A NEW KIND OF DRUG REFORM -- SUPPORTERS OF MEDICAL MARIJUANA ACT MEAN
BUSINESS.

This is not the first time that someone has proposed an initiated act to
loosen the Arkansas drug laws. It is the first time that the proposal seems
serious.

Not that the Arkansas Medical Marijuana Act is certain of a place on the
November general election ballot. Chances are, the backers will fail to get
the 56,000 signatures they need by July 7; they're far short at the moment.
But they'll come closer than anyone else with a drug proposal in Arkansas,
and they're already committed to start working immediately toward the 2002
election if they fail this time. The Alliance for Reform of Drug Policy in
Arkansas (ARDPArk), a group formed last August, has managed to raise a
little money, print brochures, provide speakers for interested groups, and
even sponsor a two-day satellite TV conference on medical marijuana, with a
host of expert witnesses speaking from the campus of the University of
Iowa. The conference was available in Arkansas, for continuing-education
credit, at both the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences in Little
Rock and the University of Arkansas Center for Continuing Education in
Fayetteville on April 7 and 8. About 25 Arkansans paid to attend the
conference ($25 for one day, $50 for both), according to Denele Campbell of
Fayetteville, president of ARDPArk.

All this is unprecedented for a drug initiative in Arkansas, a state that
is largely intolerant of drug use and specifically disallows the use of
marijuana for medical purposes. Previous drug reformers, unfunded and
unorganized, made little effort to gather the signatures necessary to put
their proposals on the ballot. It helps the ARDPArk cause that support for
medical marijuana is growing nationwide.

Campbell said last week that ARDPArk had gathered signatures of only 4,000
or 5,000 registered voters. But, she said, volunteers are stepping up their
efforts, and should have more success in the warmer weather. People are
more inclined to stop and listen in good weather, she said.

"If we don't get the signatures we need, we'll destroy the petitions to
protect the privacy of everyone who has signed," Campbell said. And then
start a new campaign, with two years to work on it.

Campbell said ARDPArk knew last fall, when it decided to sponsor a medical
marijuana act this year, that time was short. "We decided it was important
to get the issue before the public," she said.

"We've raised nearly $4,000 in contributions. We had a benefit concert last
week in Northwest Arkansas that raised $500. We received a grant from the
Drug Policy Foundation in Washington to sponsor the teleconference. The
Foundation supports a variety of drug reforms."

Only half a dozen people were present when a reporter sat in on the
UAMSteleconference Friday morning, but an ARDPArk spokesperson said that 13
had paid the registration fee at Little Rock, and most of them had signed
up for the continuing-education credit. The speakers in Iowa included
physicians, nurses, lawyers and social scientists. A broad conclusion was
that more clinical trials of medical marijuana are needed.

More specifically, various speakers said that the most promising uses of
marijuana are appetite stimulation and the relief of pain and nausea; that
"in most cases, there are more effective medications," but that patients
respond differently and marijuana might be best for some; that there is a
risk of dependency but that is equally true of other medications now in
use, and that marijuana is less addictive than cocaine, heroin, tobacco or
alcohol.

Although the federal government remains strongly opposed, seven states have
enacted laws allowing the medical use of marijuana. A dozen more, counting
Arkansas, are pondering the question. The state medical marijuana laws are
functioning despite federal opposition, Campbell said.

ARDPArk insists that sometimes, for some people, marijuana works better
than anything else, and that doctors should be allowed to prescribe it as a
last resort. The Arkansas Medical Marijuana Act provides for the state
Health Department to license people whose physicians have prescribed
medical marijuana. The patient or the patient's primary caregiver would be
authorized to grow marijuana. Patient, physician and primary caregiver
would be protected from criminal prosecution.

Opponents argue that medical marijuana is a step toward general
legalization. "We say people can distinguish between medical use and
recreational use," Campbell said.

Campbell is a piano tuner by trade. She said her family had lived in what
is now Northwest Arkansas since before statehood.

Dr. Frank Wilson attended the Little Rock teleconference as a
representative of the state Health Department and found it "interesting."
The Department is keeping abreast of the issue, he said. The Health
Department said in a written statement that it "agrees with the
recommendations of the Institute of Medicine, the Food and Drug
Administration and an expert panel convened by the National Institutes of
Health, that smoked marijuana not be legalized . . . The ADH wishes to
point out that Marinol, a derivative of marijuana and the principal
cannabinoid contained in marijuana smoke, is approved for use by the FDA
and is available for Arkansas physicians to prescribe for their patients."

Campbell said there are many problems with Marinol. Among them: It is
prohibitively expensive for many patients. Because it is taken in pill
form, it aggravates the nausea and loss of appetite that many patients seek
relief from. It is slow to take effect.