Yet, Prohobitionists have varying standards when it comes to marijuana. In that case, any excuse (pretext, etc) will do: `people must be locked up for marijuana because someone once smoked some and had an accident', we are smugly told. Drivers or not, when one driver who is also a marijuana smoker has an accident it is "proof" that all marijuana smokers are bad bad evil! I don't buy it. Alcohol drinkers are not imprisoned unless they drive drunk. But prohibitionists have double standards for marijuana. Any excuse will do when it comes to imprisoning marijuana smokers.c) Why don't prohibitionists ever mention studies like this?CANNABIS CRASH RISK LESS: STUDY http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v98/n945/a08.html``the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free. ''Isn't "on message" for the pro-prison crowd?d) "the kids", etc.Propaganda technique: ``Homey words. Homey words are forms of "virtue words" used in the everyday life of the average man. These words are familiar ones, such as "home," "family," "children," "farm," "neighbors," or cultural equivalents. They evoke a favorable emotional resp onse and help transfer the sympathies of the audience to the propagandist.''http://www.ngenius.com/sco/proptech.htmlOh yes. Prohibitionists ... they're only ratcheting up penalties and locking up adults for smoking marijuana, "for the children." [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by Another view on March 28, 2000 at 12:15:03 PT Harmless? Tell that to the parents of the kids who died or who are in hospital. http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v00/n411/a06.html?397 [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by Freedom on March 28, 2000 at 11:46:41 PT My favorite article on... ... "Smoke is not medicine.":http://www.marijuananews.com/marijuananews/cowan/counterblaste_to_dea.htmCounterblaste to DEA: Fallacious Pharmacology. "The contention that smoking cannot possibly be an acceptable route for the administrationof a therapeutic substance is morality dressed up as science." by Peter Webster I wonder if Peter reads here. [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Freedom on March 28, 2000 at 11:15:20 PT What a surprise. I got quite a laugh when Dick called this man the Czarette, or was it Czarina?>And he recommends "ambitious research . . ."Yawn... now, it's not just research, but ambitious research.A new propaganda line. Yes, everyone, James feels your pain.Zzzzz... Do these types have any idea how little credibility they have left?Hello Pat, I do not think I have seen you post here before.It is great to have a place to vent right next to the stories that just make you want to gag. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by observer on March 28, 2000 at 11:03:49 PT Fungus McDonough > McDonough, director of the Florida Office of Drug Control Policy. I think this is the guy who wants to release the marijuana fungus.He's the culprit.http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread2279.shtml etc.Florida Mulls Use Of Controversial Anti-MJ Fungus``Florida's proposed marijuana eradication plan would enlist the use of a new, marijuana-eating, soil-borne fungus, known as Fusarium oxysporum. Proponents of the program, spearheaded by state drug czar Jim McDonough, believe that the "mycoherbicide" will target marijuana and ignore other crops. Critics are uncertain.''http://www.ussc.alltheweb.com/cgi-bin/search?type=all&query=cannabisnews.com+McDonough+Florida [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by blueberry kid on March 28, 2000 at 10:42:47 PT: fungus McDonough, director of the Florida Office of Drug Control Policy.I think this is the guy who wants to release the marijuana fungus. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by fivepounder on March 28, 2000 at 10:11:33 PT prison is the point Same old, same old. Meanwhile people's lives are being ruined. If marijuana is such a carcinogen why has there never been a case of cancer documented? I refain from profanity only at the request of this site. Peolpe like these two are about as compassionate as a slug. While they think the legal drugs are just fine. Hypocrites!!! [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Pat on March 28, 2000 at 07:20:04 PT 'War on Drugs' Is Totally Illogical And Immoral Hi Guys...The "reasoning" behind the "War on Drugs" is that Adult A can determine what Adult B can ingest but that Adult B cannot decide what to put into his or her body.This is not only totally illogical, moreover... and most importantly, it is totally IMMORAL.Thank you. Good Luck.Pat(Yes, I know that at least one of you already said this before me, here; thanks.:) [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Santor on March 28, 2000 at 06:39:14 PT No Smoking... I use medical marijuana. But guess what? I don't smoke it, I use a vaporizer. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by observer on March 28, 2000 at 06:13:12 PT Deane, Morin 'Just Happen' to Forget P-R-I-S-O-N > Voters should just say no to ballot initiatives that legalize smoking marijuana for medical reasons ...A diversion of attention; a classic red-herring. The issue is not whether or not certain doctors approve or disprove of the relative effectiveness of one medicine over another: the issue is locking people in JAIL (i.e. PRISON, INCARCERATION etc.) for choosing marijuana as a medicine. These propagandists continually dupe people into unwittingly accepting more prison, by muddying the water with claims as to the potential harms and maybes and could-bes of of the effectiveness of marijuana as medicine. That's not the point. The point is that people are being thrown in jail for using this plant. That's the point. Don't let propaganda point people like Richard Morin and Claudia Deane let you forget: the issue is prison, not whether or not some doctors think that medicines shouldn't be smoked or whatever other excuse NIDA can dream up at the time. Prison ... prison. Don't let them forget!> ... Still, pro-pot initiatives are all the rage ...This whole piece is full of error. But this is a classic lie: when people argue that others should not be locked up for using marijuana, prohibitionists like to call them "pro-pot" etc. This is another prohibitionist falsehood (and they are legion): wanting to not lock up alcohol drinkers is not "pro-alcohol". But marijuana must be different. If you don't toe the prison party line, then you must be "pro-pot"...> ... Six others permit doctors to prescribe pot to patients -- though he claims few doctors do.Did Morin and Deane just happen to forget to tell you why doctors that are threatened with Federal prosecution (i.e. PRISON) for even talking to their patients about recommending marijuana, don't talk about it? I bet this detail just slipped their minds again. Oopsie daisy! [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Pat on March 28, 2000 at 04:19:47 PT 'War on Drugs' Supporters Fall Into Two Categories Hello Folks…Given what an unmitigated EVIL Prohibition is, I have come to the (sad) conclusion that everyone who supports it falls into one of two categories. People who support Prohibition are either very grossly ignorant or are, plain and simple, EVIL. Of course, some supporters of Prohibition are both ignorant and evil….Pat Whelan [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: