THE CASE FOR USING MARIJUANA AS A MEDICINE REMAINS UNPROVEN

Here's my private, unauthorized, uninformed, instinctive reaction to the
case for the medical use of marijuana: "Oh, right."

Here's what I would say publicly in, for example, a newspaper column:
"Marijuana does ease pain and stimulate appetite, but so do other
medications that have the added benefit of not blackening the lungs. So the
case that pot, and only pot, is vital to the survival or quality of life of
some sick people appears to be a weak one."

In fact, experts are divided on whether it helps or not. An authoritative
U.S. panel concluded that there are limited cases in which marijuana is the
best way to relieve symptoms of multiple sclerosis, AIDs, and
cancer-related loss of appetite. So wouldn't it be compassionate to set
aside doubts -- both about the usefulness of the drug and the credibility
of its champions -- and just let sick people smoke up?

Yes. But that isn't likely to happen any time soon. The problem isn't only
Health Minister Anne McLellan, who has communicated her skepticism and
disapproval of the whole marijuana initiative from the beginning. It isn't
even her peevish relationship with her predecessor, the more liberal Allan
Rock, once a champion of the medical use of marijuana.

The problem, as she suggests, is the hypocrisy of a health department
approving, much less providing, a substance of dubious efficacy and with
possible negative side-effects without serious study. The further
hypocrisy, some will argue, is the health department applying this
uncompromising principle to as mild a substance as marijuana while more
seriously dangerous drugs somehow make in on to the market. But we're not
talking about anti-histamines or even that entirely legal, but by no means
benign, substance, tobacco. We're talking dope.

For a generation that regarded marijuana as a recreation (or a dangerous
addiction), it is hard to take it seriously as medicine. Some proponents
liken it to a natural remedy and propose it be treated as such: a sort of
smokeable echinacea or St. John's Wort. Except that, unlike the previous
substances, marijuana has a measurable effect: In the right quantity, in
most circumstances, it will make most people high. Echinacea may or may not
boost the immune system (recent studies suggest that it doesn't), but it
won't induce anyone to weave across a highway or lose the thread of a
conversation.

Where was I?

I was trying to avoid saying the obvious, because it is so uncool and it
betrays the spirit of the sixties: Marijuana might not be so good for your
health over time. It might not be a good idea to be stoned and to be
driving (although this is not new intelligence or, in my case, even
second-hand). It might not make sense to clear obstacles for the use of a
new drug, even for sick people, when we have finally got one of the bad old
ones, tobacco, on the ropes. Finally (and this is the most difficult
admission), the insufferably fussy McLellan might be acting responsibly and
not just being her usual, conservative, preachy, party-pooping self.

On the other hand -- pulling my argument out of a sharp right turn -- what
right has government to decide what we do in our spare time, provided we
don't hurt anyone else? And you can overstate the health dangers of dope,
just as the social consequences were hilariously exaggerated in the days of
Reefer Madness. Alcohol and tobacco do far more damage and, unlike
marijuana, are more potentially addictive. Junk food is killing more of us
faster than marijuana ever could. As for impaired driving, surely tests can
be devised to pick up cannabis-related impairment as readily as alcohol?
And, last, it doesn't matter what anyone -- me, the U.S. Supreme Court,
even Anne McLellan -- says, people are smoking dope all over the place (as
close as your own backyard, even) and they are going to keep right on doing
so. Sick people, too.

They are stuck with a no-win argument. If they get ready access to
government-grown marijuana, all the other health concerns come into play --
and are a legitimate question of public policy. If they lose the right to
medical use, they can just grow their own. If decriminalization happens,
that will earn them a small fine at worst.

That said, I do feel sorry for remote Flin Flon, Manitoba. It is the site
of the first federal pot farm and has already produced a crop to be used
for "research." It is clear what McLellan wants the research to prove: The
medical use of marijuana is a scam. Only they'll think of a nicer word. I
should, too.

Susan Riley writes Monday, Wednesday and Friday.