TRUTH AND MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Medical marijuana has had a lot of successes. Eleven states have
legalized the therapeutic use of cannabis for people whose doctors
think they can benefit from it. The Supreme Court has upheld the
right of physicians to recommend pot to their patients. A 1999 report
by the federal government's Institute of Medicine concluded,
"Scientific data indicate the potential therapeutic value of
cannabinoid drugs, primarily THC, for pain relief, control of nausea
and vomiting, and appetite stimulation."

But elsewhere, medical marijuana has stalled. Most states still don't
allow it, and even in those that do, federal laws still ban the
possession of cannabis. That means sick people who need marijuana for
symptoms that don't respond to approved drugs must either do without
or risk going to jail. Despite the IOM's call for more research,
studies have been few and far between. As a result, the therapeutic
value of cannabis remains largely unknown and untapped.

Recently, there were a couple of advances that may help to erode the
federal government's stubborn resistance. The first was a study in
the journal Neurology that found smoking pot can relieve pain -
including a condition found in AIDS victims that is often impervious
to other pain drugs, even powerful opiates. Said Donald Abrams, a
physician and professor at the University of California, San
Francisco, "There is a measurable medical benefit to smoking cannabis
for these patients."

But such research is hard to come by. That's because the federal
government is the only legal source of marijuana for clinical
studies, and its monopoly presents some serious problems.

One is that it often rejects applications by scientists seeking
supplies for their research. Another is that those who do get the
stuff find its quality to be unreliable. By contrast, the government
allows licensed private laboratories to supply such drugs as heroin
and cocaine for scientific investigations.

An administrative law judge for the Drug Enforcement Administration
recently ruled that a professor at the University of
Massachusetts-Amherst should be allowed to grow marijuana in a
licensed facility. Judge Mary Ellen Bittner found that some reputable
scientists have been denied access to the government's supply and
that providing an alternative source "would be in the public interest."

Whether that decision will actually change anything remains to be
seen, since the DEA has the option of rejecting her recommendation.
That would be a shame. If the government is so sure that marijuana
has no medical value, it should welcome this sort of research. If it
refuses to facilitate such studies, it must fear knowing the truth.
The therapeutic value of cannabis remains largely unknown and untapped.