News (Media Awareness Project) - US MA: PUB LTE: Doctor States Case On Medical Marijuana |
Title: | US MA: PUB LTE: Doctor States Case On Medical Marijuana |
Published On: | 2005-07-20 |
Source: | Lowell Sun (MA) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-15 23:44:26 |
DOCTOR STATES CASE ON MEDICAL MARIJUANA
I would like to counter the contention by Stephen Heath that I object
to the use of marijuana as medicine.
Quite the contrary.
I want to make clear that we have two separate issues here: 1. The
use of marijuana as medicine prescribed by doctors; and 2. the
"legalization" of marijuana as not encompassed under issue No. 1.
Regarding the first issue, I applaud that we have a medicine
containing an active ingredient of marijuana that can and does help
patients, and hope that others are developed.
Just as with any other medications that I'd prescribe, I expect they
would be prepared in a quality-controlled environment and would
provide reproductible doses.
I also believe that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) already
has the regulatory power to oversee development of such medicines,
and therefore we do not need laws changed to allow this. The second
issue, the legalization of marijuana for other than
physician-prescribed uses, I did not address in my previous letter.
I think we as a society need to address this head-on, not clouded by
debate concerning the need for laws to allow "medical marijuana"
use. I am not quite the "zealous prohibitionist" Mr. Heath would
suggest.
I think there is "responsible" use of marijuana, currently an
"illicit" drug, just as I know there are plenty of dangerously
irresponsible users of alcohol, a quite "legal" product.
Certainly we all know of abusers of legally obtained (as well as
illegally obtained) prescription medications. Laws concerning
"recreational marijuana are unconscionably harsh.
Perhaps we need to consider legalizing marijuana in some way. It
would then be available, just as is alcohol, for those who would use
it for " self-medication." I, as a physician, would still have
dose-standardized medications to prescribe, and yet patients who would
prefer to "grow their own," for instance, would not face
prosecution and would presumably be able to (if laws were carefully
crafted to allow this) use it in whatever "alternative delivery
system" they like.
I don't pretend to know what's best regarding this complicated issue,
which is why I didn't go into it in my first letter.
There are a lot of questions that would need to be answered, such as,
would we only allow "home-grown" for home use or perhaps small
"growing clubs," or would we allow establishment of a whole new
industry comparable to the production of, say, wine or rum? I would
assume there would be some consideration of age at which one would be
allowed to partake, such as there is for alcohol.
What about "driving while impaired" as it pertains to the use of
marijuana?
It is the second issue (regarding the legalization of marijuana) about
which we need to have a national conversation concerning changing
laws, not marijuana as "medicine prescribed by doctors."
I would like to counter the contention by Stephen Heath that I object
to the use of marijuana as medicine.
Quite the contrary.
I want to make clear that we have two separate issues here: 1. The
use of marijuana as medicine prescribed by doctors; and 2. the
"legalization" of marijuana as not encompassed under issue No. 1.
Regarding the first issue, I applaud that we have a medicine
containing an active ingredient of marijuana that can and does help
patients, and hope that others are developed.
Just as with any other medications that I'd prescribe, I expect they
would be prepared in a quality-controlled environment and would
provide reproductible doses.
I also believe that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) already
has the regulatory power to oversee development of such medicines,
and therefore we do not need laws changed to allow this. The second
issue, the legalization of marijuana for other than
physician-prescribed uses, I did not address in my previous letter.
I think we as a society need to address this head-on, not clouded by
debate concerning the need for laws to allow "medical marijuana"
use. I am not quite the "zealous prohibitionist" Mr. Heath would
suggest.
I think there is "responsible" use of marijuana, currently an
"illicit" drug, just as I know there are plenty of dangerously
irresponsible users of alcohol, a quite "legal" product.
Certainly we all know of abusers of legally obtained (as well as
illegally obtained) prescription medications. Laws concerning
"recreational marijuana are unconscionably harsh.
Perhaps we need to consider legalizing marijuana in some way. It
would then be available, just as is alcohol, for those who would use
it for " self-medication." I, as a physician, would still have
dose-standardized medications to prescribe, and yet patients who would
prefer to "grow their own," for instance, would not face
prosecution and would presumably be able to (if laws were carefully
crafted to allow this) use it in whatever "alternative delivery
system" they like.
I don't pretend to know what's best regarding this complicated issue,
which is why I didn't go into it in my first letter.
There are a lot of questions that would need to be answered, such as,
would we only allow "home-grown" for home use or perhaps small
"growing clubs," or would we allow establishment of a whole new
industry comparable to the production of, say, wine or rum? I would
assume there would be some consideration of age at which one would be
allowed to partake, such as there is for alcohol.
What about "driving while impaired" as it pertains to the use of
marijuana?
It is the second issue (regarding the legalization of marijuana) about
which we need to have a national conversation concerning changing
laws, not marijuana as "medicine prescribed by doctors."
Member Comments |
No member comments available...