GOVERNMENT OPPOSES FREEDOM OF CHOICE ON BOTH ENDS OF DRUG WAR

After three years, it finally happened in my state. The medical
cannabis bill that has lingered in committee since being introduced
back in 2004 will go before the full senate and, perhaps, the full
Illinois legislature sometime this session.

I applaud everyone who was involved and hope for the best as the bill
progresses. It seems like the time may have finally
come. Legislators anywhere would have to be blind not to see all the
amazing medical advances being made in regard to cannabis ( see my
colleague Mary Jane Borden's look from last week's DrugSense Weekly
feature article.

http://www.drugsense.org/dsw/2007/ds07.n489.html#sec6

Here in Illinois, unfortunately, a few legislators do indeed appear
to be blind, as the vote to get the bill out of committee was a
narrow six to four in favor.

As with most state medical marijuana bills, there are limitations on
who can benefit from the law. I am happy to see anyone who can
benefit from cannabis be able to use the law, but there will be
people who could benefit from cannabis who won't be able to use the law.

When it actually enters the legislative process, medical marijuana
becomes more about scaling back the number of potential users, as
opposed to broadening access. The legislators say they don't want
the law abused, making the pool of people under possible protection
smaller, even as science shows the pool of people who could benefit growing.

Take any other substance with the same medical potential, legislators
would be clawing over each to get access to constituents, and to get
development contracts in their states. The media would have new
headlines every day about the Wonder Drug.

Sometimes, when government gets excited about a new drug, it even
uses its power to induce citizens to take it.

For example, several states have been considering broad use of the
HPV vaccine, which is designed to guard women against cervical cancer
from the human papillomavirus. Since the vaccine is believed to be
most effective before a woman becomes sexually active, advocates want
mandatory vaccination at a relatively young age. Some legislators
have bought into the idea, though not without intense and secretive
lobbying by the firm which makes the vaccine ( more news broke about
the story in New York just today.

http://www.newsday.com/business/ny-bzmerc095122894mar09,0,5992376.story

This is a relatively new medicine, yet some government officials want
to use pre-teen female populations from entire states without
exception to essentially serve as guinea pigs.

Cannabis, on the other hand, has been used for thousands of
years. We know about the main effects and the side effects. Many
who use cannabis medically and otherwise perceive few negative
effects at all. We are only starting to understand how many
different people might benefit from some type of cannabinoid therapy
- - there's no doubt the pool of potential beneficiaries will grow.

And yet, legislative officials who don't seem to know how to search
the web for a few selections from a wide choice of medical journal
articles, want to make sure that not too many people get it.

Again, some is better than none, and absolute prohibition remains
ridiculous. I assume (and hope) as government loosens its grip on
cannabis, it won't go to the other extreme and consider forcing
citizens to take the miracle herb.

It should be, like other medical decisions, a matter of personal choice.