PUSH MADE FOR MEDICINAL POT

ANNAPOLIS - A bipartisan group of lawmakers, including some cancer
survivors, appealed to a House committee yesterday to legalize marijuana for
people who are suffering from debilitating medical conditions.

The bill, which has 53 co-sponsors in the 141-member House, would allow
people with diseases such as cancer or AIDS to use marijuana at the
recommendation of their physician. The Department of Health and Mental
Hygiene would issue registry identification cards for patients eligible to
take the drug.

Delegate David Brinkley, Frederick County Republican, told the House
Judiciary Committee he underwent radiation treatment for lymphoma in 1989.

Mr. Brinkley addressed concerns that legalizing marijuana for medical
purposes would clash with federal law by saying it could have been a great
relief to other patients he met who were undergoing chemotherapy, which
caused great pain and trouble eating.

"Some people don't have time to wait for Washington to stop screwing
around," he said.

Delegate Dana Dembrow, Montgomery County Democrat, said marijuana is
currently legal for medical purposes in eight states, so "we're not plowing
new ground here." The sponsor of the bill, Delegate Donald Murphy, Baltimore
County Republican, said no medicinal-marijuana users have been prosecuted
federally in those states.

Mr. Murphy argued that smoking marijuana is preferable in some cases to
taking dronabinol, a legal pill that contains the principal active
ingredient in pot. Pills can be difficult to keep down for people with
extreme nausea, he said, and the smoke acts faster.

Larry Silberman, 50, of Rockville, said he decided to start smoking
marijuana as he was undergoing chemotherapy for non-Hodgkins lymphoma. He
said the marijuana helped stimulate his appetite while he was enduring
extreme nausea and pain.

"It was far better to risk arrest and imprisonment than to slowly waste away
and die," he said. "I believe smoking during that chemotherapy allowed me to
live."

Douglas Stiegler, executive director of the Family Protection Lobby,
testified against the bill, saying it "opens a door that should not be
opened."

The science supporting marijuana's medicinal benefits was too anecdotal, he
said, citing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case, which said it has "no currently
accepted medical use."

[Content not related to drug policy snipped for brevity]