cannabisnews.com: Doctors Question Use of Pot To Treat Illness Doctors Question Use of Pot To Treat Illness Posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 21:55:22 PT By Robert Walker Source: Calgary Herald Doctors who specialize in treating addictions say they have misgivings about federal Health Minister Allan Rock's regulations for the medical use of marijuana. The regulations "place most physicians in this country in a serious ethical quandary," said Dr.Nady el-Guebaly, head of Foothills Hospital addiction centre in Calgary, and a spokesman for the Canadian Society of Addiction Medicine. The association, representing doctors across Canada specializing in treating marijuana, alcohol and other addictions, released a statement Tuesday in which they raised their concerns. El-Guebaly said there's only limited evidence that cannabis is effective in any conditions, and evidence of the benefits of smoking the drug is purely hearsay. The regulations suggest patients will smoke the cannabis, yet no scientific literature supports the use of smoking marijuana as a method of delivering the active ingredients in the treatment of illness, he said. At the same time, it's been shown there are significant ill effects for some users of cannabis, said el-Guebaly. The long-awaited regulations governing the possession and production of marijuana for medical purposes, published Friday, allow terminal patients, people with AIDS, multiple sclerosis, spinal-cord injuries, epilepsy, severe arthritis and other serious conditions to use the drug if it eases their symptoms. The proposed regulations outline specific rules for patients and caregivers to possess and cultivate marijuana. There are in each disease cited in the regulations alternative therapies, says the society in its response to the proposals. Cannabis is never the first-line treatment for any known medical condition. The society's policy states "that, overall there is more risk than benefit in the use of cannabis products for medicinal purposes. "Although the government may wish to call its plans to regulate marijuana 'compassionate medicine,' it must not yet be considered as 'medical' - for smoking marijuana has not met the rigorous criteria required before a drug can be considered both safe and therapeutic," said Dr. Bill Campbell, president of CSAM and a Calgary family physician treating addicts. Marijuana decriminalization, cultivation, distribution, and use for recreation, is considered by the society of addiction experts to be a legal and social issue - not a medical one. The association said it hopes government will be prepared to adequately treat those individuals who have developed dependency or other adverse consequences from the use of marijuana. The new regulations suggest the method of delivery will be by inhalation, or smoking, which means all the other compounds that may be harmful are also inhaled in an attempt to obtain the active compounds. It's been calculated that smoking three to four cannabis cigarettes a day causes the same damage to health as 20 or more tobacco cigarettes a day, says the society. Among those who have taken cannabis, one in 10 is at risk of dependence. Other problems include risk of psychotic episodes and aggravation of schizophrenia. Cannabis is the most common drug, apart from alcohol, detected in drivers involved in fatal accidents or stopped for impaired driving, the society says. Note: No proof drug is safe and therapeutic.Source: Calgary Herald (CN AB)Author: Robert Walker Published: April 11, 2001Copyright: 2001 Calgary Herald Contact: letters theherald.southam.ca Website: http://www.calgaryherald.com/ Related Articles:Medical Pot Farm Bustedhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9346.shtmlArthritis Society Lauds New Drug Ruleshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9299.shtmlOttawa Unveils Rules for Medical Use of Pot http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread9290.shtml END SNIP --> Snipped Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #11 posted by Kirk on April 17, 2001 at 11:37:41 PT: fund raising How else are governments supposed to finance illegal arms deals than with drug money taken from pushers, that they supplied the drugs too? http://stoners.tv [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by swagman on April 13, 2001 at 10:37:13 PT lol Well, this guys still disgusts me, it's some of the most biased reporting I've seen.Naturally, I sent him a pleasant little email. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by r.earing on April 13, 2001 at 08:56:11 PT: Hick is relative Aww,shucks swagman Cowtown ain't no hick town.You want hick?You gotta go to Saskatchewan for that.Our reform MP (Vellacot) was quoted in the paper as saying that "Mariwanna makes men grow boobies,jes'like a girl,yup." and that "it shouldn't be legalized because then,criminals would make more money offen it." [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Charlie on April 13, 2001 at 07:24:53 PT Addicted to propaganda... The majority of doctors are for the most part trouble shooters and not healers. They are concerned only with disease and not health and well being, imho.So I take it this 'doctor' thinks prescription painkillers aren't addictive or detrimental to health! Someone with cronic pain or a terminally ill condition ought to have the right to choose what works for them. Just this past week I saw a news item that stated 30% of Amerika's drug problem is related to prescription drugs.I once smoked tobacco. Started at 9, yep 9 and smoked till I was smart enough to quit 26. Took 6 years to finally rid myself of that habit. Mj was instrumental in my doing so. BTW, I smoked cigarettes before ever knowing pot existed. While a tobacco smoker, a half pack a day and I couldn't breath the next day till noon. Having smoked pot daily for 25 years before and since quiting tobacco, I have never experienced anything like that and also have been a runner for 22 years of those 25. 3-4 joints = 20 cigarettes=pure bullsh*t! Also, received 2 college degrees in night school while working everyday as a sysop and later programmer/analyst. And as a pot fiend also managed to make the smart moves that allowed me to retire at 43 and persue my true passions in life. I swear to Jah, pot has been my assistant. This guy is an idiot and an unattractive parrot for the antis.Cheeb up. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...and so it goes. [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by dddd on April 13, 2001 at 04:39:43 PT Mandatory Minimums If there were mandatory minimums for not telling the truth,wewould need to install bars on the whitehouse...dddd [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by The GCW on April 13, 2001 at 04:31:12 PT mandatory minimums. If there were mandatory minimums for not telling the truth. Those doctors would be locked away.Quack quack. [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by 420ff on April 13, 2001 at 01:25:11 PT lets go wake me when the revolution starts. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by sm247 on April 13, 2001 at 01:23:29 PT Whats up Cannabis is the most common drug, apart from alcohol, detected in drivers involved in fatal accidents or stopped for impaired driving, the society says. This si because EVERYONE is doing it. They are not dumb. They know mrijuana is safer than alcohol. Just because it was found in drivers system that had been involved in an accident doesn't prove the marijuana contributed to the accident. Maybe if they hadn't been using marijuana the accident would have been worse because a driver may panic knowing they are about to get in an accident whereas a driver smoking marijuana would not panic seeing an accident unraveling they may stay more calm and in control. I personally have been high in every accident i have been involved in only 1 out of many have i been at fault.At least I was able to walk away from those accidents. So where the others involved. Maybe if i hadn't been high I may have panicked lost control and caused worse damage. This does deserve some studies i think. CAN A PERSON UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF MARIJUANA STAY MORE IN CONTROL THAN SOMEONE NOT USING IT IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Dan B on April 12, 2001 at 23:27:44 PT: Imprint--You Got It Right These doctors aren't ignorant, just greedy. I believe your observations are correct. The fact is, there are many studies that show the positive effects of marijuana smoked for medical purposes (the IOM report and the Abrams study are just a couple). We also know that marijuana shrinks some kinds of cancer tumors (glial cell brain cancer, a type of viral leukemia, breast cancer) in mice, and there is no reason to believe that it cannot work in humans, as well. Bottom Line: Dr.Nady el-Guebaly has a job to protect, and he'll do so at the expense of anyone who gets in his way. Dan B [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Imprint on April 12, 2001 at 23:03:47 PT: What's up with this article? I want to get this straight. Since marijuana has been illegal, how could it have ever risen to the status of “first-line treatment”? For the last 70 or so years doctors have not been allowed to prescribe it. Therefor other methods of treatment have been perused. How do we know marijuana isn’t a better treatment than what is available?Also, doesn’t the thousands of AID’s and cancer patents with reports of relief from marijuana use amount to more than “hearsay”? And haven’t there been medical doctors involved in many of these cases which would lend credibility to the claim of relief? I have heard the claim that three to four joints equals 20 cigarettes before. Where the heck did this come from and where is the thousands of 20-40 year marijuana smokers with emphysema and lung cancer to back it up? Also, why wasn’t this new “vaporizer” marijuana pipe mentioned as an alternative to conventional smoking? Finally, my experience has been that folks in the drug rehabilitation field have an agenda. It seems to me that it is in their best interest to keep the illusion that marijuana is additive. It keeps the patients coming in and the paychecks flowing.Have I gotten this right or am I over looking something? [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by swagman on April 12, 2001 at 22:06:06 PT sigh.... Welcome to my hick Canadian hometown. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: