Why, it was just yesterday that I was telling you…
(DEA) Exposing the Myth of Smoked Medical Marijuana
Q. Does marijuana have any medical value?
…The American Medical Association recommends that marijuana remain a Schedule I controlled substance.
And now today when you go to that same link…
Q. Does marijuana have any medical value?
And the AMA reference is gone. Congrats to the folks at LEAP who spearheaded the campaign to harass the DEA about it. (Though if you want to believe it was the fast response of the loyal frontline battle grunts in the War on (Certain American Citizens Using Non-Pharmaceutical, Non-Alcoholic, Tobacco-Free) Drugs™ known as “Stashers” that provided the “bump” that put the DEA over the edge, well, I’m not going to disabuse you of that notion. Whatever keeps you writing to your government is fine with me.)
But the rest of the document needs some serious fixing, too…
…The Institute of Medicine conducted a comprehensive study in 1999 to assess the potential health benefits of marijuana and its constituent cannabinoids. The study concluded that smoking marijuana is not recommended for the treatment of any disease condition. In addition, there are more effective medications currently available. For those reasons, the Institute of Medicine concluded that there is little future in smoked marijuana as a medically approved medication.
See? The AMA in 2009 recognizes “smoked cannabis reduces neuropathic pain, improves appetite and caloric intake especially in patients with reduced muscle mass, and may relieve spasticity and pain in patients with multiple sclerosis.” So the DEA removes that current reference and replaces it with a contrary reference from a decade ago. (I often win arguments this way, like my trivia contest where I guessed there were nine planets, the 49′ers had the most Super Bowl trophies, and Bill Clinton was the president.)
But it is nice to know that the DEA recognizes that decade-old reference from the Institute of Medicine’s 1999 Study: Marijuana and Medicine, Assessing the Science Base. For it, too, recognizes the “Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of cannabinoid drugs, primarily THC, for pain relief, control of nausea and vomiting, and appetite stimulation”. It also rebukes the DEA’s statement that “smoking marijuana is not recommended for the treatment of any disease condition” when the study concludes, “for certain patients, such as the terminally ill or those with debilitating symptoms, the long-term risks [of smoked marijuana] are not of great concern.”
It’s nice that the DEA cites the 1999 IOM study, especially when they claim:
Q. Is marijuana a gateway drug?
* Yes. Among marijuana’s most harmful consequences is its role in leading to the use of other illegal drugs like heroin and cocaine.
…while the IOM study says, “There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.”
…In other studies, smoked marijuana has been shown to cause a variety of health problems, including cancer, respiratory problems, increased heart rate, loss of motor skills, and increased heart rate.
And not only that, I also hear it can cause increased heart rate. But not cancer; in fact, cannabis users show a reduced risk of head, neck, and lung cancers compared to non-using controls. And not respiratory problems, at least not seriously debilitating problems like emphysema and COPD. And not a loss of motor skills in any permanent or even long-lasting way. Sure, you don’t smoke a blunt and then go see how well you’ll do on the driver’s test, but a couple of hours later and you’re no worse to drive than anybody else. But I do hear that it can cause an increased heart rate… an increase about the same as walking up a flight of stairs.
…It’s also important to realize that the campaign to allow marijuana to be used as medicine is a tactical maneuver in an overall strategy to completely legalize all drugs. …. The New York Times interviewed Ethan Nadelman, [when asked] “Will it help lead toward marijuana legaization?” Mr. Nadelman said: “I hope so.”
I’m not sure what “legaization” is, but maybe there is a shortage of “L’s” at the DEA. Anyway, let’s look at this tactical maneuver. According to the DEA, Ethan Nadelmann and the rest of us “legaizers” are following this strategy:
- Scenario: All (currently illicit) drugs are illegal.
- Goal: Legalize all (currently illicit) drugs.
- Tactic: Convince voters that they should make one (currently illicit) drug available to very sick or disabled people under very strict conditions.
- Premise: Once voters are accustomed to sick people using one drug, they’ll decide that all people should be able to use all drugs.
How exactly does that work? How is it that Joe Q. Public sees a cancer patient smoking a joint and decides, “You know, if they put up an initiative to put meth-flavored lollipops in the 7-Eleven, I’ll vote for it!”
The very notion that medical marijuana is a “Trojan horse” is both an insult to the public’s intelligence and an endorsement of the legalization we seek! Are they really suggesting that the only way they can keep the public from rejecting prohibition as a policy is to make sure people in pain don’t smoke pot? The fact that they think a public exposed to a non-punitive, regulatory solution to drug control will be inexorably drawn to more of those non-punitive regulatory solutions for more people and other drugs just shows you how bankrupt prohibitionist ideology is! They can’t support it with reason, they can only support it through the barrel of a cop’s gun.
Topics: AMA, american medical association, DEA, gateway drug
out of my nose 3 [...]
RSS Feed
Loading ...
Everyday the illegal underground market of marijuana creates revenues and profits of 131 billion+ dollars for the drug cartels and dealers across the country. The Government is concerned about teen abuse of marijuana, Kids these days use all different things to get high ranging form presciption pills, to huffing agents such as gasoline and cleaning products, Kids will be kids no matter what anyone does about it. The government isnt helping us by keeping restrictions on the bill of who can recieve the drug and who can’t. What is more dangerous a couple of joints or a bottle of pain killers for our teens? Answer is very obvious. Not only is the government just tearing apart families of kids who just smoke pot by having the law against it it puts a persona on the people who smoke it as bad. Maybe pot is bad for you but what isnt! Coffee-caffine, cigarrette-300+ carcinigens that poison the body, alcohol related to hundreds of thousands of domestic assaults and batterys negliegnt homicides and alcoholism across the board The Alcohol and tobacco not taxed as consumer goods but taxed at the next level with additional taxes added are all physically addictive which keeps people hooked and keeps them coming back to pay the government officals salaries SO WHO ARE THE REAL CRIMINALS HERE????The government period end of story cant dispute facts.
Look, you don’t have to buy the paper version. They allow you to read the report for free, online. Apparently, the 2003 report is the 1999 report.
Hmmm…a few fair use quotes, after a quick look:
Damn. Sorry about the blockquotes being all screwed up. It looks like a typo made worse by cut and paste. This is what I meant to say:
Look, you don’t have to buy the paper version. They allow you to read the report for free, online. Apparently, the 2003 report is the 1999 report.
Hmmm…a few fair use quotes, after a quick look:
Makes you more calm, less anxious, less nauseous. Sounds like these “side effects” might be valuable treatments for some (many) conditions.
I did not see any references to vaporized cannabis or orally administered cannabis. In my quick look, they seemed to be more concerned about smoking as the delivery system. This might be a legitimate concern, but with the availability of other methods of administration, it is a straw man concern. Studies should compare the effectiveness of the alternate methods of administration. Maybe vaped or eaten cannabis can provide all the benefits (maybe more) of smoking, without the alleged potential harm.
Shame on the DEA for taking that statement out of context.
I didn’t read the whole report, but my conclusion is that, maybe they need to update the report and include vaporized and orally administered cannabis in their studies, or criticize studies that have failed to include the use of these two alternative methods of administration.
For more detail, please follow the first link in this post, which will take you to the entire online version of the report.
-ED
IOM appears to have a more recent report. I wonder why the DEA did not quote from that report?
-ED
Yep, I went right there and emailed them. Im glad they fixed it instead of ignoring us and leaving it up for a year.
Baby Stepping our way to ending this failed policy! A heck of a year we have had.
one small step for man One giant leap for mankind Now let’s do it again
Good to re-earn the title grunt again.
Now… let’s see what happens with the DEA’s other sources… perhaps something to the effect of telling them… yeah, that was then(s) (research), this is now.
Y’all be happy to know that LEAP did it! DEA changes their FAQ.
http://bit.ly/vXT4u