NO TO MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Journalism? Nowhere does your recent medical marijuana article address
on what authority the legislature assumes the expertise to practice
medicine and also to usurp the role of the FDA in approving medical
interventions. There is no valid study yet that marijuana has
medicinal value in its current form. Why is that being ignored?

The article reports about a person helped by marijuana, yet how many
thousands of people have been helped by untested interventions,
including the quackery of the old-time medicine show? Coca-Cola once
had cocaine in it. I'm sure there were plenty of testimonials for its
medicinal value. The presence of testimonials does not mean the
legislature should jump in and make a substance legal.

How could the newspaper print a statement like, "The measure is
designed so that the system would cost taxpayers nothing," without
grilling Rep. Lou Lang on the ridiculous nature of such an assertion?
The article also asserts that the Illinois State Police are now in
support. Who at the ISP made that statement? Are they willing to stake
their jobs on such an endorsement? Are they going to be the ones to
enforce this unenforceable law?

The legislation also purports to be safer by requiring a six-hour wait
before driving. How many drug users really care whether they are able
to drive safely? What about the research that cannabis effects can
last far longer than six hours?

Also not discussed in the article is why there are other states now
debating the reversal of their medical marijuana laws. Would that not
be important to know?

Having had direct and indirect involvement in treating addictions for
more than 30 years, I assure you that governmental endorsement of this
substance will cost far more than any proposed benefit. Is a state
that is already broke ready to assume an even greater financial obligation?

Kirk W. Boyenga

Springfield