cannabisnews.com: Is Marijuana a Medicine? 





Is Marijuana a Medicine? 
Posted by FoM on April 09, 2001 at 08:19:06 PT
By Michael P. Mayko and Matthew Payne
Source: Connecticut Post
As the U.S. Supreme Court ponders whether to allow medicinal marijuana, many people here are unaware that the drug is legal for specific medical purposes in Connecticut. But despite a law passed 20 years ago, it has yet to be prescribed. In 1981, the Connecticut General Assembly approved medical marijuana to treat the side effects of cancer chemotherapy and glaucoma. The statute took effect in 1982. 
But since then, no prescription has been written or filled, according to the state Department of Consumer Protection. No state pharmacies dispense marijuana because the drug cannot be obtained legally, said June Neal, a DCP spokesman. That's because federal law prohibits its cultivation, distribution or possession. We have a law, but it is a useless law, said Betty Gallo, a spokeswoman for A Better Way, a lobbying group that supports medicinal marijuana and is pushing for changes in Hartford. This year, A Better Way is lobbying for a study to be conducted by the University of Connecticut on ways to distribute medicinal marijuana. The bill passed through the Legislature's Public Health Committee but it hasn't come up for a full vote yet, she said. She said the bill calls for the study to be completed by Feb. 1, 2002. Gallo said she is unaware of any physician who has registered with the state or written a prescription for the drug. Physicians fear writing marijuana prescriptions because doing so is not specifically decriminalized in the law, and they could be subject to arrest. Gallo said there was a recent incident in which police arrested a man for possession of marijuana even though he had a doctor's note. She said she has been in contact with the man in an effort to get him to testify before the Legislature. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court is considering arguments about a medical necessity exception to federal drug laws. At issue is whether a patient's need for marijuana should supersede the 1970 federal law that classifies it as an illegal substance with no known medical value. People interviewed in downtown Bridgeport supported the use of prescription pot to relieve people suffering with chemotherapy treatment or glaucoma, a disease that can cause blindness. I was unaware that Connecticut has legalized but it's definitely a good thing, said Sonya Oxendine, 31, a mental health worker. It ensures the quality of care people need and deserve. People with disease are going to use it anyway, said Gil Gonzalez, 32, an entrepreneur from Norwalk. Of course it should be allowed for medical use, to relieve pain. I haven't given it much thought, but if it works for people, then let them use it, said Nick Johnson, 35, an engineer from Watertown. Voters in Arizona, Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon and Washington recently approved ballot initiatives allowing the use of medical marijuana. In Hawaii, the legislature passed a similar law and the governor signed it last year. The case before the Supreme Court is U.S. vs. Oakland Cannabis Buyer's Cooperative, a California-based club that supplies medical marijuana under a referendum that authorized medical marijuana in the state in 1996. The Marijuana Policy Project Foundation in Washington says up to 2 million people across the nation use the cannabis weed to relieve symptoms of pain, the nausea related to chemotherapy and in the treatment of glaucoma. Others claim it reduces muscle spasms and relieves pain, particularly in the case of paralysis. But the federal government has taken the position that marijuana is illegal and should stay that way. Arrests and confrontations have resulted in California because of federal enforcement efforts. Lawyers for the Oakland club are arguing that judges and juries should have the right to decide for patients. Several justices seemed to think that approach was a stretch at best. The court's ruling is expected by the end of June. A ruling for the federal government would not overturn the California voter initiative, but would eliminate clubs like the Oakland one from distributing the drug openly. A ruling for the Oakland club would allow special marijuana clubs to resume distributing the drug in California, which passed one of the nation's first medical marijuana laws in 1996. The Associated Press contributed to this report. Source: Connecticut Post (CT)Author: Michael P. Mayko and Matthew Payne, Staff WritersPublished: Monday, April 09, 2001 Copyright: 2001 MediaNews Group, Inc.Contact: edit snet.netWebsite: http://www.ctpost.com/Marijuana Policy Projecthttp://www.mpp.org/CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by Sudaca on April 10, 2001 at 14:50:31 PT
Is the World Round?
- Isn't this sort of surreal?As the U.S. Supreme Court ponders whether the world is round or not, few people here seem to be aware that Hernando de Magallanes circumnavigated the globe 450 years ago..but the federal law hasn't been updated yet. "we have a law, so it's the law" says the gov't, the law says that there's no conclusive proof that the world is round. "It certainly looks flat to me" says the US. Shape Czar. Well, there are a bunch of loonies who insist that the world is round, in spite what everyone knows. The gov't will have to increase "mandatory treatment" for these dissenters, for fear that they may fall off the edge in their insistent attempts at proving the gov't wrong.The National Institute of Geometry is setting up the set-up needed to think about beginning to investigate the roundness of the world. They expect trials will begin in about 10 years, and may take forever. In the meanwhile they insist there's a perfectly legal way of travelling to China, by way of steamer from the east coast to Hispania, then Gaul and through the Empire. Another US law also confirms the viability of travelling east by glacier (watching out for wooly mammoths of course).But the federal government has taken the position that "believing in the round world" is illegal and should stay that way. Arrests and confrontations have resulted in California because of federal enforcement efforts. In particular the Oakland club of round worlders was shut down in an effor to save the sanity of the american population. Now the Oakland club strikes back as it appeals the ruling in the Supreme Court.Oakland lawyers are arguing that judges and juries should decide whether the world is round or not. [ed note . by way of presenitng a loop hole to a perfectly traditional law with thousands of years of perfectly conservative value]Several justices seemed to think that approach was a stretch at best. The court's ruling is expected by the end of June. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on April 09, 2001 at 10:43:28 PT:
Observer Strikes Again
You're sure making my job easier!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by observer on April 09, 2001 at 09:54:04 PT
Is the Associated Press all Propaganda and PSYOPs?
Notice the way the psychological operator must frame the issue. Rule number one: avoid mentioning jail or prison, which is the whole point of these laws. Rule number two: frame the issue, instead, as a struggle between a bunch of counter-culture dope-smoking hippies, versus the staid, reasonable, level-headed science of established medical instutions. (Don't mention these institutions are beholden to government for money and license.) Lawyers for the Oakland club are arguing that judges and juries should have the right to decide for patients. Rule number three: ridicule! ridicule! ridicule! Make it seem as if owning one's own body is a strange and foreign concept. (Why, everyone knows that the government has ownership of the bodies of the people! Slaves don't own slaves: massa owns the slaves.) Mock and laugh at the idea that adults own their own bodies. (Citizens are but foolish children: the paternal state will protect citizens from their foolish bodily choices.)Several justices seemed to think that approach was a stretch at best. Rule number four: Orwell's Memory Hole. Ignore the long history of medical cannabis use. Don't say anything about Queen Victoria using this plant for medicine; mention not that in 1621 English clergyman Robert Burton suggested that cannabis is in treating depression in his book, The Anatomy of Melancholy.  Assume you speak for all of science and medicine. Assume cannabis is only taken by smoking it. Modern medicine is "modern" because medicine isn't smoked. Q.E.D. Smirk, fold your arms, and look smug. Ignore all those who point out inconsistencies in your story. You speak for the hallowed learning of science and medicine. All others are dope-smoking hippies. 
Up-to-Date Chronology of Cannabis Hemp
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment


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