cannabisnews.com: Debate Swirls Over Marijuana as Medicine





Debate Swirls Over Marijuana as Medicine
Posted by FoM on February 25, 2001 at 07:22:04 PT
By Tom Mashberg 
Source: Boston Herald
Brian Fitzgerald doesn't think the law wants to throw a wheelchair-bound, half-blind father of three like him into jail, but he's still wary about where or when he smokes his pot.``Without this stuff, my limbs cramp up so much I can't roll myself to the bathroom,'' said the 53-year-old multiple sclerosis sufferer, puffing on a marijuana pipe made from a chicken's claw. ``So I risk being evicted or busted just to be able to get to the john.''
Fitzgerald is one of thousands of Bay State residents who inhale marijuana day upon day for what they insist are medicinal reasons.Desperate to stave off the pain or sickness of MS, chemotherapy, glaucoma, asthma, migraine headaches and other ailments, they cooperate in a vast illicit network, risking prison and profession to acquire their controversial ``herbal remedy'' - a substance the federal government rejects as a prescription medicine and classifies as a narcotic on a par with heroin.This medicinal marijuana underground, the Sunday Herald has found, includes grandparents and teenagers, old-line hippies and hardline Republicans, caregivers and cops, folks who can't walk and folks who run marathons.All insist that pot is a maligned miracle drug that allows the ailing to eat, sleep and breathe, to get to work or just get through the day.All are scorned by antidrug forces, ranging from the U.S. Justice Department to neighborhood crime groups, as lawbreakers with illegitimate claims to pot use.And all are eager for March, when the U.S. Supreme Court will weigh for the first time whether ``therapeutic smokers'' of marijuana can employ the so-called medical-necessity defense to contest federal and state drug charges.``Federal authorities must rescind their prohibition on medical usage of marijuana for seriously ill patients, and allow physicians to decide which patients to treat,'' said Dr. Jerome P. Kassirer of Weston, former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine and one of many physicians who have come to support marijuana's potential as a therapeutic drug.``The government should grow it and oversee its distribution,'' said Kassirer, who now teaches clinical medicine at Tufts, ``and doctors should prescribe it, but only to the very sickest people.''Yet even as the medical community begins to endorse marijuana's potential as a pharmaceutical drug - in 1999, the conservative National Academy of Sciences in Washington said ``marijuana's active components are potentially effective in treating pain, chemotherapy-induced nausea, anorexia from AIDS wasting syndrome, and the involuntary spasticity associated with MS'' - opponents are firm in their determination to block the drug's decriminalization for medical uses.``All these attempts to legalize marijuana for medicinal purposes are part of an indirect means of achieving total legalization of the drug,'' said William T. Breault of the Main-South Alliance for Public Safety in Worcester. Breault points to studies stating that regular use of marijuana damages the human brain, immune system, reproductive organs and lungs.``Even more important,'' Breault added, ``the message being spread concerning the so-called medical use of marijuana is very effective advertising to convince kids that marijuana is not harmful. This advertising is many times more effective than those `Joe Camel' ads by the tobacco companies, which lured children to smoke tobacco.''Despite the passion of anti-pot forces, it has become clear that in Massachusetts, as in many other states, an enormous amount of civil disobedience is under way among citizens who have turned to pot out of desperation and come to believe it has a bum rap.These self-avowed lawbreakers include prominent liberals like Stephen Jay Gould, the Harvard scientist and author, who used pot during abdominal cancer treatment, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the basketball legend, who says pot helps him stave off migraines.``Marijuana was the greatest boost I received in my treatment,'' Gould said, ``and the most important effect on my eventual cure.''Other illicit users include prominent conservatives like Lyn J. Nofziger, the former Reagan administration aide, who says he obtained black-market pot for a teen daughter with lymph cancer, and Richard Brookhiser, senior editor of National Review, who ``had to become a criminal'' to find marijuana while enduring harsh chemotherapy for testicular cancer.``I am for law and order,'' said Brookhiser, who added that his doctors knew many patients who used pot to subdue nausea or recover hunger during cancer treatment. ``But crime must be fought intelligently. The law disgraces itself when it harasses the sick.''Although there has been little controlled testing of the medical efficacy of marijuana in recent decades, advocates on both sides insist that some formal studies and hard science bolster their views.According to George Biernson of Woburn, a retired engineer and author of a self-published treatise, ``Dispelling the Marijuana Myth,'' pot ``is more dangerous than heroin, cocaine, alcohol or tobacco'' because its key psychoactive ingredient, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, stays ``stored in fat cells'' long after it is smoked.``We have seen that marijuana badly damages immune systems,'' Biernson said. ``How can we justify telling unfortunate AIDS patients they should smoke marijuana to lessen their pain? Instead we should be shouting out: `With your weakened immune systems, you should consider marijuana to be the worst form of poison!' ''And Gen. Barry McCaffrey, the drug czar under President Clinton, belittled medical marijuana during his tenure, saying: ``The argument that this chemical needs to be smoked doesn't make sense.''But two Harvard professors, Lester Grinspoon and James B. Bakalar, an associate professor and a lecturer in law, respectively, in the Department of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, are among the outspoken backers of marijuana's medical potential. In their 1997 book, ``Marijuana: Forbidden Medicine,'' they write: ``After carefully monitoring the literature for more than two decades, we have concluded that the only well-confirmed deleterious physical effect of marijuana is harm to the pulmonary system.''They add that weighed against ``the overwhelming anecdotal evidence'' suggesting that pot helps mitigate glaucoma, migraines, uncontrolled spasticity and other tortuous conditions, it is wrong for the federal government to disallow studies of a drug ``known to help sick people feel better.''``Driven by its harmful `war on drugs,' '' Grinspoon said, ``the government evidently fears that as more people gain experience with cannabis as a medicine, they will see for themselves that its toxicity is greatly exaggerated and its medical utility badly undervalued.''So far, the nationwide stirring of civil disobedience among furtive medicinal pot users has led to a modest groundswell at U.S. ballot boxes. Nine states - Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Oregon, Nevada and Washington - have laws that protect medicinal marijuana users from state prosecutions.Generally, state initiatives allow people with small amounts of pot, and a doctor's letter stating that they benefit from its use, to cite ``medical necessity'' if they are seized on local drug charges.But none of the state laws can deter federal prosecution. Washington refuses to let the states provide pot to residents unless the product comes from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and that agency has declined to make medicinal pot available to local health officials since 1986.The net result is that anyone growing or otherwise procuring marijuana for medicinal use faces federal arrest and imprisonment. Any physicians who formally prescribe it can be stripped of the federal licenses they need to dispense legal pharmaceutical drugs.This conflict between federal and state laws came to a head last fall in California. A group called the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative, which was set up after the state approved the growth and distribution of medicinal pot, was enjoined by the Clinton Justice Department from selling the drug to users bearing doctors' notes, despite what the state law said.The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reversed, saying there ought to be a common-law medical necessity defense. In addition, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled physicians could ``recommend'' marijuana to patients without fear that federal authorities would strip their licenses.The Justice Department appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which will hear arguments March 28. Proponents hope that the high court will reconcile the fact that more and more states, including Massachusetts, want to make pot available to sick people, while the federal government does not.Just such a lawful prescription is the hope of Maureen Blake, 53, of Webster, an avowed daily medical pot user who qualifies for federal disability for arthritis, depression and eating disorders.``I'm tired of being made into a criminal to get the only medicine that works for me,'' she said. ``And I'm sick of being prescribed costly narcotics that make me ill when a bit of cheap pot makes me well.''Source: Boston Herald (MA) Author: Tom Mashberg Published: Sunday, February 25, 2001Copyright: 2001 The Boston Herald, Inc. Address: One Herald Square, Boston, MA 02106-2096 Website: http://www.bostonherald.com/ Contact: letterstoeditor bostonherald.com Related Articles & Web Site:Marijuana The Forbidden Medicinehttp://www.rxmarihuana.com/Patients Heatedly Defend Smoking Weedhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8793.shtmlMass. Law for Medicinal Use Still in Limbohttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8792.shtmlCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #6 posted by J.R. Bob Dobbs on February 25, 2001 at 13:08:22 PT
Legalize it for EVERY use! No more jail, please!!
>>``The government should grow it and oversee its distribution,'' said Kassirer, who now teaches clinical medicine at Tufts, ``and doctors should prescribe it, but only to the very sickest people.''  So which doctor is going to have the duty of carrying out the Selektion of which patients aren't sick enough to avoid incarceration? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by ras james rsifwh on February 25, 2001 at 12:09:34 PT
"HEALING THE NATION"
REV 22:1&2...NOW IS THE TIME WHEN THE SACRED TREE OF LIFE, CANNABIS SATIVA, IS REVEALED. FRUITING (ACHENES) ON BOTH SIIDES OF THE STREETS EACH MONTH OF THE YEAR...CRYSTAL CLEAR WATERS FLOWING DOWN THE STREETS (BOTTLED SPRING WATER); AND FINALLY THE LEAVES SHALL BE USED AS MEDICINE TO HEAL THE NATIONS.THE "SEVENTH SEAL" OF CANNABIS SATIVA MARKS THE TIME OF QUEEN OMEGA AND THE BIRTH OF ZION, THE CITY OF GOD. GIVE ALL PRAISE AND THANKS TO JAH RASTAFARI FOR ETERNAL SALVATION FOR THE ALL. YES! RASTAFARI THE PROMISED FRUIT OF THE JUDEO-CHRISTIAN-MUSELUM TRADITIONS.AS RASTA BOB MARLEY SAID; "EVERYONE MUST COME TO RASTAFARI."and "SEE THEM FIGHTING FOR POWER FOR THEY KNOW NOT THE HOUR."
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Duzt on February 25, 2001 at 08:30:32 PT
Facts
There is so much research to disprove this, I could post all day, but here is a bit of it:From Exposing Marijuana Myths: A Review of the Scientific Evidence Critics state that marijuana damages brain cells and that this damage, in turn, causes memory loss, cognitive impairment, and difficulties in learning. THE FACTSThe original basis of this claim was a report that, upon post-mortem examination, structural changes in several brain regions were found in two rhesus monkeys exposed to THC. (51) Because these changes primarily involved the hippocampus, a cortical brain region known to play an important role in learning and memory, this finding suggested possible negative consequences for human marijuana users. Additional studies, employing rodents, reported similar brain changes. However, to achieve these results, massive doses of THC -- up to 200 times the psychoactive dose in humans -- had to be given. In fact, studies employing 100 times the human dose have failed to reveal any damage. In the most recently published study, rhesus monkeys, through face-mask inhalation, were exposed to the equivalent of 4-5 joints per day for an entire year. When sacrificed seven months later, there was no observed alteration of hippocampal architecture, cell size, cell number, or synaptic configuration. The authors conclude that: "while behavioral and neuroendocrinal effects were observed during marijuana smoke exposure in the monkey, residual neuropathological and neurochemical effects of marijuana exposure were not observed seven months after the year-long marijuana smoke regimen." Thus, twenty years after the first report of brain-damage in two marijuana-exposed monkeys, the claim of physiological damage to brain cells has been effectively disproven. No post-mortem examinations of the brains of human marijuana users have ever been conducted. However, numerous studies have explored marijuana's effect on brain-related cognitive functions. Many employ an experimental design -- in which subjects are given marijuana in a laboratory setting, and then compared to controls on a variety of measures involving attention, learning, and memory. In a number of studies, no significant differences were detected. In fact, there is substantial research demonstrating that marijuana intoxication does not impair the retrieval of information learned previously. However, there is evidence that marijuana, particularly in high doses, may interfere with users' ability to transfer new information into long-term memory. While there is general agreement that, while under the influence of marijuana, learning is less efficient, there is no evidence that marijuana users -- even long-term users -- suffer permanent impairment. Indeed, numerous studies comparing chronic marijuana users with non-user controls have found no significant differences in learning, memory recall, or other cognitive functions. (58) It has been widely claimed that marijuana substantially increases users' risk of contracting various infectious diseases. First emerging in the 1970s, this claim took on new significance in the 1980s, following reports of marijuana use by people suffering from AIDS. THE FACTSThe principal study fueling the original claim of immune impairment involved preparations created with white blood cells that had been removed from marijuana smokers and controls. After exposing the cells to known immune activators, researchers reported a lower rate of "transformation" in those taken from marijuana smokers. However, numerous groups of scientists, using similar techniques, have failed to confirm this original study. In fact, a 1988 study demonstrated an increase in responsiveness when white blood cells from marijuana smokers were exposed to immunological activators. Studies involving laboratory animals have shown immune impairment following administration of THC, but only with the use of extremely high doses. For example, one study demonstrated an increase in herpes infection in rodents given doses of 100 mg/kg/day -- a dose approximately 1000 times the dose necessary to produce a psychoactive effect in humans. There have been no clinical or epidemiological studies showing an increase in bacterial, viral, or parasitic infection among human marijuana users. In three large field studies conducted in the 1970s, in Jamaica, Costa Rica and Greece, researchers found no differences in disease susceptibility between marijuana users and matched controls. Marijuana use does not increase the risk of HIV infection; nor does it increase the onset or intensity of symptoms among AIDS patients. In fact, the FDA decision to approve the use of Marinol (synthetic THC) for use in HIV-wasting syndrome relied upon the absence of any immunopathology due to THC. Today, thousands of people with AIDS are smoking marijuana daily to combat nausea and increase appetite. There is no scientific basis for claims that this practice compromises their immune responses. Indeed, the recent discovery of a peripheral cannabinoid receptor associated with lymphatic tissue should encourage aggressive exploration of THC's potential use as an immune-system stimulant. It is frequently claimed that marijuana smoke contains such high concentrations of irritants that marijuana users' risk of developing lung disease is equal to or greater than that of tobacco users. THE FACTSExcept for their psychoactive ingredients, marijuana and tobacco smoke are nearly identical. Because most marijuana smokers inhale more deeply and hold the smoke in their lungs, more dangerous material may be consumed per cigarette. However, it is the total volume of irritant inhalation -- not the amount in each cigarette -- that matters. Most tobacco smokers consume more than 10 cigarettes per day and some consume 40 or more. Regular marijuana smokers seldom consume more than 3-5 cigarettes per day and most consume far fewer. Thus, the amount of irritant material inhaled almost never approaches that of tobacco users. Frequent marijuana smokers experience adverse respiratory symptoms from smoking, including chronic cough, chronic phlegm, and wheezing. However, the only prospective clinical study shows no increased risk of crippling pulmonary disease (chronic bronchitis and emphysema). Since 1982, UCLA researchers have evaluated pulmonary function and bronchial cell characteristics in marijuana-only smokers, tobacco-only smokers, smokers of both, and non-smokers. Although they have found changes in marijuana-only smokers, the changes are much less pronounced than those found in tobacco smokers. The nature of the marijuana-induced changes were also different, occurring primarily in the lung's large airways -- not the small peripheral airways affected by tobacco smoke. Since it is small-airway inflammation that causes chronic bronchitis and emphysema, marijuana smokers may not develop these diseases. In an epidemiological survey, approximately 1200 subjects gave information on smoking and pulmonary function at 2-year intervals. A large percentage of the subjects underwent pulmonary function testing. Although a small group who reported previous marijuana smoking had significant pulmonary abnormalities, current marijuana smokers had no significant reduction in any pulmonary functions. There are no epidemiological or aggregate clinical data suggesting that marijuana-only smokers develop lung cancer. However, since some bronchial cell changes appear to be pre-cancerous, an increased risk of cancer among frequent marijuana smokers is possible. Since the pulmonary risks associated with marijuana are related to smoking, the danger is eliminated with other routes of administration. For committed smokers, pulmonary risk might be reduced with higher-potency products, which produce desired psychoactive effects with less inhalation of irritants. Smokers could also be encouraged to abandon deep inhalation and breath-holding, which increase drug delivery only slightly. Finally, pulmonary risk might be reduced if marijuana were smoked in water pipes rather than cigarettes. I'm looking for a kaiser study that had amazing conclusions, it showed that brain activity improved in those smoking and the degeneration of brain cell actually occured at a slower rate in those using marijuana, I'll post it when I find it.Hope this helps.
http://www.wonderbuds.com
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on February 25, 2001 at 08:26:26 PT:
You don't have to look far, Heretic
Last year, at the 13th International AIDS Conference in Durban, South Africa, Doctor Donald Abrams unveiled the results of a study he had performed. The study had HIV/AIDS patients utilize cannabis medicinally. The findings were that cannabis did not cause any further degradation in already compromised immune systems, and that those who were afflicted with wasting disorders were able to eat...increasing their chances for survival.Here, take a look:http://ww2.aegis.org/news/sc/2000/SC000710.htmlhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6390.shtmlhttp://drcnet.org/wol/146.html#abramshttp://acmed.org/english/2000/eb000723.htmlhttp://pslgroup.com/dg/1d991a.htmAs usual, when the antis hit rock bottom in their propaganda barrel, they start scraping the dregs, trying to dress them up, perfume them, and hope a fancy title will dissauade people from challenging credentials. But I'd sooner listen to someone whose background in the medical field is impeccable, rather than from an unknown 'engineer' (in what discipline, please?) who has pretensions of superior medical knowledge...but has not conducted the kind of research necessaary to back his claims.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Anonymous on February 25, 2001 at 08:19:01 PT
Complete and utter BS!
There are no studies. None that have been peer-reviewed, at any rate. If cannabis is so dangerous, then where is the illness? Where, in a nation of some 50 million users of the drug, is the pathology supposedly caused by the drug? Any study even remotely suggesting damage is so poorly designed as to be laughable. One widely touted study simply asked cancer patients if they had ever smoked marijuana. Some had - BINGO! - marijuana causes cancer! Or the studies involve ridiculously high dosages of THC injected into lab rats. No real correlation to actual marijuana use at all.  Ever hear the old canard that pot "kills brain cells"? That whole line of lies comes from ONE study carried out decades ago. They strapped a gas mask onto a lab monkey and pumped him full of marijuana smoke for 5 straight minutes. Surprise, surprise! The monkey died. An autopsy showed that it had brain damage. Well, duh! Lack of oxygen will do that! But that's not was reported. What was reported was "pot kills brain cells"!.Every major study and review of the evidence at hand, NOT carried out by a Federally funded agency, has come to the conclusion that cannabis is far less dangerous than tobacco and alcohol. Unfortunately, there are plenty of unscrupulous scientists the world over, who feed at their Prohibitionist governments' trough, who are will to make outrageous claims about poorly designed studies, just to keep the funding flowing. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by Heretic on February 25, 2001 at 07:50:54 PT:
Does Brealt misrepresent the evidence?
William T. Breault of the Main-South Alliance for Public Safety in Worcester points to studies stating that regular use of marijuana damages the human brain, immune system, reproductive organs and lungs.What studies are these? I do not think an impartial analysis supports such conclusions. Would somebody please challenge these claims? Heretic
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment


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