NEVADA APPROVES BILL ON MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA

The legislation isn't expected to raise problems with federal authorities,
but the state medical association opposes it.

Despite the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that put the kibosh on
California's cannabis buying clubs, the Nevada Legislature earlier this
month voted to legalize the medical use of marijuana there.

The key difference in Nevada's system that some experts say should allow
the legislation to go forward without much, if any, interference from the
federal government is the way the law lets patients access medical marijuana.

Unlike California's buying clubs, where large amounts of marijuana were
grown in a central location and then distributed to patients, Nevada's
legislation would allow patients or their caregivers to have up to seven
plants for their personal use.

It's similar to laws in Oregon and Maine in that respect, and neither of
those states has encountered problems with the federal government before or
after the May high court ruling.

"Our analysis is that the Supreme Court ruling said there is no medical
necessity defense and that buying clubs weren't legal," said Brenda Erdes,
legislative counsel with Nevada's Legislative Counsel Office, which
directed the state Legislature on the best way to write the law without
running into problems. "But there wasn't anything beyond that."

The court ruling didn't strike down laws or ballot initiatives that passed
in nine states in recent years, including California.

And in Oregon and Maine, where medical marijuana programs have been up and
running for several years, the ruling hasn't changed physician habits when
it comes to recommending whether patients should be allowed to have
marijuana for medical purposes.

"We've received no questions to our knowledge," said Jim Kronenberg,
spokesman for the Oregon Medical Assn.

"The atmosphere is unchanged," added Kevin Neely, spokesman for the Oregon
Attorney General's Office. "Physicians have always been wary because they
are subject to federal laws."

Buffering physicians

But Oregon has tried to make physicians feel more confident that they won't
get in trouble with federal authorities.

Oregon law requires patients to get a note from their doctor, which they
can bring to the state to receive a license which allows them to own
marijuana plants, Neely said. About 2,300 cards have been issued.

Nevada's legislation, which at press time was waiting for the governor's
expected signature, tries to do something similar.

In addition to letting patients cultivate seven plants, the state would
create a registry for patients whose physicians recommended that they use
medical marijuana to treat side effects of their serious illnesses.

Nevada also would take things a step further than other states have.

It plans to ask the federal government for permission to conduct research
on whether marijuana helps ease pain, nausea and other problems that people
with cancer, AIDS and other serious illnesses encounter.

Despite the research component of the legislation, the Nevada State Medical
Assn. continues to oppose legalizing medical marijuana. The medical
benefits haven't been shown, and the federal government would have to
change its policies for the drug to be legal, said NSMA Executive Director
Lawrence P. Matheis.

"It simply is a popular vote," he said. "It's empathy for people who are
chronically ill. There is question to whether there is any medical value.
... The [state] constitution is a terrible place to put a medical directive."

Las Vegas oncologist Arnold Wax, MD, agreed.

He pointed to a study in the July 1, 2000, Journal of Immunology that found
that the active ingredient in marijuana actually caused cancer cells to
reproduce faster.

And, he said, there are plenty of other legal drugs on the market to treat
patients, including Marinol (dronabinol), manufactured by Roxane
Laboratories Inc. and Unimed Pharmaceuticals Inc. Marinol is the synthetic
form of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana.

"There is absolutely no use for [medical marijuana]," he said. "It is a
social and emotional issue. It is not a medical issue."