Clarity On Medical Marijuana

Clarity On Medical Marijuana
Posted by CN Staff on August 07, 2006 at 06:47:21 PT
Source: Denver Post
Denver, CO -- Maybe it's time for everybody to take a deep breath and talk calmly about medical use of marijuana. The weed is illegal as a recreational drug everywhere (of course, that hasn't necessarily deterred everyone), but it is legal as medicine in 11 states, including Colorado. The discrepancy has sparked years of running squabbles among police, prosecutors, doctors, scientists, politicians, potheads and genuinely sick people seeking genuine relief.
The U.S. Supreme Court lit a match to the issue in June 2005 when it ruled that using marijuana is a federal crime, even if used as medicine in states that allow it. The Food and Drug Administration didn't help last April when it issued a statement (just a statement, not the results of a study) that "smoked marijuana has no currently accepted or proven medical use." Patients use marijuana for nausea relief after chemotherapy, pain and some effects of AIDS. That statement, apparently issued to mollify some rock-ribbed drug warriors in Congress, was at variance with a 1999 National Academy of Sciences review that found marijuana "moderately well suited" for treating some conditions. The confusion has created a mess.  Snipped:Complete Article: Denver Post (CO)Published: August 07, 2006 Copyright: 2006 The Denver Post CorpWebsite: openforum CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #14 posted by ekim on August 08, 2006 at 19:41:28 PT
good post about Aspen Sheriff
Jeralyn posts about an Aspen sheriff who "gets" the failures of the war on some drugs and about the dirty tricks his political opponent -- who doesn't get it -- is playing against him in his reelection campaign.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #13 posted by Hope on August 08, 2006 at 05:44:22 PT
Hurting souls...
Tyranny hurts the souls of the tyrants as well as the tyrannized.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #12 posted by Hope on August 08, 2006 at 05:42:11 PT
"souls of those who live under tyranny"
It certainly does hurt the soul, doesn't it?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #11 posted by charmed quark on August 08, 2006 at 05:07:09 PT
Denver Post - how long do we wait?
Sure - it would be nice if the US government took a rational approach and perhaps said that criminilizing a weed growing in somebodies yard was insane. And did real studies looking into the medical benefits of that weed.But people in the US have been waiting for over 25 years for this to occur. Do you suggest medical patients wait another decade or so for the political climate to change and real research to get underway?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #10 posted by FoM on August 07, 2006 at 22:17:18 PT
Very good.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #9 posted by Dankhank on August 07, 2006 at 22:04:22 PT
Ltr to these yahoos ...
7 August, 2006Editor
Denver Post		Sir:Kudo’s for taking a reasoned, yet uninformed approach to a progressive idea regarding the proper way to decide the medical efficacy of the Cannabis plant.Advocates for a rational approach fairly pant for the chance of Cannabis to be evaluated in a fair and unbiased manner.  Sadly, that has not been the case since our first Narcotics Chief, Harry J Anslinger. Upon appointment he discounted the “danger” of “Indian Hemp” in testimony, but eventually realized that a prohibition of “Marijuana” would be the ticket for him and thousands of law officers facing loss of work at the end of the failed alcohol prohibition to retain their jobs.Our government tried to find bad effects of Cannabis in 1974, tasking the University of Virginia to do the study. What the researchers found, instead, is Cannabis slowed the growth of three kinds of cancer in mice -- lung and breast cancer, and a virus-induced leukemia. The study was suppressed for thirty years.Scientists recently signed a letter decrying the government’s total control over who can study Cannabis and routinely funds only studies designed to find bad effects.Included with this letter is a CD copy of the “Cannabis Research Library.” It has approximately 1100 studies of Cannabis in 19 or so medical disciplines for your perusal.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by Wayne on August 07, 2006 at 19:23:29 PT
Good luck. That would involve overturning the Controlled Substances Act. There's that damned General Welfare Clause in the Constitution. Combined with the Commerce Clause, it essentially gives Congress free reign to trample our rights whenever it suits them. If you don't believe it, look at SCOTUS' voting record for the last 70 years. It all started right around that magic year, 1937.No, the only hope is to get cited for breaking federal laws and risk going to jail. Then challenge the Constitutionality in court, appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court (that's IF they'll even hear your case). And if they do hear your case, these days, getting the verdict you want is even worse than a crap shoot.On the other hand, it may be our only chance. You could challenge any law in court as long as you can argue it effectively. Me, I am not that slick of a debater.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by Sukoi on August 07, 2006 at 18:19:42 PT
Agreed, but my point was that cannabis prohibition itself has NEVER been challenged on a constitutional level and that certainly needs to be done...
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by whig on August 07, 2006 at 17:17:48 PT
Actually Timothy Leary's case resulted in overturning the cannabis prohibition regime then existing (the Marijuana Tax Act). Raich's case did not challenge prohibition, but tried to carve out a narrow, non-commercial, medical exception.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by The GCW on August 07, 2006 at 17:00:06 PT
Christen Mitchell
Thanks for the numbers... I was wondering.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by Sukoi on August 07, 2006 at 15:35:23 PT
Storm Crow
There is another and much more efficient way; challenge the constitutionality of prohibition itself all the way to the SCOTUS. Prohibition is clearly unconstitutional and to my knowledge, it has never been challenged in the SCOTUS. The closest cases that I am aware of are the cases of Timothy Leary and Angel Raich and prohibition itself was not judged nor its constitutionality ruled upon in either of those cases.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by Medical Marijuana Mi on August 07, 2006 at 15:21:00 PT
"If people let government decide which foods they eat and medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny. "
Thomas Jefferson
"Hemp is of the first necessity to the wealth and protection of the country."
Thomas Jefferson
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by Christen-Mitchell on August 07, 2006 at 13:03:28 PT:
Colorado's Marijuana Initiative Will Attain Ballot
SAFER (Safer Alternative For Enjoyable Recreation) Colorado has turned in 129,00 signatures to the Secretary of State. 68,000 valid registered voter signatures are needed to attain ballot status for the November election.If approve by the voters, the measure will legalize possession of one ounce of marijuana in Colorado for adults. The exception will be for cities that fall under the category of Self-Rule laws.Colorado will join Nevada in this years legalization effort. Nevada's initiative calls for production and distribution as well. South Dakota will vote on Medical Marijuana.
Hemptopia-Save The Planet-Reduce-Reuse-Recycle-Relegalize
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Storm Crow on August 07, 2006 at 10:05:43 PT
So what other choice do we have?
"And, however well-intentioned, medical marijuana advocates might want to think about whether ballot measures really are the best way to decide medical questions."With the dearth of US medical marijuana studies to prove MMJ's effectiveness due to their being banned by the government, what other way do we have? There are numerous medical studies from other countries, but these are worthless in the eyes of our government! We HAVE to pass these laws to tell the government that over 80 % of the people support MMJ! The government has forgotten that it's a public servant, not the master! They need to listen to our voices and making these MMJ laws, is one of the few ways we have of getting their attention!
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment