cannabisnews.com: Anxious? Try Oregon Anxious? Try Oregon Posted by FoM on February 13, 2000 at 16:00:27 PT Editorial Source: Seattle Times Voters in both Washington and Oregon in late 1998 legalized medicinal marijuana for certain painful diseases. Today, Washington's neighbor is considering dramatically expanding the legal reasons for lighting up, including anxiety, sleep disorders and depression. Whoa, dude. As long as marijuana is considered an illegal drug, better to limit its medicinal use to the current standard: to treat intractable pain unrelieved by standard medical care. Here in Washington, people with cancer, HIV, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, glaucoma and a few other debilitating dieases can seek a doctor's prescription to possess and use the drug. Oregon's current law has similar standards. Some patients in both states want to expand the accepted uses. Washington recently added Crohn's disease to its list of approved diseases. Oregon created an advisory group to study patients' requests to add post-traumatic stress disorder, Alzheimer's disease, anxiety, bipolar disorder, insomnia and other conditions. The law will keep evolving as the body of medical research grows. The American Cancer Society, for example, agreed last month to fund a three-year study testing a "marijuana patch," similar to a nicotine patch, that could deliver the drug without the risk of lung disease. Broadening the list of ailments too quickly could threaten research's progress and funding nationwide. Best to stay focused on the people whose suffering made the medicinal-marijuana law sensible in the first place. Published: February 13, 2000Copyright © 2000 The Seattle Times Company Related Articles:CRRHhttp://www.crrh.org/Medicinal Marijuana Law Could Cover More Ailments http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread4628.shtmlPolice Told To Return Medical Marijuana http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3921.shtmlOregon First State To License M Marijuana Patients http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread1221.shtmlWashington Citizens For Medical Rights http://www.eventure.com/i692/ MMJ Users Wary Dispite Win In Washington Statehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread3944.shtmlMMJ Law: 'Playing It By Ear' In Washington State http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3801.shtmlCannabisNews Search of Articles from Oregon & Seattle, Washington:http://www.alltheweb.com/cgi-bin/asearch?type=all&query=cannabisnews+oregonhttp://www.alltheweb.com/cgi-bin/asearch?type=all&query=cannabisnews+seattle+washington Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #11 posted by Jose Melendez on February 01, 2002 at 05:55:08 PT: oops Here is the link to NORML.org's legal page http://www.norml.org/legal/norml_lc.shtml [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by Jose Melendez on February 01, 2002 at 05:54:02 PT: Arrest Prohibition Here is a link to NORML.org's legal page There you might be able to find a local lawyer willing to help. If there is any way you can mail me a videotape of you describing your situation, I'll make and circulate an online clip that others can download to hear your side of the story... Jose Melendez c/o Skydive DeLand 1600 Flightline Blvd. DeLand, FL 32724 Arrest Prohibition - Drug War is TREASON [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by FoM on January 31, 2002 at 16:41:29 PT Hello Jerry I'm sorry to hear about your arrest. Here are links concerning Colorado and a web site that could help. Good luck to you. Coloradans For Medical Rights http://www.medicalmarijuana.com/ Colorado's Marijuana Program Starts Slowly http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11674.shtml Medical Marijuana Rules Get Hearings http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11364.shtml Kaiser Lawyers Back Medical Marijuana http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10245.shtml [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by JerryR on January 31, 2002 at 16:08:56 PT: please help... I am bipolar, on medication for depression and an alcholholic. I was recently aressted for marijuana cultivation in my own home. I was growing it for my personal use, and not even that much. In my opinion, it really does help me with my depression that is a result of my lithium medication for bipolar disorder. I know it was considered being added to medicinal marijuana statue in Oregon, but I live in Colorado. I would be very grateful for any helpful advice in this unpleasant situation. Thank you... Jerry [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by Phil Schreiber on February 15, 2000 at 15:14:21 PT: Medicinal benefits A gentelman that I know had suffered a terrible auto accident 11 years ago and due to the accedent had become a quad from the damage to c5 vertebrae and only has limited use of his right arm above the wrist. Severe uncontrolable muscle spasms wrack his body from the nerve damage. And guess what helps him. Marijuana. It not only helps ,but it completely haults the seizures as soon as the drug enters his system. To witness this amazing "cure" is beyond what most will call amazing. He has begged congress, senators, and local officials for support and only is reguarded as a "pothead" DISGUSTING, especially considering the fact that the only way him to recieve the drug is to ingest it. Is there anywhere or anyone that can help this man? [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by Mark Tide on February 15, 2000 at 00:19:15 PT: Jules' comments Dear Jules,You seem pretty worried about something. Perhaps, it's related to the truth coming out about AMR and ACLU. As FoM points out, your comments do tend toward the personal side, but that's OK. I really don't mind. In fact, it's quite fascinating. Please keep it up, and also ask those of a similar view to help you. Of course, addressing yourselves to the issues would be an improvement.Truly yours, Mark Tide Arcata Journal [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by FoM on February 14, 2000 at 21:34:43 PT Please be Polite Please don't attack a person's character. That isn't necessary and we try to be polite. Thank You! [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Jules on February 14, 2000 at 17:29:29 PT Mark Tide......... You are a whiny malcontent. You state the ACLU, and now AMR is selling the movement short? You're a joke. They are doing what can be done in a given state at the time. Demands for all or nothing will get you NOTHING. Without their efforts you criticize, we would be far further behind on change.You treat your allies like the enemy, as if you have done anything on par with their real world accomplishments.You remind me of a borderline libertarian, and will accomplish about as much (zero). We would be better off without friends like you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Thomas on February 14, 2000 at 08:49:24 PT Additional Ailments Just because testimony or evidence is "anecdotal" does not mean the ailments should not be covered under these initiatives. If the government had its way, all cannabis evidence would be anecdotal and, therefore, would not be acceptable. Cannabis does help depression, anxiety, and obsessive/compulsive disorder. These truths will become evident in the future, I'm sure. If only the government would quit fighting the fight of the special interests and let some unhindered research be done, these truths would become evident sooner (something the pharmaceutical companies see as a grave threat). [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Mark Tide on February 13, 2000 at 18:24:27 PT: Response to BAD Editorial by Seattle Times Dear FoM,This Letter to Editor at Seattle Times was sent via email a few minutes ago.[Please find two different formats below, for you to post best working one as comment.]Many Thanks Go Out !!! - to Cannabisnews.com, for keeping its readers informed of this kind of material. Please keep up this important educational work.Subject: BAD Editorial of Feb. 13 Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 17:54:58 -0800 From: the arcata journal Organization: impetuosity productions To: opinion seattletimes.comDear Editor,Complete with a tired, hip exclamation, "Whoa dude," your recent opinion opposing expansion of illness types covered by Washington's medicinal cannabis law, makes it quite clear that political correctness moves you much farther than compassion for your fellow citizens. Already, Washington's law is practically unworkable due to its authors' association with Americans for Medical Rights, which has consistently sold this cause short, for similar purposes of political correctness. As demonstrated in California, a much broader and more useful law than Washington's can gain public acceptance and ballot success. Implementation remains a struggle, but at least in California we have an expansive platform with which to work. In your state, elites rather than common folk designed your law, which is a big disadvantage for its people. The least you could do is recognize this problem, and labor to solve it. Only, your views on this subject are not even as timely as your slang.To summarize your argument: "As long as marijuana is considered an illegal drug, better to limit its medicinal use to the current standard: to treat intractable pain unrelieved by standard medical care. [ ] Here in Washington, people with cancer, HIV, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, glaucoma and a few other debilitating dieases can seek a doctor's prescription to possess and use the drug. Oregon's current law has similar standards. [ ] Broadening the list of ailments too quickly could threaten research's progress and funding nationwide. Best to stay focused on the people whose suffering made the medicinal-marijuana law sensible in the first place.""[A]n illegal drug," federally speaking, cannabis use is now being viewed by courts along lines of its potential "medical necessity," which is not limited to any small category of illnesses. Historically, cannabis was even noticed as productive against alcoholism, certainly a scourge of fantastic proportions. Your notion that nationally funded research might be "threatened" by any more enlightened perspective on cannabis, smacks of the same bad politics (with its prohibition beginning in 1937) that got us into this mess in the first place. Please, climb down off your high editorial horse, and face the facts.Truly yours,Mark Tide, Investigative Correspondent, Arcata Journal -http://www.arcata.orgAPPLEWORKS FORMATTED VERSION :Dear Editor,Complete with a tired, hip exclamation, "Whoa dude," your recent opinion opposing expansion of illness types covered by Washington's medicinal cannabis law, makes it quite clear that political correctness moves you much farther than compassion for your fellow citizens. Already, Washington's law is practically unworkable due to its authors' association with Americans for Medical Rights, which has consistently sold this cause short, for similar purposes of political correctness. As demonstrated in California, a much broader and more useful law than Washington's can gain public acceptance and ballot success. Implementation remains a struggle, but at least in California we have an expansive platform with which to work. In your state, elites rather than common folk designed your law, which is a big disadvantage for its people. The least you could do is recognize this problem, and labor to solve it. Only, your views on this subject are not even as timely as your slang.To summarize your argument: "As long as marijuana is considered an illegal drug, better to limit its medicinal use to the current standard: to treat intractable pain unrelieved by standard medical care. [ ] Here in Washington, people with cancer, HIV, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, glaucoma and a few other debilitating dieases can seek a doctor's prescription to possess and use the drug. Oregon's current law has similar standards. [ ] Broadening the list of ailments too quickly could threaten research's progress and funding nationwide. Best to stay focused on the people whose suffering made the medicinal-marijuana law sensible in the first place.""[A]n illegal drug," federally speaking, cannabis use is now being viewed by courts along lines of its potential "medical necessity," which is not limited to any small category of illnesses. Historically, cannabis was even noticed as productive against alcoholism, certainly a scourge of fantastic proportions. Your notion that nationally funded research might be "threatened" by any more enlightened perspective on cannabis, smacks of the same bad politics (with its prohibition beginning in 1937) that got us into this mess in the first place. Please, climb down off your high editorial horse, and face the facts.Truly yours,Mark Tide, Investigative Correspondent, Arcata Journal - http://www.arcata.org Arcata Journal [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Gary Storck on February 13, 2000 at 16:39:15 PT What has the SeaTimes Editorial Board been smoking The Seattle Times wrote, "As long as marijuana is considered an illegal drug, better to limit its medicinal use to the current standard: to treat intractable pain unrelieved by standard medical care."There is no rationale for this statement. The medical utility of cannabis should have no relation to it's legal status. It should be available to treat any ailment that responds favorably to cannabis therapy. Why should patients be forced to use toxic synthetic pharmaceuticals when a nonb-toxic alternative exists?The SeaTomes also wrote, "Broadening the list of ailments too quickly could threaten research's progress and funding nationwide. Best to stay focused on the people whose suffering made the medicinal-marijuana law sensible in the first place." No serious research on whole cannabis is being allowed. The marijuana patch is a cruel ruse to deny access to the whole plant as medicine. There is no research to be "threatened". The only moral and compassionate thing to do is give patients legal access now and to use the Times own words, "stay focused on the people whose suffering made the medicinal-marijuana law sensible in the first place." Drug Policy Forum of Wisconsin [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: