JUDGING MARIJUANA POLICY

I must respond to the letter written by Deputy District Attorney Carl
Armbrust regarding medicinal marijuana [Talk Show, Sept. 29]. I agree
with Armbrust's assertion that medicine should be based on science,
not ideology; however, I also think that science should be based on
facts, not the bottom line.

Marijuana is a plant and, therefore, cannot be patented.
Pharmaceutical companies are opposed to marijuana's medical use
because less-effective anti-nausea drugs would be less profitable if
it were allowed. So we should scrutinize Armbrust's quote of the
president's Office of National Drug Policy.

As a survivor of a three-year battle with cancer, I'm painfully aware
that pills are of no use to someone who is too ill to keep them down.
I'm skeptical of any "study" that my be underwritten, lobbied by or
otherwise financially connected to drug companies and conducted under
the auspices of the president, who is a notorious liar.

I will reserve my judgment of any study until I find out who conducted
it, how it was conducted and, most important, who paid for it.

Anthony Patton
Anaheim Hills

Checked-by: Patrick Henry